ABSTRACT

Increasing sport participation by hosting elite sport events is a much-debated policy. This study evaluated the effect of hosting elite sport events on sport participation against the background of a shift in focus towards targeting recreational sport participation. We included 10 international elite sport events organised between 2000 and 2017 in the city of Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Sport-specific participation in the pastyear was obtained from abiannual cross-sectional survey. Per event, interrupted time series analyses were employed using 3 pre- and post-event measures. Data were summarised by means of random-effects meta-analyses. We tested for group differences to evaluate if events organised in the period with amore explicit aim to target recreational sport participation, and associated policies, had alarger impact. Three events concerning cycling, table tennis and gymnastics were followed by an increase in sport-specific participation 1-year after the event was organised, whereas the korfball event was followed by adecrease. The pooled effect of the 10 events did not show any change in sport-specific participation (0.2%-point (95% CI: −0.3; 0.8)). Significant group differences by period were found. More recent events targeting sport participation were followed by an increase in sport-specific participation (1.1%-point (95% CI: 0.0; 2.1)), but not for other events (−0.3%-point (95% CI: −0.6; 0.1)). No group differences were found for the number of visitors and location. Hosting elite sport events that explicitly target sport participation may increase sport participation among citizens. Longitudinal data following individuals over time are needed to support this finding.

摘要

通过举办精英体育赛事来提高体育参与度是一项备受争议的政策。这项研究在重点转向休闲体育参与的背景下，评估了举办精英体育赛事对体育参与的影响。我们纳入了2000年至2017年在荷兰鹿特丹市举办的10项国际精英体育赛事。过去一年的运动特定参与是从年度横断面调查获得的。对于每个事件，使用3个事前和事后措施进行中断的时间序列分析。数据通过随机效应荟萃分析进行汇总。我们测试了群体差异，以评估在此期间组织的旨在明确娱乐休闲运动目标的活动以及相关政策是否产生了较大影响。组织了三项有关自行车，乒乓球和体操的比赛之后，组织了这项运动的一年后，特定运动项目的参与有所增加，而足球比赛之后的活动则有所减少。这10个事件的综合影响并未显示出特定运动的参与度有任何变化（0.2％点（95％CI：-0.3； 0.8））。发现各组之间存在显着差异。针对运动参与的最新活动之后，特定运动的参与有所增加（1.1％点（95％CI：0.0； 2.1）），但其他活动则没有（-0.3％点（95％CI：-0.6） ; 0.1））。没有发现访客数量和位置的组差异。举办明确针对运动参与的精英运动赛事可能会增加公民的运动参与度。