The foreign models of sport governance: the case of leading sports powers

Dolmatova Tamara Vladimirovna ORCID: 0000-0003-3301-2924 PhD in Politics Leading Researcher; Federal State Budgetary Institution 'Federal Science Center of Physical Culture and Sports' (Federal State Budgetary Institution FSC VNIIFK) 10 Elizavetinsky Lane, building 1, Moscow, 105005, Russia S.tamara@rambler.ru

Introduction. In accordance with Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated July 21, 2020 No. 474 "On National Development Goals of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2030" [Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated July 21, 2020 No. 474 "On National Development Goals of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2030" // Official Internet Portal of Legal Information Of the Russian Federation. URL: http://publication.pravo.gov.ru/Document/View/0001202007210012 ] the task has been set to increase the share of citizens systematically engaged in physical culture and sports to 70%, and in accordance with Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated May 07, 2024 No. 309 "On National Development Goals of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2030 and for the future up to 2036" [Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No. 474 dated July 21, 2020 "On the National Development Goals of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2030" // Official Internet Portal of Legal Information of the Russian Federation. URL: http://pravo.gov.ru/novye-postupleniya/ukaz-prezidenta-rossiyskoy-federatsii-ot-07-05-2024-309-o-natsionalnykh-tselyakh-razvitiya-rossiysko/?sphrase_id=8483 the task of increasing the level of satisfaction of citizens with conditions for physical culture and sports by 2030 is outlined.

Both of these tasks assigned to the sports industry necessitate not only the search for additional mechanisms to attract the population to systematic physical education and sports, but also provide for the need to improve the management of the entire sports system, including the activities of relevant government agencies, public sports organizations and other actors.

Management issues in the field of sports have been repeatedly raised in scientific articles by Russian authors. Thus, the foundations of the management system in sports, as well as the problems of the modern Olympic movement, are revealed in the works of S.N. Bubka and V.N. Platonov, who note the influence on the management system of international sports of the criteria for the development of the Olympic program, the fight against doping, the development of women's sports and the modern system of periodization of sports training with increasing training loads and early specialization [1, p. 362].

The problems of managing international sports are also considered by another domestic author A.V. Iglin, who speaks about the heterogeneity of the elements of management in sports, which is due to the presence of a number of actors, including executive authorities, national public organizations, sports clubs, multi-sports organizations and other participants, which requires improving the management model of the international sports movement as a whole ^{[2, p. 163]}.

Russian authors also consider other aspects of sports management. For example, O.V. Skopin, speaking about the effectiveness of management technologies in sports, considers first of all technologies related to increasing the effectiveness of the training process and improving sports results ^{[3, p. 4]}, and Litvishko O.V., Lubyshev E.A. and co-authors consider the features of forming an effective financial mechanism for managing professional sports, offering approaches to optimize financially-economic activities of professional sports entities, including a gradual reduction in the financial burden on the use of budgetary funds, which is designed to increase the investment attractiveness of the sports industry ^{[4, p. 45]}.

Foreign experience shows that the public authorities of most modern states also strive to pay significant attention to the development and improvement of the sphere of physical culture and sports, increasing the amount of state funding, providing support to public sports organizations and using other tools to ensure the development of the industry. Articles by leading foreign experts in the field of public administration research in sports J. Grix and F. Karmichael ^{[5, P.78]}, M. Green and V. Halikein ^{[6, P. 12]}, D. Ritpas ^{[7, P.7]}, A. Baimer and S. Viham ^{[8, P. 721]} confirm this by the example of modern politics of foreign countries. Many foreign countries have adopted concepts for the development of physical culture and sports for the period up to 2030 and are implementing national programs on a large scale to involve various groups of the population in physical culture and sports.

A number of works by foreign authors are devoted to the study of theoretical approaches to the formation of sports management models in general. Thus, one of the first theories described in the management system of sports organizations was the Policy Governance Model described by Carver in relation to the management system in non-profit and public organizations using the example of the United States ^{[9, p.17]}. This model includes 5 principles to ensure the effectiveness of the Board of Governors:

1. The Council should determine the mission and strategic direction of the organization, focusing on the desired results, rather than on the means to achieve them.

2. The Board should establish executive restrictions or constraints on the working methods and means that employees use to achieve the goals of the board.

