54 Faculty of Sport, University of Ljubljana, ISSN 1318-2269 Kinesiologia Slovenica, 14, 2, 54–63 (2008) POVZETEK Prispevek temelji na podatkih Evrobarometra iz leta 2005 (N=26.688) in omogoča delni vpogled v vzorce telesne dejavnosti državljanov Evrope. Analiza obravnava 1) splošne vzorce telesne dejavnosti in 2) socialno stratifikacijo vzorcev telesne dejavnosti v državah EU-27. Rezultati kažejo, da v letu 2005 štirje izmed desetih Evropejcev še vedno niso športno ali telesno dejavni v prostem času in da kljub tridesetletni politiki športa za vse ter demokratizacije dostopnosti športa, ti cilji še niso doseženi. Športna dejavnost še vedno pada od severa proti jugu in od zahoda proti vzhodu. Še več, vzorci telesne dejavnosti so še vedno podvrženi socialnim razlikam glede na spol, starost, stopnjo izobrazbe, poklic, zakonski status in socio- geografski status. Izziv za razvoj trdne politike je v čim večji meri podvreči vpliv geografskih in socialnih razlik potrebam družbene, zdravstvene on osebne sfere. Ključne besede: športna dejavnost, Evropa, socialna stratifikacija, Evrobarometer ABSTR ACT Based on Eurobarometer data from 2005 (N=26.688), this paper presents some insight into European citizens’ physical activity patterns. An analysis is performed of 1) overall physical activity patterns, and 2) social stratification of physical activity patterns in the EU-27. The results show that, as of 2005, four out of ten Europeans are still not exposed to sport or physical activity in their leisure time and, that in spite of 30 years of Sport for All policy, the democratization of sport participation in Europe is still not realized. Also, sporting activity declines when going from north to south and from west to east. Moreover, physical activity patterns are still characterized by social differences according to sex, age, educational level, occupation, marital status and socio-geographical status. The challenge of developing a sound policy consists of subordinating the influence of geographical and social differences as much as possible to the needs of the social, educational, medical and personal spheres. Key words: sport participation, Europe, social stratifi- cation, Eurobarometer 1 University of Gent, Department of Sociology 2 Catholic University of Leuven, Department of Human Kinesiology *Corresponding author: Ghent University Department of Sociology Korte Meer 5 9000 Ghent Belgium Tel: +3292648453 E-mail: charlotte.vantuyckom@ugent.be SPORT FOR ALL? SOCIAL STRATIFICATION OF RECREATIONAL SPORT ACTIVITIES IN THE EU-27 ŠPORT ZA VSE? SOCIALNA STRATIFIKACIJA REKREATIVNIH ŠPORTNIH DEJAVNOSTI V DRŽAV AH EU-27 Charlotte Van Tuyckom 1* Jeroen Scheerder 2 Sport for all? 55 Kinesiologia Slovenica, 14, 2, 54–63 (2008) INTRODUCTION Sport and Europe share a strong connection (see Scheerder, Van Tuyckom, & Vermeersch, 2007). Not only is Europe the birthplace of modern sport – which originated in the British public schools in the 18 th and 19 th century (Renson, 1992), but Olympism and the Sport for All movement also have their roots in European soil. The fact that Europe is considered by some to be “the powerhouse of world sport” (European Commission, 1998) is demonstrated by the number of international organizations who have established and maintained headquarters in Europe, for example the IOC (International Olympic Committee) in Lausanne, the FIFA (Fédération Internationale de Football Association) in Zürich, the IAAF (International Association of Athletics Federation) in Monaco, etc. The major role European countries have played historically in the organization of several international sport events is evident as well (Scheerder & Vermeersch, 2007): more than half of the Olympic Games and World Championship Football tournaments have taken place in a European host city. One of the distinctive characteristics of European sport is the so-called European sport model, a model in which sport is embedded within a network of sport clubs and sport federations which organize competitions at all levels and which are linked to one another through systems of promotion and regulation (Heinemann, 1999; Van Bottenburg, Rijnen, & Van Sterkenburg, 2005). For example, in the former EU-25 alone, approximately 750,000 clubs were operating, with about 150 million sustaining members, which equals one third of the total EU population. Put another way, there were