Post on 02-Aug-2020
Play the Game 2013
Stepping up for democracy in sport
Prof. Jeroen Scheerder, PhD Policy in Sports & Physical Activity Research Group
KU Leuven, Belgium
Prof. Koen Breedveld, PhD Mulier Institute, The Netherlands
RUNNING ACROSS EUROPE The European sports model revisited
Outline
• European sports model – Pyramid representation
– Critical comments
– Church model
• Club-organised sport vs Sport Light – Popularity of light communities in sport
– Empirical evidence
• Case of running – Popularity of running
– Policy implications
NEW BOOK in preparation
SPM Reports can be downloaded free of charge:
www.faber.kuleuven.be/SPM
SUGGESTED READINGS
Reference article by Van Bottenburg, Scheerder & Hover
(2010)
CASE OF RUNNING
Joggers and road runners
= large group
= largest group within
athletic participants
Popularity of running
• First running boom originated in USA
• ‘forerunners’:
Popularity of running
• End of 1960s: from mere competition with
small number of elite athletes recreational
physical activity by millions of people
• Popularity of road running!
• During 1970s: trend spread over USA
• During 1980s: ‘imitated’ in Europe
Popularity of running
Popularity of running
Evolution of number of marathons (1910-2012) worldwide Evolution of number of marathon finishers (1910-2012) worldwide
1st wave
Source: Scheerder, Breedveld & Borgers (2014)
1st wave
2nd wave
Popularity of running
Evolution of the Number of Participants in some Major City Marathons, 1960-2006
0
5.000
10.000
15.000
20.000
25.000
30.000
35.000
40.000
45.000
19601963
19661969
19721975
19781981
19841987
19901993
19961999
20022005
Nu
mb
er o
f Pa
rtic
ipa
nts
Boston
(entrants)
NY (starters)
Honolulu
(entrants)
Berlin (entrants)
Paris (finishers)
Chicago
(starters)
Stockholm
(entrants)
London
(finishers)
Source: Scheerder (2009)
• Exceptional growth mid/end 1970s (1st wave) and end of 1990s second
wave of running focus on fitness, health, self-organization,
autonomy, freedom of choice
• Berlin and Chicago Marathon
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Year-by-year entrants Boston Marathon (1897-2008)
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2008
Marathon finishers in Europe, 1970-2005
Number of road running events and their number of participants in Germany, 1964-2008
Evolution of sports participation in Flanders in 12- to 75-years old population (1969-2009), in percentages of total population
Source: Scheerder et al. (2013)
Popularity of running
Number of people started before vs after 1999 wrt running market in Flanders (1963-2007) (N = 8 762)
57,7% entered running market during 2nd wave
of running
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1963-1965
1966-1968
1969-1971
1972-1974
1975-1977
1978-1980
1981-1983
1984-1986
1987-1989
1990-1992
1993-1995
1996-1998
1999-2001
2002-2004
2005-2007
Per
cen
tage
inst
rom
ers
cumulatief percentage
chronologisch percentage
Source: Scheerder (2009)
Evolution of the number of bark running tracks in Flanders (1980-2013)
Source: Scheerder et al. (2013)
Popularity of running
• Second wave of running also noticeable in sale of running
footwear
• Manufacture of running shoes = multi-billion dollar industry
worldwide
Number of Pairs Purchased of Running Footwear in the
US, 1992-2002 (in millions)
x 1.000.000 Source: www.sgma.com
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Demographics
• Along with growing N of runners
demographics changed as well
• Once elite runners, (upper) middle-
class, male now democratised
• ... from competition to completion ...
• Many participants likely to be female
• Cfr. 1970s in US only handful of female
marathon finishers vs. 40% at present
• Socio-demographic shifts in European
countries as well
Joggers and road runners
= large group
= largest group within
athletic participants
Developments Second wave of running supported by:
1. Success of HEPA
– 60% of sports participants
– Lose weight, keep fit & healthy
– Health maintenance = most important reason for
runners
2. Commercialisation + professionalisation in
sport (Van Bottenburg, 2006)
– For profit providers meet needs of runners
– Cfr. High level of care wrt running events:
– On-line registration
– Well-equipped refreshment stations
– Accurate timing (microchips)
– After race services: massage, comfortable changing
rooms, ...
