Risk management approaches in sports organisations: A scoping review

Abstract

Risk management has emerged as a critical focus area in sports organisations due to the increasing complexity of operations, governance challenges, and unexpected events such as the COVID-19 pandemic. These organisations face a wide range of risks, including financial instability, legal liabilities and operational disruptions, among others. Effective risk management, which involves identifying, assessing, and mitigating potential threats to an organisation's objectives, is critical for ensuring their resilience and long-term sustainability. A comprehensive understanding of the current state of risk management in this context is vital for the development of strategies that address these multifaceted challenges.

The objectives of this scoping review are to examine how risk management has been approached in sports organisations, categorize the different types of risks studied in the literature, and identify gaps in knowledge that could inform future research. A carefully structured five-phase methodology was applied: research questions were defined, an extensive literature search was conducted, relevant studies were identified using strict inclusion criteria, data was charted, and the results were summarized. From an initial pool of 3786 articles published between 1980 and 2023, a total of 125 studies were selected for detailed analysis.

The findings reveal a broad spectrum of risks explored in the literature, with a significant emphasis on operational challenges. Studies frequently address the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, risk categorisation, health and safety protocols, and the competencies needed within sports organisations to effectively manage these risks. Moreover, financial and governance risks are identified as potential gaps in the existing literature, suggesting a need for further exploration and detailed investigation. The review underscores the diversity of methodologies employed, although empirical research, particularly quantitative approaches, remains predominant.

In conclusion, this review highlights the need for more multidimensional approaches to risk management that integrate various aspects such as governance, financial stability, and operational efficiency.

1. Introduction

1.1. Sport & sports entities

Physical activity and sports represent fundamental pillars for societal physical and mental well-being, serving as vehicles for the promotion of healthy lifestyles and values crucial for the future [[1], [2], [3], [4], [5]]. Moreover, sports play integral roles in education, culture, and communal cohesion, historically exerting significant influence on societal development [6]. In order for society to benefit from that positive impacts of sport, it is essential that sports entities – organisations that operate within clearly defined regulatory frameworks designed to promote physical activity [7] assume a pivotal role in the structured promotion and organisation of sports activities and initiatives.

For this reason, given the social, economic, and political interests that surround the objectives of these associations, several scholars have emphasised the urgent need for modernisation of governance practices within these organisations [[8], [9], [10]]. contend that, due to their non-profit nature, including federations and clubs, organisational development and the implementation of good governance practices have not been a primary focus for those responsible of these entities over the years.

Thus, it is widely acknowledged that governance constitutes a fundamental pillar of sports entities' management, given that its implementation is indispensable for ensuring their long-term sustainability in a progressively intricate sports landscape [11]. Given its critical importance, governance has been extensively examined over the past two decades. However, this extensive body of research has led to considerable theoretical and conceptual confusion, as governance has been approached from diverse perspectives. Scholars have provided multiple definitions of governance, which largely depend on their respective research agendas and the specific phenomena under investigation. Consequently, this has resulted in a broad and often inconsistent understanding of governance, rendering it a complex and multifaceted concept [12].

Despite the extensive focus on diverse aspects of governance, the dimension of risk management has often been overlooked within this context. Specifically, some scholars who have examined the governance of sports entities, including [13], have emphasised the salience of risk management as a critical area within it. Effective risk management facilitates the control and evaluation of risk, contributing to the attainment of organisational objectives and the establishment of decision-making processes and procedural rules within the organisation. Furthermore, effective risk management entails identifying and implementing strategies to optimise and monitor performance outcomes [14].

1.2. Risk management in sports organisations

In recent years, a significant number of sports scandals have threatened the sustainability and integrity of the industry. Notable examples include the FIFA corruption scandal, where officials were involved in bribery and racketeering [15], and the Rio 2016 Olympics, which faced serious infrastructure failures and public health issues linked to the Zika virus [16]. Additionally, the 2010 match-fixing scandal in cricket, which implicated several Pakistani players, highlighted the severe risks associated with integrity in sports [17]. Moreover, the Lance Armstrong doping scandal, where the cyclist was found guilty of using performance-enhancing drugs during his seven Tour de France victories, raised questions about governance and ethics in the sport [18]. Although media attention has largely focused on high-profile incidents within major organisations, it is crucial to recognize that all sports entities, regardless of their size or typology, are exposed to risks.

Recently, the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated these challenges, leading to profound socioeconomic impacts such as organisational revenue loss, reduced economic liquidity, workforce reductions, volunteer attrition, and a decline in workforce participation [[19], [20], [21], [22], [23]].

The unfolding of these events has illuminated profound concerns regarding the adequacy of risk assessment and management practices within sports organisations [24].

The absence of robust risk management frameworks renders sports entities susceptible to significant vulnerabilities, thereby compromising their sustainability and operational integrity within an increasingly volatile environment [13].

Hence, risk management has emerged as an essential pillar comprising the cultural, procedural, and structural components directed towards optimal management of potential opportunities and associated adversities [25]. Consequently, effective risk management allows entities to take well-prepared actions when contemplating objectives and charting strategic pathways, culminating in enhanced governance of sports entities [26].

Despite the pronounced interest in risk management applications and its established correlation with good governance practices [25], and the numerous benefits it confers on sports entities, such as reducing time spent reacting to risks and enabling a more proactive approach to strategy [25], or supporting organisations in decision-making, achieving goals, and developing informed strategies (26), the operationalisation of risk management has yet to gain widespread recognition within the sports and leisure sectors (27).

Thus, despite commendable efforts by numerous organisations and institutions to develop practical guidelines and standards for managing risks in sports entities, eg. Refs. [14,27], etc., there has been limited research focused on risk management within the sports sector [24]. Additionally, observations of disparate definitions of risk management by scholars specialising in this field (see Table 1) highlight a lack of universal consensus regarding the meaning and scope of risk management pertaining to sports organisations.

Table 1.

Risk definitions - Authors' own elaboration.

Author	Definition of risk management	Main associated concepts
(Cienfuegos Spikin 2013, p.90)	“The risk management process becomes not only an instrument to prevent and manage the impact of detrimental events on the organization, but also a force for seeing opportunities"	• Prevent & Manage o Detrimental Events •Potential Opportunities
(Fuller & Drawer 2004, p.349)	“Risk management’ is the overall process of assessing and controlling risks within an organisational setting and includes the subprocesses of risk assessment and risk mitigation"	• Phases o Evaluation o Mitigation
(Luskova et al., 2023, p.257)	“Risk management should aim to reduce the likelihood of harm (injury) or financial loss by taking steps to assess (identify, analyse and evaluate) and reduce risks as well as monitoring, reporting and communicating them effectively”	• Types of Risks o Injury o Financial • Phases o Identify o Analyse o Evaluate o Monitor o Report o Comunicate
(Dugalić 2011, p.72)	“Risk management includes risk identification, risk quantification and analysis, defining and appliance of the risk management strategy and the control of risk response implementation."	• Phases o Identification o Quantification o Analysis o Strategy o Control
(Spengler et al., 2006, p.2)	“reducing or eliminating the risk of injury and death and potential subsequent liability that comes about through involvement with sport and recreation programs and services"	• Manage risks o Reduce or Eliminate • Types of risk o Lesions o Death
(Kay 2012, “What is Risk Management”, paragraph 1)	“a process intended to prevent financial loss for an organization"	• Types of risk o Financial
(Bell-Laroche & Corbett 2010, p.6)	“Risk management includes the culture, processes, and structures that are directed toward the effective management of potential opportunities and adverse effects." “Risk management planning includes the systematic application of management policies, procedures, and practices to the tasks of setting the context, identifying, assessing, managing, monitoring, and communicating risk."	•Culture, Policies and Procedures •Potential Opportunities •Adverse effects • Phases o Identify o Evaluate o Manage o Monitor •Communicate

Table 1 reveals significant variability among researchers in their conceptualisations of risk management within the context of sports entities. While some scholars approach the topic from a broader perspective [25,28,29], others hone their focus on narrower aspects of sports risk management, such as legal, financial, health, or safety risks (e.g. Refs. [30,31]).

