Network analysis of countries’ partnership in European sports programs: Erasmus+ sport

  • Authors

    • Ioannis Dallas Department of Mathematics, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki
    • Ioannis Ntoumanis Inter-Faculty Master Program on Networks and Complexity, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki
    • Francesca Karatza Department of Mathematics, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki
    • Georgios Ch. Makris Inter-Faculty Master Program on Networks and Complexity, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki
    2020-03-25
    https://doi.org/10.14419/ijasp.v8i1.30329
  • Cooperation, Erasmus , Indexes, Networks, Sports.

  • Abstract

    In the present work, data analysis of Erasmus+ Sport programs was performed using Network Theory. Funding amounts and partner coun-tries per program are the information of the target data. Developing a Python-based program, a network of countries' partnerships has been developed to examine whether specific countries cooperate more frequently, and which countries participate in more Erasmus+ Sport pro-grams. Thus, some basic indicators of centrality from network theory were calculated, which are presented together with their mathematical interpretation.

    It has also been studied whether the number of a country's participation in these programs is affected by its economic or social national characteristics. Specifically, GDP, happiness and education indexes are all examined if they affect a country's participation. Finally, given how the funding amount of a program is split between the partner countries, the total amount of funding received by each country for the period 2014-2018 was calculated.

     

     

  • References

    1. [1] https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/erasmus-plus/about_el.

      [2] https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/erasmus-plus/actions/sport_en.

      [3] Cohen, A. M. (1964). “Communication networks in research and trainingâ€. Personnel 128 Administration. 27, 18-24.

      [4] Rogers, D. L. (1974). Sociometric analysis of interorganizational relations: application of theory and measurement. Rural Sociology. 39(4), 487-503.

      [5] Freeman L. C. (1977). A set of measures of centrality based on betweenness. Sociometry Vol. 40(1), 35-41 https://doi.org/10.2307/3033543.

      [6] Freeman, L. C. (1979). Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social networks. 1(3), 215-239. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-8733(78)90021-7.

      [7] Everett, M. G., & Borgatti, S. P. (1999). The centrality of groups and classes. Journal of Mathematical Sociology. 23(3),181-201. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022250X.1999.9990219.

      [8] Grolmusz, V., (2012). A note on the pagerank of undirected graphs, [Online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.1960.

      [9] Newman, M. (2010). Networks: An Introduction. Oxford University Press Inc., New York.

      [10] Watts, D. J., & Strogatz, S. H. (1998). Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’networks. Nature. 393(6684), 440-442. https://doi.org/10.1038/30918.

      [11] Körner, János (1973). "Coding of an information source having ambiguous alphabet and the entropy of graphs". 6th Prague conference on information theory: 411–425.

      [12] Seyed Saeed Changiz Rezaei, Chris D. Godsil:

      [13] Entropy of symmetric graphs. Discrete Mathematics 339(2): 475-483 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.disc.2015.09.020.

      [14] https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators.

      [15] Clemente, F.M. et al. (2016). Social Network Analysis Applied to Team Sports Analysis, Springer Briefs in Applied Sciences and Technology https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25855-3.

  • Downloads

  • Received date: 2020-01-19

    Accepted date: 2020-03-14

    Published date: 2020-03-25