Dear Sport and Recreation New Zealand,

In the context of declining participation of adults in sports and recreation, as stated in the brief to the incoming Minister for Sport and Recreation, October 2017, I would like the following questions to be answered:

1. Why does the current New Zealand government invest significantly more in the Ministry of High Performance Sport New Zealand than any other area of the Ministry?

2. Why does the current New Zealand government invest in High Performance sport in the first place?

3. What was the evidence used to support the answer to question number 2? Would the Ministry be able to mention specific sources?

Yours faithfully,

Mijail Linares

Dear Policy Mailbox,

I would like to follow up with some questions to your response.

In reply to my question of "Why does the current New Zealand Government invest in High Performance Sport in the first place?", you responded with the following:

"The New Zealand Government invests in high performance sport, for the following
reasons:
• Its positive contribution to New Zealand’s national identity and pride ;
• To inspire New Zealanders to take up a sport or increase their physical
activity and the associated social and health benefits as a result ; and
• The economic benefits to New Zealand. "

1. - Could you please state how the "positive contribution to New Zealand’s national identity and pride" is 'currently' being measured, and how it compares to years after the survey?

According to the 2008 survey you are referring to, only 13% of respondents voted Sport to be an important contributor to national identity and pride. And when respondents were then asked specifically about the importance of the seven areas in contributing to New Zealand’s sense of national identity, Sport came up last. Have these measurements improved?

2.- Could you please state how HSPNZ specific contribution to "inspire New Zealanders to take up a sport or increase their physical activity and the associated social and health benefits as a result" is currently being measured?

Please bare in mind that according to the 16 year adult participation trends report by Sports and Active Recreation New Zealand, that National weekly participation in sport and active recreation for adults aged 18 plus decreased by 7.7 percent (73.3% in 1998 to 65.6% in 2014)", and that greater decreases occurred in younger adults’ participation, and even lower in Pacific adults.

On the 'Positive contribution to national identity and pride' section of your response, you state:

"Of those surveyed individuals aged between 18 and 24 considered sport the most important factor contributing to culture". which is incorrect, as the survey actually limits this to individuals in Auckland, between 18 and 24.

You also state: "Young New Zealanders are influenced by elite sports personalities in their decisions
about which sport or active recreation they participate in".

Which I assume is based on the Sport New Zealand Young People Survey reports, indicating that 34.5% of boys and 21.5% of girls 10 to 15-years-old identified that famous sport personalities influenced them when they choose what sport or active things they do (ranked 3rd and 5th respectively in terms of influence).25.2% of boys and 14.0% of girls 10 to 15-years-old identified ‘a famous sports team’ influences them when they choose what sport or active things they do (ranked 4th and 7th respectively).

However, the Angus & Associates (2017) Better Understanding the Value of Sport figures reference that you have mentioned, does not include any methodology, sample size, or any statistical information about the figures provided.

3.- Could you please indicate how this influence is being tracked, how often, and what is the current trend?

You state that "The New Zealand Government, in line with other Governments around the world, supports High Performance Sport to inspire its citizens. This is particularly relevant for younger people, who are inspired by mega sporting events or our elite athletes to take up sport or some form of physical activity", but the evidence from the 16 year adult participation trends report by Sports and Active Recreation New Zealand, that National weekly participation in sport and active recreation had greater decreases in younger adults.

4.- How is the promotion of the New Zealand brand with our trading partners and global tourism market, through success on the world stage by New Zealand athletes and teams being currently measured? Is there a specific metric? i.e. medals won per some economic quantifier, medals won per tourist arrival increase.

5.- How does HPSNZ respond to the view of most independent academics studies: that there is very little evidence that professional sports contribute to the increase in physical activity?

For example, Jonathan Grix & Fiona Carmichael (2012) in Why do governments invest in elite sport? A polemic, International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 4:1, 73-90, DOI: 10.1080/19406940.2011.627358) suggest that commonsensical propositions (e.g. ‘elite sport success promotes participation among citizens’) are not always based on wide, existing research and evidence.
Mega-events such as Olympic Games are invariably touted as producing widespread and significant increases in sporting activity. However, reviews of the sports research literature suggest that ‘major sporting events have no inevitably positive impact on levels of sports participation’; similarly, the idea of a link between sporting role models and general sporting participation is not supported by evidence.

A report commissioned by Sport Canada, for example came to the conclusion that ‘there is little evidence to support the anecdotal claims that high performance sport leads to social benefits such as building national pride. . . .[and] encouraging healthy behaviours’ (Bloomet al. 2006, cited in Sam (2009), p. 502).

Cora Craig and Adrian Bauman studied the influence of the 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics on physical activity and sport participation among Canadian children and adolescents. Using results from a survey of 19 862 parents, they could find no effect of the Games on objectively measured physical activity or the prevalence of overall sports participation among Canadian children. In the United Kingdom, despite their athletes’ unprecedented success at the Beijing (2008) and London (2012) Olympics, the number of people who participated in some kind of sporting activity once a week for 30 minutes fell from 15.7 million to 15.6 million between October 2013 and 2014. National data show a fairly steady decline in adult sporting participation since the peak measured in 2012.

In Germany, Arne Feddersen and Wolfgang Maennig showed that the number of members of tennis clubs fell during the golden era of Boris Becker, Michael Stich and Steffi Graf, and continued to fall after their retirement.

I look forward to your prompt reply.

Yours sincerely,

Mijail Linares

Dear Policy Mailbox,

Thank you for your response.

I've reviewed the 2017 Survey, and while I found Section G, Question 7 part 5 and 6, I did not find the results to those question anywhere. Not in the Main report, the Technical Report, the Data Tables, or even the Insights tool.

1.- Could you please provide the results of Section G, Question 7 part 5 and 6 for the Active NZ Survey 2017?

Yours sincerely,

Mijail Linares