John Gleaves & Ask Vest Christiansen

We are fighting the urge to start another editorial with the cliché, “The more things change, the more they stay the same” since it seems every editorial starts with the same sentiments. However, as we prepare again for our biennially conference this coming August 22 and 23 of 2019, it seems we find ourselves squarely focused on what has changed and what has stayed the same. Not only because of the recent revelations of blood transfusions involving Austrian cross-country ski racers (that has already spread to cycling and promises more sports), but because the theme of the 2019 conference is focusing on the two decades of the World Anti-Doping Agency’s role in leading a global harmonized anti-doping campaign. With twenty years of WADA, now is a chance for scholars to assess the organization’s impact on doping in elite sport.

WADA’s founding occurred in the wake of the 1998 Festina doping Scandal and the International Olympic Committee’s bribery scandal involving the 2002 Salt Lake City Winter Olympics. Government officials in both France and the United States publicly questioned sport’s ability to police itself. More importantly, the public’s confidence in sporting organizations to protect and preserve the moral integrity of their beloved institutions waivered.

Big steps were needed and big steps were promised.

Headed by the IOC’s Vice President, Richard “Dick” Pound, WADA would exist as an independent organization to at least ensure the credibility of sport’s anti-doping promises. WADA received half its funds from the Olympic Movement and the other half from national governments, with the United States as the largest supporter.

WADA’s structure mirrored that of the IOC, with a hub-and-spoke design that allowed WADA to set the rules and ensure their enforcement while delegating much of the work to national anti-doping organizations and international sport federations. In fact, the IOC had attempted a similar structure with enforcement of amateurism throughout the first half of the twentieth century only to witness inconsistency and hypocrisy ultimately lead to lax enforcement. It seems not all nations or sports had the same views on the need to enforce amateurism. In hindsight, anti-doping proved to have the exact same issues. Some nations insisted on strict enforcement and led the way with gold-standard anti-doping protocols while other nations looked the other way as their athletes violated the rules and a few took active roles in undermining the anti-doping process entirely.

As scholars, the INDR not only wishes to understand what happened in the past but also make some sense of where we are presently and where society should go. As always, we do not expect agreement or uniformity in these conclusions. In fact, we actively work to ensure keynote speakers provide different perspectives, represent different areas of research, and offer different insights into the issues. We believe value exists from hearing both established and emerging scholars disseminate their findings and confront findings that challenge their own views. Indeed, part of the INDR’s appeal is its members’ willingness to engage in friendly debate while sharing a meal (or a drink down at the Peter Gift Pub).

To prepare you for the 2019 conference, please find the keynote presenter’s abstracts. You will see scholars both new and familiar to the INDR with topics that should spark significant discussion. Please do not forget to submit your abstracts by following this link. Abstracts are due April 30 and should be between 250-400 words. We look forward to seeing you all back in Aarhus this August, and as usual, please join us Wednesday evening for an informal gathering at the Peter Gift Pub.