You are on page 1of 27

April 2007

THE POWER OF SPORT Sport and Cohesion
Toolkit (Pilot – work in progress) Institute of Community Cohesion
“Sport has the power to change the world. The power to inspire, the power to unite people in a way little else can” Nelson Mandela cohesion@coventry.ac.uk www.cohesioninstitute.org.uk 1

Sports And Community Cohesion Toolkit
Contents Foreword Introduction and aims Aims of toolkit Role of iCoCo How to use this toolkit Part One: Policy context and background Sport and Community Cohesion Community cohesion and parallel lives A process of separate development? Special initiative or mainstream activity? Sport and social capital Sport and culture in the UK Part Two: Profile on football and community cohesion Part Three: Practical tools for understanding sport and cohesion Good practice case studies Practitioner network Useful links Reference material How to contact us cohesion@coventry.ac.uk www.cohesioninstitute.org.uk 2

Sport can unite communities – and the country as a whole . Sport should be a great unifier…over the next six years we should be aiming to reduce to zero the number of people who play only with and against people of their own race and religion. The way we even think of our Nation can be defined by our sporting heroes – Kelly Holmes wrapped in the Union Jack. All of our inequalities are reflected on the sports field and. sports activities are completely divided failing to grasp the opportunity to build bridges between communities. Amir Kahn‟s supremacy in the boxing ring – and of course – our footballers‟ performance determining the mood of the Nation.cohesioninstitute.Foreword The Power of Sport The power of sport is simply huge. Get it right and the legacy from the Olympics will not just be medals. But sport can also just reflect society‟s divisions too. or England winning the Ashes.in common cause. This prompted David Miliband to propose: “We need to use the six years up till 2012 to promote sporting activity across racial and religious boundaries. or a positive image of Britain abroad. after winning two Olympic Golds.ac. cohesion@coventry.org. It can transform people‟s lives in so many ways.uk www. Sport can also change communities. but vital bridges between communities who have used sport to promote tolerance and understanding”.uk 3 . 31st January 2006. all too often. David Miliband MP. build teamwork and even turn the most disaffected of young people into disciplined athletes. or regeneration in East London. It can improve personal health. or sporting infrastructure. Scarman Memorial Lecture.

supported by Sport England East Midlands and the IDeA. To develop sporting activity as a means of building social capital – particularly through „bridging‟ across communities – to build trust and to enhance civil renewal programmes To highlight successful programmes and to provide examples of good practice cohesion@coventry. whilst also taking forward the Government‟s other key targets in terms of increasing participation and performance in sport and improving health and well-being. We do not claim that it is only sport that can do this and there are many similarly inspiring arts. clubs and societies. The aims of The Power of Sport toolkit can therefore be summarised as: Aims To clearly establish and promote the „power of sport‟ in the cohesion agenda To present sports activities as a non-threatening. music and other projects that can also serve to unite communities and inspire harmonious community relations. which are capable of building trust and respect To enable the widest possible participation.uk www. but it can also change the perspective of whole communities and develop their sense of belonging.uk 4 . development workers and others working in the sports „industry‟ – they already know the power of sport. We would like to see the main service providers also recognise what sport can contribute too much wider processes of social regeneration and change. It is intended to draw attention to the hugely significant role that sport can play to promote community cohesion. But the opportunities for sport have never been greater and we need to ensure that these opportunities are now fully grasped.cohesioninstitute. environment.ac. Sport can change peoples‟ lives in so many ways. across ethnic and religious divides. facilitate more equal access to sporting opportunities and to promote successful role models from all communities To create a stronger association between the success of individuals and teams and an identification with a multicultural society.Introduction and aims This toolkit has been prepared by the Institute of Community Cohesion. We hope that the role that sport can play will not simply be championed by those involved in sports – the players.org. safe.

iCoCo represents a unique partnership of academic. so that developments can be shared and constantly updated Build capacity at all levels and provide development opportunities.uk 5 . and will focus on building positive and harmonious community relations. which combine the experience and expertise of four Universities .‟ iCoCo and its role The Institute of Community Cohesion was established in 2005 to provide a new approach to race. statutory and non-governmental bodies. DeMontfort and Leicester.uk www.org. diversity and multiculturalism.cohesioninstitute.We also wish to draw attention to the particular opportunities presented by the London 2012 Olympics Games and Paralympic Games. Warwick. Cultural diversity and legacy were absolutely critical issues in securing the 2012 Games and we now have an opportunity to both improve community relations across the country and to develop them „for the young people of the World. private and voluntary sectors and support to all agencies involved in the development of community cohesion policy and practice. providing unrivalled research capacity. ranging from the training of community leaders to postgraduate research-based programmes. cohesion@coventry. academic courses to the highest level. iCoCo endeavours to: Improve and develop our understanding of community relations. collating and disseminating best practice Provide a capacity to evaluate cohesion programmes and conduct action research Provide a network for all agencies interested in this area.Coventry. with practitioners from a range of diverse backgrounds and professions. Our aim is to become the recognised national and international centre of expertise on community cohesion. In the next six years we need to ensure that the promise of „the Games‟ is realised. accredited training programmes for public.ac.

