Ethics CasesSport

Cases · Olympic movement / national sport systems · 2017–2024

Representing the Country on a Shoestring: Olympians' Financial Hardship

Olympic sport generates billions, yet many of the athletes who compete live on very little. A 2020 Global Athlete survey of 491 athletes found that 58% did not consider themselves financially stable. In 2023, the Australian Sports Foundation found that 46% of elite adult athletes in Australia earned less than A$23,000 a year, below the poverty line. In Canada, the main federal stipend was $1,765 a month until athletes successfully lobbied for an increase in 2024. The case asks who owes elite athletes a living: governments, Olympic bodies, federations or the market.

By Tanner Simkins, editor

Timeline

  1. Canada raises its Athlete Assistance Program stipend by $265 a month, the first increase since 2004.
  2. Global Athlete launches its survey of athletes on rights and welfare.
  3. Global Athlete publishes the results: 58% say they are not financially stable.
  4. The Australian Sports Foundation surveys 2,304 athletes.
  5. The ASF reports that 46% of elite adult athletes earn under A$23,000.
  6. Canadian athletes' representatives request a $6.3 million increase to the AAP.
  7. Canadian athletes describe their debts and crowdfunding during the Paris Olympics.
  8. Canada sets the senior card at $2,175 a month, retroactive to April.

The ethical issues

  • Fair compensation for athletes who generate value.
  • Dependence on family wealth and inequality of access.
  • Performance-based funding and its insecurity.
  • Who bears responsibility: the state, Olympic bodies or federations.
  • Effects on mental health and dropout.

Stakeholders

StakeholderInterests & obligations
Elite athletesA living income and security.
Governments and sport agenciesMedals and value for public money.
Olympic committees and the IOCCommercial revenue and the sustainability of the system.
National federationsTeam costs and programs.
Families and donorsSupporting athletes without unlimited burden.
TaxpayersEffective use of funds.

The case

“Can’t train without funds but trying to get work around training is not easy.” That was one athlete’s answer in a 2020 survey of 491 elite athletes from 48 countries.[5] In that survey, 58% said they did not consider themselves financially stable.[5] In 2023, an Australian study found that nearly half of the country’s elite adult athletes lived below the poverty line.[3] In Canada, an Olympic bobsledder said her government stipend was her “main source of income.” She described couch surfing and carrying thousands of dollars of debt for equipment and travel.[6] The case asks who owes elite athletes a living when the sport they compete in is a global commercial product.

Background

Athletes’ advocacy group Global Athlete launched its survey in September 2019. It found that athletes believed they did “not receive the appropriate amount of compensation” from the International Olympic Committee (IOC), the International Paralympic Committee, national federations and governments. It also concluded that the IOC and federations “should pay athletes for attending their Games.”[4] The Associated Press reported that 57% of respondents supported the IOC paying athletes to attend. Many respondents also said they could not easily fit paid work around training and selection demands.[5]

Most Olympic athletes rely on a mix of government grants, family support, prize money and sponsorship. In Canada, the federal Athlete Assistance Program (AAP), known as “carding,” is the base. AthletesCAN, citing Sport Canada’s survey of high-performance athletes, said the AAP makes up about 75% or more of athletes’ annual income.[2] Before 2024, the maximum payment was $1,765 a month, or just over $21,000 a year.[2][6] The last increase, in 2017, was also the first since 2004.[6]

What happened

The Australian Sports Foundation (ASF) surveyed 2,304 athletes in February and March 2023. It found that 46% of elite athletes over 18 earned less than A$23,000 a year. Of those, 43% said their finances had worsened over the past year, and 52% of elite athletes had considered leaving their sport.[3] The ASF, which runs a fundraising platform for athletes, recommended more fundraising.[3]

In Canada, AthletesCAN and the Olympic and Paralympic athletes’ councils asked for a $6.3 million increase, or 18.8%, in line with inflation since 2017. They also asked for the AAP to be indexed to inflation in future.[2] Athletes described mounting debts. An Olympic rowing champion said her mother planted an extra garden to help feed her.[6] During the Paris Olympics, the National Post reported a private fund’s survey of athletes. It found that the average annual net income of the 65 summer-sport athletes covered ranged from -$23,142 to $5,260. The fund’s founder said, “you know you’re gonna go into major debt to wear the red and white.”[7]