3. The Council should establish clear roles and relationships between the Council and the executive bodies.

4. The Council should ensure that governance processes are clearly defined in areas such as board membership, reporting on board and staff activities, and ensure that the council focuses on policy rather than specific issues.

5. The Council should develop clear performance indicators related to strategic results, and not just ensure compliance with various procedures and practices.

This model proposed by Carver later met with criticism regarding the lack of a role for the board of directors in raising funds and managing external relations of a public organization.

In particular, another American author, Caitlin Fletcher, notes that Carver's model is criticized primarily for "an idealized view of the board of directors, operating not with the relations between the board of directors and executive bodies that actually exist in non-profit organizations" ^{[10, p.437]}. Thus, the model turned out to be insufficiently describing the real conditions of management in the activities of non-profit public organizations in the United States, including in sports.

In addition, in the works of the authors Hoye et al. (Hoye et al.), three general types of management models for non-profit organizations were proposed, proposed by Hoye and Cuskelly, which can be applied to non-profit sports organizations ^{[11, p. 14]}. All three models relate to organizations managed by boards of directors, in which hired managers and employees work ^{[12, p. 376]}.

These models include the "traditional model", the "political leadership model" and the "management model with the central role of the executive director" ^{[13, p. 6]}.

Another approach to finding optimal control models is used by scientists from Australia. Thus, researchers Ross Booth, George Gilligan, Francesco de Zwart and Lee Gordon-Brown consider typical management models in sports in relation to the activities of national sports organizations in Australia, noting that three of the three models They turned out to be applicable for each of the three sports organizations ^{[14, p. 234]}. This circumstance emphasizes not so much the national context of the management system, but rather focuses on the specifics of a particular sport and the importance of taking it into account when implementing a particular management model within a sports federation by sport, even on the example of one country.

At the same time, despite the available works of domestic and foreign authors, it should be noted that there is a continuing lack of scientific research devoted to identifying approaches to management in the field of physical culture and sports, taking into account national specifics, legal peculiarities and traditions of various countries, as well as the role of national public organizations in the sports management system.

In the countries, as it seems, there are various models of management in the field of physical culture and sports, which is due to historical traditions, peculiarities of national culture, the system of regulatory regulation, approaches to the decision-making process and public administration in the country as a whole. These factors also affect the development of the sports sphere, forming original and distinctive management models in the sports sphere ^{[15, p. 435]}.

Foreign experience shows that the public authorities of most modern states also strive to pay significant attention to the development and improvement of the sphere of physical culture and sports, increasing the amount of state funding, providing support to public sports organizations and using other tools to ensure the development of the industry. Articles by leading foreign experts in the field of public administration research in sports J. Grix and F. Karmichael ^{[1, P.78]}, M. Green and V. Halikein ^{[2, P. 12]}, D. Ritpas ^{[3, P.7]}, A. Baimer and S. Viham ^{[4, P. 721]} confirm this by the example of modern politics of foreign countries. Many foreign countries have adopted concepts for the development of physical culture and sports for the period up to 2030 and are implementing national programs on a large scale to involve various groups of the population in physical culture and sports.

Meanwhile, despite the existence of common specified mechanisms to support the development of the sports sector, different models of physical culture and sports management operate in the countries, which is due to historical traditions, peculiarities of national culture, the regulatory system, approaches to the decision-making process and public administration in the country as a whole. These factors also affect the development of the sports sphere, forming original and distinctive management models in the sports sphere ^{[5, p. 435]}.

The article provides an overview of the approaches used to regulate the sphere of physical culture and sports abroad on the example of the leading countries of Olympic sports, including the USA, Great Britain, Canada, China, France and Germany. For many years, all the countries represented have been recognized international sports powers and leaders in the medal standings of the Olympic Games, both summer (USA, China, Great Britain, France) and winter (Canada, Germany).

The purpose of the study is to determine approaches to management in the field of physical culture and sports on the example of foreign countries that are recognized leaders of world Olympic sports.

Research methods: the work used a modeling method based on the systematization of data, carried out an analysis of regulatory legal documents defining the development of physical culture and sports in foreign countries, as well as comparative analysis and generalization of official materials.

The relevance of the presented work is based on the factual basis of primary sources, including current regulatory legal documents, and relevant materials published on the official websites of executive authorities and national sports organizations in the field of physical culture and sports of the six specified countries, which allows us to form an integrated approach to understanding the established models of management in the field of physical culture and sports in the member countries the leaders of Olympic sports.

