Formally Civil, Functionally State-Run? Dilemmas of the Hungarian Sports Model
Abstract
This study examines the civil nature of the Hungarian sport system in the context of increasing state involvement. While sport has traditionally been considered a key subsystem of civil society, in Hungary the past decade has been characterized by a significant expansion of state funding, governance, and strategic influence. The main objective of the study is to explore to what extent sport organizations, which formally operate within a civil framework, have retained their autonomy, and to what degree they have become embedded in state structures.
The research applies a dual methodological approach. On the one hand, it builds on a review of relevant national and international literature, with a particular focus on sport financing, governance models, and the role of the civil sector. On the other hand, it presents an empirical analysis of the leadership structures of national federations in Olympic sports, examining the presence of political involvement. The findings show that in 76% of the 33 analyzed federations, direct or indirect political connections can be identified, indicating a strong state embeddedness at the level of sport governance. Based on these results, the Hungarian sport system cannot be clearly classified as either a purely civil or a purely state-driven model. To capture this duality, the study introduces the concept of a “quasi-civil” sport model, which reflects the coexistence of formal civil organizational structures with the dominance of state-driven operational logic. The study contributes to a reinterpretation of the relationship between sport and civil society, and provides a deeper understanding of the structural characteristics of sport governance in Hungary.
References
Bardóczy, G. (2014). A látvány-csapatsport-támogatások helyzete és perspektívái. In L. Petridis (Ed.), A felsőoktatás szerepe a sportban, az élsportban és az olimpiai mozgalomban (pp. 50–72). Debreceni Egyetem.
Bergsgard, N. A., Houlihan, B., Mangset, P., Nødland, S. I., & Rommetvedt, H. (2007). Sport policy: A comparative analysis of stability and change. Butterworth-Heinemann.
Bukta, Zs., & Gősi, Zs. (2019). A kiemelt sportágfejlesztési program első éveinek hatása a hazai sportágak fejlődésére. Taylor Gazdálkodás- és Szervezéstudományi Folyóirat, 11(3), 15–24. https://acta.bibl.u-szeged.hu/69566/1/taylor_2019_003_015-024.pdf
Chappelet, J.-L., & Kübler, D. (2008). The international Olympic Committee and the Olympic system: The governance of world sport. Routledge.
Chappelet, J.-L., & Mrkonjic, M. (2013). Basic indicators for better governance in international sport (BIBGIS): An assessment tool for international sport governing bodies. IDHEAP, Lausanne.
European Commission. (2016). Mapping and analysis of the specificity of sport. Publications Office of the European Union. https://ec.europa.eu/assets/eac/sport/library/studies/mapping-analysis-specificity-sport_en.pdf
Eurostat. (2022). General government expenditure by function (COFOG) (gov_10a_exp). https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/gov_10a_exp/default/table
Gősi, Zs., & Bukta, Zs. (2019). Sportszövetségek a kiemelt sportágfejlesztés tükrében. Taylor Gazdálkodás- és Szervezéstudományi Folyóirat, 36(2), 46–55.
Gősi, Zs., & Bukta, Zs. (2020). A sport civil szervezetei mint az elmúlt évtized nyertesei. Civil Szemle, 17(2), 59–68.
Gősi, Zs., & Nagy, J. (2018). Sportvállalkozások jellemzői 2016. In P. Hamar & K. Köpff (Eds.), Mozgás–Biológia–Sport–Tudomány (pp. 100–110). MET.
Green, M., & Houlihan, B. (2005). Elite sport development: Policy learning and political priorities. Routledge.
Grix, J. (2015). Sport politics: An introduction. Palgrave Macmillan.
Grix, J., & Carmichael, F. (2012). Why do governments invest in elite sport? A polemic. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 4(1), 73–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/19406940.2011.627358
Houlihan, B. (2005). Public sector sport policy: Developing a framework for analysis. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 40(2), 163–185. https://doi.org/10.1177/1012690205057193
Központi Statisztikai Hivatal. (2025). A nonprofit szervezetek száma, megoszlása és összes bevétele tevékenységcsoportok szerint (9.1.1.11. sz. STADAT tábla). KSH. https://www.ksh.hu/stadat_files/gsz/hu/gsz0013.html
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon & Schuster.
Salamon, L. M., & Anheier, H. K. (1997). Defining the nonprofit sector: A cross-national analysis. Manchester University Press.
Sárközy, T. (2017). A sport mint nemzetstratégiai ágazat: Előnyök és hátrányok, hosszú távú kilátások. Polgári Szemle, 13(4–6), 143–159.
Sebestény, I. (2017). A civil szektor demográfiája: A civil szervezetek névjegyzékének retrospektív feldolgozása alapján. Civil Szemle, 14(1), 7–34.
Skelcher, C., & Smith, S. R. (2015). Theorizing hybridity: Institutional logics, complex organizations, and actor identities. Public Administration, 93(2), 433–448. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12105
Sterbenz, T., Csurilla, G., & Gulyás, E. (2017). Vertikális dilemmák a magyar sportban: A sportfinanszírozás hatékonyságának növelése. Magyar Sporttudományi Szemle, (Különszám), 7–22.
