The Issue of Global Soccer Player Migration Based on Bourdieu’s Theory

The world is increasingly becoming interconnected, which has in turn led to increased global migration that affects nearly all parts of the world. Global migration has also influenced soccer players. There are different theories that can explain why soccer players migrate because economists and sociologists offer varying opinions regarding the motivation of global soccer player migration (Velema, 2020). Economic theories emphasizes economic migration in which people migrate to find work or earn a living. Sociological theories, however, emphasize different determinants in addition to the economic reasons. The present paper analyzes global soccer player migration based on Bourdieu’s theory. The paper will first examine the general patterns of soccer migration across countries to identify the involved countries and the global scope of the migration. The analysis of global soccer player migration will then be conducted using Bourdieu’s theory to offer insights regarding their causal mechanisms. 

The paper argues that the highly globalized nature of professional soccer influences players to migrate. The habitus or past behaviors and attitudes of the player, the sport system or the field, and the various forms of capital including cultural, social, economic, and symbolic capital interact dynamically to facilitate the migration of players. 

Patterns of Global Soccer Player Migration 

Globalization has influenced societies across the world and soccer has not be spared. Players have increasingly moved across boarders over the last two and half decades as European, clubs focus more on the best talent (Kim, 2018; Milanovic-front). Studies show that nearly 50% of soccer players were members of a club abroad in the period 2000-2005 in which about 86% of them played in countries with higher FIFA rankings (Gelade & Dobson, 2007). In 2017, 93 national soccer associations globally with 137 leagues and 2,120 clubs received 12,051 foreign soccer players (Poli et al., 2018). Each team within the same year had about six foreign players, which accounted for about 22% of the entire team (Poli et al., 2018). The percentage of foreign players in 2018 in each team across UEFA clubs increased to nearly 42% (Poli et al., 2018). Foreign players are also valued in their teams and play an average of 65% of the entire minutes in England, 61% in Italy, 51% in Germany, 39% in Spain, and 37% in France (Poli et al., 2018). The migration of soccer players relies on the global soccer performance of the host country. 

The migration usually occurs from lower performing domestic leagues to higher performing leagues in Europe (Boor et al., 2018). Studies show that the top five leagues including Bundesliga, Legue 1, La Liga, Serie A, and Premier League had 20% of foreign players in the 1995-1996 season. The proportion rose to 43% during the 2008-2009 season (Poli, 2010). These leagues are more valuable in market terms compared to the rest of the leagues (Kuper & Szymanski, 2010). Most players migrate in large numbers when they are in the spotlight, which is usually the immediate period following a global event such as the World Cup. Studies show that players who participate in such events recently gain from a double effect involving increased salaries by clubs and increased chances of moving to higher ranked clubs (Kuper & Szymanski, 2010). These studies show that soccer players migrate across soccer clubs in different countries and the number of foreign players has been increasing over the years. 

Causal Mechanism Driving Global Soccer Player Migration 

After examining the trends of global soccer player migration, it is now possible to formulate the causes of global migration among soccer players based on Bourdieu’s theory. The formulation will offer insights regarding the networks driving the soccer industry with an emphasis on those contributing to the movement of soccer players. 

Features of Bourdieu’s Theory 

Bourdieu’s theory of practice concerning the concepts of habitus, field, and capital offer useful tools for understanding the way the individual relates to the social world (Bourdieu, 1978). The theory allows stakeholders to conceptualize the social and the individual as existing in a dialectical association in which the social cultures and structures affect the individual agency before being reproduced through people’s social action. The model shows the way people and groups behave in the social world. Based on the theory, societal structures, traditions, and cultures influence the behaviors of social groups. 

The habitus, capital, and field ideas interact to produce these influences (Tucker, 2019). Practices entails the action or the activities that agents participate in when making their world. It focuses on understanding the way agents or people engage in various activities and the way the world they develop should be understood (Giulianotti, 2015). The major issue regarding the conception of practice and social action relates to the way society interrelates to the development of society. Nevertheless, practice also involves activities through which people generate and regenerate societal development in different dimensions such as economic, social, and cultural (Smith et al., 2018). Practice can also be an intermediate between the action of people and development in society to intervene between the action of a person and people and social organizations. 