Although prevailing definitions of risk management in sports entities have originated from distinct studies that have employed varying methodological and theoretical approaches, there has been a conspicuous lack of collective attempt within the sports management literature to capture the breadth of research on the subject matter thus far.

Thus, the necessity of conducting a scoping review becomes evident, as risk management is increasingly recognised as essential for the sustainability of sports organisations, underscored by a range of recent incidents that have highlighted significant vulnerabilities. The existing literature presents a fragmented array of approaches that, according to various scholars, often lack the necessary depth of analysis.

This process promises to provide an overview of the current knowledge base in the area of sports risk management from a sport management perspective, while facilitating the identification of critical knowledge gaps and future research opportunities.

Accordingly, the purpose of this study is to conduct a scoping review of literature to ascertain the current state of research on risk management within the sports domain. This exploratory review seeks to achieve three specific aims: (a) to examine how risk management has been approached in sports organisations, (b) to categorize the different types of risks studied in the literature, and (c) to identify gaps in knowledge that could inform future research.

This scoping review endeavours to make three primary contributions to the sports management literature.

• a)First, by organising and synthesising the currently disparate research on risk management in sports entities, this review intends to advance the process of knowledge development and deepen understanding in this field. To build upon existing knowledge, it is essential to gain insight into the literature that already exists in a particular area of study. Given the current definitional ambiguities that persist in the research on this subject, an exploratory review is particularly suited to contribute to the literature. Through a scoping review, scholars interested in risk management in sports entities can gauge the contributions of different disciplines and identify gaps in current knowledge that require further research.
• b)Second, considering the dearth of research on the comprehensive mapping of studies that have assessed risk management in sports entities to date, this study endeavours to be the first attempt at thorough mapping of the literature on the topic.
• c)Finally, in conjunction with established scoping review procedures, such as those detailed in Ref. [32], recent advancements in review methodologies in the field of sports management, including [33,34] bolster the credibility of the study and add another dimension to the management and governance elements of sports entities.

2. Method

Scoping studies are a highly useful tool to determine the scope or coverage of a given topic and provide a comprehensive overview of the literature and studies available, as well as an overview of the focus, which includes its size, range, and nature [35,36]. Furthermore, a scoping review may be employed to determine the value of undertaking a systematic review, to summarise the findings of heterogeneous bodies of knowledge in terms of methods or disciplines, or to identify gaps in the literature to aid in the planning and commissioning of future research [37].

Exploratory studies are associated with the following purposes: (a) to identify the types of evidence available in a given field, (b) to examine how research is conducted on a given topic or field, (c) to identify and analyse knowledge gaps (d) as a precursor to a systematic review, (e) with the aim of clarifying key concepts in the literature, (f) identify the key characteristics of factors related to a concept [36]. Therefore, our focus was on the first five objectives. In this case, the framework of [32] was used as a specific methodological guide.

2.1. Phases

The following subsections describe the methods of this study based on five phases.

2.1.1. Phase 1 - Identification of the research questions

The initial and fundamental step for conducting a scoping review is to identify the research question, as it serves as a framework for the construction of search strategies. In accordance with the methodology developed by Arksey & O'Malley [32], it is imperative to adopt a broad approach in order to generate a comprehensive coverage. Setting parameters on a vast number of bibliographic references may be determined after acquiring an overview of the field's volume and overall scope. Accordingly, our research objectives have led to the following research questions: (a) how has the literature examined the management of risks associated with sports entities? (b) Which types of entities have been predominantly studied? (c) What specific thematic areas related to risk management have been explored? and (d) What upcoming and promising directions of research are emerging in the field of sport risk management?

2.1.2. Phase 2 - Identification of relevant studies

To ensure the widest coverage of the literature on sport management, we have followed the methodology of searching and identifying relevant studies, similar to the approach implemented by Muñoz & Solanellas [34] and Dowling et al. [33]. Accordingly, three primary sources were explored as part of this scoping review.

• 1)Electronic databases
• 2)Manual search of sports management journals
• 3)Reference list of previous articles

Initially, we utilised four electronic databases, namely SPORTDISCUS, SCOPUS, WEB OF SCIENCE, and SCIENCE DIRECT. The results obtained from these databases were then supplemented by additional studies identified from the search of the three most significant sports management journals, Sport Management Review, European Sport Management Quarterly, and Journal of Sport Management, all of which having a Q1 ranking in the Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR) in 2023. Additionally, we conducted a thorough manual search for relevant studies in other prominent sports management journals such as International Journal of Sports Management and Marketing, Sport, Business and Management: An International Journal, Sport and Leisure Management, and Risk and Financial Management. Finally, we identified further studies by conducting a comprehensive examination of the reference lists of the studies obtained from the aforementioned databases and journals of relevance. This rigorous process encompassed these several sources to ensure the complete coverage of the literature on sport management for this scoping review.

All our searches were conducted in June 2023 with the aim of identifying studies focused on the risk management of sport entities, including Sport Governing Bodies (SGBs), clubs, events, leagues, etc. We utilised the following search terms for the electronic databases: (“RISK MANAGEMENT” OR “RISK ASSESSMENT”) AND (“SGB” OR “SPORT∗ GOVER∗ BOD∗" OR “SPORT∗ ORGANISATION∗" OR “SPORT∗ EVENT∗" OR “SPORT∗ AND RECREA∗" OR “SPORT∗ CLUB∗") in all fields, which generated a total of 3663 results (SportDiscus [318], Scopus [2919], Web of Science [130], and ScienceDirect [296]). Additionally, we identified a further 123 studies from the search of the three databases of sports management journals and by conducting a thorough manual search of other relevant journals.

While some of the search terms employed may appear generic, the objective of this scoping review was to adopt a broad exploratory approach, allowing us to map the vast scientific literature on the subject, as suggested by Ref. [32]. Based on these findings, we subsequently refined our search employing the following inclusion criteria.

2.1.2.1. Inclusion criteria

To ensure that this review provides a comprehensive global perspective on risk management in sport, we relied on the definition of risk management in sport provided by Ref. [38]. According to this standard, risk management in sport is described as an all-encompassing process of the organisation that considers its external and internal context and involves interaction with stakeholders. The objective of this process is to establish effective strategies, achieve predetermined goals, and make informed decisions. It is guided by the principles, frameworks, and processes outlined in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1.

