Health promotion in sports mega-events: The governance gap in promoting health in the Summer Olympic Games

How does the governance network set by the Internacional Olympic Committee (IOC) and The Olympic Partners (TOP) sponsors in Paris 2024 Olympic Games address health promotion in commercial partnerships and in their marketing campaigns?  The IOC had 15 global TOP partners when delivering the Paris 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games, However, this collaborative governance structure does not seem to embed health promotion as part of their marketing strategy.

Abstract

How does the governance network set by the Internacional Olympic Committee (IOC) and The Olympic Partners (TOP) sponsors in Paris 2024 Olympic Games address health promotion in commercial partnerships and in their marketing campaigns?  The promotion of health through sports has been discussed in academia (Nutbeam & Muscat, 2021). However, sport mega-events worldwide have been reticent regarding the societal expectations set on them (Misener & Misener, 2017). In the case of delivering the Olympic and Paralympic Games, different interests must be managed by the IOC through a collaborative governance structure (Chappelet, 2021). The IOC linkages with the highest-level sponsors results in a crucial collaborative governance structure for the Games due to sponsors’ economic input.  In exchange for this investment, these companies have category-exclusive marketing rights (International Olympic Committee, 2024). This qualitative research was conducted through document analyses in two main stages. In the first stage an in-depth document analysis of each of the 15 TOP sponsors for Paris 2024 Olympic games was conducted. The second stage consisted in analysing marketing campaigns that addressed health topics, during the Paris 2024 Olympic Games, from the 15 TOP partners in 12 countries around the world. Data were analysed using collaborative governance theory to discuss the relationship between IOC and their commercial partnerships strategies (Emerson & Nabatchi, 2015; Qi & Ran, 2024). Results show that health promotion is addressed by the IOC through partnerships and agreements with stakeholders. These partnerships were part of the IOC 2020 agenda strategy, to increase the impact of its programmes. The most prominent initiative in this respect was the agreements between the IOC and the WHO and highlights a commitment to strengthen the health legacy of Olympic Games (International Olympic Committee, 2021). Despite health being a topic addressed by the IOC in previous decades, though recommendations in the IOC agenda (Mountjoy et al., 2011) it is not systematically addressed through the TOP program, showing no consistence between partnerships goals, initiatives and evaluation metrics. In a health promotion concept, only one of the 15 sponsors mentioned well-being promotion for athletes as a goal in the partnership deal. Related to social health, only 2 companies mentioned inclusion, equity and inclusiveness as aspects being addressed in their sponsorship deal. Another company’s aim was to provide a “fulfilling lifestyle to society”. In terms of environmental health, 3 companies mentioned “sustainable development”, “environmental protection” and “climate change emergency”. Results show that the collaborative scheme set by the IOC and its TOP partners relies on a commercial partnership where private companies seek to use the Games as a marketing platform to reach a global audience and expand their business.

This study found 110 health related messages in the 12 countries analysed, promoted by TOP partners. From 15 companies in the program, 4 of them were consistent in promoting health during their marketing campaigns at the Olympic Games. 2 were companies that presented health in their strategy in the sponsorship agreement with the IOC, while other 2 that did not address the topic before. Despite being mentioned a couple of times in these agreements, environmental health was by far the rarest type of health present in the messages analysed.

The collaborative governance structure set by the IOC with its multinational sponsors do not seem to embed health promotion as part of their strategy. The implication of this study claims for the Olympic movement to act strategically in the health promotion in the global context and to actively seek to incorporate its commercial partnerships in the matter.

1. References

Chappelet, J. L. (2021). The Governance of the Olympic System: From One to Many Stakeholders. Journal of Global Sport Management, 0(0), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/24704067.2021.1899767

Emerson, K., & Nabatchi, T. (2015). Evaluating the Productivity of Collaborative Governance Regimes: A Performance Matrix. Public Performance & Management Review, 38(4), 717–747. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2015.1031016

International Olympic Committee. (2024). IOC Marketing Media Guide Paris 2024. In https://stillmed.olympics.com/media/Documents/International-Olympic-Committee/IOC-Marketing-And-Broadcasting/IOC-Marketing-Media-Guide-Paris-2024.pdf .

Misener, L., & Misener, K. E. (2017). Examining the integration of sport and health promotion: partnership or paradox? In Sport, Physical Activity and Public Health. Routledge.

Nutbeam, D., & Muscat, D. M. (2021). Health Promotion Glossary 2021. Health Promotion International, 36(6), 1578–1598. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/daaa157

Qi, H., & Ran, B. (2024). Paradoxes in collaborative governance. Public Management Review, 26(10), 2728–2753. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2023.2196290