Ethnographic reflections of the role of Global North volunteers in sport-for-development

Abstract

This article critically examines the work undertaken by Global North volunteers in Global South sport-for-development programmes. Whilst existing studies acknowledge the centrality of Northern volunteers to the delivery of sport-for-development programmes in the Global South, there are few detailed explorations of how volunteers approach working in diverse cultural contexts and their impact on local communities. Drawing on an ethnographic methodology and post-colonial theory, the article reflects on the first author’s experiences as an AusAID funded volunteer working as a cricket development officer in the Solomon Islands. In addition to the first author’s fieldnotes and critical reflections, the article draws on interviews conducted with indigenous and expatriate stakeholders involved in the sport-for-development programme. The findings demonstrate the complexities of Global North volunteers’ engagement with sport-for-development. The use of post-colonial theory illustrates the ways in which Global North volunteers can perpetuate neo-colonial initiatives and systems of working that are imposed on Global South communities. The study suggests that volunteers can be very aware of their position but can feel helpless in challenging external agencies to promote more culturally sensitive and localised approaches to development work. Furthermore, the paper indicates the complications of developing localised initiatives, indicating how external agencies, through the Global North volunteer, used indigenous people to create the impression that programmes are locally driven. The paper concludes by examining the ways in which indigenous communities resisted the imposition of a sport-for-development initiative that did not meet their needs.

Keywords

ethnography local agency neo-colonialism sport for development volunteering

Introduction

This paper provides a critical reflection on the first author’s experiences of working as a Global North volunteer within a sport for development (SFD) programme in the Solomon Islands. The first author undertook a yearlong, AusAID funded volunteer role to assist with the development of cricket, with the intention of increasing cricket participation, and supporting wider social outcomes including promoting gender equity and leadership capabilities amongst participants within the Solomon Islands. Drawing on data collected during this yearlong volunteer assignment, the paper examines the experiences of working as an external volunteer within a Global South country, the responses of indigenous and expatriate stakeholders to development of and through sport, and the impact volunteers have on local communities. Utilising a post-colonial lens this paper questions the power relations that exist within the context of volunteering, adding further insights into the ways that Northern volunteers may perpetuate neo-colonialism (Darnell, 2007). This paper also explores issues of local ownership, resistance and local agency in the ultimate success or failure of SFD initiatives.

To date, very few studies have provided accounts of first-hand, long term engagement within the field of SFD. In a rare example, Forde (2015) has utilised autoethnographic methods to detail his experiences of working on a yearlong SFD project in southern Africa, exploring issues of whiteness and masculinity. Whilst Forde (2015) highlights important insights from his own volunteer experiences, there remains a lack of local voices providing perspectives on SFD projects and the role of volunteers within them. Furthermore, whilst some authors have acknowledged the prevalence of the use of volunteers in SFD initiatives (Darnell, 2007, 2011; Forde, 2015; Smith et al., 2016), there are still very few first-hand accounts of volunteer experiences that highlight the complexities that volunteers face when working in this space.

This paper seeks to contribute to the literature by providing an in-depth account of a volunteer experience when working on an SFD programme, whilst also where possible foregrounding local voices as part of this process. In particular, this paper questions to what extent Northern volunteers are uncritically implicit in the imposition of neo-colonial approaches and values, instead discussing some of the complexities that volunteers face as they attempt to fulfil project requirements and meet local desires. The experiences of the first author as demonstrated throughout this paper serve to illustrate these complexities; whilst this assignment was initially framed as an SFD initiative, with cricket to serve as the vehicle for the achievement of broader development outcomes, once the first author arrived in the Solomon Islands, the assignment significantly shifted to incorporate a much greater focus on the development of cricket itself. As a result, the suitability of cricket as the vehicle for SFD in the Solomon Islands was called into question, as were the motives of the stakeholders driving the project. As called for by Tiessen, this paper further serves to highlight an example of research that demonstrates an instance in which the local community has “challenged the Northern-dominated, paternalistic and neo-colonialist nature of many SDP [sport for development and peace] initiatives” (Tiessen, 2011: 584).

The present study is exploratory, drawing on ethnographic research methods including fieldnotes and interviews to examine the following questions: How do international volunteers influence SFD programmes? What is the response of local communities to this?

Research context

The volunteer assignment

The data presented in this paper were collected during a 12-month AusAID funded volunteer assignment, which the first author undertook, as a Cricket Development Officer based in Honiara, Solomon Islands. The volunteer assignment was instigated by the Solomon Island’s Cricket Association, the national governing body established in 2009 by locals and expatriates from Australia and New Zealand living in the Solomon Islands at the time. The volunteer assignment, as it was initially designed, was for the volunteer to support the association to increase participation in cricket as well as contributing to broader development outcomes that included promoting gender equity and developing leadership skills amongst participants. In a society where few opportunities exist for women to participate in organised sport, it was anticipated that cricket may offer an avenue to improve sporting opportunities for women, thereby promoting gender equity. Furthermore, given the large numbers of disengaged and disaffected youth throughout Honiara, not actively engaged in education, the workforce or other aspects of civil society, it was viewed that cricket may serve as a vehicle for the development of leadership qualities amongst these young people, skills that then could be transferred to assist with their participation in broader society. As will be explored further, once the first author arrived in the Solomon Islands to commence the project, significant changes to the focus and the outlook of the assignment were required. Operational funding was provided to the Solomon Islands Cricket Association by the International Cricket Council East Asia-Pacific Office, which contributed towards costs associated with the procurement of equipment, staff employment, and associated administrative costs. Private sponsorship was also sought and utilised to contribute to the operating costs of the Solomon Island’s Cricket Association.

Solomon Islands

The Solomon Islands are an archipelago of over 1000 islands in the South Pacific Ocean, located northeast of Australia (Allen, 2012). The nation hosts a population of approximately 500,000 people, predominantly Melanesians, speaking over 80 indigenous languages (Cox, 2009). The nation is divided into nine provincial regions, with 85% of Solomon Islanders living in rural areas (Allen, 2012; Cox, 2009). Employment opportunities are scarce, and over 80% of the population live a traditional village lifestyle, relying on subsistence living through fishing, farming and gathering (Ride, 2010).