– Training advice (internet, fitnesscentres, personal
trainers, ...)
New market drivers
Beside traditional athletic clubs
new suppliers entered the market:
1. Rise of (commercial) running events
2. Rise of ‘light communities’ in sport (Duyvendak & Hurenkamp, 2004)
New market drivers: light communities
• Number of ‘non-cluborganised’ sports participants
increases
8,5
36,8
22,9
40,8
12,0
51,6
40,6
59,4
31,627,7
31,9
4,0
22,7
14,0
18,4
0
20
40
60
80
100
1969 1979 1989 1999 2005
% s
po
rts
par
tici
pan
ts
general
outside club
(non-organized)
in club
(organized)
Evolution of Active Sports Involvement among Adults in Flanders
1969-2005, percentages i.f.o. total population
Source: Scheerder et al. (2006)
New market drivers: light communities
• Thus ‘non-cluborganised’ sports participation is popular
• Also in running: only 9% of runners is member of a CLUB
• Running = typically non-cluborganised sport
• Most runners INDIVIDUALLY (80%)
• But: growing number participates in ‘LIGHT RUNNING COMMUNITIES’ (24%)
0
25.000
50.000
75.000
100.000
125.000
150.000
1979 1984 1989 1994 1999 2006
Nu
mb
er o
f R
un
ner
s
club organised
runners
light community
runners
Number of Adult Runners in Light Communities vs. Club-organised Runners
in Flanders, 1979-2006
Source: Scheerder et al. (2006)
New market drivers: light communities
• LIGHT COMMUNITIES = demand-oriented, flexible and loose communities, with a minimum of rules of conduct, focusing on the achievements their participants seem to demand (Duyvendak & Hurenkamp, 2004)
• LIGHT RUNNING COMMUNITIES = small group of running mates featured by a non club-organised structure based on rather ‘weak ties’ between the members (Van Bottenburg, 2006)
New market drivers: light communities
• LIGHT COMMUNITIES vs GREEDY INSTITUTIONS
• Greedy institutions = organisations that ask for loyalty and almost undivided commitment from their members (Coser, 1974)
• Traditional athletic clubs and associations also try to make total claims on their members
• Problem: loyalty and commitment = scarce resources not only do human beings possess only finite energies for investing in organisations, but their resources of time are also limited!
Popularity of running
Evolution of number of runners in Flanders in 12- to 75-years old youngsters and adults (1969-2009) compared to the number of active members of the Flemish Athletics Association (FAA) (1978-2009)
Source: Scheerder et al (2014)
Marketing implications
• Flemish Athletic Association (VAL) = important player in field of running in Flanders
• Second wave of running should be opportunity
• Yet FAA market share dwindled: 13% (1979) 9% (2006)
0
50.000
100.000
150.000
200.000
250.000
300.000
350.000
400.000
450.000
500.000
550.000
1979 1984 1989 1994 1999 2006
Nu
mb
er o
f R
un
ners
total number of
runners
FAA members
Evolution of the Market Share of the Flemish Athletic Association (FAA)
1979-2006
Source: Scheerder et al. (2006)
Marketing implications
• Decline of FAA market share hardly surprising wrt aforementioned developments
– Growing impact of HEPA
– Commercialisation and professionalisation
– Rise of running events
– Rise of light communities
FAA lost its monopoly by only partially corresponding to changing needs of today’s runners
Also challenging policy issue for other sports federations in Europe
EUROPEAN MODEL OF
SPORT
European Model of Sport
Source: European Commission (1999)
European Model of Sport
1998
Pyramid model
(Eichberg, 2008):
- monopolistic
- centralistic
- hierarchical
model of competition
model of organisation
CLAIM OF POWER
Eichberg (2008):
“The description of the
world of sports by
applying the pyramid
model doesn’t take into
account the existence of
a rich spectrum of
[sport] practice all over
Europe.”
e.g.: street soccer,
dance, outdoor
activities, jogging, city
runs, recreational
walking, etc.