The rules and governance

There is no global rule that athletes must be paid. Funding is set nationally, usually by performance criteria that decide who receives support.[2][7] In October 2024, Canada announced $35 million over five years for the AAP, plus $7 million a year after that. The senior card rose to $2,175 a month, an increase of about 23%, retroactive to April. Canada also funded cards for pregnant athletes and added ten senior card equivalents for new and emerging sports. The allowance for Paralympic athletes with high support needs rose by 30%, to $650 a month. In 2023–24, 1,918 athletes from 96 sports were carded. Of those, 51% were women and 291 were athletes with a disability.[1] The government did not announce the indexation that athletes had requested.[1][2]

Aftermath

The head of the Canadian Olympic Committee said the committee reinvests more than 70% of its revenue in the sport system.[7] Even with the increase, the Canadian stipend amounts to about $26,000 a year. Athletes still pay team fees, which the fund’s founder said range from $2,000 to $20,000.[1][7]

The core dilemma

Should national sport systems guarantee elite athletes a living stipend, or is elite sport a personal pursuit that public money should only partly support?

Competing values

Fair pay for value created stands against limited public budgets. Access for all stands against performance-based funding. Athletes’ welfare stands against medal efficiency.

Strongest arguments

For a guaranteed stipend: Athletes represent their country and generate commercial value. Poverty harms their mental health and drives them out of sport. Without support, only those with family wealth can compete.[3][5][6]

Against or for limits: Public money is limited, and performance-based funding rewards results. Many sports have little commercial revenue, and Olympic bodies say they reinvest in the system.[1][7]

Applying the frameworks

Justice

Distributive justice asks whether those who create value receive a fair share, and whether access to sport depends on family wealth.[4][7]

Care

An ethic of care focuses on athletes’ wellbeing, including their mental health and the risk of dropping out.[3]

Utilitarian

A consequentialist weighs the cost of stipends against the benefits of keeping athletes in sport, along with their performance and inspiration to others.[1][3]

Walk it through: the Simple Decision Model

  1. What are the facts? The survey results, Canada’s stipend levels and the 2024 increase.[1][2][3][4]
  2. Who are the stakeholders? Athletes, governments, Olympic bodies, federations, families and taxpayers.
  3. What are the options? Pay a guaranteed stipend; keep funding performance-based; or require the IOC to share revenue directly with athletes.
  4. Which values are in conflict? Fair pay against budgets; access against efficiency.
  5. What do the frameworks suggest? All three favor more support, though they differ on who should pay.
  6. What would you decide and why? Decide as a sport minister.

What’s settled and what’s contested

Settled: The survey results and Canada’s funding changes.[1][3][4]

Contested: Who should pay athletes, and how much they should receive.[2][5]

Why this case matters

Compare with World Athletics’ Olympic prize money, Paralympic prize money parity and Grand Slam Track’s unpaid athletes.

Key terms

Distributive justice
Fairness in how scarce opportunities, resources, benefits and burdens are shared.
Duty of care
The responsibility of coaches, organizations and institutions to protect the health, safety and well-being of those in their charge. It is not a license for total control.
Commercialization
The process of turning sport into a product and a business enterprise, with profit pressures that can compete with principle.
Stakeholders
Everyone with something at stake in a decision: athletes, coaches, parents, officials, fans, employees, sponsors, media, communities and regulators, including the less visible ones.
Agency
An athlete’s ability to make decisions and act independently about their body, career and voice.
Institutional accountability
Structures that make a sport organization explain its decisions and face consequences: clear authority, transparency, appeals, independent oversight and enforcement.

Definitions from the Ethics Cases glossary.

Discussion questions

  1. Should national teams pay athletes a living wage?
  2. Is performance-based funding fair?
  3. Should the IOC pay athletes for competing at the Games?
  4. Does crowdfunding solve or hide the problem?
  5. What would a fair funding system look like?

Sources

  1. Minister Qualtrough announces major funding boost for Canada's high-performance athletes — Government of Canada (Canadian Heritage)
  2. Canadian Athlete Representatives request $6.3 Million increase to Athlete Assistance Program Funding in Budget 2024 — AthletesCAN
  3. ASF Study Reveals Australia's Athletes are Living Below Poverty Line — Australian Sports Foundation
  4. Global Athlete Survey Results: Athlete Rights, Welfare and Representation — Global Athlete
  5. Survey finds Olympic, elite athletes struggling financially — The Seattle Times (Associated Press)
  6. Drowning in debt, Canadian athletes ask for raise in monthly 'carding' money in federal budget — CBC Sports
  7. Why Canadian Olympic athletes operate 'right around the poverty line' — National Post