social value of sports: focus on sports creating a sense

Social value of sports: focus onsports creating a sense ofcommunity — A case study onsports promotion in Japan

Kazunori Maeda1 Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics andManagement

Kozo Tomiyama2 Osaka University of Health and Sport Sciences,Department of Health and Sport Management, School of health and SportSciences

Ken Sumida3 Shizuoka Sangyo University, School of Management

The aim of this study was to investigate the formation of the community

through sports and the sports policy that municipalities advanced. A

case study was conducted applying combination of two theories: MAS

(mechanism, actions, and structure) theory, which is mainly explored in

macromarketing and sense of community (SOC) theory, which is widely

discussed in community psychology. Its research site was a town of which

municipal leaders intentionally promote only field hockey by ruling other

sports out. Qualitative data were collected through interviews; and most

of interviewees were responsible for the promotion of field hockey in a

town in Japan. The collected data were analyzed through two coding

steps: (1) open coding and then (2) axial coding. The findings demon-

strated that each of the interviewees considered the promotion of hockey

[email protected]@[email protected]

359

SOCIAL VALUE OF SPORTS 360

as his own responsibility, even though all of those who were involved in the

promotion had different visions and goals. Through the processes of pro-

moting hockey, it became a symbol for the town bonding the municipal

institutions, educational institutions, and residents together. This is that,

the sports policy successfully enhanced the sense of community in the

town.

Introduction

Social value of sports: impact on community formation

Sports can be a platform for the formation of social values in a community(Hori, Kida, and Usui, 2007). According to Hori et al. (2007), the social value ofsports can be categorized based on its economic and social impacts. Previ-ous research has already discussed the economic value of “improving facil-ities and infrastructure” and the social value of “community formation,” “re-gional identity formation,” and “promoting exchanges between locals andforeign nationals.”

There was a need to focus more on the social values promoted by sports(Crompton, 2004) because social values are intangible when compared witheconomic values, and policies prioritizing sports should be implemented bear-ing these social values in mind (Crompton, 2004; Chalip, 2006; Hori et al.,2007; Kida, Takahashi, and Fujiguchi, 2013). Therefore, studies were con-ducted of sporting events to investigate the social values of these eventson host cities and areas (Olympic Games: Waitt (2003); Super Bowl: Kim andWalker (2012); Tour de France: Balduck, Maes, and Buelens (2011); Marathon:Yamaguchi, Yamaguchi, and Nogawa (2014)). Hori et al. (2007) undertooka study on 24 municipalities that hosted pre-camps in the 2002 Japan-KoreaSoccer World Cup, particularly focusing on the expected impact on the hostcities and the actual consequences. The economic impact calculated af-ter the event in 2003 met only 12.5% of the expectations calculated in 2000;however, the social impact was much greater than expected (Hori et al.,2007).

To understand the kind of social values resulting from sporting events andhow these can be achieved through promotion of sports, a case study wasundertaken in this paper focusing on Okuizumo, a Japanese town that haspromoted hockey for over 30 years. Communities have been formed through


the sport of hockey and its continuous promotion. Here, in this paper, we aregoing to introduce Okuizumo and its hockey promotion activities.

Hockey town in Okuizumo, Shimane, Japan

Field hockey has been Okuizumo’s main sport since 1982 whenKokutai (the National Sports Festival of Japan) was held in ShimanePrefecture. This was the first time the town hosted such a prestigioushockey game. Since then, the town municipality office, with coop-eration from the community, has worked to encourage the sport’sprogress.

This sentence appears on the PR page of the website of Okuizumo, Shi-mane Prefecture, extending an invitation to teams from across the worldto the 2020 Tokyo Olympic Games (Okuizumo Board of Education, 2016).Okuizumo, Shimane Prefecture, is a town in a mountainous area with a pop-ulation of 15,000 or less (Okuizumo, 2011). Nevertheless, the residents believethat “hockey is the symbol of Okuizumo,” and the town produces a numberof Japan’s Olympic competitors (Nagano, 2012). As stated, ever since thenational festival was held in 1982, Okuizumo’s main sport has been hockey. Inthis research, we focus on how sports can become a catalyst in connectingthe residents of a region, forming a new community, and developing the re-gion. Japan in recent times is trying to cope with the problem of decreasingbirthrates and an aging population as a result of which personal relation-ships are becoming diluted. According to Masuda (2014), 896 municipalitiesin Japan will disappear by 2040. Currently, hosting the Tokyo Olympic Gamesis an endeavor by the local government to make a regional revitalizationplan by featuring sports as the main factor. This research contributes to a fu-ture regional revitalization plan by clarifying the structure of the hockey townformation.

