走向善治:世界反兴奋剂机构如何应对治理失灵

doi:10.15942/j.jcsu.2024.05.007

成都体育学院学报 ›› 2024, Vol. 50 ›› Issue (5): 54-66.doi: 10.15942/j.jcsu.2024.05.007

• 体育人文社会学：体育治理 • 上一篇下一篇

走向善治:世界反兴奋剂机构如何应对治理失灵

郑志杰¹, 赵耀¹, 易剑东², 任慧涛^3,4

1.福建师范大学体育科学学院,福建福州 350007;
2.温州大学奥林匹克与全球体育善治研究院,浙江温州 325035;
3.扬州大学体育学院,江苏扬州 225127;
4.泉州师范学院社会科学处,福建泉州 362000

收稿日期:2024-03-10 修回日期:2024-07-11 出版日期:2024-09-15 发布日期:2024-10-11
通讯作者: 任慧涛,教授,博士,博士研究生导师,研究方向:体育管理学、体育治理;E-mail:renhuitao@foxmail.com。
作者简介:郑志杰,硕士研究生,研究方向:体育治理;E-mail:zjie_zheng@163.com。
基金资助:
国家社会科学基金青年项目“全球体育治理的组织间冲突与中国应对研究”(21CTY017)。

Towards Good Governance: How does the World Anti-Doping Agency Respond to Governance Failures

ZHENG Zhijie¹, ZHAO Yao¹, YI Jiandong², REN Huitao^3,4

1. School of Physical Education and Sport Science, Fujian Normal University, Fujian Fuzhou 350117;
2. Institute for Olympic Governance, Wenzhou University, Zhejiang Wenzhou 325035;
3. College of Physical Education, Yangzhou University, Jiangsu Yangzhou 225127;
4. Office of Social Sciences Research Administration, Quanzhou Normal University, Fujian Quanzhou 362000

Received:2024-03-10 Revised:2024-07-11 Online:2024-09-15 Published:2024-10-11

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 经过2016年至今的多轮次改革,世界反兴奋剂机构及其领导下的全球反兴奋剂治理体系有效解决了治理失灵挑战,建构并巩固了基于内部结构、透明度、程序正义、运动员代表和问责制的治理新实践。文章在俞可平(2002)的全球治理要素分析框架下,重新审视了全球反兴奋剂治理失灵及其校正的历史进程。研究认为:世界反兴奋剂机构放弃威权主义,回应运动员诉求,重新树立“专业自治、协同共治”理念与价值观;明确全球反兴奋剂治理体系中的主体与客体;改革形成更具独立性、民主性和透明度的治理结构,聚焦违规本身与背后复杂网络;完善政策、健全监管和注重多元路径。世界反兴奋剂机构“走向善治”的主动变革,形成了面向现代性善治诉求的治理框架,推动了全球反兴奋剂工作重回正轨。

关键词: 世界反兴奋剂机构, 国际体育组织, 治理失灵, 善治, 体育治理

Abstract: After multiple rounds of reforms from 2016 to the present, WADA and the global anti-doping governance system under its leadership have effectively addressed the governance failures by constructing and consolidating new practices of governance based on internal structure, transparency, procedural justice, athlete representation, and accountability. This study re-examines the historical process of global anti-doping governance failures and their correction within the framework of Yu Keping's (2002) analysis of the elements of global governance. The study argues that: WADA should abandon authoritarianism, respond to athletes' demands, and re-establish the concept and values of "professional autonomy and collaborative governance"; clarify the subjects and objects in the global anti-doping governance system; reform a more independent, democratic, and transparent governance structure that focuses on the violations themselves and the complex networks behind them; and improve policies, improve regulation, and focus on the complex networks behind them. The WADA has been working to improve policy, regulation and pluralistic approaches. WADA's initiative to "move toward good governance" has resulted in a governance framework towards the demands of modernity and good governance, which has helped to put the global anti-doping effort back on track.

Key words: World Anti-Doping Agency, international sports organizations, governance failure, good governance, sports governance

中图分类号:

G80-053

郑志杰, 赵耀, 易剑东, 任慧涛. 走向善治:世界反兴奋剂机构如何应对治理失灵[J]. 成都体育学院学报, 2024, 50(5): 54-66.

ZHENG Zhijie, ZHAO Yao, YI Jiandong, REN Huitao. Towards Good Governance: How does the World Anti-Doping Agency Respond to Governance Failures[J]. Journal of Chengdu Sport University, 2024, 50(5): 54-66.

