year 6, Issue 3 (Autumn 2018)                   2018, 6(3): 61-72 | Back to browse issues page

XML Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Javadipour M, Rahbari S. Pathology of the Policy-Making Process in Sport for All in Iran. Annals of Applied Sport Science. 2018; 6 (3) :61-72
1- Faculty of Psychology and Education, Tehran University, Tehran, Iran ,
2- Young Researchers and Elites Club, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
Abstract:   (1716 Views)
Background. “Sport for all” is associated with the heart of the community and aims to spread joy and happiness, boost morale, increase motivation, promote healthy individual and social life, reduce family and social abnormalities, strengthen physical power, and eliminate mental problems for all people, including men and women, and old and young people.
Objectives. This study aims to evaluate the pathology of the policy-making process in 
sport for all in Iran.
Methods. The methodology of this study utilized an applied mixed-method study. The population of the study consisted of executives and experts of sports for all in Iran. In the qualitative study, by using targeted and criterion sampling methods, 16 subjects were selected as a sample. Data was collected by conducting interviews. Then, the data from the interviews by Streubert and Carpenter’s method (2011) were coded and analyzed. In the quantitative study, the samples were selected by using a simple random sampling method; the data was collected
by using a questionnaire that was extracted from qualitative research. Data analysis in this section was performed by using the SPSS software and the Friedman test.
Results. In the qualitative study, the findings showed that the organizational components, beliefs and cultures, economic conditions, scientific analysis and interpretation of studies, and research were factors that affected the policy-making process of sport for all in Iran. The existing weaknesses of the policy-making process in
sport for all in Iran included weak control and monitoring, weak structure, weak planning and execution, weak performance of media, limited financial resources, weak performance of human resources, rules, and limited partnership of academic and research centers.
Conclusion. In general, the findings showed that the policy-making process for sport for all in Iran was associated with certain weaknesses and challenges; they must be recognized and modified based on scientific methods. Strengthening the close communication between the individuals responsible, policy-making organizations, and universities in the field have been suggested.
Full-Text [PDF 712 kb]   (248 Downloads)    
• It is suggested that the close communication between those responsible and the policy-making organizations and universities in this field should be strengthened, requirements are to be announced, for the process and its sensitive guidance, it is essential to have accredited research centers as policy research centers at the university, in which the management team of this center can be managed by a joint board of the Ministry of Sports, the National Olympic Committee, and other executive agencies.
• Reforming the existing structure of public sports is essential so that the components of the public sports system, including policy-making, planning, implementation, and monitoring are separated and also complementary to each other.
• General education and awareness, and creating a broad and inclusive partnership in the public sports policy-making model of Iran must have a central role.

Type of Study: Original Article | Subject: Sport Management and its related branches
Received: 2017/12/3 | Accepted: 2018/05/8 | Published: 2018/10/13

