Pedisic, Zeljko ORCID: 0000-0003-2886-3556 and Jurakić, Danijel ORCID: 0000-0002-4861-4066 (2002) Sports Club for Health (SCforH) Movement in the European Union: Conclusions and future directions. In: Sports Club for Health (SCforH) movement in the European Union. Pedisic, Z, ed. Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia, pp. 294-297.

Abstract

The wide recognition of the importance of Sports Club for Health (SCforH) movement in Europe is a result of more than 15 years of continuous work of the SCforH consortium. This book was written to inform and facilitate the further development of SCforH movement. Herein, we present main conclusions from 10 chapters of this book and suggest future directions for the SCforH movement. In the chapter “Sports Club for Health movement: definitions and terminology” we defined 48 terms that are commonly used in SCforH-related communications (1). The definitions may help standardise the use of these terms and improve the effectiveness of communication related to SCforH. Therefore, the members of SCforH consortium should endeavour to use the SCforH-related terms in accordance with the definitions presented in this chapter. From the chapter “Physical activity guidelines for health: evolution, current status, policy context, and future outlook” (2), it can be concluded that physical activity guidelines are constantly evolving. However, all the recommendations, starting from the historical ones dating before 1980s to the current ones, can be met by participating in sports. The SCfroH movement should, therefore, keep its focus on the promotion of health-enhancing sports. The chapter “Physical activity and sport participation in the European Union” (3) shows that a large number of people in Europe do not adhere to physical activity guidelines. This means that more work on the promotion of physical activity has to be done by implementing SCforH and other initiatives. As it can be seen from the chapter “The structure of the European sports system as a framework for the implementation of health-enhancing sports activities” (4), several components of the European sports system need to be improved to reach their full potential for the promotion of health-enhancing physical activity. This should be facilitated by implementing the SCforH approach in sports organisations at the European, national, and sub-national levels. From the chapter “The history of HEPA Europe: Growing from an EU-funded project towards a WHO-Europe network” (5), it can be seen that HEPA Europe played a major role in the development of SCforH movement and many other initiatives to promote health-enhancing physical activity. HEPA Europe can serve as a role model for networking and effective capacity building in the sports and health sectors. The SCforH consortium should continue collaborating with and contributing to the HEPA Europe network. From the chapter “The history of the Sports Club for Health movement in Europe” (6), it is clear that the SCforH movement has long tradition and extensive legacy. A major milestone in the history of SCforH movement was the acknowledgment of the SCforH guidelines on the list of indicators for the evaluation of health-enhancing physical activity promotion in the European Union countries that was made by the Council of the European Union. By continuing its high quality work, the SCforH consortium should aim to ensure progress on this indicator in all European Union member states. In the chapter “Sports Club for Health movement in published media: a systematic scoping review” (7), we found 196 academic and non-academic publications about SCforH and an increasing trend in their numbers over time. To increase the awareness of SCforH guidelines among the stakeholders in the sports sector, the SCforH consortium should continue increasing the number of its publications. The chapter “Promotion of health-enhancing sports activities through European and international umbrella sports organisations: four examples of good practice” (8) shows that the European Federation for Company Sport (EFCS), European Non-Governmental Sports Organisation (ENGSO), International Sport and Culture Association (ISCA), and The Association For International Sport for All (TAFISA) have been very active in promoting health-enhancing physical activity and the SCforH approach. The SCforH consortium should continue its successful collaboration with these and other European and international umbrella sports organisations. The results presented in the chapter “Dissemination of Sports Clubs for Health guidelines in Europe: a survey-based evaluation” (9) suggest that the national governments in European countries are substantially more committed to the promotion of elite sports than to the promotion of health-enhancing physical activity. The results also show that the awareness and use of SCforH guidelines in sports clubs and associations could be significantly increased. Therefore, the SCforH consortium should aim to raise the awareness of policymakers about the importance of health-enhancing sports activity and continue disseminating the SCforH guidelines among representatives of sports clubs and associations. The 76 initiatives described in the chapter “Sports Club for Health and similar initiatives in Europe: examples of good practice” (10) can serve as a source of ideas for sports clubs and associations when implementing the SCforH approach. The SCforH consortium should, therefore, continue cataloguing and spreading the news about the examples of good SCforH practice. We are confident that the findings presented in this book will help in the selection and shaping of future activities aimed to advance the SCforH movement.

Search Google Scholar

Repository staff login