This book fills an important gap in the sport governance literature by engaging in critical reflection on the concept of ‘good governance’. It examines the theoretical perspectives that lead to different conceptualisations of governance and, therefore, to different standards for institutional quality. It explores the different practical strategies that have been employed to achieve the implementation of good governance principles. The first part of the book aims to shed light on the complexity and nuances of good governance by examining theoretical perspectives including leadership, value, feminism, culture and systems. The second part of the book has a practical focus, concentrating on reform strategies, from compliance policies and codes of ethics to external reporting and integrity systems. Together, these studies shed important new light on how we define and understand governance, and on the limits and capabilities of different methods for inducing good governance. With higher ethical standards demanded in sport business and management than ever before, this book is important reading for all advanced students and researchers with an interest in sport governance and sport policy, and for all sport industry professionals looking to improve their professional practice.
Scientific research from within and beyond academia continues to provide the justification and the knowledge for policy developments directed toward migration and integration governance. A proliferation of scholarship aims to study, pilot, and investigate the ‘best practices’ for facilitating integration, which is then taken up in advice to policy makers. Many authors have written about this science-policy nexus (Boswell 2009; Penninx, Garcés-Mascareñas, and Scholten 2005; Scholten et al. 2015; Verbeek, Entzinger, and Scholten 2015) These works have also engaged in critical reflection, problematizing this nexus and demonstrating how funding structures draw researchers not only into addressing short-term policy goals, but also into reproducing some of the essentialist worldviews that come with methodological nationalism (Wimmer and Glick Schiller 2002) and the ‘national order of things’ (Malkki 1995). Yet, the colonial legacies and dis/continuities of these logics in integrationism have not received much attention so far.The paper takes a critical lens on the implications of the science-policy complicity in reproducing colonial logics of ‘cultural distance’, based on perspectives and empirical research from different national (Netherlands and Switzerland) and supra-national (EU) contexts. We analyse texts which shape the civic integration programme in the Netherlands, the genealogy of the integration requirement to respect the values of the constitution in Switzerland, and the EU framework on migrant integration. This combined analysis brings forth the role scientists and knowledge producers play in (re)producing the colonial logics within integrationism, and their contributions to the regime of truth within which integration discourse operates. Throughout this article, we draw on examples from these different contexts to display that integration and its migranticized (Dahinden 2016) subjects are constructed through practices deemed as scientific or objective expertise, building on important work by Schinkel (2018) on integration research as “neocolonial knowledge production” and Favell’s (2022) critical reflections on integration indicator frameworks. As we demonstrate, the “idea of integration as an issue of cultural distance is rendered imaginable in and through colonial legacies and scientific practices from which policy draws legitimacy. We show how cultural distance is produced in the scientification of migrants’ assimilability in a ‘Western work ethic’, in measurement of migrants’ adherence to liberal values, and through constructions of integration drawing on social imaginaries of national and European identity. Importantly, we argue that by presenting this cultural distance as a product of objective, scientific processes of empirical observation, the notion of cultural distance is normalised and depoliticized, which ultimately legitimizes integrationism as a mode of governance.The present study builds on important contributions (by Schinkel 2017; Favell 2022; Korteweg 2017; Bonjour and Duyvendak 2017, and others) in attempting to destabilize the normalization of integrationism as the widely accepted mode of governance of ‘immigrant’ or ‘ethnic’ populations and their inherent and problematic ‘distance’. The content and structure of this summer school in post-colonial Amsterdam would allow us to continue our critical reflexive discussions to better understand the colonial logics at play and how they operate in multiple contexts and at multiple levels of governance, in and beyond integration
LINK
Halfway through the UN 2030 Agenda of Sustainable Development Goals (2015–2030), the achievement of most of the proposed targets have been lagging behind, as has been confirmed in recent UN and UNESCO reports. While these reports mostly provide external features which cause the delay, this paper analyses and addresses possible features within the UN 2030 Agenda which might explain that shortfall. These include an unflagging belief in economic growth and a lack of an analysis of causes, as well as problems to do with costs and benefits of particular SDGs. Hence, the application of some SDGs might be counterproductive for the environment – and thus for sustainability. This article highlights outcomes of analyses of the Agenda, zooms in on SDG4 on education and presents alternative, more promising avenues concerning the SDGs. The 2030 Agenda and the alternative approaches are interpreted in terms of a shallow ecological (mechanistic) and a deep ecological (organic) worldview. We then propose ways forward for critical policy discourse analysis that may enhance the capacity of the UN 2030 Agenda in the direction of what they are meant to do: global cooperation toward a sustainable rearrangement of human life on earth.
LINK
Circular agriculture is an excellent principle, but much work needs to be done before it can become common practice in the equine sector. In the Netherlands, diversification in this sector is growing, and the professional equine field is facing increasing pressure to demonstrate environmentally sound horse feeding management practices and horse owners are becoming more aware of the need to manage their horses and the land on which they live in a sustainable manner. Horses should be provided with a predominantly fibre-based diet in order to mimic their natural feeding pattern, however grazing impacts pasture differently, with a risk of overgrazing and soil erosion in equine pastures. Additionally, most horses receive supplements not only with concentrates and oils, but also with minerals. Though the excess minerals are excreted in the manure of horses, these minerals can accumulate in the soil or leach to nearby waterways and pollute water resources. Therefore, the postdoc research aims to answer the main question, “What horse feeding practices and measurements are needed to reduce and prevent environmental pollution in the Netherlands?” The postdoc research is composed of two components; a broad survey-based study which will generate quantitative data on horse feeding management and will also obtain qualitative data on the owners’ engagement or willingness of horse owners to act sustainably. Secondly, a field study will involve the collection of detailed data via visits to horse stables in order to gather data for nutritional analysis and to collect fecal samples for mineral analysis. Students, lecturers and partners will actively participate in all phases of the planned research. This postdoc research facilitates learning and intends to develop a footprint calculator for sustainable horse feeding to encompass the complexity of the equine sector, and to improve the Equine Sports and Business curriculum.
