Doctoral Dissertation Research: Finding the Common Place of Anti-Doping. An Ethnographic Case Study of Legal Consciousness in New Zealand.

博士论文研究：寻找反兴奋剂的共同点。

• 批准号: 0851536
• 负责人: Justin Richland
• 金额: $ 1.2万
• 依托单位: University of California-Irvine
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2009
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2009-06-15 至 2010-11-30
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=0851536&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Doctoral; Dissertation; Research; Finding; Common

In light of recent scandals regarding drug use by high-profile athletes to enhance their sport performance, there is heightened public awareness of the regulation of and sanctioning of "doping" in sport. By definition, doping encompasses any performance enhancing methods used by athletes that are considered unethical or undermine a level playing field in sport. In the attempt to regulate and deter doping, the World Anti-Doping Code outlines the international standards for anti-doping procedures, while the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), an international nongovernmental organization, ensures their implementation. Though these mechanisms are considered forms of alternative dispute resolution, anti-doping rules mimic aspects of law, even at times taking on the appearance of law. Violations often lead to suspensions that can last for years, potentially ending an athlete's career and sometimes leading to criminal charges. In light of these punishments, arbitration mechanisms have been established to hear the appeals of athletes who have tested positive for banned substances.This research examines the implications of anti-doping practices by studying the arbitration hearings of athletes who appear before the Sports Tribunal of New Zealand. The Sports Tribunal is uniquely positioned, because it is an independent national body, made up of members with specialties in law and sport, which determines disputes for the sports sector, including anti-doping violations. Through observations of meetings and interviews with tribunal members, athletes, lawyers who represent athletes, and sports administrators, this dissertation research examines the arbitration process and the meanings attributed to anti-doping codes versus law and other rules in sport. As these law-like practices are indicative of a broader global trend in which nongovernmental organizations act to change and regulate social practices, often in reaction to law's inability to provide remedy or assistance within a specific arena, the significance of this research is not limited to sporting contexts.

鉴于最近有关知名运动员使用药物以提高运动成绩的丑闻，公众对体育运动中“兴奋剂”的监管和制裁的认识不断提高。根据定义，兴奋剂包括运动员使用的任何被认为不道德或破坏体育公平竞争环境的提高成绩的方法。为了规范和阻止兴奋剂，《世界反兴奋剂守则》概述了反兴奋剂程序的国际标准，而国际非政府组织世界反兴奋剂机构（WADA）则确保其实施。尽管这些机制被认为是替代性争议解决的形式，但反兴奋剂规则模仿了法律的某些方面，甚至有时呈现出法律的外观。违规行为通常会导致长达数年的停赛，甚至可能结束运动员的职业生涯，有时还会导致刑事指控。鉴于这些处罚，已经建立了仲裁机制来听取违禁物质检测呈阳性的运动员的上诉。本研究通过研究在新德里体育法庭出庭的运动员的仲裁听证会来探讨反兴奋剂做法的影响。西兰岛。体育法庭具有独特的地位，因为它是一个独立的国家机构，由具有法律和体育专业知识的成员组成，负责裁决体育部门的争议，包括反兴奋剂违规行为。通过对仲裁庭成员、运动员、代表运动员的律师和体育管理人员的会议和采访的观察，本论文研究探讨了仲裁程序以及反兴奋剂法规与体育法律和其他规则的含义。由于这些类似法律的实践表明了更广泛的全球趋势，即非政府组织采取行动改变和规范社会实践，通常是对法律无法在特定领域提供补救或援助的反应，因此这项研究的意义不仅限于体育背景。