Niall McCaffrey

1
To What Extent Do The Stakeholders Of Cerebral
Palsy Sport Benefit From Setting Of Sport Policy
By
Niall McCaffrey
Supervisor: Dr. Joe Piggin
A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Science in
Sport Science with Management
School of Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences
LOUGHBOROUGH UNIVERSITY
April 2015
© Loughborough University
Word Count: 9888

2
Statement of Originality
I declare thatthis,the report,andthe researchonwhichit isbasedare myown original work.
Signed: Date: 30/04/2015

3
Abstract
The marginal interest of disability sport on the government agenda has historically led to scarce
opportunitiesforcerebral palsy (CP) athletestoparticipate insport.Additionally, understandings of
disability have changed from being viewed as just a functional limitation, to being viewed as a
multidimensional limitation which encompasses personal, environmental and social constraints.
This research project is an analysis of the current CP stakeholder network, with a focus on the
impact of the setting of sport policy, and the roles of individuals and organisations who are the
stakeholders of CP Sport. Therefore, the project aims to dissect the current policy processes by
conducting research with stakeholders such as the English Federation of Disability Sport (EFDS),
Cerebral Palsy Sport (CP Sport), Boccia England, and Project Ability.
Non-departmental governmentbodiessuchasthe EnglishSportsCouncil (SportEngland) are shown
to be ubiquitous in policy processes involving the distribution of sport in England. The study
subsequently indicates that non-tangible resources such as expertise, knowledge and access are
essential mediators to the benefits associated with CP stakeholders deriving from the setting of
sport policy.

4
Acknowledgements
I thank the representatives from the English Federation of Disability Sport, Cerebral Palsy Sport,
Boccia England, and Project Ability for their time and effort in providing me with the valuable
information required to complete this research project. In addition, I would like to thank Dr. Joe
Piggin for his supervision in overseeing this project.

5
Table of Contents
Page
Chapter One:Introduction
DisabilitySport,Cerebral Palsyandthe PolicyCommunity 6
Research Questions 7
ResearchObjectives 7
Chapter Two: Literature Review
Introduction 8
A StakeholderApproach 8
AgendaSetting 11
Lobbying 12
PolicyFormulation 14
Decision-makingandImplementation 15
PolicyEvaluation 17
Chapter Three:Methodology
Introduction 18
ResearchPhilosophy 18
ResearchDesign 20
Data Collection 21
Data Analysis 24
TrustworthinessCriteria 24
ResearchLimitations 25
Ethical Considerations 26
Chapter Four: Results
Introduction 27
EnglishFederationof DisabilitySport 27
Cerebral PalsySport 28
Boccia England 29
ProjectAbility 30
Chapter Five:Discussion
Introduction 32
Resource Distribution 32
Sustainability 33
Performance Pathways 34
PolicyAnalysis 36
Chapter Six:Conclusion
Introduction 38
ResearchObjective Review 38
Future Research 40
Reference List 42
Appendices 49

6
Chapter One- Introduction
Disability Sport, Cerebral Palsy and the Policy Community
Sport has traditionally been defined as a structured, goal-oriented, competitive form of play
(Guttman,2004), whichhasmodernisedtoinclude notionsof respect and fair play (Malcolm, 2008).
However,inaworldwherebygroupsare definedbytheir differences (Sheldon, 2005), the isolation
and oppression of the disabled population from participating in sport reaches far beyond the
individualisation and medicalisation of disability (Barnes and Sheldon, 2010).
Cerebral palsy (CP) is a neurological condition characterised by muscle spasticity, impaired
movement and learning difficulties. It is the most common motor deficiency that causes disability
(Van Eck et al., 2008), with its severity ranging from subtle motor impairment to whole body
involvement.A diverse variationof spasticityinCPsubtypes (Cans et al., 2002) means that engaging
in physical activity or competitive sport can be challenging, with the subsequent lack of physical
adeptness and success often resulting in sedentary behaviour (Rimmer and Marques, 2012).
Therefore, the implication for alleviating the personal and environmental barriers that constrain
the disabled from participating is to design strategies and policies on a governmental level, which
can be organised and implemented by National Governing Bodies (NGBs) and National Disability
Sport Organisations(NDSOs) toemancipatedisabilitygroups.Effectively,the growingprominence of
disabilityandsport policy on the government agenda (Thomas, 2004) is representative of a shift in
understanding that challenges oppression in all its forms (Barnes, 1996).
Thisprojectseekstounderstandthe nature of the attitudes, environments and organisations that
eitherrestrictorbenefitthe stakeholderswithinthe policy community. In Marsh and Rhodes (1992)
policy network model, the policy community was deemed to be concerned with the relationship
betweenorganisationsand the policy outcomes that they contribute to. Thus, in the government's

7
reach fororganisational neatnessand equity within sport, the characteristics of the disability sport
policyprocessare likelytoreflectthe significance of the social andenvironmental restrictionsplaced
upon disabled people (Thomas, 2004).
Research Questions
Using the stakeholder approach (Freeman, 1984) as a framework, this project will seek to access
answers from different aspects of the policy community, and answer the following research
questions:
1) Who are the stakeholders that impact government policy-making?
2) How do stakeholder groups integrate in the CP sport policy community?
3) What determines the relative success of policy implementation?
4) How does the distribution of power in the policy community affect stakeholder relations?
5) Is a top-down or a bottom-up approach to policy implementation more suitable for CP
stakeholders?
Research Objectives
The research objectives are therefore as follows:
1) To identify the key stakeholders in the CP sport policy network.
2) To understand stakeholder relations in a sport policy context.
3) To identify stakeholder incentives to adhering to sport policy.
4) To establish a suitable future direction for the CP sport stakeholder community.
5) To identify and explain the stakeholder benefits derived from sport policy.

8
Chapter Two- Literature Review
Introduction
The literature in this research project seeks to aid the division of the research question into
theoretical andconceptual categorieswhichcanbe operationalised.The researchquestion''Towhat
extent do the stakeholders of cerebral palsy sport benefit from the setting of sport policy?''
identifies with the concepts of ''the stakeholder'', ''cerebral palsy/disability sport'' and ''the policy
process'';therefore the theoretical andconceptual frameworksforthisproject,throughthe research
process and the data collection process, address the areas of agenda setting, policy formulation,
decision-making,policyimplementation and policy evaluation, in the context of the cerebral palsy
sport paradigm.
A Stakeholder Approach
An understanding of the salience of a changing managerial environment is essential to the
accomplishment of organisational objectives, as explained using ''the stakeholder approach''
(Freeman, 1984). The philanthropic nature of disability organisations and the egalitarianism of
disability sport policy (DCMS, 2010) is incongruous with the traditional corporate objectives of
shareholder returns in the form of dividends, and is more closely aligned with the view of an
organisation as a ''social institution'' (Freeman, 1984).
The stakeholder is defined as ''any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the
achievementof the firm'sobjectives''(Freeman,1984);thiscan be relatedtostakeholder legitimacy
and stakeholder management capability. Stakeholder legitimacy refers to a group or individual's
claims to the resources of an organisation, which in the disability sport context includes modes of
funding, networking, training, and facilitating.

9
Pertinently, Laver (1986) affirmed that the perception of resource scarcity is a distinct cause of
social conflictwhichsubsequentlyjustifiesthe requirementforpublicpolicytostimulate or regulate
the distributionof resourcestovariousstakeholders. Resource distribution conceptually resonates
with Sheldon's (2005) view of the world as an inequitable entity, whilst Laver (1986) also suggests
that whilstanincrease insocial welfare(i.e.agrossincrease inresources) mayreduce both resource
scarcity andsocial conflict,the consequentialdistributionof resources maybe uneven.The literature
therefore linkseffectively with the resource requirements in the cerebral palsy sport network and
focuses on the processes of distribution between the stakeholder groups.
Additionally, any attempts at the social redistribution of resources (Laver, 1986), are potentially
compromisedbythe qualitative valuationof welfare,whichreferstopeople'schangingvaluationsof
particular resources, depending on how much they have of it. As a result, the decision of public
bodiessuchas SportEnglandto distribute National Lotteryand Exchequer funding to NGBs, NDSOs,
and inclusivityprogrammes,isacoordinationanda conflictissue with the implication of systematic
disharmony and differing marginal utilities.
Stakeholder management capability must also be considered as a moderating variable in the
distributionof resourcestostakeholdergroups. This refers to the extent to which an organisation's
ability to organise relationships with its stakeholders yields concrete actions with specific
stakeholder groups and individuals (Freeman, 1984).
On one hand, the capability of an organisation to effectively manage its stakeholders exists in
Donaldson and Preston's (1995) evaluation of the stakeholder approach, whereby the stakeholder
theory is used as a descriptive, instrumental and normative tool for justifying the recognition of
stakeholder interdependence as significant in achieving organisational objectives.
Anotherperspective isdocumented by Freeman (1984), who presents three levels of stakeholder
analysis:the rational,processandtransactional levels.Theselevelsprovide an analytical framework

10
whichinvolvesthe identificationof astakeholdernetwork,the achievementof an environmental fit
and the study of both latent and explicit organisational interactions.
Potential flaws in this theoretical grounding exist in the form of the top-down organisational
structure implied by the implementation of the stakeholder approach to strategic management
(Freeman, 1984). This approach has been criticised for being over-simplistic and inflexible to
accommodating the needs of stakeholder groups which show specific cultural and behavioural
characteristics (O'Gorman, 2011).
Conversely,Sheldon's(2005) idealist social model views disability as a symptom of the prejudices
that are implicitin the cultural representations and socialisations that exist in stakeholder groups.
Therefore, studying the effects of social oppression implies taking a bottom-up organisational
approach (O'Gorman, 2011) which considers the continual impingement of ''street level'' policy
implementation on stakeholders. Suitably, Freeman's (1984) stakeholder approach does consider
the multidimensionality of the policy network by acknowledging the need to deal with multiple
stakeholdersonmultipleissues,thusprovidingatheoretical frameworkthataddressessocial conflict
directly.
Moreover,the DepartmentforCulture,MediaandSport's(2010) utilisationof an alternative social
model of disability in its ''Creating a fairer and more equal society'' policy, infers that disability is
createdby barriersinsocietyinthe formof the environment, people's attitudes and organisations.
Thus,the combinationof the stakeholderapproachandthe social model of disability give credence
to the policy process and its impact on multiple levels of the disability sport policy network, and
provides a rationale for opposing a parochial approach to oppressed disability groups, whilst
stimulatingthe investigationof stakeholders'interests,responsibilities,andsubsequent solutions to
social conflict.

