The issue and its context
This forum is a response to the South Australian government’s decision to partner with the Saudi Arabia’s Investment Fund to hold the LIV golf tour in Adelaide this April. According to Human Rights Watch, it is blatant sportswashing by the Saudis (Human Rights Watch 2017). Our government is now a partner in this sportswashing.
The government spruiks the economic benefits of the LIV tour for the state but is less forthcoming about how much of the income generated stays in South Australia. It is also silent about the number of jobs created, whether they are ongoing employment, and about employment conditions. This raises questions of transparent governance and the widening gap between workers with secure, well-paid jobs and those struggling in the ‘gig economy’.
Our concern is that our government’s willingness to ignore human rights may inadvertently embolden autocratic, repressive regimes. Further, we worry that the lack of detail about the economic benefits of the LIV tour accelerates the public’s declining faith in democracy by weakening transparency and accountability by governments (Stoker et al 2018).
Sportswashing
The Sydney based Ethics Centre says sportswashing is an attempt by entities — states or corporations — to deflect attention from human rights abuses they have perpetuated by hosting sporting events, or injecting funds into sporting events or teams (The Ethics Centre 2022).
Sportswashing generates positive media about the entity’s links to popular and publicized sports. In place of headlines on human rights, we get ones celebrating sporting achievements and personalities. It also makes all those who participate complicit in human rights violations (The Ethics Centre 2022; Fruh et al 2022; Skey 2022).
Sportswashing attempts to avoid damaging ‘reputational capital’, because of its value to any entity engaged in the market, whether state or corporation (Eccles et al 2007). Sportswashing is related to ‘soft diplomacy ’ and ‘place branding’; both are used by states and companies to increase reputational capital. However, sportswashing should not be confused with place branding or soft diplomacy. These undertakings can both have positive outcomes; sportswashing, by contrast, only deflects attention from human rights breaches (Skey 2022).
Sport is important because it is profoundly important to many people; it can be used to garner the attention of specific groups and it often attracts mass audiences (Skey 2022). Sportswashing also exploits sport’s assets— enthusiasm, affiliation, and identity — to accomplish its objectives. In doing so, a range of people (participants, spectators, journalists, clubs, venues, media organisations, providers) become complicit in the wrong sponsors seek to camouflage (Fruh et al 2022).
A version of sportswashing occurs in the arts, where sponsors use events to hide questionable practices and enhance reputational capital. Artists involved in the 2014 Sydney Biennale successfully persuaded the organizers to cut Transfield’s sponsorship loose because of its association with the running of detention centres (Sydney Morning Herald 2014). Environmentalists and traditional owners forced organizers to end Santos’ sponsorship of the Festival of Darwin because of Santos’s links with fossil fuels (Canberra Times 2022). The Sydney Festival revoked the Israeli government’s sponsorship last year after artists and arts organizations complained (The Conversation 2022).
Why have ethical frameworks?
The Sydney-based Ethics Centre suggests that the choice of sponsors should be a careful and deliberative process, using a formal decision-making tool, because taken-for-granted assumptions and the values implicit in an organization’s culture can unwittingly shape decisions that have unethical consequences (The Ethics Centre 2022).
Both the Ethics Centre (2022) and the Victorian government (2019) argue that, in selecting sponsors, organizations and governments should consider their ‘foundational purposes’; that is, their reasons for being, and their values, goals, and guiding principles. Sponsorship (and supply chains) should align with these. For these reasons, we believe that, for governments, normal cabinet decision-making processes are unlikely to promote ethical decisions about sponsors and supply chains. An ethical events framework would assist transparent and deliberative decision-making.
Existing frameworks
Glasgow Commonwealth Games
Sporting events are an opportunity to enhance and extend human rights (Glasgow 2014). Both the 2014 Commonwealth Games in Glasgow and the 2018 games, held on the Gold Coast, created ethical frameworks for these events. The Organizing Committee of the Glasgow games directed attention to respecting individual rights and freedoms, including civil and political rights, as well as the right to privacy and family life. Further, the 2014 Games promoted freedom of association, conscience and belief, and expression. The Games also endorsed decent labour conditions, including wages, and worker health and safety. Suppliers, the organizers insist, must also adhere to ethical trading frameworks and the code of conduct for the World Federation of the Sporting Goods Industry. The Glasgow Games also formulated policies — albeit limited ones — promoting environmental sustainability
Gold Coast Commonwealth Games 2018
The Organizing Committee of the 2018 Commonwealth Games exemplified the deliberative approach to creating an ethical framework by engaging human rights experts, key stakeholders, and existing human rights assessment tools, to focus on:
- Supply chain impacts
- Athlete well-being
- Local community impacts
- Security
- Work health and safety (Gold Coast Commonwealth Games 2018:8).
