国际体育组织善治改革问题研究
|
摘要
国际奥委会、国际足联等国际体育组织先后发布了善治改革议程,标志着善治已经成为国际体育组织主导性的改革发展议程。选择国际奥委会比赛项目的 35个国际体育单项联合会作为考察对象,从善治的范畴展开全面分析,具体范畴包括任期限制、权力制衡机制、问责机制、参与机制等善治改革方面。研究认为,国际体育组织在任期限制、权力制衡机制、问责机制、参与机制、性别平等、国家代表来源等方面存在不足,与严格意义上的善治标准还有很大的改进空间。国际体育组织之间必须协商一致,依照一系列明确、客观、严格的善治标准展开行动。只有这样,体育运动的自治才是可靠可信的,国际体育组织的自治权才具有正当性和合法性。国际体育组织善治改革的经验,对于中国体育社会组织改革发展具有一定的借鉴意义。
Various international sports organizations including IOC(International Olympic Committee) and FIFA(Federation Internationale de Football Association) have successively released their agenda for reforming the good governance,indicating that good governance has become the dominant reform &development agenda for international sports organizations. This paper chooses 35 international sports federations of the competition items for Olympic Games as the research subjects and conducts in-depth analysis on the range of good governance. The detailed range include term limits,power balance mechanism,accountability mechanism,participation mechanism as well as other aspects of good governance needing to be reformed. The results show that the international sports organizations have some disadvantages and weaknesses in term limits,power balance mechanism,accountability mechanism,participation mechanism,gender equality and sources of national representatives,and there's a long distance between the actual good governance and the ideal one. Therefore,it's suggested that the international sports organizations should discuss and act together according to a series of explicit,objective and strict standards of good governance. As far as these can be done,the self-governance of sports organizations shall be reliable and trustworthy and their self-governance rights shall be legitimate and just. The experience gained by the international sports organizations from reforming the good governance shall provide the references and lessons for China's societal sports organizations to perform their own reforms.
Various international sports organizations including IOC(International Olympic Committee) and FIFA(Federation Internationale de Football Association) have successively released their agenda for reforming the good governance,indicating that good governance has become the dominant reform &development agenda for international sports organizations. This paper chooses 35 international sports federations of the competition items for Olympic Games as the research subjects and conducts in-depth analysis on the range of good governance. The detailed range include term limits,power balance mechanism,accountability mechanism,participation mechanism as well as other aspects of good governance needing to be reformed. The results show that the international sports organizations have some disadvantages and weaknesses in term limits,power balance mechanism,accountability mechanism,participation mechanism,gender equality and sources of national representatives,and there's a long distance between the actual good governance and the ideal one. Therefore,it's suggested that the international sports organizations should discuss and act together according to a series of explicit,objective and strict standards of good governance. As far as these can be done,the self-governance of sports organizations shall be reliable and trustworthy and their self-governance rights shall be legitimate and just. The experience gained by the international sports organizations from reforming the good governance shall provide the references and lessons for China's societal sports organizations to perform their own reforms.
引文
[1]BEVIRM. Encyclopedia of governance[M]. London:SAGE Publications,2007:359-262.
[2]黄璐.国际足联危机性案件的延伸论证[J].体育科研,2016,37(2):16-23.
[3]Play the Game/Danish Institute for Sports Studies. Action for good governance in international sports organisations[R/OL].(2013-04-30)[2017-06-20]. http://www.playthegame. org/fileadmin/documents/good_governance_reports/aggis_final_report. pdf.
[4] PIELKE R. How can FIFA be held accountable?[J].Sport Management Review,2013,16(3):255-267.
[5]萨托利.民主新论:当代论争[M].冯克利,阎克文,译.上海:上海人民出版社,2015:289.
[6]黄璐.国际足联改革路线图研究:批判性反思[J].成都体育学院学报,2016,42(4):7-14.
[7] IOC. Olympic Agenda 2020:the strategic roadmap for the future of the Olympic Movement[EB/OL].(2014-11-18)[2017-06-20]. http://www. olympic. org/olympic-agenda-2020.
[8]SCHENK S. Safe hands:building integrity and transparency at FIFA[EB/OL].(2011-08-16)[2017-06-20]. https://issuu. com/transparencyinternational/docs/fifa_safehands? e=2496456/2710188.
[9] VAN KERSBERGEN K,VAN WAARDEN F.“Governance”as a bridge between disciplines[J]. European journal of political research,2004,43(2):143-171.
[10]ESCAP. What is good governance?[EB/OL].(2009-07-10)[2017-06-20]. http://www. unescap. org/resources/what-good-governance.