1. Gilchrist P, Wheaton B. Lifestyle sport, public policy and youth engagement: Examining the emergence of parkour. International journal of sport policy and politics. 2011;3(1):109-31. [DOI:10.1080/19406940.2010.547866]
2. Arab Narmi B, Goudarzi, M., sajadi, SN., Khabiri, M. ., Television and development of sport for all: a Grounded Theory. Journal of Sport Management. 2016;8(40):17-40. [Article in Farsi].
3. Ratten V, Ferreira J. Entrepreneurship, innovation and sport policy: implications for future research. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics. 2017;9(4):575-7. [DOI:10.1080/19406940.2017.1380683]
4. Österlind MI. Sport policy evaluation and governing participation in sport: governmental problematics of democracy and health. International journal of sport policy and politics. 2016;8(3):347-62. [DOI:10.1080/19406940.2015.1123755]
5. Chalip L. Toward a distinctive sport management discipline. Journal of sport management. 2006;20(1):1-21. [DOI:10.1123/jsm.20.1.1]
6. Houlihan B. Public sector sport policy: developing a framework for analysis. International review for the sociology of sport. 2005;40(2):163-85. [DOI:10.1177/1012690205057193]
7. Sharifzadeh F, Alvani, S. Rezaiimanesh, B., Mokhtarianpour, M. Implementation Barriers of the Cultural Policies of the First to Fourth Development Programs: A Review of the Experiences of Cultural Managers. Strategic Management Thought. 2013;7(1):33-77. [Article in Farsi].
8. Enjolras B, Waldahl RH. Policy-making in sport: the Norwegian case. International review for the sociology of sport. 2007;42(2):201-16. [DOI:10.1177/1012690207084753]
9. Green M, Collins S. Policy, politics and path dependency: Sport development in Australia and Finland. Sport management review. 2008;11(3):225-51. [DOI:10.1016/S1441-3523(08)70111-6]
10. De Bosscher V, De Knop P, Van Bottenburg M, Shibli S. A conceptual framework for analysing sports policy factors leading to international sporting success. European sport management quarterly. 2006;6(2):185-215. [DOI:10.1080/16184740600955087]
11. Mansfield L, Piggin J. Sport, physical activity and public health. Taylor & Francis; 2016.
12. Delaney T, Madigan T. The Sociology of Sports: An Introduction. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company. Inc; 2009.
13. Malakoutian M. Sport and Politics. politics Quarterly: Journal of Faculty of Law and Political Scince, 2009;39(2): 301-16. [Article in Farsi].
14. Safania AM. Designing a Development Strategy for the Public Sport–a Case Study in Mazandaran Province. Annals of Applied Sport Science. 2014;2(1):87-100. [DOI:10.18869/acadpub.aassjournal.2.1.87]
15. Dousti M, Goodarzi M, Asadi H, Khabiri M. Sport policy in Iran. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics. 2013;5(1):151-8. [DOI:10.1080/19406940.2013.766808]
16. Skille EÅ. Sport for all in Scandinavia: sport policy and participation in Norway, Sweden and Denmark. International journal of sport policy politics. 2011;3(3):327-39. [DOI:10.1080/19406940.2011.596153]
17. Fahlén J, Stenling C. Sport policy in Sweden. International journal of sport policy. 2016;8(3):515-31. [DOI:10.1080/19406940.2015.1063530]
18. Smith A, Jones J, Houghton L, Duffell T. A political spectator sport or policy priority? A review of sport, physical activity and public mental health policy. International Journal of Sport Policy. 2016;8(4):593-607. [DOI:10.1080/19406940.2016.1230554]
19. Kobayashi T, Hoye R, Nicholson M. Sport Policy in Vanuatu. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics. 2017;9(4):753-65. [DOI:10.1080/19406940.2016.1272621]
20. Downward P, Rasciute S. The relative demands for sports and leisure in England. European sport management quarterly. 2010;10(2):189-214. [DOI:10.1080/16184740903552037]
21. Green K, Thurston M, Vaage O, Moen KM. Girls, young women and sport in Norway: a case of sporting convergence amid favourable socio-economic circumstances. International Journal of Sport policy and politics. 2015;7(4):531-50. [DOI:10.1080/19406940.2015.1031812]
22. World Health Organization. Global recommendations on physical activity for health: World Health Organization; 2010.
23. Oliveira-Brochado A, Brito PQ, Oliveira-Brochado F. Correlates of adults' participation in sport and frequency of sport. Science & Sports. 2017;32(6):355-63. [DOI:10.1016/j.scispo.2017.03.005]
24. Ghafori F. General sports and recreational activities in the southern provinces of the country and presentation of future planning model. Journal of Sport Management Studies. 2011;12:87-106. [Article in Farsi].
25. sameenia M, paymanizad, H., javadipour, M. The Pathology of Strategic of Sport For All in Iran and provide development solutions based on SWOT model. Sport Management Studies. 2013;5(20): 221-8. [Article in Farsi].
26. Speziale HS, Streubert HJ, Carpenter DR. Qualitative research in nursing: Advancing the humanistic imperative: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2011.
27. Denzin NK, Lincoln YS. Handbook of qualitative research: Sage publications, inc; 1994. [PMID]
28. Kheirgo M, Danaeifard, H. . Challenges of Public Administration and their Effects on Iranian national Administration Education: An Explanatory Research A research Quarterly in Military Management 2012;11(44):11-46. [Article in Farsi].
29. Asefi A, asadi dastjerdi, H. An Investigating of Developmental Barriers of Sport for All in State Universities of Tehran City and Presenting Developing Strategies. Journal of Sport Management. 2017;8(6):823-44. [Article in Farsi].
30. Goudarzi M, Eslami A, Alidusti A. IDENTIFYING FACTORS AFFECTING THE DEVELOPMENT OF SPORT FOR ALL VIA THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN BROADCASTING. Journal of Applied Research in Sport Management. 2016;4(15):11-27. [Article in Farsi].
31. Irajpour A, Mojarrad, N., Dabbagh Rezaieh, F. Investigating the Role of Mass Media in Cultural Development of Iran Amateur and Professional Sports. Sport Management and Development. 2016;5(2): 36-52. [Article in Farsi].
32. Widdop P, King N, Parnell D, Cutts D, Millward P. Austerity, policy and sport participation in England. International journal of sport policy and politics. 2018;10(1):7-24. [DOI:10.1080/19406940.2017.1348964]
33. Asefi A A , Khabiri, M., Asadi Dastjerdi, H., Goodarzi, M. Investigating the Organizational Factors Influencing the Institutionalization of Public Sports in Iran. Journal of Sport Management and Motor Behavior. 2014;10(20): 2014; 10(20):63-76. [Article in Farsi].
34. Miller P, Rose N. Governing the present: Administering economic, social and personal life: Polity; 2008.
35. Bacchi C. Analysing policy: Whats the problem represented to be? : Frenchs Forest. NSW: Pearson; 2009.
36. Dean M. Governmentality: Power and rule in modern society: Sage publications; 2010.
37. Gholipour souteh R, Jandaghi Gh. Studying the Trends of Policy Research in Policymaking Environment. American Journal of Economic. 2012;4(3): 10-3.
38. Shabani A, Ghafouri, F., Honari, H. A Study on policies and strategies of sport for all in comprehensive sport plan of Iran. Sport Management Studies. 2016;6(27):15-30. [Article in Farsi].
39. Javadipour M, Saminia, M. . Sport for all in Iran and Codification of perspective and programs strategy. Journal of Applied Research in Sport Management. 2013;1(4):21-30. [Article in Farsi].
40. Javadipour M, Ghavedel Sarkandi, M., Sameenia, M. Introdaction to The Theoretical Framework and Model Designing of Sport for All in Iran. Journal of Sport Management Review. 2014;5(21):127-48.
41. Nassif N, Amara M. Sport, policy and politics in Lebanon. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics. 2015;7(3):443-55. [DOI:10.1080/19406940.2014.914553]
42. Tinaz C, Turco DM, Salisbury P. Sport policy in Turkey. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics. 2014;6(3):533-45. [DOI:10.1080/19406940.2014.893247]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:

Send email to the article author

© 2017 All Rights Reserved | Annals of Applied Sport Science

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb