Sport and development in Indonesia: sport policy in the Reformation era

Amung Ma’mun and Agus Mahendra


This chapter discusses sport development in Indonesia, from the period of 1998 to the present. This period of history has been called the Reformation era and has witnessed five different presidents: B.J. Habibie (1998-1999), Abdurachman Wahid (1999-2000), Megawati Soekarno Putri (2000-2004), Susilo Bambang Yudoy- ono (SBY) (2004-2009 and 2009-2014) and Joko Widodo (2014-2019 and 2019 to date). However, the discussion of sport development, in general, will inevitably be connected with the preceding eras, the old order era (1945-1967) and the new order era (1967-1998). The scope of the discourse will cover the historical journey of sport development, the planning system and its implementation. This discourse reflects the development of the democratic political system in the country, which was allegedly based on the fourth amendment of the 1945 constitution.

At the beginning of the Reformation era (1998-1999 and 2000-2004), sport development was never a significant concern of the government, although the United Nations, in the same period, integrated sport into the Millennium Development Goal’s (MDG’s) for the 2000-2015 period. However, in 2005, Indonesian sport society was delighted when the new government launched the Law of the National Sports System (NSS). The ratification of this law, one that had been long awaited, was considered a victory by the community, for their efforts to develop the sport would have been legally reinforced by the formal policy. In essence, the Law of Sport put the emphasis on the government, both central and local, to plays the critical role in all efforts to develop the sport initiative in the country. With this emphasis, the sport community was convinced that the government would create a bigger budget for sport development efforts. The effort of the government to develop its sport initiative reached its peak at the moment Indonesia was entrusted to host the 2011 SEA Games and the XIV Asian Games 2018 in Jakarta and Palembang.

During the above period, the development of sports has always been connected with efforts to build the self-image of the country, both related to the national prestige earned when athletes obtain medals in international events and related to politics - crediting whoever was the leader in the moment the victory was accomplished.

The issue of Sport for Development and Peace (SDP) declared by the United Nations in the year of 2015-2030, under the umbrella of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), has never become an essential consideration in the view of the government. The practice of sport development in the Reformation era was mainly dominated by the frame of development of sport, aimed at fostering elite athletes in each biennial SEA Games, Asian Games and Olympic Games. From this perspective, it was not mentioned that the 2018 Asian Games hosted in Indonesia were considered a strategic moment to show to the Asian community that Indonesia has the ability to host sport mega-events.

Historical perspective of sport development in Indonesia

Indonesia is the largest archipelagic country in the world, with more than 17,504 islands and a population of 270,054,853 (BPS, 2018). Located in the South East region of Asia, most of the area of Indonesia was crossed by the equator and has been an independent country since 17 August 1945. Before its independence, Indonesia was a country that was occupied by the Dutch as a colony for about three and a half centuries and then by Japan for approximately four and a half years. Since its independence, there has been a process of replacing national leaders through general elections based on the 1945 Constitution.

During the time since independence, Indonesia has experienced the rise and fall of the Democracy of the Political System (DPS) but succeeded in electing its leaders (president and vice president), which political experts categorised as spanning three eras of national leadership orders, namely the old order (1945-1967) led by President Soekarno, the new order (1967-1998) led by President Soeharto and the reform order (1998-present) led by five presidents, as indicated previously. The sports policy that was implemented during these periods was reflecting the vision of each leader, so the style and the nuances of its leader also colouring much on how the government applied its sports development policies both in national and local government (Ma’mun, 2019b).

In the Old Order era, the development of sports in Indonesia was meaningfully utilised as an arena for international political diplomacy as part of the struggle of the nation to gain international recognition as a newly independent country. The International Olympic Committee’s (IOC’s) refusal of Indonesia to participate in the 1948 London Olympic Games was considered a very strategic moment for Indonesia, because it gave impetus to the birth of the 1948 National Sports Week (Games) in Solo, Central Java. The Games were more an arena for the country to declare its national pride and self-existence to the world, exhibiting that the country had become a free nation, independently existing and sovereign. It was also an event used to reinforce that all people were united, within regional identities.

It was in the same spirit that Indonesia also held the 4th Asian Games in Jakarta, in 1962. This mega event at that time was primarily used as an arena for international diplomacy in order to build new strength, followed by the hosting of the 1963 Games of the New Emerging Forces (GANEFO). This event was con- troversial because it was considered to be an adverse reaction to the sanctions set by the IOC, which, in turn, were a reaction to Indonesia’s decision to break IOC rules by not inviting Israel and Taiwan to the Games as they were not bound by bilateral diplomatic relationships.

In fact, the 1963 GANEFO in Jakarta was initiated by Indonesia and supported by non-aligned countries as a cold war politics event, especially by those who attended the Asia Africa Conference in Bandung, Indonesia in 1955 (Trotier, 2017). Unfortunately, the 1963 GANEFO in Jakarta was the first and the last one (Lutan and Hong, 2005). However, on the other hand, the GANEFO fostered a love and a desire to participate in sport in the newly independent Indonesia people. It also encouraged a spirit of collectivism and confidence that the country would have the ability to fight together for national identity.

In the New Order era, the development of sport was continued by making improvements to the system and synchronizing international relations as the political strategy. In another stage, the new leader also believed that it was crucial to restore the relationship with the IOC for the sake of sport development. It was also critical to focus on bilateral relations with countries in Southeast Asia, by establishing the Association of Southeastern Asian Nations (ASEAN) organisation. It was then, on 8 August 1967, in Bangkok, that this regional organisation was founded by five original member countries: Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand (Cuyvers, Chen and Lombaerde, 2019). Ten years later, Indonesia participated for the first time, in the ASEAN multisport-event, known as the SEA Games of 1977.

Ever since, the focus of sport development in the country has shifted to efforts to expand sport as the mobilising means for the community to stay active, in line with the launch of UNESCO’s charter on the importance of physical education and sports as human rights (UNESCO, 1978). As we have witnessed, it was this UNESCO charter that gave birth to the concept of Sports for All which was then translated as “socializing sport and sporting society" (Decree of the President of the Republic of Indonesia No. 17/1984 concerning Call for Sports at Work). To strengthen the previous decree, one year later, the President released the proceeding Decree No. 67/1985 on National Sports Day, to be celebrated on every 9 September, with the goal of developing a healthier Indonesia.

In the Reformation era, the development of sport was not employed adequately as the political vehicle to reconstruct something outside of the sport itself. The vision of the leader seemed to be more occupied with the attention on efforts to maintain the continuity of the national leadership dynamic pressure after President Soeharto resigned (1998). As a consequence, President B.J. Habibie (1998— 1999) put his concentration more on the election process launched in 1999 and placed greater focus on improving the democratic political system. In addition, President Abdurachman Wahid (1999-2000), who was elected through a People’s Consultative Assembly (PCA) session, made a drastic change by demolishing the existence of the Sport Ministry and put the function of sport development as part of the Ministry of Education at the level of Directorate General. Through his policy, the work of sport development as a government function was reduced to the smallest extent.

Since then, the policy and process of developing sport has continuously changed in line with the changes of the leadership policies along the decades. It was in the era of SBY that the sport affair was returned to the ministry level, with the creation of the Ministry of Youth and Sports (2004-2009 and 2009-2014) and continued in President Jokowi’s era (2014-2019 and 2019-present).

There are two distinctive paradigms that can be identified and offered for these two country leaders to be chosen. They are the strong and dominant role of a government paradigm like China on one side; and the dominant role of the private sector or society like America on the other side. Indonesia seems to have chosen a position that prioritises the important role of the state and society together. Similarly, Indonesia is taking a middle ground in the implementation of sport development, where the role of the state or government and the community is equally important.

Sports systems and the structure of organised sport

Law No. 3/2005, concerning the NSS as the legal basis for organising sport development in Indonesia, essentially followed the Cooke (1997) sport development system model, better known as the House of Sport. This model was then further translated according to the historical outlook and basic comprehension of the country’s leader to be modified and manifested in the country sport system. From this perspective, it is understandable that Cooke’s model was easily accepted for its resemblance but broader and more comprehensive than the traditional pyramid model. This new model follows the underlying principles:

Stage 1 represents sport activities that form the foundation and are developed in the family and community, which can be described with five characteristics: simple, cheap, fun, massed, and beneficial. The emphasis was on how the public could fall in love with sport and participate regularly because sports contain so many benefits for health while being easy, cheap, fun and done with many other people. It is at this foundational level that people could understand what sport is, especially those related to human motion as a locus of sport, understand its benefits for quality of life, understand how to do it correctly, begin doing it regularly and, last but not least, enjoy it for the purpose of non-sport aspects, such as ethics and morals, social relations and psychological harmony.

