Sport Policies in Brazil

International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics ISSN: 1940-6940 (Print) 1940-6959 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/risp20 Sport Policies in Brazil Fernando Marinho Mezzadri, Marcelo Moraes e Silva, Katiuscia Mello Figuêroa & Fernando Augusto Starepravo To cite this article: Fernando Marinho Mezzadri, Marcelo Moraes e Silva, Katiuscia Mello Figuêroa & Fernando Augusto Starepravo (2015) Sport Policies in Brazil, International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 7:4, 655-666, DOI: 10.1080/19406940.2014.937737 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19406940.2014.937737 Published online: 08 Aug 2014. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 104 View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalinformation?journalcode=risp20 Download by: [191.177.187.149] Date: 21 November 2015, At: 14:51

International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 2015 Vol. 7, No. 4, 655 666, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19406940.2014.937737 COUNTRY PROFILE Sport Policies in Brazil Fernando Marinho Mezzadri a, Marcelo Moraes e Silva a *, Katiuscia Mello Figuêroa a and Fernando Augusto Starepravo b a Physical Education, UFPR, Curitiba, Brazil; b Physical Education, UEM, Maringá, Brazil This article provides an overview of sport policies in Brazil. The investigation methodology involved a critical analysis of important national policy documents dedicated to the subject. The article begins with an analysis of the creation of the field, since the passage of the first laws in the 1940s, up to the current stage of Brazilian sport. As a conclusion, the paper finds that the sports policy in Brazil moved away from an the organization model centred only on the state. However, it was noted that, despite the greater autonomy of sports entities, it is public funding that maintains the sports structure in the country. Keywords: sports; policy sports; sports organization Initial considerations The concern with sport policies has never been so popular in Brazil. Winning the right to organize sporting mega events, like the Confederations Cup in 2013, the soccer World Cup in 2014, the Olympic and Paralympic Games in 2016 and the University Games in 2019, was effective in attracting the attention of the Brazilian public. Individuals, social groups and institutions began to pay attention to the theme of sport policies after the selection of the country to host events of such magnitude. The country s success in winning bids to host these events has had great symbolic resonance, which, according to Starepravo (2011), has led to the topic of sport policy being discussed in various social circles ranging from the media, passing through the academic field to reach the less formal places of everyday life. The increased relevance of sports issues has both positive and negative implications. On the positive side is that sport became part of the agenda of widespread social debate, while on the negative side the debate tended to be ideological rather than based on analysis. Debate has been marked by a lack of rigour and determined by political loyalties (Starepravo 2011). Similar comments may be made regarding the scientific literature on the subject in Brazil where academic interest is still recent and thin as pointed out by Manháes (1986), Linhales (1996), Mezzadri (2000), Veronez (2005) and Starepravo (2011) and different from the international context where there is a more solid academic body of work that deals with sport systems and policies of different nations (Riordan 1991, Chalip 1995, Green and Houlihan 2005, Green and Collins 2008). Responding to the increase in interest, and in order to contribute to the scientific production of the field, this article provides an overview of sport policies in Brazil. The research methodology involved a critical analysis of important national policy documents *Corresponding author. Email: marcelo.moraes75@hotmail.com 2014 Taylor & Francis

656 F.M. Mezzadri et al. dedicated to the subject. The article begins with an analysis of the formation of the field, since the passage of the first laws in the 1940s, up to the current stage of Brazilian sport. To better understand the central issues of Brazilian sport, this long period has been divided into three stages: (1) The first will cover the period of the 1940s to the 1980s, when the Brazilian Government started its intervention in the country s sports field, until the end of the military regime; (2) the second stage begins with the introduction of democratic government in the 1980s and covers the Brazilian Constitution of 1988 and two specific sport Laws, Federal law no. 8672/1993 (known as Zico Law ) and Federal Law no. 9615/1998 (called Pelé Law ); (3) lastly, the third stage is delimited by the creation of the Ministry of Sports in 2003, the National Sport Conferences, the definition of the national sports policy and the winning of the right to organize mega events. From the Decree-Law 3199/41 to the constitution of 1988 The federal Government s concern with the sport in a more institutionalized form occurred for the first time only in Getúlio Vargas Government, during the period called New State (1937 1945), 1 through the passage of Decree-Law no. 3199 of 1941 (Brasil National Congress. Decreto-Lei n. 3.199 de 14 de abril de 1941). If before the decade of the 1930s, the Brazilian State did not intervene directly in the sporting issues apart from rare exceptions, like the shooting modality, as showed in Moraes e Silva (2011) it was only from the first Getulio Vargas Government that sport became part of a State policy (Manháes 1986, Linhales 1996, Mezzadri 2000, Starepravo 2011). According to Mezzadri (2000), such issues were evident in the Decree of 1941, the first legislation to consider the organizational base for the sport in Brazil. Such planning was intended to systematize, discipline and organize the embryonic Brazilian sports field a little