11
Withthissaid,potential downfallsmayexistinthe stakeholderapproach'sinitial application to the
private sector,wherebycorporate establishments may have different infrastructures and values to
the paternalisticideological constructs inherent in the disability sport network. Therefore, caution
should be taken when linking stakeholder incentives with a tool formed in a corporate context.
Agenda Setting
Before addressing an issue which may have an impact on cerebral palsy stakeholders, policy
problems must appear on the policy agenda, which involves looking at how a disability ''issue''
arises. The literature recognises that disability is a concept that comes from Western-influenced
economicandcultural development(BarnesandSheldon,2010),as the productof Marxistprinciples
and the increasing disparity between the ''rich'' and the ''poor'' (who are unequivocally linked to
disability).
The notion that disability is enabled by class politics is furthered by Coleridge (2006) whom
identifiesimpoverishedpopulationsasexperiencingsocial exclusionthatencompassesemployment,
education, leisure and social relationships. Thus, disability is perceived as a social enablement
process rather than a medical diagnosis, as is delineated in the DCMS' (2010) social model of
disability,Sheldon's(2005) materialist social model of oppression, and in the concept that cerebral
palsy sufferers' ''rights'' to play sport are insufficient without a systematic solution to the
marginalisation and powerlessness of disability groups.
Thiscan be relatedtopolitical ideologies,whichthroughthe literature demonstrate thatchangesin
political ideasmayinfactreflectlong-termdemographic,social andeconomicdevelopments(Leach,
2009). FurtherstudiesbyParekh(2008) indicate thatchangingpolitical attitudesand behaviours are
creatingopportunitiestoreachout beyondparties'traditional classbases,and to the formation of a
newpolitical consensus that accepts increased diversity among voters. Therefore, political parties
are showingincreasedpragmatismintheirapproachtotacklingdisabilityissues,invariablyfavouring

12
short-term''quickwin''situations(HoulihanandLindsey,2013), thattreat minoritycasesof disability
as unfortunate exceptions rather than an indication that attitudes towards disability are more
deeply rooted in society.
For example,the Conservativeparty'stentative encouragement of community sport (DCSM, 2012)
may showconsistencywithtraditional Conservative values such as collective social reform and the
creationof an ''organic society''(Leach,2009), howeverthe establishment of a sustainable network
of community sport stakeholders who are willing to cooperate with centrally determined policy
initiativesfromthe DCMSand SportEnglandis a more complex and enduring objective towards the
emancipation of disability groups (King, 2009).
Intermsof the researchquestion,policy agenda literature raises the questions of which variables
moderate the creationof disabilitysport policy. Despite their much broader application to political
consensusandthe essential role of government power, this literature still provides an insight into
the social significance and relevance of policy issues.
Lobbying
Thomas (2000) and Charlton (1998) believe that the alleviation of cultural oppression lies with
disabled people's capability to make links with other oppressed people, thus becoming their own
trustees andenablingthemselvestosolve theirproblemshow theysee fit.Thisliterature linkstothe
political philosophy of pluralism, which states that the definition of problems and the setting of
policy agendas is the outcome of the process of competition between different groups (Parsons,
1995). In the context of agenda control, the extent of activity in which interest and lobby groups
engage with each other may be an important factor to provide a link between agenda setting and
policy formulation.
Existingliterature examineshowpolicyissuesare communicatedthrough''metanarratives'' (Piggin
and Bairner, 2014), which are the dominant stories used to address a social problem, as well as

13
referringtothe implicitassumptionsmade bypolicymakers.Inaphysical inactivity context, physical
activity action agendas such as Nike's (2012) ''Designed To Move'' document illustrates the
economic, human and environmental consequences of the global physical inactivity pandemic.
Piggin (2015) seeks to examine the claims made by the document, and indicates that Nike actively
constructs values of what role sport should play in individuals' lifestyles.
Furthermore, Fullagar (2002) makes reference to the underrepresentation of ''hard to reach''
populationsinDesignedToMove, such as those with a disability; therefore the implication for this
researchprojectishowdisabilitysportissuescanpenetrate the systematic and institutional agenda
(Cobb and Elder, 1972) when they are initially deficient in the widespread and shared concern
between public officials and physical activity lobbyists.
A consideration can be made regarding the impact of issue dynamics on their access into the
systematicagenda;these determinants are the specificity, social significance, temporal relevance,
complexityandcategorical precedence of the issue (Parsons, 1995). In the context of an analysis of
the globally distinguished medical journal The Lancet, which has published research regarding the
global inactivity pandemic, Piggin and Bairner (2014) make reference to the disparate meanings
assignedtothe conceptof physical activity. Additionally, in The Lancet's article for physical activity
for people withdisabilities(Rimmer and Marques, 2012), there is a lack of guidance regarding what
constitutes sufficient physical activity in disabled populations, despite the acknowledgment that
stakeholdersinvolvedinphysical inactivitypreventioneffortsdon'tadequatelyaddressthese needs.
Therefore, in line with Piggin and Bairner's (2014) argument that the article does not reflect the
range of disabilities which may impact on people's lives in different ways, there appears to be a
complexityandspecificityproblemwiththe issue(Parsons,1995),whichreduces the likelihood of it
reaching the expanded public.

14
With specific regard to cerebral palsy populations, manifestations of the condition affect the
magnitude,extent and location of the cerebral insult (Van Eck et al., 2008), therefore a large range
of physical andmental attributes canbe negativelyaffected.Inthe contextof the research question
in this project, the literature can therefore be used to understand barriers to communicating and
understandingcerebralpalsysportissues,consideringwhothe cerebral palsysportstakeholdersare,
and acknowledging how disability sport policy creation can be moderated.
Policy Formulation
Literature thatdescribesandexplains the identification of policy problems and policy solutions is
valuable to this research, and falls into categories of problem types, the policy approach, power
relations, and policy instruments. Laver (1986) made the argument that the requirement of public
policy-makingcomesinthe formof the need for social cooperation, the existence of social conflict
and a combinationof the two.Hence,the theme of conflictisapparentinitsderivationfromsocially
''imagined'' scarcity of resources and social incompatibility. Accordingly, in Hill's (1997) theories of
the state,the pluralistexistence of differentinterest groupsisnoted,whichisrelevant to the notion
of cooperation in a society whereby diversity of interest is emphasised and saluted.
For thisreason,the policy-orientatedapproachmustbe considered as noteworthy in its impact on
whichpolicyresponsesare deemedsignificantandwhich are not. John (1998) identifies two sets of
policyphenomenainthe formof policyvariationandpolicychange,whichcan be seen as important
in the ways that they frame this research project. In terms of policy variation, disunities can occur
betweendifferentpolicysectorsandwithindifferentenvironmentalcontexts, so policy formulation
can be seen as a process which is sensitive to contextual variables such as underlying political
systems.Thispointengagesthe partof the researchquestionthat examines who the cerebral palsy
sport stakeholders are and what the implicit relationship is between sport policy and the
stakeholder groups.

15
For example,Pigginetal.(2009) examinesthe relationshipbetweenpower and knowledge in New
Zealand, figuring that policy-makers' understandings of policy success can be contradictory and
abstruse,whilstStones(2002) refers to the usage of symbolic devices that frame part of a problem
as representative of the whole,regardlessof whether they encompass the whole issue. Therefore,
with relevance to John's (1998) reference to policy change, the policy process is inherently
accounted for with assumptions that exist constitutionally, yet may still be applied universally.
Pigginetal.(2009) andHill (1997) bothidentifythe significantpower of state institutions and seek
to analyse the role of actors within institutions of government. Thus, this literature adequately
referencessocial conflictandcooperationof interestsasa ''cause'' in the policyprocess,considering
how a policy issue is perceived, and acknowledging those who are responsible for being the
''perceivers'' of the issue.
Decision-making and Implementation
In a publication on the examination of the disability sport policy network by Thomas (2004), the
transitional organisationalinfrastructure of disabilitysportsuggeststhatthe basisof policyselection
has a role to play in the empowerment of disability sport organisations.
On a governmental level, the lack of clarity in the government and Sport England's objectives in
relation to disability sport has historically resulted in a weak policy community (Thomas, 2004).
Subsequent attempts to challenge and change disability sport has led to the government ring-
fencing£10.2 millionforimprovingsportingopportunitiesfordisabledpeople(SportEngland, 2014);
however Thomas (2004) makes a strong consideration of the disparate range of organisations that
operate within the sport policy process, and also the peripheral interest of central government.
Therefore,the processof decision-makingand policy implementation appears to be a coordination
issue which extends beyond a financial solution.