The National Sports Festival of Japan, Shimane

The National Sports Festival of Japan (Kokutai), held by the Japan Sports As-sociation in 1946, right after Japan’s defeat in World War II, offered the peo-ple and the youth, especially, who had lost ambition and entertainment,the pleasure of sports. It encouraged the proliferation of sports in Japan. It


was the first sports event held in an area that escaped war damage (Kwon,2006). Kokutai is a sports competition held at the prefectural level and heldin a different prefecture each year. The current standard aim of Kokutai is“to encourage widespread participation in sports among people, build asporting spirit, improve health and physical fitness, promote local sports andits culture, and enrich people’s lives” (Japan Sports Association, 2015, on-line). The Japanese government has been using Kokutai as a policy andsports promotion mechanism to increase the number of sportspersons andimprove players’ abilities and develop better sports facilities (Kwon, 2006).“Kunibiki Kokutai” was held in Shimane Prefecture in 1982. In the 1980s, host-ing the Kokutai became a social issue because the prefectural governmentthat hosted a Kokutai faced the burden of maintenance of the facilities, itsadministration, and management after the Kokutai, and the responsibility forimproving players’ competitiveness. These were also a burden on the edu-cational institutions. Kunibiki Kokutai was held in an era when “Kokutai hadjust started to become a local festival after being a national festival.” Peo-ple then began to increasingly regard Kokutai as a “regional mobilizationmovement” of the host prefecture. The aim was to foster “prefecture attach-ment,” develop the region, and strengthen the bonds among citizens livingin the prefecture by holding Kokutai (Kwon, 2006, pp. 213-218). In ShimanePrefecture as well, they worked on Kokutai as a policy to activate the region.

On deciding to co-host Kokutai, Nita and Yokota Town (later merged in2005 and renamed Okuizumo Town) began the process of making them-selves “the hockey town” by co-hosting the field hockey match venue. Al-though Yokota Town’s first choice was to host a mountain sport and NitaTown’s was to host a table tennis competition, they lost the selection tohost these sports. Then the two towns decided to co-host the hockey com-petition (Shimane Prefecture Hockey Association, 2009). Since hockey wasnever played in both the towns, they had to begin from the scratch. Thetowns established the Shimane Prefecture Hockey Association and hockeyclubs in elementary schools, junior high schools, and high schools for the firsttime. They took an extreme step and abolished all other sports clubs such asbaseball, soccer, and basketball to promote only hockey. Nevertheless, thetowns achieved regional successes: uniting the communities through sports(hockey), increasing players’ competitiveness, and improving the psycholog-ical well-being of the locals. The regional successes were underpinned by thefact that the citizens perceived the social values of hockey and attached im-


portance to it. The leaders of the community may also have played a partin the formation of the community. Undoubtedly, there were both economicand social impacts in creating a hockey town in Okuizumo through Kokutai,a major national sports event. Thus, in this study, the social values that havebeen perceived in the formation of the hockey town are discussed.

The aim of this study was to investigate the formation of the communitythrough sports and the sports policy that municipalities advanced. A casestudy was conducted applying the sense of community (SOC) theory, whichis widely discussed in community psychology. The SOC theory conceptuallyexplains the formation of communities based on the psychological states ofthe individuals who identify themselves with the communities (McMillan andChavis, 1986; McMillan, 1996, 2011; Nowell and Boyd, 2010, 2011, 2014).

Sense of community theory

Sense of community theory: four elements of sense of commu-nity

The concept of SOC has been widely debated in community psychology,which examines processes by which individuals form communities. Sarason(1974) proposed SOC as “a sense that one was part of a readily available,mutually supportive network of relationships upon which one could dependand as a result of which one did not experience sustained feelings of lone-liness” (p.1). Extending this concept, McMillan and his colleague (McMillan,1976; McMillan and Chavis, 1986) established the SOC theory as “a feelingthat members have of belonging, a feeling that members matter to one an-other and to the group, and a shared faith that members’ needs will be metthrough their commitment to be together” (McMillan, 1976, p. 9). This defi-nition has four elements: 1) membership, 2) influence, 3) integration and ful-fillment of needs, and 4) shared emotional connection. These four elementsrepresent not only the sub-elements comprising the SOC but also the orderof community formation (McMillan and Chavis, 1986; McMillan, 1996, 2011).

Membership is “a feeling that one has invested part of oneself to becomea member and therefore has a right to belong” (McMillan and Chavis, 1986,p. 9). Membership commonly creates boundaries that divide individuals whobelong and who do not. McMillan and Chavis (1986) suggest, “boundaries


provide members with the emotional safety necessary for needs and feelingsto be exposed and for intimacy to develop” (p. 9). Members make sacrificesto belong to the community and personal investments such as time and ef-fort increase their commitment to it. They know that becoming a memberallows them to protect themselves from threats and gain emotional safety,affiliation, and unity.

Once membership is established, then influence becomes fostered. Influ-ence between a community and its members can work both ways at thesame time. On the one hand, members work actively to make a differ-ence to the community; on the other hand, cohesiveness depends on howthe sense of community matters to its members (McMillan and Chavis, 1986;Nowell and Boyd, 2011).

After members perceive that through membership they can influencetheir community, they start seeking newer ways of becoming more involvedwith the community and fulfill their needs. The third element is integrationand fulfillment of needs. Members meet each other’s needs and there isreinforcement (McMillan and Chavis, 1986). Hence, a strong community iscreated by activities such as sharing and exchanging values within the com-munity, acquiring a position, and reinforcing each other’s ability.

The fourth element is shared emotional connection. It is “the commitmentand belief that members have shared and will share history, common places,time spent together, and similar experiences” (McMillan and Chavis, 1986, p.9). Togetherness of the community is reinforced through events that mem-bers repeatedly experience. This is because “the interactions of membersin shared events and the specific attributes of the events may facilitate orinhibit the strength of the community” (McMillan and Chavis, 1986, p. 13).Shared emotional connection increases cohesion within the community bymembers sharing common experiences. These experiences eventually be-came symbols defining membership; they became culture and history.

