There is a growing awareness of the need for collaborative governance in sport for social change. Collaborative governance of sport for social change concerns the way in which actors collaborate to tackle societal problems through sports. Although collaborative governance seems a logical and fitting instrument for working on sports for social change, this special issue further unpacks and problematizes the relation between collaborative governance and sport for social change.
Collaborative governance can be understood as the processes and structures “that bring together stakeholders from across the public and private sector in order to carry out a public purpose that could not otherwise be accomplished” (Emerson et al., 2012). This definition refers to the private sector as consisting of very diverse actors, including local community sports clubs, as well as large corporate entities. We therefore make a further distinction between public, private and community actors.
Recent contributions to the broad body of literature on collaborative governance zoom in on the mundane dynamics of collaborating (La Grouw et al., 2024) and actor positioning (Bannink, Sancino & Sorrentino, 2024). This line of research further illuminates how ‘small’ (and often local) collaborative dynamics contribute to ‘big’ challenges. Enhancing our knowledge of the role of collaborative dynamics at the meso-level and academic- practitioner interactions at the micro-level will enable a more comprehensive understanding of the organisational and professional frames in which sport for social change takes shape. How do collaborative structures, processes and cultures affect sport for social change?
Regarding the context of sport for social change, including sport for development and peace, we specifically expect connections between public actors, community and non- profits to be the dominant constellation, with private commercial actors taking a more peripheral position. Yet, we observe a lack of scholarly attention to the intimate entanglement between collaborative actors: organizations, professionals with diverse backgrounds (e.g. sports, social work, public health, academia) and the community. Academics working in the field of sport for social change increasingly find themselves as one partner in complex inter-organizational networks. In such settings, academics become co-producers of collaborative practices, while practitioners and citizens become co-producers of knowledge. In these networks, research translation and knowledge mobilisation take shape (Schaillée et al., 2019), which challenges how practitioners and academics understand their professional identities in new and hybrid ways (Noordegraaf, 2015). Different understandings of sport for social change reflect broader institutional logics (Waardenburg, 2021), which in turn reflect how actors operate and relate to each other within collaborative processes. Indeed, sport for social change projects could have the potential to foster change among the actors involved in collaborative governance themselves.
In addition, much attention has been given to local organizations that play a key role in sport for social change projects (e.g. Nols et al., 2019) as well as the impact of their efforts (Mansfield et al., 2018; Vandermeerschen et al., 2017), yet the collaborative dynamics, including academic-practitioner interactions, and the network configurations they are a part of, are less frequently the focus of research into sport for social change. This creates several issues regarding knowledge development in our scholarly community. First, collaboration is a tough cookie to crack, creating all kinds of frustrations in the process (Rigg & O’Mahony, 2013). How do such collaborative frustrations influence the output and outcome of sport for social change projects? Second, collaborative governance is grounded in network modes of organizing, with the need for trust (O’Boyle &Shilbury, 2016) and leadership in managing the network (Shilbury, O’Boyle & Ferkins, 2020). How do modes of leadership (distributed, centralized, transactional, transformational, relational) influence the issue to which sport for social change programmes seek to contribute (Kinder et al., 2021; Parry & Bryman, 2006). Following the work by Vangen and Huxham (2003), how are leadership activities employed throughout the collaborative process, and how do they manage tensions between ideology and pragmatism? Third, with little attention being paid to collaborative dynamics, power imbalances and shifting power relations stay largely out of sight (Avelino& Wittmayer, 2016). This is particularly important, considering strong resource dependencies between organizations in the field of sports (Jones et al., 2020; Lucidarme et al., 2017; Waardenburg, 2021), as well as differences in legitimacy between professions, and between practitioners, academics and citizens (Harris &Adams, 2016).
This special issue provides a forum for new insights and further academic exchange on this topic. We invite scholars working on specific topics related to the broad agenda outlined above. These include, but are not limited to:
-
-
- case studies on collaborative governance of sport for social change;
- conceptual and empirical contributions on the inclusivity of collaborative governance regarding the role of community actors, such as informal community leaders and groups of citizens;
- conceptual and empirical contributions analyzing collaborative governance, collaborative dynamics or academic-practitioner interactions within multi-actor collaborative settings;
- how academic-practitioner interactions advance collaborative innovation in sport for social change;
- reflections from a range of theoretical approaches to network collaboration or collaborative governance, including theories on organizational paradox, leadership, and critical pedagogy;
- critical reflections on methodological approaches to collaborative governance in sport for social change, including action research or living lab
-
Submission process
Please submit your extended abstract of 500-800 words by e-mail to M.Waardenburg@uu.nl, no later than November 15th. Abstracts will be assessed by the Special Issue editors. The editorial decisions on abstracts will be communicated within three weeks after the deadline.