The Solomon Islands were declared a British Protectorate in 1893, and until their independence in 1978, the British maintained as minimal an administration as could be found anywhere in the British Empire (Bennett, 1987). Independence was achieved more as a result of Britain’s desire to rid itself of a loss than a local drive for sovereignty (Bennett, 1987). The task of the Solomon Islands’ leaders at independence was to unite a multitude of semi-autonomous island groups, often with no sense of shared identity, complicated by cultural, historic and linguistic diversity under a single national identity (Dinnen, 2007; Fraenkel, 2004). After 20 years of independence, the Solomon Islands remained a patchwork of local identities with little progress in nation building. During the late 1990s and throughout the early 2000s, the Solomon Islands were plagued by armed conflict between indigenous groups (Atkinson, 2009; Bennett, 2002). Civil society remains fragile and has resulted in numerous aid agencies, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), church groups and sporting associations working in the islands focusing on promoting education, community development and enhancing social conditions. The volunteer assignment took place within this broader context and was part of increasing efforts within the Solomon Islands to develop productive opportunities for young people to participate in as part of a broader reestablishment of civil society.

Sport volunteering in international development

The volunteer assignment undertaken by the first author was initially designed as an SFD project, and therefore the literature pertaining to the role of international volunteers in SFD has been utilised to guide the analysis of this experience. Whilst volunteering has been considered within the broader international development literature (Baillie Smith and Laurie, 2011; Devereux, 2008; Engel and Georgeou, 2011), only a small number of authors have explored the role and experiences of international volunteers within SFD programmes (Darnell, 2007, 2011; Forde, 2015; Smith et al., 2016). This is despite a range of authors highlighting the reliance on Global North volunteers to initiate, deliver and manage SFD projects in the Global South (Coalter, 2013; Smith et al., 2016; Welty Peachey et al., 2014). Coalter (2013) has posited that the use of foreign volunteers within SFD adds substantial value to programmes for minimal investment, though despite this, the reliance on volunteers has come under increasing criticism as the field has emerged. Darnell (2011) has questioned the lack of understanding Global North volunteers in SFD have of the broader social and political context within which they work, which may contribute to reinforcing neo-colonial inequalities. In one of the few firsthand accounts of international volunteering in SFD, Forde is critical of the use of volunteers, arguing that they are potential contributors to a “neo-colonial endeavour, as projects typically position the Global North as a benevolent and civilizing force, and the Global South as the passive, deficient, and grateful recipient of aid” (Forde, 2015: 960). In their study of SFD in Zambia, Jeanes et al. suggest that Global North volunteers “may inadvertently reproduce structures of benefactor/recipient through their work, with limited acknowledgement of local expertise and knowledge” (Jeanes et al., 2013: 31). It has been further highlighted that whilst volunteers may bring sport-specific knowledge to their roles as volunteers within SFD, they often lack knowledge about development practices, along with a critical awareness of their privileged positions, and how their work may reinforce existing power structures (Darnell, 2011; Guest, 2009; Smith et al., 2016; Welty Peachey et al., 2014).

The existing literature related to volunteering in international development and SFD highlights a range of tensions, including the potential for volunteers to reinforce dominant power structures, impose particular knowledge on communities and gain more than they provide to host communities. As with the broader international volunteering literature, Gartner-Manzon and Giles have highlighted that “workers involved in international SFD programmes experience larger impacts than intended programme beneficiaries” (Gartner-Manzon and Giles, 2015: 161). Darnell further argues that “northern athletes and volunteers are the ones who are changed by the experience, potentially more knowledgeable of, and secure in, their relative freedom from economic and political oppression and their dominant social class standing” (Darnell, 2007: 573). Forde has furthered this notion, highlighting that the experience of volunteering in SFD may be viewed “as means to an end, as educational tools for privileged volunteers” (Ford, 2015: 971), where projects are inadvertently designed to benefit volunteers who gain a stronger sense of their own privilege, as opposed to being designed in response to community need.

Despite the criticism of SFD as a top-down, neo-colonial imposition, a number of authors have also highlighted the role of agency amongst local populations, how this may be used as a form of resistance to the imposition of development efforts, and how this has shaped the ongoing use of sport within society. For example, speaking on volunteer experiences within SFD, Guest has argued that despite the use of cricket and football as tools in the colonising mission, historically “local communities regularly resisted intentional colonial efforts and transformed sport to local purposes” (Guest, 2009: 1339). He further contends that despite criticism that positions SFD as a purely neo-colonial imposition, local agency has a significant large role to play in mediating this process. As Guest further argues, “implicitly disregarding these types of local agency continues to be among the most problematic assumptions of many international sport efforts” (Guest, 2009: 1339). Furthermore, Giulianotti (2004) posits that the neo-colonial imposition of development efforts through sport has its limits, as recipient cultures will demonstrate resistance by retaining their own ways of spending leisure time, or adapting interventions to meet local needs. Despite these limited examples, there remains a lack of literature exploring the impact of local agency on the adoption or rejection of SFD initiatives, and as Tiessen suggests, “future research addressing the degree to which local communities have taken ownership of SDP programmes and have challenged the Northern-dominated, paternalistic and neo-colonialist nature of many SDP initiatives is much needed” (Tiessen, 2011: 584).

Furthermore, there is evidence to suggest that volunteers can help to support development under specific and regulated circumstances, and can also act as a resource for communities that they work with to begin challenging dominant power relations. Darnell (2010) has suggested that volunteers in SFD may be actively involved in negotiating and challenging the ideologies that underpin the use of sport as a development tool, as they become increasingly aware of their own privileged positions in society and the racialised nature of the use of sport in development. Furthermore, Manley et al. have argued that volunteer experiences in SFD may draw “attention to the complexities that surround international volunteer experiences, specifically the ways in which volunteers understand their service roles and the dominant power relations that guide them” (Manley et al, 2016: 387). In their exploration of volunteer identity formation, Manley et al. (2016) posit that volunteers’ understandings of their roles may occur whilst reflecting on the neoliberal forces driving the SFD “movement”, and the potential that exists for reinforcing hegemonic relationships between the Global North and South. Smith et al. (2016) argue that, in some cases, the extended nature of volunteer experiences which allow for greater immersion in the recipient community and the partner organisation may provide opportunities for reflection upon the dominant power struggles inherent within SFD. In another example, referring to volunteers who had recently completed an eight-month internship with a Southern NGO, Darnell argued that SFD volunteers were in the “unique position to reflect on the ‘work’ of SDP, its challenges and, most importantly…the social and political implications of using sport within development in different cultural settings” (Darnell, 2010: 402).

Post-colonial theory and SFD

Post-colonial theory seeks to expose and challenge the oft-hidden power relations that are an inherent part of the legacy between colonised states and their former colonial masters (Gandhi, 1998). Post-colonial theory has been used extensively to critique international development efforts which position the Global North as benevolent and continue to represent Southern knowledge as inferior, as this simplistic dichotomy conceals hidden power relations that continue to determine the relationships between imperial powers and their former colonies (Gandhi, 1998; Mongia, 1996). Recent research has also forced scholars to confront issues of neo-colonialism inherent within SFD, and as a result, post-colonial theory has been used extensively to critique international SFD efforts (Darnell and Hayhurst, 2011, 2012; Levermore, 2009; Waldman and Wilson, 2017).