Previous studies advancing SOC

A number of studies have been undertaken to demonstrate four elementsof SOC that McMillan and Chavis (1986) proposed. Chavis, Hogge, McMil-lan, and Wandersman (1986) conducted telephone interviews with 1,200 res-idents of Nashville, Tennessee, and developed a scale of SOC for residentialareas. This scale was called SCI (sense of community index). SCI had been


used in a wide range of research (Perkins, Florin, Rich, Wandersman, andChavis, 1990; Bishop, Chertok, and Jason, 1997; Proescholdbell, Roosa, andNemeroff, 2006; Obst and White, 2004, 2007; Flaherty, Zwick, and Bouchey,2014). Perkins et al. (1990), for example, used the SCI to assess SOC amongresidents of New York.

Although a great deal of effort had gone into a series of quantitative stud-ies, questions about the validity of the SCI were unresolved. In order to ad-dress the validity questions, Peterson, Speer, and McMillan (2008) developeda simpler scale, the BSCS (brief sense of community scale). Prezza, Pacilli,Barbaranelli, and Zampatti (2009) made another attempt and developedthe MTSOC (multidimensional sense of community scale) by adding two el-ements, social climate and help when in need, to McMillan and Chavis’s(1986) four elements to make a multidimensional assessment of SOC of localresidents. At the same time, SCI and BSCS have also been used to mea-sure a variety of non-geographical communities such as science-fiction fans(Obst, Zinkiewicz, and Smith, 2002), college students (Obst and White, 2004),gay communities (Proescholdbell et al., 2006), German navy (Wombacher,Tagg, Bürgi, and MacBryde, 2010), and participants in health programs (Now-ell and Boyd, 2014). However, none of these studies completely reflects thefour elements, that is, the questions of validity still leave room for discussion.Nowell and Boyd (2010, 2011, 2014) advocate that a community is formedbased on innumerable contexts and this would cause validity issues. Insteadof applying McMillan and Chavis’s (1986) four elements of SOC, Nowell andBoyd (2010, 2011, 2014) proposed an alternative viewpoint of SOC, sense ofcommunity as responsibility.

SOC as responsibility

Nowell and Boyd (2010) pointed out that thus far, most researchers havebeen struggling to capture the four elements in a quantitative manner; theyquestioned the community formation process that McMillan and Chavis (1986)proposed. In their contention, the most decisive cause was probably the factthat the SOC theory of McMillan and Chavis (1986) was related to the needs-based theory of McClelland (1961). By contrasting the items of SCI (Chipuerand Pretty, 1999) and BSCS (Peterson et al., 2008) with the needs-based the-ory, they suggested that the four elements are based on the “need for af-filiation,” “need for power,” and “need for achievement.” Nowell and Boyd


(2010) viewed SOC related to the needs-based theory as sense of commu-nity as resource (SC_rsc) and said, “SOC within this perspective can thus beredefined as an individual’s sense that their community serves as a resourcefor meeting key physiological and psychological needs such as the need foraffiliation, power, and affection” (p. 833). Thus, SC_rsc is rooted personalexpectation of benefits that members can gain by belonging to the com-munity.

Some members become affiliated to the community not only on to meettheir personal needs or interests but also to express their sense of responsi-bility in the belief that psychological well-being results from partnership withothers. Nowell and Boyd (2010) considered responsibility to play an impor-tant role in community formation and this concept is referred to as “sense ofcommunity as responsibility (SC_resp).” In other words, the SC_rsc is fosteredwhen members perceive personal needs for crisis avoidance and emotionalsafety. The reliability and validity of SC_rsc were unstable possibly becausethis concept ignored members who developed a community based on theirown beliefs and sense of responsibility. To address validity issues, Nowell andBoyd (2010) emphasized introducing SC_rsc and SC_resp: “We see two dis-tinct models grounded in different theoretical traditions that complementone another in providing a more holistic perspective on SOC” (p. 838).

Later, Nowell and Boyd (2014) tried to develop the scale of SC_resp andquantitatively study how community satisfaction and leadership are affectedby comparing it with BSCS (i.e. SC_rsc). The results of the study suggestedthat people who have higher SC_resp are treated more as leaders and theyhave a higher sense of commitment to the community. Considering theseresults, SC_resp may be an effective concept to describe members’ involve-ment in community formation.

SOC theory in the context of sports

SOC research in the context of sports has focused thus far on college sportsand campuses (Clopton, 2007, 2008; Warner, Shapiro, Dixon, Ridinger, andHarrison, 2011; Elkins, Forrester, and Noël-Elkins, 2011). Previous studies usedthe campus atmosphere scale to assess the relationship between (1) com-petition performance and SOC in a university (Clopton, 2007, 2008), (2) uni-versity sports spectators and SOC in a university (Warner and Dixon, 2011),and (3) participation of university students in college recreational sports and


SOC in a university (Elkins et al., 2011). The campus atmosphere scale wasdeveloped by Lounsbury and DeNeui (1996) by referring to the SCI of Chavisand Newbrough (1986), but since the content is a comprehensive arrange-ment of SOC in a university context, many original items are included in it (i.e.“My parents like this college”).