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

链接本文: https://cdtyxb.cdsu.edu.cn/CN/10.15942/j.jcsu.2024.05.007

https://cdtyxb.cdsu.edu.cn/CN/Y2024/V50/I5/54

参考文献

[1] HANSTAD D V, Smith A, WADDINGTON I. The establishment of the World Anti-Doping Agency: A study of the management of organizational change and unplanned outcomes[J].International review for the sociology of sport, 2008, 43(3): 227-249.
[2] WADA. WADA Investigation of Sochi Allegations[EB/OL][2023-03-16].https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/default/files/resources/files/20160718_ip_report_newfinal.pdf
[3] HOULIHAN B, HANSTAD D V, LOLAND S, et al. The World Anti-Doping Agency at 20: progress and challenges[J].International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 2019, 11(2): 193-201.
[4] READ D, SKINNER J, LOCK D, et al. Legitimacy driven change at the world anti-doping agency[J].International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 2019, 11(2): 233-245.
[5] BOIN A, FAHY L A, HART P‘t. Guardians of Public Value:How public organisations become and remain institutions[M].Palgrave macmillan, 2021:185-210.
[6] 俞可平.全球治理引论[J].马克思主义与现实,2002(1):20-32.
[7] 魏建,宋艳锴.刑罚威慑理论:过去、现在和未来——刑罚的经济学分析[J].学习与探索,2006(4):193-197.
[8] ENGELBERG T, MOSTON S, SKINNER J. The final frontier of anti-doping: A study of athletes who have committed doping violations[J].Sport Management Review, 2015, 18(2): 268-279.
[9] HANSTAD D V, WADDINGTON I. Sport, health and drugs: a critical re-examination of some key issues and problems[J].Perspectives in public health, 2009, 129(4): 174-182.
[10] WADDINGTON I, MØLLER V. WADA at twenty: old problems and old thinking?[J].International journal of sport policy and politics, 2019, 11(2): 219-231.
[11] MACEDO E. WADA and imperialism? A philosophical look into anti-doping and athletes as coloniser and colonised[J].International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 2018, 10(3): 415-427.
[12] RITCHIE I, JACKSON G. Politics and ‘shock': reactionary anti-doping policy objectives in Canadian and international sport[J].International journal of sport policy and politics, 2014, 6(2): 195-212.
[13] HANSTAD D V, SKILLE E Å, LOLAND S. Harmonization of anti-doping work: Myth or reality?[J].Sport in society, 2010, 13(3): 418-430.
[14] 张翼.俄罗斯兴奋剂事件的社会学解读与思考[J].体育学研究,2016,30(4):17-24.
[15] 周青山,敖忠.美国反兴奋剂领域的域外管辖:国际体育自治的挑战与应对[J].北京体育大学学报,2022,45(3):144-152.
[16] 邢婉莹,王大鹏,张世杰,等.政治博弈下世界反兴奋剂机构公信力的流失与重塑[J].北京体育大学学报,2019,42(03):80-87,156.
[17] READ D, SKINNER J, LOCK D, et al. Balancing mission creep, means, effectiveness and legitimacy at the World Anti-Doping Agency[J].Performance Enhancement & Health, 2020, 8(2-3): 100175.
[18] ULRICH R, POPE HG, CLÉRET L, et al. Doping in Two Elite Athletics Competitions Assessed by Randomized-Response Surveys.[J].Sports Medicine, 2018, 48(1):211-219.
[19] HON O D, KUIPERS H, BOTTENBURG M V. Prevalence of doping use in elite sports: a review of numbers and methods.[J].Sports Medicine, 2015, 45(1):57-69.
[20] KAYSER B, MAURON A, MIAH A. Current anti-doping policy: a critical appraisal[J].BMC Medical Ethics, 2007, 8(1):2.
[21] MARTENSEN C K, MØLLER V. More money–better anti-doping?[J].Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy, 2017, 24(3): 286-294.
[22] 黄世席.《反对在体育运动中使用兴奋剂国际公约》研究[J].武汉体育学院学报,2006(3):10-14.
[23] MOTTRAM D R, Chester N. Drugs in Sport[M].New York:Routledge, 2018:54.
[24] KONSTANTINIDIS K, PANAGIOTOPOULOS D. The Judgment of Sport Jurisdiction Bodies on Doping Cases[J].Kutafin Law Review, 2020, 7(1): 96-107.
[25] GATTERER K, GUMPENBERGER M, OVERBYE M, et al. An evaluation of prevention initiatives by 53 national anti-doping organizations: achievements and limitations[J].Journal of Sport and Health Science, 2020, 9(3): 228-239.
[26] 马克思·韦伯.经济与社会,第一卷[M].阎克文,译.上海:上海人民出版社,2009:322-323,351-356.
[27] 谢玉波.对《世界反兴奋剂条例》的几点法律思考[J].西安体育学院学报,2009,26(3):295-298.
[28] 李智,王美烟.正当程序视野下国际体育兴奋剂处罚体系的发展[J].武汉大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2010,63(3):408-415.
[29] 熊瑛子.兴奋剂违禁处罚中“过罚相当”原则的适用——从接吻引发的兴奋剂违禁处罚案件谈起[J].武汉体育学院学报,2013,47(4):36-40.
[30] 马太·多甘,黄照静.政治合法性:新范畴与过时理论[J].国际社会科学杂志(中文版),2010,27(3):18-34,3.
