Abstract
Athlete maltreatment has drawn significant attention from governing bodies, stakeholders and the global public. While a number of policies have been introduced to address maltreatment, their effectiveness calls for an analytical approach to policy design incorporating three considerations: an acknowledgement of policy and political goals, an understanding of path-dependence and adaptation, and an anticipation for conflict. Focusing on South Korea’s responses to scandals, this study draws from 18 interviews with government officials, sport organisation managers and athletes. Findings first suggest that while revised rules have led to heightened political legitimacy, they have also generated conflicting perspectives on punishments and ambiguities in the management of training camps. Second, data suggests that the Korea Sport Ethics Centre (KSEC), the new agency tasked with investigating maltreatment, lacks independence, adequate staff and professionals, sufficient authority to investigate and punish, and trust amongst athletes. Third, stakeholders reported the limitations of educational programmes, including incomplete coverage in a one-hour compulsory programme, repetitive content and a disproportionate focus on sexual abuse. Consequently, this article suggests that when policy makers neglect design considerations (such as the inertia of previous policies or stakeholder conflict), countermeasures for addressing maltreatment may be prone to ambiguity and failure.