16
Sport England's policy and financial directions (DCMS, 2007; DCMS, 2004) supply stakeholders of
the EnglishSportsCouncil withguidelinesforensuringcommunityintegration, widespread equality
of opportunity, and mechanisms of internal control, although Thomas (2004) notes a confused
relationship between DSOs and NGBs which emphasises the role of Sport England and the EFDS as
influential incoordinating,providing and developing opportunities for disabled people. The policy
document for sports participation (DCMS, 2014) puts forward three actions for increasing sporting
opportunities;these includethe funding of Sport England, the expansion of the School Games, and
the £450 million investment in primary schools.
Significantly,inthe DCMS's (2012) sport strategydocument ''Creating a sporting habit for life'', the
onlyreference to ''disability'' exists in a brief explanation and justification of the School Games. In
combinationwiththe DCMS'scategorisation of the document as a ''youth sport strategy'', targeting
14-25 year olds, the implication exists that there is an indubitable focus on the delivery of youth
sport to mainstream and disability populations.
Relevanttothe pertinenceof the applicationof sportpolicytocerebral palsypersons,the literature
considersmediatingfactorsrelatingdirectlytocerebral palsysportparticipants.The low fitnesslevel
associated with cerebral palsy sufferers, inclusive of low aerobic capacity, muscular strength and
muscularendurance (VanEck et al.,2008), iscontributorytowards the assumption that all sufferers
are at ''high risk'' of sedentary behaviour (Lollar and Crews, 2003). However, Spivock and Gauvin
(2006) consider that a population-based intervention must develop an approach that extends
beyond the functional limitations of participants, and studies their interactions with the
environment which are inevitably responsible for facilitating their participation, implying that
disability is no longer a personal characteristic. Furthermore, Verschuren et al. (2012) identifies
cerebral palsy children and adolescents' interactions with personal and environmental factors as
beingeitherfacilitating or hindering towards engaging in physical activity, stating that attempts to
increase activity levels should reach beyond the individual.

17
Thisliterature isagreeablewiththe theoretical premise of thisprojectthata disability is a restraint
mediatedinthe social environment(Laver,1986),whichis effective in its application to this project
inits investigationintothe relationship between sport policy setting, sport policy implementation
and the resultantstakeholderbenefits.However,this analysis is weakened by its application to the
limiteddemographicof the youthpopulationinselected geographical areas (e.g. the Netherlands),
which may not be relevant in other societies.
Policy Evaluation
The evaluation of actions is a subjective phenomenon consistent with the interpretivist
epistemological philosophy of this project. Laver (1986) referred to the fact that all actions have
''spillover'' effects, therefore the evaluations used in this project should consider the causal
sequence of actions within the stakeholder network. Additionally, in the context of the sports
participationof disabledchildren, Murphy and Carbone (2008) explain that the combined advocacy
effortsof several stakeholderssuchas parents and educators are needed to ensure participation in
sports.Thus,the relative successof apolicyimplementationmaynotexist singularly, but may come
inthe formof several publicandprivate evaluations, from which interactions can stimulate further
conflict and the need for further regulation (Laver, 1986).
The researchbeingconductedinthisprojectaddressesthe vacantneed forananalysisof the policy
''issue'' of disability in the form of cerebral palsy sport, whilst considering the scale of the policy
problem from its conception in society through to its impact on non-departmental organisational
bodies. The usage of the stakeholder approach advocates a multidimensional perspective of the
incentives that stakeholders hold to act and react to sports policy. Thus, the research question can
be extended to include a review of cerebral palsy sport stakeholders' integration into the policy
community and the implications of their experiences and responses to the policy environment.

18
Chapter 3- Methodology
Introduction
Gratton and Jones (2010) clarify that research in the sporting discipline is substantial due to the
social,economical andpolitical significance of sport;whilstWann(1997) claimsthatquality research
is the ''lifeblood'' of any scientific discipline. Therefore, the complexity of approaching a
multidisciplinary and multifaceted research question which has different social, contextual and
methodological dimensions(inareas of stakeholder theory, disability sport and the policy process)
should be carefully considered in order to extract the relevant information from the research.
Indoingso, the enablementwill take place of the formulation of an analysis and conclusion that is
congruentandcoherentwiththe philosophical and ideological approach, and the initially outlined
research objectives.
Research Philosophy
Researchepistemologyandontologyare guiding conceptsforconductingresearch.Epistemology is
the studyof knowledgeacquaintance andexamines the relationship between the inquirer and the
object of knowledge (Gratton and Jones, 2010). In the case of a qualitative research project which
studiesthe impactof sportpolicyon disability sport, the epistemology is based upon interpretivist
principleswhichsuggest that there is an interdependent relationship between the researcher and
what is being researched. Lasswell (1970) claimed in his policy sciences conception that the policy
scientist perceives themselves as the integrator of knowledge and action, in a contextual, multi-
method and problem-orientated setting. The absence of separation in this relationship advocates
the subjective meanings of actions as key to defining our social reality, or more specifically, our
perceptions of a ''disability''.

19
Epistemologically, the interpretivist approach is complimentary to the social model of disability;
one of the major conceptual frameworks used in this project, claiming that disability is created by
barriersinsociety,comprisingof the environment, people's attitudes, and organisational practices
(DCMS, 2010). An idealist would claim that disability is ''the irrational product of deep-rooted
cultural beliefs, attitudes and prejudices'' (Sheldon, 2005) which are self-constructed and result in
our perceptionof the disabledpopulationasisolatedandoppressed.As a researcher, it is therefore
of paramountimportance inaqualitative studytounderstand the impact of us, the ''inquirers'', and
our subjects, on beliefs and behaviours directed towards and within the disability sport policy
network.
An ontological approach refers to the nature of reality as either a realist view or a relativist view
(Gratton and Jones, 2010). The realist approach is objective in nature and is therefore not relevant
to thisresearch project because the qualitative nature of the research leaves the results open to a
humanlyconstructedinterpretationof itssalience anddistinctiveness. Therefore, in a project being
conducted for the decipherment of the processes of sport policy and their impact on stakeholder
groups,a relativistphilosophyismore appropriate toaccountforthe humanlyconstructednature of
reality as a subjective phenomenon.
Another philosophical consideration is that by conducting research designed to elicit the
effectiveness of an existing system, the subjected population and network are made aware of the
distortionsof theirsocial practicestothe pointthattheyare inspired to change (Sparkes and Smith,
2013). This phenomenon is central to the concept of critical inquiry, whereby the research has the
power to emancipate disability groups, as they will be made aware of the conditions and
constraining factors which act on the perceptions of their own agency.
Inaccordance withthe objectivesof thisresearchproject,althoughemancipationmaybe abroader
goal of disabilityresearch,amaterialist/radical social model of disabilityimpliesthat disability is the

20
systematicoutcome of adominantpolitical ideology(Sheldon, 2005). Therefore, the establishment
of organisational or social change in the disability sector is not necessarily guaranteed from the
simple identificationof the symptomsof effective disabilitysportpolicy,butmayexistatthe sources
of policycreationwherebythe conceptof ''change''existsasa cause.This researchwill explore both
of these possibilities.
Research Design
One of the reasons cited for undertaking research is to investigate an existing situation and/or its
problems (Hussey and Hussey, 1997). In the context of this research project, potential flaws in the
cerebral palsy/disabilitysport policy network may be understood as moderating variables (Gratton
and Jones, 2010) which contribute to the heterogeneity of the stakeholder groups and their
experiences, which are being assessed in this study.
Traditionally, the experimental approach to conducting research is associated with the positivist
paradigm of investigating the spuriousness of the relationship between the independent and
dependentvariables.Althoughthe relationshipsbetweenthe inputsandthe outputsof the disability
sport policyprocess,andtheirrelativeoutcomes, are important concepts, the enduring complexity
of policy networks makes a wholly experimental approach unsuitable for this project.
Contrarily, a descriptive and explanatory research design may be more appropriate for this study
because the collection and analysis of data which explains the oppressions and gains of cerebral
palsy sport stakeholder groups, using a theoretical and conceptual framework, may more
substantiallyfacilitate anunderstandingof the covariationandcausalityof the relationshipbetween
sport policy and the aforementioned stakeholders.
The two types of research that are commonly used in the sport policy paradigm are pure and
applied research (Gratton and Jones, 2010). Pure research takes place to ameliorate an
understandingof aconceptwithoutregardfora specificproblem.Thisprojectutilises pure research

21
as there is no initially apparent problem with the existing disability sport policy network. Applied
research is often conducted consequentially after the empirical research has been completed
(Grattonand Jones,2010), althoughthe abductive nature of thisstudymeansthatany evidence of a
''solution'' can only be conjectured, rather than conclusively proven, due to the restricted
generalisability of focused samples, and the equivocal nature of an interpretivist epistemological
approach.
Data Collection
The nature of this research project means that the data collection will largely involve primary
researchinorder toobtaindata that is specificand relevant to this research project. Moreover, the
collection of in-depth data can effectively contribute to answering the research question, and is
vitally important to supporting the empirical strand of research from which idea generation and
conclusions can be made in the form of emergent narratives.
The method for collecting the empirical data will be the utilisation of semi-structured phone
interviews onaselectionof case studies. Case study research is a suitable method for this research
due to the fact that it allows the intensive study of particular instances (Gratton and Jones, 2010),
thusallowingthe analysis of chosen cases, which focus on both the ''process'' and the ''product'' of
the inquiry(SparkesandSmith,2013). Therefore,the researchwill allow the obtainmentof different
perspectives of practice from different organisations in the cerebral palsy sport policy network.
In this qualitative study, a non-random sample was deemed the most appropriate to meet the
researchobjectives.Inthisinstance,quotasampling- anon-probability sampling technique- is most
suitable.Thismode of samplinginvolvesidentifyingspecific sub-groups and selecting samples from
withinthese sub-groupswhomeetthe participationcriteria, which was pre-determined before the
samplingprocess.The criteriaforparticipantselectionwasprovidedinaninitial email containing an

22
explanation of the research and interview procedure; a template of this email is provided in
Appendix 1.
In this case, the aim was to target key informants- individuals chosen on the basis of specific
knowledge they possess (Gratton and Jones, 2010)- who can purposively illustrate a particular
situationandimprove ourunderstandingof the disabilitysportparadigm.Therefore,thisproject has
targeteddifferentareasof the cerebral palsysportpolicynetwork,fromwhichspecificorganisations
have been selected and made aware of the study, before selecting a suitable candidate to
participate in the recorded interviews.
The participatory bodies are:
1. The English Federation of Disability Sport (EFDS) (National Charity and Disability Sport
Umbrella Organisation)
2. Cerebral Palsy Sport (CP Sport) (National Disability Sport Organisation)
3. Boccia England (Boccia's National Governing Body)
4. Project Ability (School Games inclusivity initiative)
One downfall of thismethodisthatnon-randomsampling may undermine the external validity of
the data, and thus the extent to which the findings can be generalised to a larger population.
However,thisstudyisspecialisedinthe researchareaof disabilityandcerebral palsysportpolicy, as
well asthe carefully selected stakeholder groups which form the focus of the analyses. Therefore,
the four interviewsare onlyintendedtoproduce a representationof stakeholderexperienceswithin
this specific network and not outside of it.
The usage of semi-structured interviews is a strategic choice to effectively elicit a range of
informationfromthe interviewsubjects.The ''semi-structured''element,comprisinglargelyof open-
ended questions, allows the participants a greater flexibility to describe and explain their