Recently, scholars have highlighted the similarities between the historical diffusion of sport in support of Northern empires, and the mobilisation of sport as a development tool by Northern NGOs and governments (Darnell and Hayhurst, 2011; Waldman and Wilson, 2017). It has also been argued that research approaches in SFD have traditionally privileged knowledge produced by Northern academics, whilst subjugating indigenous voices throughout the process (Darnell and Hayhurst, 2011; Darnell et al., 2018. When applied to SFD, Levermore has argued that a post-colonial analysis of dominant institutions and policies may render them “overwhelmingly simplistic and Eurocentric” (Levermore, 2009: 40), and scholars employing post-colonial theory in SFD have rejected the negative light in which those in the Global South are represented through development discourses (Hayhurst, 2009). To redress this, Levermore (2009) has called for more local, indigenous understandings in SFD research to disrupt entrenched systems of Northern knowledge creation that are reproduced through development practices. Therefore, this research, which draws on post-colonial perspectives of development to provide a critical framework for the analysis of the experiences of the first author, seeks to engage with indigenous voices and additionally to analyse other local community voices, such as those of expatriate stakeholders driving the development agenda.

Methodology

Given the first author’s extended engagement with the research setting, this study has utilised ethnography as an overarching framework for exploring the volunteer experience. As a methodology, ethnography is a process that seeks to understand the culture of a particular group or setting, through the integration of first-hand empirical investigation and theoretical knowledge, from the perspective of group members (Holt et al., 2013). Hammersley and Atkinson (2007) suggest that ethnography as a research approach involves the researcher participating in the daily lives of people for an extended period of time, and often involves collecting research data through fieldnotes and formal or informal interviews. Furthermore, ethnography may allow the researcher to “investigate some aspect of the lives of the people who are being studied, and this includes finding out how these people view the situations they face, how they regard one another, and also how they see themselves” (Hammersley and Atkinson, 2007: 3). Given that this research was an attempt on the part of the first author to make sense of the social context in which the volunteer assignment was being undertaken, whilst also exploring the perspectives of stakeholders involved in the development of cricket in the Solomon Islands, ethnography was selected as the most appropriate methodology to fulfil this.

This research has therefore drawn on data gathered through methods that are characteristic of ethnographic work, including fieldnotes collected by the first author during the year-long study, and interviews with key stakeholders involved in the development of cricket in the Solomon Islands.

Methods

Fieldnotes

According to Creswell (2018), one of the primary methods for recording information in ethnographic research includes the documentation of fieldnotes by the researcher. This method of data collection is characteristic of ethnographic research and sought to prioritise information directly related to the research questions guiding the study. Throughout the data collection process, the first author used reflective journaling (Hubbs and Brand, 2005) which was recorded on a weekly basis and contained details of subjective experiences. These fieldnotes were written and recorded using the Evernote software and were catalogued chronologically. These journal entries contained data drawn from a broad range of events, including the delivery of cricket programmes to local schools and community groups, experiences working alongside local staff members, negotiation with programme sponsors locally and abroad, and reflections on the broader processes and circumstances guiding the volunteer assignment. These events detailed the various interactions with the cricket association, programme sponsors, staff members, facility managers, school teachers and principals, local businesses, government administrators, local government organisations, volunteer programme managers, and other volunteers working on sport development projects in the country at the time. These reflections contained a range of opportunities and challenges, potential research and interview questions, lessons learned, and personal thoughts and feelings.

Interviews

At the conclusion of the fieldwork period, semi-structured interviews were conducted with four research participants, which were guided by a set of questions targeted towards each stakeholder group. The interview participants fell into two broad categories: two interviews were conducted with administrators from the Cricket Association (Robert and Michael); and two interviews were conducted with local staff members working on the development of cricket (Daniel and Billy). In general, administrators were expatriates from Australia and New Zealand, who had long term engagement in the country as professionals, in the areas of banking, logistics and agricultural management. Their involvement in the development of cricket was generally limited to participating in social cricket and providing general advice and support for the first author. Staff members were locally employed Solomon Islanders, who were engaged in the daily operation and development of the organisation, and the ongoing delivery of cricket programmes in schools and communities. Given their differences in age, profession and cultural background, as well as their roles in the development of cricket in the Solomon Islands, both of these groups brought unique views and experiences to the interviews.

Semi-structured interviews were chosen as they could be easily altered throughout depending on participant responses, and because they allowed space for participant responses to be explored more fully (Creswell, 2007). Semi-structured interviews were also utilised since research in Melanesian societies often requires interview techniques to be less formal to allow for an easy exchange of information (Waldrip and Taylor, 1999). The interview questions were informed by both the post-colonial framing of the study and reviews of previous literature and as such particularly probed to explore power relations within the programme, local drive and need, perceptions of the volunteer and the work he undertook. The questions were structured around key themes including a broad overview of the sporting and cultural contexts in the Solomon Islands, the perceived need or otherwise for the cricket programme, key drivers and influencers in the process, the role of local knowledge, and reflections and experiences of the programme. A selection of questions is provided in the Appendix.

Data analysis

The process of data analysis began immediately after the fieldwork and interviews were completed. The process was guided by the approach of Braun and Clarke (2006) to thematic analysis. Initially recorded interviews were transcribed verbatim. The co-authors then independently read through the transcripts to become familiar with the data set. They made notes during this process of key concepts they identified and inconsistencies across the transcripts and fieldnotes. After this process they undertook a more detailed line by line reading which provided the basis for generating initial open codes. This process was informed by previous literature and the post-colonial lens we were seeking to apply to the research data. The co-authors then discussed their interpretations, any discrepancies and from this developed a coding framework that was used to assist with sorting and coding fieldnotes and interviews via NVivo software. After similar statements related to the key themes were grouped together, they were then coded again using an axial coding theme that provided a greater level of nuance and detail in relation to the overarching codes. The open codes identified within this process were: drivers and influencers; imposition of Global North systems; (non) sustainability; and resistance and local agency. The findings section is organised according to these categories.