How to use the toolkit This toolkit.org. in line with others produced by iCoCo.ac. 3) The toolkit is also to provide an opportunity for practitioners to share good practice and lessons learnt. cohesion@coventry. is a dynamic document that can be used in a number of ways: 1) The toolkit provides a summary of key policy issues which will enable users to gain a useful understanding and links through to further detailed documents and papers that have been produced in this area.uk www. 2) The toolkit has a number of tools that can be used to develop practical solutions to use sport to promote and develop good outcomes in terms of community cohesion.uk 6 .cohesioninstitute.

. which were identified by the Community Cohesion Review Team and found on a much wider basis in many parts of the country. They described a complete separation of communities in which there was no contact and no relationship between different groups because the separation of housing areas was compounded by separation in schooling. across the world. social. employment. the diversity of people‟s different backgrounds and circumstances are appreciated and positively valued. It developed partly in response to the „parallel lives‟ of different communities. faith and other spheres. Formal definition of community cohesion The formal definition of community cohesion adopted in Guidance issued by the Government and the LGA is that a cohesive community is one where: there is a common vision and a sense of belonging for all communities. various models of „multiculturalism‟ are being questioned. The heightened international tension has ensured that race and diversity has moved up the political agenda and it is also apparent that. It is now a part of many local authority community strategies and is central to the Government‟s approach to race and community relations. following the London bombings on July 7th 2005 and small scale „riots‟ in a number of towns and cities including Birmingham. Burnley and Oldham disturbances. The ignorance and lack of understanding about each other‟s communities was seen to create an easy target and opportunity for extremists to stir up race hatred and to demonise particular groups. „Parallel lives‟ were not simply related to segregation in a residential sense. cultural.PART ONE: Policy context and background Community cohesion and ‘parallel lives’ The concept of Community Cohesion was conceived 5 years ago in response to the Bradford. The importance of the community cohesion agenda has become even more apparent over the last 12 months or so. Community cohesion has now become a national programme with a formal definition (see below) promulgated by central government and the LGA on behalf of local government.

cohesion@coventry. in schools and within neighbourhoods.cohesioninstitute.uk www.uk 7 .org.ac.those from different backgrounds have similar life opportunities and: strong and positive relationships are being developed between people from different backgrounds in the workplace.

such as the Asian participation in football initiative. for example. However. Such is the nature of competition and especially where those on the field of play are simply a reflection of wider social divisions and problems. have also created some dilemmas. are prepared to meet. These schemes may well have increased the number of Asians playing football and have raised the level of participation. Many efforts have been made however. In some cases these divisions are almost tribal. cohesion@coventry.uk www. Sport also has the power to inspire both teams and individuals and to create a sense of achievement which can be built upon week by week and year by year. Yet. This is attributable to a combination of tradition and heritage. whilst sport can create many opportunities for bringing communities together and establishing the strongest of social bonds it can also be the root of the most destructive of forces. or reinforce existing divisions based on area. rules and norms are readily understood.Catholic participation is almost wholly through the Gaelic Athletic Association.ac. The Catholic/Protestant division is also evident to a lesser extent. or providing the basis for interaction and multicultural structures.cohesioninstitute. for example. whilst also trying to break down the barriers between communities. the sectarian divides in the community are reflected in support for particular football clubs. on occasion. Catholic and Protestants use separate auctioneers. Community Cohesion programmes are being devised in relation to sport and many other areas – there is no single way of bringing communities together and it is important to find ways of bridging divides in all parts of daily life. solicitors and estate agents and around 95 per cent of children are served by separate school systems. The reinforcement of divisions are perhaps nowhere more evident than in Northern Ireland where many aspects of daily life are segregated. though not on the same scale. social class. Residential areas are highly segregated.org.uk 8 . some well meaning attempts to raise ethnic minority participation. rather than impacting on the sport as a whole. in particular. However.It should be noted that the more „traditional‟ approaches of tackling discrimination and promoting equal opportunities are still very much part of the agenda and that community cohesion is building upon them. but may also have succeeded in reinforcing separation by creating. encouraging people to come to terms with diversity and difference and promoting an overarching identity and sense of belonging. to rid sport of racism and some of these initiatives have been remarkably successful in both raising ethnic minority representation and reducing overt racism. Sport can divide communities. Sport is similarly divided . intimidation and even violence. sport has been identified as an area of „safe ground‟ and is often where youngsters. Sports like football are a „universal language‟ common to all cultures where the discipline. ethnicity and faith. to indirect and direct discrimination. supported by mythology. Sport has also divided the many minority ethnic communities from each other and from the majority community. an Asian team to play in an all-White league. social class and cultural factors and. in England and Scotland and.