Risk management principles, framework and process. Adapted from (ISO 2018).

As shown in Table 2, to ensure a comprehensive and rigorous coverage of the relevant literature in the field of study, this scoping review only included articles published in English. This decision stems from English being the predominant language in academic production on a global scale, as demonstrated by studies like that of [39], which highlighted that around 80 % of articles indexed in prominent academic databases like Scopus are written in English. Therefore, focusing solely on articles published in English allowed for a more extensive and comprehensive overview of the relevant literature in the field of sport management to be created.

Table 2.

Inclusion criteria - Authors' own elaboration.

Publication status	Full Text Academic Peer-reviewed journal articles
Period	Published between 1980 and 2023
Language	English
Definition	ISO 31000
Main theme	Focused on risk management (studies that address risk from the point of view of risk management, regardless of the approach taken).
	Sport-focused (studies that address sport-only risk management).
	Focused on the risk management of sports entities (studies that address risk from the point of view of sports entities, excluding the management of the athlete's own risk or other aspects.)

2.1.3. Phase 3 – Study selection

In order to analyse the studies that fulfilled the research questions posed, we undertook the selection of definitive studies in various phases. Initially, we excluded studies that did not meet specific inclusion criteria covering publication status (860), and language (266). In addition, we also identified and removed duplicate studies found across different databases and journals (148).

Following the initial screening process, the first author undertook a thorough review of the titles of all identified studies, identifying those that did not meet our thematic inclusion criteria (articles that did not focus on risk management or sport were excluded). This resulted in the exclusion of a total of 2005 articles. Following this, the abstracts of the remaining articles were reviewed, leading to the exclusion of a further 313 articles. Finally, 194 full texts were rigorously examined, resulting in the exclusion of 69 articles that did not meet the established inclusion criteria. In cases where there was a discrepancy in identifying articles for exclusion between researchers, a collective decision was made following discussion.

Through this selection process, a total of 125 studies were identified for further analysis, utilising the phases illustrated in Fig. 2. These studies were deemed to be highly aligned with the research questions and highly relevant to the field of sport risk management.

Fig. 2.

Flow chart of the search process - Authors' own elaboration.

2.1.4. Phase 4 - Charting the data

As part of the methodology established by Ref. [32], the next step of this scoping review involved data extraction and graphical representation of the 125 identified articles using Excel.

For each included article, the following information was extracted: year of publication, country of origin, journal of publication, type of study (such as empirical, review, case study), methodology employed (quantitative, qualitative, mixed), data collection strategy (including interviews, questionnaires, and other techniques), sample size and population, study population (clubs, federations, events, etc.), sector (public or private), sport studied (including multisport, tennis, football, and other types of sport), dimension and categories of the study presented, topics, keywords, and conclusions reached in the article.

To develop a consistent understanding of which data points to extract from each article, the authors independently extracted data from the first 20 articles and then discussed the results together. After completing the coding of all the articles, data was reviewed, and any necessary modifications were made to ensure accuracy and appropriate representation of information for each article.

2.1.4.1. Thematic approach

Beyond the information extracted in the preceding section, this study adopts a thematic approach to analyse risk management in sports organisations, aiming to systematically structure and synthesise the existing literature. This approach considers both the classifications of standards and guidelines developed by various institutions, as well as the application of open coding techniques, facilitating a more profound and comprehensive analysis of the diverse topics that constitute risk management within the sporting domain.

To achieve a comprehensive understanding, the analysis is structured at three levels: dimensions, categories, and topics. First, the broad dimensions that have been most frequently utilised to address risk management in sports organisations are identified. These dimensions, based on guidelines and standards, provide an overarching view of the key aspects to consider in risk management.

Subsequently, within the dimensions, a series of categories are defined to facilitate a more concrete and detailed approach. These categories, also extracted from the analysed literature and standards, serve to decompose the dimensions into specific and delineated aspects that are the focus of study by various researchers.

Finally, through an open coding process, the topics that emerge from the literature on risk management are identified. This inductive and iterative process, based on the continuous review of the selected studies, has enabled the development of a finer classification of the addressed themes, highlighting the most relevant patterns and trends.

This structure, based on dimensions, categories, and topics, as illustrated in Fig. 3, provides a solid foundation for organising and conducting thematic analysis, ensuring a coherent and detailed perspective on the studies concerning risk management in sports organisations.

Fig. 3.

Thematic analysis structure - Authors' own elaboration.

For this reason, before delving into the different variables of the selected articles, considering the efforts of different bodies and institutions in the development of practical guides and standards for risk management in sports entities, we carry out a detailed analysis of the main dimensions with which different institutions and organisations have studied risk management in sports entities.

This preliminary step was crucial to establish a solid and coherent basis from which to approach the thematic analysis of this scoping review.

For this reason, Table 3 shows the main dimensions with which each of the institutions approaches risk management in sports entities.

Table 3.

Risk Management Dimensions According to Standards and Guidelines - Authors' own elaboration.

Chartered Governance Institute (2024) - UK & Ireland		Australian Sports Commission (2012)	Institute of Risk Management (2002)	New South Wales (2020)	Standard New Zealand (2010)	Bell-Laroche & Corbett (2010) -Canada	TOTAL
Finance	X	X	X	X	X	X	6
Governance	X	X		X	X	X	5
Law, regulation and compliance	X	X	X	X	X		5
Operational (health and safety)	X	X	X			X	4
Staffing	X			X	X		3
Strategic		X	X	X			3
Facilities					X	X	2
Environmental	X	X					2
Reputational	X	X					2
Safeguarding	X	X					2
Technology		X		X			2
Cultural		X		X			2
Social		X		X			2
Data security		X					1
High Performance		X					1
Political				X			1
Stakeholders				X			1
Accidental loss or damage	X						1
Procedures				X			1
Marketing					X		1
Membership					X		1
Terrorist	X						1
Commercial		X					1
TOTAL	10	14	4	11	7	4

It is evident from our analysis that the governance, operational, financial, and legal dimensions have been the most extensively used in various guidelines and standards outlining risk management in sports entities. However, our research also identifies the infrastructure dimension as one of the main dimensions of risk management that requires consideration.

Subsequently, the definitions that are presented to delineate each dimension facilitate the segmentation of the thematic analysis. This precision in definition is paramount for ensuring a structured and comprehensive examination of the identified dimensions, thereby enabling a more nuanced understanding of the various aspects of risk management within sports entities.

• •Governance Risks - “related to board leadership, such as decision-making or oversight, policies and procedures, image and reputation, and overall organizational capacity.” [25].
• •Operational Risks - “related to the delivery of programs and services including event management, program management, human resources management (employees and volunteers) and management of crises.” [25].
• •Legal Risks - “related to insurance, public, professional and public liability, warranties, indemnities, liquidated damages, applicable law, excusable delay.” [40].
• •Financial risks - “including loss of funding, decline in membership, decline in other revenues, mismanagement of funds, weak cash flow, failure to diversify revenue sources.” [25].
• •Infrastructure risks - “risks related to equipment, property and facilities.” [25].