The results of the study and their discussion.

The analysis of international experience on the example of leading sports powers has revealed several models for the organization of management in the field of physical culture and sports abroad.

The first conditional model includes, first of all, approaches to management in the field of sports used in a number of Anglo-Saxon countries (USA, Great Britain, Canada), in which the leading driver of the development of the sports industry is the activity of public sports organizations, and the role of the government is reduced either to conditional formal regulation and encouragement of grassroots initiatives as in the case of Great Britain and Canada, or even to its formal absence, as in the case of the United States.

Thus, the state does not participate in the management and financing of sports in the United States. The central leadership role in American sports belongs to the national public organization – the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee.

The basis of its financing is income from its own activities. Thus, the total income of the US NOC for 2022 amounted to 345 million US dollars [Financial summary for 2022 // Website of the US Olympic and Paralympic Committee. URL: https://www.usopc.org/2022-impact-report/financial-summary]. The main income items in it were sponsorship and income from the sale of license rights and income from broadcasts. It is the US NOC that provides support to US sports federations and their individual athletes in the form of direct funding and the provision of scientific and methodological programs for sports training and other services.

The U.S. National Olympic and Paralympic Committee was founded in Colorado Springs in 1894 and is a non-profit public organization whose activities are not taxed in accordance with Section 501(c)(3) of the U.S. Tax Code. In accordance with the Ted Stevens Law "On Olympic and Amateur Sports", adopted in 1978, the Committee provides the main coordinating role in the development of not only high-performance sports, but also in general in the popularization of physical activity and mass sports in the country.

This circumstance significantly distinguishes the US National Olympic Committee from similar organizations in other countries. So, while in most states the National Olympic Committee (NOC) is primarily responsible for the formation of the national Olympic sports team, the US NOC is endowed with much greater powers, since it oversees not only Olympic, Paralympic and non-Olympic sports, but also coordinates the activities of most public organizations on sports development, education and patriotic education. The NOC consists of 6 recognized sports organizations, 22 local and 4 educational multi-sports organizations, as well as 5 army organizations.

The leading role of public sports organizations is also noted in other Anglo-Saxon countries, such as the United Kingdom and Canada. Despite the fact that specialized authorities in the field of physical culture and sports are already operating there, directing state financing of the sports industry, nevertheless, it is public organizations that are the main decision-makers and ensure the development of leading regulatory legal documents defining the development of the sports industry in the country.

Thus, a feature of Canada's policy, despite the presence of the main public authority represented by the federal sports agency Sport Canada in the structure of the federal government, is the extremely active role and participation of non-governmental multi-sports organizations in the process of developing key regulatory legal acts (NPA) in the field of physical activity, sports and recreation.

The main public authority in Canada is the Sports Canada Agency, which is under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Heritage in the structure of the Federal Government of Canada. However, the Agency regulates federal policy in the field of physical education and sports in Canada, in fact, only providing funding programs from the state budget to support the development of sports in the country.

At the same time, key regulatory documents subsequently adopted by the Government were proposed and developed by public organizations. For example, the Concept of "A system of long-term development in sports and physical activity" [The concept of "Long-term development in sports and physical activity 3.0" // Website of the national public organization "Sport for Life". URL: https://sportforlife.ca/portfolio-view/long-term-development-in-sport-and-physical-activity-3-0 /], adopted by the government in 2019 and which is the main document regulating the development of physical activity and sports in Canada, was developed by experts of the national public organization Sport for Life. The concept of integrated school health care [The concept of integrated school health care // The website of the national public organization "Organization of Physical Education and Health of Canada". URL: https://phecanada.ca/sites/default/files/content/docs/resources/healthy-school-communities-concept-paper-2012-08_0.pdf] Developed in 2012, it was the result of joint activities of the Organization of Physical Education and Health Canada (Physical and Health Education Canada) and the Propel Center for Public Health Research (Propel Centre for Population Health Impact) at the University of Waterloo with the participation of the federal Government and the governments of the Canadian provinces and territories. The concept of "A common vision to increase physical activity levels in order to combat a sedentary lifestyle in Canada "Let's move"" 2018 [The concept of "A common vision to increase physical activity levels in order to combat a sedentary lifestyle in Canada "Let's move"" // Website of the Government of Canada. URL:https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/publications/healthy-living/lets-get-moving.html It was developed by specialists of the Canadian Scientific Research Institute of Physical Culture and Healthy Lifestyle (Canadian Fitness and Lifestyle Research Institute) and the national organization "Participation".