2004). In these terms.uk 9 . IDeA research examined the shortlisted Round 7 Beacon – „Sport and Culture for Hard to Reach Groups‟ and conducted a search on references to „cohesion‟ in each of the applications. The IDeA also looked at applications that were not shortlisted for Beacon Status. seem to have reflected community patterns and networks and developed on a single identity basis. been relatively little by way of properly funded and evaluated action-based research. The results were. The Power of Sport argues that a more holistic approach can also ensure that initiatives also improve community relations and avoid institutionalising separation and division. some has been funded by charitable bodies. (A number of such schemes are in part 3 of the toolkit). The Raich Carter Sports Centre in part 3). sporting or community activities can provide good opportunities” (ICAR. Leicester City Council. Practice is. a search was conducted on references to „cohesion‟ in each of the applications. however.ac. the most significant of which is Understanding the Stranger. Sunderland City Council. that. 2004). ironically. at least by the statutory agencies. 5 made no reference to cohesion. Similar approaches have been developed to tackle the under-representation of women and girls. However. cohesion@coventry. as well as new ones. Fewer still. only 7 made any reference to cohesion and only 3 made it a significant feature of their bid. Results of this search revealed that of the 13 authorities shortlisted.uk www. however. was outstanding with 18 references. one of the most effective ways of encouraging understanding between local people and asylum seekers is for them to meet each other… “arrangements need to be made for local residents and asylum seekers to meet as neighbours.Many of the initiatives undertaken to date have been designed to improve access for underrepresented black and minority ethnic groups and to ensure equality of opportunity. though there are some schemes which include such arrangements (see for example. commissioned and published by the independent Information Centre about Asylum and Refugees in the United Kingdom (ICAR. with a view to developing practical steps which would prevent tension from developing in local areas.org. The research examined ways to manage the arrival of asylum seekers. with again only one being outstanding. In a number of studies and reviews there has been difficulty in identifying mixed sports teams and many established teams. which is a Beacon Council for Community Cohesion. appear to use sport as a means of assisting asylum seekers to integrate and as a means of allowing the host community to get to know and respect them. a little better but from the 21 applications. amongst other things. most of the schemes have been an unqualified success. Fortunately. lagging behind policy and relatively few sports initiatives have been used to promote community cohesion.cohesioninstitute. This is a critical area and the power of sport to break down barriers should again be recognised. 11 made very limited reference and 4 made it a significant feature. There has. financed by the Paul Hamlyn Foundation. This need not be through specially convened meetings – existing cultural. The Report uses „contact theory‟ as an approach and concludes. Again.

uk www. However. White League‟). which traditionally focused upon the dual strands of increasing participation and raising performance levels. it has often proved easier to engage with different groups on their own ground (or within their own comfort zones). with people from a similar background. ‘Sports policy in Britain. More generally. Vol 76 No 2 2005. that this has been necessary (see Appendix „Black Team. is difficult to argue against.uk 10 . it seems as though it can be even harder to develop common programmes subsequently and the arrangements quickly become institutionalised.org. whilst those policy teams responsible for regeneration. so that they can perhaps compete on an equal basis. has begun to shift towards viewing the potential benefits and impacts of sport in more holistic and cross-cutting ways’ Town Planning Review. „The framework for Sport in England: making England an active and successful sporting nation: a vision for 2020‟ A process of separate development? The arguments for and against „single identity funding‟ are not unique to sport (see for example NACVS Paper on Single Identity Funding on the Institute‟s website www. pp i-v cohesion@coventry. To some extent the modest emphasis on cohesion in sports schemes to date is not very surprising: most departments with a responsibility for sports developments are focused on their own particular targets in respect of participation.uk) and are not entirely straightforward.Other research has highlighted the need to tackle the ignorance of the resident population as a means of reducing hate crime and the necessity of interaction between young people to improve tolerance and reduce conflict. Furthermore. It can also be argued. ‘The sector should build the evidence base that demonstrates the benefits of sport and physical activity to social cohesion. once established on that basis. the progression into higher level coaching and management structures. or on the physical side of regeneration. and inclusion of minorities in the governance arrangements. In the short term at least. the separate development on the playing field appears to make it even more difficult to challenge other areas of sports development and management.cohesioninstitute. community safety…’ Sport England.ac.org. and especially in respect of new migrant groups. the need for „capacity building‟ within a particular community. performance and access.cohesioninstitute. has generally failed to develop where it has simply been based on single identity groups. cohesion and community relations tend to focus on more conventional approaches. For example. historically at least. The Power of Sport seeks to make these connections more apparent.

Haringey Council‟s Youth Services and Neighbourhood Management. within a wider multicultural perspective. which.org. However. It aimed to break down the lack of social mixing. a view reflected in the Hounslow Focus/Awaaz project. West Ham United Football Club.cohesioninstitute. multicultural areas. Targeting of groups. utilised funding from London & Quadrant Housing Association. the Community Cohesion Focus/Awaaz project in Hounslow. such as the Saltaire Cricket Club in Bradford. though mixed teams are still difficult to achieve. Bradford has similarly championed multicultural development in other sports like golf. may offer a compromise between single identity funding and cross-cultural provision. and co-operation between Jews and Muslims. a joint Jewish-Muslim interfaith organisation. They create forums where the two communities can share their commonalities and discuss their differences through dialogue.5 million Muslims. in deprived. Multi-sports activities are also able to attract a diverse range of participants. For example. though care will obviously need to be taken to ensure that schemes remain genuinely multicultural. The targeting of groups. dialogue.uk 11 . schemes in other sports such as cricket and golf. tolerance and understanding which had been reflected in local schools. which fosters understanding.uk www. which have a history of conflict with a view to defusing hostility and tension. has an active education programme which runs a number of projects and events for young people of Jewish and Muslim faith. rather than the sporting. a number of new and more challenging approaches and schemes are beginning to emerge (again. which brought together South Asian and Somalian communities from central Hounslow. (see both schemes in section 4). have also been undertaken. cohesion@coventry.000 Jews and 1. bringing together people from those communities. are also beginning to emerge. 2005. although targeting young Asian players is a key objective given their past low representation. see Section 4) and football is again leading the way. for example the Haringey Warriors Youth Organisation (HWYO) summer sports camp.ac. Interestingly. which are predominantly white. One of their most high profile events is the annual Interfaith Football Programme. It is open to all children in the Borough regardless of ethnicity. Similarly. in partnership with the London Borough of Tower Hamlets is at the forefront of a pioneering project to improve participation in football. with communities from the west of the borough. their success has been based more on changing the social. at which over 120 Jewish and Muslim students between the ages of 912 take part in a football tournament in mixed faith teams. inner city.However. which was founded in 1869 and has reinvented itself as a multicultural club over the last five years or so. The Foundation has used both art and football as „universal languages‟ to begin to develop fraternal relations between Britain‟s 275. dimensions of the club. gender or disability. The Maimonides Foundation. some of whom have never previously met anyone from the other community.