The 2018 Games also formulated policies promoting:
- Indigenous participation in the Games, including opportunities for economic participation.
- Accessibility, diversity, and inclusion
- Engagement, particularly with local communities and stakeholders
- Gender Balance
- Links with LGBTIQ+ organizations (Gold Coast Commonwealth Games 2018:20-26).
Human Rights Risk Assessment
The Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) and the New Zealand Human Rights Commission (NZHRC) formulated a detailed ethical framework to guide the Fédération Internationale de Football Association’s (FIFA) staging of the 2023 Women’s World Cup. Together they developed a Human Rights Risk Assessment tool for assessing risks to human rights, particularly in relation to:
- the exploitation of migrant labour in creating infrastructure
- forced evictions of homeless and other people
- child labour that may be employed in the production of various kinds of merchandise (Australian Human Rights Commission 2021)
The following also require scrutiny:
- Use of labour in slavery like conditions
- Risks for workers, with special attention to strong labour and OHS laws, and regulations.
- Protecting the rights of migrant works (comprising approximately 11% of Australia’s workforce) because, for a variety of reasons, they are less likely to be assertive and less likely to report breaches.
- Younger workers, who are also more open to exploitation, because they are unaware of their rights and channels to address breaches of them. Sexual harassment of younger female workers presents a specific risk (Australian Human Rights Commission 2021).
Certain groups of workers and industries have been documented to be at high risk of exploitive practices:
- Construction
- Hospitality
- Security
- Cleaning
- Consumer goods (Australian Human Rights Commission 2021)
Volunteers may also be exploited by having roles and responsibilities that could be done by paid employees (Australian Human Rights Commission 2021).
All risks must be assessed in relation to sponsors and media organizations, as well as sporting participants, coaches, and support crews in the event (Australian Human Rights Commission 2021).
Additionally, organizers must promote the cultural safety of people attending the event. How safe are the environments for women, people of linguistic and cultural diversity, Indigenous people, LGBTIQ+ and people with disability? Additionally, Indigenous groups must be involved. This extends beyond a welcome to, and acknowledgement of, country. It must entail genuine and meaningful participation of Indigenous groups in the planning, running and management of such events (Australian Human Rights Commission 2021).
The risk assessment framework developed by ARHC and NZHRC offers a mechanism to identify the likelihood, scope and severity of risks, as well to assess how remediable they are (Australian Human Rights Commission 2021). This facilitates a deliberative and comprehensive calculation of risks, together with a means for identifying priorities. It also suggests that it is possible to create templates to gauge ethical risks in diverse events.
Environmental considerations
The State government of South Australia has guidelines for best practice in waste and recycling for events. It champions sustainability, promotes recycling and the diversion of organic and compostable material away from landfill. The guidelines focus on:
Minimizing waste
Developing waste management plans
Utilizing ethical service providers
Criteria for evaluation (Government of South Australia 2022).
References
Australian Human Rights Commission (2021) FIFA 2023 Women’s World Cup Human Rights Risk Assessment, Australian Human Rights Commission, https://humanrights.gov.au/about/publications.
Canberra Times (2022) ‘Santos ends Darwin festival sponsorship’,
https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/7947873/santos-ends-darwin-festival-sponsorship/
Eccles R; Newquist S and Schatz R (2007) Reputation and its risk, Harvard Business Review, https://hbr.org/2007/02/reputation-and-its-risks
Fruh K; Archer A and Wojtowicz J 2022) Sportswashing: Complicity and Corruption, Sport Ethics and Philosophy, 17 (1)
Glasgow 2014 XX Commonwealth Games (2014) Approach to human rights:.
Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games (2018) ‘Approach to human rights: Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games.
Government of South Australia (2022) Waste and Recyling at Events and Venues, Green Industries, South Australia.
Human Rights Watch (2017) Saudi-owned LIV Golf “Sportswashes” Rights Abuses
https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/02/17/saudi-owned-liv-golf-sportswashes-rights-abuses
Skey M (2022) Sportswashing: Media headline or analytic concept? International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1177/10126902221136086
Stoker G; Evans M and Halupka M, (2018) Democracy in Australia: Democratic Decline and Renewal, Museum of Australian Democracy. https://www.democracy2025.gov.au/documents/Democracy2025-report1.pdf
Sydney Morning Herald (2014) ‘Biennale of Sydney facing uncertain future after severing ties with Transfield,
The Conversation (2022) ‘Sydney festival boycott when arts organizations accept donations, there is always a cost’,
The Ethics Centre (2022) Sportswashing: How money and politics are corrupting sport https://ethics.org.au/sportswashing-how-money-and-politics-are-corrupting-sport/)
,Victorian Government (2019) Victorian Government Sponsorship Policy, https://www.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-03/Victorian-Government-Sponsorship-Policy.pdf
Ethical Events April 2023