“Worldwide Experiences and Trends of Sport for All”
Lamartine P. DaCosta & Ana Miragaya• the project• development• conclusions• the future

The Book• 36 countries, 5 continents• 87 authors• Databank – 800 pages• 36 studies cases• Comparative study• Basis for ground Research &Developement

COUBERTIN:

1919 – All Sports for All
1935 – Excellence + Differences

Main Theoretical Approach“Sport for All (SFA) is an umbrella term for recreation,
sport development, mass participation programs and cultural
recreation activities aiming to provide leisure opportunities
and health promotion to their adherents”.
A Goslin & A R Bush

Tafisa, IOC and FISpT Congresses• Emphasis on successful models of SFA• Aggregation of explanatory attempts• Individualistic interpretations• Lack of theories• Few generalizations• Insufficient conclusions

“Until recently scientific efforts to study
the foundations of sport for all havebeen non-systematic and unorganized.
It is therefore no wonder that theconcept of sport for all remains vague
and its directions blurred, objectives
unspecified, and procedures groping”.

Ojja & Telama, 1991

SFA International Book - Aims
• A body of knowledge able to point out adequate
ways and means of developing Sport for All in theupcoming 21st century.
• A central focus on comparative analysis toilluminate connections built on the sharedconception of Sport for All in different cultures,
then proceed by placing them into a larger andupdated scope of social needs and scientificknowledge.

SFA International Book - Aims
• Status-trends of Sport for All by means ofunderstanding how it has developed and may be
developed in the future, either in poor or in richcountries.
• Explanations of the building up and expansion ofSport for All in different historical contexts.

Methodological options• Comparative study – international proposals X
national/local experiences• Study cases – each country, one case
• Pre-set categories for comparisons (validationwith experts in 1998)• Focus on local culture X general procedures orassumptions• Emphasis on differences of both target groups
and participant cultures

Authors according to academic status or function
Asia (15): 10 PhDs, 2 Ms and 3 leaders or managers.
Africa(4): 2 PhDs, 1 Ms and 1 leader.
Europe (35): 26 PhDs, 3 Ms and 6 leaders or managers.
Latin America(21): 7 PhDs, 9 Ms and 5 leaders or managers.
North America (2): 1 PhD and 1Ms.
Total: 87 authors - 46 PhDs (52,8%);16 Ms (18,3%) and25 (28,7%) leaders or managers.

Sport for All Book – participating countries – 1999
Proportion of population by continents – (Number of countries) x 100

CONTINENTSTOTALPOPULATIONPOPULATIONBY COUNTRYPERCENTAGE OFPOPULATION

Asia

3 664 294

(8)

1 490 759

40,60

Africa766 623(2)

50 186

7,72Europe

728 934(17)

572 753

78,57L. America511 346(7)

385 532

75,39

N. America

307 202(2)307 075

99,95

Total (n=36)

5 978 402

2 815 305

47,00

Beyond the pre-set categories• Focus on some theory: 15 countries• Focus on international comparisons: 17 countries• Focus on governmental/local influences: 22 countries• Focus on political influences: 10 countries• Focus on international relations: 4 countries

Language and Culture
Since most authors are not native speakers ofEnglish, the identity of the culture they represent has
been preserved in the deep syntactic structures oftheir messages. Cultural features are values to becherished and kept alive in Sport for All. Therefore,
some dialectal differences that lead to cultural
aspects have been maintained and the text was kept
as close as possible to the original version.

Target Groups
Juxtaposition Analysis – 36 countries – 1970s/1990s

SIMILARITIES• Focus on Targeting• Research to identify targeting
profiles• Targeting on elderly, children,youth, women, families,workers, poor people etc.

DIFFERENCES• Focus on free access toparticipation• Target groups chosen at
local level or by specificprograms• Focus on inactive people
and participation expansion(all groups)

Local versus Global – 1970/2000
LOCAL SPORTCONTINENTS/ INTERNATIONAL OLYMPIC MOVEMENTTRADITIONS INFLUENCE
VARIABLESINFLUENCE
INFLUENCE
Asia

(6)

(4)

(6)

Africa

(2)

(1)

(2)

Europe

(15)

(6)

(9)

L. America

(5)

(4)

(4)

N. America

(1)

(0)

(2)

Total

291523

Países: o SFA através do Olimpismo
INCENTIVOS
OLÍMPICOSTRABALHO DAS CONsNENHUMA ATIVIDADEOLÍMPICA PELO SFA

