Getting off the Bench and in the Game: Sport and Community Development
By Umar T. Muhammad, MS
The power of sports is far more than symbolic. You are engines of economic growth.
You are a force for gender equality. You can bring youth and others in from the margins,
strengthening the social fabric. You can promote communication and help heal the divisions
between peoples, communities and entire nations. You can set an example of fair play (Louise
Frechette, UN Deputy Secretary General, World Sports Forum, 2000).
Too often sports are perceived primarily as a form of entertainment and/ or commerce.
While sports’ entertainment and commercial value are tremendous, it’s impact is most felt in key
aspects of American culture. This culture of sport that exist in the United States is pervasive and
its cultural implications impact society, from the quality of life of individuals and communities
within the United States to how American society is perceived around the world. Currently,
limited efforts are made to recognize the usefulness and ultimately the necessity of sports
development in the United States on a comprehensive level. Federal, state and local public
foundations and State and local legislatures have been slow to implement even pilot programs
that would increase the data and information available to develop informed, coordinated
programs around underserved communities.
Pregame Warm-up: Community Development through Sport
Sport development programs have a wide range of aims and objectives that traditionally
include increased participation and developing sporting skills. These are rarely the reasons or
basis for which investments and evaluations are achieved. It is without exception that the role of
sport in contributing to broader social goals is highlighted and emphasized. But in attempting to
address issues of community development and social inclusion some have suggested that
redefining the concept of sport development is necessary for traditional community development
programs to be effective. “There is a danger that aims and objectives may incorporate many of
the values that traditional sports provision stood for…the widely-used term ‘sports development’
still has connotations of coaching and competitions for some community development agencies”
(McDonald and Tungatt, 1992, p. 33). This pervasive acceptance of the idea that sports
development only promotes commercial and competitive development must be addressed if
sports programs are to have a positive impact on the most underserved in our communities.
Evidence suggests that traditional approaches and forms of provision may not be effective for
those most at-risk in our society. Sport in Society, a Northeastern University Center argue that
“the sport-culture-government intersection could help the United States harness the power of
sport and culture to effect change on many issues our country champions, including health and
fitness, social inclusion, human rights, and diplomacy.” This “intersection” is where I believe
state and local policymakers can have the greatest consensus and impact in solving longstanding
and complex issues such as anti-social behavior among young people and gang involvement.
Nearly every other country, including all other G8 and those rated by the United Nations as “low
development” has cabinet level positions that primarily deal with issues around sport. These
ministers use sport to promote (a) health, social inclusion, human rights, tourism, and youth
development; (b) economic development through tourism and other forms of commerce; and (c)
sound government policy involving professional and amateur sports. Notably, the United Nations
has repeatedly passed resolutions encouraging member states "to designate focal points for sport
for development and peace within their governments” (Sport in Society, Northeastern University
Center, 2009).
Game Changer: Community Corrections + Sport = ‘TOUGH LOVE’
The use of recreation and sports programs is not a new approach to prevention and
intervention in crime reduction, gang involvement and urban violence. And even though
professionals can point to data and evidence from successes all across the country, many people
are either not convinced or don’t believe that recreation and sports services “effectively
contribute to alleviating problems associated with at-risk youth” (Witt and Crompton, 1996).
Witt and Crompton suggest that these differences in view can be explained by the concept of
positioning. “Positioning refers to perceptions of the role of recreation and sports services in the
minds of elected officials, decision-makers and citizens. The position that prevails in many
policymakers and citizens minds is that recreation and park services are a “soft” alternative
which pampers youth and has no ameliorating effect on their behavior” (Witt and Crompton,
1996). So, the belief arises that society is better off if delinquent youth are subjected to “hardnosed” treatment by law enforcement and the juvenile justice system. These perceptions explain
why there is more resources allocated for law enforcement agencies. Police are then positioned
as the exclusive resource for combating what is a social or community development issue not
just a criminal or law enforcement one.
