Mapping of corruption in sport in the EU : a report to the European Commission, executive summary.
Date: 2019-08-05
Institutions: Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture
Subjects: EU Member State, EU sport policy, corruption, criminal law, enhanced cooperation, performance drugs, professional sport, sport, sporting event

© Shutterstock 

Mapping of Corruption in Sport in the 
EU 

A report to the European Commission 
– Executive Summary 

December 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Directorate-General for Education and Culture 
Directorate C – Innovation, International Cooperation and Sport 
Unit C.4 – Sport  

E-mail: Eac-sport@ec.europa.eu  

European Commission 
B-1049 Brussels 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Mapping of Corruption in Sport 
in the EU  

A report to the European Commission 

Executive Summary 

Ecorys and Dr. Argyro Elisavet Manoli (Loughborough University) 

written by  

2018 

Directorate-General for Education and Culture 
Youth and Sport 

EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Disclaimer 

This  document  has  been  prepared  for  the  European  Commission;  however,  it  reflects  the 
views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which 
may be made of the information contained therein. 

Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers  
to your questions about the European Union. 

Freephone number (*): 
00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 

(*) 

The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone 

boxes or hotels may charge you). 

More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://europa.eu). 

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2018 

ISBN 978-92-76-08748-9 
doi: 10.2766/785734 

© European Union, 2018 
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Executive summary 

The Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture (DG EAC) of the European 
Commission  commissioned  Ecorys  in  July  2018  to  undertake  a  mapping  review  of  sport 
and corruption across the EU28.  

Background 

Recent high profile cases of corruption in sport have shown the potential damage corruption 
cases can cause to sport’s reputation for integrity and fair play. Corruption has been shown 
to  manifest  in  varying  contexts  ranging  from  non-profit  community-based  activities 
through  to  activities  involving  high  profile  international  events. In  addition  to  traditional 
forms  of  corruption,  particular  types  of  corruption  such  as  match  fixing,  spot  fixing  and 
doping are unique to the industry. The complex and multidimensional nature of corruption 
in  sport  has  created  significant  challenges  for  sport  management  and  policy  makers  in 
identifying  where  the  problems  lie  and  developing  actions  to  safeguard  the  integrity  of 
sport globally. 

Aims and methodology 

The  key  objective  of  this  small-scale  research  study  has  been  to  complete  a  mapping 
review of the types of corruption that exist in different EU Member States, if/how they are 
dealt with at national and/or international level and what kind of legal instruments exist to 
deal with them and minimise potential risks. The study has sought to provide the European 
Commission with adequate knowledge of existing initiatives in order to identify where best 
to focus its efforts – and those of the Member States – in the years to come.  At the scoping 
stage of the study a rapid literature review was completed covering the subject of sport 
and corruption. The review covered academic publications, official policy documents and 
papers. Around 70 relevant documents were identified. The mapping of reported cases and 
government responses also built on responses to a call for evidence which was sent out to 
members of the EU Expert Group on Sport and Integrity. The second element of the desk 
research  was  to  undertake  systematic  reviews  of  available  data  and  information  and 
evidence on relevant government and organisational responses in specific Member States. 
Within  the  limits  of  the  resources  available  for  the  study,  it  was  possible  to  complete 
systematic desk reviews of available evidence and information on sport and corruption in 
11  countries  covering  a  range  of  geographies  and  large  and  small  countries.    Finally,  a 
number of responses were examined in more depth through more detailed desk research 
and telephone interviews with contacts in Member States. This resulted in six case studies 
which are presented in boxes in the findings chapter. 

Key findings and recommendations 

The  need  to  tackle  corruption  in  sport  is  an  important  element  of  EU’s  policy  on  sport 
integrity. The rapid literature review undertaken for this study has shown that the more 
detailed empirical studies of corruption in the EU tend to focus on the prevalence of match-
fixing and doping cases. This is reflected in the mapping research for this study as despite 
adopting  a  broad  definition  of  corruption  in  setting  the  parameters  of  the  research,  the 
vast majority of cases identified from recent years in the sample countries were identified 
as either doping or match fixing cases.  

