SUE HARVEY INTERVIEW

“IOF is constrained always by the need to be democratic ...”

Sue Harvey gives an interview to Jan Skricka of O-Sport

AT the January meeting of the International Orienteering Federation Council, IOF president Sue Harvey announced that she will not be applying to prolong her presidency in the IOF General Assembly this September. This means that the 10-year-long-period of her presidency will come to an end. In this interview, we asked her things that, despite being of significant importance for orienteers around the world, are not frequently mentioned – such as the IOF’s publications, its budget for organisation, PWT / IOF relations, event applications, her vision of the future of our sport, and more.

? I have a somewhat visionary question to start with: What are your expectations for 2004 in regard to orienteering?

High class World Championships in Foot, Mountain Bike and Trail Orienteering. I am happy to note in this connection that a very successful World Championships in Ski Orienteering has already taken place. New heights of visibility for the sport in the international multi-sport arena through the General Assembly of International Sports Federations (GAISF), whose annual Assembly takes place this year in Lausanne in May. Increased visibility also with sports people generally through coverage of the World Championships.

? Of course, finance is always a hot topic …but, is it still possible to say what the IOF total annual budget is and what things are financed with it? Does any of the money return directly to orienteering in order to support the sport in its development?

IOF’s first job is to provide the structure for the international sport – rules, a programme of events etc. What it can do in addition depends on the funds available. The budget of the IOF is approved by the IOF’s biennial General Assembly. The sources of funding of the IOF are the national federations. Most of the federations want to use their money to develop the sport in their own country, so they have only a minimum to spare to pay fees to the IOF. It should also be borne in mind that it is the national federations that pay the expenses of their representative and experts who work within the IOF. Most of IOF’s budget therefore goes on paying for the Secretariat, a Secretariat which now serves 63 countries with no more staff than when it served just 32 countries two decades ago. IOF does what it can to develop the sport in both member and nonmember countries e.g. with the help of the IOC a clinic was held in South America in 2003. However, much development work is also done by national federations themselves through bilateral action or other programmes, e.g. the Swedish O-Ringen Clinic.

? I would like to consider the presentation of our sport through official IOF media – such as O-Zine, Orienteering World, and the IOF website at www.orienteering.org . All of these, except for O-Zine, seem to be far behind what is generally considered a standard in the field. I would take the website as an example,

Photo: Pirjo Valjanen, Finland

specifically its design, updating, and structuring …things that can definitely be done better, as many orienteering websites have already proven. Or is this just my point of view?

IOF’s publications serve an important purpose by providing reliable information to the whole orienteering world. There are plenty of commercial websites and magazine-type websites that thrive on sensation and controversy. This is not IOF’s role. IOF must put a premium on accurate facts in all its publications. IOF has a minimum budget for publications. The federations would hardly view it as good value if their member fees to the IOF were spent on flashy magazines. At the same time, the IOF must provide a shop window to other sports and governments and to organisations like the IOC, so the content of IOF’s magazine, for example, is aimed primarily at the outside world and non-orienteers. Indeed, Orienteering World, IOF’s magazine, is very highly regarded among international sport leaders as a model shop window for the sport.

? I have another object for consideration: the situation surrounding last year’s JWOC applications, though the same in fact applies to all other applications for organising IOF elite events. JWOC 2004 applications may have needed to have been decided in a hurry; but still, do you think that just announcing the following is enough? "We believe that Poland has the expertise to handle the event even at this short notice. The local club WKS Flota Gdynia has organised several major orienteering events, among them the 1994 edition of the JWOC and the European Youth Orienteering Championships in 2002, says Brian Porteous, Chairman of the IOF Foot Orienteering Commission.” Wouldn’t it more fair to other applicants to announce in what ways the Polish candidature was better than those presented by other countries, and also which other countries had applied? With this and similar things in mind, would you describe the IOF as a transparent organisation?

The application procedure for allocation of events takes place according to clear fixed rules, with specific dates for receipt of applications, specific requirements to be fulfilled by the application and a procedure by which applications are evaluated.

The Council is the body elected by the General Assembly to make decisions on organisers of its events on behalf of IOF’s members (except for the elite World Orienteering Championships, where the decision is made by the General Assembly). In the case of Junior World Orienteering Championships, once the Foot Orienteering Commission has made its recommendation, Council approves the appointment. Reasons why the unsuccessful candidates are not usually given, not least because orienteers are mostly volunteers and it would be unnecessarily demotivating for IOF to publicly list the failings of, say, the Czech application. Any federation that wishes to improve its application for the future is encouraged to start a dialogue with the appropriate Commission to ensure that attention is being paid to the important issues. (While the Foot Orienteering Commission deals with Junior and Masters Championships, the Elite Events Commission is responsible for advising on World Championships applications).