Stage 2 represents sport activities developed in a formal educational environment, like school or clubs, in the name of sports education or physical education. This stage also includes sports and health subjects as well as school sports, such as extracurricular activities, student sports activities units, sports classes, and competitions. For this purpose, sports in an educational setting have been formed under the Ministry of National Education and Culture, namely the Indonesian Board of Sport (School) Students Development (BAPOPSI) and the Indonesian Board of Sports (University) Student Development (BAPOMI). The government representing the Ministry of National Education, by involving these two organi- sations (BAPOPSI and BAPOMI), regularly organise national sport competition activities in a biennial championship cycle.

Stage 3 represents sport activities in the recreational stream that grow and develop in the community as an effort to encourage community healthy active lifestyle, with facilitation and regulation from the government, such as the re* quirement that all government officials do sports or physical activities during a half day of office hours, sports for all activities in almost all public space available in the neighbourhood, healthy heart exercise, groups of active living for diabetics, healthy bicycle communities, and others. For these kinds of sports, the govern- ment encouraged the community to establish sport for all organisations (ICRSF: Indonesian Community and Recreation Sport Federation) and through the Ministry of Youth and Sports, this organisation was also financially subsidised.

Stage 4 represents sports activities for Elite athletes under the National Sports Federation (NSF). The NSF affiliates with the National Sport Committee (NSC) whose function is internal affairs, which in Indonesia, has been separated from the National Olympic Committee (NOC) whose function is more on international affairs. The difference between Indonesia’s NSF and other countries is that it is structured at municipal, provincial and national levels.

In addition to the NSF that operates in each region, the National Sports Committee (NSC) has the same structure and essentially has the right to set policy in each region, especially on how each province can excel in terms of colleting medals in the National Games (held every four years). For that reason, the Provincial Sport Committees always strive to obtain more budget from provincial government. Likewise, the municipal sports committees require resources to prepare their elite athletes for the provincial games. The National Paralympic Committee (NPC) operates similarly in each region for the Paralympic games at each level.

Stage 5 represents superior sports that are developed and coordinated by prestigious sports associations in the country (and government) through the sports development centres in various regions and nationwide. To this date there are only two sports categorised as superior sports: badminton and weightlifting. This is only due to their achievement in the Olympic Games as they are the main source for medals gained. Badminton is considered unique since its organisational structure was fully occupied by famous former athletes and some high ranking outstanding military generals who devoted their time and budget to supporting the financial needs for the development processes. So far, badminton has become Indonesia’s identity in world-class sports competition, in addition to its role in gaining national pride.

Stage 6 represents entertaining sports games that are integrated with community entertainment, such as soccer, basketball, futsal and volleyball. Those sports were facilitated by the private sector and supported by the government, along with the development of the sports industry containing high economic value.

Stage 7 represents the top sport in the form of high performance achievement in various multi-events and/or single events that elevates the nation’s dignity. The top sports are represented by Badminton and Weight Lifting, two sports that regularly contribute the most gold medals in many Asian and Regional Championship events. The training and coaching system is directly carried out independently by NSF and coordinated by the Indonesia Gold Program (1GP) and the National Sports Development Centre (NSDC), among others. For this system to run, its financial expenses were provided fully by the government. Hence, all NSF executing those excellence programmes must be subject to government supervision. This coordination between IGP and NSDC was just like the triadic project among the ministry of youth and sport, NSC and all NSF.

In addition to the NSC, the Indonesian sport system also acknowledges the role of the NOC. As has been mandated by Law No. 3/2005 on NSS, the duties and functions of the NOC is more focused on international relationships, such as chairing and managing the Indonesian contingent to multi-sport event competition, attending the IOC and the Association of National Olympic Committees (ANOC) meetings, paving the way for bidding for and hosting the Regional Sport Organisation meetings and bidding for and hosting regional Games such as SEA Games and Asian Games. The success of this NOC effort was exemplified by the hosting and organising of the 2011 SEA Games and the 2018 Asian Games in Jakarta, Palembang.

