Why do certain countries dominate the Olympics? The answer might lie in the correlation between athletic performance and GDP. This year’s Paris Olympic Games were a case in point: the top seven medal winners — the US, China, Japan, Australia, France, the Netherlands and the UK — are all among the world’s 20 largest economies.
This can be partly attributed to demographics: A larger population provides a deeper pool of athletic talent from which to draw. The more populous and developed a country is, the more it is likely to win Olympic medals.
This can also be confirmed empirically. Weighting the total number of medals won by each country by value — three points for gold, two for silver and one for bronze — reveals that the 12 countries with the highest medal count in Paris are all advanced economies. The G7 countries, which account for 43.5 percent of global GDP, won 33.8 percent of all medals. Africa, with a 3 percent share of the world economy, captured 3.7 percent of the total. Latin America, which represents 7.3 percent of global GDP, secured just under 6 percent of the medals, with 29 percent of those going to its largest economy, Brazil.
Although the correlation between GDP and Olympic performance is strong, it is far from absolute. Consider, for example, the EU: Despite accounting for 17.5 percent of global GDP, EU member states won nearly 30 percent of the medals in Paris. This suggests that European countries’ dominance is partly due to their effective national sports policies and deeply rooted athletic traditions. Of course, Europe also benefits from the fact that many Olympic sports were invented there.
Asia, for its part, is too politically and culturally heterogeneous for its Olympic performance to be reduced to a single explanation. While Asia and Oceania are home to three major sporting powerhouses — China, Japan and Australia — the Indian subcontinent has a relatively modest Olympic record.
In fact, India is perhaps the most striking example of how GDP can be a poor predictor of Olympic excellence. Despite a population of 1.4 billion and an economy that represents 7.9 percent of global GDP in purchasing-power-parity terms, India ranked 71st among medal-winning countries in this year’s Olympics. Australia, with just 26 million people, claimed 5 percent of the medals, putting it in fourth place.
The US and China predictably led this year’s medal race, winning 12 percent and 10 percent of all medals respectively, largely thanks to their economic might and population size. That said, the US’s medal count was far lower than its economic power would suggest, given that it accounts for roughly 20 percent of global GDP.
To be sure, economic development and demographics alone are not enough to guarantee Olympic success. Unlocking a country’s athletic potential requires effective policies and adequate infrastructure, which is why sparsely populated yet highly developed countries like Australia often punch above their weight, while densely populated countries like Nigeria barely win any medals.
Athletic culture also plays a vital role. African countries, for example, excel in track and field, particularly middle and long-distance running, largely due to east Africa’s deeply rooted tradition of training at high altitudes.
Notably, distance running does not require sophisticated infrastructure or access to high-level training facilities like other Olympic sports such as swimming, fencing, and gymnastics, which remain overwhelmingly dominated by wealthy Western countries and China. For example, French swimming sensation Leon Marchand, who won four gold medals in Paris, trains in the US. Likewise, Algerian gold-medalist gymnast Kaylia Nemour trains in France.
The disparities in Olympic medal counts offer valuable, albeit nuanced, geopolitical insights. At first glance, this year’s medal count appears to reflect our increasingly multipolar world. With 92 of the 206 participating countries and territories winning medals, the Paris Olympics suggested a more open and competitive global landscape.
However, the fact that 50 percent of these medals were concentrated among G7 countries and China, which together account for 60 percent of global GDP, shows that there is still a long way to go.
While sports and the world economy are moving toward greater multipolarity, this shift might be slower and more limited than many expect.
Zaki Laidi, a professor at Sciences Po, is a former special adviser to the high representative of the EU for foreign policy and security.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
US political scientist Francis Fukuyama, during an interview with the UK’s Times Radio, reacted to US President Donald Trump’s overturning of decades of US foreign policy by saying that “the chance for serious instability is very great.” That is something of an understatement. Fukuyama said that Trump’s apparent moves to expand US territory and that he “seems to be actively siding with” authoritarian states is concerning, not just for Europe, but also for Taiwan. He said that “if I were China I would see this as a golden opportunity” to annex Taiwan, and that every European country needs to think
For years, the use of insecure smart home appliances and other Internet-connected devices has resulted in personal data leaks. Many smart devices require users’ location, contact details or access to cameras and microphones to set up, which expose people’s personal information, but are unnecessary to use the product. As a result, data breaches and security incidents continue to emerge worldwide through smartphone apps, smart speakers, TVs, air fryers and robot vacuums. Last week, another major data breach was added to the list: Mars Hydro, a Chinese company that makes Internet of Things (IoT) devices such as LED grow lights and the
RSS