Additionally, the model of practice helps to understand human action, how agents internalize the external world, and the way this influences their actions. According to Ozturk (2011), practice allows individuals to generate and regenerate their culture, social organization, and wealth. Rhynas (2005) also demonstrates that the practice framework is based on three concepts including capital, habitus, and field that describe group and individual behaviors in addition to considering the social world. Researchers use these concepts to explore the way people construct objective structures in which the focus is on the way individuals construct and perceive their social world in addition to the way disposition constrains construction and perception. According to Bourdieu (1978) the concepts relate, intersect, and converge to enable the analysis of various influences on social associations and social factors that affect them. 

The field concept is a structured system in which the social positions of organizations, social groups, and people determine their various obligations, social roles, and material situations (Tucker, 2019). Bourdieu (1978) states that the concept includes struggles and forces besides the physical and social domains upon which habitus occurs. It also includes the constructed positions based on the distribution of capital. The involvement of both institutions and agents occurs when they accumulate capital in which capital distribution contributes significantly to the development of power associations. 

The habitus concept includes the initial physical and mental forms of knowledge and skills, schemas, and internalized dispositions that a person acquires during socialization in childhood (Tucker, 2019). The theory of practice considers habitus as the outcome of the enduring position occupations that a person acquires in the social domain. The position reflects the mental organization by which individuals handle the social world. The concept allows people to master uncertain situations and develop feature knowledge through practice (McGillivray & McIntosh, 2006). The social world generates and is generated by habitus in which individuals internalize external structures before they practice externalizing those internalized things. 

The concept of capital refers to the accumulated labor, which allows agents or individuals to generate income through appropriation (DeLuca & Andrews, 2016). Crossley (2008) states that the concept can also be regarded as the individual possessions and attributes. The amount of capital that people have determines the extent to which they meet, interact, and establish associations due to their similarities in lifestyles and habitus. Capital can be cultural, social, symbolic, and economic in which cultural capital may include different skills that allows people to know things and behave in a certain way (Smith et al., 2018). Social capital includes connections to individuals that an agent can draw resources from while economic capital includes property, material things, money, and commodities. 

The theory relates the field concept to a game involving strategies and struggles to attain legitimate power. In the game, capital and habitus determine the chances of the actors to win or lose and the game style (Tucker, 2019). Bourdieu (1978) states that the game commences only when actors collectively believe in it and in the importance of the outcome as they struggle to manage key resources. The theory considers field as a social space in which actors transfer potential and actual capital. Bourdieu (1978) shows that social positions set and modify the social space and are vital factors that allow actors to access the available power in the field. However, deliberate actions do not generate the field as the game has rules requiring inner knowledge. The preferences, values, and social positions of the social actors determine their social positions, which in turn establishes their inner knowledge. 

Winning the game relies on actors mastering the logic of the game in addition to the relevant rules (Bourdieu, 1978). Actors form the field through discourse, conscious control, and experience in which the educational and social paths of actors generate strategies that comply with the game rules. Bourdieu-(1978) demonstrates that the accumulated labor by actors allows them to develop social energy through living labor and contributes to successful playing and winning of the game. The accumulated labor can be considered as a form of capital as the accumulation takes time and social actors can use them to be effective at the game. 

Moreover, each capital varies and its importance may not be the same in a specific field as it is in another. Capital is in various forms including symbolic, linguistic, social, cultural, and economic (Smith et al., 2018). The individual and education paths in different fields determine how social actors accumulate the different forms of capital (McGillivray & McIntosh, 2006). Capital and the game are connected bi-directionally because capital allows social actors to be effective at the game and the trophy that the actors seek from the outcome of the game. In the game, social actors struggle to increase their various forms of capital in various field. Having explored the features of the involved theory, the next section will examine the causes of soccer player migration. Achieving this will entail investigating the way people engage with soccer and examining the decision-making mechanisms to migrate. The research will draw on Bourdieu’s theory and its key concepts to help in the analysis. 

Causes of Global Soccer Migration 

This section will focus on the involvement of soccer players in the sports system, the influence of parents and other stakeholders in the system, and the aspiration to acquire skills as the key elements involved on global soccer player migration. An important component of Bourdieu’s theory regards the way people make decisions about migrating and their subsequent success (Bourdieu, 1978). Based on the theory, decisions are pragmatic, which is supported by the habitus idea (McGillivray & McIntosh, 2006). The theory’s conceptualization of practice also offers insights regarding the pragmatic mechanisms involved in decision making since Bourdieu states that the perception and understanding schemata is a valuable element that offers structure to the lived world (DeLuca & Andrews, 2016). Research also shows that the players amass schemata to interpret their environment from throughout life by sifting out irrelevant information and making sense of partial data (Hodkinson & Sparkes, 1997). In turn, Bourdieu (1978) adds that people develop knowledge within structured dispositions in society, which they acquire through practice. Thus, the decisions of people rely on experiences that affect and are affected by habitus. 

Habitus 

Mills (2008) states that the habitus concept entails the way people act and react to events in their daily lives. People develop the idea over time by engaging in different environments since cultural, economic, and social contexts influence the habitus (Atkins, 2016). The concept is vital since Bourdieu’s theory posits that it is impossible to separate decisions from family background, culture, or life history of a person (McGillivray & McIntosh, 2006). In turn, this contributes to people becoming more pragmatic as the involved decisions are less logical and linear but are more embodied (Hodkinson & Sparkes, 1997). Therefore, habitus embodies social structure and individual agency, which reinforces the idea of decisions being pragmatic (Oliver & O’Reilly, 2010). People choose their lifestyle pragmatically through their habitus and modify the habitus as they develop (Hodkinson & Sparkes, 1997). McGillivray and McIntosh (2006) argues that for the skillful soccer players, their family and parents and the culture of the soccer domain contribute significantly in shaping their habitus. In turn, the influence informs the decision of players to migrate to a specific country and join a soccer club. 

The habitus of people is subjective to each person even though the objective cultural norms and social networks within the person’s environment influence it (Velema, 2020). The association between objectivity and subjectivity influences how people consider themselves and the way they think others consider them (Giulianotti, 2015). Family plays a key role regarding the way people construct their subjective views and influences different components of people’s lives such as decisions about migrating to a specific club (Atkins, 2016). The importance of family arises because of the role of parents in the early years of a child (Morris & Summers, 2004, pp. 529–546). Research suggests that each family has a distinctive capital that socializes the youth to learn specific family practices and principles (Tucker, 2019). The opportunities that caregivers present to the children during the early periods influences this socialization. 

Socioeconomic and cultural factors also shape these opportunities (Morris & Summers, 2004, pp. 529–546). For instance, parents can play an important role when introducing organized sports to their children and offering continuous support for the continued participation of the children (O’Rourke et al., 2011). The involvement of parents contributes to the accumulation of experiences, which in turn shapes the habitus. Therefore, schemata involving conceptual structures developed over time shapes the habitus of a player, which in turn influences the way people consider themselves and changes their worldviews (Hodkinson & Sparkes, 1997). Bourdieu’s theory states that the habitus is a key factor in the way people develop their schematic principles due to the influence of subjective and objective factors in the society (Oliver & O’Reilly, 2010). Based on the theory, the identity of people determines their perceptions and is influenced by cultural and sociological experiences, interactions with others, and people’s history. 

The Field 

Another key element of Bourdieu’s theory concerns the field concept that suggests that people make decisions through interacting with other people who influence the process (Croft-Piggin, 2015; DeLuca & Andrews, 2016). The power of people in all fields such as soccer influence the migration decisions of players even though the power varies significantly (McGillivray & McIntosh, 2006). Since a field usually includes unequal power distribution, soccer players must find their paths by complex and intricate power associations if they desire to migrate. Understanding the field concept entails examining ways through which the soccer system structures the playing opportunities and the way the capital of the players influence individual agency (Tucker, 2019). Regarding the soccer system, the sport today can be considered as a kind of religion given its attractiveness to billions of people across the world (Gibbons, 2019). Political, social, and economic factors drives the attractiveness of the sport, which in turn has contributed to soccer being a global enterprise (Giulianotti & Robertson, 2012). The number of sports spectators attending specific soccer events and the fees that media and telecommunication firms receive to air sport events illustrate the importance of soccer to people’s lives. 

The objective structure of a field in various contexts determines the capital people have in the soccer field (Bourdieu, 1978). Additionally, different sports have various levels of cultural penetration as influenced by the sporting organizations, the media, and the government (Croft-Piggin, 2015). Media coverage or government funding demonstrates the commitment of countries across the globe to specific sports (McGillivray & McIntosh, 2006). The importance of a particular sport in a certain society contributes to the understanding of the way social structures affect the decisions of young people to migrate and join a soccer club. 

