International development associated with the 2016 Rio Olympic Games legacy did not deliver on grassroots sport-for-development, as ‘hard development’ is preferred to ‘soft development’.

An Canadian author but the context is Brazil, South America (a development economy in the Global South)

Review of publications – 201 articles and reports obtained from the media and DJF database

Debates:

• The broader development agenda promoted by the Olympic Movement linked to Rio 2016.
• Messages by commercial media after announcement of Rio as host city.
  Delivering on IOC’s Olympism in Action relating to ‘softer’/people-centred development agenda linked to Sport for Development and Peace (SDP).

Brazil, development and sport:

• Brazil as third world country and part of BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) group
• Can developing countries afford to host mega events like Commonwealth Games, the FIFA World Cup and Olympic Games?
• IOC and host countries are committed to IOC agenda for development  Olympism in Action.
• What development is for the public good?
  o Social and economic benefits – what is the net loss and gains for the public account?
  o Mega-events is more than athletic performance and elite sport.
  o NGOs have a key role to play to deliver on a broader development agenda.
  o Policy development alone is not enough – it is about the delivery on political (and IOC) promises, whilst also listening to the ‘voices from below’ (NGOs)

The IOC, United Nations and International Development – addressing the components of Olympism in Action:

• Development through sport (IOC website) – building a better world through development programmes.
• Act on UN-IOC Forum: The importance of partnerships (including NGOs and academics)
• Act on 19 recommendations ‘on how to maximise the impact of various activities in the field of
  development through sport’ (p. 876). Examples of recommendations:
  o #2 – IOC to leverage its relationship with the UN to build better relationships with government
  authorities and deliver on achieving the (Sustainable) Development Goals.
  o #3 – Maximise the contribution to development ‘beyond the competitive character of sport’.
  o #7 – Link to development issues such as combating the spread of HIV/AIDS.
  o #12 – Speak the role that sort can play ion achieving gender equality.
  o #15 – Assert the role of sport in creating a climate for peace.

• Official government projects did not deliver on broad social development in Brazil.
• Olympism in Action (and SDP) is a framework for sport-focused, civil society-led development initiatives but need to deliver sustainable change beyond the promises of political actors on ‘hard development’ outcomes (e.g. infrastructure development).
• See ‘development as growth’ to be promoted on commercial, media and political platforms.
• Reshape Olympism (philosophy of life and life skill framework) for/by local communities.

What role can the SSCN and NGOs play in claiming a stake in legacy programmes?
What were the benefits of a mega – or national sport event for communities and NGOs?