Ethical issues and reflexivity

The authors’ human research ethics committee granted ethical approval for this research. All names used throughout are pseudonyms to protect the privacy of individuals involved. Conducting research in the Global South has the potential to raise several ethical issues, and within this particular study, the dual role that the first author held of volunteer and ethnographer raised a number of ethical considerations that needed to be negotiated. One such example involved interviewing staff members who the first author had been responsible for managing during his assignment. This highlighted several critical power dynamics that had to be considered in the design of this research, including the sensitive relationships of the researcher/researched, that of manager/employee, and finally, that of a White Global North researcher seeking to gain information from indigenous participants from the Global South. The views and perspectives of the research participants were invaluable to the research, and therefore participants were encouraged to be as open and honest as possible in their accounts, but they inevitably positioned the first author as their “manager” first and a researcher second which had the potential to hamper how honest they felt they could be.

To negate this, the first author concluded his volunteer assignment prior to commencing the interviews with the research subjects. Whilst remaining in the Solomon Islands, and continuing to work alongside the Cricket Association to promote the development of cricket, the first author was relieved of his staff management responsibilities, which were subsequently transferred to the local Cricket Association. Additionally, through the volunteer assignment the first author had built a trusting relationship with the staff members over several months and they were both confident to express their views and as the findings reveal be critical of both the first author and the role he had undertaken within the community. The authors acknowledge however that White Global North power dynamics continued to shape the interactions between the first author and indigenous participants and have taken this into consideration when undertaking analysis and reflecting on the findings from the data.

Reliability and validity

Cohen describes reliability in qualitative research as “a fit between what researchers record as data and what occurs in the natural setting that is being researched” (Cohen, 2007: 149). To ensure reliability in ethnographic research, Creswell (2007) suggests that researchers maintain prolonged engagement in the field, and employ techniques such as triangulation of data and methods. In this study, the use of interviews to complement fieldnotes allows for the confirmation or juxtaposition of various views and attitudes.

Limitations

The authors acknowledge that the small sample size of interviewees represents a significant limitation of this study. The sample of interviewees was constrained by a number of factors, including the departure of members of the Cricket Association prior to, or during the time of the first author’s volunteer assignment. The inclusion of data from these additional interviewees would undoubtably have strengthened the findings of this research. Despite this, all of these additional interviewees would have fallen into the category of administrators, skewing the research in the direction of expatriate voices. At present, the equal representation of local indigenous voices alongside expatriate stakeholders is a key strength of the research, and through this, saturation of the key themes emerging from the data has been achieved despite the small sample size.

Findings and discussion

SFD, driver and influencers and the role of Global North volunteers

Prior to arriving in the Solomon Islands, the expectation of the first author was that cricket was a well-established sport with genuine local interest, and that the role of the volunteer would be to build upon this to achieve the assignment’s objectives and particularly support the development of the intended broader social outcomes associated with the project. Upon arrival, it soon became clear that cricket was not an established sport, and that the cricket association were seeking a volunteer to develop cricket itself, as opposed to using cricket as the vehicle for the achievement of the stated development outcomes. As a result, the first author was required initially and for what became the entire assignment to try to develop a base of cricket participation to then begin to springboard wider development outcomes from. It was initially anticipated that if the volunteer could establish regular opportunities for cricket with sustained participation amongst boys and girls, local staff who were to be appointed would be able to continue to drive this work at the end of the volunteer assignment and build in educative and life skills elements that would support the programme to achieve wider social impact.

Furthermore, it appeared that the drive to develop cricket and use it as a social development tool within the country came from expatriate members of the local cricket association, as opposed to being in response to an identified local need. Robert outlined that:

It all started when the association was, had a pretty powerful, or interested anyway, committee. There were some expatriates from the UK, and Australia, who made cricket, for whom cricket had been part for their lives, and they were very keen to continue involvement in cricket in the Solomon’s, at an association level.

Michael confirmed this, adding that “ah, probably 2008 or 2009, we sort of formed, we formed a committee, but we didn’t recognise it as a committee, it was more an organising group, probably a better way of putting it.” Recognising their lack of available time and knowledge to drive the development of cricket on the ground, the association also recognised the need to bring in some outside expertise to further the work that had been started. As Robert highlighted, “the idea was presented to get a volunteer and to pursue ICC [International Cricket Council] registration if that’s the right terminology, and the committee at that time went down that pathway.”

The volunteer was therefore considered a resource to support the cricket association administrators to achieve this aim. Rather than utilising the volunteer to support broader development outcomes or the locally-driven development of cricket, the expatriate group saw the volunteer as leading and driving cricket development. Recognising that it would have been challenging to gain support for an international volunteer purely for sport development purposes, they constructed the assignment to also include broader development outcomes which would enable them to request support from the AusAID programme. Whilst it is acknowledged that the development of sport may be beneficial for programmes to achieve development through sport (Giulianotti, 2011), this represented a significant shift away from the stated intent of the volunteer assignment. Therefore, cricket development in the Solomon Islands was no exception to the neo-colonial imposition of cricket witnessed historically in other countries since it relied heavily upon both physical and human capital imported from the Global North (Banda, 2010).

When asked to describe the level of interest in cricket from Solomon Islanders, Daniel’s view was that “here, lots of people they are interesting [sic] on soccer, futsal, so there’s no one interesting [sic] on cricket.” With reference to people returning to Honiara from the outer provinces after the armed conflict described above, Daniel again repeated this view:

When they come back, they are looking forward to do, they are looking forward to do some of the sport, but they are not thinking about cricket. So they are focussing on soccer, futsal, and those things.

When asked to describe why cricket may not have been seen as being important to Solomon Islanders, Daniel commented that:

But somehow when it came in Solomon they somehow people try to put rules, and it’s hard because somehow people in Solomon Island, they didn’t use playing with rules on the, on that local games…So somehow cricket came in and put rules and then we try to put people to doing [sic] cricket, and it’s hard because somehow people they used to do bowling, and they do it straight arms, and it’s hard to do that one.

When asked to describe how much cricket was being played in Solomon Islands, Billy commented that:

Recently there haven’t [sic] been much cricket played at all, I haven’t seen it happening over the years, it’s more soccer, and volleyball, so no more cricket, since those days.

Given this, the first author asked Billy to offer his view on the level of interest for cricket in Solomon Islands, and whether it was a sport that local saw as being important:

I’m afraid not. Yeah, it was, well, I’d say, by far, not one of the most wanted games in the Solomon’s. Yeah, I’d rank it out of ten, I’d be lucky if we have one out of ten. So it’s not that popular, it’s not that wanted as well.

Given his response, the first author asked Billy to further elaborate on why he found it challenging to work for a project such as this, to which he outlined:

OK, for me personally, trying to develop cricket in an island with very little is known about the sport itself, it’s like saying, ‘[Author], I’ll give you 100 bucks and you can do a job for me. Jump into the pool where there’s 7000 stingrays, try and clean up the pool and hope you don’t get stung.’ Yeah, that’s something like that, yeah? It’s a bit challenging and yeah, I’d say it’s been a very challenging task, having to start from nothing to create something.

