Health-friendly sport policy: an emerging soft law doctrine.

Autor/in	Kornbeck, Jacob
Titel	Health-friendly sport policy: an emerging soft law doctrine. Gefälligkeitsübersetzung: Gesundheitsfreundliche Sportpolitik: eine aufstrebende Grundsatz-Leitlinie.
Quelle	Aus: Anderson, Jack (Hrsg.); Parrish, Richard (Hrsg.); García, Borja (Hrsg.): Research handbook on EU sports law and policy. Cheltenham: Elgar (2017) S. 49-78 PDF als Volltext Link als defekt meldenVerfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	online; gedruckt; Sammelwerksbeitrag
ISBN	1-78471-949-8; 978-1-78471-949-4
Schlagwörter	Gesellschaft; Beeinflussung; Bildungspolitik; Gesundheitsförderung; Gesundheitspolitik; Europarecht; Sozialpolitik; Bewegungsaktivität; Sportaktivität; Sportförderung; Sportpolitik; Sportpädagogik; Sportrecht; Sportsoziologie; Europäische Union; Europa
Abstract	The aim of this chapter is to critically revisit pre- and post-Lisbon sport policy initiatives leading up to and including current ones using Article 165 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) to promote health-enhancing physical activity (HEPA), i.e., the embedding and coordination of physical activity-friendly policies, including but not limited to sports, within all public policy areas, both at the level of the European Union (EU) and at that of its Member States (MS), by addressing these specific initiatives as a form of EU soft law. For while not legally binding and certainly not enforceable, the norms laid down in these initiatives have a legal and political life of their own: they become (borrowing a phrase from social psychology) 'real in their consequences'. Just like sports governing bodies (SGBs) appear to have responded to the increasing clout of ECJ/CJEU case-law since Bosman by 'engaging with the EU in order to minimise its impact', a strategy which may be interpreted as attempted 'delegalisation', either because it aims at 'the softening of hard law norms (limited delegalisation)', or even embodies an outspoken move 'from soft/hard law to non-legal norms (complete delegalisation)' (whether successful or not), the EU's own initiatives to promote HEPA in spite of MS' maintained intact national sport policy prerogative may be phrased as 'engaging with sport policy to maximise its health impact'. Soft law seems a natural response to a situation where the EU cannot regulate. As far as SGBs are concerned, 'in the absence of a legal base, soft law is the preferred tactic to limit the application of law to sport', which applies equally when a legal base exists (art. 165 TFEU) but cannot be used for adopting legally binding measures, although it may well even be the case that Article 165 encourages rather than limits the interventions of EU law in the sporting world. Under this scenario, a 'soft' legal base may nevertheless formalise an otherwise largely informal approach and lend a certain measure of quasi-enforcement to otherwise unenforceable initiatives. (Einleitung).
Erfasst von	Bundesinstitut für Sportwissenschaft, Bonn
Update	2018/4