more, trying to unify it and thus decrease the disputes and the existing conflicts between the various clubs, leagues and federations about the control of sport in the national territory. The decree was also designed to decrease the monopoly that individuals of European immigrant origin had in relation to the practice of sports in the country (Linhales 1996, Moraes e Silva 2011). One can notice that in this context, the sports regulations enacted by the federal Government sought a management model which aimed to systematize sports practices in national territory, with the National Sports Council (Conselho Nacional de Desportos CND) and the Brazilian Sports Confederation (Confederação Brasileira de Desportos CBD) as the central elements (Manháes 1986, Linhales 1996, Mezzadri 2000, Veronez 2005). According to Mezzadri (2000), the regulation of the development of the Brazilian State in general, and of sport in particular, reflected the preferences of the Getúlio Vargas Government for running the country. According to Fausto (2001), the transfer from the liberal management model, which dominated until the end of the 1920s, to the centralist model of the New State affected directly the everyday life of individuals. The State became an active agent in the organization of society. In many cases, individuals were treated as mere extensions of the New State bureaucratic organization. One priority was the creation of a national identity which in this historical period was lacking. A priority for the State was this invention of the Brazilian Nation. The Government at that time was undertaking a broad reform process through the area of health and labour laws and was investing in the expansion of basic education. Regarding the institutionalization of sport, the administration was dominated by bureaucrats and politicians with restricted participation in decision making for other stakeholders. For Fausto (2001), administration was constituted in an authoritarian way, i.e.,

International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics 657 the administration emanated from the centralization of power and rule by bureaucrats, who interpret the social, political, economic and cultural needs of the Brazilian population in their own way and according to their interests. Initially, it was assumed that the State regulations, incorporated in the legislation, assisted in the construction of the national identity, symbolized by the New State flag which was intended to represent the consolidation of the nationalist base, in general and in specific policy areas such as sport. According to Mezzadri (2000), the State had become increasingly present in the lives of individuals and sport contributed through the process of strengthening the head of State as well as in the construction of a national identity. The regulatory framework that was established was shaped by a set of moral values which reflected this authoritarianism of the government. The new forms of social organization produced by the government eventually defined an enclosed space for the creation of a centralizing national identity which would also affect policy development within the sports sphere (Manháes 1986, Linhales 1996, Mezzadri 2000, Veronez 2005). These governmental priorities caused the promotion of a nationalist civility within society. In this regard, it is possible to argue, according to Starepravo (2011), that in this period State intervention was not marked by public involvement in policy making but by a process of legislative intervention in relation to the administration of Brazilian sport. According to Linhales (1996) such intervention eventually established a dependency relationship between the sport and the State. With the end of the so-called New State in 1945, Brazil started its first democratic experience. Weffort (1978) indicates that this period was also called Populist Democracy. 2 This moment in Brazilian history begins, even though in an incipient form, the process of incorporation of the mass of the population into the political sphere. However, this populist dimension, linked to the power structures inherited from the New State eventually limited the extent of popular participation in the political sphere. According to Benevides (1981) the democratic experience which took place between 1945 and 1964 turned out to consolidate the process of restricting political participation inaugurated by the New State. Weffort (1978) notes that Brazilian populism was a very specific way of population control in the political sphere; however, the author recalls that populism was also a way for people to express their dissatisfaction. According to Benevides (1981), populism was a political form in which the dominant groups maintained and exercised their dominance, but it was also a way in which such a domain was threatened. This ambiguity of populism as a political form is evidenced by the uncertain character that permeated the populist Brazilian State. As Weffort (1978) and Benevides (1981) demonstrate there were a large number of political leaders, mainly Latin Americans, and with different profiles, styles and/or parties, who climbed to power on behalf of the population. Despite their differences these leaders perpetuated political practices based on dependency/clientelistic relationships, inequality and exclusion. The ambiguity contained in this style of populist relationship served the fragility of the political system and of democracy itself. In this sense, it is not difficult to understand, as indicated by Manháes (1986), Linhales (1996), Mezzadri (2000) and Veronez (2005) that, after the New State there were no significant changes in sports policy in the period from 1945 to 1964. The Brazilian State remained a central and authoritarian figure in the control of sport. After all, the populist style continued to rely on patronage and financial resources transferred from the Government to the sports entities in exchange for political favours and bargains. Starepravo (2011) argued that the main characteristic of this period was the democraticpopulist massification of sports according to a populist and bargaining logic, which was

