Abstract

The purpose of the paper is to understand the efficiency of national sport markets. There is the personal concern to see why Portuguese sport market produces lower welfare rates than other European countries running other sport sub-models of institutional framework. Why there are European sport systems enjoying divergent efficient rates? The questions to answer relate primarily to Neale’s (1964) suggestion to understand sport characteristics which produce economic peculiarities according to neo-classical theory and then the (Ostrom, 1990) social common resource to comprehend the sustainability of European sport sub-models. To fully apply Ostrom (1990) definitions, the Neale (1964) suggestions about sport economic peculiarities justifies the boundaries and the production structure of the sport market over which the institutional framework concern. The investigation follows three steps: First, sport is a social common including sport for all and professional sport in a unique market with clear defined boundaries by public and private property rights from the bottom to the top of the sport market. Second, the sport market products and co-products goods and externalities in multiple layers of nested sport organizations from the local, national, European or continental and world levels. Third, sport federations are private not for profit institutions regulating, accounting and sanctioning the behavior of three types of stakeholders either quantity, quality or profit maximizers. In conclusion sport public policy is outlined to maximize the sport commons through national, continental and world levels. The competitive behaviour of the market will be specified for each of these three aspects, including any sporting peculiarities and deficiencies. The final chapter will deal with the activity of the state. Verf.-Referat