Contents
​
How can Sport for Social Change (S4SC), sport and physical activity organisations become more sustainable?
Introduction
The sport and physical activity sector provide important opportunities for communities to realise social, health and economic benefits. Research has shown sport and physical activity benefits include:
-
increased physical health, psychological and social factors (Australian Government Department of Health, 2022; Gould, 2019; WHO, 2022),
-
prevention of obesity (Charlton, 2010) and
-
reduction in the risk of inheriting pathologies and non-communicative diseases (Forradellas et al. 2021).
There are an increasing range of organisations which conduct grass roots sport and physical activities to encourage communities to become more physically active, as well as achieve broader non-sport outcomes. Many of these organisations belong to the broader movement of Sport for Social Change (S4SC), and this movement has grown considerably in the past fifteen years (Elkington et al., 2019). Yet, in spite of this growth in the depth and breadth of programs, the financial viability of these programs remains a challenge (Elkington et al., 2019). These organisations rely on funding to continue their work, many cannot survive without financial support (Elkington et al., 2019). The focus of this project is to explore how S4SC sport and physical activity organisations can become more financially sustainable in their offering of sport and physical activity opportunities in communities.
Literature Review
The sport and physical activity sector provide important opportunities for communities to realise social, health and economic benefits (Elkington et al., 2019; Berry and Manoli, 2017; Morgan & Summers, 2017). Research has shown sport and physical activity benefits, included in image1:
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
Image1 Benefits of physical activity
​
​Sport and physical activity participation also contributes to public health benefits and economic impacts (Forradellas et al., 2021). The Australian Health Department (2020) states that the sport and recreation sector accounts for 0.8% of GDP for Australia, being $14.4bn.
In Western democratic countries such as Australia, the UK and New Zealand, provision of opportunities for grassroots or mass participation have typically been via the community clubs which we would normally consider the base of the sport development pyramid. Traditionally, local, or regional councils would provide the tangible infrastructure, and the clubs would rely on volunteers to govern the club or association and administer the sporting opportunities. Clubs would operate predominantly on membership fees, perhaps some local sponsorship or fundraising and perhaps canteen sales.
​
However, these traditional models have been challenged in recent times, with the cost of providing community sport increasing and number of volunteers declining. In addition to several barriers to people’s participation in sport (e.g., lack of confidence, transport, access, enjoyment, self-esteem) is the cost (SportAus, 2022). Community members ability to pay to participate in sports is declining, and lives are busier, meaning the normal Saturday afternoon timeslot for sport is not available to the majority anymore (ABC news, 2022).
Concomitantly, we have seen an increase in the provision of sport and physical activity opportunities by not-for-profit organisations which conduct grassroots sport and physical activities to encourage communities to become more physically active, as well as achieve broader non-sport outcomes such as ‘to address the social determinants of health, including increasing social inclusion, building community capacity, and fostering social change’ (Richmond et al., 2021, p. 451). Many of these organisations belong to the broader movement of S4SC, and this movement has grown considerably in the past ten to fifteen years (Elkington et al., 2019, Peachy et al., 2019). S4SC organisations refer to organisations that ‘use sport to yield positive influence on [the] public health’ (Richmond et al., 2021, p. 451) and are generally considered those outside of traditional sport systems (Richmond et al., 2021). Most research has tended to focus on impact assessment of S4SC, and there’s been much less focus on the financial sustainability of S4SC models (Bingham & Walters, 2013; Elkington et al., 2019).
​
Key themes that came out of the literature review are in images 2-10.
​
Image 2 Literature review themes
Image 3 Traditional funding structures
Image 4 Partnerships
Image 5 Relationships
Image 6 Diversification of structures and revenues
Image 7 Diversification risk
Image 8 Revenue diversification
Image 9 Organisational structures
Image 10 Income streams
Methodology
The primary data for this research was extracted from an online platform called Mindhive, emails, and phone interview. Mindhive provided asynchronous responses to questions. This meant that there were many benefits of undertaking research in this way. Participants were able to complete the questions in their own time, there was no need for travel, and we didn’t need to get everyone in the room at the same time.
Findings
Finding 1: Ideas of sustainability
Three main subthemes that came out of this finding include i) ‘Importance of financial resources over the long-term’, ii) ‘Systems perspective for sustainability’ and iii) sustainable development goals.
Watch video
Finding 2
Three key subthemes emerged: (I) "long-term vision and strategy," (II) "exploring alternative business models," and (III) "creative ways of support."
Watch video
Finding 3
Information to come
Three main subthemes emerged including i) ‘Staffing capacity’, ii) succession planning and iii) ‘Volunteers’.
Watch video
Finding 4
Information to come
Finding 5: Partnerships & Collaboration