658 F.M. Mezzadri et al. based on the sports structure established during the New State. However, this greater inclusion of sport in the social fabric did not result in its consolidation as a social right because the sports structure did not treat sport as a national public good but rather as a means to satisfy the interests of certain social groups. The prevailing homeostasis would be broken only in the period of military dictatorship (1964 1985) during which, according to Skidmore (1988), a bureaucratized State apparatus was re-introduced in the country, marked by a strong technocratic tendency, which guaranteed the Government monopoly of power through the use of physical force. This militarized technocracy was marked by a sustained period of economic growth, which was tightly controlled by the State. According to Gaspari (2002), this period was also known as economic miracle, when there was a significant increase in the concentration of income and poverty and a patriotic image of Brazil as a power was established and which was echoed and evidenced in the sports field as well, as for example, in the winning of a third World Cup in 1970, in Mexico. Linhales (1996) points out that this style of technocratic administration also invaded the sports sphere. The author argues that this period differs from earlier period mainly by the emergence of a more interventionist approach to sport through the introduction of various guidelines, plans, projects and actions of the State, which came accompanied by highly regulatory legislation. However, according to Starepravo (2011), the clientelistic interests, created in the New State and maintained during the period of the Populist Democracy instead of being removed by military technocracy were actually strengthened. Some of the legal changes that occurred began in the late 1960s. In 1969, for the first time in the country, a Federal Sports Lottery (Decree-Law no. 594) was instituted, which allocated 30% of the net revenues obtained for sports activities. Alongside these policy changes, a high-profile project began: the Analysis of Physical Education and Sports in Brazil (Da Costa 1971). For the first time in the history of Brazilian sport, a broad study of sports provision and practice reality of the country was undertaken. This State action was shared between the Division of Physical Education (Divisão de Educação Física DEF), an agency linked to the Ministry of Education and Culture (Ministério da Educação e Cultura MEC) and the Institute of Applied Economic Research (Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada IPEA), of the Ministry of Planning. Its coordination was the responsibility of a young teacher, Lamartine Pereira da Costa, who would later become one of the most renowned researchers of Brazilian sports field. The analysis came to numerous conclusions that proved to be fundamental to the development of the Brazilian sports policy, mainly in tackling structural shortcomings. As noted by Tubino (1996), the primary suggestion arising from the analysis was to change the current legislation which dated from the period of the New State, which was considered to be the main obstacle to the modernization of sport in Brazil. This study formed the basis for Law no. 6251 of 1975 and for Decree-Law no. 80228 of 1977, which established the National Policy for the Development of Physical Education and Sport. The promulgation of Law no. 6251, despite maintaining the authority of the State over the sport, made progress towards integrating the existing public agencies and sports authorities. In terms of funding, this new legislation indicated that financial support should come from the Government but that it could not be given to private enterprise. The use of government resources should support programmes and projects that were in accordance with the National Plan for the Development of Physical Education and Sports.

International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics 659 However, this strong governmental presence continued to treat sport in an oligarchic and authoritarian way, marked by a structure of clientelism, which, in the opinion of Manháes (1986), was only a policy of continuity, characterized by formal and marginal adjustments on sports legislation in force since the 1940s. Mezzadri (2000) supports the analysis of Manháes (1986); however, he points out two fundamental aspects to the debate. The first is that for the first time the Brazilian State s concern went beyond performance sport as there were emerging actions, even though still modest, both for educational and for participation sport, expanding the concept of sport in the State s vision. The second point raised by the author was the beginning of the privatization of Brazilian sport. According to Veronez (2005), this State diversification beyond the sphere of performance, with the insertion of the educational and participation manifestations, did not weaken the predominance of the first. Linhales (1996) complements this observation and suggests that government support for participation sport may be seen as providing a valorization of the government support for performance sport in the country. According to Starepravo (2011), the increased profile for participation sport in Brazil came through the implementation, in the second half of the 1970s, by Lamartine Pereira da Costa of the Sport for All Movement (Esporte Para Todos EPT), action imported from Europe, which since the 1960s had aimed to encourage sedentary individuals to practice a physical activity. Linhales (1996) and Veronez (2005) point out that it was still in the military period in Brazil that the first criticism of the process of mass sport emerged, starting with criticism of the pyramid model, which supported the organization of sport in three levels (educational, participation and performance) and saw the participation and