The  mapping  research  has  emphasised  the  complex  interplay  of  factors  and  contextual 
issues that can influence match-fixing activity. The research has also provided insights in 
to the diversity of match-fixing practices and its association with other types of corruption 
such as bribery. Specific examples of match-fixing have also revealed the importance of 
factors such as pay levels of athletes and the level of media exposure of specific matches.  

 
 
 
 
Aside from match-fixing and doping, the mapping review has revealed very few examples 
of other types of corruption in sport across the EU. This does not necessarily mean that 
other types of corruption do not exist as such cases may be more difficult to detect through 
mapping exercise  which is reliant on using rapid research approaches  across a  range of 
countries. The broader academic literature review indicates however that due to the lack 
of  a  transparent  system  of  reporting  in  sport,  the  sport  industry  has  become  a  fertile 
ground for other corruption activities such as money laundering and tax evasion.  

The mapping of responses at the Member State has revealed a variety of measures that 
have  been  implemented  in  recent  years.  These  include:  new  legislation;  new  policy 
initiatives;  tighter  regulations;  more  stringent  fines;  organisational  restructuring; 
educational  programmes;  multi-stakeholder  platforms  for  information  sharing;  and 
whistleblowing  initiatives.  Based  on  a  limited  number  of  case  studies,  the  research  has 
highlighted a number of key conclusions with regard to the effectiveness of responses and 
particular features of promising practices in this area: 

  There  is  evidence  that  the  introduction  of  stricter  legal  penalties  reduces 
levels of match-fixing: Legal penalties have been shown to work in countries where 
there was previously a high prevalence of match fixing.    

  There is a need to focus on preventative measures as well as legal penalties: 
the case studies have highlighted a range of education and awareness raising initiatives 
that have been shown to be successful in terms of take-up amongst sport professionals 
and,  based  on  anecdotal  evidence,  their  ability  to  improve  understanding,  influence 
behaviour and encourage reporting of suspicious behaviour.     

  The role of multi-stakeholder groups for preventing and tackling corruption in 
sport: some case studies have highlighted the potential for involving all relevant actors 
in addressing specific corruption practices including law enforcement agencies, judicial 
bodies, government ministries, national sport agencies and federations.  

  There is an increasing emphasis on promoting ‘good governance’ practices in 
sport federations: such codes are being introduced in order to address other types 
of management corruption such as bribery, money laundering and tax evasion, as well 
as more well-known forms of corruption such as match-fixing.  

This small-scale research has addressed the topic of sport and corruption from a broad and 
open-ended perspective and therefore it has not been possible to address the prevalence 
of  specific  types  of  corruption  in  a  systematic  and  detailed  way.  The  research  findings 
nevertheless provide evidence and insights in understanding how the EU could potentially 
add value to existing initiatives in this area. Recommended actions that could be taken to 
develop more systematic evidence on the topic and further promote effective practice in 
this area are as follows:  

  Supporting  mechanisms  for  cooperation  in  addressing  corruption:  The  study 
has  highlighted  various  initiatives  taken  forward  by  international  sport  federations. 
There is potentially a role for the EU to add value to these initiatives by facilitating the 
development of new networks and enhancing the work of existing networks focused on 
addressing  specific  types  of  corruption.  The  EU’s  potential  role  would be  to  facilitate 
cooperation  between  the  various  relevant  actors  who  have  a  role  in  addressing 
corruption  practices.  This  role  could  involve  developing  multi-stakeholder  groups 
concerned with addressing specific types of corruption based on a detailed assessment 
of  the  role  of  specific  actors  as  well  as  current  networking  arrangements.  Enhanced 
cooperation  would  also  allow  sharing  of  information  on  good  practice  and  help  to 
support their implementation internationally.  