23
experiences as well as their knowledge of the disability sport policy network (Sparkes and Smith,
2013). A template of the interview structure is provided in Appendix 2. The application of probing,
such as the use of clarificationprobes,istobe useful inreducingresponse ambiguity,and solidifying
the interviewer's role as an ''active listener'', whilst building rapport with the subject and
establishing an antagonistic relationship.
Thisprojectwill alsoembarkonsignificantdatacollectionfromsecondary sources. Secondary data
isuseful inestablishingandevaluatingdifferentformsof datainsupportof fundamental arguments.
This project will use quantitative secondary data in the form of variables such as participation
volume and financial investment in the disability sport sector, whilst remaining relevant to the
relationship between different stakeholder groups.
Inaddition,thisprojectaimsto interpret the data by aggregating the analyses in order to counter
the biases associated with utilising a singular analytical method (Sparkes and Smith, 2013). This
multiple means of data collection refers to the triangulation of data, which is accounted for by the
combineduse of differenttypesof dataincludingthe empiricallycollectedinterview data,whichwill
undergo a thematic analysis, and the secondary quantitative data used to support the arguments
formed in the primary means.
Building upon the triangulation of research sources, this project also seeks to use multiple
theoretical viewpoints to frame its analyses. For example, the utilisation of Freeman's (1984)
stakeholder perspective, the Department for Media, Culture and Sport's (2010) social model of
disability, and Sheldon's (2005) materialist and idealist perspectives of the social model of
oppressive forces in society. These components form the theoretical framework of the study, and
will contribute to the ''meaning-making'' process when concluding the research findings.

24
Data Analysis
The data collectedwillbe organisedand assessed using a thematic analysis. Thematic analysis is a
systematic method of analysing qualitative data into key themes through the process of coding
(Sparkesetal.,2012). Subsequently,similaritiesanddifferencesbetweenthe experiencesof cerebral
palsysportstakeholdergroupscanbe made usingsemanticcomparisonsof the data,although some
data may be contextuallyabductive when analysed in conjunction with the theoretical framework.
Essentially, the primary interview data will be thematically dissected and reviewed with
consideration of the theoretical dataset and prior knowledge of the disability sport policy sector.
Trustworthiness Criteria
Qualitative research sample selection requires an informed assessment of bias; in this case,
researchislimited by the relative success of applying a ''trustworthiness criteria'', which is used to
judge the quality of the research (Sparkes and Smith, 2013). Firstly, as opposed to the traditionally
quantitative criterionof reliability,thisprojectwill aimtoproduce ahighlevel of dependability. This
will be achievedbyretaininginterview recordings,communicationdocumentations,andapapertrail
of the logistical processesusedtoobtainthe relevant data. The traceability of the research process
holdsindividualisticcharacteristicsbecause the datacollectionisbasedonindividual,non-replicable
case studies.Therefore,the commitment to adhering to and recording a logistical research process
may be potentially limiting to the research quality.
Consistent with the interpretivist epistemological approach of qualitative research, complete
objectivity can never truly be obtained. Thus, the quality of this research can be enhanced by
executing strategic, informed and principled methodological decisions in order to ensure that the
outcomesof inquiriesare rootedinthe contextsandpersonsapartfromthe researcher(Sparkesand
Smith, 2013). This principle is known as confirmability and will be controlled through researcher
reflexivity and self-assessment.

25
Additionally, this research aims to apply the trustworthiness principle of transferability, which is
achievable throughthe provision of thick descriptions of the selected case studies, thus improving
the generativity of the disability sport policy phenomena even though the research is only
representative of the selectedstudies(SparkesandSmith,2013). Whilst the generalisation of these
case studies to larger populations is unreasonable in this mode of research, the findings may still
retaingeneralisabilityintheirapplicationtothe theoretical frameworks and their recognisability in
the disability sport paradigm.
The credibilityof the researchholdsignificance tothe question''Doresearch findings capture what
really happened?'' (Sparkes and Smith, 2013). The ontologically relativist approach claims the
existence of multiple ''truths'', whilst epistemologically there is no separation between the
researcher and what is being researched (Gratton and Jones, 2010), therefore corresponding the
researchfindingswith''reality''ina qualitativeresearchprojectisoftenunobtainable, although this
research will strive to maintain a ''parallel perspective'' (Sparkes and Smith, 2013) of credibility
practicesby applyingtechniques such as triangulation, data checking, and progressive subjectivity.
Research Limitations
Potential flawsinthe researchdesignare susceptible tofall intofourcategories:complexity,access,
facilities/resources and expertise (Clarke et al., 1998). Fundamentally, as a sole researcher
conducting empirical research, access to data collection is a significant limitation. During the
samplingprocess,initial attemptsto organise data collection resulted in limited success due to the
non-responsiveness and non-communication of target bodies. In this research, the decision to
conduct phone interviews was strategic to alleviate the possibility of temporal and geographical
limitingfactors.However,thisprojectmaystill be limitedinits scope of accessing the most suitable
bodies, and selecting the ''correct'' persons with which to conduct the research.

26
Furtherlimitationscome inthe formof facilities and resource demands. These may be in the form
of the secondary data collection which placed a heavy reliance on internet databases due to their
low cost, ease of accessibility and general convenience (Sparkes and Smith, 2013); although the
depth of research that can be conducted in this manner is limited, it should be considered when
forming evaluations.
Finally,the relationshipbetween the complexity of the research and the relative expertise of the
researcherisa constrainton the applicationof researchprocedures,analysesandexaminations.The
priorknowledge of the researcher could have an impact on the research direction, understanding,
and also the types of questions asked during the semi-structured interview process. These
interpretations are difficult to measure, but should be understood and considered to improve the
confirmability of the data collection and analyses.
Ethical Considerations
Before eachinterview,participantswereremindedof the ethical implicationsof participatinginthe
research,whichwas granted ethical clearance by the School of Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences
Department at Loughborough University in November 2014. For example, participants were
reminded of their right to interviewee anonymity, their explicit role in the research process and
access to the data,and theirrightto withdrawal fromthe study.The consent form template used in
this study is shown in Appendix 4.
One potential limitation of disclosing a large volume of information to the participant is subject
deception(GrattonandJones,2010), whereby the participant is aware enough of the nature of the
study to provide invalid answers and thus distort the data collection and subsequent analysis.
However, this factor is difficult to control in a study whereby participation is voluntary and data
derivation is subjectively elicited.

27
Results
Introduction
The theoretical thematicanalysesof the dataare basedupona hypothetico-deductive approach to
analysingthe dataset (Willig, 2008). This is to say that the combination of open, axial and selective
coding is designed to elicit deeper understandings of the stakeholder mentality and the social
models of disability. In addition, metanarratives may emerge from the data in the form of latent
themesthatmaterialiseinductively(BraunandClarke,2006),therebyjustifyingthe whollyabductive
approach to the research process and analyses of results.
There are resultsandanalysesforeachof the fourcase studies- the EFDS,CPSport,Boccia England,
and Project Ability- which will initially aim to describe semantic themes, before being cross-
examinedinthe discussionto appraise existing relations within the CP sport stakeholder network.
English Federation of Disability Sport (EFDS)
The English Federation of Disability Sport, an organisation with national charity status, strives
towards an equal society through increased opportunity and choice for all disabled people. Core
themesderivedthroughthe interview with its Research Insight Manager indicated the significance
of resource distribution in various formats, thus highlighting the EFDS's key role as a facilitator of
sport andphysical activityopportunities.Sub-themesindicatedthatthe distributionof resourceshas
a relationship with the demand for disability sport, by both NGBs as providers and the disability
population as receivers. Additionally, the EFDS's supervision of the sustainability of inclusivity
programmesadministeredbyNGBsandNDSOswas showntobe consistentwiththe EFDS's purpose
as a ''strategic organisation'', prioritising long-term solutions over immediate improvements.
Responsibilityandpowerinthe contextof organisational interests also emerged as a key theme in
the form of the two-way process between the EFDS and disabled people, thus embodying the

28
stakeholderdefinition, and also the impact of non-departmental government bodies such as Sport
England, who cooperate with the EFDS and NGBs to ''ensure that realistic targets are set based on
what is known about disabled people taking part''.
Finally, the impact of sport policy was found to be moderated by the theme of how disability
stakeholdersare accessed,intermsof how organisations increase the awareness of disability sport
and also create opportunities for the disabled population. On one hand. ''working with local
authoritieson a providerand face-to-facelevel''to localise the deliveryof sport and physical activity
was foundtobe an importantprocessinimproving local provision, whilst the EFDS was also shown
to supportthe government''buy-in''byhighlightingthe ongoing benefits of participation to NDSOs,
as often ''disabled people's needs are above and beyond physical activity''. Thus, with the
encouragementof disability sport and physical activity from a governmental perspective comes an
understandingof the non-sportingrequirements and incentives for disabled people to participate.
Cerebral Palsy Sport (CP Sport)
Froma researchperspective, CP Sport is superficially crucial to the translation of sport policy into
cerebral palsy stakeholder benefits. Through the interview process, stakeholder engagement
emergedasa core theme,byencouragingNGBsto ''engagewith NDSOsin developing their products
and programmes in ways they can be more inclusive and land in different communities''.
The National Sport Development Manager for CP Sport continued to elicit the importance of
matchingcerebral palsyathleteswiththe right sports, claiming that there are ''a lot of athletes that
are not in the right sports'', when referring to the Youth Sport Trust's role in organising and
deliveringthe School Games.Similarly, the theme of putting athletes onto a performance pathway
was identified as an issue, whereby NGBs' understandings of the severity of different types of
disability are not the same. This theme raises the query of the relevance of sport policy in
encouraging inclusivity when those responsible for delivering sport do not have the sufficient