educational levels as the basis for performance sport. Those involved in these two levels eventually started a more social and critical discussion of performance sport. Starepravo (2011), by synthesizing this period of sport history, points out that the military regime represented not only the strengthening of performance sport but also started investment in other sporting events, stimulating a greater degree of pluralism in the policy area. However, the development that most affected the sports structure in the country was the introduction of an increased degree of autonomy in the management of sport organizations. The New Republic: sport after the constitution of 1988 According to Tubino (1996), the direct tutelage of sport by the Brazilian State continued until 1985 when the military Government was replaced, starting a new democratic period, referred to as the New Republic. Thus, between 1985 and the promulgation of the Federal Constitution of 1988, which indicated the need for a greater autonomy of the sporting field in its text and which also pointed out that public resources should prioritize educational sport, Brazilian sport went through an intermediary time during which the Commission on the reformulation of Brazilian sport, created in 1985, served as an advocate for change and produced a number of reforms, mainly by the introduction of new agents in the sports field of the country. The inclusion of these new agents took numerous forms. In the sphere of performance, which was previously controlled by the State structure, it would incorporate the private sector and the commercial interests. According to Linhales (1996), another element introduced into the policy area was from the academic sphere from which emerged a criticique of the supposed alienating and authoritarian character of performance sport. A polarization in the Brazilian sports policy field arose. On one side was a group associated

660 F.M. Mezzadri et al. with economic interests that defended performance sport, and on the other were those who defended sport as a social right and were concerned with the protection of educational and participation forms of sport. This period of democracy was one of the possibilities that allowed the entry of new agents in the policy area and started to change the sports structure of the country. If on the one hand, there began a process of sport privatization in the country, especially regarding the control over performance sport, on the other hand there was a greater incorporation of the idea of sport as a social right which allowed its elevation to the constitutional level. Veronez (2005) noted that this period of debate and reform culminated with the end of the government of President José Sarney (1985 1990) and with the election of Fernando Collor de Mello who at the beginning of his mandate introduced major administrative reform, including the creation of the Secretariat of Sports, linked directly to the Presidency of the Republic. As this organ had Ministirial status, this action ended up being the foundation for the creation of the Ministry of Sport. To give the position of the secretariat maximum profile, the famous former football player Arthur Antunes Coimbra (Zico) was appointed. Upon taking the Chair, Zico initiated discussions to formulate a new law. After the promulgation of the Federal Constitution of 1988 the focus in debates on Brazilian sport was again on its regulatory framework. From within this context arises the first general post-constitution sport policy, which was Law no. 8672 of 1993, also known as Zico Law, which complemented the constitutional text and established the concepts and principles which would underpin national sports development. As Starepravo (2011) noted the Zico Law recognized sport, in conceptual terms, as defined by Tubino in the first half of the 1980s, i.e., in the previously mentioned three manifestations of education, participation and performance. The performance sphere was the one that received the most detailed discussion in the new regulatory framework, the educational sphere received some discussion and the participation was cited only in a generic way. Another striking point of the Zico Law was in chapter IX, which focused on the funding for sport. In article 39, among the various sources of funding, some were highlighted: (1) Union, States and Municipalities budgets; (2) sports funds; (3) forecasting lottery receipts; (4) donations, sponsorships and legacies; (5) forecasting lottery prizes of Federal Sports Lottery unclaimed within the regulation period; (6) tax incentives established by law; (7) other sources (Brasil 1993). Among the various forms of funding cited, items (5) and (6) are of special importance. In relation to the Sports Lottery, the Zico Law signaled that, annually, the total net income of one of the lottery competitions would be allocated to the Brazilian Olympic Committee (Comitê Olímpico Brasileiro COB), for the training of Olympic athletes and the Olympic teams preparatory competitions. In the years when the Olympic Games and the Pan American Games are taking place, the total net income of a second lottery competition would also be allocated to the COB. It was the idea of autonomy, advocated by article 217 of the Federal Constitution of 1988, which allowed the emergence of the Zico Law. This legislation was an innovative text, as it sought to reduce State interference and to stimulate the autonomy in the organization of sports entities. However, even acknowledging the acceptance of the principle of autonomy, the financing of Brazilian sport was still almost entirely from the public coffers. These features of administrative autonomy and financial independence were also marked in the new legislation that came to replace it. Law no. 9615, called Pelé Law, despite maintaining some elements of Zico Law, revoked it completely (Brasil 1998). It is worth remembering that between the process of creation of Zico Law and Pelé Law, Brazil underwent a major institutional crisis.

