Sport for development in crisis: Revisiting old ideals in an era of political volatility

By Ioanna Maria Kantartzi, PhDc. University of Ottawa | LinkedIn

The promise of Sport for Development (SfD) has long captured the imagination of global institutions, policymakers, and grassroots actors alike. Rooted in mid-20th century humanitarianism, SfD emerged from foundational milestones such as the 1959 UN Declaration on the Rights of the Child, the 1978 International Charter of Physical Education and Sport, and the 1979 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women—each framing sport not as entertainment, but as a right, a tool of inclusion, and a means of empowerment (Darnell et al., 2019; Coatler, 2007).

By the 1990s, this vision became operational. In 1992, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and UN bodies signed landmark agreements that integrated sport into development policy agendas (Bencsik & Doczi, 2019). The 1993 UN Resolution 48/11 on the Olympic Truce and the creation of Olympic Aid—later Right to Play—by Olympian Johann Koss further cemented sport as an instrument of peace. This momentum culminated in the UN's inclusion of sport in the Millennium Development Goals and the 2001 establishment of the UN Office on Sport for Development and Peace by Secretary-General Kofi Annan (van Luijk, 2013; Blom et al., 2014). By 2005, the global recognition of sport’s developmental value was institutionalized through declarations, designated observances, and dedicated funding streams.

For decades, SfD was embraced as a framework for social cohesion, democratic participation, and grassroots empowerment (Kay et al., 2009; Skinner et al., 2008). It was celebrated for fostering pluralism and agency among youth, immigrants, women, and marginalized populations (Spaaij, 2012; Walseth, 2008). More than a set of activities, SfD was envisioned as a vehicle for building global citizenship, fairness, and human dignity (Lister, 1998; Penney et al., 2005).

However, this vision is now facing significant challenges

In the midst of escalating armed conflicts, shrinking humanitarian space, and the politicization of aid, SfD faces unprecedented challenges. The global aid crisis—once viewed through the lens of logistics or funding—is now a profound political reality, altering what is possible in the realm of development work. In countries like Sudan, Gaza, and Afghanistan, sport infrastructure has been destroyed, local facilitators have fled or been targeted, and youth, the primary beneficiaries of SfD, are now exposed to trauma, displacement, and recruitment into armed groups.

These realities directly are in contrast with SfD’s foundational principles. Where sport was once a neutral space for dialogue and unity, today it is either suspended or co-opted in environments where humanitarian neutrality no longer holds. The collapse of consistent, secure environments means SfD cannot function as it once did. Its symbolic value remains high, however its operational capacity is critically impaired.

A stark example came on January 20, 2025, when President Trump signed Executive Order 14169, enacting a 90-day freeze on U.S. foreign development aid. Though narrowly exempting military aid to strategic allies, and later waiving restrictions for life-saving interventions, the order triggered massive disruptions across the aid ecosystem. Over 5,200 of USAID’s 6,200 programs were stalled, with CNN reporting catastrophic layoffs and halted projects in over 30 countries (CNN, 2025; Reuters, 2025a).

The ripple effects were immediate and sobering. Borehole water projects in rural Kenya—sustaining over a million people—were jeopardized. FEWS NET, the U.S. government's famine early-warning system, was suspended, blinding crisis responders in regions most vulnerable to food insecurity (Reuters, 2025b). Without water, shelter, food security, or early warning capacity, many communities became inaccessible to sport-based programming. Also, youth centers were closed, camps looted, and safe spaces rip to pieces.

This is not merely a funding issue; it is a crisis of principle

SfD’s core beliefs—humanitarian neutrality, peacebuilding through engagement, and long-term social transformation—are in direct tension with the geopolitical realities of 2025. Programs dedicated to gender equity, refugee integration, or community reconciliation are often the first to be defunded. As the world moves forward with growing political and security challenges, sport participation is increasingly perceived and treated not as a fundamental human right and a strategic pillar of human development, but as a luxury.

