2016 Olympics Emmanuel Dunand/Getty Images

Long Reads

The Governance Games

There was a time when the Olympic Movement was viewed as an almost perfect reflection of a shining ideal: a global commons and a global common good. But the International Olympic Committee’s stunning fall from grace is hardly unique: governments of all types are held in low esteem nowadays.

As happens every four years, the world is transfixed by the Summer Olympic Games. Yet even the brilliance of Usain Bolt, Simone Biles, Wayde van Niekerk, Katie Ledecky, and so many others has not obscured the dirty underside of the Olympic Movement – the self-serving governance of the International Olympic Committee.

Lucy Marcus of IE Business School gets straight to the point: “Thanks to the IOC,” she says, the Olympics now “embodies some of the most prominent problems the world is facing today, from inequality to exploitation to sheer hypocrisy among our leaders.” The IOC disregards the athletes’ interests, to the point that it permitted the Russian team to compete in Rio de Janeiro, despite recent revelations about Russia’s official doping program and the World Anti-Doping Agency’s recommendation that the team be banned. Likewise, it is “indifferent to how host cities and countries” fare, particularly the vast debts that pile up in hosting the Games.

Tokyo’s new governor, Yuriko Koike, is already concerned that the 2020 Summer Games in her city may “hobble future generations with debt,” not to mention “white-elephant structures that served a single purpose in 2020, only to mar the skyline for years and decades after.” But no one should be surprised by the IOC’s disregard for its stakeholders. After all, says Smith College economist Andrew Zimbalist, the IOC is “an unregulated global monopoly” with arbitrary, self-interested decision-making practically programmed into its organizational DNA.

To continue reading, please subscribe to On Point.

To access On Point or our archived content, log in or register now now and read two On Point articles for free and 2 archived contents. For unlimited access to the unrivaled analysis of On Point and archived contents, subscribe now.

required

By proceeding, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, which describes the personal data we collect and how we use it.

Log in

http://prosyn.org/hwHwE3u;
  1. Andia/UIG via Getty Images

    No Robo-Apocalypse

    Growing fears that automation and artificial intelligence will destroy jobs and create a “surplus population” are understandable. But whether the future of work will serve the many instead of the few is not up to the robots; it is up to us.

Cookies and Privacy

We use cookies to improve your experience on our website. To find out more, read our updated cookie policy and privacy policy.