International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics 661 President Fernando Collor de Mello was impeached in 1992, with his deputy, Itamar Franco, assuming the leadership of the country until the election of Fernando Henrique Cardoso, in 1994. Cardoso, who assumed the Presidency in 1995, appointed another former football player to the post of Extraordinary Minister of Sports, namely Edson Arantes do Nascimento, Pelé. As noted by Veronez (2005), the Government of Fernando Henrique Cardoso (1995 2002), which operated between the years of 1996 1999 and 2000 2003, set goals for sport within the so-called Multi-Annual Plan system (Plano Plurianual PPA). 3 The text on sport contained in these outlined a fairly generic set of intentions, covering performance sport as well as the participation and educational spheres. However, Veronez (2005) concludes that there was a substantial discrepancy between the ambition and the accomplishment. Changes in the sports field were again more evident in the regulatory framework than in the execution of substantitive public policies. Starepravo (2011) argues that the new legislation, the Pelé Law, was in fact, a continuation with only small changes of the Zico Law. Both laws clearly supported the new configuration of Brazilian sport. Both supported a greater role for private sports entities, most of which were led by agents from football, and both clearly supported the withdrawal of the State from its dominant role in relation to sport. However the Pele Law, like the Zico Law sought a less interventionist State without the loss of State funding for performance sport, i.e., a public policy consisting of monetary transfers to private entities to develop sports actions. This new policy setting was characterized by a decrease in State guardianship and a higher openness to market forces. In relation to monetary transfers, Law no. 10264 of 2001 was proposed by Senator Pedro Piva and by Mr. Agnelo Queiroz (Brasil National Congress 2001). Agnelo-Piva Law amended the Pelé Law by regulating the transfer of 2% of the collection of Federal lotteries income to the COB and the Brazilian Paralympic Committee (Confederação Paralímpica Brasileira CPB). This new source of income was divided: 85% to the 305 COB and 15% to the CPB. Of the resources received by each Committee, it was required that 10% should be allocated to school sport and 5% to university sport. According to the report on the use of technical/financial resources in 2011, the amount of 156,950 million BRL (66.79 million USD) was transferred by the Federal Government to the COB with 7850 million BRL (3.34 million USD) transferred to 310 the University sport; 15,695 million BRL (6.78 million USD) to educational sport and 133,410 million BRL (56.77 million USD) to performance sport. Of the total allocated to performance sport, 59,125 million BRL, about 2515 million USD (37.67%) was transferred by the COB to the confederations; the remaining 97,825 million BRL, 4162 million USD (62.33%) was allocated to a range of functions including activities 315 to promote sport, maintain the entity and organize sporting events (COB 2012). The supervision of the funds transferred to the COB and to the CPB is responsibility of the Federal Court of Accounts of Brazil (TCU). The funds committed by the Government via Agnelo-Piva Law are the largest source of financial resources available to the COB and CPB. These two organizations pass on the amounts to confederations of Olympic and Paralympic sports according to their own criteria. The process to release these funds occurs through the development of work plans by the confederations, which are also responsible for implementation and accountability, duly accompanied by the two committees (COB and CPB). Referring to the arguments of Starepravo (2011), it is possible to affirm that, in the sports field, the Fernando Henrique Cardoso s government was responsible for introducing significant changes in the regulatory framework. The primary focus of the government was performance sport, serving primarily the interests of football. However, the

662 F.M. Mezzadri et al. government also introduced policies which let to the introduction of programmes and projects aimed at the participation and educational spheres. From Lula s Government to Dilma s: from 2003 to present day The Ministry of Sport was established in 2003 following the election of the former trade union leader Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva as president of the Republic, a post he held until 2010. The establishment of the Ministry significantly raised the status of sport within the government. According to Starepravo (2011), after the creation of the Ministry and the appointment of Agnelo Queiroz, one of the formulators of the Agnelo-Piva Law, to the post of Minister, the focus turned to its administrative structure. The initial structure was as follows: (1) Executive Secretariat; (2) High Performance National Secretariat (Secretaria Nacional de Esporte de Alto Rendimento SNEAR); (3) Educational Sport National Secretariat (Secretaria Nacional de Esporte Educacional SNEED) and (4) National Secretariat of development of Leisure and Recreation Sports (Secretaria Nacional de Desenvolvimento de Esporte e Lazer SNDEL). The SNEED was subsequently merged with SNDEL, creating the National Secretariat of Sports, Education, Recreation and Social Inclusion (Secretaria Nacional de Esporte, Lazer e Inclusão Social SNELIS). In addition, because of the hosting of the Football World Cup in 2014, an exclusive department for matters related to football, the National Football and Fan Protection Secretariat (Secretaria Nacional de Futebol e Direito do Torcedor SNFDT), was created. In parallel to the process of institutionalization of the Ministry of Sport the emergence of something new in the Brazilian sports field occurred, namely the creation of the National Sport Conference, convened by President Lula at the beginning of 2004. The National Sport Conferences were intended to