European Model of Sport
Source: Borgers et al. (2012)
TWO SEPARATE WORLDS?
OR STILL CONNECTED TO
EACH OTHER?
2 TOWERS?
OR STILL WITH A
CONNECTION IN BETWEEN?
LEISURE TIME SPORTELITE SPORT
professionalinternationalmediatisedoften paid
non-paidactive or passive
during leisure time
MASS SPORTMEDIA SPORT
watching sportphysically passive
sport public
doing sportphysically activesport participant
PARTICIPATION SPORTPERFORMANCE SPORT
Competitiveresult driven
competing and winningprinciple of exclusion
recreationalprocess driven
having /taking partprinciple of inclusion
Club organisedInformally organised(non-traditional forms
of organisation)Individual Club organised
Informally organised(non-traditional forms
of organisation)Individual
Source: Scheerder et al. (2011: 17)
LEISURE TIME SPORTELITE SPORT
professionalinternationalmediatisedoften paid
non-paidactive or passive
during leisure time
MASS SPORTMEDIA SPORT
watching sportphysically passive
sport public
doing sportphysically activesport participant
PARTICIPATION SPORTPERFORMANCE SPORT
Competitiveresult driven
competing and winningprinciple of exclusion
recreationalprocess driven
having /taking partprinciple of inclusion
Club organisedInformally organised(non-traditional forms
of organisation)Individual Club organised
Informally organised(non-traditional forms
of organisation)Individual
Source: Scheerder et al. (2011: 17)
Church model of sport
Source: Scheerder (2007)
From pyramid model to church model
ELITE SPORT
COMPETITIVE SPORT
RECREATIONAL SPORT
COMPETITIVE SPORT
=
PERFORMANCE SPORT
RECREATIONAL SPORT
=
PARTICIPATION SPORT
ELITE SPORT
COMPETITIVE SPORT
AT HIGH LEVEL
Source: Scheerder (2007)
EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE
FOR POPULARITY OF
SPORTS PRACTICES
OUTSIDE CLUB?
In all EU countries club participation = only minority of sport participants
Club participation in member states of the EU25 in 2004, % of total population
54
49
33
51
74
93
42
4850
44
28
58
65
55
95
60 59
45
58
67 68 68
6562 64
83
67
3 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 911 12 13 14 14 15 16 17 18
20 20 20 21 2224
28
33
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
sport part. club part.
Source: Scheerder et al. (2013)
General sports participation Recreational sport
Club sport
Competitive sport
Evolution of sports participation in Flanders/Belgium 1969–2009 (age 12 to 75)
Source: Scheerder et al. (2013)
Running Cycling Fitness Soccer Tennis
19,2
Participation in running, cycling, fitness, soccer and tennis in Flanders/Belgium 1989–2009 (age 12 to 75)
LEISURE TIME SPORTELITE SPORT
professionalinternationalmediatisedoften paid
non-paidactive or passive
during leisure time
MASS SPORTMEDIA SPORT
watching sportphysically passive
sport public
doing sportphysically activesport participant
PARTICIPATION SPORTPERFORMANCE SPORT
Competitiveresult driven
competing and winningprinciple of exclusion
recreationalprocess driven
having /taking partprinciple of inclusion
Club organisedInformally organised(non-traditional forms
of organisation)Individual Club organised
Informally organised(non-traditional forms
of organisation)Individual
Source: Scheerder et al. (2011: 17)
A free copy of the full version of the SPM10 report is available at http://faber.kuleuven.be/spm/
Sports preference: running (11 countries)
Country / Region 1 2 3
4 5
Austria
Denmark Walking Running Fitness Aerobics Swimming
England (UK) Gym Swimming Football Cycling Athletics / running
Finland Walking Cycling Gym / weight exercise
Cross country skiing
Jogging
Flanders (Belgium) Running Recreational cycling
Swimming Fitness Walking
France Swimming Cycling Pétanque / bowling
Walking & trekking Running / jogging
Germany Cycling Running Fitness Swimming Gymnastics
Italy Fitness / aerobics / gymnastics
Football Swimming Cycling Running / jogging
The Netherlands Swimming Cycling Fitness / aerobics Running Walking
Northern Ireland (UK) Swimming / diving Walking Exercise bike / running machine /
spinning class
Jogging Dance
Poland Cycling Jogging / walking Swimming Football Volleyball
Portugal
Spain Swimming Football Cycling Fitness Mountaineering
Switzerland Cycling Hiking / walking Swimming Downhill skiing Running / jogging