Once the main dimensions of risk management in sports organisations have been identified from the guidelines and standards, and with the aim of delving into the primary approaches made by each of the authors, a series of more specific categories have been identified. In this case, these categories have also been extracted from the standards and guidelines and aim to take a further step in the approximation of the dimensions.

Thus, in order to discuss the main categories studied within each dimension in greater detail, we grouped them into more specific risk categories, including reputational [14,41] organisational [42], decision-making [42], management [42], marketing [40], communication [14], strategic [14,42,43], political [42], health [14,25,41,43], security [14,41], human resources [40,41], social [14,42], procedural [42], technological [14,42], regulatory and compliance [14,25,41,43], social responsibility [42], sports [14], and the environment [14] (Australian Sport Commission, 2012). It is important to note that each study was classified with a specific dimension and could contain a maximum of three risk categories.

Finally, in order to explore the specific topics of risk management in greater depth, an inductive and iterative process of open coding was employed.

Open coding is a qualitative data analysis method that involves breaking down the data into distinct categories and concepts, allowing researchers to identify patterns and themes that emerge organically from the data itself, rather than imposing preconceived categories. This process is particularly effective in exploratory research where the aim is to develop a deep understanding of the subject matter [44].

In this study, open coding was used to identify specific risk management study topics. The process began with the initial reading of the collected literature, where key findings, terminologies, and concepts were highlighted and noted. During this phase, researchers engaged in open coding by assigning labels to specific excerpts of text that represented emerging ideas or topics. This step was iterative, meaning that as new data were introduced or additional literature was reviewed, the coding scheme was continuously refined. This allowed for flexibility and adaptability in identifying relevant topics that aligned with the research objectives.

Through this inductive approach, researchers could capture a wide range of perspectives and insights related to risk management in sports organisations. As patterns began to emerge, the open codes were grouped into broader topics that reflected the primary themes in the literature. This coding process facilitated a deeper understanding of how various factors intersect and influence risk management practices within sports entities.

Moreover, the iterative nature of this analysis ensured that the final themes were representative of the full range of literature reviewed. This iterative feedback loop helped in validating the emerging categories and to go into detail on specific topics studied in each of the categories. The results of this open coding process not only guided the narrative summary but also provided a solid foundation for the subsequent discussion, allowing for a nuanced analysis of the identified themes in relation to the overall objectives of the study.

In conclusion, the general dimensions of risk management, as outlined in the relevant guidelines and standards, provided a foundational framework for the initial classification of the literature. The subsequent identification of specific categories, also extracted from these standards and guidelines, allowed for a more detailed exploration of particular areas within risk management, thereby enhancing the depth of the analysis. Furthermore, the application of open coding facilitated the identification of key topics within each category, enabling a nuanced understanding of the primary topics studied by researchers. This comprehensive approach not only enriches the existing body of knowledge but also lays the groundwork for future research initiatives aimed at advancing risk management practices in sports organisations.

2.1.5. Phase 5: Collection, summarisation, and communication of results

Based on the data extraction from phase 4, a frequency analysis was carried out, resulting in Table 4, Table 5 below. The aim of this phase is to describe the number of occurrences of each of the variables studied. On the other hand, a thematic analysis was carried out in which the aim is to present a narrative summary classifying the different dimensions and categories addressed in this review through the guides reviewed.

Table 4.

Frequency analysis (country, journals, study design, methodology and data collection technique) - Authors' own elaboration.

STUDY CHARACTERISTICS
Country	n - %	Main journals	n - %	Study design	n - %	Methodology	n - %	Data collection technique	n - %
EEUU	26–20 %	British Journal of Sports Medicine	5–4 %	Empirical	58–46 %	Qualitative	75–60 %	Theorical analysis	37–30 %
China	17–17 %	Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport	4–3 %	Theoretical	38–30 %	Quantitative	43–34 %	Surveys	36–29 %
Australia	13–10 %	Journal of Legal Aspects of Sport, IBIMA Business Review, Recreational Sports Journal, Event Management, Sustainability, European Sport Management Quarterly, Sports Medicine, BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine	3–2 %	Case study	24–19 %	Mixt	7–6 %	Observation	16–13 %
UK	13–10 %			Review	5–4 %			Interviews	15–12 %
Canada	6–5 %							Document analysis	8–6 %
Brazil, Iran	4–3 %							Tests	8–6 %
Qatar, Poland, Malaysia, New Zealand, Saudi Arabia	3–2 %							Surveys and interviews	3–2 %
Italy, Turkey, Norway, South Africa, Japan	2–2 %							Interviews and focus groups	1–1 %
Israel, Switzerland, Indonesia, Botswana, Austria, Netherlands, Bangladesh, Denmark, South Korea, Nigeria, Thailand, Egypt, Ukraine, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Spain, Serbia	1–1 %							Workshops	1–1 %

Table 5.

Frequency analysis (sector, organization and sport) - Authors' own elaboration.

STUDY POPULATION
Sector	n/%	Organisation	n/%	Sport	n/%
Private	67–53,6 %	Sport event	58–46,4 %	Multisport	85–68 %
Public/private	54–43,2 %	Sport organisation	21–16,8 %	Football	13–10,4 %
Public	4–3,2 %	Club	19–15,2 %	Athletic	7–5,6 %
		Sport facilities and leagues	5–4 %	Skiing	5–4 %
		SGB and high school	4–3,2 %	Golf and hiking	2–1,6 %
		Federation, athletes, college	2–1,6 %	Cycling, endurance sports, fitness, outdoor sports, netball, climbing, volleyball, swimming, tennis, triathlon, winter sports	1–0,8 %
		Sport councils, government, national team	1–0,8 %

3. Findings

3.1. Frequency analysis findings

One of the initial significant findings from the statistical analysis of the 125 articles included in this review appears in Fig. 4. As illustrated, 66 (52.8 %) of the articles were published between 2020 and 2023, while 59 (47.2 %) were published between 1994 and 2020.

Fig. 4.

Frequency of publication - Authors' own elaboration.

It is worth noting that 23 of the 66 articles published from 2020 to 2023 (34.8 %) focused specifically on Covid-19 risk management. This finding highlights the fact that the pandemic situation resulting from COVID-19 has provided a particularly favourable environment for researchers to increase their in-depth study of the risk management in sport entities across various dimensions. Such studies may significantly help organisations responsible for sports entities to become even more conscious of the possible risks involved in the management of their organisations.

Table 4 provides a comprehensive summary of the descriptive outcomes pertaining to the location of the studies, the primary journals in which they were published, as well as the methods utilised in the research process, including study design, methodology, and data collection methods.

This Table highlights that research on risk management in sports entities has been conducted in a total of 34 countries. Among the most frequently studied countries were EEUU, with 26 studies, China, with 17, and UK and Australia, with 13 studies respectively.

