Bjarne Ibsen

Voluntary organized sport in Denmark and Norway

Sport organized through voluntary organizations is widespread in the Scandinavian countries, and voluntary organized sport in Denmark and Norway is the topic of this essay. The two cases are compared along a set of dimensions: voluntary sector in general and voluntary sport in particular (organizational structures, level of participation, type of activity and ideology, resources and relations to the public sector). Having described the two cases, we try to understand and explain similarities and differences between them. We end the essay with a discussion of some future challenges for voluntary organized sport in the Scandinavian countries.

Introduction: sport in Scandinavian societies

Scandinavia consists of the three countries on the Northern peninsula of Europe: Norway, Denmark and Sweden. This issue of Sport in Society includes a selection of articles addressing a set of what we consider actual questions regarding sports and their place in modern Scandinavian societies. Thinking of Scandinavian particularities, many (outside Scandinavia) will probably think of the Scandinavian welfare states, social democratic and state-friendly societies in general. The political organization of the Scandinavian nations and the strong position of public authorities are also important when it comes to sports. Yet, even though there have been public policies towards sports for almost 150 years in Scandinavia, the last decades has witnessed a more politicized field of sports politics. This is, in turn, partly because of shifts within late-modern society – post-industrialization in a wide meaning of the term – and partly because of shifts within sports. Several of the articles to be found in this issue will clearly touch on the question of sport policies and politics. However, other qualities of sports in the Scandinavian nations are probably just as important as closeness to public authorities. Among these other characteristics, we are thinking of the way sports are organized by voluntary organizations, the high level of participation in sports in particular and physical activity in general, sports’ gendered patterns, children’s participation and the way the ever-present challenges of inclusion versus exclusion are handled. Our aim with editing a special issue of Sport in Society on Scandinavian sports is first and foremost to help gain a better understanding of what Scandinavian sports actually look like: to gather and present information and knowledge on the phenomenon of Scandinavian sports. For those interested, both inside and outside Scandinavia, this could be interesting in itself, and the main criteria for selecting articles for this issue has been to provide a broad and characteristic picture of what actually happens. Besides, it was our ambition that most articles should have a double comparative view: taking stock of similarities and differences within Scandinavia, and similarities and differences between Scandinavia and the outer world. This was certainly very ambitious and though all articles are at least to a certain point comparative, some include thorough discussion of all Scandinavians nations, most of the articles concentrate on presenting characteristics of

Sport Clubs in Denmark

The kingdom of Denmark is a constitutional monarchy, consisting of Denmark and the two autonomous areas: the Faroe Islands in the North Atlantic and Greenland. This analysis does not include the latter two parts of the kingdom. Denmark has 5.6 million inhabitants spread over approx. 43,000 km2.

Denmark: The Dissenting Sport System in Europe

The Danish sports system differs from that of most European countries in terms of six distinctive characteristics. First, sport in Denmark is organised into three—independent—umbrella organisations, each of which have different aims and are based on different values. Secondly, there is a stronger organisational separation between the organisation of elite sports and the organisation of ‘Sport for All’. Thirdly, Denmark has a number of semi-governmental institutions for sports, which in other countries are either included as part of the national organisation of sport or as part of the state department responsible for sport. Fourthly, the Danish sport policy is particularly decentralised. Fifthly, there are essentially two separate support systems, one at the local level and one at the state level. Finally, even though the level of public support is among the highest in Europe, both sports organisations and sports clubs have a high degree of autonomy.

The Scandinavian Organizational Landscape: Extensive and Different

This chapter describes the historical and institutional background of the Scandinavian organizational society in detail. The popular mass movements are analysed as core institutions in the building of the modern Scandinavian mass democracies. Particular attention is devoted to the organizational model that characterized the popular mass movements and their organizations. In this model, local members played a decisive role. Another characteristic feature is the vertical integration between local branch organizations and regional and national organizations that provided a communication channel from the local level to the national level and vice versa. The chapter also provides an overview of the density, structure and composition of the Scandinavian voluntary sectors and demonstrates the lasting dominance of the sport, culture and leisure fields, though the welfare field is becoming more important in all countries. Finally, the decreasing significance of membership and member-based associations, in particular in Norway and Denmark, is analysed. This development may be consequential for the historically strong political and democratic role of voluntary associations and for their position more in general in society.

Nekrolog: Henning Eichberg

Professor emeritus, Dr. Phil. Habil. Henning Eichberg dode den 22. april 2017 i Odense. Fra 2004 til 2015 var Henning Eichberg ansat ved Institut for Idraet og Biomekanik, SDU, tilknyttet Center for Forskning i Idraet, Sundhed og Civilsamfund og forskningsenheden Bevaegelse, Kultur og Samfund. Fra 2015 fastholdt han som professor emeritus en taet tilknytning til sin gamle arbejdsplads og var indtil sin dod stadig en saerdeles produktiv forsker.