All the listed regulatory documents adopted by these organizations have been supported by the Government and extend their legal force to all sports organizations in the country.

It should also be noted that all key multi-sports organizations in Canada receive government funding under the federal Sports Support Program through the Sports Canada agency. For example, the Sport for Life organization received 931,500 Canadian dollars in 2022-2023, the Participation organization received 6,656,000 Canadian dollars, while the Canadian Olympic Committee received only 1,985,417,000 Canadian dollars [Financing of national multi-sports public organizations in 2022-2023 // Website The Ministry of Canadian Heritage. URL: https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/sport-organizations/national-multisport-service/funding.html].

A similar model of governance in the field of sports operates in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

The Ministry of Digitalization of Technology, Culture, Media and Sport (Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport), which is part of the structure of the British government headed by the Prime Minister, is responsible for the development of sports in the country.

In the structure of this Ministry, in 1997, the specialized sports agency UK Sport (UK Sport) was established, which became the leading government agency developing and implementing policies in the field of physical activity and sports throughout the country.

The role of public sports organizations in the UK is already less strong than their role in Canada, nevertheless they play an active role in the process of developing and making all key political decisions in the field of sports. At the same time, the main regulatory legal documents are also largely discussed with representatives of public sports organizations. For example, the National Strategy "Sporting Future" (Sporting Future: A New Strategy for an Active Nation) [National Strategy "Sporting Future" // Website of the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. URL: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a74a48240f0b61df47774bf/Sporting_Future_ACCESSIBLE.pdf] Before being adopted and approved by the Yukey Sport Agency in 2015, there was a period of numerous public discussions, which involved representatives of sports organizations, including sports federations, as well as other leaders of the country's sports movement. The strategy sets the vectors for the strategic development of state policy in the field of physical activity and sports for the period up to 2025.

One of the largest national multi-sport organizations in the UK, which determines national policy in the field of sports, is the Sport and Recreation Alliance. It is a non-governmental public organization whose tasks include regulating the development of physical activity, sports and recreation. The Alliance's activities are partially funded by the Sports Council of England and receive income from other sources. The Alliance currently includes more than 320 organizations, including the national sports federations of Great Britain [About us. Sports and Recreation Alliance // URL: https://www.sportandrecreation.org.uk/pages/about-us (date of access: 09/27/2024)]. Thus, the Alliance is an umbrella organization representing the interests of a variety of national public organizations in the field of physical activity and sports in the United Kingdom.

It is noteworthy that the activities of this organization are aimed not only at the development of the sports movement in the country, but are also associated with lobbying the interests of all public organizations of the sports industry in the British Parliament. Thus, at the initiative of the Alliance, a working group on sport was established in the UK Parliament, which included representatives of all political parties to develop a unified policy in the sports sector. Issues related to both mass sports and high-performance sports are discussed at the meetings of the working group.

The Alliance provides expert support to parliamentarians by conducting targeted research in the sports industry, and also provides parliamentarians with the position of the public, accumulating the opinions of representatives of various organizations in the field of physical activity and sports. The main activities of the Alliance are the following:

− consultations with the UK government on the formation of a tax system providing for the encouragement of organizations involved in financing the development of mass sports;

− ensuring the implementation of programs and projects to promote mass sports and physical activity;

− conducting annual research and conferences on the problems of mass sports, as well as regular meetings with the government and interested organizations in the field of mass sports.

In addition, the Alliance develops and publishes official regulatory documents that are mandatory for all public sports organizations in the country. For example, in April 2023, the Alliance prepared National Recommendations on concussion during sports, which were approved by the British government [National recommendations of the British Government on combating Concussion in Mass Sports from April 2023 "In case of doubt, drop them off" // Website of the national public organization "Alliance of Sports and Recreation". URL: https://sramedia.s3.amazonaws.com/media/documents/9ced1e1a-5d3b-4871-9209-bff4b2575b46.pdf].

The Alliance also implements a number of national campaigns to involve various groups of the population in regular sports activities within the framework of various programs: "Let's Dance" (Let's Dance), "Right to be active" (Right to be active), "Healthy for the Future" (Fit for the Future) and others, funds for which it attracts through fundraising, donations and sponsorship.

