Reform der Finanzierung der Welt-Anti-Dopingagentur WADA
Vorschlag eines Finanzierungsmodells
Das Finanzierungssystem der WADA steht von Beginn an in der Kritik. Zur Hälfte übernehmen die Länder, die andere Hälfte das IOC.
Eine echte Unabhängigkeit der Agentur ist damit nicht gegeben. Insbesondere Hauptgeldgeber IOC dürfte weit mehr Einfluss haben als bekannt wird. Doch auch die großen Nationen wie USA, China und Russland müssen bei Laune gehalten werden und die kleineren müssen dabei eine faire Chance haben beachtet zu werden – kein leichtes Unterfangen im weltpolitischen Gemenge und Machtgefüge.
Deutlich wurde dies 2024 nach Bekanntwerden der Affaire um 23 chinesische Schwimmer*innen, die vor den Olympischen Spielen in Tokio positiv auf Trimetazidin getestet worden waren, aber seitens China entlastet wurden. Die WADA akzeptierte diese Einschätzung, geriet aber damit unter heftige internationale Kritik. Ein von ihr in Auftrag gegebenes Gutachten entlastete die Agentur, doch der Ruf nach einer unabhängigen Untersuchung verstummte damit nicht. Im Gegenteil. Insbesondere die USA stellte sich quer. Seit Längerem schwelende Differenzen eskalierten mit dem Ergebnis, dass die USA Ende 2024 die Zahlung ihres Jahresbeitrages zurückhielt.
Näheres zu der Affaire und den damit verbundenen internationalen Auseinandersetzungen siehe hier:
>>> doping-archiv: 2021 – 2025 Massendoping im chinesischen Schwimmsport?
Wie könnte ein Finanzierungsmodell aussehen, welches die Unabhängigkeit der WADA garantiert, gleichzeitig aber auch dafür sorgt, dass diese selbst ihre Aufgaben compliance-treu, effektiv, nachprüfbar und damit transparent wahrnehmen und weiter entwickeln kann?
Richard Vaughan und Catherine Ordway von der Universität Canbarra, Australien, unterbreiten einen Vorschlag. 20.1.2025:
>>> the conversation: The US has exposed the World Anti-Doping Agency’s precarious funding model
Zitate:
The US contribution of $US3.6m ($A5.8m) amounts to 13.6% of the budgeted $US26.5m ($A42.7m) from global governments.
WADA’s hybrid public-private structure reflects the balancing act between the national governments on one side and the International Olympic Committee (IOC), representing the sports movement, on the other.
Catherine Ordway, one of the authors here, has long argued the 50-50 funding model between the IOC and the national governments creates “a fox guarding the henhouse” scenario.
This is because WADA relies heavily on funding from stakeholders, some of which have had the highest number of doping cases to investigate, such as Russia, China and the US. This in turn creates serious challenges for WADA in maintaining its own independence and impartiality.
…
The deficiency in the WADA funding model was exposed during the long and expensive investigation into the “institutionalised manipulation of the doping control process in Russia” following the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympic Games.
Although in financial distress, WADA could hardly beg one of its biggest funders, Russia, for more money to help it unearth the breadth of the fraud.
Instead, it led to WADA seeking private funding for the first time in its history.
A system open to manipulation
… This precarious system limits WADA’s ability to enforce anti-doping measures equitably. For example, smaller nations without robust anti-doping infrastructure are more reliant on WADA. Yet reduced funding hampers the organisation’s ability to investigate violations, test athletes, research new ideas, implement education programs effectively, and expand the function of new initiatives, such as athlete Ombuds.
The risks go beyond under-funding. If a government does not pay its contribution, this has a double impact as the withheld amount will not be matched by the IOC.
If other nations follow the US example, WADA’s financial model could collapse entirely. …
Innovative solutions for clean sport
There is widespread agreement that WADA’s current funding model is flawed. The real challenge lies in designing an a system that guarantees independence while fostering accountability and transparency.
Beyond current WADA efforts to secure private sponsorships, and support from philanthropic foundations, here are our proposals:
1. An independent global trust fund
A neutral, independently managed trust fund could be financed by a small percentage of global sporting revenues, such as broadcasting rights, sponsorship deals, or ticket sales. This would create a more impartial funding base.
2. Expand WADA’s social science research grant program
WADA recognises that social scientists play a crucial role in designing solutions for “wicked” problems, including doping, and has established a social science research grant program to support the science research program.
Rather than limiting research to “athlete behaviours (and) the social and environment factors that influence athlete behaviors”, the grant program could be expanded to look at WADA’s governance, accountability and funding from perspectives including behavioural economics, governance and public policy.
Additionally, social scientists can analyse WADA’s internal structure to identify inefficiencies beyond funding, ensuring anti-doping efforts are as effective as possible.
Since January 2024, Ordway has been a volunteer member of WADA’s social science research expert advisory group, which reviews the grant applications on behalf of WADA. Ordway does not have any research projects that would be eligible for funding under the proposed reforms.
3. Progressive athlete contribution model
Professional athletes could contribute a small levy from their earnings to fund anti-doping efforts. This model would promote athlete “ownership” of clean sport and increase investment in fair play.
However, many player associations argue that until there is revenue sharing (from event broadcasting, ticketing and sponsorship), especially in the Olympic context, and a greater voice for athletes, that this option is a non-starter.
With the WADA code consultation process well underway, for stakeholder approval at the sixth World Conference on Doping in Sport in November 2025, this is the perfect moment to act.
The urgency for change
Without bold reforms, WADA’s credibility and the integrity of sport itself, will remain at risk.
The stakes could not be higher: fair play, athlete safety, and the future of global competition all hang in the balance.
It’s time to take decisive action to remove the fox from the henhouse.
By building a funding model for the future, WADA can be properly resourced to fulfil its mandate as the organisation established to support clean and fair competition.
The future of sport may depend on it.