2006). Much of the present funding on community cohesion is short term and limited to specific areas or activities. But „social capital‟ is not yet widely understood.cohesioninstitute. However. Local councils. If social capital – the loose associations and networks which enable people to work together and establish neighbourliness and trust – becomes a key part of public policy. the possible mainstreaming of community cohesion approaches is gradually being seriously considered.uk 12 . the Department of Media. will create a stronger sense of purpose and clearer focus within all mainstream services.org. On occasion they have had little to do with the statutory agencies and depend upon the voluntary effort and good will of community activists. which reported that they had managed to help participants in their various programmes to feel differently about people of other cultures and backgrounds and to break down the barriers between them. Sport and social capital The concept of „social capital‟ is now beginning to play a much bigger role in public policy and as John Williams suggests (see Section 3) sport is a key „arena for promoting social relations and community bonding‟. The pioneering work of the London Borough of Camden and the IPPR to assess and measure social capital at a local level may however mean that this position changes. nor accepted as being within the competence of local authorities and their partners. Regeneration agencies. governing bodies and the sports infrastructure provided by Sport England in particular needs to consider how community cohesion principles can be embedded in all its work.Special initiative or mainstream activity? A large number of the best practice schemes referred to in Section 4 – and perhaps especially the most innovative and challenging – appear to have been the product of special initiatives. their partners. RDAs. LSPs.must also consider how they can use sport to achieve their aims of a safer society in which individuals can engage and reach their potential and in which communities are more at ease with each other.ac. However. together with the establishment of the Commission on Integration and Cohesion. which creates strong support for one team by inhibiting the „bridging‟ to other teams and groups. colleges . as John Williams also points out sport can be responsible for the some of the more extreme forms of „bonding‟ social capital. LB Camden and IPPR. For example. However. This started the process with a collection of ideas resulting from a seminar and involving an array of government agencies. sports associations. Culture and Sport (DCMS) produced Bringing Communities Together through Sport and Culture in 2004.uk www.and universities and many other bodies responsible for the various aspects of societal relations . LEAs and schools. then sporting links and associations will inevitably be seen as cohesion@coventry. local authorities. It is to be hoped that the bringing together of the various Government programmes within the new Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG). Crime and Disorder Partnerships. (Sticking Together – social capital and local government. just as importantly. pilots or pathfinders.

uk www. From a cohesion perspective. and inexorably. the emerging best practice now adopts cross-cultural sports activities. which have become a bulwark against civic unrest. societies. across boundaries. Such networks may need to be established and sports associations can provide a ready made vehicle.ac.is a key part of civil society. challenge the information and respond by quelling the anxieties. Rotary Clubs and integrated sports societies. Social capital is in no way limited to the relationships that develop on the sports field. this recent drawing together of sport and the arts under the panoply of „culture‟ in the UK is connected to attempts to reconcile the principles of „access‟ and „excellence‟ in policies for the creative industries as an intrinsic part of a New Labour strategy for developing a more „democratic‟ agenda for present and future UK cultural policy. This demands preexisting networks. organisations like the Inter-Faith Network have been responsible for promoting cross-cultural and inter-faith dialogue and many local networks have been established over the years. unfortunately. unrest can quickly follow. and facilitate cross-cultural understanding. league structures and governing bodies . Sport alone cannot provide them. simply because of the association and trust which had been previously created.uk 13 .org. can also draw people together. or a rumour which has begun to fly around communities. the concept of „bridging‟ social capital is pretty much equivalent to „cross-cultural contact‟ and is a means by which we can begin to break down the barriers and develop understanding and trust between different communities. It also has much to do with the current (rather overplayed) trend of urban regeneration in the UK and elsewhere to be seen to be substantially.cohesioninstitute. but should be part of that community tapestry which can do so. As discussed above. The hundreds of sports bodies. Varshney's Ethnic Conflict and Civic Life (YUP. culture-driven (Coleman. At a national level. 2002) draws upon previous work in Northern Ireland to highlight the beneficial effect of a range of Lions Clubs. Recent UK competitors for nomination as European Capital of Culture in 2008 (Liverpool was the cohesion@coventry. 2003). which can also be formed by sporting organisations – clubs. Sport and culture in the UK As the Australian sociologist John Hughson (2004: 320-1) points out. They also need to understand that cross-cultural contact.more important. which are generally constituted on a voluntary basis. These have been purposely cross-cultural and local and regional sports associations should consider how they measure up. does not generally arise naturally and often has to be „engineered‟ in the first instance to break down barriers and to give people the confidence to move out of their comfort zones. However. unless community leaders are able to quickly confer. In the present context. following a small incident. associational engagement.