Ásia414África-11Europa

845Am. Latina

223

Am. Norte

2--Total

16

813

CONTINENTESPAÍSES

Número de países no SFA que privilegiam mulheres

CONTINENTES/
PAÍSESPaíses com
programas
esportivos paramulheres

Países sem
programas
esportivos paramulheres

Países que nãomencionammulheresÁsia (8)611África (2)1-1Europa (17)

12

2

2

Am Latina (7)

-

2

5

Am do Norte (2)2--Total (36)

21

5

9

% de Participação por Gênero no Esporte na Espanha

1974

1980

1985

1990

1995

Total %

17,72534

35

39Homens

22,733

46

42

48

12,8

17

23

2632

ANOSMulheres

Proporção da população dinamarquesa (16-74 anos) ativamente
envolvida em esporte ou exercício (%)

1964

1975

1987

1993

1998

Todos

15294247

51

Homens

21

31

43

47

51

Mulheres112742

47

51

16-19

53

52

6167

67

20-29

27

41

48

56

59

30 – 39

1741

46

49

51

Proporção da população dinamarquesa (16-74 anos) ativamente
envolvida em esporte ou exercício (%)

1964

1975

1987

1993

1998

40 - 49

1025

4449

51

50 - 59

521

31

42

46

60 - 69

31130

36

47

70 - 742132430

37

Conclusions
1. Sport for All is a mode of intervention in society by means ofmotivating the population as a whole or in segments to the practice ofphysical activities aiming at the inclusion of participants in leisure,
health and sport developments.

2. Sport for All can be implemented both by the State and by nonorganized activities (bottom-up processing), which are characteristicfeatures of SFA in any country. Moreover, for-profit organizations havebecome influential but they reflect market opportunities on anoccasional basis. In all, SFA is currently inserted and adapted to multilayered sport systems but remains uncoordinated and lacks continuityof programs.

Conclusions
3. Marketing: Communication tools for people to participate in events
have more common usage in SFA initiatives than in marketing.
Moreover, communication in SFA is reinforced by marketing principles
and rationales.

4. Financial resources: SFA funding has been made by multiple
sources led by governmental institutions, especially at local level.
Besides the participants themselves, private institutions also share
SFA costs as leisure consumption. In this context, sponsorship in SFA
concerns is more an exception than a common option even indeveloped countries.

Conclusions
5. Targeting: Research to identify target groups needs is insufficientin all continents; therefore, the selection of social segments for
activities has been mostly arbitrary or referred to intervention needs
in different areas of sport, health or leisure.

6. Fixed and special settings for different offers and diverse decisions
made by participants suggest an improvement in SFA throughout its
development. But the choice of settings according to the offer ofspecific programs and/or of local opportunities remains dominant.

Conclusions
7. Strategies for SFA development are mostly related to government
institutions that adopt long-term programs and focus on the increaseof participation. The improvement of the participation rationale isusually referred to social inclusion.

8. The expansion of SFA continues at the end of the 1990-decade in
addition to changes in participation profile (from the population as awhole to segments) suggesting that the qualitative focus is now
equivalent to the quantitative approach.

Conclusions
9. In spite of the instability of governmental bodies in relation to thedevelopment of SFA in some countries, the results of SFA social
interventions have been successfully reached according to their
original purposes. In addition, these changes are becoming more
specific in the different components of interventions (national to local,
mass to individuals, leisure to health and target groups to noncompliers).

SFA Participation Index by Continent
Active Population / Total Population in Percentage(Number of respondent countries) N= 27

CONTINENTS /INDEXLESS THAN
10%10-30%

30-50%

50-60%MORE THAN
60%

41142232

3

Asia (6)Africa (2)1Europe (11)
L. America (6)11N. America (2)Total

227954Minimum SFA Participation by Continents
Active Population of Respondent Countries (N= 27)

CONTINENTS /PARTICIPATIONMINIMUM
PARTICIPATIONIN PERCENTAGE

POPULATIONRESPONDENTCOUNTRIES INMILLIONSMAXIMUM
PARTICIPATIONIN PERCENTAGE

CONTINENTSMINIMUM
PARTICIPATIONIN MILLIONS

Asia

33,2 (CHI)

1490

65,7 (JAP)494,6Africa

2,0 (MOZ)

50

28,5 (SFA)

1,0Europe

21,4 (ROM)572

83,5 (HUN)

122,4

L. America

7,0 (COL)

385

35,0 (CHL)

19,2N. America
Total60,0 (USA)307

65,0 (CAN)

184,22815

821,4

Approaches to Sport for All

HEALTHLEISUREHEALTH + LEISURE

Global Meanings

Local Developments