act as a broad arena for discussion, deliberation and formulation of public sports policies in Brazil. According to Starepravo (2011), the first conference held in 2004 resulted in the approval of benchmarks for the construction of the National Sports Policy, published in 2005, and also indicated the need for the creation of a National Sport System. The National Sports Policy aimed to replace the old policy, developed in the early 1970s, during the military regime (Da Costa 1971). In contrast to the 1971 document, which had the aim of promoting the physical fitness of the population and strengthening national representation on the international stage, the 2005 document emphasized the quest for democratization and universalization of sport. This was the focus of the second conference held in 2006, which had the development of the National Sport System as its main theme. In the attempt to universalize sport in the country, the conference sought to create ways to articulate and assign responsibilities to all federal entities. The third conference in 2010 changed the focus of the first two and concentrated on the construction of a 10-year plan for Brazilian sport, which was more focused on performance sport. This change of trajectory is mainly due to the election of Rio de Janeiro to host the 2016 Olympics. Starepravo (2011) reminds us that despite the low impact of the decisions taken at the conferences, they have nonetheless configured historic moments within the Brazilian sports policy field. After all, for the first time in the history of the sport in the country, agents from the lower levels of the political hierarchy (e.g. civil society organizations) were participating in a public policy discussion space. Complementing these policy documents there were also changes in the regulatory framework. A change that appeared in the Brazilian legislation during Lula s administration was Law no. 11438 (Brasil 2006). The Law of Sports Incentive aimed to provide

International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics 663 incentives and benefits designed to promote/develop sports activities. The law allowed a legal entity to deduct 1% of the value of income tax owed, and in each period of calculation, the individual can deduct up to 6% of the tax due on the Declaration of Annual Adjustment and for the proceeds to be used for the promotion of sport. It also determines that the Ministry of Sport is obliged to inform the Federal Revenue Secretariat (Secretaria da Receita Federal SRF), by the last working day of March of the year following the calendar year, the values of sponsorship or donation, in direct support of sports and parasports projects. Following changes in policy and financial arrangements within the new structure of sports in the country, the process of implementation began. The new ministerial structure with the SNELIS junction of SNDEL and SNEED demonstrated that after the election of Rio for the 2016 Olympics, the investment priority would be performance sport at the expense of educational and participation sport. SNELIS inherited from the extinct SNEED its main programme called the Second-Half. Despite having other programmes, this action is the main sport policy in Brazil, and it aims to democratize access to sports for schoolchildren, especially those who find themselves in areas of social vulnerability. For its implementation, institutional partnerships with the states, municipalities and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) were made (Oliveira and Perim 2009). Starepravo (2011) reported that the programme has involved more than 3 million young people since its creation in 2003. The author also indicates that in 2010 the programme reached approximately 1 million children in 1300 Brazilian municipalities. The budget of the programme for 2013 was 164.4 million BRL (approximately 70 million USD) (Brasil 2012). From the former SNDEL, SNELIS inherited a series of programmes for the development of participation sport. With the main policy being the Sport and Leisure in the City Programme (Programa Esporte e Lazer da Cidade PELC). Through this programme the Ministry finances events and operations of centres with systematic sports and leisure activities. Initiatives have also taken place in partnership with municipalities, states, NGOs, institutions of higher education and Civil Society Organisations of Public Interest (Organizações da Sociedade Civil de Interesse Público OSCIPs). Currently, PELC is represented primarily by three initiatives: (1) All ages centres, that involve all segments of society (child, adolescent, adult, elderly, people with disabilities and other special educational needs); (2) centres for PELC healthy living programmes, specifically for the age group from the age of 45 and over, with a view to improving quality of life of this population, including persons with disabilities; and (3) centres for traditional peoples and communities. An important policy element of the government of Dilma Rousseff was the expansion in the budget for sport under the Multi-Annual Plan (Plano Plurianual PPA) Mais Brasil (2012 2015), which reached 2.76 billion BRL (approximately 1.17 billion USD) (Brasil 2011a, b). There has been growth in the spending directed towards achieving social inclusion through sport, the running of sport centres and the promotion of educational participation, as well as development and modernization of sports venues. In the new PPA it is explained that the values calculated show an increase of investments in the development of public policies in the area of sports and in the preparation for the 2014 World Cup and 2016 Olympic and Paralympic Games. The budgetary plan also indicates that expenditure on performance sport would increase from 2011 onwards because of the decision to increase resources to support elite athletes and teams, financed by the following initiatives: Athletes Preparation, Granting of allowances to athletes and the preparation for the realization of mega events (Brasil 2013).