Warner et al. (2011) and Warner, Dixon, and Chalip (2012) proposed SOCin the context of sports in qualitative research to clarify the SOC of top stu-dent athletes of the university (NCAA) compared to student athletes in sportsclubs. Based on the findings of the SOC in the context of sports, Warner etal. (2013) conducted a quantitative study focusing on the SOC of the univer-sity archery club and developed an SCS (sense of community in sport) scalecomprising elements of Administrative Consideration, Common Interest, Eq-uity in Administrative Decisions, Leadership Opportunities, Social Spaces, andCompetition. Their research was based on the SOC of McMillan and Chavis(1986) and not of Nowell and Boyd (2010, 2014). However, in terms of Lead-ership, both mention that a) Leadership is a concept that closely resemblesthe influence factor of McMillan and Chavis (1986), which has great influ-ence on other members, and b) Leadership strongly relates to responsibilityand increases SOC. Later, Nowell and Boyd (2014) linked Leadership to re-sponsibility.

Justification for applying SC_resp in the context of sports

Summarizing our review, SOC is an appropriate and useful theory that ex-plains the processes of community formation. SOC has been traditionallyexplained by needs-based theory, wherein members in the community ex-pect to gain benefits from belonging to the community. Indeed, Nowell andBoyd (2010) suggest another complementary concept, SOC as responsibility(SC_resp), wherein individuals feel a sense of responsibility to take action asexpected of them by other members in the community. In this research, weadopt the concept of SC_resp to address the purpose of this study, that is, toexplain process of community formation.

The research site chosen was Okuizumo, wherein the leaders exerted theirauthority to promote hockey, which had never been played previously. Theleaders were motivated to promote hockey due to a sense of responsibilityrather than an expectation of benefits for themselves. In Okuizumo, this na-tional sports event triggered hockey promotion, making it the “hockey town.”


It is important that SOC research clarifies how local residents increased com-munity cohesion through sports. At the macrolevel, it is significant to inves-tigate a system in which leaders undertook the responsibility of deliveringhockey in the town, particularly in schools and children’s sports clubs.

SC_resp and marketing system

We think that it is effective to focus on a marketing system defined by Layton(2007) in order to demonstrate the mechanism of community formation froma macro marketing point of view. He explained a marketing system as “anetwork of individuals, groups and/or entities, embedded in a social matrix,linked directly or indirectly through sequential or shared participation in eco-nomic exchange, which jointly and/or collectively creates economic valuewith and for customers, through the offer of assortments of goods, services,experiences and ideas, that emerge in response to or anticipation of cus-tomer demand” (Layton, 2007, p. 230), and suggested that “. . . the formationand growth of a marketing system reflects the social, cultural, political andeconomic life of communities, the physical environments in which communi-ties are located, and the historical context or legacies that each communityhas inherited” (Layton, 2014, p. 305).

Layton (2014) also suggested MAS (Mechanisms, Actions, and Structure)theory as a process of forming a marketing system. “MAS theory draws ona common but heterogeneous set of human endowments and relationshipsand begins with the dynamic co-evolution of behaviors, beliefs, and socialpractices that together combine to change the way that individuals, groupsand entities act in response to or anticipation of external events. While theco-evolution of beliefs, behaviors and practices is singled out as a principaldriver of system change it is also the first of four primary social mechanisms— co-evolution, trust, exchange, and emergence — that have their origin inanalytical sociology” (Layton, 2014, p. 307).

Comparing conceptual properties of MAS theory and SC_resp, SC_respmay correspond to a part of social mechanisms and co-evolution, and ac-tion fields in the MAS theory. SC_resp describes processes of community for-mation (SC_resp model will be explained in the section 4). According toNowell and Boyd (2010), initially personal belief system and community con-text leads to emergence of psychological responsibilities. Then psychologi-cal responsibilities have a direct influence on community-enhancing behav-


iors. For the hockey promotion in Okuizumo, the leaders might have followedtheir personal belief system in turn responsibilities, and then attended to theirduties. Taken together, we ponder that personal belief system in SC_resp the-ory to a certain degree correspond to social mechanism and co-evolutionin MAS theory. Likewise, community engagement may correspond to actionfields. Psychological responsibilities may do bridging these sets of marketingsystem (of SC_resp model theory). Therefore, it is reasonable to assume theSOC theory is incorporated into this MAS theory.

Research questions

We set forth the following three questions in this research.RQ1: How did the municipal leaders feel about their responsibility toward

the policy on hockey promotion? In Okuizumo, national and municipal poli-cies were set forth to promote hockey. Therefore, leaders (e.g. mayor) beganto consider promote hockey on top priority. In the light of SC_resp (Nowelland Boyd, 2010, 2011, 2014), we suggest that the sense of responsibility of theleaders played an essential role in promoting hockey, leading to communityformation.

RQ2: How did the coaches of the schools perceive hockey and act tomake Okuizumo the hockey town? Hockey was promoted according to themunicipal hierarchy, with the mayor first notifying the policy on hockey pro-motion. On receiving this official notice of the mayor, subordinate organiza-tions such as Shimane Prefecture Hockey Association and the Committee ofEducation were responsible for translating it into action. At the bottom of thehierarchy, schools and children’s sports clubs followed the notice from theHockey Association and Committee of Education. According to ShimanePrefecture Hockey Association (2009), the municipal leaders believed thatthat promoting hockey would not possible without schools’ engagement incoaching hockey. Schools had to become the agents for promoting hockeyat the grassroots level. Similarly, coaches of school sports teams also under-took on the responsibility of carrying out their task, and in due course, hockeybecame meaningful for them.