29
knowledge orexpertise.However,the interviewee didelude to ''just being about to write a cerebral
palsy awareness course'' with the purpose of teaching different cerebral palsy sports, in order to
overcome this problem.
The final theme of resource distributionandredistributionresonatedwiththe DCMS'ssocial model
of disability(DCMS,2010), encompassingthe organisationalresponsibilityof social enablement. The
dataset highlighted that Sport England's reporting mechanism involved ''just having a number of
minimum outcomes per year'', rather than key performance indicators which may have been more
appropriate.Additionally,despite the Inclusive SportFund'sassociationwithtargeting the 14-25 age
group, CP Sport identified the inclusivity process as encompassing all age groups, whilst also
expressing concern that ''the people that should be supplying sport at a younger age are not being
made accountable''.
Boccia England
The predominant theme identified in the Boccia England interview data was the importance of
stakeholderincentive.Thisistosay that theirChief Executive indicated that Boccia England's policy
focuswas alignedto''operating asa governing body of sport as opposed to looking and catering for
a specific disability group'', which suggests the strategic direction of the organisation is
developmental. In addition, from a resource perspective, the interview data indicated that due to
boccia being a relatively new sport, Boccia England are a young governing body who are still
developing and growing, therefore in the context of the disability and cerebral palsy sport policy
network, awareness and access to the policy agenda may be limited.
Froman attitudinal perspective,the interviewee explained that ''the role of CP Sport and the EFDS
in introducing knowledge of disability has more relevance to providing an 'in' as a mechanism for
better and more continued participation''. Thus, the stakeholders are reliant on each other to
succeedintermsof providingexposureandopportunities toincrease participation.Another feature

30
of the dataset was the numerous existing partnerships in place that have financial and practical
ramifications, such as The Lord's Taverners support of school boccia competitions and the Youth
Sport Trust'scoordinationof disabilitysportprogrammes,whichenablespan-disability participation
for young people.
Finally, when referring to the generally inverse relationship between age and disabled people's
participation in sport (Sport England, 2015), the nature of boccia as a sport was highlighted as a
reason for the population-based approach being unsuitable. It was explained that ''conditions are
often degenerative and the period that athletes can play is also limited'', therefore it is more
importantto understandthe needsof the athletesinorder to create opportunities for them, rather
than treating them as one target group.
Project Ability
ProjectAbilityisaSchool Gamesinitiative designedtopromote and deliver sport participation and
competition in an inclusive format in schools. An interview with one of the Project Ability county
leaders emphasised the critical role of school sport in breaking the barriers to participation, as
''physical education and sport are a little bit more accessible to young people with cerebral palsy in
general''.
The importantfactorof accessibilityinschool sport was continually highlighted in the dataset as a
keytheme,withthe YouthSportTrust playingapivotal role in providing the infrastructure for NGBs
to develop inclusive formats of their sport. However, the logistical difficulties of implementing
inclusive school sport were also identified in the form of the sparseness of Project Ability schools,
and the needforperformance pathwaysleadingfromschool sporttoelite competition,summarised
by the declaration that ''we need pathways because young people always want to participate in
competitions''.

31
Leading from this, the sustainability of providing inclusive opportunities was revealed as a core
theme, making reference to the fact that there were ''not enough young people with specific
cerebral palsy''to deliveratailoredprogramme forimpairment-specificsport.However,the running
of ''multisport days/sessions'' to encourage participation which can then be fed into performance
pathways within specific NGBs was apparent, once again working through the Youth Sport Trust to
provide grass-roots opportunities.

32
Discussion
Introduction
Inresponse tothe results,the thematicdistinctionsfromall fourcase studieshave conveyed three
key areas of influence in the way that sport policy is mediated and delivered. These are: the
distribution of resources; the sustainability of disability sport; and the allocation of performance
pathways.
Resource Distribution
The issue being presented is that resource distribution and redistribution tends to exhibit high
levels of conflict, with some stakeholders ''worse-off'' than others (Laver, 1986). Across the four
interviews, non-tangible resources were found to be prominent, in the form of the expertise and
advice offered by the EFDS and CP Sport to NGBs and DSOs, with a strong view to developing
''popularsports''witha highpublicdemand.Therefore,the needforpublicpolicyappearstosuggest
itsvalue as an educational tool,backedupbyProjectAbility'sclaimthatguidelines could be used to
access school sport stakeholders, and identify individuals who can then be initiated onto a
performance pathway.
Interestingly,althoughthe government has an equality policy in place (DCMS, 2010), its proposed
actionsonlyappearto ''protect the rights''of disabledpeople, which using Sheldon's (2005) idealist
social model, suggests that rights alone are insufficient to eradicate inequality, as it is an over-
simplisticsolutiontooverturningthe deep-rooted,traditional beliefsof society.Thus,inline with CP
Sport's claim that ''education is a major problem with the inclusion of children in mainstream PE'',
publicpolicy would be well-informed to address resource distribution as a stimulatory exercise to
increase awareness of disability groups in both special needs and mainstream populations.
Additionally,despite the dataindicatingthe distribution of National Lottery and exchequer funding
by SportEnglandas the ''first step'' towardsincreasingparticipation,the argument was raised in the

33
ProjectAbilitydatathatitwas ''time-consuming'' sorting out funding streams, thus highlighting the
impracticalitiesassociatedwithinteractingwithmultiple stakeholders, regardless of the superficial
positive impact of increased funding.
Fromthe perspectiveof the stakeholderapproach,Freeman(1984) identifiesthe importance of the
willingness of stakeholder groups to expand their resources; therefore the integration of special
educationneeds/disabledgroupsandmainstreamnon-disabled groups, as demonstrated by Boccia
England and Project Ability, suggests strong stakeholder coordination in approaching policy issues
and implementingasystematicsolution.The EFDS,CPSportand ProjectAbility all address the need
to access stakeholderswhocandeliverdisabilitysport.Thismaybe achieved for example by ''giving
young people the responsibility to be leading sport leadership events and workshops'' and the
implementation of the ''CP awareness programme'', which provides a progressive solution to
addressing the gap in experience of organisations and people working with CP athletes.
Sustainability
The literature review for this project has already referred to the difference between a pragmatic
short-termsolutionandastrategiclong-termsolutiontopolicyissues. In the government policy for
increasing sport participation (DCMS, 2014), explicit attention is paid to the Youth Sport Strategy,
givingyoungpeople the opportunitytotake partinsport,witha view toalleviatingthe participation
''drop-off''whichisevidentasage increases(SportEngland,2015).In supportof thispolicydirection,
the EFDS claimed that early exposure to physical activity and sport reduces the lifetime cost of
gettingpeople physicallyactive, thus justifying the heavy government investment in organisations
such as the Youth Sport Trust who focus on getting young people playing sport.
However,inadisabilitycontext,the argumentcanbe made that the specialisation of disability and
CP populationscanmake the organisationanddelivery of sport unsustainable. For example, the CP
Sport dataset indicated that an important stakeholder relationship resides in the collaboration of

34
impairment-specific bodies and NGBs. This implies that although NGBs may show interest in
becoming more inclusive, the specialist nature of conditions such as CP creates an issue for
delivering the right format of inclusive sport with the right participants (for example the
development of CP football and frame football with the Football Association).
Potentially,thisargumentcouldbe localisedtothe reportingof disabilitysportandphysical activity
inthe UK, as demonstratedby ''Start Active, Stay Active'' (Department of Health, 2011); a report on
physical activitywhichpresentsguidelines for participation. In this document, it is proclaimed that
''the guidelines in this report would be broadly applicable to disability'', which implies an
acknowledgement of the broad beneficial impact of physical activity on disabled populations, but
doesnotprovide aninsight or education for organisations or governments as to how to adapt their
policiestocaterfor specificdisabilityathletes.Thisresponsibility lies with organisations such as the
EFDS and CP Sport who adhere to their own independent aims and objectives.
Thus, as expressed by the EFDS, the challenge of coordinating a sustainable disability sport
programme requires ''buy-in at all levels from the sectors involved'' to increase awareness and
guidance for disability sport. In accordance with Kohl et al.'s (2012) ''systems approach'', the
acknowledgement of health behaviours should consider the complexity of actions, interactions,
adaptations and adoptions within that system, which from a stakeholder perspective denotes an
understanding of the ''rational level'' of the stakeholder map (Freeman, 1984), which fosters an
inter-organisational expertise that appears to be crucial to the success of the CP sport policy
community.
Performance Pathways
Inthe contextof organisational structure indisabilitysport,thereexiststhe implicationof accessing
the potential athletes on a grass roots level in order to allocate them into the right sports and to
progress them to an elite competition level. Research obtained from the EFDS indicated that the

35
representation of disabled people is high on their agenda, thus aiming to communicate positive
attitudes towards disabled people in the sports they participate in. However, the dataset also
revealed attempts at ''moving away from a sport focus'' and more towards a focus on ''physical
activities... whether that be running or walking'', demonstrating a perspective of inclusivity as
obtainable andsustainable fromagrassroots level upwards. Boccia England have labelled the EFDS
and CP Sport's roles in the sport policy network as ''introducers'' of knowledge.
Furthermore,BocciaEngland have claimed that they place a large focus on developing boccia as a
sport, as opposed to catering for a specific disability group. Therefore, disability interests and
sportinginterestsappeartobe distinctconceptsthatmaycause conflict,consequentlyimpactingthe
identification and development of athletes moving onto performance pathways.
This multidimensional approach can be furthered by Barnes and Sheldon's (2010) argument that
disability is an exclusion that encompasses access to education, employment, leisure and social
relationships.Similarly,the DCMS's(2010) social model of disabilityportraysbarrierstoparticipation
as coming in the form of attitudes, the environment and organisations. Therefore, the policy
implication for change-makers is to access the disabled population through a bottom-up
organisational approachtounderstand their requirements on a disability level, before introducing
the progression of sport.
Throughthe analysisof SportEngland's policy directions (Sport England, 2007) in conjunction with
Freeman's(1984) stakeholderapproach,itcanbe statedthata needexiststofosterlocal community
initiativeswhichbringlegitimatestakeholderstogethertodeliverinclusivesport.The EFDSexplained
how its physical activity sector ''helps to engage physical activity at a local level'', whilst Project
Abilitydemonstratedthataccessto competitions restrains young athletes from being exposed to a
suitable pathwaytodevelop.Insummary,policynetworksshould not be seen as threats containing