[11]黄璐.国际奥委会政治自治问题研究[J].山东体育学院学报,2016,31(1):6-11.
[12]HEALEY D. Governance insport:outside the box?[J].The Economic and Labour Relations Review,2012,23(3):39-60.
[13]陈华荣.论欧盟体育治理基本原则的形成与发展[J].体育成人教育学刊,2015,31(1):4-8.
[14]FIFA. 2016 FIFA Reform Committee report presented to the Executive Committee[EB/OL].(2015-12-03)[2017-06-20]. http://www. fifa. com/governance/news/y=2015/m=12/news=2016-fifa-reform-committee-report-presented-to-the-executive-committee-2741751. html.
[15] GROENEVELD M. European sport governance,citizens and the state[J]. Public Management Review,2009,11(4):421-440.
[16] FIFA. FIFA governance regulations(FGR)[EB/OL].(2016-10-06)[2017-06-20]. http://www. fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/administration/02/11/20/75/forenweb_neutral. pdf.
[17]邱雪.国际奥委会改革动向及其对中国体育改革的影响[J].体育文化导刊,2015(8):20-25.
[18]黄璐. 2016年国际足联改革委员会报告解读[J].体育研究与教育,2016,31(5):22-27.
[19]刘亮.全面深化改革背景下我国体育治理结构问题厘析与改革路径研究[J].天津体育学院学报,2015,30(4):351-356.
[20]刘云峰,王翔宇.感知价值对网络体育组织成员行为意向的影响:基于探索性因子分析[J].体育研究与教育,2016,31(3):46-49.
[2]黄璐.国际足联危机性案件的延伸论证[J].体育科研,2016,37(2):16-23.
[3]Play the Game/Danish Institute for Sports Studies. Action for good governance in international sports organisations[R/OL].(2013-04-30)[2017-06-20]. http://www.playthegame. org/fileadmin/documents/good_governance_reports/aggis_final_report. pdf.
[4] PIELKE R. How can FIFA be held accountable?[J].Sport Management Review,2013,16(3):255-267.
[5]萨托利.民主新论:当代论争[M].冯克利,阎克文,译.上海:上海人民出版社,2015:289.
[6]黄璐.国际足联改革路线图研究:批判性反思[J].成都体育学院学报,2016,42(4):7-14.
[7] IOC. Olympic Agenda 2020:the strategic roadmap for the future of the Olympic Movement[EB/OL].(2014-11-18)[2017-06-20]. http://www. olympic. org/olympic-agenda-2020.
[8]SCHENK S. Safe hands:building integrity and transparency at FIFA[EB/OL].(2011-08-16)[2017-06-20]. https://issuu. com/transparencyinternational/docs/fifa_safehands? e=2496456/2710188.
[9] VAN KERSBERGEN K,VAN WAARDEN F.“Governance”as a bridge between disciplines[J]. European journal of political research,2004,43(2):143-171.
[10]ESCAP. What is good governance?[EB/OL].(2009-07-10)[2017-06-20]. http://www. unescap. org/resources/what-good-governance.
[11]黄璐.国际奥委会政治自治问题研究[J].山东体育学院学报,2016,31(1):6-11.
[12]HEALEY D. Governance insport:outside the box?[J].The Economic and Labour Relations Review,2012,23(3):39-60.
[13]陈华荣.论欧盟体育治理基本原则的形成与发展[J].体育成人教育学刊,2015,31(1):4-8.
[14]FIFA. 2016 FIFA Reform Committee report presented to the Executive Committee[EB/OL].(2015-12-03)[2017-06-20]. http://www. fifa. com/governance/news/y=2015/m=12/news=2016-fifa-reform-committee-report-presented-to-the-executive-committee-2741751. html.
[15] GROENEVELD M. European sport governance,citizens and the state[J]. Public Management Review,2009,11(4):421-440.
[16] FIFA. FIFA governance regulations(FGR)[EB/OL].(2016-10-06)[2017-06-20]. http://www. fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/administration/02/11/20/75/forenweb_neutral. pdf.
[17]邱雪.国际奥委会改革动向及其对中国体育改革的影响[J].体育文化导刊,2015(8):20-25.
[18]黄璐. 2016年国际足联改革委员会报告解读[J].体育研究与教育,2016,31(5):22-27.
[19]刘亮.全面深化改革背景下我国体育治理结构问题厘析与改革路径研究[J].天津体育学院学报,2015,30(4):351-356.
[20]刘云峰,王翔宇.感知价值对网络体育组织成员行为意向的影响:基于探索性因子分析[J].体育研究与教育,2016,31(3):46-49.