EU_and_global_sport_regulation_2016-10-03_accepted_version.pdf (280.28 kB)
Global sport power Europe? The efficacy of the European Union in global sport regulation
journal contributionposted on 2016-10-20, 10:36 authored by Borja Garcia-GarciaBorja Garcia-Garcia, Henk-Erik Meier
The effectiveness of the European Union (EU) as global regulator is controversial. Some scholars characterize the EU as one of the most important shapers of global regulations; others argue that the EU’s effectiveness critically depends on its regulatory cohesion, the political opportunity structure and regulatory capacity of its interlocutors. Since global sport represents a regionally segmented industry and is governed by private actors of diverse regulatory capacity, global sport regulation represents an excellent domain to study these propositions systematically. Comparative case studies on global sport regulation support the idea that the EU can impose its regulatory ambitions on sport governing due to market size and regulatory capacity. However, the broader political opportunity structure is found to be relevant and the EU does not appear as a strong regulator of global sports.
- Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences
Published inJournal of Common Market Studies
CitationGARCIA, B. and MEIER, H.-E., 2016. Global sport power Europe? The efficacy of the European Union in global sport regulation. Journal of Common Market Studies, 55 (4), pp. 850–870.
Publisher© University Association for Contemporary European Studies and Wiley
- AM (Accepted Manuscript)
Publisher statementThis work is made available according to the conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) licence. Full details of this licence are available at: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
NotesThis is the peer reviewed version of the following article: GARCIA, B. and MEIER, H.-E., 2016. Global sport power Europe? The efficacy of the European Union in global sport regulation. Journal of Common Market Studies, 55 (4), pp. 850–870, which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12512. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Use of Self-Archived Versions.