[31] 任慧涛.全球反兴奋剂治理中的运动员参与[J].成都体育学院学报,2020,46(4):30-35.
[32] WADA. Report to WADA Executive Committee on Lack of Effectiveness of Testing Programs[EB/OL].[2023-03-16].https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/default/files/resources/files/2013-05-12-Lack-of-effectiveness-of-testing-WG-Report-Final.pdf
[33] KAMBER M, MULLIS P E. The worldwide fight against doping: from the beginning to the World Anti-Doping Agency[J].Endocrinology and Metabolism Clinics, 2010, 39(1): 1-9.
[34] EFVERSTR? M A, AHMADI N, HOFF D, et al. Anti-doping and legitimacy: an international survey of elite athletes' perceptions[J].International journal of sport policy and politics, 2016, 8(3): 491-514.
[35] WADA. WADA 2014 Statutes[EB/OL].[2023-03-16]. https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/default/files/resources/files/WADA-Revised-Statutes-4-July-2014-EN.pdf
[36] TOOHEY K, BEATON A. International cross-sector social partnerships between sport and governments: The World Anti-Doping Agency[J].Sport management review, 2017, 20(5): 483-496.
[37] 刘会平,程传银,杨小帆.世界反兴奋剂机构权利探源[J].体育文化导刊,2016(12):33-38.
[38] HARRIS S, DOWLING M, HOULIHAN B. An analysis of governance failure and power dynamics in international sport: The Russian doping scandal[J].International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 2021, 13(3): 359-378.
[39] WADA. WADA Working Group on Governance Matters Recommendations[EB/OL].[2023-03-16]. https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/default/files/resources/files/item_4_1_attach_1_wggov_recommendations_and_annexes_26102018_final.pdf
[40] KAYSER B, SMITH A C T. Globalisation of anti-doping: the reverse side of the medal[J].British Medical Journal, 2008, 337(7661):85-87.
[41] FINCOEUR B, VAN K, MULROONEY K J D. The symbiotic evolution of anti-doping and supply chains of doping substances: how criminal networks may benefit from anti-doping policy[J].Trends in Organized crime, 2015, 18(3): 229-250.
[42] 杨春莉,朱考金,陈建兵.兴奋剂问题的社会学分析[J].南京体育学院学报,2001(6):26-28.
[43] PAPPA E, KENNEDY E.‘It was my thought… he made it a reality': Normalization and responsibility in athletes'accounts of performance-enhancing drug use[J].International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 2013, 48(3): 277-294.
[44] HOULIHAN B. Achieving compliance in international anti-doping policy: An analysis of the 2009 World Anti-Doping Code[J].Sport management review, 2014, 17(3): 265-276.
[45] DVORAK J, SAUGY M, PITSILADIS Y P. Challenges and threats to implementing the fight against doping in sport[J].British journal of sports medicine, 2014, 48(10): 807-809.
[46] PATTERSON L B, BACKHOUSE S H, DUFFY P J. Anti-doping education for coaches: Qualitative insights from national and international sporting and anti-doping organisations[J].Sport Management Review, 2016, 19(1): 35-47.
[47] DIKIC N, MCNAMEE M, GÜNTER H, et al. Sports physicians, ethics and antidoping governance: between assistance and negligence[J].British journal of sports medicine, 2013, 47(11): 701-704.
[48] DIMEO P, MØLLER V. The anti-doping crisis in sport: Causes, consequences, solutions[M].London:Routledge, 2018:92-94.
[49] 黄璐.国际体育组织自治问题审视——以奥林匹克善治改革为背景[J].天津体育学院学报,2016,31(1):6-11.
[50] 李睿智,郭树理.反兴奋剂公共利益的学理探析及启示[J].体育学研究,2019,2(6):79-87.
[51] 姜熙.反兴奋剂法治全球化的挑战、机遇与中国应对[J].体育科学,2021,41(11):19-29.
[52] 刘雪芹.《世界反兴奋剂条例》的修改与运动员人权的保障[J].天津体育学院学报,2014,29(4):347-351.
[53] 宋彬龄.《世界反兴奋剂条例》的最新修改和完善[J].武汉体育学院学报,2014,48(3):27-33.
[54] 熊英灼,宋彬龄.从信赖到怀疑:世界反兴奋剂体系对科学的法律控制[J].武汉体育学院学报,2016,50(10):29-36.
[55] 罗小霜.《世界反兴奋剂条例》的最新发展与中国的应对[J].体育科学,2020,40(5):73-84.
[56] 郭树理.揆情审势、宽严相济:《世界反兴奋剂条例》之新发展[J].上海体育学院学报,2021,45(2):1-12,21.
[57] 郭树理.2021年实施版《世界反兴奋剂条例》之修订[J].体育科研,2020,41(2):19-29.
[58] 姜涛.反兴奋剂治理中的人权保障[J].人权,2021(6):13-31.
[59] 陈林会,刘青.全球体育治理变局中的中国战略选择与实现路径[J].体育与科学,2022,43(3):71-79.
[60] 战文腾,孙晋海,曲爱宁.国际体育组织善治改革问题研究[J].西安体育学院学报,2018,35(5):513-520.
[61] 张琴,易剑东.自治、他治、善治:体育治理路向何方[J].北京体育大学学报,2019,42(9):88-95.
[62] 姜世波,姜熙,赵毅,等.国际体育组织自治的困境与出路——国际足联腐败丑闻的深层思考[J].体育与科学,2015,36(4):19-26.
[63] 任慧涛,赵耀.国际体育自治的权力流散研究——兼论全球反兴奋剂治理的新趋势与新困境[J].武汉体育学院学报,2024,58(7):48-55.
[64] 任海.国际奥委会演进的历史逻辑——从自治到善治[M].北京:北京体育大学出版社,2013:253.

