Building effective management models in the field of physical culture and sports
https://doi.org/10.26794/1999-849X-2025-18-3-172-182
Abstract
The subject of the research is the management of the sphere of physical culture and sports, taking into account the social significance of this field of activity and the need to solve the tasks of ensuring the public good. The relevance of this article is due to the fact that the effective functioning of this sphere requires government intervention aimed at taking into account the interests of a wide range of stakeholders and using the most effective tools of state regulation. The objectives of the work are to analyze existing models of physical culture and sports management, identify their advantages and disadvantages, establish key principles of effective regulation and develop approaches to the formation of socially oriented solutions. The study examines four main models of physical culture and sports management: social, missionary, bureaucratic and entrepreneurial, which vary in the degree of government involvement, ranging from complete centralization to absolute decentralization, and also have different time horizons for planning. The main results of the study indicate that an effective management system should take into account the integrity of approaches, the presence of control, social orientation, openness and orientation towards achieving socially significant goals. The paper substantiates the need for algorithmization of the decision-making process related to the use of certain regulatory tools by identifying existing social problems and choosing the most effective regulatory tool. The practical significance of the research lies in the proposal of a methodological approach aimed at improving the social effectiveness of physical culture and sports management, which contributes to the creation of a sustainable regulatory system focused on the interests of various groups of stakeholders.
About the Author
A. M. EreminRussian Federation
Andrey M. Eremin — Cand. Sci. (Law), Assoc. Prof. of Basic Department of Selected Sports
Moscow
References
1. Henry I. European models of sport: Governance, organisational change and sports policy in the EU. In: Henry I., Ko L.-M., eds. Handbook of Sport Policy. London: Routledge; 2013.
2. Rusmane S. Public sport governance in theory and practice: Managing and organizing public sport sector with a comparative analysis of Baltic States and Scotland. Eurasian Journal of Social Sciences. 2021;9(2):61–77. DOI: 10.15604/ejss.2021.09.02.001
3. McLeod J., Shilbury D., Zeimers G. An institutional framework for governance convergence in sport: The case of India. Journal of Sport Management. 2021;35(2):144–157. DOI: 10.1123/jsm.2020–0035
4. Kadyrov A. R. Sport infrastructure as a factor in the development of regional economic systems. Kazanskii ekonomicheskii vestnik = Kazan Economic Bulletin. 2024;(5):20–26. (In Russ.).
5. Dees W., Walsh P., McEvoy C.D., McKelvey S., Mullin B. J., Hardy S., Sutton W. A. Sport marketing. Human Kinetics; 2022.
6. Zuev V. N., Popova I. M. The European model of sport: Values, rules and interests. Vestnik mezhdunarodnykh organizatsii: obrazovanie, nauka, novaya ekonomika = International Organisations Research Journal. 2018;13(1):51–65. (In Russ.). DOI:10.17323/1996–7845–2018–01–03
7. Malyshev A. I. Professional education and professional training of athletes: Problems and solutions. Vestnik Leningradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta im. AS Pushkina = Pushkin Leningrad State University Journal. 2020;(4):93–113. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.35231/18186653–2020–4–93
8. Porotkin E. S. The effectiveness of financing professional football clubs from the regional budget. Vestnik Samarskogo gosudarstvennogo ekonomicheskogo universiteta = Bulletin of Samara State University of Economics. 2017;(3):89–95. (In Russ.).
9. Leonov S. V., Polikanova I. S., Bulaeva N. I., Klimenko V. A. Using virtual reality in sports practice. Natsional’nyi psikhologicheskii zhurnal = National Psychological Journal. 2020;1(37):18–30. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.11621/npj.2020.0102
10. Tsepeleva A. D. Improving the mechanism of public-private partnership in the field of physical education and sports services. Diss. Cand. Sci. (Econ.). St. Petersburg; 2015. (In Russ.).
11. Melnik T. E. Public-private partnership in the field of physical culture and sports. Zhurnal rossiiskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law. 2016;12(240):133–141. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.12737/22731
12. Papoyan R. A., Vorotnikov A. M. Problems of interaction between the state and business in the development of sports infrastructure. Zhurnal sotsiologicheskikh issledovanii = Journal of Sociological Research. 2021;6(3):22–30. (In Russ.).
13. Davies L. E. Sport and economic regeneration: a winning combination? In: Sport in the City. London: Routledge; 2013:22–41.
14. Tsepeleva A. D. Public-private partnerships in the sphere of sports: Foreign experience. Uchenye zapiski universiteta im. PF Lesgafta = Scientific Notes of the PF Lesgaft University. 2013;4(98):173–177. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.5930/issn.1994–4683.2013.04.98.p173–177
15. Munteanu S. M. Project and sports events management. Review of International Comparative Management. 2010;11(2):1307–1311.
Review
For citations:
Eremin A.M. Building effective management models in the field of physical culture and sports. Economics, taxes & law. 2025;18(3):172-182. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.26794/1999-849X-2025-18-3-172-182