about 17 sports clubs per 10,000 citizens (Scheerder, 2004). However, the majority of those active people were “amateurs” who did not make money from the practice of sports. One particular powerful, commercial sport dominates the European club scene: football (soccer). European football is the most popular sport in most countries and is growing in popularity in countries where this is not yet the case. Europe counts more football players than any other continent: of the 122 million official football players almost 36 million of them are active members of a European football club. As such, it is not surprising that a European sport federation such as the UEFA (Union of European Football Associations) is an important player in developing European sport policy (Scheerder & Van Tuyckom, 2006; Scheerder & Vermeersch, 2007). In addition to the traditional sport organizations, several European governments have con- tributed to the development of the European sport sphere. After World War II, many (West) European countries developed a noticeably active government policy with regard to sport and physical activity. An important aim of this policy was to inspire as many citizens as possible to get involved in sportive action and to take part in physical activities. In 1966 the Council of Europe had already launched the Sport for All idea, as a result of which Sport for All achieved a pioneer role in the advancement of sportive body movement among European citizens (Husting, 2003; Scheerder & Vermeersch, 2007). In 1975 government actions with respect to recreational sport became institutionalized in the form of the European Sport for All Charter (Council of Europe, 1975). Inspired by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, this Charter endorses the right to active sport participation for every citizen. All Council of Europe member-country ministers responsible for sport signed the Charter, and it still acts as a democratic counterbalance for the ideology of top level sport (Vanreusel, 2001). It is evident that societal interest in sport has increased in past decennia, and that active sport participation has become one of the most common forms of leisure activity. Crum summarized this trend as the “sportization of society” (1991, p. 15). However, this popularization of sports 56 Sport for all? Kinesiologia Slovenica, 14, 2, 54–63 (2008) does not imply that sport participation has become (more) democratized. Numerous empirical studies demonstrate that participation in sports still appears to be socially stratified according to sex, age, income, education, etc. (Collins, 2003; Collins & Kay, 2003; De Haan & Breedveld, 2000; Hartmann-Tews, 2006; Lamprecht & Stamm, 1995; Scheerder & Pauwels, 2002; Scheerder, Vanreusel, & Pauwels, 2007; Sugden & Tomlinson, 2000; Taks, Renson, & Vanreusel, 1998; Wil- son, 2002). Bourdieu’s perspective (1979, p. 24) on “sport as a site of struggles between the social classes” remains a topic of interest. In this paper, we intend to present an initial look at European citizens’ physical activity patterns. Specifically, an exploratory analysis is performed of (1) overall physical activity patterns in the EU-27, and (2) social stratification of physical activity patterns in the EU-27. By doing this we intend to develop a picture of sport participation in the European Union, and to verify whether traditional background characteristics such as sex, age, education, etc. still play an important part in recreational sport activities. The first section of this article describes the research material used for the (bivariate) analyses. In the second section, the results are presented. Finally, the third section discusses the results in greater detail and provides some policy recommendations. METHOD 1.1 Comparative research into physical activity Europe has a tradition of mapping out sporting activity based on scientific research from Eu- ropean member states, an approach that is aimed at enhancing a stimulating sports policy both on the European level and the level of the individual member states. For example, at the end of the seventies and the beginning of the eighties, Rodgers (1977; 1978) and Claeys (1982a; 1982b) conducted a study of the sporting behavior of European citizens, commissioned by the European Council. Two decades later a similar European project, the COMPASS study (COMPASS, 1999; see also