走向善治:世界反兴奋剂机构如何应对治理失灵

Towards Good Governance: How does the World Anti-Doping Agency Respond to Governance Failures

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	苏玥, 李珂, 田径. 中国共产党领导下的百年农村体育“治理”实践经验与新时代治理路径研究[J]. 成都体育学院学报, 2024, 50(5): 47-53.
[2]	丁永亮, 谢正阳, 汤际澜. 智慧城市发展推动中国式城市体育治理现代化建设研究[J]. 成都体育学院学报, 2024, 50(3): 19-26.
[3]	李晓鹏, 徐成立, 李忠伟, 汪如锋. 走向多样与包容:爱尔兰《体育行动计划2021-2023》的解析与启示[J]. 成都体育学院学报, 2023, 49(5): 131-138.
[4]	杜长亮, 王志文, 陈冰清. 非正式体育组织的生成逻辑与治理策略研究[J]. 成都体育学院学报, 2023, 49(3): 8-14.
[5]	朱罗敬, 杨叶凌, 李兵. 体育产业项目何以能嵌入农村？——基于村民自主与政府主导两种模式的比较研究[J]. 成都体育学院学报, 2023, 49(3): 49-54.
[6]	万义, 李珂. 乡村振兴战略下农村体育治理的现实困境、理论逻辑与实现路径[J]. 成都体育学院学报, 2022, 48(5): 21-26.
[7]	戴鹏,谷梦云,李哲,阮宜杰,郇昌店. 中国青少年体育治理的社区动态参与研究——疫情常态化背景下的再审视[J]. 成都体育学院学报, 2022, 48(3): 67-72.
[8]	吴宝升. 新时代中国体育行业协会职能定位问题探析[J]. 成都体育学院学报, 2022, 48(3): 73-76.
[9]	黄璐. 以善治促自治——《奥林匹克2020+5议程》自治与善治改革新动向研究[J]. 成都体育学院学报, 2022, 48(2): 18-23.
[10]	任振朋, 王润斌. 奥林匹克治理体系的时代窘境与纾困之道[J]. 成都体育学院学报, 2022, 48(2): 24-30.
[11]	赵富学, 吕钶, 李林. 澳大利亚青少年身体素养促进的问题聚焦与治理实践研究[J]. 成都体育学院学报, 2021, 47(5): 24-30.
[12]	徐士韦. 建设体育强国进程中运动项目协会去行政化研究[J]. 成都体育学院学报, 2021, 47(2): 71-77.
[13]	易剑东. “东京2020年奥运会延期一年”决策探析[J]. 成都体育学院学报, 2021, 47(1): 21-31.
[14]	彭国强, 高庆勇. 美国大学竞技体育的制度治理及其特征[J]. 成都体育学院学报, 2020, 45(4): 74-81.
[15]	胥万兵. 从体育管理到体育治理的内在困境与路径选择[J]. 成都体育学院学报, 2019, 45(2): 49-54.