Moreover, the data suggests that Asia and the Americas are the two continents where risk management of sports entities has been the focus of considerable research attention, with 37 and 36 studies, respectively. This is followed by studies conducted in the European continent (32), and Oceania (16), with the African continent being the least studied (4). The significant geographical distribution of such research highlights the global concern for risk management in sports entities and provides a foundation for its comprehensive understanding and management in the future.

In addition, the selected articles were published in a wide range of 95 different scientific journals, as shown in Table 4. Notable journals with the highest frequency of publications in the field of risk management in sports entities include the British Journal of Sport Medicine (5) and the Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport (4).

Regarding methodological approaches, empirical studies represented 46.4 % (58) of the articles, followed by theoretical studies (30.4 %, 38), case studies (19.2 %, 24), and finally, reviews (4 %, 5). Of the 58 empirical articles, 60.3 % (35) were conducted with a quantitative approach, 31 % (18) utilised a qualitative approach, and 8.6 % (5) employed a mixed approach.

Furthermore, the primary data collection techniques used in these studies were theoretical analyses of other studies (37), followed by questionnaires (36), observations (16), and interviews (15). These findings provide a comprehensive understanding of the different methodological approaches and data collection techniques employed in the study of risk management in sports entities.

Continuing with the analysis of the descriptive statistics of the articles, as presented in Table 5, sporting events are clearly the most frequently studied sample, representing 46 % (58) of the total. Most studies focused on the risk management of sporting events have concentrated on major sporting events like the World Cups, Olympic Games, European Championships, etc. For example [45], studied the main strategies implemented during the Euro 2020 football matches to mitigate the risk of Covid-19 transmission, and [46] assessed the COVID-19 transmission risk at the Tokyo Olympics based on the risk assessment indicators of various scenario simulations and concluded that the COVID-19 prevention measures proposed by the Japanese Olympic Committee at that point needed improvement.

Despite the significant number of studies focused on risk management at large-scale sporting events, an increasing body of research has emerged aimed at identifying risks associated to specific events of different sports. For example, studies such as those by Refs. [[47], [48], [49], [50]] seek to highlight the primary risks associated with marathons and half-marathons from varying viewpoints, including those of stakeholders, organisers, and volunteers. Similarly, the study by Ref. [51] identified the risk management protocols adopted by triathlon race directors. In addition [52], research examined the specific security strategies and risk mitigation measures employed by the English Football League concerning stadium design, technology adoption, risk management, hospitality, and industry best practices.

Following sporting events, studies on sports organisations in a more general context (21) and clubs (19) have been the next most frequently studied samples. Notably, research on the competencies of workers and volunteers stands out, such as the studies by Refs. [53,54] which assess worker competencies following risk management training programs, as well as the studies by Refs. [55,56], which evaluate the competencies and behaviours of coaches and club officials in preventing risks. Similarly, studies have explored the effectiveness of practices to prevent alcohol consumption risks [57,58], as well as the categorisation of the primary risks in sports clubs, such as studies by Refs. [59,60].

Finally, sports facilities and leagues (5), Sport Governing Bodies and colleges (4), federations, athletes, and colleges (2), and sports councils, government, and national teams (1) round out the list of samples studied in this scoping review.

Of all the sports studied in this scoping review, multi-sport entities (85) were the most frequently researched, followed by football (13), athletics (7), and skiing (5).

Before shifting to the thematic analysis of the included studies, Fig. 5 presents the most prominent keywords identified across the articles. As illustrated, the most frequently used terms include “risk”, “management”, “sports”, “events”, “COVID”, “assessment”, and “safety”. These findings provide useful insights regarding the primary topics and themes that have been extensively explored in the literature related to risk management in sports entities.

Fig. 5.

Keywords - Authors' own elaboration.

4. Discussion

4.1. Thematic analysis

Having informed the dimensions and categories of this research through the review of various guidelines from institutions and organisations on risk management in sports entities, as shown in Table 61 it is noteworthy that 49.6 % of existing studies adopt an operational approach (62), with 28 % endorsing a multidimensional approach (35). Conversely, 11.2 % of studies focus on risk management from a governance perspective (14), while only 4.8 %, 4 %, and 2.4 % of the studies center on legal, financial, and equipment approaches, respectively. Health (77), management (35), and human resources (26) are the most frequently studied categories.

Table 6.

Thematic frequency analysis - Authors' own elaboration.

STUDY DIMENSIONS & CATEGORIES
Dimensions	n	Categories	n
Operational	62	Health	77
Multi-dimensional	35	Management	35
Governance	14	HR	26
Legal	6	Security	21
Finance	5	Environment	19
Facilities	3	Procedures	17
		Social responsibility	13
		Strategy, technology, and regulation	8
		Organisational	7
		Politician and decision making	5
		Compliance	3
		Communication, marketing, and sporting	2
		Reputational and social	1

Having classified the primary dimensions with which researchers have studied risk in sports entities, we conducted a thematic analysis of the contextualisation advanced by different authors in relation to each of the identified dimensions. Specifically, we sought to identify the categories within each dimension that have received the most focused research attention and the particular risks that have been investigated thus far.

4.1.1. Dimensions

The ensuing sections present the main findings for each dimension.

4.1.1.1. Operational dimension

Studies focused on an operational perspective of risk management in sports entities have exhibited varied approaches, with research attention directed towards several specific categories of risk management. Prominently highlighted among these is the risk management of health aspects, where studies such as [61,62] have evaluated the risk management of the COVID-19 pandemic, identifying key factors and potential management tools to mitigate its impact in sports leagues and events. Similarly, studies focused on risk management of injuries or health emergencies, such as [47,63], have identified the primary risks of injury or medical disaster in sports events and leagues and the strategies their organisers employ to mitigate these risks.

On the other hand, another group of authors approach this dimension from a human resources risk perspective. Some of them focus on the competencies that workers have or should have according to their role to prevent or mitigate potential risks [64,65]. Meanwhile, other researchers have analysed the impact of risk management training courses on the entity's risk management by the responsible of risk management [66].

4.1.1.2. Governance dimension

Among the approaches to risk management within the dimension of governance in sports entities, decision-making has been a particularly salient focus in the scholarly literature. In this regard [24], emphasise the concepts of “risk tolerance” and “risk appetite” as central to the governance of an entity, given that an entity's appetite for and tolerance of risks can have a direct impact on its objectives and strategies. In addition [67], analysed the main risks of poor governance concerning democracy, transparency, accountability, and ethics.

Social responsibility risks have also been a subject of study pertaining to governance risks in sports entities. Scholars, such as [68], have identified the primary strategies employed by sports entities to prevent bullying, while [69] proposed a novel anti-doping control method aimed at preventing doping in sports.

4.1.1.3. Legal dimension

The legal risks associated with security aspects of sporting events have been the primary focus of the legislative dimension in the literature on risk management in sports entities. In this regard, studies such as the one conducted by Ref. [70] have examined the risks of sporting events through a case study of a death that occurred during an event. Similarly [71]) have highlighted the primary legal implications in risk management for mud racing events.

More generally [72], contextualises the legislative dimension by detailing the principal European regulations relating to risk management in sports entities.