This reinforces the notion that the development of cricket was not being pursued due to the identification of a need or desire within the local population and as Billy’s quote indicates it was something he felt he had to do because it was being enforced on him by the volunteer rather than him perceiving it to be beneficial to the local community. His emotive analogy of jumping into a pool of stingrays, illustrates some of the antagonism he felt towards this agenda being imposed on him. Similar to the use of cricket by the British as a vehicle for colonisation throughout the colonies (Waldman and Wilson, 2017), the impetus for cricket development came from the need to fulfil a desire in the lives of expatriates from Australia and New Zealand who were residing in the Solomon Islands at the time. Furthermore, the volunteer programme was viewed as a way to import and secure human capital to achieve these ends, despite the disparity between the purpose of the AusAID volunteer programme and the intentions of the cricket association.

Based on Billy’s responses, the first author wanted to explore further why there may have been resistance to cricket from the local population. Billy offered that:

What I meant by that is cricket, unlike soccer, it’s soccer you have just a, just a football, yeah? And probably a few dead branches or something, and you stick it in the ground to have the goals and then you play. Unlike cricket, we have some of the equipment’s that they can be costly, it’s a bit rare to have them here in the Solomon’s, that’s one thing, a barrier there, of where we can have less people playing cricket because of the equipment’s and due to the expense and stuff. So that’s one thing I can think of.

Both Daniel and Billy referred to the popularity of soccer in the Solomon Islands, though despite this and the prevalence of its use in SFD programmes worldwide (Darnell et al., 2018; Schulenkorf et al., 2016), cricket was presented by expatriate stakeholders as an appropriate vehicle for the achievement of the stated developmental outcomes. This process is again reflective of the neo-colonial imposition that authors have referred to that is hidden by the banner of development (Banda, 2010; Hartmann and Kwauk, 2011). Unfortunately, the motives behind the development work had not been apparent to the first author prior to undertaking the assignment, who perhaps naively assumed the role had been developed due to an identified need and desire within the local communities.

The first author’s fieldnotes reveal the tensions and frustrations that he felt at the shift in assignment direction, the resultant lack of interest, and the concerns regarding what he was doing within the Solomon Islands:

(Cricket development) feels like a shamble. Here I am thinking constantly about a programme/sport that I am trying to set up, and I don’t even know if any of the people that I am trying to set it up for even want it.

Despite this, the first author did not consider that leaving the assignment was an option due to the commitment he had made to be in the country for a year and the desire to not be seen by AusAID as failing and unable to manage in a different cultural context:

But it is necessary to make it appear as though I have had some success on this project – if not, I will look – or feel as though I look — like a failure.

Reflecting on the level of interest displayed by the local population throughout the fieldwork, the first author commented on some of the challenges that were experienced in trying to engage and maintain interest from programme participants:

We have struggled to maintain interest from both students and teachers. Many times, we would show up for sessions and teachers would simply be absent, or classes, along with our session, would be cancelled. As a result of this, we have struggled to maintain momentum…as we have had a fairly interrupted schedule.

Unfortunately, this was not an isolated event that was limited to one instance, as the first author later noted:

[School name] didn’t go ahead today due to the school having other organised sport taking place. We got out there, had no one rock up, then were told that there’d be other sports using the field. We sat around and just watched, was fun, but frustrating to make the trip and not do anything. Lost a bunch of numbers due to this, and one of the biggest challenges that I can identify is the fact that most schools have no PE classes. If they did, we could get in there pretty easily.

In addition to the lack of community involvement in the decision to utilise cricket as a development tool, it also became apparent that there was a lack of forethought as to how it was that cricket could contribute to the development aims attributed to it. This is reflective of Tiessen who argues that “when employed as a development ‘tool’, sport is rarely accompanied by a deconstruction or even questioning of the predominant international development objectives” (Tiessen, 2011: 579). As Haudenhuyse et al. (2013) further suggest, many SFD initiatives lack a coherent theoretical framework for how their outcomes will be achieved, and it appears that the use of cricket in this instance was no exception. Robert drew on the universal “power” of sport when asked to describe how cricket could contribute to broader development outcomes:

Sport is recognised world over as a contributor to breaking down barriers between ethnic groups, between age groups, between gender groups, etc. Cricket can contribute to every one of them. The Solomon Islanders…if you can get them involved in sport, of any nature, they will take it on passionately. So, if cricket could be developed and a structured organisation at all levels be put in, then I am sure the Solomon Islander youth in particular would grab it with both hands.

Conversely, when asked to describe his belief on what benefit the development of cricket would bring to the Solomon Islands, Michael offered a less optimistic view:

What benefit. What benefit does anyone get out of cricket, other than enjoyment? Like it’s…it’s for the love of it, and probably the sporting side of it. I don’t know if you can describe the benefit of it. Is it going to move the country forward? No. Is it going to bring people closer together? Well its sport. It’s also going to push people away as well.

Imposing Global North systems

The first author decided to focus his effort on trying to establish interest in the sport by delivering activities within schools and seeking to build junior and senior cricket teams within local communities. This approach was also chosen as it offered a way to achieve the broader development outcomes attached to the assignment itself, particularly around cricket participation and gender equity. In reviewing the author’s fieldnotes during this time, it is evident he had a fixed understanding of how cricket development should occur and sought to do this by establishing systems and modes of participation for cricket that replicated Global North approaches to SFD, despite the very different cultural context of the project. This mindset permeated his approach to working with communities and importantly whom he sought to recruit as paid staff from the local community.

One of the first tasks of the first author was to recruit indigenous community members to undertake [paid] support work, with the intention that the first author could work alongside and train these individuals, and that they could continue to drive the development work once the yearlong volunteer assignment was complete. SFD literature frequently illustrates the centrality of programmes and initiatives prioritising local knowledge and working in partnership with local communities in the design and development of initiatives (Coalter, 2013; Giulianotti, 2011). In his fieldnotes, the first author noted that it was important to employ local staff so the “project can be seen to be locally driven.” The experiences of the first author in undertaking recruitment reveal some of the complexities of this process in practice and the subtle ways in which this reproduced a neo-colonial imposition.

Despite being a paid employment role, in an area where opportunities were scarce, very few members of the local community ‘applied’ for the position. The application process required the submission of a formal curriculum vitae and covering letter, in line with Global North recruitment mechanisms; a process that was potentially alien to many Solomon Islanders. The first author, guided by his Northern experience, outlined after he had secured two staff from the local community that:

Taking Daniel on is good, now I need to provide him with as much training as possible. I also want to take on this other bloke, Billy, who would be brilliant to have work for us because he would make an exceptional communicator - his English is brilliant, he has knowledge of the game from his schooling in Adelaide, and he genuinely seems like a good guy.