The second proposed management model, as it seems, can be attributed to the countries of the Romano-German legal family with a pronounced central role of authorities (France and Germany).

The regulatory documents defining the development of the field of sports in France are adopted by the authorities. Thus, the main document regulating the sphere of physical culture and sports in the country is the French Sports Code, adopted by Parliament in 2006 as a set of French legislation on sports, containing 1675 articles [The French Sports Code of 2006 // The official Internet portal of legal information of France "Legifrance". URL: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do?idArticle=LEGIARTI000038872792&cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006071318&dateTexte=20190803]. In addition, the National Strategy "Sport – Health", adopted for the period 2019 - 2024 (Stratégie Nationale Sport Santé) [National Strategy "Sport – Health" 2019-2024 // Website of the French Ministry of Sports. URL: https://sante.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/la_strategie_nationale_sport_sante_2019-2024.pdf]. The strategy was developed and adopted for implementation jointly by French Sports Minister Roxana Maracineanu and French Minister of Health and Social Protection Agnes Buzyn and is designed for a period of 5 years.

France has traditionally been distinguished by a very centralized management system in sports, headed by the Republican Ministry of Sports, which determined all state policy in this area. However, as a result of the management reform initiated in 2017-18 to change the model of development of French sports, the impetus for which was France's acquisition of the right to host the Olympic and Paralympic Games in 2024, a step was taken away from the comprehensive centralization of power, towards granting more rights and voices to public organizations, leaders and representatives of the sports movement, bodies municipal authorities and the business community. As a result, in 2019, the National Agency for Sport (Agence Nationale du Sport, ANS) was created, which, according to the Founding Agreement, is a state agency in the form of a public-private partnership (Groupement d'intérêtpublic), uniting the state, the sports movement, local governments, as well as representatives of the commercial sector [Founding Agreement of the National sports agencies // Website of the National Sports Agency. URL: http://www.agencedusport.fr/IMG/pdf/2019_convention_constitutive_agence-2.pdf].

The Agency is divided into four boards, each of which has a certain percentage of the right to vote at the General Meeting and meetings of the Administrative Council, among them:

- the board of representatives of the state (30 people, of which 15 are deputies appointed by the resolutions of the relevant ministers) – 30% of the voting rights;

- the board of representatives of the sports movement (30 people, of which 15 are deputies) – 30% of the voting rights;

- board of representatives of local governments (30 people, of which 15 are deputies) – 30% of voting rights;

- the board of representatives of the economic sector (10 people, of whom 5 are deputies) – 10% of the voting rights.

The Sports Agency is an institution under the jurisdiction of the French Ministry of Sports. According to article L. 112-16 of the French Sports Code, the State concludes a "Convention d'objectifs" with the National Sports Agency for a period of three to five years [Article L. 112-16. The Sports Code of France of 2006 // The official Internet portal of legal information of France "Legifrance". URL: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do?idArticle=LEGIARTI000038872792&cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006071318&dateTexte=20190803]. This agreement lists the measures of state policy in the field of sports, the implementation of which is entrusted to the Agency, as well as the goals and means provided to the agency to achieve them. The President and Director General of the Agency annually submit a report on the activities of the Agency to the Standing Committees on Culture and Finance of the National Assembly and the Senate of France.

At the same time, the very fact of the creation of such a body has become indicative of the involvement of non-governmental sports organizations and representatives of the country's sports community in the decision-making process in the field of sports.

As a result, representatives of non–governmental public organizations, business structures, municipal authorities and the relevant expert community were involved in the decision–making process through a new federal body - the Sports Agency, which significantly increased the weight of their voice in the development of national sports policy in France.

Despite the fact that the central role in the development of sports in France is performed by the relevant Ministry of Sports and the Sports Agency supervised by it, the role of national multi-sports organizations is also noticeable in the structure of national sports policy.

For example, the National Federation of Mass Sports (Fédération française Sports pour Tous) was formed in 1967 and is a multi-sports federation recognized by the Ministry of Sports, engaged in organizing sports activities for citizens of all ages, from the youngest to the elderly, with the aim of promoting health, well-being and social integration. The Federation unites more than 3,000 affiliated sports organizations, more than 190,000 licensed athletes, 5,200 qualified coaches and instructors, and more than 80 methodologists. The Federation has committees in every department and a wide network of multi-sport clubs throughout the country. The Federation oversees classes in 57 sports and outdoor activities. [A mandatory participant in the sports movement! // National Federation of Mass Sports. URL: https://www.sportspourtous.org/fr/la-federation/qui-sommes-nous.html (date of access: 09/21/2024)].