4.1.1.4. Financial dimension

The financial dimension has been one of the least studied dimensions by researchers, as shown in Table 6. Nevertheless, studies that relate strategy and decision-making to financial risk stand out in the research focused on this dimension. For instance Ref. [73], identified the financial risks of sporting events due to inadequate separation between decision-making and control in the decision domain. Similarly [74], identified financial risks in organising the Olympic Games due to a lack of alignment between the budget and the actual costs.

Furthermore, studies focused on identifying the economic impact of adverse situations have also received research attention. For example [75], assessed the economic impact during the COVID-19 pandemic, while [76] investigated financial coverage in ski resorts as meteorological risk management.

4.1.1.5. Facilities dimension

The facilities dimension has been the least studied among all dimensions of risk management in sports entities. Within this dimension [77], identified and prioritised risk factors that impact the safety of sports facilities, while [78] explored the use of technology in preventing risks in stadiums.

4.1.1.6. Multidimensional

Finally, the multidimensional dimension comprises studies that have examined risk from a more comprehensive standpoint, incorporating at least two dimensions. It was the second-most studied approach, accounting for 28 % of research attention to date.

Researchers have shown particular interest in identifying risk categories and specific risks at a multidimensional level through empirical research. Scholars have successfully identified the principal risks in contexts such as sporting events [49,51,79], clubs [59], sports facilities [80], among others.

As observed, most of the studies identified in this review focus on the operational approach to risk management (49.6 %), therefore, it is essential to question whether this predominance reflects a reactive approach to immediate risks, such as the COVID-19 pandemic [81], rather than a long-term, comprehensive strategy [24]. The emphasis on operational risks, such as health and safety, while clearly important, may divert attention from more systemic and less visible risks that are equally crucial for the sustainability of sports organisations. For instance, the prevalence of scandals related to corruption, such as the FIFA bribery case [15] or match-fixing in cricket [17], highlights the need to address governance as a key dimension of risk management. Despite this, only 11.2 % of the reviewed studies focus on risk management from a governance perspective, suggesting insufficient attention to issues that can jeopardize the integrity and long-term survival of these entities.

Moreover, the limited research on financial risks, which account for only 4 % of the studies, is particularly concerning given the devastating impact financial mismanagement has had on various sports organisations, including clubs that have faced bankruptcy or massive debt. The Lance Armstrong doping scandal, which not only damaged his career but also tarnished the reputation of professional cycling as a whole [18], also illustrates how poor management of reputational and ethical risks can lead to long-term financial and operational consequences. In this regard, it is worrying that so few studies consider governance and financial risks, which are critical to preventing crises of credibility and organisational survival. Indeed, studies that integrate multiple dimensions of risk, such as those by Ref. [79], emphasise that a holistic view of risk management can strengthen the resilience of sports organisations in the face of adverse events. The lack of a more integrative approach in most of the reviewed studies points to a significant gap in the current literature that needs to be addressed to ensure more robust and preventive risk management practices.

Fig. 62 illustrates the primary relationships between the studied dimensions and categories, as well as significant contexts that are the focus of research.

Fig. 6.

Map of risk management in sports entities - Authors' own elaboration.

First, it highlights how the financial, legal, and facilities dimensions have not been predominant in any type of entities. Instead, sports clubs and organisations, in general, have predominantly been studied from an operational dimension.

Furthermore, examining the relationship between the dimensions and the specific categories studied, several trends become apparent. Security elements have been the most extensively studied within the legal and facilities dimensions, indicating a particular focus on ensuring safety and compliance in these areas. When risk management is approached from a multidimensional perspective, the entities management emerges as the predominant category. This suggests a comprehensive interest in how organisations manage various risks collectively. Additionally, within the operational dimension, health risks have been the most studied, highlighting a concern for the physical well-being and safety of individuals involved in sports activities. These insights underscore the varied focal points within different dimensions of risk management in sports organisations.

4.1.2. Topics

Lastly, regarding the various topics that have received research attention, Fig. 7 shows how the pandemic, risk categories, risk management methods, and employee competencies have been the primary focuses on the selected studies.

Fig. 7.

Main themes - Authors' own elaboration.

These topics will be analysed in detail in relation to their relevance to risk management according to the works of different researchers. It is worth noting that the same topic may have been studied from different dimensions (e.g., identification of a club's primary risks from an operational or multidimensional perspective).

4.1.2.1. Pandemic

Of the articles included in this review, pandemic risk management has been the most extensively studied topic, with 25 articles out of 125 addressing this issue, primarily from an operational dimension (23 out of 25).

Among the studies, sporting events received the most research attention (84 %), with clubs, leagues, federations, and sports organisations comprising only 4 % each. Interestingly, two studies investigated pandemic risk management in sports events before the onset of Covid-19: [81], which outlined the planning and surveillance systems used to control public health risks during the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games, and [82], which focused on preparedness for disease threats at the Vancouver 2010 Olympic Winter Games.

In terms of methodology, the vast majority of studies employed empirical approaches or case studies to identify the primary measures taken to prevent Covid-19 risk management and measure their effectiveness. Among these studies, some have utilised Covid-19 tests to analyse the impact of risk management measures taken by those responsible for sports events, such as [83,84]. Additionally, four studies have used observation to identify possible strategies and impacts of mitigation measures, such as the study of [45] examining the implementation of mitigation measures and messaging at EURO 2020 matches held at venues in the UK. Interestingly, observation has also been used to study Covid-19 risk indicators associated with sports clubs [85].

Despite the predominance of empirical studies and cases of study, there were seven identified theoretical or review articles, such as the study by Ref. [61], which reviewed how different countries dealt with various communicable diseases in the context of previous World Cups and provided recommendations on protecting oneself from outbreaks. Another such study was [86], which outlined the minimum requirements to be considered when spectators return to live sporting events following COVID-19.

Finally, several studies have used interviews and questionnaires to identify the primary risk management strategies of various stakeholders and assess their impact. For instance Ref. [19], interviewed athletes, managers, and cycling officials to investigate measures introduced to manage health emergency situations in cycling events, compare these measures with previous experiences in similar SE contexts, and explore potential changes to the organisational models of cycling events in the post-pandemic era.

4.1.2.2. Risk categories

Studies that aim to identify various categories of risks in sports entities or to identify distinct risks within each category represent the second-most studied topic, with 22 out of 125 articles, predominantly from a multidimensional perspective.

Despite 50 % of studies on risk categories focusing on sports events, some studies have also identified risk categories in other entities such as clubs, sports facilities, and sports councils.

Upon analysing the results of the numerous studies, it becomes evident that each research article identifies a unique categorisation of risks and specifies specific risks of their study. The specificity of the type of entity studied, whether it be an event, club, sports council, among others, can drastically modify the risks to which they are exposed.

Detailing the main categorisations of risk in sporting events [79], identified several risk categories in their semi-structured interviews with various stakeholders: environment, financial, human resources, infrastructure, interdependence, legacy, media, operations, organising, participation, political, relationships, sport, threats, and visibility. The authors also specified the risk categories identified by each stakeholder group, such as the organising committee, government, press, community, delegation, and sporting bodies. Similarly [87], through semi-structured interviews with managers, identified categories of financial, environment, infrastructure, operations, human resources, political, safety, legal, and tourist behaviors as possible risk categories in tourist sporting events. Another study by Ref. [88] on risks in running events conducted in Poland, identified safety, budget and finance, information, comfort and satisfaction of participants, organisation, start package and medal, recovery and energy support, reputation, environmental, and force majeure as risk categories, using questionnaires for the race organisers.