Gratton, 1997; Rossi-Mori, Neri, Minelli, & Freda, 2002), showed the sporting activity of seven European member states by means of comparable and adjusted questionnaires. In addition to these seven countries, the COMPASS study also included twenty other countries that had data on sporting activity available; however, the figures provided did not allow for cross-national comparisons. More recently, the Dutch Mulier Instituut carried out a study, commissioned by Nike Europe (Van Bottenburg et al., 2005), about active sporting activity in Europe. This study provided an overview of research into sport activity in the (then still) 25 member states of the European Un- ion. However, this research was based on secondary source material, so results from the various countries are not comparable. Like the private initiatives mentioned earlier, an examination of the sporting activity of European Union citizens was conducted by the European Commission (in particular the Directorate-General for Education and Culture) by means of the Eurobarometer survey series (European Commission, 2004). Since these surveys apply standardized measure- ment instruments, they do allow for cross-national comparisons between the different European member states. 1.2 Research material The most recent Eurobarometer survey about recreational sporting activity was carried out in November 2005 by request of the European Commission, Directorate-General Press and Com- munication Polls. It covers the population of each of the EU member states aged 15 years and Sport for all? 57 Kinesiologia Slovenica, 14, 2, 54–63 (2008) older (N = 26,688). The survey was also conducted in Bulgaria and Romania, an interesting detail since at that time they were still preparing for accession to the EU. A multistage random sample design was applied in all countries and all interviews were conducted face-to-face in people’s homes, in the appropriate national language. With respect to the data capture, CAPI (Computer Assisted Personal Interview) was used in those countries where that technique was available (Papacostas, 2005). In each member state, at least 500 (Malta) and at most 1,557 (Germany) interviews were conducted. In spite of the standardized procedure, however, it must be considered that citizens from different member states may have different perceptions about the concept of sporting activity. Consequently, differences in responses might be partly ascribed to differences in conceptualization. This study focuses specifically on aspects of active sporting participation. Passive participation – as spectators, newspaper readers or television viewers – will not be dealt with here. Eurobarometer 64.3 (2005) assesses overall sporting activity by means of the following question: “In the last 7 days, how much physical activity did you get from recreation, sport and leisure-time activities?” The answer categories are as follows: (i) a lot, (ii) some, (iii) little, and (iv) none. Physical activity items not included are physical activity when at work, when moving from place to place, and when working in and around the house since these items are the subject of a different question. The original question is dichotomized, whereby respondents who answered “none” are defined as non-participants and those who answered “a lot,” “some” or “little” are defined as participants. This dependent variable is related to the following six background variables: Gender: – men versus women; Age: – (i) 15- to 24-year-olds, (ii) 25- to 34-year olds, (iii) 35- to 44-year-olds, (iv) 45- to 54-year- olds, (v) 55- to 64-year-olds, or (vi) 65 years old and older; Marital status: – (i) cohabiting or married, (ii) single, (iii) divorced, or (iv) widowed; Occupation: – (i) self-employed, (ii) manager, (iii) white–collar worker, (iv) manual worker, (v) house person, (vi) unemployed, (vii) retired, or (viii) student; Education (age when finished): – (i) younger than age 15, (ii) between age 15 and age 18, (iii) between age 18 and age 21, or (iv) after age 21; Geographical status: – (i) living in a rural area or village, (ii) living in a small- or mid-sized town, or (iii) living in a large town. To get an initial picture of active sporting participation with regard to certain socio-cultural and socio-economic background characteristics, several bivariate analyses were performed. The results of the analyses are presented