However, the first author found it challenging to equip these officers with the knowledge required to deliver cricket development programmes using a Global North model. Towards the end of the assignment after a year of working with both officers on administration skills, coaching skills and leadership, the first author concluded:

I really don’t think that Billy is capable of stepping up to the plate as a GM [general manager], definitely not in the capacity that I am doing the role in. Daniel doesn’t even know how to read or write,¹ let alone be the front-line guy for the development of cricket here.

One of the major problems associated with having a volunteer at the forefront of the development agenda is that it raises questions about the contributions of local staff members. Coalter (2010) posits that the use of indigenous staff members is a cost-effective and culturally appropriate way to deliver SFD programmes, which provides employment opportunities in countries where they often remain scarce. Although these assertions ring true the extracts above reveal the ways in which recruitment was more for the project to “seem” locally driven and for the first author to feel he was making a visible contribution within the local community. So, although cricket development was providing a source of financial security not available elsewhere, the first author considered local staff as “a means to an end,” as opposed to an integral part of the development of cricket who could offer expert knowledge (Darnell, 2007).

The prioritising of Global North skill sets in recruiting, such as speaking English, having organisational capabilities and skills associated within rigid Global North sport development systems meant that many indigenous participants would have been unable to “apply” for the position. As Coalter (2007) suggests, SFD initiatives privilege Northern knowledge, which is also reflected in the mindset that was brought to the development of cricket. This had a significant impact on the expectations that were subsequently placed upon indigenous staff members. The first author was open in his reflections that he considered Billy to be an excellent candidate because he spoke English and had knowledge about cricket from his schooling in Australia; in other words, he had previous knowledge which meant he would be able to successfully navigate Global North expectations and systems of working. The first author in contrast was critical of Daniel for being unable to read and write, considering this would prevent him from being an effective ongoing contributor to the programme. The first author later reflected that these skills were largely irrelevant given that Daniel’s primary role was to deliver cricket programmes in schools. What is important to note in the reflections of the first author is that there was no mention of the contribution of the two staff members’ local knowledge and language skills, their capacity to relate to and understand their local community, or their ability to employ contextually appropriate methods of programme design and delivery which are critical elements of decolonised SFD programmes (Hayhurst, 2009; Kay, 2009).

The extracts examining the recruitment of staff illustrate the subtle way in which Global North thinking, systems and structures can continue to be perpetuated even if the project is seemingly run and managed by indigenous, local participants. As Guest (2009) suggests, volunteers who are equipped with sport-specific knowledge but have no understanding of the cultural context in which they are operating risk perpetuating subtle power dynamics through flaws in their programme delivery, which may render programmes irrelevant to the local community. Darnell (2007), and Forde (2015) further argue that the use of Global North volunteers in SFD may contribute to reinforcing neo-colonial inequalities, given their lack of understanding of the broader social and political context within which they work. In this case, the relative inexperience of the first author and the minimal time spent in the country before undertaking this project meant that Northern frameworks were heavily drawn upon for the development of cricket, an approach which contributed towards the unwitting imposition of cricket upon the local population.

Establishing interest in SFD, resistance and local agency

After recruiting the two staff members the first author worked with them to organise opportunities within local schools to provide cricket taster sessions for children and train local teachers. Again, reflecting modes of working drawn from his experience in the Global North, the first author also sought to establish community clubs “so I can establish a pathway for kids and get adult teams and competitive leagues going.” Despite offering hundreds of sessions within schools and events and activities in the local community, the first author noted midway through the assignment that this had not led to any significant uptake in the sport. Schools would only run sessions if the Cricket Association staff came into deliver them and attempts to establish community clubs had fallen flat due to a lack of interest. When asked why he thought the programme had failed to generate interest in the sport, Billy replied that there was no community interest and his perception was that the programme was “all about [first author], so to speak” rather than an inbuilt desire to work with and improve provision within local communities. The narrow vision that privileged the development of cricket over the promotion of broader development outcomes through cricket also undoubtedly contributed in part to the failure of this initiative. The myopic view that saw the cricket association and the volunteer continue to persist with the development of cricket despite the clear lack of interest amongst the local population demonstrates a lack of reflexivity from the first author and the cricket association.

As acknowledged above, the drive for developing cricket on which the assignment mostly emerged was from a small expatriate community, an ambition that the first author helped to facilitate but which had very limited support or interest from Solomon Islanders. Members of the cricket association and the first author both acknowledged that for cricket to become embedded as a sport in the local community, its development needed to be locally driven. Unfortunately, though, as Robert acknowledged, “the committee at all times has wanted to get more Solomon Islander, indigenous people’s involvement, but to this date, has not found the trick as to how to get them involved in the association level.” The attempt to shift the impetus by employing local staff did little to alter this or motivate local people to engage with the sport. Whilst several academics have often called for greater involvement of local knowledge in determining development agendas (Jeanes et al., 2013), and others have argued the criticality of local ownership for the success of SFD initiatives (Giulianotti, 2011), it is important that this moves beyond a superficial use of local people to provide a “front” for externally imposed agendas. As this study has illustrated, a genuine local approach does not occur when local people simply adopt the agenda and priorities of external agents.

Despite the obvious lack of interest, the first author continued to reflect on the necessity of developing a cricket programme that would be sustainable. It is useful to illustrate where the first author’s priorities lay in this regard: “getting an office is going to be the first step, this will ensure ongoing sustainability.” On another occasion, the first author commented that:

We need to sit down and have a look at our budgets…how much we have, how sustainable that is going to be in the long term…the most important thing at this stage will also be making sure that we get (major sponsor) to come on board for another year.

When coming towards the end of the volunteer assignment, the first author reflected that cricket development may not be sustained beyond his assignment. To continue the development of cricket, the first author commented that:

It really is going to need to be another (volunteer) come in and take over from me once I’m done. Another volunteer for the cricket programme would be ideal, maybe that is a path that we pursue, but it leaves big questions about the ability of our guys here to be able to run the programme.

By the end of the volunteer assignment, the decision was made to not recruit another volunteer, as the interest from the local population did not appear to warrant continued investment in this approach. This lack of interest was confirmed by Robert, who suggested that:

I do not see in the country the interest by the Solomon Islanders, or by the expatriate community, to maintain the momentum that has been developed through the last two years of the association, and the advent of the volunteer.

