The Evolving Nature of Self-Regulation:  A Case Study of Sport

Sport is a self-regulatory system of great sophistication. Sport governing bodies (SGBs), of which the IOC and FIFA are exemplars, have developed a hybrid transnational regulatory regime through which they control every important aspect of their competitions. They determine which countries and athletes compete in their competitions, and the rules under which they compete. They also have proven themselves adept at co-opting intermediaries (state and non-state) to assist them to administer and enforce their rules. Central to their ability to do this is the concept of "autonomy" – that SGBs have the right to (self) regulate their sports free from political and government interference. And central to the concept of autonomy is the perception that only SGBs can be trusted to protect and advance sports’ universal values of fair play, tolerance and friendship. However, recent failures in sport governance have undermined this trust. This has led to calls for SGB’s autonomy and self-regulatory status to be limited, and sport governance to be reformed. Common to these calls is a more prominent role for regulatory intermediaries - whether it be governments playing a more assertive role or the adoption of collaborative governance approaches. This paper examines these calls and how SGBs are responding to them. In particular, it asks whether the future of sport governance lies in enhanced self-regulation (where intermediaries constrain SGB behaviour and improve their credibility); thin self-regulation (where intermediaries remain dependent on and controlled by SGBs); or diminished self-regulation (where the presence of intermediaries reflects a substantive power shift).