To provide a clear picture regarding the Indonesian Sport System, we could take Cooke’s model of the House of Sport as the analogy of the stages. This model was adopted in the period of SBY’s leadership in 2010-2014 and was modified to cater to the specific needs of Indonesia characteristics. This model was called the National Sports Building Model (Strategic Plan of the Ministry of Youth and Sport, 2010-2014).

The framework of institutions related to sport development in Indonesia, both those formed by the government (governmental) and the community (nongovernmental) can be seen in Figure 7.1 below. From the figure, it can be seen that each institution is connected by arrow lines with different shapes. Each shape determines the relationship between the institutions, whether it means command or coordination.

Financial support for sport development

Overall, the financial support for the purpose of sport development in Indonesia is provided by the government in the form of grants or funds. Law Enactment number 25 of 2004 concerning the National Development Planning System (NDPS) outlines that every development sector including the sports sector is part of the national development system, both long term and medium term. In 2007, Law No. 17 regarding the National Long-Term Development Plan (NLTDP) considered sport as one sub-sector of the national development plan.

The budget obtained during the four years, from 2015 to 2018, is illustrated in Table 7.1 below. There was a significant increase in yearly budget in 2017 and 2018, for it coincided with the preparations for hosting the 2018 Asian Games.

Framework of Indonesia’s sport structure

Figure 7.1 Framework of Indonesia’s sport structure.

Policy on sports development in Indonesia

In line with the vision of the national leadership during the Reformation era, which was also influenced by the previous leadership era, sport development in Indonesia in general was built based on the theory of sport development deveb oped by Cooke (1997), which placed the importance of the role of government and society together.

In article 17 of Law No. 3/2005 concerning NSS, the scope of sport consists of educational sport, recreational sport and competitive sport. Educational sport is all activities related to physical activities, physical education and sports competition organised in the milieu of schools (from Primary to Secondary High School), carried out as part of the educational process in obtaining knowledge, personality, skills, health and physical fitness (UU SKN, 2005). For this purpose, physical education and sport integrated into the educational curriculum at each level

Table 7.1 Budget allocation of the Ministry of Youth and Sports (2015-2018)


Budgeting field







Youth Sector Youth Empowerment




Youth Development






Sports Sector





Youth and Sport











Achievement improvement






for sport












Asian Games Organizing





Committee Asian Games Athlete





3,034,1 13,276




Amount in US$





Total State Budget





Percentage (sport)





Source: Edited by the authors based on the data were derived from planning documents, accountability reports, newspapers and the Ministry of Youth and Sports and Ministry of Finance websites and State Revenue and Expenditure Budget.

should become a vehicle to develop both the students’ potential and athletes’ career paths. Physical education and sports ranging from primary education to secondary education are considered relatively adequate in teaching physical activity and sport culture of the society in navigating daily life throughout childhood and adulthood.

Recreational sports are sports that are carried out by people with a passion and ability to grow and develop in accordance with the conditions and cultural values of the local community for the purposes of improving health, fitness and excitement (UU SKN, 2005). In general, recreational sports are synonymous with filling leisure time. Over time, the position of sports has become increasingly crucial in utilising the leisure time of city dwellers (Depei, 1989). Physical activities and sports are the choice of the community, intended to maintain health while building social interaction and excitement so that people are encouraged to schedule physical activity and sports in their free time and daily activities.

Competitive sports are sports that foster and develop athletes in a planned, tiered and sustainable manner through systematic training sessions and regular competitions to achieve high performance with the support of sports science and technology (UU SKN, 2005). This achievement is based on the FTEM concept that has been developed in Australia, namely: Foundation, organised by educational institutions and the community that is fun, without coercion, and without competition; Talent, which focuses on further coaching that is more directed, both in the training system, the specificity of the type of sport, as well as the organisation, along with a model of collaboration with educational institutions to expand sports activities accompanied by tiered initial competition activities; Elite, is a coaching stage in addition to a more programmed training process, both in associations and at the training centre accompanied by a scheduled, tiered and sustainable participation in the local and national competition system; and Mastery, a group of athletes that are fostered in on-going training camps throughout the year and/or are fostered in an association, ready to defend the name of the country in the arena of international competition (Gulbin et al., 2013a). The FTEM rules are in line with the elite athlete development model through the concept of the Athlete Development Triangle (ADT) (Gulbin et al., 2013b).