36
entitiesthatprotecttheir own interests, but should play a crucial role in overcoming adversity and
reducing conflict on an attitudinal, societal and organisational level.
Policy Analysis
Kingdon'spolicystreamsapproachtopolicyanalysis (John, 1998) assumes continual policy change
through a flow of policy processes: problems, policies and politics. In the context of the CP sport
policynetwork,the problemstreamcanbe identifiedasthe recognitionof unequal opportunity on a
societal and sporting level.
In the policy stream, the salient matter is understanding how CP sport issues can penetrate the
systematicandinstitutional agenda(CobbandElder,1972); one solution suggested by this model is
the mobilisation of ideas and attitudes by policy entrepreneurs, who have a lobbying role to
proposing solutions to policy problems. In the Project Ability dataset, reference was made to the
workof BaronessSue Campbell ininstigatingthe YouthSportTrust's role as an influentialproviderof
youthsport.Therefore,apolicyentrepreneurwithacommitmenttodisabilityand/orCP sport could
capitalise on a disability issue residing in the problem stream.
Finally, in the political stream, there is a strong relationship between political processes and
influencesonpeople'sperceptionsof disabledpopulations.Thisnotionrelatesstrongly to Sheldon's
(2005) materialistsocial model,whichimpliesthatsocietysystematicallyoppressesdisabledpeople,
and also Spivock and Gauvin's (2006) view of a population as an artificial creation.
Alternatively,Sabatier'spolicyadvocacycoalitionframework(John, 1998) could be used to analyse
the CP sport policy network. This framework takes a pluralist approach with regard to its
acknowledgementof relationshipswithinpolicysectorsinthe formof differentcoalitionscompeting
for dominance.

37
In the context of CP sport, the explicit government focus of targeting youth sport means that
coalitions have formed around organisations such as the Youth Sport Trust, as has been
demonstratedinthisresearch.The developmentof disabilitysportactorsinyoungorganisations,for
example Boccia England, is likely to be influential in furthering disability and CP sport in its
development,asthe implicitassumptionismade thatenvironmental factorswill remainstable, thus
enabling reform in the disability sport sector.
The advocacy coalitionframeworkbringsrelevancetothe stakeholderapproach(Freeman,1984) in
terms of its replication of the ''transactional'' level of interaction with stakeholders. However, in
reality,adownfall of takingthese perspectives together is that policy activity can stagnate by being
''paralysed'' by the over-analysis of transactions from the government, through to Sport England,
DSOs, NGBs, NDSOs and CP athletes.

38
Conclusion
Introduction
This research was administered to fulfil the purpose of understanding the extent to which the
stakeholdersof cerebral palsy sport benefit from the setting of sport policy, through an analysis of
the CP sport anddisabilitypolicynetwork.Thus,the researchobjectiveshave beenadheredtointhe
following ways.
Research Objective Review
1. To identify the key stakeholders in the CP sport policy network
Overall,NGBswere showntobe crucial intheirdecision-makingto provide inclusive, adaptive and
sustainable opportunities to play sport. Sport England do have a role to play in selecting the policy
and funding criteria for organisations to adhere to, although the factors of access and awareness
withregardto CP sport opportunitiesare largelyinthe control of organisationssuchas the EFDS and
CP Sportwho can provide expertise andknowledge to bodies that can deliver inclusive sport to the
parts of society that require it.
The stakeholderswhoholdthe greatestpotential tobenefit from the setting of sport policy are CP
athletes, who ordinarily experience oppression in the form of embedded attitudes, the social
environmentandorganisationalmarginalisation.However,the research revealed the critical role of
school sport stakeholders in providing inclusive opportunities to both disabled and non-disabled
populations, under the premise that CP athletes are provided with a subsequently suitable
performance pathway.
2. To understand stakeholder relations in a sport policy context
Inaccordance withthe stakeholderdefinition,''anygrouporindividual whocanaffectorisaffected
by the achievement of the firm's objectives'' (Freeman, 1984), the interdependent relationship

39
betweenCPstakeholdersisunderstoodasatwo-wayprocess.The literature indicated thatdisability
can be liberated through a social enablement process, therefore sport policy should do more to
influencedisabilitysporton a structural level by making it sustainable, rather than taking a ''rights''
approach which doesn't actively stimulate increased disability sport participation.
AlthoughCPsportstakeholdersindicateddifferentlevelsof cooperation with various partners, the
literature anddataindicate that the integration of mainstream and disability stakeholders into the
policy community will be beneficial towards achieving a consensus for the delivery of inclusive
opportunities. In this instance, school sport is the ideal instrument to utilise, for example through
the ''gettingmore people playingsport''policyandthe School Games. However, for this to happen,
appropriate support is needed from organisations such as the Youth Sport Trust in locating and
providing schools with the correct tools to foster inclusive participation.
3. To identify stakeholder incentives to adhering to sport policy
Stakeholder incentives have been found to revolve around the obtainment of both tangible and
non-tangible resources. Theoretically, the scarcity of resources is a fundamental cause of social
conflict,althoughinaCP sportstakeholdercontext,one member'sresource,forexample expertise,
may proliferateintoanother'sbenefit. In the case of disability sport, there is a tendency to deliver
sports that are either practical to deliver, or sports that are perceived to carry a high demand.
Unwillingness to change the current balance of resources may alleviate conflict between
stakeholdergroups,butthe nature of the policycommunityisdynamic,therefore changing political
and financial balances are subject to alter stakeholder behaviours.

40
4. To identify and explain the stakeholder benefits derived from sport policy
Stakeholder benefits are contingent on the public policy issue of disability sport marginalisation
reachingthe systematicandinstitutional policyagenda.Thisistosaythat indisabilitysportthere isa
strongrequirementtohave prominent policy actors in the sector. These actors must have lobbying
capabilities which can address the relevant metanarratives to influence government policy
formulation.
Onthe level of CPathletes,the impactof inclusivesportopportunities derived from sport policy is
multifaceted. Evidenced by public physical activity articles such as Designed To Move, The Lancet
and Start Active Stay Active, the health outcome of opportunities to play sport has a tendency to
developintoalong-termbehavioural trend,whilstthe social,physical and psychological benefits of
inclusion are predominant.
Organisationally, whilst sport policy has a guiding role in educating people about disability sport
and physical activity,organisationsstillretainahighdegree of agencyinpursuingtheirown agendas
and objectives. In these terms, the usage of the stakeholder approach to frame this project is
potentially problematic, as it makes the assumption that organisations actively want to surface
difficult issues, which may not necessarily be beneficial or solvable.
Future Research
5. To establish a suitable future direction for the CP sport stakeholder community
This research addresses the need for a cross-dimensional analysis of the current disability sport
policycommunity.Therefore,future researchthatcouldbuildonthis work may come in the form of
a longitudinal study which emphasises policy change and policy variation. Additionally, a large
proportionof theoretical perspectivesinthisprojectare derived from international infrastructures,
which may not necessarily be directly applicable to the locus of this project. Therefore, the need

41
existstoperforma comparative studyacrossdifferentpolitical andeconomicconditions, which may
offera betterunderstandingof causalityfrompolicycreation to policy implementation in different
social environments.

42
Reference List
BARNES,C. 1996. “Forward”. In Disability politics: Understanding ourpast,changingour future,
Editedby:Campbell,J.andOliver,M.ix–xii.London:Routledge.
BARNES,C. andSHELDON, A.,2010. Disability,politicsandpovertyinamajorityworld context.
Disability & Society, vol.25, no. 7, pp.771-782 ISSN 0968-7599. DOI
10.1080/09687599.2010.520889.
BRAUN,V. andCLARKE, V.,2006. Using thematicanalysisinpsychology.QualitativeResearch in
Psychology,vol.3,no.2, pp. 77-101 ISSN 14780887. DOI
10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
CANS,C.,GUILLEM, P., ARNAUD,C.,BAILLE, F.,CHALMERS, J.,MCMANUS, V.,CUSSEN,G.,
PARKES,J.,DOLK,H., HAGBERG, B., HAGBERG, G., JARVIS,S.,COLVER,A.,JOHNSON, A.,
SURMAN, G., KRÄGELOH-MANN,I.,MICHAELIS,R.,PLATT, M.J.,PHAROAH,P., TOPP,M.,
UDALL, P., TORRIOLI,M.G., MICELI, M. and WICHERS, M., 2002. Prevalence and
characteristicsof childrenwithcerebral palsyinEurope. DevelopmentalMedicine
and Child Neurology,vol.44,no.9, pp.633-640 ISSN 00121622. DOI
10.1017/S0012162201002675.
CHARLTON,J. I.1998: NothingAboutUs WithoutUs: DisabilityOppressionand Empowerment.
Berkeley:Universityof CaliforniaPress.
CLARK,M.A.,RILEY, M.J.,WILKIE, E. and WOOD,R.C.,1998. Researching and writing
dissertationsin hospitalityand tourism. International ThomsonBusinessPress.
COBB R W, ELDER C D 1972 ParticipationinAmericanPolitics:The Dynamicsof Agenda Building.
AllynandBacon,Boston

