Opinion | End China's state-led sports system
Hu Shuli says changing attitudes in a more open society mean that the model has outlived its usefulness and now lumbers on as an ever greater drain on resources
The London Olympics have just ended and the memory of Chinese athletes giving their all to win honours is still fresh in our minds. Who can forget Liu Xiang's heart-wrenching fall in the hurdles event?
Even before the Games were over, the pros and cons of China's state-driven sports system were already being hotly debated. The public concern gives reason to re-evaluate the organisation of sports development in China.
China's state-run sports system is a legacy of central planning. The state deploys the human, financial and material resources at its command to produce athletes who win medals at international competitions, particularly gold medals at the Olympics. Despite the reform drive over the past 30 years, this system has remained untouched and can even be said to have strengthened alongside China's economic growth.
Admittedly, the sight of a Chinese gold medallist waving the national flag and singing the national anthem boosts our self-confidence. But while we acknowledge the system's positive contribution in the past, we can't ignore the problems that have become more obvious today.
Nationalism and faith in an omnipotent government have twisted the essence of sport: sports as a pursuit for pleasure and entertainment has become of secondary consideration, while the development of sports for all is out of the question.
As China becomes more developed and its society more open, many Chinese no longer see national athletes as mere symbols of the nation. Thus, their wins and losses in international competitions are increasingly seen in the context of individual striving. With attitudes changing, the state-run system is losing its support in society.
Yet even as its reason for being weakens, the costs of maintaining it have only increased. Like any other product of a planned economy, the state sports system cannot efficiently allocate resources, because - with politicians' whims guiding priorities - its true costs and benefits cannot be accurately reflected. High investments are made for low returns; the result is massive waste.