RQ3: How did members of each organization contribute to making Okuizumothe hockey town? Okuizumo is unique in that it successfully overcame theproblems of building bonds among residents and communities. It is extremely


Figure 1: The hierarchy of hockey promotion in Okuizumo

difficult to promote cohesiveness among residents and communities, be-cause residents (or members) have different beliefs and goals for their differ-ent communities (or organizations) as previous SOC research has suggested(Chavis and Pretty, 1999; Mahan, Garrard, Lewis, and Newbrough, 2002;Nowell and Boyd, 2010). In town development that uses a certain sport asa symbol, it is certainly worth investigating the influences of hockey as thecommon symbol on community formation.

Method

This study was qualitatively designed to address the research questions. In-terviewees were selected according to the criterion that they were personswho had been assigned some responsibility in the promotion of hockey (seeTable 1). As shown in Table 1 and Figure 1, interviewees were selected fromeach category of the organizations in the municipal hierarchy. For example,the former mayor was selected from the top category of the municipal hier-archy (see Figure 1). An interview was conducted with the former mayor fortwo hours after explaining to him the purpose of our research.

The semi-structured interviews referred to the SC_resp model (Nowell andBoyd, 2010, 2011, 2014). Specifically, the questions were regarding their (1)personal belief system, (2) SOC as responsibility (SC_resp), (3) leadership,(4) community engagement, and (5) psychological well-being (see Figure2). In parallel, we conducted a review of literature on the former mayor ofOkuizumo, the history of hockey by Shimane Prefecture Hockey Association(2009), and Nagano (2012) to gain a better understanding of the intervie-


Tab

le1:

De

scrip

tion

ofI

nte

rvie

we

es

Hie

rarc

hyIn

terv

iew

ee

Oc

cu

pa

tion

Ge

nd

er

Beg

an

top

rom

ote

ho

cke

yTo

p1

The

form

erm

ayo

rofO

kuiz

umo

Ma

le19

73M

idd

le2

Ad

min

istra

tive

dire

cto

ro

fSh

ima

ne

Pre

f.H

oc

key

Ass

oc

iatio

nM

ale

1978

3Ed

uc

atio

nc

om

mitt

ee

Ma

le19

82Bo

tto

m4

He

ad

co

ac

ho

fth

eju

nio

rh

igh

sch

oo

lho

cke

yc

lub

Ma

le19

82

5H

ea

dc

oa

ch

oft

he

ch

ildre

n’s

spo

rts

clu

bA

Ma

le19

856

He

ad

co

ac

ho

fth

ec

hild

ren

’ssp

ort

sc

lub

BM

ale

1985

7H

ea

dc

oa

ch

oft

he

hig

hsc

ho

olh

oc

keyc

lub

Ma

le19

89O

the

rs8

Pare

nts

ofh

oc

key

pla

yerA

Ma

le19

959

Pare

nts

ofh

oc

key

pla

yerB

Fem

ale

1995


Figure 2: SC_resp model. Source Nowell and Boyd (2010)

wees’ responses.After all the interviews were completed, the contents were transcribed.

Open and axial coding were used to categorize concepts correspondingto the research questions. Open coding was used to clarify essential cate-gories that were prominent in the narratives. Axial coding focused on howthe categories identified through open coding were linked to the SC_respmodel.

Findings and discussion

RQ1: What did municipal leaders feel about their responsibility regarding thepolicy on hockey promotion? First, the comments of the former mayor ofOkuizumo, who was deeply involved in hockey at Kokutai to make Okuizumothe “hockey town,” include phrases such as “for the town” and “town devel-opment”:

Honestly speaking, I didn’t care which sports were appropriate,because I believed Kokutai itself was an opportunity for town de-velopment. I initially wanted to host kendo. All my thoughts wereonly for the development of the town. I made huge efforts to al-locate a substantial budget for facility development and for trans-portation expenses. Sports are not promoted unless there is intensefocus on it. The town had to have a certain level of financial re-sources to promote sports. It was important that the town provideconsiderable subsidies for promotion of the sport. Players’ compet-itiveness has increased, and as a team, they were able to demon-strate a great performance. People in the town held a party to


celebrate when the team won games even held outside town. Asa result, hockey became a sport providing great excitement forthe town. I decided to abolish a few sports clubs at schools, buthad to make students and their families give up participating inother sports and promote hockey.

As the comments of the former mayor make clear, hockey was used as asymbol to allocate support in the form of facilities and property as part of hisresponsibility. Therefore, in the SC_resp model, the former mayor’s personalbelief system entailed responsibility toward the town (i.e. SOC as responsibil-ity) and enhanced the engagement of various communities or organizations.

Second, the comments of the administrative director of Shimane Prefec-ture Hockey Association included phrases such as “I wanted to return to myhome town” and “through the momentous event of Kokutai, I wanted tomake it happen.” He decided to promote hockey to secure his position andhis own sense of belonging to Okuizumo:

We were able to promote hockey in elementary schools becausethe town backed us up and provided all the elementary schoolswith cages, sticks, protectors, and all other necessary equipment.Kokutai provided benefits not only for the maintenance of infras-tructure but also for the improvement of competitive skills; hockeyin Okuizumo became the best in Japan. Hockey became thepride of the town; the high school won the Triple Crown, and Olympicplayers were chosen. The association started elementary-schoolstudent hockey competitions in 1984 to expand the base of hockeyafter Kokutai. As Okuizumo became famous for hockey, we contin-ued to promote hockey with coaching facilities and by sponsoringteams coming from all over the country, attracting training camps.