Authors of accepted abstracts are invited to develop their idea into a full manuscript (note that this invitation does not guarantee final publication in the special issue). The Special Issue editors handle all manuscripts following the journal’s policies and procedures; they expect authors to follow the journal’s submission guidelines (https://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?show=instructions&journalCode=fcs s20). Full manuscripts must be submitted via e-mail to M.Waardenburg@uu.nl, no later than May 2nd.
References
Avelino, F., & Wittmayer, J. M. (2016). Shifting power relations in sustainability transitions: a multi- actor perspective. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 18(5), 628-649.
Bannink, D., Sancino, A., & Sorrentino, M. (2024). Governance without we. Wicked problems and collaborative governance. Public Policy and Administration, 09520767241239863.
Emerson, K., Nabatchi, T., & Balogh, S. (2012). An integrative framework for collaborative governance. Journal of public administration research and theory, 22(1), 1-29.
Harris, K., & Adams, A. (2016). Power and discourse in the politics of evidence in sport for development. Sport management review, 19(2), 97-106.
Jones, G. J., Misener, K., Svensson, P. G., Taylor, E., & Hyun, M. (2019). Analyzing collaborations involving nonprofit youthsport organizations: A resource-dependency perspective. Journal of Sport Management, 34(3), 270-281.
Kinder, T., Stenvall, J., Six, F., & Memon, A. (2021). Relational leadership in collaborative governance ecosystems. Public Management Review, 23(11), 1612-1639.
La Grouw, Y., van der Woerd, O., Visser, E. L., & Blijleven, W. (2024). Mundane dynamics: Understanding collaborative governance approaches to ‘big’problems through studying ‘small’practices. Public Policy and Administration, 09520767241244981.
Lucidarme, S., Babiak, K., & Willem, A. (2018). Governmental power in elite sport networks: a resource-dependency perspective. European sport management quarterly, 18(3), 348-372.
Mansfield, L., Kay, T., Anokye, N., & Fox-Rushby, J. (2018). A qualitative investigation of the role of sport coaches in designing and delivering a complex community sport intervention for increasing physical activity and improving health. BMC Public Health, 18, 1-11.
Nols, Z., Haudenhuyse, R., Spaaij, R., & Theeboom, M. (2019). Social change through an urban sport for development initiative? Investigating critical pedagogy through the voices of young people. Sport, Education and Society, 24(7), 727-741.
Noordegraaf, M. (2015). Hybrid professionalism and beyond:(New) Forms of public professionalism in changing organizational andsocietal contexts. Journal of professions and organization, 2(2), 187-206.
O’Boyle, I., & Shilbury, D. (2016). Exploring issues of trust in collaborative sport governance. Journal of sport management, 30(1), 52-69.
Parry, K., & Bryman, A. (2006). I: 2.1 Leadership in organizations. The SAGE handbook of organization studies, 5(3), 447-465.
Rigg, C., & O’Mahony, N. (2013). Frustrations in collaborative working: Insights from institutional theory. Public Management Review, 15(1), 83-108.
Schaillée, H., Spaaij, R., Jeanes, R., & Theeboom, M. (2019). Knowledge translation practices, enablers, and constraints: bridgingthe research–practice divide in sport management. Journal of Sport Management, 33(5), 366-378.
Shilbury, D., O’Boyle, I., & Ferkins, L. (2020). Examining collective board leadership and collaborative sport governance. Managing Sport and Leisure, 25(4), 275-289.
Vangen, S., & Huxham, C. (2003). Enacting leadership for collaborative advantage: Dilemmas of ideology and pragmatism in theactivities of partnership managers. British journal of management, 14, S61-S76.
Vandermeerschen, H., Meganck, J., Seghers, J., Vos, S., & Scheerder, J. (2017). Sports, poverty and the role of the voluntary sector. Exploring and explaining nonprofit sports clubs’ efforts to facilitate participation of socially disadvantaged people. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and nonprofit organizations, 28, 307-334.
Waardenburg, M. (2021). Understanding the microfoundations of government–civil society relations. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 32(3), 548-560.