by means of crosstabulations with Pearson chi²-test statistics. These statistics are used to test the hypothesis of no association between columns and rows in tabular data, or in the case of this study, no association between the independent and the dependent variables. A chi² probability of 0.05 or less is interpreted as justification for rejecting the null hypothesis that the row variable is unrelated (that is, only randomly related) to the column variable, or for accepting the alternative hypothesis that the row and column variables – or independent and dependent variables – are related to each other. R ESULTS 1.3 Overall physical activity First of all, we notice striking differences between the European member states with respect to sporting activity in 2005. Figure 1 shows Finland as the most active sporting nation. More than 58 Sport for all? Kinesiologia Slovenica, 14, 2, 54–63 (2008) eight out of ten Fins age 15 and older are physically active. Remarkably, in contrast with research from 2004 in which sporting participation was assessed by means of the question “How often do you exercise or play sport?” (Scheerder & Van Tuyckom, 2006; 2007), the other Scandinavian countries are not among the leaders in the present survey. Sweden (71%) and Denmark (62%) are merely in eighth and thirteenth place, respectively. Portugal and Romania are last with only four out of ten citizens being physically active. On average, 63% of the European adults indicate some sort of physical activity from recreation, sport or leisure-time activities in the last seven days. The percentages of countries which differ significantly from the European average are indicated with an asterisk (*p ≤ .05; ** p ≤ .01; ***p ≤ .001). In general, physical activity declines when moving from north to south in Europe. Citizens from more northern locations and from Scandinavian countries exceed their continental colleagues from the Mediterranean Sea area. In addition, East Europeans generally score less well in the sportive sphere than West Europeans. The exceptions, however, are Slovenia and to a lesser degree the Czech Republic and Bulgaria. Figure 1: Sporting activity for all EU-27 member states (2005), percentages in function of total population (* p ≤ .05; ** p ≤ .01; *** p ≤ .001 for difference with EU-27 average) 1.4 Social stratification of physical activity From Table 1 it is apparent that differences in physical activity occur according to sex, age, marital status, occupation, educational level and geographical status. First, more European men than women seem to be actively involved in sports. Whereas 66% of the European men aged 15 or more are active sport participants, this number decreases by 8% for their female counterparts. Second, age also seems to be a strong determinant of sporting activity in the EU-27. As age increases, sporting activity decreases. Almost 80% of the 15 to 24 year old Europeans are physically active, in contrast to merely 45% of the 65-year-olds. Third, sport activity clearly increases with additional years of education. Of the European citizens who finished school after the age of 21, 69% are Sport for all? 59 Kinesiologia Slovenica, 14, 2, 54–63 (2008) active in sport, in contrast to 39% of those who finished school before the age of 15. With respect to the relationship of physical activity to marital status, single Europeans are the most active (75%), followed by divorced people (64%) and cohabiting or married individuals (61%). Widowed Table 1: Sporting activity according to background variables for all EU-27 member states (2005), results of bivariate analyses, percentages in function of total population Variable Categories No Y es Sex men 34.2% 65.8% women 42.0% 58.0% chi² = 186,743; df = 1; p < .001; N = 28815 Age category 15- to 24-year-olds 20.2% 79.8% 25- to 34-year-olds 32.1% 67.9% 35- to 44-year-olds 34.8% 65.2% 45- to 54-year-olds 39.5% 60.5% 55- to 64-year-olds 42.8% 57.2% 65 years and older 55.5% 44.5% chi² = 1411,205; df = 5; p < .001; N = 28815 Marital status cohabiting or married 39.2% 60.8% single 24.6% 75.4% divorced 36.0% 64.0% widowed 60.5% 39.5% chi² = 986,539; df = 3; p < .001; N = 28495 Occupation self-employed 37.4% 62.6% manager 24.0% 76.0% white-collar worker 29.0% 71.0% manual worker 36.7% 63.3% house person 51.0% 49.0% unemployed 43.2% 56.8% retired 52.3% 47.7% student 15.2% 84.8% chi² = 