The comments of this administrative director indicate that he too had asense of responsibility in making Kokutai a success to promote his hometown.The hockey association promoted hockey with the town providing the facili-ties, equipment, and physical resources. They succeeded in fostering pride inthe town saying, “hockey is less popular than baseball or soccer in Japan, sowe believe we have a huge opportunity to be the champions, even thoughthe town is a small one.” Applying this finding to the SC_resp model, the ad-ministrative director’s personal belief system was to do everything possible


“for the hometown and Kokutai’s success.” He fostered SC_resp, reflectingthe former mayor’s words. As a result, communities such as accompanyingschools have increased their engagement with hockey and a communitycontext was created with hockey as the symbol. A member of the educationcommittee clarified (this interviewee had experienced Kunibiki Kokutai whenhe was a junior high school student; later, in 1994, he was hired for his currentposition) that they have been supporting hockey without expecting eco-nomic benefits. Specifically, committee’s financial support was 1,210,000 yenfor the prefectural hockey association, 620,000 yen to improve elementary-school and junior-high-school hockey, 1 million yen for the general top team,400,000 yen annually for each group that takes part in the hockey compe-tition, and 188,000 yen for assistance to the sports club youth group. Nowthe staff of the town committee is working to maintain the hockey commu-nity, which is a major support for junior high schools. This comment mainlyconcerns the period after Kunibiki Kokutai:

Even if we attend Kokutai held in another prefecture, we can getwinning points at hockey. I was proud of that. We did not expecteconomic gains from supporting hockey, but the hosting trainingcamps will produce great results. We will continue to develop ourtown by hosting training camps and arranging matches with thelocal high school and consider these to be our administrative tasks.

As stated, by applying the SC_resp model, we realize that the educationcommittee’s personal belief system was to “promote the hometown” out ofa sense of belonging, and the interviewee fostered SC_resp in this belief. Thecommittee created a supporting culture by repeatedly investing, expectingsocial value, and then increasing engagement with the community.

RQ2: How did the coaches of the schools perceive hockey and then takeaction to become the hockey town? First, the comments of the head coachat the junior high school hockey team revealed that his leadership had adifferent purpose than that of municipal leaders:

I was not born in Shimane Prefecture, but I got the job as a hockeycoach here because there were few hockey players in Japan. Inany case, I just wanted to coach my players. I wanted to takecare of my players as long as they wanted to take lessons fromme. I just couldn’t give that up. Hockey was not famous at all,


but I thought that it would be possible to produce a top playerwho brings honor to Japan. Hockey hadn’t yet taken root when Iarrived in the year of Kokutai, but in 1985 we won the third placein the national competition. This event led me to stay here. Afterwe won the championship, I decided to stay on and coach myplayers further.

From this comment, the hockey coach at the school was trying to fulfillresponsibilities to his club. Taking his narrative into the SC_resp model, weassume that his personal belief system was entirely “for my students” and hispassion toward his job was the source of his responsibility; coaching with re-sponsibility made his students form a united team so that they won competi-tions. As a result of this unity, they won the championship; they showed com-munity engagement and acquired well-being. Next, concerning the com-ments from the two coaches of the elementary-school hockey club (bothstarted playing hockey in elementary school after Kunibiki Kokutai in 1982),it was clear that they were involved in hockey as coaches with a sense ofresponsibility for the community, and as a result, hockey became graduallyestablished in schools.

We have played hockey at several bases since our childhood. Forexample, in our town the only sport event for the townspeoplewas hockey competition. After we became head coaches in thistown, we appreciate the fact that the town has supported hockey.The town provided the lighting equipment for the field so that wecan coach at any time. We want elementary-school students tochoose to play hockey after entering junior high school. I think itis nice for other sports to become available, but we want them tokeep playing only hockey.

Similar to the coach in junior high school, the comments of interviewee4, also reflect a solid personal belief system “for our students.” Interestingly,they perceived the benefits, such as the psychological well-being, from thepromotion of hockey; in other words, the coaches were not only facilitatorsfor the promotion of the hockey community but also the recipients of munic-ipal policy. As Nowell and Boyd (2010) stressed (see Figure 2), they continueto create a circulating community context in which their SC_Resp enhancescohesiveness as in the elementary school club.


Similar results were also obtained from the head coach of the high schoolhockey club (he started playing hockey in 1989):

“I started playing hockey because everyone around me was playing hockey,and I naturally went to the tournament and realized it was fun. My top prior-ity was to coach players to win when I arrived in this high school. . . . I havebeen telling the players about the greatness of the game hockey and havebeen training them to aim for the top.”

His personal belief system was “for my students.” We propose that it isuniversal for coaches to bear the responsibility for their clubs and students.It is fair to say that coaches have cherished the tradition of having a per-sonal belief system for students, which helps in the formation of the hockeytown. Finally, we interviewed parents whose children have played hockey atvarious ages, from primary school to college. It was an indirect rather than adirect part of popularizing, instructing, and playing hockey. These are peoplewho belong to each school community as the general townspeople. Theircomment was that

“If our kids did not play hockey, we would be completely indifferent inhockey at all. We do not know what to do if the children cannot play hockey.We have been thinking about what can be done to build a hockey commu-nity. Neither us nor anyone unrelated to hockey says ‘this town is the hockeytown’ when speaking of this whole town.”