664 F.M. Mezzadri et al. However, after the ministerial restructuring, PELC suffered a reduction in its funding, with 90% of their resources allocated mainly to infrastructure, and slightly less than 10% of the total allocated to all the other sub-categories that compose PELC. In the PPA (2012 2015) about 600 million BRL (approximately 255 million USD) were intended for educational and participation sport. However, we must remember that from this amount, 164.4 million BRL (approximately 70 million USD) went to the Second Half (Segundo Tempo) programme. Of the remaining 435.6 million BRL (about 185.4 million USD) that should go to the other educational and/or participation sports programmes, among them PELC, a significant proportion ended up being allocated, almost completely, for the establishment and modernization of sports infrastructures linked to mega events to be hosted by the country. These structures will probably not be used for the participation and/ or educational sports. The High Performance National Secretariat (SNEAR) has as its main programme the Athlete-Allowance (Bolsa Atleta), established in 2004, with the publication of law no. 10891 (Brasil 2004). This form of public financing was taken to the National Congress in 2000, by the then-congressman and future Minister Agnelo Queiroz. The Athlete- Allowance Law would be sanctioned by President Lula just over a month before the start of the Olympic Games of Athens 2004. In solemnity in the Planalto Palace, the Athlete-Allowance programme was launched on 25 July of the same year, which supported 975 athletes and over the course of the programme, more than 20,000 allowances have already been granted. Currently, the programme benefits 5691 athletes in a total budget of 183 million BRL (about 78 million USD). The law that instituted the Athlete-Allowance created: (1) the student athlete category, for students who participate with distinction in Brazilian School and University Games; (2) national athlete category, related to the athletes who have participated in sports competition at national level; (3) International athlete category, related to the athletes who have participated in sports competitions abroad; and (4) the Olympic and Paralympic athlete category, related to athletes who have participated in the Olympic and Paralympic Games. Trying to correct some imperfections, at the end of Lula s administration, there were changes in the law, through the Provisory Act No. 502, which created the base and podium athlete categories (Brasil 2010). The base category is intended for athletes who participated with distinction in competitions for athletes under 19 years of age. The current values of these allowances are as follows: (1) Base: 370.00 BRL (158 USD); (2) Student: 370.00 BRL (158 USD); (3) National: 925.00 BRL (394 USD); (4) International: 1850.00 BRL (788 USD); (5) Olympic and Paralympic: 3100.00 BRL (1320 USD). The allowance for the podium category can be as high as 15,000 BRL (6382 USD) and is aimed at athletes from the sports of the Olympic and Paralympic Games programme who are considered to have a real chance of winning a medal, based on their success in previous international competitions. Other programmes, projects and actions are being implemented by the Ministry of Sport. As seen, the priority is preparation for the Olympic and Paralympic Games of 2016. Final considerations In general terms, it is possible to affirm that sports policy in Brazil has moved away from an organization model centred only on the State. However, it was noted that, despite the greater autonomy of sports entities, it is public funding that maintains the sports structure in the country, especially at the high performance level. This review also served to show how Brazilian sport has always been marked by political patronage, where the sport was

International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics 665 used as a resource for promoting the interests of certain groups. Another striking point is that changes in policy have always been more focussed on the regulatory framework than in the execution or delivery of more consistent public policies. The sport policies in Brazil are seen as synonymous with funding and not as actions (i.e., programmes, initiatives, campaigns, etc.) aimed at the development of sports. As a conclusion, it is necessary to point out that there is an obvious need to improve and refine the research into the effectiveness and the impact of sport policies in Brazil. The number of specific studies of sports policies in the country is still limited and limiting, with notable exceptions, such as the works of Manháes (1986), Linhales (1996), Mezzadri (2000) and Starepravo (2011). The current Brazilian production of sport policy research is still incipient. Similar conclusions can be drawn in relation to research into physical education. Research lacks the theoretical constructions of Political Science and therefore also lacks conceptual focus with the consequence that themes such as the analysis of the impact of policies, the evaluation of efficiency, effectiveness and financing of policies are under-researched. These issues and gaps should be the priority for policy research, especially at a time when sport in Brazil has such a high visibility due to the hosting of the world s main mega sporting events. Notes 1. The period of the New State is the name of the political regime established by Getúlio Vargas in 1937 lasted until 1945 which was characterized by centralization of power, nationalism, anti-communism and authoritarianism. The New State was part of the first Vargas Government, historical period between 1930 and 1945, when the same was the supreme chief of the Brazilian State (D'araújo 2000, Fausto 2001). 2. The period known as Populist Democracy begins with the end of the New State in 1945, when President Getúlio Vargas was forced to resign the Office. Its completion occurs in 1964, with the deposition of the civilian President João Goulart by the military forces, starting the so-called military dictatorship (1964 1985). The other presidents of the period were Eurico Gaspar Dutra (1946 1951); again Getúlio Vargas (1951 1954); Café Filho (1954 1955); Juscelino Kubitschek (1956 1961); Jânio Quadros (1961) and João Goulart (1961 1964). The so-called Latin American populism, popular in the continent at that historic moment, relied on the charismatic image of determined politician, and their popular acts which in the view of people promote a better life, ending up deifying the ruler, even though these acts or improvements are transitory (Weffort 1978, Benevides 1981). 3. The PPA is a planning instrument of government action provided in article 165 of the Federal Constitution, which defines guidelines, goals and objectives for the purpose of facilitating the implementation and management of public policies, guiding the definition of priorities and assisting in the promotion of sustainable development of the country (Veronez 2005). References Benevides, M.V.M., 1981. A udn e o udenismo : ambiguidades do liberalismo Brasileiro (1945-1965). Rio de Janeiro: Paz e Terra. Brasil National Congress, 1993. Lei n. 8.672 de 06 de julho de. Institui normas gerais sobre desportos e dá outras providências. Brasil National Congress, 1998. Lei n. 9.615 de 24 de março de. Institui normas gerais sobre desportos e dá outras providências. Brasil National Congress, 2001. Lei nº 10.264 de 16 de julho de. Acrescenta inciso e parágrafos ao art. 56 da Lei nº 9.615, de 24 de março de 1998, que institui normas gerais sobre o desporto. Brasil National Congress, 2004. Lei no 10.891, de 9 de julho de. Institui a Bolsa-Atleta. Brasil National Congress, 2006. Lei nº 11.438 de 29 de dezembro de. Dispõe sobre incentivos e benefícios para fomentar as atividades de caráter desportivo e dá outras providências.