As evident from these studies and other works that identified risk categories in sporting events [88,89], general risk categories such as financial, operational, human resources, and environmental categories appear in all events. Additionally, specific categories emerge based on each event's idiosyncrasies, such as start package and medal category [88] and tourist behaviors category [87].

Within these more generalised risk categories, different studies have identified specific risks that event organisers face. In a study on stakeholder perceptions of critical risks and challenges involved in holding marathons [48], identified unforgiving weather, bomb threats, crowd control, medical issues, active shooter, logistical failure, and emergency response time as the primary risks. Furthermore, the study identified risks relating to interagency communication and knowledge of jurisdictional responsibilities, staff/volunteer recruitment, training, and commitment (including adequate numbers), emergency response time, and recovery preparedness, financial constraints, course logistics/equipment, and ultimately balancing public safety with race-friendly environment as significant concerns. Meanwhile, in a very similar study on major risks in marathons [50], identified major risks such as overlap with another rival event, inability to receive start packages on the day of competition, insufficient funding from sponsors, inappropriate organisation of the run, jams after the start, unattractive start packages, and lack of information about the event in national media.

This differentiation in the main risks of running events highlights disparities in perceived risks between different involved parties.

As previously discussed, not all studies on risk categories have been restricted to sporting events. In an article focused on minimising risks in sports clubs [60], highlighted main risk categories of transportation, injury, financial, human resources, and hazing.

4.1.2.3. Injuries & security elements

In this scoping review, 14 % of the studies examined safety concerns, including different safety aspects and managing the risk of injuries. Unlike other subjects, risk management in the context of security has been extensively explored from various perspectives, such as legal, operational, and facilities, while also considering different types of organisations.

In a study conducted by Ref. [90], they examined the safety of sports facilities and identified three key factors: internal factors (such as training and culture), external factors (like weather conditions and demographic changes), and governance factors (such as insurance and industry standards). Their findings also revealed that awareness of safety standards varied across operational areas, with higher awareness in areas like aquatic and childcare, compared to areas like gym and group fitness activities. Similarly [77], conducted a study in Iran, focusing on the control systems of sports facilities. They found that physical protection systems were the primary control measure, followed by security personnel, the structure of the facility, and entry control and emergency management.

Alternatively, there have been research studies examining risk management in terms of ensuring the safety of sporting events. For example, a recent study by Ref. [91] looked into the vulnerabilities of the pre-hospital medical system during the TOKYO 2020 Olympic and Paralympic Games (TOKYO2020). The study identified several areas of concern, including patient misidentification, delays in immediate on-scene care, misjudgement of on-site medical room layout, and inadequate care during hospital transfers. In order to address these issues, the researchers proposed a number of solutions, such as increasing vigilance to reduce blind spots, providing first aid booklets for bystanders, and implementing a uniform protocol for medical personnel at the scene.

Several researchers have also examined the security of leagues and clubs, in addition to studies focusing on the security of sports facilities and events. For example, a study conducted by Ref. [92] identified the main risk factors for Netball voluntary organisations, aiming to develop risk management plans that are easy for users to understand. This study identified accidents, overuse injuries, court conditions, sport-specific risks, skill level, and fitness level as the primary risks. The main barriers to preventing these risks included lack of funding, lack of knowledge, poor communication, the culture within football/netball clubs, delegation of duties, volunteer issues, time constraints, accountability issues, policymaking and ownership issues, resistance to change, and perceived lack of control.

4.1.2.4. Competences

Among the 125 articles on risk management, 6 of them discuss the competencies of workers in various organisations. These studies examine the potential risks associated with workers' competencies from both an operational and multidimensional perspective, with an emphasis on sports clubs, accounting for 83 % of the research.

When delving into the specific studies that explore the competencies of workers as risks in sports clubs and colleges, it is important to distinguish between those that seek to identify the key competencies that coaches and workers should possess [65], and those that investigate whether workers/trainers have the necessary competencies to prevent or handle risks [56,64,93].

To begin with, the identification of competencies has been a subject of research in the field of sports coaching. The work of [65] outlines six main modules of competencies that a trainer must possess. These modules cover the role and responsibilities of the sports trainer, emergency management, injury and illness assessment and management, taping and injury prevention, and risk management. Within each module, specific competencies have been identified, such as qualifications and experience, injury prevention knowledge, understanding priorities in emergencies, and drug prevention knowledge. The full study has identified 77 specific competencies that can help coaches prevent risks.

Moreover, studies have been conducted to determine whether workers have the necessary competencies to prevent risks [64]. conducted a detailed study that identified coaches' competencies in risk prevention based on their attitude, knowledge, and skills. Key performance indicators were analysed, such as conflict resolution knowledge, demonstrating specific skills related to conducted activities, and maintaining a positive attitude towards workload. This approach analyses workers' competencies in a holistic manner, encompassing their knowledge, skills, and attitudes.

Additionally [56,93], provide a more comprehensive perspective on risk management in sports clubs, with a focus on workers' competencies. These competencies encompass their educational backgrounds, behaviours, and additional training in risk management.

As observed, the increased focus on pandemic risk management (23 out of 25 studies) signifies not only an immediate response to a global crisis but also an opportunity to fundamentally re-evaluate risk management practices within sports organisations. This influx of research highlights the necessity for a more comprehensive risk management framework that addresses a spectrum of interconnected risks, including governance, financial stability, legal considerations, among others. The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the vulnerabilities inherent in traditional risk management approaches, prompting a critical reflection on how these entities prepare for and respond to multifaceted challenges [45].

This moment of heightened awareness can catalyse sports organisations to adopt proactive risk management strategies that are not solely reactive to health crises but are also anticipatory of systemic risks [26]. By integrating lessons learned from the pandemic into organisational protocols, there is potential for developing a resilient infrastructure that not only mitigates health-related risks but also fortifies the entities in their global dimension. Such a holistic approach is crucial for ensuring the integrity and sustainability of sports organisations in an increasingly complex and dynamic environment. Ultimately, the evolution of risk management practices catalysed by the pandemic could lead to a more robust framework for risk assessment and mitigation, enabling sports entities to navigate future uncertainties with greater efficacy.

5. Future directions and emergent areas of research

This section aims to highlight prospective research delineations that have emerged from our study's conclusions thus far. These future research areas represent a natural continuation of our work and present new opportunities for exploration and progress in the realm of sports risk management.

A crucial avenue of future research within the domain of sports entities is risk management from a financial perspective, as discerned by the present scoping review.