General Douglas MacArthur is reported to have said that, “On the friendly fields of
athletic strife are sown the seeds which, on other days, on other fields will reap the fruits of
victory.” Whether these are the words of the General or not, they reveal a pervasive belief that
many families and communities across America hold dear; that their child’s participation in
sports will teach them positive values and ethics. These values and ethics tend to be local and
reflect the culture of the specific community because, “…people value each other and the places
they live because they have shared goals, common beliefs, and public rituals that bring them
together” (Walls & Bassham, 2007, p. 9). Many of the “low development” communities that are
most affected by crime, juvenile delinquency and increased police presence are the same ones
that lack positive “shared goals, common beliefs and public rituals.” Communities determine
meaning not individuals, so “it follows that the best way to preserve the dignity of individuals is
to strengthen and enhance the communities to which they belong” (Walls & Bassham, 2007).
Today rural and urban community identities are replaced by gang affiliations and instead of
teenagers shooting baskets with each other they are shooting bullets at each other. Stephen
Webb in an essay entitled, “Building Communities One Gym at a Time,” provides the context in
which we can begin to focus any sports and community development work for underserved, low
resourced populations. He states,
Communities need public spaces, for example, where people can gather to discuss the issues of
the day and just share each other’s company. Indeed, one of the most important ways to build a
good society is to create buildings that enable people to make connections with each other. For
small towns in Indiana throughout the twentieth century, basketball gymnasiums served this
precise purpose (Walls and Bassham, 2007, p. 12).
Huddle Up! : Communities Focus In
The Recreation Movement (1880-1920), was a strong voice, critiquing industrialization,
trends in urban society and excesses of capitalism (Hunnicutt, 2000, p.1). Joseph Lee and Jane
Addams, founders of the “playground movement” around the turn of the century established a
blueprint for reform that speaks powerfully today. Looking around them at the overcrowded and
crime ridden streets of Boston and New York, they spoke out about conditions and marshaled
support for free recreation and leisure programs and open spaces where children could “play”
and be themselves (Hunnicutt, 2000). These actions began a social movement that continues
today. Their basic premise was that “Americans were becoming passive in their free time,
consuming rather than creating their amusements” (Hunnicutt, 2000, p.3). The major concern
facing the new parks and recreation reformers was the loss of community (Hunnicutt, 2000).
People were becoming solely spectators at sports events and therefore taking a passive role in the
building and maintenance of their own local culture (Hunnicutt, 2000). Recreation and leisure
advocates have a history of finding practical solutions that help reform troubling social problems
and challenges. Throughout history, sports have been organized in various ways to accomplish a
variety of sociopolitical needs. From a functionalist approach; sports are viewed as a means of
unifying and aiding in maintaining the social order (Hawkins, 1998). Now the question is; what
can recreation and sports programs do to help underserved communities?
Sport involvement has been suggested to create opportunities where young people can
become more engaged and responsible in their communities and as such promote social inclusion
(Donnelly & Coakley, 2002). Evidence is limited with regard to the process by which young
people might become “socially included” through sport, but there are some clues (Donnelly &
Coakley, 2002). First, access is a necessary condition of inclusion: if sport is to be involved in
the process of social inclusion, it is essential that young people have opportunities to participate.
Second, inclusion is not possible unless agencies and organizations develop projects and
programs that involve excluded young people in decision-making (Long, 2002). Third,
developmental competencies are necessary components to impact self-esteem, confidence and
peer acceptance (Bailey, 2000). Finally, sports programs are most effective when they are local
and have local leadership (Coakley, et al., 2000).
However, the issue cannot just be whether increased sport participation can contribute to
young people’s personal and community development and the reduction of social exclusion. We
must also question the nature of the contribution such participation can make to community
relations. A Council of Europe report (Svoboda, 1994) suggests that sport provides opportunities
to meet and communicate with other people; to take different social roles; to learn particular
social skills (such as tolerance and respect for others); to adjust to team/collective objectives
(such as cooperation and cohesion); and that it provides experience of emotions that may not be
available in other activities of life. The literature in the field advocating for sport participation
among young people highlights; physical and mental health, cognitive and academic
development, crime and truancy reduction and disaffection as significant areas where sport
development programs can have effective impacts (Svoboda, 1994). A number of programs take
a comprehensive approach, combining recreation with other activities and services like the New
Jersey School Based Youth Service Program, Los Angeles County’s Youth Service program, the
Boston Safe Neighborhood program and various Boys and Girls clubs throughout the United
States (Derezotes, 1995). Most of these programs try to assist young people, particularly highrisk and gang members, to improve their lives through education, living drug-free lives and
increasing their physical and mental health. The underlying thinking of these programs is that
sports participation can provide a positive outlet for energy and at the same time facilitate selfesteem, confidence, leadership skills, self-discipline and responsibility (Lovell & Pope, 1993).
