A New Era for Volunteerism: The Brisbane Games’ ‘Passport’ Plan

The lord mayor’s announcement of a “volunteer passport” system for the 2032 Brisbane Games has sparked both excitement and scrutiny among community organizers, sporting clubs, and prospective volunteers. This initiative appears to be a pragmatic approach to recruiting top talent for the event, but it raises complex questions about the commodification of volunteerism.

The Brisbane Beyond the Games legacy plan includes the “volunteer passport” scheme, an attempt to build on the momentum generated by previous Olympic and Paralympic Games. The program’s designers likely drew inspiration from cities like London, which has a long history of community-driven events and volunteer programs. However, in an era where corporate sponsorship and commercialization are increasingly prominent at sports events, it is worth questioning whether this approach will ultimately serve the best interests of volunteers and the community.

One concern surrounding the “volunteer passport” system is its potential to create a tiered system of volunteerism, where those with existing credits have an unfair advantage over newcomers. This raises questions about equity and access: will only those who are already well-connected or have significant experience in volunteering be able to secure coveted spots at the 2032 Games? The announcement’s emphasis on “recognition” for existing volunteers suggests a transactional approach, where community service is valued primarily for its potential to generate more community service.

Historically, volunteer programs for major sporting events have been touted as opportunities for local residents to get involved and make a difference. However, the reality often falls short of these ideals. The 2024 Paris Games’ application process, which saw over 300,000 hopefuls vie for just 45,000 spots, is a stark reminder of the intense competition and scrutiny that volunteers face.

The introduction of a “passport” system may inadvertently create a culture of competition among volunteers rather than fostering a sense of community and shared purpose. Furthermore, the announcement’s focus on identifying top talent within existing volunteer networks raises questions about what constitutes “quality” volunteering. Are those who merely flip sausages at the barbecue truly the most valuable assets to the event? Or are there other types of contributions that are just as crucial but less easily quantifiable?

The rollout of the “volunteer passport” system has yet to be announced, leaving many in the community wondering what this will mean for them. Will it create a more inclusive and equitable volunteer landscape, or will it exacerbate existing power dynamics? The Brisbane Games’ approach to volunteerism will set a precedent for future events, and it is essential that we critically examine its implications.

Cities hosting major sporting events, such as the Los Angeles 2028 Games, which aim to recruit around 60,000 volunteers, may provide valuable insights into the effectiveness of different approaches. Local community organizers and sporting clubs must grapple with the potential impact on their own volunteer programs – and decide whether to adapt or resist this new paradigm.

Ultimately, the success of the Brisbane Games’ “volunteer passport” system will depend on its ability to balance competing priorities: rewarding existing volunteers, creating a more inclusive environment, and harnessing the energy of community-driven initiatives. As we move forward, it is crucial that we prioritize transparency, equity, and community needs – rather than succumbing to a culture of competition and commodification.