Continuing last week´s initial coverage of an important Ipsos Marplan Institute report on the wider Brazilian sport industry, the study also reveals that although the Brazilian federal government has taken a much stronger position on sport industry investment since the mid 1980s, the total is still very low compared to top spending countries the US, the UK and France. While in 2004 the latter countries spent 1.6%, 1.8% and 1.9% respectively of federal revenue on sport, Brazil´s equivalent was just 0.087% (US$192 million).
Brazilian state and city government spending on sport is also very low, with an average of just 0.9% of financial resources spent on sport for the 26 states and the federal district, while the 5,567 Brazilian municipalities spend on average 0.96% (2003 figures), with the 400 biggest municipalities receiving over two thirds of the public funding for sport.
The report explains that Brazil´s Government has historically viewed sport in two categories, elite/middle class, practiced mainly in private schools and sport clubs, and low income sport, utilising the modest resources and sport facilities of public schools and equally modest public sporting facilities funded by the three tiers of government. The city council level of government accounts for the greatest presence of government in sport in Brazil, with rich states and macro-regions providing significantly more resources for sport than their poorer cousins.
Overall, the Dossié Esporte report make a strong point that sport receives an insufficient amount of public funding in Brazil, particularly given the proven social and economic advantages associated with investment in sport.
It also highlights the heavy cost of a burdensome bureaucracy in Brazilian sport spending, which sees more than half of the public funding for sport ‘lost’ on administrative functions and support services. For example, in 2004 53% of the spending by the federal ministry of sport was on personnel, management and administrative support, social security and other costs, leaving just 47% for direct investment in sport programs. In comparison, countries such as the US, Australia and NZ work off a breakdown closer to 20% administration costs and 80% on direct investments in sport.
Further details from the report covering Brazil’s private sector will be provided next week.