Full Court Press: Building Communities One Game at a Time
Without significant coordinated intervention by sports programs, business, governmental
and community organizations, the negative consequences for both at-risk youth and society in
general will continue to increase. With juvenile arrests for crimes such as murder, rape, robbery,
aggravated assault, burglary, and theft still at unacceptable levels, elected officials in many
communities are faced with the political necessity to undertake prevention and intervention
programs. With juvenile drug use, alcohol abuse, and teen pregnancies at unacceptable levels,
significant cost effective actions are being sought. As David Fisher, Executive Director of the
Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board, reminds us, recreation programs for at-risk youth need
to be supported by long-term base-budget city funding rather than relying on short-term grants
and special purpose funding. “We will undertake a disservice to our clients, who already are
beset by part-time parents and part-time education, by offering part-time programs. To be
effective, programs must be consistent, constant and sustainable. Otherwise I believe we simply
feed the loop of failing to fulfill our promises” (Witt & Crompton, 1996b, p. 24). When
individuals are able to become involved in creating, and transforming, the meaning of their
physical activities, the transformative effects could reach beyond health and quality of life issues:
“It is possible that the struggle to achieve a fully democratized sport and leisure [one in which
the participants determine the form, circumstances, and meaning of their participation] might
result in the capacity to transform communities. People could learn initiative, community
endeavor, collective rather than individual values, self determination, etc., that could permit them
to begin to take charge of their own lives and communities” (Donnelly, 1993, p. 428).
The main support for inclusion processes is found in settings where young people are part
of a club structure that is non-hierarchical, and where activities are not exclusively based on
power and performance models [of competitive sports] (Coakley, 2001); where pleasure and
participation sports are the dominant activities; and where age integration (as opposed to age
segregation) is common. Coakley’s 2002 summary of the research with respect to youth
development in physical recreation is especially relevant for the promotion of social inclusion,
and is worth repeating here:
At the risk of oversimplifying an impressive array of research and theory on youth and youth
development,… positive transitions from childhood to adolescence to adulthood are most likely
when young people live in a context in which they are: (1) physically safe; (2) personally valued;
(3) socially connected; (4) morally and economically supported; (5) personally and politically
empowered; and (6) hopeful about the future.
In concluding, there is a general understanding among advocates of sports programs for at-risk
youth that ultimately the success of any program will depend greatly on the ability of
practitioners to engage the community through volunteerism. From mentoring through coaching
to teaching life skills through structured workshops, any effort aimed at changing negative
behaviors of young people must elicit the “time, talent and treasure,” of the broader community.
The populations of young men in our neighborhoods have a special and unique need to be
connected to a positive, supportive community. These young people fall victim to the negative
pressures of street life because there is an absence of community life. The African proverb that,
“It takes a village to raise a child,” is true, but when we are battling long held, complex issues, in
our society, research suggests, “it takes a community to support a man.”
Works Cited
Derezotes, D. (1995). Evaluation of the late nite basketball project.
Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal. 12(1), p. 33-50.
Donnelly, P & Coakley, J (2002). The role of recreation in promoting social
inclusion. Laidlaw Foundation.
Hawkins, B (1998). Evening basketball leagues: the use of sport to reduce african
american youth criminal activity. International Sports Journal. 24(4), p. 68-77.
Hunnicutt, B (2000). Our reform heritage: recovering the vision of community leisure. Journal
of Leisure Research. 32(1), p. 58-61.
Lovell, R. & Pope, C. (1993). Recreational Interventions. In A. Goldstein & R.C. Huff
(Eds.), The gang intervention handbook (pp. 319-333). Champaign. 111. Research
Press.
McDonald, D. & Tungatt, M. (1992). Community development and sport. (Community
development briefing paper no. 3) London: Community Development Foundation with
Sports Council.
Walls, J. & Bassham, G. (2007). Basketball and philosophy: thinking outside the paint.
University of Kentucky Press.
Witt, P., Crompton, J (1996). The at-risk youth recreation project. Journal of Park and
Recreation Administration, 14(3), p. 1-9.
Wolff, E. (2009). Embracing the power of sport and culture: An opportunity to effect change
at the sport-culture-government intersection. Sport in Society, a Northeastern
University Center.