Speakers
Description
Objectives
During the past decade, ‘sport integrity’ has become a catchword of significant currency. Nonetheless, unethical conduct is not a new phenomenon neither internationally nor in Sweden. In fact, Swedish sport itself states that moral breaches have not increased. This raises a fundamental question of why Swedish sport has adopted integrity instruments? The objective of this investigation is to unveil the lines of argumentation that surrounded the adoption of these instruments to inform discussions about their consequences.
Methods
We focus on the emergence of three instruments: ombudsman- and whistle-blower functions, and ethical code of conduct, and draw on data from documents advancing lines of argumentation concerning instrument adoption and design such as minutes from, and motions submitted to the Swedish Sports Confederation general assemblies, preparatory work, and consultation responses.
Findings
The analysis shows that neither laws nor authorities provided impetus for the adoption of integrity instruments. Rather, references are made to international trends towards ‘good governance,’ with the adoption of instruments as key to preserving the credibility of sport. Furthermore, ethics instruments are positioned as a timely tool in Swedish sport’s strategic reorientation, particularly with regards to the goal of making compliance to sport’s basic values a strategic foundation.
Discussion
We discuss the significance of the ‘politicking’ surrounding instrument emergence and design and the ways in which these processes may foreshadow shifts in overall governance paradigms and their inherent allocation of blame, mandate, and accountability.
Conclusion
At the time of the conference, we will provide conclusions regarding the potentially unintended consequences of sport integrity instruments.