The development of educational sports

Fostering and developing educational sports includes comprehensive organisation related to sports education. This involves the standardisation of its implementation, regarding its human resources, facilities and infrastructure in all lines and levels of education.

The role of the government is to incorporate sports activities of non-physical education and sports as part of intra-curricular in schools, extracurricular, sports activities units (school sports clubs), sports classes, student coaching and training centres, and sports schools. This programme requires a competition system that runs throughout the year. Unfortunately, the competition system is not integrated into the community, because it is infrequent for school sports clubs to partner with community sports clubs (club links). The competition system targeting all school levels only took place just as routine ceremonial celebrations of school events.

The development of recreational sports

Physical activities and sports for the community are directly focused on improving the quality of life of the community members. For that purpose, the community is encouraged to adopt an active lifestyle, and one of the strategies to drive the people to sport is by providing guidelines and information about physical activities. Community participation rates in sports are continuously driven through the promotion of sport and physical activities by the government and other sport organisations on any great day celebration or even exposed in many TV programmes. This was implemented in conjunction with the UNESCO declaration of the importance of physical education and sports (1978). Indonesia made a strategic and relevant ‘motto’ for promoting sports through Presidential Decree number 17/1984 and yearly celebration of National Sports Day on September 9. In the Reformation era, the motto “let us do sport” was also created and promoted as a movement to increase participation numbers within the community.

A particular challenge for Indonesia was how sport could become an integral part of the concept of “sport for development and peace” launched by the United Nations through the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015-2030 and the MDG’s in 2000-2015. Sports for development and peace in the umbrella of SDGs offers a practical approach for sports programs to be conceptualised and organised as part of a holistic approach (Darnell and Dao, 2017). SDP is a rapidly developing field of activity in which sport is used as an intervention tool to pursue broader social goals, not just sports objectives (Giulianotti, Hognestad and Spaaij, 2016).

The development of competitive sports

Fostering and developing overall performance sports from the stage of talent development to the elite Olympic class athletes continue to be goals. However, since the development programme through educational sport has not been well organised and cannot support the development of elite sports, this arm of sport strategy hasn’t seen much improvement, except in some provinces where training centres, student training and sports schools have been integrated successfully. In addition, the development of associations has not been widespread, and the annual competition system is weak. Only a few sports such as soccer, basketball, volleyball, futsal, and other sports that have their own competition calendar saw improvements in both the organisation and the performance gain for their athletes.

System of elite sports in preparation for multi-sport events

The preparation of elite athletes for multi-sport events such as SEA Games, Asian Games, Olympic Games and other single-sport events is generally executed by the NSF. Only with some exceptions is the preparation of elite athletes conducted by the National Training Centre of Sports (NTCS), under auspices of the Ministry of Youth and Sport as the government representatives. However, in that case, the involvement of sports personnel from the NSC, NOC or NSF will still exist. The preparation process of developing badminton athletes that adheres to the FTEM and ADT rules demonstrates the significant influence of this government involvement on badminton’s progress. Badminton itself is the only sports federation in Indonesia that has its own system, both in expanding badminton as a cultural activity (foundation and talent) and in the development of the elite level.

Sports competition system and its challenges

The competition model being developed in Indonesia is oriented to the type of sport (single event) following FTEM and ADT rules and the government system (municipal, provincial and national). However, while the model may be simple, putting it into practice in Indonesia has not been easy, as the multi-sport event competition has been relatively developed for decades, even in the beginning of this nation. The competition model of Indonesia has been based regional and national competition. The National Sport Games (NSG) were held for the first time in 1951, and the regional sport games were also organised following afterward.

