22. Globalization on the Football Pitch

Africa’s emergence as a footballing force to be reckoned with has not been matched by its economic performance. In terms of gross domestic product (GDP), Nigeria, Cameroon and Senegal are the three poorest countries to have qualified for this year’s World Cup. The latest figures from the World Bank show that Nigeria is the l93rd richest country in the world, Cameroon is the l65th, and Senegal is the 171st, Nigeria has double the population of Britain, but its per capita GDP is US$800 a year, compared with the average US$23,550 for the average British football supporter.

South Africa, mainly because of its large mineral reserves, has the highest living standards in Africa, with per capita GDP of US$9,000, 50 percent more than Tunisia. which is also in the World Cup. But even these middle-income nations are a long way behind the United States, where the GDP for one week is nearly as great as that of Nigeria in a year. Nevertheless, for all its wealth, the U.S. team—unlike many of the African teams—has no players of world-class stature and stands little chance of winning the World Cup.

So why is there this discrepancy? The most obvious difference is that African players have been granted a degree of access to the lucrative West European markets that their farmers and textile workers can only dream of. The vast majority of the 115 players representing the five African nations at the World Cup regularly play for European clubs. Brendan Batson, deputy chief executive of the Professional Footballers Association, argues that the ability of players to move from African countries to play for European clubs is proving beneficial, not just to the exported sportsmen but to their national teams as well. He pointed out that Nigeria emerged as a World Cup favorite several years ago. “On current form,” he said, “Cameroon has overtaken them and a number of other African countries are making progress. The importing of African players by European clubs has been a good thing, and bodes well for international football,” he said.

However, football is not an example of perfect free trade, as players from outside the
European Union do not enjoy the same access to different clubs as those on the inside. For one thing, imported players have to be full internationals. This means that they must have played three-quarters of their country’s international matches in the previous two years. One of the attractions of recruiting African players was that transfer prices for European players are high. But that may soon be a thing of the past, according to analysts, who point out that the increased role of the players’ agents means that the scope for paying less than the going domestic rate is limited.
Contrast all this with the barrage of restraints that prevent African nations from playing a full part in the global economy. An example is the recently passed U.S. Farm Bill, which raised subsidies to American farmers by US$180 billion a year. In addition, the new U.S. Farm Bill will reduce pressure on Europe and Japan to cut subsidies to their own farmers. Agriculture makes up a large share of African nations’ GDP, and such subsidies will severely hamper efforts by African exporters to sell their produce in the most lucrative markets. In the football world, on the other hand, the fans in the West want to see the best players, wherever they come from, and the desire to protect benefits to home-grown talent is much weaker than in the field of economies and trade. The result has been a global market in football.

Years after European clubs began to welcome players from Africa, the World Trade Organization (WTO) has only just launched its “development round,” promising to bring the benefits of trade liberalization to Africa’s poorest countries. However, few believe that last November’s Doha Declaration will do much to help African exporters. The reason is that the “development round” should have started a decade ago; as it is, the export industries of poor countries have not had a chance to develop to the point at which they could take advantage of the WTO’s latest trade liberalization step.

Oxfam policy adviser Kevin Watkins said, “If Europe had the same approach to market access in areas like agriculture and garments as it has for football, it would go a long way to improving prospects for Africa. We are in favor of improving market access when it is in the interests of our entertainment industry, but it is a different story when it could do something for the quality of life in poor countries.”

Adapted from an article in The Guardian by Mark Milner and Larry Elliott

Questions 1—6
Choose the appropriate letters A —D, and write them in boxes 1-6 on your answer sheet.
1. In the first paragraph the writers argue that success at football
A. has boosted the economies of African nations.
B. has kept GDP growth in Africa low.
C. has had no effect on African countries’ economies.
D. has made Africans envious of rich countries.

2. The writers mention the United States in the second paragraph in order to point out
A. that the Americans are a new force in football.
B. the irony of a rich nation being weak in a world-class sport.
C. how much richer the U.S. is than Nigeria.
D. that not all World Cup teams are African.

3. Brendan Batson thinks
A. that there are too many African players in European teams.
B. that Nigeria will win the World Cup.
C. that Cameroon will win the World Cup.
D. that player mobility is good for football worldwide.
4. The analysts claim that attempts to pay African players low wages are being hampered by
A. the Professional Footballers Association.
B. the global economy.
C. the European Union.
D. the players’ agents.

5. According to the writers, the U.S. Farm Bill will
A. encourage Europe and Japan to maintain farm product subsidies.
B. encourage African countries to lower agricultural export prices.
C. encourage African producers to concentrate on non-U.S. markets.
D. encourage the West to subsidize domestic producers.

6. Kevin Watkins criticizes Europe for
A. not recruiting enough African footballers.
B. not opening its other markets as widely as the football market.
C. making the infant mortality rate in Africa worse.
D. regarding football as entertainment and not as an industry.

Questions 7—13
The reading passage describes a number of cause-and-effect relationships. Match each Cause question (7—13) in List A with its Effect (A —J) in List B.
Write the appropriate letters A —J in boxes 7—13 on your answer sheet.
List A: Causes

7. South Africa has large mineral reserves.
8. Leading African footballers play in Europe.
9. Players from outside the European Union must be full internationals.
10. Domestic transfer prices within Europe are high.
11. The U.S. has raised subsidies to its farmers.
12. Europe's football fans want to watch the best players.
13. The WTO ‘s “development round” has been delayed for ten years.

List B: Effects
A. European clubs are buying more overseas players.
B. Poor countries export industries are undeveloped.
C. Africa’s national teams benefit.
D. Football is not an example of perfect free trade.
E. Political clout is the key.
F. It has the highest living standards in Africa.
G. European teams now have a cosmopolitan makeup.
H. A global market in soccer has been created.
I. African agricultural exports are barred from the top markets.
J. U.S. chances are poor in the World Cup.

Answer: 1-C,2-B,3-D,4-D,5-A,6-B,7-F,8-C,9-D,10-A,11-I,12-H,13-B

- 제주도 유일한 off-line 아이엘츠 학원 -