43
COLERIDGE, P. 2006. “CBR as part of communitydevelopmentandpovertyreduction”. In CBR as
partof communitydevelopment:A poverty reduction strategy,Editedby: Hartley,S.
19–39. London:UniversityCollege London,Centre forInternational Child Health.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, 2011, PublicDocument,
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/start-active-stay-active-a-report-on-
physical-activity-from-the-four-home-countries-chief-medical-officers
DEPARTMENT FOR CULTURE, MEDIA ANDSPORT, 2004, PublicDocument,
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1
20730/SEFinancialDirections.pdf
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1
20728/SEPolicyDirections2007.pdf
DEPARTMENT FOR CULTURE, MEDIA ANDSPORT, 2010, Website,
https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/creating-a-fairer-and-more-equal-
society/supporting-pages/making-it-easier-for-disabled-people-to-stand-for-election
https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/creating-a-fairer-and-more-equal-
society/supporting-pages/the-social-model-of-disability
https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/creating-a-fairer-and-more-equal-society
https://www.sportengland.org/media/130949/DCMS-Creating-a-sporting-habit-for- life-
1-.pdf

44
https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/getting-more-people-playing-sport
DONALDSON,T.and PRESTON,L.E.,1995. The StakeholderTheoryof the Corporation: Concepts,
Evidence,andImplications.TheAcademy of ManagementReview,vol.20, no.1, pp.
65-91 ISSN 03637425.
FREEMAN, R.E.,1984. Strategicmanagement:a stakeholderapproach. Boston(Mass.) ; London:
Pitman.
FULLAGAR, S.,2002. Governingthe HealthyBody:Discoursesof LeisureandLifestyle within
AustralianHealthPolicy.Health:,vol.6,no. 1, pp.69-84 ISSN 1363-4593. DOI
10.1177/136345930200600104.
GRATTON,C., 1948- and JONES,I.,1970-., 2010. Research methodsforsportsstudies. 2nd ed..
ed.London:Routledge.
GUTTMANN, A.,2004. Fromritual to record : the natureof modern sports. Updatedwitha new
afterword..ed.NewYork;Chichester:ColumbiaUniversityPress.
HILL, M., 1937- and HAM, C.,1997. The policy processin the modern state. C.HAM ed.,3rd ed..
ed.London:Prentice Hall.
HOULIHAN,B. and LINDSEY,I., 2013. Sportpolicy in Britain. I. LINDSEY ed.,New York: London:
Routledge.
HUSSEY, J. and HUSSEY, R., 1997, BusinessResearch,Basingstoke:Macmillan.
JOHN,P.,1960-., 1998. Analysing publicpolicy. London:Continuum.

45
KING,N.A.,2009. Sportpolicy and governancelocalperspectives. Oxford:Butterworth- Heinemann.
LASSWELL, H., 1970. The emergingconceptionof the policysciences.Policy Sciences,vol.1, no.
1, pp. 3-14 ISSN 0032-2687. DOI 10.1007/BF00145189.
LAVER,M., 1949-., 1986. Social choice and public policy. Oxford:Blackwell.
LEACH, R.,1941-., 2009. Political ideology in Britain. 2nd ed..ed.Basingstoke,Hampshire ;
NewYork:Palgrave Macmillan.
LOLLAR, D.J.and CREWS, J.E.,2003. Redefining the role of publichealthindisability.Annual
Review of Public Health,vol.24, pp.195-208 ISSN 01637525. DOI
10.1146/annurev.publhealth.24.100901.140844.
MALCOLM, D., 1969-., 2008. The SAGE dictionary of sportsstudies. London:SAGE.
MURPHY, N.A.,CARBONE,P.S.andAmericanAcademyof PediatricsCouncil onChildren With
Disabilities,2008. Promotingthe participationof childrenwithdisabilitiesin sports,
recreation,andphysical activities.Pediatrics,May,vol.121, no.5, pp. 1057- 1061 ISSN
1098-4275; 0031-4005. DOI 10.1542/peds.2008-0566 [doi].
NIKE,2012,DesignedTo Move:A Physical ActivityActionAgenda,PublicDocument,
http://s3.nikecdn.com/dtm/live/en_US/DesignedToMove_FullReport.pdf
O'GORMAN,J., 2011. Where isthe implementationinsportpolicyandprogramme analysis? The
EnglishFootball Association'sCharterStandardasan illustration.International Journalof
SportPolicy and Politics, vol.3, no.1, pp.85-108 ISSN 1940-6940. DOI
10.1080/19406940.2010.548339.

46
PAREKH,BHIKHU. 2008. A NewPolitics of Identity:Political Principles foran Interdependent
World. Palgrave MacMillan.
PARSONS,D.W.,1995. Public policy : an introduction to the theory and practice of policy analysis.
Aldershot:EdwardElgar.
PIGGIN,J.,2015. Designedtomove?Physical activitylobbyingandthe politicsof
productivity.HealthEducation Journal,vol.74,no. 1, pp. 16-27 ISSN 0017-8969. DOI
10.1177/0017896913517385.
PIGGIN,J. andBAIRNER,A.,2014. The global physical inactivitypandemic:ananalysisof knowledge
production.Sport,Education and Society,pp.1-17 ISSN 1357-3322. DOI
10.1080/13573322.2014.882301.
PIGGIN,J.,JACKSON,S.J.andLEWIS, M., 2009. Knowledge,powerandpolitics:contesting
'evidence-based'nationalsportpolicy.
RHODES, R.A.and MARSH, D.,1992. New directionsinthe studyof policynetworks. European
Journalof Political Research,vol.21, no.1‐2, pp.181-205.
RIMMER, J.H.and MARQUES, A.C.,2012. Physical activityforpeoplewith disabilities.The
Lancet,vol.380, no. 9838, pp.193-195 ISSN 0140-6736. DOI 10.1016/S0140-
6736(12)61028-9.
SHELDON,A. One world,one people,one struggle?Towardsthe global implementationof the
social model of disability.

47
SPARKES,A.C.,authorandSMITH, B.(.M.).,author.,2013. Qualitative research methodsin
sport,exercise and health: fromprocessto product. B.(.M.).SMITHauthor ed., London:
Taylor& Francis.
SPARKES,A.C.,PÉREZ-SAMANIEGO,V.andSMITH,B., 2012. Social comparisonprocesses,
narrative mappingandtheirshapingof the cancer experience:A case studyof an
elite athlete.Health:,vol.16,no. 5, pp.467-488 ISSN 1363-4593. DOI
10.1177/1363459311428229.
SPIVOCK,M.and GAUVIN,L. PromotingPhysical ActivityamongPersonswithPhysical Disabilities:
Stepstowardsa Population-basedPerspective.
SPORTENGLAND, 2014, Website, https://www.sportengland.org/our-work/disability/
SPORTENGLAND, 2014, Website, https://www.sportengland.org/funding/our-different-
funds/inclusive-sport/
SPORTENGLAND, 2015, Website, https://www.sportengland.org/our- work/disability/disability-
infographics/
SPORTENGLAND, 2015, Website, https://www.sportengland.org/our- work/disability/disability-
infographics/
STONE,D.A.and STONE,D.A.,2002. Policy paradox :theart of political decision making. D.A.
STONE ed.,Rev.ed..ed.NewYork; London:Norton.
THOMAS, A.2000: Meaningsand viewsof development.InT.AllenandA.Thomas(eds), Povertyand
Developmentintothe 21stCentury.MiltonKeynes:The Open Universityinassociation
withOxfordUniversityPress.

48
THOMAS, N.B.,2004. An examination of thedisability sportpolicy networkin England:a case
study of the English Federation of Disability Sportand mainstreaming in seven sports. ©
Nigel BrianThomas.
VAN ECK,M., DALLMEIJER, A.J.,BECKERMAN,H., VAN DEN HOVEN,P.,A.M.,VOORMAN,J.M. and
BECHER, J.G., 2008. Physical activitylevel andrelatedfactorsinadolescentswith
cerebral palsy.PediatricExercise Science, vol.20, no. 1, pp.95 ISSN 0899-8493.
VERSCHUREN,O., KETELAAR,M., HERMANS,D. andWIART, L., 2012. Identificationof facilitators
and barriersto physical activityinchildren andadolescentswithcerebral palsy.
Journalof Pediatrics,vol.161, no. 3, pp.488-494 ISSN 00223476. DOI
10.1016/j.jpeds.2012.02.042.
WANN,D.L.,1997. Sportpsychology. UpperSaddle River,N.J.:London:Prentice Hall ; Prentice-
Hall International.
WILLIG, C., 1964-., 2008. Introducing qualitativeresearch in psychology :adventuresin theory and
method. 2nded..ed.MiltonKeynes:OpenUniversityPress.