Among other national federations developing mass sports in France, the National Federation of Multisport Clubs, the National Federation of Physical Education and Gymnastics and a number of others should be noted.

In general, it should be noted that all these national organizations are multi-sports federations of national importance, registered with the French Ministry of Sports, and have their own regional and departmental branches. All of them also receive government funding from the Sports Agency for the implementation of their sports projects. For example, in 2020, the National Federation of Mass Sports received funding in the amount of 763,735 euros, which was distributed among the regional branches and sports clubs of the federation in order to implement their sports projects [Application for a grant under the federal sports project (February 2020) // National Federation of Mass Sports. URL: https://www.sportspourtous.org/medias/fichiers/FFSPT_PSF_Note-Orientation_V-fevrier-2020_def-WEB.pdf (date of application: 17.10.2024)]. Other sources of income for French multi-sports organizations are membership fees, income from other activities and sponsorship funds.

In many ways, the Federal Republic of Germany has a similar model with the central role of authorities in the decision-making process in the field of sports. The main function of regulation in the field of sports in Germany is performed by the Ministry of the Interior, within which the Department of Sports directs policy in the field. In its activities, the Sports Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Federal Republic of Germany closely cooperates with the governments of the states and the Olympic Sports Confederation of Germany.

The development of all regulatory legal documents and the adoption of key decisions in the field of sports is handled by the relevant public authority – the Sports Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Germany.

At the same time, representatives of sports societies also have the tools to participate in the decision-making process and the development of public policy in the field of sports through participation in the Conference of Ministers of Sports of the Lands. This body deals with issues of regulation in the field of sports at the federal level with the participation of the Ministers of Sports of 16 German states in order to coordinate the interests of the lands in the field of sports development and the uniform regulation of the lands and their legislations on sports.

It is also the main advisory body for the German Interior Ministry on the development of sports in the lands and at the federal level.

It is important to note that at the meetings of the Conference of Ministers of Sports of the Lands, along with the lands, representatives of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Germany, the Olympic Sports Confederation of Germany, the Union of Cities and Communities, the Parliament of Cities, as well as the sports Commission of the Permanent Conference of Ministers of Education and Culture of the Lands are present on a permanent basis. In addition, invited experts in the field of sports, representatives of sports organizations at the federal and regional levels, including sports federations and other sports organizations, can take part in meetings of the Conference of Ministers of Sports of the Lands. At these meetings of the Conferences, various regulatory and strategic documents are adopted, for example, in April 2024, the "Sports Development Plan" was adopted, in which all participants indicated the need to continue joint efforts to improve the intangible and material base of sports development in Germany" ["Sports Development Plan" of April 2024 // Website Conferences of Ministers of Sports of the lands. URL: https://www.innenministerium.bayern.de/assets/stmi/med/aktuell/05_bv_entwicklungsplan.pdf].

Thus, the Conference of Ministers of Sports of the Lands is an advisory, consultative body that ensures the interconnection of state policy in the field of sports at the federal and regional levels. Taking into account the specifics of the political and administrative structure of the Federal Republic of Germany with the pronounced independence of the German lands, this body performs an important coordinating function, not only forming a coordinated policy for the development of sports in the German lands, but also advising the Ministry of the Interior of the Federal Republic of Germany, as well as the Olympic Sports Confederation on the development of sports in Germany.

As a result, participation in the decision–making process through an advisory body of federal significance - the Conference of Ministers of Sports of the lands, where representatives of non-governmental organizations, representatives of the national sports movement and the relevant expert community are also participants. There is a tool for discussing and correcting the decisions made.

Germany also has large multi-sports organizations that play an important role in the development of sports in the country. Among them:

– "Young Power of Germany" (Deutsche Jugendkraft), established in 1920 in Würzburg, the organization is the Catholic sports organization of Germany, while being an official member of the Olympic Sports Confederation (NOC of Germany), as well as the International Catholic Federation of Physical and Sports Education and the International Sports Federation of Catholic Education.

The organization is included in the so-called list of multi-sports organizations or "organizations with special tasks", because in its activities it promotes the values of sports in combination with Christian values and there are more than 1,100 sports societies throughout the country [Sports Federation "Young Power of Germany" // Website of the sports federation "Young Power of Germany". URL: https://www.djk.de/sportverband/wir-ueber-uns/6-dies-ist-ein-test (date of access: 09/14/2024)].