This point of view is the same as Nowell and Boyd’s (2010) statement that“some members expressed a sense of responsibility for the betterment andwell-being of other members and the partnership as a whole that was explic-itly not rooted in expectation of personal benefit” (p. 835). In the applicationof the SC_resp model, interviewees 8 and 9 also represented SC_resp, whichhelped in raising community engagement as a couple or family with the be-lief that they were acting on behalf of “their kids.”

Therefore, the coaches, unlike the municipal leaders, demonstrated thatthey increased the cohesiveness of their community based on SC_resp withtheir leadership by regarding hockey as a great opportunity. In addition,hockey was a minor sport that had the potential to produce top playersand teams in Japan and this allowed them to regard hockey as a sourceof pride and a symbol of the region. Although the municipal leaders and thecoaches had different types of responsibilities for achieving their purposes,they came together to build the “hockey town.”

RQ3: How did the members of each organization contribute to making


Figure 3: The mechanism involved in making Okuizumo a “hockey town”

Okuizumo the hockey town? This study describes how hockey was promotedand recognized in the complex context of geographical communities (town,administration) and non-geographical communities (associations, schools,guardians: residents). The leaders acted to fulfill their responsibilities for dif-ferent purposes in each community, but the symbol (i.e. hockey) was thesame. In other words, the mechanism to make Okuizumo a “hockey town” isa successful example in which sports integrated townspeople with differentpurposes with the same solid symbol: “hockey” (see Figure 3).

General discussion

This study makes two contributions: First, it shows that SC_resp was applica-ble to studies on SOC. According to Nowell and Boyd (2010), most of theprevious studies investigating SOC followed the needs-based theory, whereinindividuals are viewed as those who expect to gain benefits by belonging toa community. Instead of adopting a needs-based theory, Nowell and Boyd(2010) proposed a model of SOC as responsibility in which individuals of the

REFERENCES 378

community try to understand and play the role that other members in thecommunity expect them to do in the formation of the community. Regard-less of geographical and non-geographical communities, the responsibilitiesof members in a community can enhance their community engagementeven when they have different purposes or goals for the community.

Second, it shows that sport is a useful tool that can be a symbol to inte-grate people. In this study, it was considered that the symbol (i.e. hockey)integrated leaders with different purposes to form a hockey town. As we treatsports as a symbol, it is necessary for the region municipality to apply this sym-bolism to focus on sports promotion with a view to community formation orcohesion improvement. Although the scope of this study was what to selecta symbol, it also suggests that sports is easy to symbolize because it is public.“Activating the town through sports” is a general and abstract slogan. Thisstudy tried to bring out the possibility of applying a systemized model by theSOC theory.

References

Balduck, A.-L., M. Maes, and M. Buelens, 2011. The social impact of the Tourde France: Comparisons of residents’ pre-and post-event perceptions. Eu-ropean Sport Management Quarterly 11 (2): 91–113.

Bishop, P. D., F. Chertok, and L. A. Jason, 1997. Measuring sense of community:Beyond local boundaries. The Journal of Primary Prevention 18 (2): 193–212.

Chalip, L., 2006. Towards social leverage of sport events. Journal of Sport &Tourism 11 (2): 109–127.

Chavis, D. M., J. H. Hogge, D. W. McMillan, and A. Wandersman, 1986. Senseof community through Brunswik’s lens: A first look. Journal of CommunityPsychology 14 (1): 24–40.

Chavis, D. M. and G. M. Pretty, 1999. Sense of community: Advances inmeasurement and application. Journal of Community Psychology 27 (6):635–642.

Chipuer, H. M. and G. M. Pretty, 1999. A review of the sense of community

REFERENCES 379

index: Current uses, factor structure, reliability, and further development.Journal of community psychology 27 (6): 643–658.

Clopton, A., 2008. College sports on campus: Uncovering the link betweenfan identification and sense of community. International Journal of SportManagement 9 (4): 343–362.

Clopton, A. W., 2007. Predicting a sense of community amongst studentsfrom the presence of intercollegiate athletics: What roles do gender andBCS-affiliation play in the relationship? The SMART inancial Journal 4 (1):95–110.

Crompton, J., 2004. Beyond economic impact: An alternative rationale forthe public subsidy of major league sports facilities. Journal of sport man-agement 18 (1): 40–58.

Elkins, D. J., S. A. Forrester, and A. V. Noël-Elkins, 2011. The contribution ofcampus recreational sports participation to perceived sense of campuscommunity. Recreational Sports Journal 35 (1): 24–34.

Flaherty, J., R. R. Zwick, and H. A. Bouchey, 2014. Revisiting the sense of com-munity index: A confirmatory factor analysis and invariance test. Journalof Community Psychology 42 (8): 947–963.

Hori, S., S. Kida, and M. Usui, 2007. Community building using sports. Universityof Tokyo Press.

Japan Sports Association, 2015. The Kokutai standard requirement states.website. URL http://www.japansports.or.jp/Portals/0/data0/kokutai/pdf/

kitei53.pdf.

Kida, S., Y. Takahashi, and M. Fujiguchi, 2013. Community Building Using Sports2. University of Tokyo Press.

Kim, W. and M. Walker, 2012. Measuring the social impacts associated withSuper Bowl XLIII: Preliminary development of a psychic income scale. SportManagement Review 15 (1): 91–108.

