Esports, governance and behavior: who has the power?

Professional and amateur gamers compete in video game tournaments, a fast-growing business known as esports. Esports draw millions of viewers, advertisers, and investors, bringing in billions of dollars and offering numerous people chances for professional and personal growth. Esports does, however, also confront governance and integrity issues, which may jeopardize the industry's credibility and long-term viability.

The processes, practices, and rules that organize and direct esports activity are known as esports governance. Esports governance is crucial to preventing and resolving ethical, security, fairness, and transparency issues, as well as ensuring the rights and interests of related actors. The social and economic advancement of nations and areas that host or take part in esports events can also be facilitated by esports governance.

However, because there are many players involved, each with distinct duties, responsibilities, abilities, and interests, esports governance is complicated and unpredictable. Esports bodies and federations, which represent and defend the interests of esports; sponsors and investors, who finance and support esports; game developers and publishers, who are responsible for creating and controlling game titles; the media and streaming platforms, which broadcast and promote esports; the fans and spectators, who watch and interact with esports; esports organizations and teams, which are in charge of hiring and training players; and governments and regulatory agencies, which legislate and regulate esports, are some of the key esports actors.

Based on the game, event, nation, and environment, these actors' levels of autonomy and influence in esports governance vary. Since they are the owners of the intellectual property rights and have the authority to set the guidelines and formats for competitions and games, game publishers and developers typically hold the most influence. Other players, on the other hand, have power as well since they can work with publishers and developers to protect their own goals and interests, and they can negotiate, collaborate, compete, engage, or conflict.

Using the idea of network governance, Peng et al. (2020) conducted a recent study that examined the dynamics of players in esports governance. According to this theory, governance is carried out by a network of interdependent individuals who share resources, knowledge, and duties rather than by a single central authority. Several characteristics of esports network governance were found in the study, including:

• Since every game has its own rules and organization, and every region has its own culture and laws, esports governance is diverse and fragmented.
• Esports governance is dynamic and ever-changing, as stakeholders adjust to and react to developments in technology, society, and the economy that impact the industry.
• Esports governance is characterized by conflict and competition, as stakeholders seek resources, recognition, and influence, often at odds with one another.
• Because participants understand their connection and the importance of cooperation and communication, esports governance is collaborative and cooperative.

According to the study, esports governance is becoming more and more similar to the network steward organization (NAO) model, which is a type of network governance that entails the establishment of impartial and representative entities that mediate and oversee interactions amongst network actors. The following are ways that this paradigm could enhance esports governance:

• Create uniform guidelines and standards for esports to improve the caliber and consistency of events and services.
• Resolve disagreements and confrontations amongst esports players to foster peace and confidence within the network.
• Promote and protect esports interests in front of outside audiences, enhancing the industry's reputation and validity.
• Encourage involvement and cooperation within the network to further the growth and innovation of esports.

But this model also has to contend with a few obstacles, like:

• The cooperation and buy-in of publishers and game developers, who may or may not accept the loss of authority and control over esports.
• The diversity and representation of actors in esports can make it challenging to come together and express themselves in unison.
• The management entity's capability and authority could be restricted in its ability to enforce and oversee network policies and choices.
• The participation and involvement of governments, which, according to?their objectives and interests, may either assist or obstruct the administration of esports.

As a result, esports governance is a timely and difficult subject that calls for thoughtful consideration and cooperation from all parties concerned. Although esports offer a lot of potential to advance social and human development, there are risks involved that must be understood and reduced. Esports governance is a means of guaranteeing that esports are played and watched in a way that respects each player's rights and obligations while also being morally righteous, safe, equitable, and transparent.

References

Who holds the power in sports governance?. (2023, July 25). Sportanddev. https://www.sportanddev.org/latest/news/who-holds-power-sports-governance.

Peng, Q., Dickson, G., Scelles, N., Grix, J., & Brannagan, P. M. (2020). Esports governance: Exploring stakeholder dynamics. Sustainability,?12(19),?8270.