Source: Scheerder et al. (2011)
Sports Preference: walking (8 countries)
Country / Region 1 2 3
4 5
Austria
Denmark Walking Running Fitness Aerobics Swimming
England (UK) Gym Swimming Football Cycling Athletics / running
Finland Walking Cycling Gym / weight exercise
Cross country skiing
Jogging
Flanders (Belgium) Running Recreational cycling
Swimming Fitness Walking
France Swimming Cycling Pétanque / bowling
Walking & trekking Running / jogging
Germany Cycling Running Fitness Swimming Gymnastics
Italy Fitness / aerobics / gymnastics
Football Swimming Cycling Running / jogging
The Netherlands Swimming Cycling Fitness / aerobics Running Walking
Northern Ireland (UK) Swimming / diving Walking Exercise bike / running machine /
spinning class
Jogging Dance
Poland Cycling Jogging / walking Swimming Football Volleyball
Portugal
Spain Swimming Football Cycling Fitness Mountaineering
Switzerland Cycling Hiking / walking Swimming Downhill skiing Running / jogging
Source: Scheerder et al. (2011)
Sports preference: fitness (9 countries)
Country / Region 1 2 3
4 5
Austria
Denmark Walking Running Fitness Aerobics Swimming
England (UK) Gym Swimming Football Cycling Athletics / running
Finland Walking Cycling Gym / weight exercise
Cross country skiing
Jogging
Flanders (Belgium) Running Recreational cycling
Swimming Fitness Walking
France Swimming Cycling Pétanque / bowling
Walking & trekking Running / jogging
Germany Cycling Running Fitness Swimming Gymnastics
Italy Fitness / aerobics / gymnastics
Football Swimming Cycling Running / jogging
The Netherlands Swimming Cycling Fitness / aerobics Running Walking
Northern Ireland (UK) Swimming / diving Walking Exercise bike / running machine /
spinning class
Jogging Dance
Poland Cycling Jogging / walking Swimming Football Volleyball
Portugal
Spain Swimming Football Cycling Fitness Mountaineering
Switzerland Cycling Hiking / walking Swimming Downhill skiing Running / jogging
Source: Scheerder et al. (2011)
Sports preference: cycling (10 countries)
Country / Region 1 2 3
4 5
Austria
Denmark Walking Running Fitness Aerobics Swimming
England (UK) Gym Swimming Football Cycling Athletics / running
Finland Walking Cycling Gym / weight exercise
Cross country skiing
Jogging
Flanders (Belgium) Running Recreational cycling
Swimming Fitness Walking
France Swimming Cycling Pétanque / bowling
Walking & trekking Running / jogging
Germany Cycling Running Fitness Swimming Gymnastics
Italy Fitness / aerobics / gymnastics
Football Swimming Cycling Running / jogging
The Netherlands Swimming Cycling Fitness / aerobics Running Walking
Northern Ireland (UK) Swimming / diving Walking Exercise bike / running machine /
spinning class
Jogging Dance
Poland Cycling Jogging / walking Swimming Football Volleyball
Portugal
Spain Swimming Football Cycling Fitness Mountaineering
Switzerland Cycling Hiking / walking Swimming Downhill skiing Running / jogging
Source: Scheerder et al. (2011)
Sports preference: swimming (11 countries)
Country / Region 1 2 3
4 5
Austria
Denmark Walking Running Fitness Aerobics Swimming
England (UK) Gym Swimming Football Cycling Athletics / running
Finland Walking Cycling Gym / weight exercise
Cross country skiing
Jogging
Flanders (Belgium) Running Recreational cycling
Swimming Fitness Walking
France Swimming Cycling Pétanque / bowling
Walking & trekking Running / jogging
Germany Cycling Running Fitness Swimming Gymnastics
Italy Fitness / aerobics / gymnastics
Football Swimming Cycling Running / jogging
The Netherlands Swimming Cycling Fitness / aerobics Running Walking
Northern Ireland (UK) Swimming / diving Walking Exercise bike / running machine /
spinning class
Jogging Dance
Poland Cycling Jogging / walking Swimming Football Volleyball
Portugal
Spain Swimming Football Cycling Fitness Mountaineering
Switzerland Cycling Hiking / walking Swimming Downhill skiing Running / jogging
Source: Scheerder et al. (2011)
…with regard to sport preferences:
large similarity in sport preferences among countries
popularity of individual, recreational leisure-time sport activities
importance of so-called ‘LIGHT SPORTING COMMUNITIES’
Some general trends….