 
 
  Enhancing  knowledge  on  sport  and  corruption  across  the  EU:  There  are  a 
number of potential mechanisms that the EU could use to encourage the development 
of better knowledge on sport and corruption across the EU. Through the development 
of networks with relevant federations and other relevant institutional stakeholders, and 
more  formal  recommendations,  the  EU  could  help  to  promote  more  systematic 
monitoring of corruption cases across the EU. Such systematic monitoring would also 
allow to enhance and maintain a more updated intelligence picture on the phenomenon 
for  further  use  by  policy-makers,  for  the  purpose  of  identifying  major  issues  and 
anticipating  future  challenges  to  be  addressed  at  EU  level.  Building  on  the  limited 
number  of  case  studies  completed  for  this  study,  it  is  also  recommended  that  more 
systematic evidence is collected on the current state of play in the EU with regard to 
understanding what works well in addressing corruption in sport. In order to do this, it 
is paramount that the correct stakeholders are identified and reached out. This would 
draw  on  more  systematic  evaluation  evidence  including  primary  research  with  most 
relevant  stakeholders  in  Member  States.  Generally  there  is  a  need  to  improve 
evaluation  evidence  on  the  impacts  and  effectiveness  of  government  responses  that 
aim to deal with corruption. 

  Support the development of good practice sharing and dissemination: The EU 
potentially  has  a  role  to  play  in  enhancing  knowledge  sharing  on  approaches  to 
addressing corruption, for example through networking events for international sport 
federations It is also recommended that actions are developed to support dissemination 
of  and  knowledge  sharing  on  good  practice  responses.  This  could  include  European 
level conferences held on an annual or biannual basis that allow projects Member States 
and international organisations to present their approaches and good practice features. 
Responses to addressing corruption could also be included as a regular topic in events 
such as the EU Sport Forum. and other relevant events organised at EU level.Building 
on the recommendations above, the EU could also support actions to develop capacity 
building of relevant authorities and sport federations in member states. The research 
has identified examples of practices where the promotion of common understandings 
and good practice may be helpful in addressing corruption (recommendations below).  

  Support  the  development  of  common  understanding  of  appropriate  and 
proportionate  penalties  for  corruption  activities:  This  research  has  highlighted 
the  potential  to  develop  a  common  understanding  on  the  use  and  effectiveness  of 
appropriate penalties to address corruption practices.  

  Support  the  development  of  common  definitions  and  measurement 
frameworks for ‘good governance’ and its component parts: This research has 
highlighted  a  number  of  areas  of  promising  practice  in  the  development  and 
implementation of ‘good governance’ approaches to addressing corruption. Building on 
the recommendations above, there is potential for the EU to play a role in supporting 
actions to develop common understanding on the elements required to promote good 
governance practice amongst sport federations. It is important for sport federations to 
understand  the  principles  that  constitute  good  governance,  and  how  and  why  these 
principles  can  benefit  the  sport  system  and  improve  their  operations,  in  order  to  be 
able and motivated to put these principles in practice. The promotion of codes of best 
practices in ‘good governance’, illustrated by the case study examples of Cyprus and 
the UK could be beneficial for the sport industry.  

  The  role  of  Member  States  in  addressing  corruption:  The  case  studies  have 
highlighted the particular role that Member States can play in leading strategically on 
the fight against corruption and in promoting transparency and information sharing at 
the  national  level.  It  is  recommended  that  Member  State  governments  address 
corruption in national sport strategies and national strategies on crime fighting as well 

 
 
 
 
as  in  related  national  action  plans  based  on  consultation  with  all  the  relevant 
stakeholders.  Governments  should  also  play  a  role  in  supporting  multi-stakeholder 
platforms  to  address  specific  types  of  corruption.  There  is  also  potentially  a  role  for 
Member States in collecting data and evaluation evidence on the effectiveness of policy 
responses, in line with the recommendation above.  

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
HOW TO OBTAIN EU PUBLICATIONS 

Free publications: 

•  one copy: 

via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu ); 

•  more than one copy or posters/maps: 

from the European Union’s representations (http://ec.europa.eu/represent_en.htm );  
from  the delegations in non-EU countries (http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/index_en.htm );  
by contacting the Europe Direct service (http://europa.eu/europedirect/index_en.htm ) or 
calling 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (freephone number from anywhere in the EU) (*). 

(*)  The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may 
charge you). 

Priced publications: 

•  via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu ). 

 
 
 
 
N
C
-
0
2
-
1
9
-
4
9
4
-
E
N
-
N

ISBN: 978-92-76-08748-9