666 F.M. Mezzadri et al. Brasil National Congress, 2010. Medida provisória nº 502, de 20 de setembro de. Dá nova redação às Leis nos 9.615, de 24 de março de 1998, que institui normas gerais sobre desporto, e 10.891, de 9 de julho de 2004, que institui a Bolsa-Atleta; cria os Programas Atleta Pódio e Cidade Esportiva, e dá outras providências. Brasil National Congress, 2011a. Tribunal de contas da união. Esporte de alto rendimento. Brasília: TCU, Secretaria de Fiscalização e Avaliação de Programas de Governo. Brasil National Congress, 2011b. Plano plurianual 2012-2015: projeto de lei/ministério do planejamento. Brasília: Ministério Público. Brasil National Congress, 2012. Prestação de contas da presidenta da república/2011. Relatório Sobre os Orçamentos e Atuação Governamental Balanço Geral da União. Brasília DF: CGU. Brasil National Congress, 2013, Prestação de contas da presidenta da república/2012. Relatório Sobre os Orçamentos e Atuação Governamental Balanço Geral da União. Brasília DF: CGU. Brasil National Congress, Decreto-Lei n. 3.199 de 14 de abril de 1941. Estabelece as bases de organização do desporto em todo o País. Chalip, L., 1995. Policy analysis in sport management. Journal of sport management, 9, 1 13. COB, 2012. Demonstração da aplicação dos recursos técnico/financeiro 2011. Available from: http://www.cob.org.br/midias/2012/07/09/downloads/2vlxbyxptdc9grw4zt199b672c.pdf [Accessed 30 October 2012]. D araújo, M.C., 2000. O Estado Novo. Rio de Janeiro: Jorge Zahar Ed. Da Costa, L., 1971. Diagnóstico de educação física e Desportos no Brasil. Brasília: CDRH-MP/ DEF-MEC. Fausto, B., 2001. O pensamento nacionalista autoritário (1920-1940). Rio de Janeiro: Jorge Zahar. Gaspari, E., 2002. A Ditadura Escancarada. São Paulo: Cia. da Letras. Green, M. and Collins, S., 2008. Policy, politics and path dependency: sport development in Australia and Finland. Sport management review, 11 (3), 225 251. doi:10.1016/s1441-3523 (08)70111-6 Green, M. and Houlihan, B., 2005. Elite sport development. policy learning and political priorities. London: Routledge. Linhales, M.A., 1996. A trajetória política do esporte no Brasil: interesses envolvidos, setores excluídos. Dissertação (mestrado em ciência política). Belo Horizonte: Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Manháes, E.D., 1986. Políticas de esportes no Brasil. Rio de Janeiro: Graal. Mezzadri, F.M., 2000. A estrutura esportiva no Estado do Paraná: da formação dos clubes as atuais políticas governamentais. Tese (Doutorado em Educação Física). Campinas: Universidade Estadual de Campinas. Moraes e Silva, M., 2011. Novos modos de olhar outras maneiras de se comportar: a emergência do dispositivo esportivo da cidade de Curitiba (1899-1918). Tese (Doutorado em Educação). Campinas: Universidade Estadual de Campinas. Oliveira, A.A.B. and Perim, G.L., 2009. Fundamentos Pedagógicos do Programa Segundo Tempo: da reflexão à prática. Maringá: Eduem. Riordan, J., 1991. Sport, politics and communism. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Skidmore, T.E., 1988. Brasil: De Castelo a Tancredo, 1964-1985. Rio de Janeiro: Paz e Terra. Starepravo, F.A., 2011. Políticas Públicas de Esporte e Lazer no Brasil: aproximações, intersecções, rupturas e distanciamentos entre os subcampos políticos/burocráticos e científico/acadêmico. Tese (Doutorado em Educação Física). Curitiba: Universidade Federal do Paraná. Tubino, M.J.G., 1996. O esporte no Brasil. São Paulo: Ibrasa. Veronez, L.F.C., 2005. Quando o Estado joga a favor do privado: as políticas de esporte após a Constituição Federal de 1988. Tese (Doutorado em Educação Física). Campinas: Universidade Estadual de Campinas. Weffort, F., 1978. O populismo na política Brasileira. Rio de Janeiro: Paz e Terra.