LEISURE TIME SPORTELITE SPORT
professionalinternationalmediatisedoften paid
non-paidactive or passive
during leisure time
MASS SPORTMEDIA SPORT
watching sportphysically passive
sport public
doing sportphysically activesport participant
PARTICIPATION SPORTPERFORMANCE SPORT
Competitiveresult driven
competing and winningprinciple of exclusion
recreationalprocess driven
having /taking partprinciple of inclusion
Club organisedInformally organised(non-traditional forms
of organisation)Individual Club organised
Informally organised(non-traditional forms
of organisation)Individual
Source: Scheerder et al. (2011: 17)
Can 2nd wave of running
be an opportunity to
federations/clubs?
Don’t miss the next boat!
• Study by Van
Bottenburg, Scheerder
& Hover (2010)
• Commissioned by EA
• Web-based survey
among 47 EA Member
Federations
Popularity of road running in Europe
Popularity of road running in Europe
Van Bottenburg, Scheerder & Hover (2010)
Popularity of road running in Europe
Van Bottenburg, Scheerder & Hover (2010)
Recommendations
1. Get more and better data
DATA MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
2. Introduce new membership categories
DIFFERENTIATION MARKETING
3. Improve relations with event organisers
‘NATURAL AUTHORITY’ POLICY
Marketing implications
• Runners’ profile (motives, attitudes, needs) has changed
no longer interested in ‘traditional’ services of athletic clubs
SERVICES OF TRADITIONAL SPORT ORGANISATIONS
– ...
– ...
– ...
– ...
NEW INTERESTS OF SPORT PARTICIPANTS
– ...
– ...
– ...
– ...
Marketing implications
SERVICES OF TRADITIONAL SPORT ORGANISATIONS
– System of competition, tournaments, championships, ...
– (Technical) training & instruction
– Traditional accommodation and facilities (track&field court, ...)
– Conviviality and group bounding
NEW INTERESTS OF SPORT PARTICIPANTS
– Recreational sport activities, health-related PA, ...
– Personal training & advice
– Alternative sport infrastructure (parks, woods, running track, ...)
– Fit & fun with more than one actor, no intensive affiliation
CONCLUSION
1. Running market has increased second wave of running
2. New providers have entered the running scene commercial events, light running communities
3. New markets: women, elderly, youngsters (kids runs!), people from other sports, fun & pleasure, …
4. Traditional providers have lost their monopoly
5. Yet, traditional organisations can make profit:
to attract new segments (females, youngsters, non-participants, ...):
– Transform from greedy institutions into light communities
– Development of more differentiated package of services
– From product-oriented to consumer-related marketing
– More attention to high quality services twrds consumers
– Enhancement of relationship with consumers
THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION!
jeroen.scheerder@faber.kuleuven.be k.breedveld@mulierinstituut.nl