1814,354; df = 7; p < .001; N = 28815 Education finished younger than age 15 61.0% 39.0% finished between age 15 and age 18 43.2% 56.8% finished between age 18 and age 21 36.1% 63.9% finished after age 21 31.4% 68.6% chi² = 1106,617; df = 3; p < .001; N = 26146 Geographical status rural area or village 42.6% 57.4% small-or mid-sized town 37.3% 62.7% large town 34.4% 65.6% chi² = 136,200; df = 2; p < .001; N = 28681 60 Sport for all? Kinesiologia Slovenica, 14, 2, 54–63 (2008) Europeans are the least physically active, which is not surprising given that this age group is generally older. Differences according to occupation can be noticed as well. As expected, sport participation grades are the lowest among retired citizens (48%) and the highest among students (85%). The latter are followed by managers (76%), white collar workers (71%), manual workers and self-employed individuals (both 63%), and unemployed persons (57%). The house persons group is, with only 49%, the least involved in sport and physical activity. Finally, geographical status is a determinant of sporting activity as well. Of the European citizens living in a rural area or village, 57% are active sport participants. This number increases to 63% for people living in a small- or mid-sized town, and to 66% for people living in a large town. DISCUSSION Sport and Europe are inextricably connected, and it seems clear that Europe will continue to strengthen its ties with professional and non-professional sports. Since the 1995 Bosman ruling, there has been a greater and greater involvement – governmental as well as non-governmental – in European sport policy. In addition, several academic and informal organizations have been estab- lished (see for instance www.easm.net, www.ejss.de and www.sportandeu.com) which focus on sport policy. Furthermore, in Europe a tradition is developing to empirically map several aspects of sport participation and sport policy. One of the most useful instruments for measurement on the European level is the Eurobarometer survey series. Based on the Eurobarometer survey of 2005, this paper has tried to present insight into the physical activity patterns of EU-27 citizens. In addition, our data has allowed us to carry out some exploratory bivariate analyses so that sport participation could be examined in function of certain socio-cultural and socio-economic background characteristics. Based on the Eurobarometer survey of 2005, this paper has tried to present insight into the physical activity patterns of EU-27 citizens. In addition, our data has allowed us to carry out some exploratory bivariate analyses so that sport participation could be examined in function of certain socio-cultural and socio-economic background characteristics. Some remarkable findings emerge from this paper. First of all, we find that the sport participa- tion behavior of Europeans is geographically stratified. In particular, there are some apparent differences between North and West European countries on the one hand and South and East European countries on the other hand. In general, sporting participation declines when going from north to south and from west to east, with a few exceptions. The reasons for this finding should be scrutinized in future research. On average, 63% of European citizens are physically active. However, the popularization of sport participation at the start of the 21st century does not change the fact that in 2005 four out of ten Europeans were still not exposed to sport or physical activity in their leisure time, even by the rather broad definition of physical activity used in the 2005 Eurobarometer survey. Furthermore, sport participation in the EU-27 is still socially stratified. The sportive leisure-time behavior of European citizens aged 15 and over seems to differ in terms of sex, age, marital status, occupation, educational level and geographical status. These findings are congruent with the results from previous national and regional studies into sport participation which have shown that in many European countries physical activity patterns are still characterized by social differences (see Collins & Kay, 2003; De Haan & Breedveld, 2000; Lamprecht & Stamm, Sport for all? 61 Kinesiologia Slovenica, 14, 2, 54–63 (2008) 1995; Scheerder & Pauwels, 2002; Scheerder, Vanreusel, Taks, & Renson, 2002; Scheerder & Van Tuyckom 2006; 2007). The findings