Foremost, it is manifestly apparent that the financial dimension is consistently entailed in all guidelines and standards pertaining to risk management in sports entities, as illustrated by Ref. [25]. Moreover, it is notable that financial risk management constitutes one of the principal concerns and hazards confronted by sports entities. Recent issues in sport clubs that have been poorly managed financially illustrate the gravity of this concern. Instances of bankruptcy, severe debt accumulation, and the forced sale of valuable assets have plagued several organisations. These financial mismanagement issues have led to diminished competitive performance, loss of key personnel, and reputational damage, further emphasising the critical need for robust financial risk management strategies in sports entities.

Despite this, only a small proportion, merely 4 %, of the overall articles included in this review have specifically focused on risk management from a financial perspective. This fact highlights a significant research gap and emphasises a clear opportunity to delve further into this fundamental aspect.

Another noteworthy aspect regarding future dimensions of research pertains to the scarcity of studies focused on the governance dimension, with just 14 out of the 125 studies included in the review investigating this dimension.

Hence, it is pertinent to consider studying risk management from a governance perspective as a future area of focus since increasing and improving research in this area can enable sports entities to control and assess risks to achieve organisational objectives, establish standards and procedures for organisational decision-making, and determine ways to optimise and monitor performance, as stated by the Australian Sport Commission [14].

Moreover, beyond the primary dimensions identified as potential future lines of research, certain specific categories emerge as particularly ripe for further exploration of their associated risks, notably the political category among them. As highlighted by numerous scholars, including [94], many sports entities, particularly those in European countries, rely heavily on public subsidies for their functioning. This dependence underscores the significance of public policies in ensuring the sustainability of these entities.

Despite this evident importance, the existing literature, offers limited insight into the political category of risk management in sports organisations. This dearth of attention to the political category suggests a significant gap in understanding and addressing risks associated with public policies and governmental support. By delving into the intricacies of public policies, funding mechanisms, and governmental regulations, researchers can enhance comprehension of the unique challenges and opportunities presented by the political environment, ultimately contributing to more effective risk management strategies and sustainable organisational practices within the sports industry.

Once the main dimensions and categories that emerge as future lines of research have been identified, it is worth noting that risk assessment studies emerge as significant trajectories for future investigation. Numerous researchers have directed their inquiries towards delineating the principal risks inherent to various sports entities, constituting 22 out of 125 studies. In this case, as mentioned above, a prominent trajectory for future investigation lies in the realm of risk management evaluation. This entails, as elucidated by Ref. [25], the assessment of risk necessitating the determination of two fundamental dimensions: the likelihood of its occurrence and the consequences it might entail upon materialisation. The risk matrices serve as a comprehensive tool for gauging the magnitude of each identified risk, amalgamating measures of probability and consequences. Hence, the pursuit of this avenue is regarded as a prospective trajectory, transitioning beyond the preliminary phase of risk identification towards the subsequent phase of comprehensive risk management.

Finally, delving into the yet-to-be-studied entities, sport governing bodies emerge as significant entities warranting investigation into their risk management.

National Governing Bodies (NGBs) are non-profit entities pivotal in fostering sports participation and elite-level athletic endeavours across many Western nations. Due to the importance of these entities in the sport sector, there is a growing acknowledgment that NGBs must undergo effective governance reforms to modernise their management practices [8,9,95].

Henceforth, it is deemed that one of the prospective avenues of research within the domain of risk management pertains to NGBs. Among the 125 articles encompassed in this scoping review, a mere 4 (3.2 %) have directed their focus towards risk management within NGBs. This observation is echoed by Ref. [24] in their discourse on governance from a risk management standpoint. They contend that despite the substantial corpus of research on contemporary risk management, the practical application and scholarly investigation of modern risk management methodologies appear to have been less pervasive within the sphere of non-profit organisations and NGOs, with an even more conspicuous absence within sports management bodies.

6. Limitations

This scoping review bears inherent limitations that warrant consideration when interpreting its findings. Firstly, it is crucial to note that scoping reviews do not aspire to engage in the appraisal of research quality. Instead, their primary objective is to afford comprehensive (albeit intensive) coverage of a chosen subject domain. Thus, scoping reviews endeavour to delineate the contours of a research area, encapsulating the breadth of scholarship therein [96]. Notwithstanding these limitations, such reviews serve as valuable tools for guiding future research trajectories, facilitating informed decision-making, and shaping research agendas. Moreover, they can stimulate the conceptualisation of novel studies and serve as a springboard for advancing knowledge and praxis within a specific field.

Furthermore, another salient limitation pertains to the potential for publication bias, wherein studies yielding positive or significant outcomes may be disproportionately represented in the literature, thereby skewing the sample's representativeness and potentially biasing the review's conclusions. Moreover, the selective inclusion of studies based on predefined eligibility criteria may curtail the generalisability of findings and overlook pertinent research offering alternative perspectives on the subject matter. Nevertheless, it is asserted that the eligibility criteria have been sufficiently broad to facilitate a comprehensive mapping of the risk management terrain within sports entities.

7. Conclusions

This scoping review furnishes a comprehensive and intricate examination of the study of risk management within sports entities. Through an exhaustive analysis of extant literature, several pivotal facets have been discerned, enriching our comprehension of this critical domain within the realm of sport. Firstly, a discernible uptick in awareness regarding the significance of risk management within sports entities has been observed in recent years, notably post-2020. This burgeoning consciousness is propelled by multiple factors including the sector's escalating professionalisation, apprehensions regarding adversities such as the advent of Covid-19, the emergence of novel technologies, and the imperative to ensure the safety and integrity of athletes, staff, and enthusiasts. Secondly, an emphasis has been placed on the manifold nature of risks confronting sports entities across various identified dimensions, spanning operational, governance, legal, financial, and equipment realms. This panoply of risks underscores the exigency for comprehensive, multifaceted risk management strategies, encompassing both tangible and intangible facets of sporting endeavours. Lastly, the scoping review delineates prospective avenues for further research, thereby enabling scholars to direct their investigations towards potential lacunae in the literature.

In essence, this scoping review proffers an all-encompassing elucidation of risk management within sports entities, underscoring its paramountcy in the contemporary landscape while delineating pivotal arenas for future research and advancement. Effective risk management stands as a linchpin for ensuring the enduring sustainability and prosperity of sports entities, alongside safeguarding the well-being and safety of all stakeholders within the sporting milieu.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Francesc Genovard: Writing – original draft, Visualization, Software, Resources, Project administration, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. Joshua Muñoz: Writing – review & editing, Visualization, Methodology, Investigation, Funding acquisition, Data curation, Conceptualization. Josep Petchamé: Writing – review & editing, Validation, Supervision, Investigation, Formal analysis. Francesc Solanellas: Writing – review & editing, Validation, Supervision, Methodology, Funding acquisition, Formal analysis.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Availability of data and material

Data will be made available on request. For requesting data, please write to the corresponding author.

Funding

This study is part of the “Risk Management for Sport Governance” project, led by INEFC, with code 101050453, which has been supported by a grant from the European Commission. The initial phase of the “Risk Management for Sport Governance” project focused on conducting a state-of-the-art review. For this purpose, financial resources were allocated to enable the authors of the present article to dedicate time to carry out this comprehensive literature review.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Francesc Genovard I Sureda reports financial support, administrative support, article publishing charges, and statistical analysis were provided by Erasmus. If there are other authors, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.