This paper examines the utility of circular cooperation for the Sport for Development and Peace (SDP) field. Circular cooperation is a modus operandi used to address the Central Mediterranean refugee crises. This methodology is currently employed between Sicily, The Gambia, Senegal, and Mali. It relies on rehabilitating asylum-seekers crossing the Mediterranean, to then provide training towards a return to their country of origin. Returnees then establish start-ups that are functional in addressing the needs of their community of origin, while keeping a cyclical supportive partnership with their country of departure. In doing so, returning migrants can tap into the resources of the host country while also autonomously leading developmental efforts in their original community, by transferring their acquired skills from the country of relocation.

Circular cooperation is a vehicle for SDP to cooperate with other developmental fields, ensure the autonomy of initiatives and meaningfully address the necessities of user groups. The adoption of circular cooperation in SDP directly safeguards and improves the livelihood of forcibly migrating populations. Moreover, the adoption of a circular cooperation methodology could challenge neocolonial tendencies in SDP.

Over the past two decades, a plethora of studies have investigated gender distribution on the boards of national and international sport organizations. However, none of these have focused on sport for development and peace (SDP) organizations. The purpose of this paper was to examine gender distribution across the leadership and governance teams of SDP organizations, and the degree to which they have achieved a critical mass of women (a minimum of 30%). We used a quantitative survey in which 118 SDP organizations participated that were diverse in structure and geographic location. On average, the boards and senior leadership teams of the SDP organizations were gender balanced, with 47.71% and 48.92% female representation, respectively. Most organizations had a critical mass of women across their boards, leadership teams, and staff, and there were few differences in gender distribution across continental groupings. Drawing on critical mass theory, the findings imply that women influence legislation, policy, and decision-making within SDP organizations. Furthermore, gender balanced leadership and governance teams likely have a positive impact on SDP organizations’ culture and performance. However, we call for qualitative research to further explore whether women with a seat at the table have a voice to make change within SDP.