Another oldest public organization in the field of German sports is the German Union of Cyclists and Motorists "Solidarity" (Rad-und Kraftfahrerbund "Solidaritaet"). This organization was formed in 1896 as part of the workers' sports movement and during the Weimar Republic in the early twentieth century. It was the most massive cycling organization in the world, it has existed for more than 120 years. During this period, the Union promoted the mobility of workers and their participation in public life, organized a sports workers' movement as opposed to bourgeois "discriminatory" sports and united sports, culture and politics [History of the German Union of Cyclists and Motorists "Solidarity" // Website of the German Union of Cyclists and Motorists "Solidarity". URL: http://rkbsoli.org/rkb/ueber-uns/historie / (date of access: 09/19/2024)].

In 1977, the Union of Cyclists and Motorists "Solidarity" was accepted into the Olympic Sports Confederation of Germany (NOC FRG) as an organization with special tasks. The headquarters of the Solidarity Union is located in Offenbach am Main.

Another area of activity of the Solidarity Union is the development and popularization of mass sports and sports recreation for the German population. The Union organizes trips to the surrounding area, multi-day cycling tours and tourist trips by bicycle, which allows participants to enjoy nature and get an excellent opportunity to get acquainted with the cultural and historical heritage of Germany in order to develop domestic tourism.

– The organization "Sports Youth of Germany" (Deutsche Sportjugend) is another organization that actively develops mass sports among children and youth. It was established under the auspices of the German Olympic Sports Confederation (NOC FRG) in 1950 and today unites about 10 million children, adolescents and young people under the age of 27 who play sports in 91,000 sports societies, in 16 land organizations "Sports Youth of Germany" [Goals and mission // The website of the organization "Sports Youth of Germany". URL: https://www.dsj.de/deutsche-sportjugend/selbstdarstellung-und-leitbild / (date of access: 08.10.2024)].

The organization "Sports Youth of Germany" positions itself as the largest non-governmental, non-profit organization in Germany to promote the development of youth sports. She is an important participant in the sports movement of Germany in terms of the development of youth sports, and the NOC of Germany actively supports her activities in order to ensure the preparation of a sports reserve for high-performance sports.

These multi-sports organizations receive government funding. For example, according to the financial report for 2022, the total annual income of the organization "Young Power of Germany" (Deutsche Jugendkraft) amounted to 1,247,399 euros, of which subsidies from the state amounted to 347,014 euros (27.82%), and most of them were membership fees – 502,737 euros (40.3%) and other income [Annual balance sheet dated December 31, 2022 // Website of the Young Power of Germany Sports Federation. URL. https://www.lobbyregister.bundestag.de/media/15/b4/231129/Jahresabschluss-DJK-2022.pdf (date of access: 08.10.2024)].

The budget of the organization "Sports Youth of Germany" (Deutsche Sportjugend) according to the report for 2022 amounted to 20,090,353 euros, of which 94.72% of the funds came from the state budget [Register of funding receipts for 2022 // Website of the organization "Sports Youth of Germany". URL: https://www.lobbyregister.bundestag.de/suche/R003435 (date of access: 09.10.2024)].

Thus, in general, the approach to management in the field of physical culture and sports that has developed in Germany and France shows the dominant role of public authorities. At the same time, it should also be noted that legitimate mechanisms are in place at the state level to take into account the voice of representatives of the sports movement – through participation in the board of the Sports Agency in France and the Conference of Ministers of Sports of the Lands in Germany, which makes this approach to sports management very balanced and harmonious.

Finally, as a third model, it seems possible to single out the management system in the field of physical culture and sports operating in the People's Republic of China, which is characterized by a high degree of centralization of power, including in the field of sports.

The main body responsible for the development of sports in the People's Republic of China is the State Commission for Physical Culture and Sports. In 1998, the State Sports Commission was restructured into the Main State Administration for Physical Culture and Sports, which in turn is subordinate to the highest state executive authority – the State Council of the People's Republic of China.

The structure of the Main State Administration for Physical Culture and Sports unites 43 structural divisions divided into three groups: 12 administrative departments, 21 sports discipline management centers, subordinate institutions.