Moving Forward 

To preserve SfD’s relevance, practitioners must recalibrate their strategies—not abandoning sport’s ideals, but re-embedding them in today’s political terrain. This means:

1. Integrating with Humanitarian Delivery
   Embed sport within broader aid packages (e.g., health, water, food security) to ensure its presence even during acute emergencies.
2. Strengthening Safeguarding Mechanisms
   Design flexible, risk-informed sport programs that can scale down responsibly under pressure while protecting both facilitators and participants.
3. Advocating Politically and Diplomatically
   Use evidence from disrupted programs—such as the Kenyan boreholes and FEWS NET collapse—to argue for SfD’s indispensable role in resilience, psychosocial healing, and community rebuilding.
4. Leveraging Corporate Social Advocacy (CSA) by Influential Sport Organizations
   Encourage mega sport organizations—such as the IOC, FIFA, or NBA—to engage in strategic advocacy that champions the protection of displaced youth and the institutionalization of SfD. By publicly aligning with humanitarian priorities, these actors can pressure donor states, multilateral agencies, and NGOs to integrate sport into long-term policy solutions for youth engagement, trauma recovery, and social reintegration. CSA thus becomes a powerful instrument not only for visibility, but for policy mobilization and structural impact.

In a world of competing crises, SfD must be politically wise, practically engaged, and strategically framed as a core element of global development. Its ideals remain compelling, but they must now be upheld not only in principle, but also in the complex realities of today’s fragmented aid landscape.

About the author

Ioanna Maria Kantartzi is a Ph.D. candidate at the School of Human Kinetics, University of Ottawa, Canada. Her research explores Corporate Social Advocacy (CSA) practices within sport organizations, with a focus on how these are shaped by social movements related to human rights and social justice | LinkedIn

References

Bencsik, M. B., Doczi, T. (2019). Mapping sport for development and peace as Bourdieu’s field. Physical culture and sport, 81(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.2478/pcssr-2019-0001

Blom, L. C., Van Zee, A., Hilliard, E. C., Judge, L. W. (2014). Sport for development and peace: knowledge of and application by youth sport directors. International Journal of Sport Studies, 4(11), 1349-13-58. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275041189_Sport_for_Development_and_Peace_Knowledge_of_and_Application_by_Youth_Sport_Directors

CNN. (2025, February 4). How the US foreign aid freeze is intensifying humanitarian crises across the globe. https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/04/world/usaid-us-foreign-aid-freeze-humanitarian-crises-intl

Coalter, F. (2007) Sport clubs, social capital and social regeneration: “ill-defined interventions with hard to follow outcomes. Sport in Society, 10(4), 537-559. https://doi.org/10.1080/17430430701388723 

Darnell, S.C., Field, R., Kidd, B. (2019). The history of politics of Sport-for Development. Activists, Ideologues and Reforms. Springer Link. 

Lister, R. (1998). Citizen in action: citizenship and community development in ta Northern Ireland context. Community Development Journal, 33(3), 226-235. https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/33.3.226

Penney, D., Clarke, G., & Quill, M. (Eds.). (2005). Sport education in physical education: Research based practice. New York, NY: Routledge.

Reuters. (2025a, February 19). U.S. aid freeze ‘decimates’ life‑saving work globally, survey finds. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-aid-freeze-decimates-life-saving-work-globally-survey-finds-2025-02-19/

Reuters. (2025b, February 7). Halt in US aid cripples global efforts to relieve hunger. Reuters. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/world/halt-us-aid-cripples-global-efforts-relieve-hunger-2025-02-06/

Spaaij, R. (2012). Beyond the playing field: experiences of sport, social capital, and integration among Somalis in Australia. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 35(9), 1519-1538. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2011.592205 

van Luijk, N. (2013). A historical examination of the IOC and UN partnership: 1952-1980. [Unpublished Research Report]. University of British Columbia. 

Walseth, K. (2008). Bridging and bonding social capital in sport-experiences of young women with an immigrant background. Sport, Education and Society, (13)1, 1-17, https://doi.org/10.1080/13573320701780498