? In O-Sport 8/2003, we asked the PWT president, Michael

Thulin, about Park World Tour / IOF relations. I would like to ask you the same. Why is co-operation between the PWT and IOF almost nonexistent, despite the fact that there are definitely things in PWT that have proven to be working both to attract TV and other media, as well as to create new, challenging urban O-disciplines? To be honest, it sometimes seems almost irrational not to use this know-how in IOF races, to ask the PWT for assistance and closer co-operation?

It is clear that the role of the IOF and that of the PWT are very different. IOF is constrained always by the need to be democratic, to operate always within its own rules, and to take account of the wishes of its 63 member federations. IOF must above all respect its own procedures and especially with regard to fairness. The PWT, on the other hand, is free to innovate much more rapidly, can choose who it invites to its competitions and can, to some extent, write its own rules. PWT can make changes to its programme later on, and can at times be thoroughly commercial in a way IOF can never be. This does not mean the two cannot work together. On the contrary, both can learn from each other. At the same time, there is a limit to the closeness of any co-operation due to the different ways of working and the different objectives of the two organisations.

? Getting our sport into the Olympics seems to be an Sue Harvey ever-green issue. But, what Sue has been involved with specific steps has the IOF taken orienteering for 38 years, competing, since the last Congress in 2002, mapping and organising at all levels and how much closer have we from club through to World got? How long a course do we Championships. She has worked in the still need to run? organisation of the sport at national

The Olympic Games are a keystone for world elite sport. Naturally all sports strive to be part. Currently some three winter sports are seeking inclusion in the winter programme and 14 in the summer programme. As no new sports will and international level for 32 years. Since becoming IOF President in 1994, Sue has also been active in international multi-sport organisations. Sue speaks six languages - Swedish, French, Russian, German, Arabic and English. be added in Athens and few if any Competitive career in orienteering: in Beijing, it is hard to get a new World Championships 1968, 1970, sport into the programme. 1972 for Britain (best placing 24th), The way in which sports will be accepted for the programme of the British Champion 1971 (W21), 197980 (W35), 1986 (W40) Olympic Games is changing also. Organising and planning events: Jan The IOC is beginning to move to Kjellstrom Trophy (UK Easter Three make the process more Days) 1971 and 1990 – planner, WOC transparent, and it seems likely ‘76 General Secretary, Scottish 6 Days that in future an attempt will be ‘77 and ‘85 Coordinator made to have a sort of rotation of Mapping: Many maps including Jan sports, with some removed and Kjellstrom Trophy 1971 and 1990 and others included on the basis of a WOC 1976 (with Robin Harvey) proper evaluation. But don’t International multi-sport bodies: expect quick results. Changes will International Masters Games come very slowly. Meanwhile Association (IMGA) - Governors 1994; orienteering needs to qualify by Association of IOC-Recognised reaching a membership of 75 International Sports Federations countries in the IOF. IOF (ARISF) - Council 2000 – 2001; membership has increased from 50 International World Games Association to 63 in the last 10 years, but (IWGA) - Executive Committee 2001; there is some work to do yet European Masters Association (EMA), before foot orienteering is eligible Vice President 2002 even to apply for a place in the summer games. The criteria for the winter games are different. Orienteering (as ski orienteering) already fulfils the criteria. After IOF’s application for inclusion in the 2006 Winter Games was rejected, IOF made a number of changes in response to comments made on that application, and IOF now has a new application already with the IOC seeking inclusion in the 2010 games.

? As the current IOF president, what is your vision of our sport, let’s say over the next 10 years?

A vision is a hope and at the same time a goal to strive for. It is also something that may prove impossible to achieve because of circumstances outside one’s control. For me, the future lies with both the grass roots of the sport and the elite athletes. There is new interest in physical activity in the developed world now because of the bad effects of lack of sufficient exercise on health and well-being. This is an opportunity for orienteering which, unlike so many other sports, can be enjoyed throughout life. Masters sport, the World Masters Orienteering Championships, and the World Masters Games, have an important role to play in providing goals for older athletes to aim for. At the same time, orienteering is finding a place in schools in more and more countries, giving youngsters a chance to start early in a sport they need never quit. In this the elite has a significant role to play. The elite provide the heroes that can inspire youngsters and stimulate recruitment. For this to work, we need publicity for our elite competitions and elite athletes. Obtaining this publicity is a challenge and an opportunity for the coming decade. Printed with permission