collective identity. but also that it can reverse the social decline of the underprivileged. one available to all members of the community. of course). usefully.org.‟ These were once open and democratic public urban spaces.and thus by a culturally and socially deadening „controlled spontaneity. almost alone.especially in a neo-liberal era in which categories of „acceptable citizenship‟ seem. relying on sport and culture in this way . social need and on a range of connected social ills in the city is to mistake the kind of simple political rhetoric that is often effortlessly mobilised in debates such as these. this rather extreme pessimism about the effects on the transformation of public space produced by a cultural regeneration of this narrow range. he claims.uk www. as the main. this tends to ask too much. to be defined by the capacity to consume and in which „failed consumers‟ seem to be progressively „managed out‟ of preferred images and experiences of urban space (Bauman. but when overcoming social decline is made too dependent on the success of programmes in culture sport and the arts.cohesioninstitute. Coleman (2003: 32) warns. for the real effects of urban „difference‟ and for the consequences for marginalized communities of often deep seated. increasingly. deliver on issues of community cohesion..uk 14 . future for an otherwise economically and socially polarised late-modern city (Hughson. He.ac.‟ Sport is sometimes portrayed.as the unifying totem of a cultural package that can. argues in this regard that: „The attendant rhetoric proposes not only that culture will revive the economy. for example. 2004). all included prominence given to successful professional sports clubs as part of their portfolio of supposedly indispensable cultural attributes. of what he calls the dangers of an emerging „hegemony of aesthetics‟ regarding who and what should be allowed to be seen in these newly branded Merseyside „streets of culture. 1997). in fact. entirely.‟ We need not share.‟ (Hughson. a kind of regeneration that occurs as a response to intensifying global competition and the socalled city „place wars‟ of late-modernity. Now such spaces are increasingly „privatised‟ and sanitised and are characterised by what he suggests are officially sponsored and staged cultural events .successful city. But as John Hughson also points out. Talking specifically of the plans for the cultural regeneration of the city of Liverpool and looking forward to 2008. long term and impacted social inequality and poverty. a more inclusive. But we do need to be aware. to successfully unite the ethnically diverse and resolutely classed members of local urban communities in the UK in a putative and nostalgically cohesive „all embracing civic culture. Reversing urban social decline and overcoming poverty and related problems is. emergent hope for a more egalitarian. of course. of course. a reasonable and worthy aim for social planners. and will.. 2004: 328) cohesion@coventry. of some of the potential negative implications of these new dimensions of sporting and cultural policy – which are often pursued in the name of greater community cohesion and cultural integration . It is probably also true that this specific policy focus on the cultural relevance of sport in this context has had the associated effect of driving up unrealistic and largely unfounded perceptions of the increasing capacity of sport. convincingly.

It promises to address at least some of the problems of racialised exclusion in the English game of the sort identified in a survey recently undertaken by the Commission for Racial Equality – though the Premier League and its member clubs claim their own expertise and successes in these areas (see CRE. . Here. 2004). the case of English football.PART TWO: Profile on football and community cohesion English football and community cohesion: some progress and problems Let us take one sporting example now. an effective new equity strategy for the sport is very impressive. the modernised and generally „progressive‟ national Football Association‟s recent public commitment to pursue. But. centrally. successfully devolving this new FA policy down to local County FAs where it is arguably needed most: Where the governance of the grassroots version of the sport is mainly delivered. Let us examine it a little more closely in this respect of potentially conflicting national and local agendas.

in turn. They claim the FA‟s new national agenda for change . independent and geographically and socially outlying policy deliverers of the local governance of the game in England (the County FAs) has.Where the processes of „modernisation‟ experienced centrally have been much more slowly felt and have been generally more patchy in their effects. And. produced something of a challenge from British Asians who are deeply committed to local football. 2006). The apparent cultural and organisational dissonance between the policy centre of English football (The FA) and the rather more resistant. where racially divisive forms of exclusion and marginalisation continue to impact against the possibilities of local football becoming a reliable site for community cohesion All this seems a much more contentious issue altogether (see Lusted.

cohesioninstitute.uk 15 .ac. Despite much goodwill. paradoxically. it is still far too little experienced in some areas at the local.and thus enhancing community cohesion and social inclusion at the local level through sport . 2005). Here the claim from the FA‟s opponents is that making „progress‟ on delivering real opportunities and real safeguards for British ethnic minorities in local football .is just too much discussed and advertised in the English game at the national level of rhetoric.org. a progressive and centralised commitment towards greater equity and thus more community cohesion in sport at The FA – one that is heavily pursued via promotional packages in order to advertise and cement these new agendas . Here. cohesion@coventry.underplays the structural problems in the game and fails to see that real equity strategies require more power sharing (See NAFF.may also have stimulated anger and resentment at the local level. where some ethnic minority players and officials still claim that relatively little seems to have changed.uk www. grassroots versions of the sport.