discussed in this paper are based on a first, exploratory analysis. Consequently, some prudence is called for in the interpretation of the findings. Nevertheless, the results show that Europe still has many policy challenges to face in the field of sport. A Europe aiming at greater and greater integration of its citizens into the political sphere should also pay attention to optimal and equal opportunities with respect to the recreational sport activities of its citizens. As such, it is important to adjust for any social discrepancies with respect to physical activity. In spite of thirty years of Sport for All policy, differences according to social position continue to exist. At the onset of the 21st century active involvement in sports is still related to social position and social class. In other words, democratization of sport participation as of 2005 has still not yet been realized. Consequently, Europe should pay increasing attention to the promotion of sport and physical activity for and by all Europeans, so that elements such as health and social integration can be considered as appropriate arguments for potential policy changes. The challenge of developing a sound policy consists of subordinating the influence of geographical and social differences as much as possible to the needs of the social, educational and medical spheres, as well as to personal preferences and needs. REFERENCES Bourdieu, P. (1979). La distinction: critique sociale du jugement [Distinction. A social critique of the judgement of taste]. Paris: Minuit. Claeys, U. (1982a). Rationalising sports policies. Sport in European society: a transnational survey into participation and motivation (Technical Supplement; CDDS 82/25E 2). Strasbourg: Council of Europe/ Committee for the Development of Sport. Claeys, U. (1982b). Rationalising sports policies. Sport in European society: a transnational survey into participation and motivation (CDDS 82/25E 1). Strasbourg: Council of Europe/Committee for the Develop- ment of Sport. Collins, M. & Kay, T. (2003). Sport and social exclusion. London: Routledge. Collins, M. (2003). Social exclusion from sport and leisure. In B. Houlihan (Ed.), Sport and society. A student introduction (pp. 67-88). London: Sage. COMPASS. (1999). Sports participation in Europe. A project seeking the co-ordinated monitoring of partici- pation in sport in Europe. London: UK Sport. Council of Europe. (1975). The European Sport for All Charter. Strasbourg: Council of Europe/Committee for the Development of Sport. Crum, B. (1991). Over versporting van de samenleving. Reflecties over de bewegingsculturele ontwikkelingen met het oog op sportbeleid [Sportification of society. Reflections for policy]. Rijswijk: Ministerie van Welzijn, Volksgezondheid & Cultuur. De Haan, J. & Breedveld, K. (2000). Trends en determinanten in de sport. Eerste resultaten uit het AVO 1999 (Werkdocument 68) [Trends and determinants in sport. First results of AVO 1999]. Den Haag: Sociaal & Cultureel Planbureau. European Commission. (1998). The European model of sport. Brussels: European Commission, EC/DG X) 62 Sport for all? Kinesiologia Slovenica, 14, 2, 54–63 (2008) European Commission. (2004). The citizens of the European Union and sport. Brussels: European Com- mission/Directorate General for Education & Culture (EC/DGEC). Gratton, C. (1997). The COMPASS (Co-ordinated Monitoring of Participation in Sports) Project. Cross- national comparative analysis of sports participation in Europe, In I. Davies & E. Wolstencroft (Eds.), Fifth Congress of the European Association for Sport Management (pp. 99-106). Glasgow: EASM. Hartmann-Tews, I. (2006). Social stratification in sport and sport policy in the European Union. European Journal for Sport and Society, 3, 109-124. Heinemann, K. (1999) Sport clubs in various European countries. Schorndorf: Hofmann. Husting, A. (2003). De Raad van Europa en Sport [The council of Europe and sport]. In: K. Geeraerts (Ed.), Praktijkgids sportmanagement (pp. 1-46). Antwerpen: F & G Partners. Lamprecht, M. & Stamm, H. (1995). Soziale Differenzierung und soziale Ungleichheit im Breiten-und Freizeitsport [Social stratification and social inequalities in recreational sport]. Sportwissenschaft, 25, 265-284. Papacostas, A. (2005). Eurobarometer 64.3: Foreign languages, biotechnology, organized crime, and health items – Codebook (ICPSR 4590). Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political & Social Research. Renson, R. (1992). Geschiedenis van de sport in de oudheid [History of sport in ancient times]. Leuven: Acco. Rodgers, B. (1977). Rationalising sports policies. Sport in its social context: international comparisons (TCCC/DC 77/11E). Strasbourg: Council of Europe/Committee for the Development of Sport. Rodgers, B. (1978). Rationalising sports policies. Sport in its social context: international comparisons (Technical Supplement; CDDS 78/19E). Strasbourg: Council of Europe/Committee for the Development of Sport. Rossi-Mori, B., Neri, C., Minelli, D., & Freda, M. (2002). The European COMPASS-Project. The Co-ordi - nated Monitoring of Participation in Sport, In G. Ghent, D. Kluka, & D. Jones (Eds), Sport & information (ICSSPE/CIEPSS perspectives – the multidisciplinary series of physical education & sport science 4) (pp. 81-94). Oxford: Meyer & Meyer Sport. Scheerder, J. & Pauwels, G. (2002). Vlaanderen sportief gepeild! Resultaten van de APS-survey 1999 (Stati- varia 26) [Sport Participation in Flanders. Results from the APS Survey 1999]. Brussel: Ministerie van de Vlaamse Gemeenschap/Administratie Planning & Statistiek. Scheerder, J. & Van Tuyckom, C. (2006). Een crossnationaal vergelijkende studie betreffende sport. Vlaan- deren in het Europa van de 25 [A crossnational comparative study on sport. Flanders in the EU-25], In P. De Knop, J. Scheerder, & H. Ponnet (Eds) Sportbeleid in Vlaanderen (pp. 87-96). Brussel: Publicatiefonds Vlaamse Trainersschool. Scheerder, J. & Van Tuyckom, C. (2007). Sportparticipatie in de Europese Unie. Vlaanderen vergeleken met het Europa van de 25 [Sport participation in the European Union. Flanders compared to the EU-25], In J. Scheerder, C. Van Tuyckom, & A. Vermeersch (Eds.) Europa in beweging. Sport vanuit Europees perspectief (pp. 123-158). Gent: Academia Press & Publicatiefonds voor Lichamelijke Opvoeding. Scheerder, J. & Vermeersch, A. (2007). Sport en beleid in Europees perspectief. Een inleidend kader [Eu- ropean sport policy. An introduction]. In J. Scheerder, C. Van Tuyckom, & A. Vermeersch (Eds.), Europa in beweging. Sport vanuit Europees perspectief (pp. 3-50). Gent: Academia Press & Publicatiefonds voor Lichamelijke Opvoeding. Sport for all? 63 Kinesiologia Slovenica, 14, 2, 54–63 (2008) Scheerder, J. (2004). Spelen op het middenveld. Vrijetijdssport als ontspanning, ontplooiing en ontmoeting (Cultuursociologische essays 4) [Recreational sport activities]. Tielt: Lannoo. Scheerder, J., Van Tuyckom, C., & Vermeersch, A. (2007). Europa in beweging. Sport vanuit Europees per- spectief [Europe on the move. A European perspective on sport]. Gent: Academia Press & Publicatiefonds voor Lichamelijke Opvoeding. Scheerder, J., Vanreusel, B., & Pauwels, G. (2007). Breedtesport in Vlaanderen gepeild. Trends en profielen 1999–2006 [Recreational sport in Flanders: 1999-2006]. In J. Lemaître, & J. Pickery (Eds.), Vlaanderen gepeild! (pp. 225-281). Brussel: Studiedienst van de Vlaamse Regering. Scheerder, J., Va n reu sel, B., Ta k s , M., & Renson, R . (20 02). Socia l spor t s st rat i fic at ion i n F la nders 1969 –1999. Intergenerational reproduction of social inequalities? International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 37, 219-245. Sugden, J. & Tomlinson, A. (2000). Theorizing sport, social class and status. In J. Coakley & E. Dunning (Eds.), Handbook of sport studies (309–321). London: Sage. Taks, M., Renson, R., & Vanreusel, B. (1998). A socio-economic analysis of social stratification in sport. In K. Cachay, & I. Hartmann-Tews (Eds.), Sport und soziale Ungleicheit: Theoretische Überlegungen und empirische Befunde. Sozialwissenschaften des Sports 5 (pp. 167-181). Stuttgart: Stephanie Naglschmid. Van Bottenburg, M., Rijnen, B., & Van Sterkenburg, J. (2005). Sports participation in the European Union: Trends and differences. Nieuwegein: Arko. Vanreusel, B. (2001). Sport: bewegingscultuur tussen idealisering en degradering [Sport: movement culture between idealizing and downgrading]. In Raeymaekers, B. (Ed.), Moeten, mogen, kunnen. Ethiek en wetenschap (Lessen voor de 21ste eeuw 7) (pp. 70-86). Leuven: Universitaire Pers. Wilson, T. C. (2002). The paradox of social class and sports involvement. The roles of cultural and economic capital. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 37, 5-16.