It should be wisely understood that, for Indonesia, the development of NSG had its root in the IOC’s rejection of Indonesia’s participation in the London Olympic Games in 1948. The NSG was an alternative created by the founding father of the country to develop and build the national identity of the new emerging country to catalyse unity in the spirit of independent Indonesia (Ma’mun, 2019a). However, in its further development, the implementation of the spirit of the NSG has been systematically ignored and the spirit of noble sport values unconsciously abandoned. Nowadays, NSG and regional sport games (RSG) (Lim and Aman, 2016) experience changes to the number of events to provide an advantage to the hosting province or city to become the winning team. In other words, the hosting province or city would arbitrarily add events in some sports, especially in the events they are strong at, only for the sake of drastically increasing their medals tally. In that situation many athletes migrate from one region to another region just to earn more money for the medals they collected.

From an academic perspective, these practices were considered unfair and not at all healthy for sport development itself. Efforts have been made to minimise these loopholes by standardising regulation regarding the participants’ enrollment based on age limit and performance levels. Following lessons from other countries, academic studies with the involvement of the government and

Table 1.2 The comparison between numbers of matches in national games and other events

No. Games

Provincelcountry, year and number of events

1 National Games

East Kalimantan 2008 755

Riau 2012 650

West Java 2016 756

2 SEA Games

Indonesia 2011 554

Myanmar 2013 461

Singapore 2015 402

3 Asian Games

PRC 2010 477

South Korea 2014 436

Indonesia 2018 485

4 Olympic Games

PRC 2008 302

England 2012 302

Brazil 2016 306

Source: Adapted from Ma’mun et al. (2018).

bureaucracy that outline the practice of applying appropriate and measurable regulations, must he a criterion that is used as a common reference (Tinaz, Turco, and Salisbury, 2014). The comparison of the numbers of events is summarised in Table 7.2 below, between NG, SEA Games, Asian Games, and Olympic Games in three periods.

While the competition management of the elite stream has not yet been refined in terms of its competition format (Harris and Houlihan, 2015), the same pattern has also been replicated by other forms of competition. To name a few, Indonesia has also developed competition for students, in the national, provincial and municipal levels. In this students’ competition there are two streams of competition: first, the National/Provincial Student Sport Games, organized by the Ministry of Youth and Sport, and second, the National/Provincial Students Olympiad Games, organized by the Ministry of Education and Culture. In the university level, there has been a competition called the National University Students Sports Games, organised by the Ministry of Education and Culture under the auspices of the Directorate General for Higher Education. Those student competitions were organised on a regional or provincial basis.

Other than the above competition organised regularly on such an annual or biennial basis, Indonesia also has a competition for the members of civil services from different ministries of government offices and a competition organized for members of the educational services, including teachers and lectures. These are organised both for the national level and provincial level. The members of the military services were also provided with the same competition structure. All these competitions were financially born by the institution budget, which originated from the government’s annual budget. All those situations will, of course, need a comprehensive evaluation whether all those competition are really needed and give benefit to people’s health, for instance.


Sports development proliferating in a country, as happened in Indonesia, could never be separated from the local situation of the country, which also influences the policy priorities declared and implemented by its leaders. Thus, the national leadership of a country need to exercise its power and policy choices in various fields of development, including in the field of sports.

The sport development in Indonesia in the Reformation era, at an early stage, stagnated due to leadership transitions, which sometimes produced political turbulence. However, changes in leadership colour the policies chosen and adopted, as some leaders focus less on sports and more on political stability, while others find ways to expand sport development in conjunction with their political strategies. In that context, sport policy is more a reflection of how a leader comprehends the realm of his country being led, his vision for the future, and his manifestation of that vision.

For Indonesia, the legal basis for the implementation of sports development, Law No. 3/2005 on NSS, was successfully established by referring to the theory of Cooke (1997), known as the House of Sport, for which it was then adjusted to prioritize policies and experience of sports development from the previous era. This theory was adopted with slightly different emphasis by tasking the sports development system solely to developing the sport as it was implemented in other countries - that is, to obtain the highest performance. This fact has influenced the public’s perspective that sport is synonymous with athletes, training, winning competition, collecting medals and awards. As a result, Indonesia is still far from the achieving the goals of the SDP strategy.

Sport development in its broadest scope, as outlined in Law no. 3/2005 on NSS, should be equally focused on educational, recreational and high-performance sports. Educational sports take place in schools and colleges, including physical education, sports and health as subjects, sports extracurricular activities and sport clubs in school as a talent development arena. Recreational sports, on the other hand, are more about developing public space, sports clubs in the community and festivals. High-performance sports are developed at sporting associations in the community, coordinated by the National Sports Federation and sports development centres in various regions nationwide.