These all remain real difficulties in domestic sport in Britain.ac. perhaps. but also sensitive handling and the careful dissemination of training and best practice. as well as some potentially fruitful sporting and commercial contacts with a new. and rather more „topophobic‟ responses (a sense of fear or discomfort) for those excluded sporting citizens who are more likely to be drawn from local ethnic minorities and communities of colour. simultaneously. Bradbury and Williams. British sporting stadia can still. the more invidious and divisive effects of the gentrifying. And because. multi-cultural Britain . after more than a decade of agitation for change from British Asians in football. as many British sports clubs such as these claim to be – and often believe themselves to be – resolutely „colour blind‟ in their approach to access.This is because existing barriers to the effective delivery of such commitments decided at the core. has the associated tendency to reject. if hardly always consensual.cohesioninstitute. antiracism and community cohesion in and via sport. especially in some racially „divided‟ British towns and cities in parts of the north of England. the temptation for some smaller and medium-sized provincial football clubs . 2001). 2006). And it should also be pointed out that even in the face of these tales of incomplete.org.uk www. males (see Bradbury. indeed. more „marketised‟.uk 16 .even in a by now well established. for some of those who operate at some distance from the palatial and undoubtedly cosmopolitan Soho Square corridors of the national FA headquarters. largely working class and lower middle class. marketing and local community relations (Bradbury. cohesion@coventry. They are ones that require directed local action. are perceived to remain relatively undisturbed at the grassroots. This rather narrow approach to community and customer relations in some parts of professional football in England. 2001. substantial progress has. at the same time. progress on matters of increasing community cohesion in local football in their own neighbourhoods can still. evoke what Bale (1993) has described as „topophilic‟ sentiments (a pleasurable sense of place) for the mainly white „included‟ fan base. contingent. seem almost glacially slow to arrive. problems that have no easy solution. But. they also risk marginalising potential community cohesion gains in and around British sports stadia. been made in specific locales in British football and in other British sports to positively promote inclusion. local BME supporter base – including possible female ethnic minority fans and even BME female football players (see Bradbury. local resistances to changes in sporting practices in relation to extending community cohesion. sometimes.has seemed to be to continue to mine what have been historically positive and successful long-term „community‟ relations with more „traditional‟ sectors of the local football publics in England – white. types of fan/club relations popularly pursued elsewhere in the sport in recent years. nevertheless. In this sense. At the professional football club level in England. 2001). meanwhile.

In a recent review of European-wide initiatives in football to combat racism. just what a broadly based. 2001: 67). which was established in 1997. These are in addition to the many funded Pathfinder schemes established around Britain to work at bringing together members of local communities through sport. has extended its work in these areas to members of poor. to the important new messages about interdependence and globalisation in sport. is much better resourced than these independent schemes. These include the national Kick it Out strategy established in 1997. it was shown that whilst both Italy and Spain then relied solely on fans to offer opposition to widespread racism in the sport in those countries. the UK was shown to boast a number of national and local initiatives on this score. and to sporting provision more widely in the borough of Greenwich. 2005: 39).uk 17 . CARE has shown. co-ordinated and adequately funded local campaign can deliver through sport. is a much more broadly based initiative. cohesion@coventry. 2005).7 million Euros available in 2005 for anti-racism programmes established by its 52 member associations across Europe (uefa. football‟s European governing body.org. meanwhile made a sum of 1. especially. and also Foxes Against Racism (FAR) from Leicester. Charlton Athletic responding. predictably positively. rather than remaining.uk www. independent initiatives aimed at addressing football racism and increasing community cohesion in England include Football United. as well as access to the football club and its facilities. The Charlton Against Racism and Exclusion (CARE) project. pigeon-holed in the low status „community‟ department of the organisation (Garland and Rowe. 2005). especially when it is allied to an approach to cohesion and inclusion strategies that run throughout the culture of the local professional sports club. Racism Divides (FURD). black township communities in South Africa (see Williams. UEFA. for example (van Sterkenburg et al.cohesioninstitute. and it links the voluntary and statutory sectors directly with the local football club in promoting training and employment opportunities. established in conjunction with Charlton Athletic FC. More recently. and the education and media focused Show Racism the Red Card campaign that worked with an impressive 63 British professional clubs on the production of anti-racism publicity materials and videos in 2003/04 (van Sterkenburg et al. set up in Sheffield in 1993. Local.com/uefa 2005).ac. the local Race Equality Council. Greenwich Council and local regeneration projects. as is often the case. the police.

summaries of which are highlighted throughout this section and have been added to schemes identified from other sources. disabled people etc.org.uk 18 .org.org. The review revealed a number of initiatives promoting sporting engagement with so called „hard to reach groups‟ e. For information on this project see www. The development plan also links to the Playing Pitch Strategy that has identified the need to develop quality and modern football facilities across the Borough. The document is the plan for Burnley. It targets children and families from deprived areas.ac. The programme also includes a number of targeted sports events including an Asian Sports Festival featuring traditional sports such as Kabbadi and wrestling as well as a Disabled Sports Festival and the recently acclaimed Estate Based Sports Programme aimed at reducing anti -social behaviour amongst young people. The main reason different ethnic groups don’t mix is not because they don’t want to but because they have no reason to. BME groups. journals and books.uk cohesion@coventry.Football Development Group This group has been tasked to produce a development plan for football for the Borough. The development plan also identified the need to have a specific development officer for the sport because football has a new dimension emerging which is centred on the broader social impact that football can have and particularly its capacity for generating a „sense‟ of community and empowerment amongst groups who are typically seen as „excluded‟ from mainstream society. some information on interesting projects was obtained.g. recent applications to the Round 7 Beacon Scheme Theme „Sport and Culture for Hard to Reach Groups‟.cohesioninstitute.PART THREE: Practical tools for understanding sport and community cohesion Good Practice case studies (see our online database) The IDeA undertook desk research focused on 3 main areas. Community Cohesion Review Report Case studies London Borough of Tower Hamlets Olympic Summer of Sport A programme of sport sessions inspired by the 2012 Olympic bid and is designed to take advantage of the local enthusiasm and publicity for the Olympics. Sessions are themed around the 26 Olympic and 12 Paralympic sports encouraging participation by previously under-represented children and young people.cohesioninstitute. but less information was uncovered with regard to promoting sport as a tool for community cohesion.uk Burnley Borough Council . Therefore a Community Football Development Officer was appointed. young people. and finally other information sources such as the internet. However. For information on this project see www. existing local authority contacts who have demonstrated good practice in community cohesion or community engagement.uk www.cohesioninstitute.

