IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0354667.html

The comparative analysis of Sino-Japanese football policies from the perspective of policy instruments

Author

Listed:
  • Chuanmin Zhang
  • Zanying Hu
  • Huqiang Wei
  • Mei Peng
  • Fei Gao

Abstract

Football development depends heavily on strong policy support, rendering policy analysis and evaluation of significant practical importance. This study uses Nvivo11 software and the PMC index model to conduct a quantitative comparative analysis of 31 Sino-Japanese football policy texts, focusing on policy instruments, content characteristics, and overall quality. The findings reveal that both countries prioritize football development, social participation, and club construction; China emphasizes campus football, while Japan focuses on elite player development and league performance. PMC evaluation indicates that Chinese policies score higher in system design and institutional capacity, whereas Japan performs better in implementation clarity and community linkage. Both countries share shortcomings in insufficient policy clarity and vague long-term competitive goals. The research results provide empirical evidence for the optimization of Chinese football policies and a reference for drawing on international experience.

Suggested Citation

  • Chuanmin Zhang & Zanying Hu & Huqiang Wei & Mei Peng & Fei Gao, 2026. "The comparative analysis of Sino-Japanese football policies from the perspective of policy instruments," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(7), pages 1-25, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0354667
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0354667
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0354667
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0354667&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0354667?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0354667. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.