Development of sports requires an active role of government, but years of practice of Neoliberalism has meant a diminishing role of the public sector, both in terms of provision of institutional environment– in terms of giving meaningful governance, and incentive structures– for the underlying organizations, and markets.
Moreover, an associated phenomenon with Neoliberalism is the overboard practice of austerity policies, whereby aggregate demand is wrongly seen as the primary determinant of inflation, rather than seeing a more balanced role of both aggregate demand, and supply-side policies in reining in inflation. Hence, monetary and fiscal austerity policies as a consequence only provide at best short-term relief from inflationary pressures, high cost of capital, and lowering development expenditure negatively impacts sports in terms of adequate funding.
An important aspect of governance for both the economic in general, and also for sports economics, is to provide needed focus in this regard at the municipal or local level
This, together with a diminishing role of the public sector, results in sub-optimal productive, and allocative efficiencies in the economy, which includes sports economics– a field that encompasses both the skills, and the financial side of sports. Overall, lack of development expenditures, especially in terms of creating a resilient society, and economy, also negatively feeds into the initial pool of players, and managers of the game in terms of sub-optimal capacity for instance in terms of learning, adapting, and communicating.
Lack of traditionally low investment in sports, and overall social sectors, like health, education, sports infrastructures and welfare aspects of society at large, had already not allowed to put the country on sound footings in the wake of independence– not to mention an extractive institutional design of the colonial times also negatively impacted sports, in addition to the overall economy- practice of neoliberal, and over-board austerity policies over the last four decades, led to apparently sharp decline in sports, and overall sports economics in the country.
That decline apparently became all the more steep in the wake of fast-unfolding of climate change crisis, and the related covid-19 pandemic, whereby climate, and health related catastrophes– including smog intensification– further dented the economic situation of both individuals, and the country, with negative spillovers into an already struggling sports economy.
Hence, while it is important to identify the micro-level aspects of individual sports in terms of needed interventions, it is in this holistic sense of rolling back the neoliberal, and overboard, austerity assault that is needed to provide a meaningful, and long-term solution to sports economics; where sports economics is not an end in itself, as it is a major contributor to overall economic growth in the country.
Therefore, it is important to see a non-neoliberal role of government, whereby it plays a pro-active, and well-capacitated role in collaborating with the private sector, and in co-creating underlying organizations, and markets within the sports sector. Highlighting the need for enhancing the role of public sector in general, internationally renowned economist, Mariana Mazzucato in her recent Project Syndicate (PS) published article ‘Restoring public-sector capacity where it counts’ which she co-authored with Rainer Kattel, pointed out in this regard ‘After years of underinvestment, governments around the world are struggling to keep pace with growing demands. The consequences are now widely evident, as underfunded and unprepared public agencies falter whenever crises strike. The problem is not “slimming” government down, but rather rendering it more capable, strategic, outcomes-oriented, and a good partner in solving the greatest problems of our time: providing adequate housing for all, strengthening climate resilience, and ensuring that technology makes our lives better, not just a few “bros” richer. …Today’s intertwined crises demand a new public-sector economics that regards the state as a proactive market shaper, co-creating innovation, public services, and socio-technical systems for inclusive, sustainable, and resilient futures.’
An important aspect of governance for both the economic in general, and also for sports economics, is to provide needed focus in this regard at the municipal or local level. The Mariana Mazzucato-led project at the ‘University College London Institute of Innovation and Public Purpose’ (UCLIPP) rightly indicates in this regard that it is at this level that given the smaller scale it is more feasible, and less risky to adopt more innovative policies in terms of governance. Moreover, to improve the performance of governance at this level, and to monitor the progress in this regard, UCLIPP has developed a ‘Public Sector Capabilities Index’ (PSCI).
Details provided in this regard by UCLIPP are as follows: ‘Local governments across the world face mounting pressures to address complex urban challenges—from climate change and public health crises to growing inequality and economic transformation. Yet prevailing frameworks for assessing public sector capabilities focus too narrowly on market regulation and economic efficiency, leaving cities without the tools they need to meet today’s urgent demands. …The Public Sector Capabilities Index becomes the first global measure of where government capacity is strong and where critical public sector skills must be developed. …By creating the first global diagnostic tool to measure and understand city government capacity, the Index provides: [1] A clear, actionable picture of where cities excel and where they need targeted investment; [2] Opportunities for rapid scaling or strengthening of critical skills, such as: [a] Engaging residents through innovation; [b] Cross-sector collaboration; [c] Leveraging data infrastructure; [d] Utilising digital platforms; [e] An evidence base for resource allocation and strategic decision-making; [f] A platform for collaboration between local, national, and state governments, as well as philanthropic and financial institutions, to fund and support capability building. This initiative positions city governments to respond strategically to global and local challenges, creating stronger public value and resilience.’