It links schools of a variety of backgrounds to allow communities to connect through sport in a safe. One tenth of the population are from BME groups. from the youngest children at 8 and 9 years old to the senior teams. Other clubs are starting to make inroads and the the propspects are brighter than for a number of years. fun structured environment and impact on changing attitudes of young people in the borough. teenage pregnancies in the city and region. More than 200 young people took part in the Street Sports finale bringing together young people from 5 deprived communities.org.cohesioninstitute. lung cancer deaths. 16% of over 16s are long term sick or disabled (national average 5%) and the area has some of the highest incidences of coronary heart disease. Open for Action holiday courses and junior club sessions.uk 19 .434 residents in 4.cohesioninstitute. councillors set up a community cohesion funding stream used this summer for a programme of inter-cultural sporting activities. For information on this project see www. For information on this project see www.uk www. Children are then actively encouraged to attend further sporting opportunities such as Active Sport sessions. The area is home to 9. Saltaire Cricket Club has managed to achieve a mix in its teams from the Asian and White communities. 48% of working age households have no-one in paid employment. Bradford At a time when many clubs in the Bradford area have still been unable to sustain a mixed playing and non playing membership.uk Oldham Unity in the Community Sport Programme Unity in the Community is an imaginative community cohesion initiative across 50 plus primary / secondary schools.uk Saltaire Cricket Club.000 households. partly in response to emerging community tensions between Somali and African Caribbean young people.cohesioninstitute.org.uk Sunderland City Council – The Raich Carter Sports Centre The Raich Carter Sports Centre is a community sports hub which sits in New Deal for Communities (NDC) area with £54m regeneration funding.cohesioninstitute.org. For information on this project see www.ac. This has now been sustained at Saltaire for a number of years and there are several different stands to the club‟s ability to achieve this. It is a Sport England Pathfinder Multi Sports Environment and a national model of excellence. predominantly Bangladeshi. For information on this project see www. Greater Manchester Youth Games.Leicester City Council Leicester‟s political leadership is effectively engaged on sport and cultural issues and has for many years championed diversity and the needs of hard to reach groups.uk cohesion@coventry.org.org.cohesioninstitute. For example.

Sport England.ac.uk www.cohesioninstitute. For information on this project see www.org. to be underpinned by a comprehensive. local sporting group‟s users and future users to help determine the exact nature of sports provision. The culmination of the work led to the Council approving the development of a new multi sport “sports village” in the north of Shrewsbury.Nottinghamshire County Council – Social Capital Development Sport Action Zone Social Capital Development SAZ‟s Needs Assessment recognises that projects to improve access to sport and leisure are best developed at a local.org. The SLPO continuously works in partnership with community providers and community members to develop and create projects and opportunities for specific communities. together with an appropriate sports development programme. The partnership arose as a result of effective initiatives across Charnwood through the local community cohesion agenda and the successful work of Connecting Communities.uk 20 . Following a needs analysis in 2003 an Open Space Sport and Recreation Strategy was developed. For information on this project see www.uk cohesion@coventry. Charnwood Arts. These relationships have been sustained through the Charnwood Community Cohesion Pathfinder Programme. The 4 NRF areas in the Zone have all recognised the power of sport in developing neighbourhood cohesion. Charnwood Council for Voluntary Service.cohesioninstitute. We undertake work with and where necessary join the committees of various organisations to overcome barriers.uk Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Council In response to the shared priorities of the local strategic partnership and agreed objectives.org. which hinders groups from accessing grants and support. meeting a key objective within the Community Strategy (Health & Well Being).cohesioninstitute. Leicestershire Youth Service and Charnwood Racial Equality Council.org. another partnership commissioned under the Home Office “Resolving Differences” programme for the East Midlands. community sport & recreation programme for ALL.uk Charnwood Borough Council. Leicestershire Constabulary.Sports Links project The Sports-Link Project is a partnership between the Council. yet in C2DE former Coalfield Communities there is sometimes and absence of social capital. This in turn led to the programme of delivering a set of new and enhanced facilities. The project coordinator developed close working relationships with the various sporting bodies. Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Council set about its target to deliver a first class sport and recreation facility base within the borough. preferably Neighbourhood level. For information on this project see www.cohesioninstitute.