49
Appendices
Appendix 1- Research Information Sheet Template
Hi,
I'm writingtoyou withregardto the researchI am conductingwhichwasbrieflydiscussedonthe
phone today.Sothe salientinformationisasfollows:
Withyour permission,Iamlookingtoconduct a phone interview nextweekwithsomeonein
your organisationtoprovide me withsome insightintothe disabilitysportnetwork.The title of
my independentresearchprojectis''Towhat extentdothe stakeholdersof cerebral palsysport
benefitfromthe settingof sportpolicy?''Therefore,Iwill be hopingtoaskyou aboutthe
followingareasof disabilitysport:
-yourrole as a national disabilitysportorganisationforthe disabled(andnon-disabled
population
-yourrelationshipwithyourpartners,suchasnational governingbodies,disabilitysport
organisations,and governmentorganisationssuchasthe EnglishSportsCouncil
-yourreliance onfundingandthe fundingdistributionprocess
-yourrole inmeetingphysical activityguidelinesforthe disabledpopulation
-yourcommitmenttomeetinggovernmentpolicy
-yourcommitmenttoprovidingapathwayfromgrassrootsto elite sport
-attitudestowardsintegrationandmainstreamingof disabilitysports
-the majorbeneficiariesof yourworkand the initiativesyouare workingontoachieve your
objectives
The interview will ideallylastnomore than40 minutes,althoughitiscompletelyinyourcontrol
whetheryouparticipate andhowlongyouare willingtoparticipate for.Iwill runthroughall the
relevantdetailsaboutthe workIam doingandthe procedure once again before the interview.I
will clarifyinformationsuchasmyresponsibilityinthe procedure,aswell asthe destinationof
the data whichwill be recordedusingavoice recorder.All inall,the processisessentiallysoIcan
findouta bitmore about yourworkand the disabilitysportnetworkasIam keentolearnand
expandmyknowledgeof the topic.There isnopressure toprovide a''model'' answerto
anything,asall I am lookingforisa participantwitha sufficientlevel of insightintothe
disability/cerebralpalsysportnetworkwhocangive me some informationformyresearch.
I hope thisinformationclearsupanyquestionsyoumayhave hadaboutmy research,although
please letme knowif youhave anyfurtherqueries.Mynumberis07792584959, althoughI am
happyto be contactedthrough thisemail addressaswell.
As I saidonthe phone,I'dideallylike totalktosomeone byFriday,althoughIam veryflexible on
the timing.Hope tohear back fromyou soonso we can arrange a date.
Kindregards,
Niall McCaffrey
LoughboroughUniversity

50
Appendix 2- Interview Structure Template
1. As an organisation, what are your primary aims?
2. Who do you consider to be your clients?
3. To what extentwouldyousaythatyouhave a responsibilitytointegrate disability sports
with mainstream populations?
4. How is you funding organised and distributed within the disability sport network?
5. Do you have a working relationship with _________?
6. How do you ensure that all your stakeholders are aware of the same aims and
objectives?
7. How do you decide which sports hold precedence for funding and resources?
8. Would you say that you have a direct working relationship with disability/CP athletes?
9. To what extent do you focus on grass roots participation over elite competition?
10. How do you prepare your workforce to deliver inclusive opportunities?
11. To what extent do you cooperate with government organisations?
12. How do you measure the success of the strategies that you implement?
13. Do you advocate the government's encouragement of youth sport (14-25)?
14. Which stakeholder groups have the greatest responsibility to break down the barriers
that preventCPpersonsanddisabilitygroupsfrom participating in sport and integrating
in society?

51
Appendix 3- Sample Interview Transcript Extract (CP Sport)
Researcher: The government has recently placed quite an explicit amount of attention on
addressing the needs of youth sport, particularly those aged 14 to 25. Is this something that you
advocate?
Participant: Well, our inclusive sport money is 14 to 25 because we don't just get Sport England
money,weworkacross....wewould say wework cradle to grave, so we work younger than that.
If you look at someof our kick startfootball... we have five year olds at our football... and under,
you know we take them at three. The same with swimming, we take them younger. I appreciate
that Sport England has to start somewhere, but you can't try to say to a child at seven ''no, no...
you can't come'',it doesn'tworklike that.Theconcern is thatthe peoplethat should be supplying
the sporting opportunities at a younger age are not doing that, they're not being made
accountable I don't believe.

52
Appendix 4- Consent Form
To what extent do stakeholders of cerebral palsy sport benefit from the setting of sport
policy?
INFORMED CONSENT FORM
The purpose and detailsof thisstudyhave beenexplained. Iunderstandthat
thisstudyis designedtofurtherscientificknowledge andthatall procedures
have beenapprovedbythe LoughboroughUniversityEthicsApprovals(Human
Participants) Sub-Committee.
Yes  No 
I have readand understoodthe informationprovidedandhave beeninformed
of thisconsentform.
Yes  No 
I have had an opportunitytoaskquestionsaboutmyparticipation. Yes  No 
I understandthatI am underno obligationtotake partinthe study. Yes  No 
I understandthatI have the rightto withdraw fromthisstudyat any stage for
any reason, andthat I will notbe requiredtoexplainmyreasonsfor
withdrawing.
Yes  No 
I understandthatall the informationIprovide willbe treatedinstrict
confidence andwill be keptanonymousandconfidential tothe researchers
unless(underthe statutoryobligationsof the agencieswhichthe researchers
are workingwith),itisjudgedthatconfidentialitywill have tobe breachedfor
the safetyof the participantor others.
Yes  No 
I agree to participate inthisstudy. Yes  No 

53
Appendix 5- Research Progress Report
The progressreportfor thisproject(dated06/11/14) waswrittenasan initial researchproposal,
detailingthe intendedresearchdirectionof the project,andincorporatingaconcise planof action.
Research question: initially my first research topic which I decided to focus on was team
cohesion.However,myfocushassince changedtothe topicof sport policy,andmore specifically
itsimplicationson cerebral palsy sport in the UK. This change was motivated by my search for a
purposeful topic which contained opportunities to conduct a combination of pure and applied
research. With the growing media attention and equal rights support of physical and mental
disabilitysport,afocus on a disability such as cerebral palsy in the context of sport policy holds
great significance for a research project. Cerebral palsy is a term used to describe the
neurological condition which affects someone’s movement and coordination (NHS, website).
Therefore,apersonwhoexperiencesthe effectsof cerebral palsymaybe lessinclined to adopt a
physicallyactive lifestyle.AccordingtoVerschurenetal’s(2012) work on facilitators and barriers
to physical activityinchildrenandadolescentswithcerebral palsy,individualswithcerebral palsy
(CP) are less physically active and have poor fitness levels which can compromise daily
functioning.Therefore,the creationof along-termstrategythroughthe settingof national policy
holds a great importance in maintaining the welfare of people with CP. Thus, the research
question which I have decided to use is ‘’to what extent do stakeholders of cerebral palsy sport
benefit from the setting of sport policy?’’.
Literature search: thisresearchprojectwill be groundedbythe theoretical basisof stakeholder
theory,initiallyproposed byFreeman(1984) and thenanalysedbyDonaldsonandPreston(1995)
in terms of its concepts and implications on corporations. Stakeholder theory implies that
corporations should move away from the traditional shareholder view of prioritising owners’
returns,andmove towards appeasing the needs of various stakeholders with an interest in the
company, such as customers, suppliers, communities, governments, or trade associations. This
theoryholdsrelevance tomyprojectbyattemptingtoexplainthe behaviour of the government
whosetspoliciesanddistributes resources, and organisations (e.g. National Governing Bodies)
whoimplementcertainpolicies on their chosen segment. Additional literature which has been
investigatedincludesVerschuren et al’s (2012) work on facilitators and barriers to children with
cerebral palsyinHolland.Althoughthispaperhighlightsthe environmental and personal factors
which influence the experiences of children and adolescents in physical activity, the study is
confinedto a geographical areawhichisnotrelevanttomy study;therefore Iaminvestigatingan
area which may have different social and contextual implications for setting policies. Also, my
research will aim to make a link between sport policy (input) and the impact on stakeholders
(output) which is not a common theme in current literature in a disability sport context. This is
with the exception of Thomas’ (2004) study on the disability sport policy network in England,
which highlighted seven particular sports and looked at disability in a more general sense.
However,myresearchwill lookspecificallyatcerebral palsy sport and also the wider causes and
effects for the various stakeholder groups. Another theoretical base from which I may conduct
my research is that of the Multiple Constituency Approach (Terry, Conlon and Deutsch, 1980),
althoughthe suitabilityof thisgroundingisyettobe confirmed.Research into policy setting will
begin with The Department for Culture, Media and Sport, and subsequently the Governing
Bodies and private organisations who offer physical activity and sport to those with cerebral
palsy,froma grass roots to an elite perspective; for example, Sport England, UK Sport, CP Sport,
and the English Federation of Disability Sport.

54
Research design: for this project, I will be conducting a combination of descriptive and
explanatoryresearch,withatheoretical grounding(stakeholdertheory).The methodswhich will
be employed are mainly qualitative and empirical in nature, in the forms of primary data
collection from both interviews and questionnaires. Semi-structured Interviews will be
conductedwithpurposefulsamplesof individualswhorepresentthe policysettersinthe UKwith
the objective of understandingthe goals of the policies being set, whilst questionnaires will be
usedto understandtrendswhichexistinotherstakeholder groups (e.g. a random sample of the
general public).The quantitative aspectof this research will be evident from the obtainment of
secondarystatistical datawithregard to participation figures in the disabled community, which
will enable me tounderstandthe impactof sportpolicyonCPathletes.Therefore,the analysisof
my research will be largely deductive in nature, and will take both theoretical and empirical
stancesto forma coherentconclusion.One of the aimsof thisprojectis to identify the extent to
which sport policy objectives have reached their targets in the form of stakeholders. A further
point which must be explored is therefore which pathways of sport and physical activity exist
currently for CP individuals, and how these pathways can be improved in the future to achieve
the policyobjectives.Aspartof the conceptual threadof the project,I will also be conducting an
explorationintohowpolicyissetinthe UK to understandandappreciate the processesinvolved.
As part of the research process, the theme of disabled sport is one which must be treated with
much sensitivityandcaution.Whilstnot planning to interact directly with the participants of CP
sport,the notionof researchingandunderstandinga sector of the sport market with such moral
sensitivityshouldnot be underestimated. For this reason, the correct steps have been taken to
ensure thatthe correct code of practice is followedwhilstusinghumanparticipants,forexample
ethical clearance anda riskassessment.The timescale that I will follow is on a month-by-month
basis,forexample bythe endof nextmonthI hope to have completed my literature review and
formulatedmyinterview andquestionnaire structure, although this is yet to be agreed with my
supervisorinournextmeeting.The anticipatedoutcomeof thisresearchistoproduce a research
reporton the relative strengthbetweensport policy setting for CP individuals in the UK and the
benefits experiences by the stakeholder groups associated with CP sport. Therefore, the
structure of the projectwill incorporate the processof policysetting,the role of government and
private organisationsindelivering sport to those with CP, and the impact on society in the form
of the stakeholder groups that the policy affects.

Niall McCaffrey

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (9)

Similar to Niall McCaffrey

Similar to Niall McCaffrey (20)

Niall McCaffrey