Kwon, H. J., 2006. National Athletic Meets since 1946-2002: The Sports Festivaland Nationalism in Japan. AOKI-SHOTEN Publishing Co.

REFERENCES 380

Layton, R., 2007. Marketing Systems A Core Macromarketing Concept. Jour-nal of Macromarketing 27 (3): 227–242.

Layton, R. A., 2014. Formation, Growth, and Adaptive Change in MarketingSystems. Journal of Macromarketing 35 (3): 302–319.

Lounsbury, J. W. and D. DeNeui, 1996. Collegiate psychological sense of com-munity in relation to size of college/university and extroversion. Journal ofCommunity Psychology 24 (4): 381–394.

Mahan, B., W. Garrard, S. Lewis, and J. Newbrough, 2002. Sense of Commu-nity in a university setting. In Psychological Sense of Community , editedby A. Fisher, C. Sonn, and B. Bishop. Springer Science and Business Media,123–140.

Masuda, H., 2014. Chihou Shoumetsu. CHUOKORON-SHINSHA, INC.

McClelland, D. C., 1961. The Achieving Society . NJ: Princeton.

McMillan, D. W., 1996. Sense of community. Journal of community psychology24 (4): 315–325.

—, 2011. Sense of community, a theory not a value: A response to Nowelland Boyd. Journal of Community Psychology 39 (5): 507–519.

McMillan, D. W. and D. M. Chavis, 1986. Sense of community: A definitionand theory. Journal of community psychology 14 (1): 6–23.

McMillan, W., 1976. Sense of Community: an Attempt at Definition, Unpub-lished manuscript. George Peabody College for Teachers, Nashville .

Nagano, M., 2012. The Challenge from Okuizumo. Bungeishunju Ltd.

Nowell, B. and N. Boyd, 2010. Viewing community as responsibility as well asresource: Deconstructing the theoretical roots of psychological sense ofcommunity. Journal of Community Psychology 38 (7): 828–841.

—, 2011. Sense of community as construct and theory: authors’ response toMcMillan. Journal of Community Psychology 39 (8): 889–893.

Nowell, B. and N. M. Boyd, 2014. Sense of community responsibility in com-munity collaboratives: Advancing a theory of community as resource andresponsibility. American journal of community psychology 54 (3-4): 229–242.

REFERENCES 381

Obst, P., L. Zinkiewicz, and S. G. Smith, 2002. Sense of community in science fic-tion fandom, Part 1: Understanding sense of community in an internationalcommunity of interest. Journal of Community Psychology 30 (1): 87–103.

Obst, P. L. and K. M. White, 2004. Revisiting the sense of community index:A confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of community psychology 32 (6):691–705.

—, 2007. Choosing to belong: The influence of choice on social identificationand psychological sense of community. Journal of community psychology35 (1): 77–90.

Okuizumo, 2011. Shimane Prefecture Okuizumo HP. URLhttp://www.town.okuizumo.shimane.jp/admin/townpresentation/

townpresentation010/263.html.

Okuizumo Board of Education, 2016. URL http://

www.town.okuizumo.shimane.jp/files/Hycamp.html.

Perkins, D. D., P. Florin, R. C. Rich, A. Wandersman, and D. M. Chavis, 1990.Participation and the social and physical environment of residential blocks:Crime and community context. American journal of community psychol-ogy 18 (1): 83–115.

Peterson, N. A., P. W. Speer, and D. W. McMillan, 2008. Validation of a briefsense of community scale: Confirmation of the principal theory of sense ofcommunity. Journal of community psychology 36 (1): 61–73.

Prezza, M., M. G. Pacilli, C. Barbaranelli, and E. Zampatti, 2009. The MTSOCS: Amultidimensional sense of community scale for local communities. Journalof Community Psychology 37 (3): 305–326.

Proescholdbell, R. J., M. W. Roosa, and C. J. Nemeroff, 2006. Componentmeasures of psychological sense of community among gay men. Journalof Community Psychology 34 (1): 9–24.

Sarason, S. B., 1974. The psychological sense of community: Prospects for acommunity psychology.. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Shimane Prefecture Hockey Association, 2009. The hockey history in Shimane.

REFERENCES 382

Waitt, G., 2003. Social impacts of the Sydney Olympics. Annals of TourismResearch 30 (1): 194–215.

Warner, S. and M. A. Dixon, 2011. Understanding sense of community fromthe athlete’s perspective. Journal of Sport Management 25 (3): 257–271.

Warner, S., M. A. Dixon, and L. Chalip, 2012. The impact of formal versusinformal sport: Mapping the differences in sense of community. Journal ofCommunity Psychology 40 (8): 983–1003.

Warner, S., S. L. Shapiro, M. A. Dixon, L. L. Ridinger, and S. B. Harrison, 2011.The football factor: Shaping community on campus. Journal of Issues inIntercollegiate Athletics 4: 236–256.

Wombacher, J., S. K. Tagg, T. Bürgi, and J. MacBryde, 2010. Measuring senseof community in the military: cross-cultural evidence for the validity of thebrief sense of community scale and its underlying theory. Journal of Com-munity Psychology 38 (6): 671–687.

Yamaguchi, S., Y. Yamaguchi, and H. Nogawa, 2014. The perceived eventimpacts of the city marathon on event support of local residents: Compar-isons of pre-post surveys. Sasakawa Sports Foundation 4 (1): 140–148.

social value of sports: focus on sports creating a sense

Documents