The 21 sports discipline management centers include national sports organizations. Among them there are centers responsible for the development of both individual sports (for example, the Basketball Management Center) and groups of sports (for example, the Winter Sports Management Center). At their core, these centers fully supervise and manage the activities of national sports federations, defining strategies for the development of sports and assigning them state funding.

The development of state policy in the field of sports is exclusively carried out by the relevant state authority of the People's Republic of China in the person of the Main State Administration for Physical Culture and Sports, which in turn is part of the State Council of the People's Republic of China, which indicates a high degree of centralization of power in one hand.

It is expected that all regulatory legal documents defining the development of the sphere of physical culture and sports are developed exclusively by the executive authorities represented by the Main State Administration for Physical Culture and Sports and are adopted by the Communist Party.

For example, the national strategy "Healthy China 2030" (中中中 国 国 国""健康中中国国国国国国中中"规划纲要》[National Strategy "Healthy China 2030" // Website of the State Council of the People's Republic of China. URL: http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/2016-10/25/content_5124174.htm ]) was adopted on October 25, 2016 by the CPC Central Committee and the State Council of the People's Republic of China in order to promote the construction of a healthy China and improve the health of the population. The program is a very voluminous document and contains provisions concerning the development of various areas in the field of healthcare, ecology, pharmacology, recreational sports related to the topic of a healthy lifestyle, improving the health of the population, as well as the development of physical culture and sports.

In order to attract 300 million people to winter sports and recreation, the Chinese Government has developed a number of national and regional plans aimed at developing winter sports infrastructure and attracting children and youth to winter sports at educational institutions. Among the documents of national importance adopted by the Government of the People's Republic of China, it should be noted the National Plan for the Development of Winter Sports for the period from 2016 to 2025, the National Plan for the Development of sports facilities and facilities for winter sports, adopted for the period 2016-2022, the Guidelines for the development of Winter sports 2019. A medium– and long-term plan for the development of football in China (2016 - 2050) was adopted separately [The medium- and long-term plan for the development of Chinese football indicates an increased demand for training in related fields // Website of the British Council. URL: https://opportunities-insight.britishcouncil.org/news/market-news/medium-and-long-term-plan-chinese-football-development-points-increased-demand (date of application: 10/19/2024)], which was jointly developed by the State Committee for Reform and Development, the Office of the Interdepartmental Meeting on Football Reform and Development under the State Council (Chinese Football Association), the General State Administration for Sports and the Ministry of Education and was approved by the State Council.

National public sports organizations in China also receive government funding, but this does not happen in the form of any approved government programs, as in a number of countries, but through a public procurement mechanism through which sports organizations, including sports federations, purchase the services, sports equipment and inventory they need. Thus, they receive funding not in the form of direct subsidies, but through a centralized system of public procurement and supplier selection, which also emphasizes to a certain extent the total control over the financial activities of Chinese sports organizations.

Conclusion.

Thus, in this example, it seems important to note that the mechanisms and volume of state support for sports organizations and the degree of participation of these organizations in the process of developing sports policy and making key strategic decisions in the field of sports, as it seems, are determined by the established national legal traditions, cultural characteristics and the specifics of the political structure of various countries.

In general, in foreign countries, there is a varying degree of participation of non-governmental public organizations in the implementation of policies for the development of physical culture and sports. The models of participation of non-governmental organizations in the management of sports abroad are shown in table 1.

Table 1. – Models of participation of non-governmental organizations in the management of sports abroad

In some, mainly Western countries, it has historically been due to the weak role of public authorities (Canada) or their actual absence (USA). In other countries, as in the People's Republic of China, on the contrary, it was less weak in the context of strong centralization of government authorities, including in the field of sports.

In most foreign countries, there is a very balanced interaction between non-governmental public organizations and state authorities in the field of physical culture and sports in terms of implementing state policy and achieving the goals set by the government of these countries in the field of sports (Great Britain, France, Germany). At the same time, even in those countries where the government structure does not have a specialized executive authority in the field of sports and does not allocate state funding for sports (USA) and where, on the contrary, there is a high degree of centralization of power in the person of a specialized body in the field of physical culture and sports with dominant state funding (PRC), national sports organizations carry out successful training of high-class athletes who win medals at international competitions of the highest level, including the Olympic Games, which proves the success of the established management models in the field of physical culture and sports, taking into account the form of the political structure, regulatory traditions and cultural specifics of these countries.