Given the use of a post-colonial lens throughout this research, the fact that all aspects of cricket are not perceived to be sustainable might be viewed in positive terms for the local community (Darnell and Hayhurst, 2011). Furthermore, in this case, it could be argued that the quest for sustainability is more concerned with the volunteer creating a legacy, as opposed to providing ongoing benefits for the local population (Devereux, 2008). Therefore, sustainability as it relates to the development of cricket in the Solomon Islands may be viewed as a self-serving concept, a way for the volunteer to have an impact and gain recognition (Darnell, 2010). Additionally, whilst this study has deemed cricket development in the Solomon Islands to be a neo-colonial imposition, the assertion of local agency must also be acknowledged for its contribution to the lack of success for the project. The unwillingness of the local population to participate in the development of cricket demonstrates that “organisations from the Global North may have less influence on local sport-for-development than has hitherto been acknowledged” (Lindsey and Grattan, 2012: 92). That the local population largely rejected the development of cricket, as evidenced by their lack of interest and input, shows that local stakeholders “have more scope to exert their agency than is often implied by Northern portrayals of power” (Lindsey and Grattan, 2012: 107).

As Guest (2009) and Jeanes et al. (2013) argue, to discount the role of local agency would be an oversimplification of the complex interactions between the donors and volunteer from the Global North, and populations in the Global South. The local population in the Solomon Islands could be seen to be resisting the use of cricket as a development tool, and the development of cricket more broadly, in the same way that indigenous communities have been seen to resist the imposition of sports throughout the colonial mission, or have adapted colonial sports to their own ends (Guest, 2009). The development of cricket in the Solomon Islands is therefore a clear demonstration of local agency and highlights the criticality of local ownership in SFD initiatives that are conceived by and implemented by actors from the Global North. Even so, this exertion of local agency within the hegemony of neo-colonial development should only be viewed as a survival from oppressive structures as opposed to evidence of broader structural change (Darnell and Hayhurst, 2012).

Conclusions

The contribution of the current research is to further illustrate that the process of implementation in SFD projects in the Global South is a complex process involving a multifaceted range of power relations. Whilst, as indicated above, the use of cricket as a vehicle for development in the Solomon Islands can be interpreted as neo-colonial in nature, the study has as Guest (2009), Giulianotti (2011) and Jeanes et al. (2013) suggest, demonstrated that this is not imposed on an entirely passive local population. Although active resistance (in the form of anger or antagonism for example towards the volunteer) was not evident, a form of more passive resistance (simply not engaging or showing interest in cricket) occurred throughout the first author’s time as a volunteer. The study therefore demonstrates the ongoing influence of indigenous agency on development work and supports the claim made by Lindsey and Grattan (2012) that SFD work in the Global South cannot be viewed entirely as a neo-colonial endeavour. By drawing on the firsthand experiences of a volunteer engaged in the complex work of SFD, this study offers an alternative perspective to many of the theoretical analyses of neo-colonial accusation in SFD evident in other studies (Darnell, 2010, 2011).

One of the key contributions of the current research has been to highlight the complexities and ongoing dilemmas faced by volunteers working within SFD in the Global South. The studies that have been undertaken to date frequently suggest that volunteers engage relatively uncritically within their work and are largely unaware of how they may be perpetuating broader power imbalances (Darnell, 2007). Although this research has acknowledged that volunteers are implicated in neo-colonial impositions, it also suggests that volunteers reflect deeply on their role and have a desire to contribute meaningfully to development efforts, even when faced with significant flaws in project design. This research has also highlighted the pressure and expectations that volunteers experience when recruited to fulfil a particular role; even though they may realise that they are caught in an imposition, they also may be powerless to change this given their position within the development agenda, and their lack of alternative experience and frameworks to draw upon. Even so, the decision not to pursue the recruitment of another volunteer, which would knowingly result in the cessation of the cricket development programme, is one example by which a volunteer may utilise their agency to disrupt a neo-colonial imposition on a local population. Given the in-depth focus on one particular case, this research has highlighted the complex circumstances faced by volunteers undertaking SFD work in the Global South, which may help to further inform and critique the experiences of volunteers operating in this field. It is acknowledged that the in depth focus on a singular case represents a limitation of this study, as the findings presented may not be generalisable to other research contexts.

In their integrative review of SFD literature, Schulenkorf et al. (2016) noted that only 18% of SFD research was undertaken throughout Oceania. Considering that this includes Australia and New Zealand, there are very few accounts of research exploring the impact of SFD initiatives throughout Pacific island nations. Given that Pacific island nations such as the Solomon Islands and Papua New Guinea are categorised as Low Human Development in the Human Development Index (United Nations Development Programme, 2018), further examples that explore the contribution of sport to development efforts within this context would be merited. Furthermore, there are very few accounts that have been produced as a result of long-term engagement with the field and explore the complex and nuanced nature of this work (Forde, 2015). Therefore more examples of in-depth, extended SFD experiences reflected through first-hand accounts would be beneficial for identifying areas that warrant further investigation within the field of SFD. Finally, since this research has sought to directly examine the influence of agency of local communities in response to SFD initiatives that are conceived outside of the community, further investigation into the manner in which local agency is exerted is warranted. The rejection of the development of cricket in this research may be viewed as one way in which agency is exerted, though future research may seek to further explore the processes by which externally initiated SFD initiatives are reappropriated to meet local needs. Whilst the development of cricket in the Solomon Islands may be viewed as a failure in terms of the achievement of the development outcomes guiding the project, it may also be viewed as a win for the local community who have successfully resisted an externally imposed development agenda. This research complements the assertion from Giulianotti (2004) that neo-colonial impositions through sport have their limits, and represents a significant challenge to the notion that host communities are simply passive recipients of SFD initiatives.

Footnotes

Appendix

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes

ORCID iD

Ruth Jeanes

References

Allen

(2012) Land, identity and conflict on Guadalcanal, Solomon Islands. Australian Geographer 43(2): 163–180.

Atkinson

(2009) Big trouble in little Chinatown: Australia, Taiwan and the April 2006 post-election riot in Solomon Islands. Pacific Affairs 82(1): 47–65.

Baillie Smith

Laurie

(2011) International volunteering and development: Global citizenship and neoliberal professionalisation today. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 36(4): 545–559.

Banda

(2010) Zambia: Government’s role in colonial and modern times. International Journal of Sport Policy 2(2): 237–252.

Bennett

(2002) Roots of Conflict in Solomon Islands Though Much Is Taken, Much Abides: Legacies of Tradition and Colonialism. Canberra, ACT, Australia: Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies.

Bennett

(1987) Wealth of the Solomons: A History of a Pacific Archipelago, 1800-1978 (Pacific Islands Studies Program, Center for Pacific and Asian Studies, University of Hawaii). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.