Last but not least, the competition system needs to be perpetuated by encouraging more single-sport competition to be regularly and more frequently conducted in the NSF competition system. In other words, competitions needs to not rely on multi-sport events, which are scheduled every two and four years. At the same time, a competition system focusing on those sport industries gaining economic value also need to be regularly scheduled, as well as competitions that provide the broadest opportunities for young people relevant to the Sport Development Policy principle.


BPS, (2018). Statistical Yearbook of Indonesia 2018, Badan Pusat Statistik. Jakarta. ISSN: 0126-2912.

Cooke, G. (1997). Pathways to success: A new model for talent development. Super Coach (a publication of the National Coaching Foundation), 8(5), pp. 10-11.

Cuyvers, L., Chen, L. and Lombaerde, P. (2019). 50 years of regional integration in ASEAN. Asia Pacific Business Review, 25(5), pp. 609-618.

Darnell, S.C. and Dao, M. (2017). Considering sport for development and peace through the capabilities approach. Third World Thematics: A TWQ Journal, 2(1), pp. 23-36.

Depei, L. (1989). Sports and the leisure lives of Chinese City Dwellers. Loisir et Sociite / Society and Leisure, 12(2), pp. 325-340.

Giulianotti, R., Hognestad, H. and Spaaij, R. (2016). Sport for development and peace: Power, politics, and patronage. Journal of Global Sport Management, 1(3-4), pp. 129-141.

Gulbin, J.P., Croser, M.J., Morley, E.J. and Weissensteiner, J.R. (2013a). A closer look at the FTEM framework. Response to “more of the same? Comment on ‘An integrated framework for the optimisation of sport and athlete development: A practitioner approach’”. Journal of Sports Sciences, 31, pp. 1319-1331.

Gulbin, J., Weissensteiner, J.R., Oldenziel, K. and Gagne, F. (2013b). Patterns of performance development in elite athletes. Europeari Journal of Sport Science, 13(6), pp.


Harris, S. and Houlihan, B. (2015). Competition or coalition? Evaluating the attitudes of National Governing Bodies of Sport and Country Sports Partnerships towards School Sport Partnerships. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 8(1), pp. 1-21.

Lim, P. H. and Aman, M. S. (2016). The history of the South East Asian Peninsular Games, 1959-1975. International Journal of the History of Sport, 33(5), pp. 545-568.

Lutan, R. and Hong, F. (2005). The politicisation of sport: GANEFO-A case study. Sport in Society, 8(3), pp. 425-439.

Ma’mun, A. (2018). Pembangunatr Olahraga Nasional. Bandung: Lekkas.

Ma’mun, A. (2019a). Governmental roles in Indonesian sport policy: From past to present. International Journal of the History of Sport, 36(4-5), pp. 388-405-19.

Ma’mun, A. (2019b). Kebijakan Olahraga Indonesia: Dulu, Sekarang dan Tantangan Masa Depart. Bandung: Makalah Posisi Guru Besar.

Ma’mun, M., Abdullah, C.U., Slamet, S. and Khairunnisa R. (2018). The Indonesian national sports games: Expectations and reality. Jumal Pendidikan Jasmarti dan Olahraga,

3(1), pp. 122-128.

Tinaz, C., Turco D.M. and Salisbury, P. (2014). Sport policy in Turkey. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 6(3), pp. 533-545.

Trotier, F. (2017). The legacy of the games of the new emerging forces and Indonesia's relationship with the International Olympic Committee. The International Journal of the History of Sport, 33(12), pp. 1-20.

UNESCO, (1978). International charter of physical education and sport, [online]. Available at: https://unesdoc.unesco.Org/ark:/48223/pf00002I6489 [Accessed 19 May 2020].

UU SKN, (2005). Undang Republik Indonesia. Nomor 3 Tahun 2005, Tetang Sistem Ke- olahragaan Nasional. Kemenpora: Jakarta.

Chapter 8

Sport and development in M exico

< Prev   CONTENTS   Source   Next >