Charnwood Borough Council – The Global All Starts Project The Global All-Stars is a football project.social behaviour This pilot project is delivered at a local comprehensive school on a Friday evening in one of Darlington‟s Priority wards.ac. For information on this project see www.org.uk www. focus on disadvantage and inclusion in schools.uk Darlington Borough Council.uk 21 .cohesioninstitute.cohesioninstitute. estate and community settings.uk London Borough of Southwark.Westside project – Tackling Anti.cohesioninstitute.org. deemed a hot spot area for anti social behaviour.uk cohesion@coventry.org.uk Darlington Borough Council. the Darlington SSP was implemented in September of 2002 across approximately half of the schools (including Beaumont Hill Special School) in the town. For information on this project see www. It takes place across the eight community council areas in schools.Darlington School Sport Partnership As part of the Government‟s PE and School Sport Strategy.Southwark Community Games Southwark Community Games is a council-led partnership initiative that continues to build on its success. which aims to promote unity and friendship to undertake work around cultural and personal differences and cohesion.org. The SSP programme has five key principles: support for PE in schools. Young people were chosen from teams at the World Cup Football Camp in 2003 to represent the Global All-Stars Team. after school clubs. For information on this project see www. For information on this project see www.org. The concept of the project is to create a „World United‟ football team consisting of participants living in Charnwood from different cultural backgrounds.cohesioninstitute. The purpose of the project is to provide diversionary leisure activities for young people. working together with families. integrated sports development and partnership working. There is also sport related vocational training for teachers and young people aged sixteen years and older. The Southwark Community Games is a year round programme of sports coaching and competition for young people aged seven to 16 years old. and a whole school approach.cohesioninstitute.

disability sports development Preston Panthers was Lancashire‟s first disabled multi-sports club for young people. The coaching programmes are open to all children in the borough aged 7-11 years old.uk www.Preston City Council. inner city.uk The Maimonides Foundation.cohesioninstitute. though targeting young Asian players is a key objective given the lack of opportunities that have historically been available them. and co-operation between Jews and Muslims through cultural. A second Disability Sports Club has also been established in partnership with Preston Primary Care Trust specifically for those with co-ordination difficulties. in deprived.org.uk 22 . It has an active education programme which runs a number of projects and events for young people of Jewish and Muslim faith.org. Tottenham Hotspur Community (THC) provided opportunities for over 750 young people aged six to 18 years to participate in a structured coaching programme in a safe and friendly environment.uk cohesion@coventry.org.uk Tottenham Hotspur Community: Coaching Programme in Partnership with Haringey Neighbourhood Management During February half-term 2006. London The Maimonides Foundation is a joint Jewish-Muslim interfaith organisation. Since its establishment in 1998 it has expanded and developed and now has a membership base of 65 young people who attend weekly sessions at West View Leisure Centre and an annual residential course in outdoor pursuit activities in the Lake District. dialogue.org. regardless of ethnicity.cohesioninstitute. For information on this project see www.uk West Ham United Football Club: Partnership with the London Borough of Tower Hamlets A pioneering project to improve participation in football.cohesioninstitute.cohesioninstitute. which fosters understanding. multi cultural areas.org. For information on this project see www.cohesioninstitute. For information on this project see www. gender or disability. For information on this project see www.ac. academic and educational programmes based on mutual respect and trust.

For the first time. new experience that they would otherwise not have had during their summer holidays.uk cohesion@coventry. Starting with both teams going to tournaments together in the same mini bus but playing in their own teams.Tameside Sport Development Tameside Sports Development has responsibility for the development of a network of sports opportunities across the Borough. For information on this project see www.cohesioninstitute. Tameside‟s Cultural Strategy and Government led recommendations and initiatives with Sport Development seeing its role as a constantly changing mixture of direct provision and facilitation. For information on this project see www.cohesioninstitute. central Hounslow having large South Asian and Somalian communities.org. This was also reflected in the football teams. Under the expert guidance of our coaching team the children and young people have been able to create new friendships and engage with young people from different cultures.org. The sports camp offered the children and young people an exciting.uk Haringey Warriors Youth Organisation Summer Sports camp and end of summer tournament The HWYO summer sports camp and end of summer tournament 2005 took place between July 25th and August 26th 2005.cohesioninstitute. whilst the west of the borough. areas like Feltham. Hounslow suffers from an unfortunate polarisation of young people within the borough. fun. the camp was brought to Priory Park.uk Hounslow Community Cohesion Focus/Awaaz Football Team This project is a good example of how one can use sport to bring young people together.org. HWYO puts emphasis on providing professional. are predominantly white.uk 23 . leading to a lack of social mixing and therefore a lack of tolerance and understanding.org. Awaaz and Focus.cohesioninstitute.ac. This also seems to be reflected in the schools young people go to. The main aspects of development work are directly linked to Tameside‟s Community Plan. top quality coaching and youth mentoring to children and young people.uk www. there is now one football team. For information on this project see www.

The iCoCo good practice database provides a facility for practitioners to record their achievements and to learn from the experiences of others. Register your scheme at www. why not submit your project? Much can be achieved through the sharing of experiences.cohesioninstitute.ac. your successes should be talked about and your insights are valuable to other cohesion practitioners. seek solutions to problems and find out about successful initiatives operating throughout the UK. discuss issues. If you have been involved in community cohesion work.uk cohesion@coventry.cohesioninstitute.cohesioninstitute.org.uk 24 .org.org.uk Good practice database There are numerous examples of community cohesion projects and schemes throughout the UK. why not register now at www. If you would like to contribute to making effective changes in the field of community cohesion. which will continuously be revised and updated.Practitioner’s network The Practitioners' Network is a group of cohesion practitioners who exchange ideas. This is a dynamic resource.uk www.