Braun

Clarke

(2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3(2): 77–101.

Coalter

(2007) A Wider Social Role for Sport: Who’s Keeping the Score? London: Routledge.

Coalter

(2010) The politics of sport-for-development: Limited focus programmes and broad gauge problems. International Review for the Sociology of Sport 45(3): 295–314.

10.

Coalter

(2013) Sport for Development: What Game Are We Playing? London: Taylor & Francis.

11.

Cohen

(2007) Research Methods in Education. London: Routledge.

12.

Cox

(2009) Active citizenship or passive clientelism? Accountability and development in Solomon Islands. Development in Practice 19(8): 964–980.

13.

Creswell

(2007) Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

14.

Creswell

(2018) Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.

15.

Darnell

(2007) Playing with race: Right to play and the production of whiteness in ‘development through sport’. Sport in Society 10(4): 560–579.

16.

Darnell

(2010) Sport, race, and bio-politics: Encounters with difference in “sport for development and peace” internships. Journal of Sport and Social Issues 34(4): 396–417.

17.

Darnell

(2011) Identity and learning in international volunteerism: ‘Sport for Development and Peace’ internships. Development in Practice 21(7): 974–986.

18.

Darnell

Hayhurst

(2012) Hegemony, postcolonialism and sport-for-development: A response to Lindsey and Grattan. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics 4(1): 111–124.

19.

Darnell

Hayhurst

LMC

(2011) Sport for decolonization: Exploring a new praxis of sport for development. Progress in Development Studies 11(3): 183–196.

20.

Darnell

Marchesseault

Holmes

(2018) The state of play: Critical sociological insights into recent ‘sport for development and peace’ research. International Review for the Sociology of Sport 53(2): 133–151.

21.

Devereux

(2008) International volunteering for development and sustainability: Outdated paternalism or a radical response to globalisation? Development in Practice 18(3): 357–370.

22.

Dinnen

(2007) A comment on state-building in Solomon Islands. The Journal of Pacific History 42(2): 255–263.

23.

Engel

Georgeou

(2011) The impact of neoliberalism and new managerialism on development volunteering: An Australian case study. Australian Journal of Political Science 46(2): 297–311.

24.

Forde

(2015) Fear and loathing in Lesotho: An autoethnographic analysis of sport for development and peace. International Review for the Sociology of Sport 50(8): 958–973.

25.

Fraenkel

(2004) The Manipulation of Custom: From Uprising to Intervention in the Solomon Islands. Canberra, ACT, Australia: Pandanus Books.

26.

Gandhi

(1998) Postcolonial Theory: A Critical Introduction. St Leonards, NSW, Australia: Allen & Unwin.

27.

Gartner-Manzon

Giles

(2015) A case study of the lasting impacts of employment in a development through sport, recreation and the arts programme for Aboriginal youth. Sport in Society 19(2): 159–173.

28.

Giulianotti

(2004) Human rights, globalization and sentimental education: The case of sport. Sport in Society 7(3): 355–369.

29.

Giulianotti

(2011) Sport, transnational peacemaking, and global civil society: Exploring the reflective discourses of “sport, development, and peace” project officials. Journal of Sport & Social Issues 35(1): 50–71.

30.

Guest

(2009) The diffusion of development-through-sport: Analysing the history and practice of the Olympic Movement’s grassroots outreach to Africa. Sport in Society 12(10): 1336–1352.

31.

Hammersley

Atkinson

(2007) Ethnography: Principles in Practice. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

32.

Hartmann

Kwauk

(2011) Sport and development: An overview, critique, and reconstruction. Journal of Sport and Social Issues 35(3): 284–305.

33.

Haudenhuyse

Theeboom

Nols

(2013) Sports-based interventions for socially vulnerable youth: Towards well-defined interventions with easy-to-follow outcomes? International Review for the Sociology of Sport 48(4): 471–484.

34.

Hayhurst

(2009) The power to shape policy: Charting sport for development and peace policy discourses. International Journal of Sport Policy 1(2): 203–227.

35.

Holt

Scherer

Koch

(2013) An ethnographic study of issues surrounding the provision of sport opportunities to young men from a Western Canadian inner-city. Psychology of Sport and Exercise 14(4): 538–548.

36.

Hubbs

Brand

(2005) The paper mirror: Understanding reflective journaling. Journal of Experiential Education 28(1): 60–71.

37.

Jeanes

Magee

Kay

, et al. (2013) Sport for development in Zambia: The new or not so new colonisation? In: Hallinan

Judd

(eds) Native Games: Indigenous Peoples and Sports in the Post-Colonial World. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp.127–145.

38.

Kay

(2009) Developing through sport: Evidencing sport impacts on young people. Sport in Society 12(9): 1177–1191.

39.

Levermore

(2009) Sport-in-international development: Theoretical frameworks. In: Levermore

Beacom

(eds) Sport and International Development. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp.26–54.

40.

Lindsey

Grattan

(2012) An ‘international movement’? Decentring sport-for-development within Zambian communities. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics 4(1): 91–110.

41.

Manley

Morgan

Atkinson

(2016) ‘Mzungu!’ Implications of identity, role formation and programme delivery in the sport for development movement. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics 8(3): 383–402.

42.

Mongia

(1996) Contemporary Postcolonial Theory: A Reader. New York: Arnold.

43.

Ride

(2010) Country profile: Solomon Islands. New Internationalist 436: 22-26.

44.

Schulenkorf

Sherry

Rowe

(2016) Sport for Development: An Integrated Literature Review. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics Publishers, Inc.

45.

Smith

Cohen

Pickett

(2016) Exploring the motivations and outcomes of long-term international sport-for-development volunteering for American Millennials. Journal of Sport & Tourism 19(3–4): 299–316.

46.

Tiessen

(2011) Global subjects or objects of globalisation? The promotion of global citizenship in organisations offering sport for development and/or peace programmes. Third World Quarterly 32: 571–587.

47.

United Nations Development Programme (2018) Human Development Indices and Indicators: Statistical Update. New York: United Nations

48.

Waldman

Wilson

(2017) Behind the scenes of sport for development: Perspectives of executives of multinational sport organizations. International Review for the Sociology of Sport 52(6): 651–674.

49.

Waldrip

Taylor

(1999) Standards for cultural contextualization of interpretive research: A Melanesian case. International Journal of Science Education 21(3): 249–260.

50.

Welty Peachey

Lyras

Cohen

, et al. (2014) Exploring the motives and retention factors of sport-for-development volunteers. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 43(6): 1052–1069.