The major actors in the soccer field include soccer clubs, soccer associations, coaches, family and parents, and players among others. All the stakeholders strive to achieve their various goals (Giulianotti & Robertson, 2012). For soccer players, family and parents play a vital role in the decision to migrate (Croft-Piggin, 2015). The contributions of parents include encouraging their children to join a certain club and supporting their decisions to play in a specific country (Houlihan & Mick Green, 2016, pp. 195–217). Understanding global soccer player migration also entails examining the challenges that the players face in their professionalization processes, challenges to sustains their positions and their regular movements across countries (Marques & Júnior, 2020). In most countries, soccer players engage in similar processes involving early soccer professionalization. 

Most players practice the sport early as children and during early adolescence before becoming professional players. The process involves multiple actors such as schools, universities, sports associations, families, and agents who condition the professionalization of the players (Marques & Júnior, 2020) Soccer subject the players to different markets and locations. Western Europe has the leading soccer leagues, which offers players a path to Western European clubs in prestigious leagues such as in England, Spain, Italy, Germany, and France (Magee & Sugden, 2002; Marques & Júnior, 2020). The value of the leagues is due to their different Champions league titles and their higher compensation (Magee & Sugden, 2002). 

Therefore, the success of players is a multi-dimensional event involving both social, mental, and physical factors. In turn, this means that the cultural and social surroundings influence the development and self-definition of a player. Actors and networks in the soccer field exert power and influence the decisions of talented soccer players (Poli, 2010). Scouts, agents, clubs, and coaches also collaborate to facilitate transfers and rival each other to benefit from the added financial value besides the role of parents (Poli, 2010). The financial aspect during transfers concerns the training compensation that develops when players are transferred from a single soccer club to another. In turn, this shows the significance of the soccer sport system and its influence in the decisions of soccer players to migrate. 

The Role of Capital 

Bourdieu’s theory considers capital as a specific kind of power. Collective identity arises when people unite to participate in soccer. Bourdieu (1978) emphasizes the importance of identifying the field, its limits, and determining the active form of capital. Individuals should identify the relevant form of capital to understand their position. The influence of the various forms of capital based on Bourdieu’s theory differ depending on the structure of the field. Studies suggest that cultural capital is vital as it shapes the decisions of players (Cooper & Johnston, 2012). Cultural capital can be conceptualized in relation to the habitus of the person and the different social fields that migrant players inhabit. 

Considering cultural capital in the larger field and habitus framework offers insights into the way various variables such as age and ability intersect and the complexity of the players’ experience of soccer. Studies show that the integration outcomes and trajectories of players rely on various factors such as the parental human capital, the reception context, ethnicity, and the association between the origin and final destination (Smith et al., 2018). Since soccer players are a heterogeneous group, the aforementioned factors can facilitate, deny, and transform their cultural capital in the sports context. Bourdieu’s theory identify three kinds of cultural capital, which include institutionalized, objectified, and embodied (Bourdieu, 1978). These forms define who people are or the way others perceive them. 

Embodied and institutionalized capital are relevant to the present analysis. Individuals acquire cultural capital through specific experiences during socialization in various fields. The experiences enables the individuals to engage in the processes of learning and growth (Križaj et al., 2016). The learning occurs internally and involves the various ways of using the societal rules in which the person resides (Križaj et al., 2016). Soccer players acquire institutionalized and embodied cultural capital through socialization experiences as influenced by social structures that shape their soccer careers and their daily lives. Embodied cultural capital include elements such as age, location of the club, the competitive level of the club, club changes, extra training in youth, the practice of another sport, family support, financial support, family relationships, and the family’s social class (Bourdieu, 1978). When soccer is a major part of the identity of a person, its embodiment influences the person’s dispositions and the way the individual interprets the surroundings (Bourdieu, 1978). Neighbors, peers, and relatives in society strengthens this embodiment, which in turn results in soccer prowess and influence the player to be inclined towards a specific soccer club. In turn, this maximizes their physical or bodily capital (Dunning, 1999). Institutional elements include appearances in national team matches, successful championships throughout the years, number of played matches, and familiarity with foreign languages, educational level, and school performance. Organizations such as sporting bodies, universities, and schools that value soccer generate institutionalized capital (Giulianotti & Robertson, 2012). The value of soccer arises when these institutions engage in competitions to acquire soccer skills. 

Acquiring institutionalized capital entails engaging in purposeful practice to develop the required soccer competencies (Darby et al., 2007). Players select a specific club and extra training based on their experiences or embodied capital as this describes the actions of the player because of the acquired skills, origin, and socio-cultural background (Magee & Sugden, 2002; Tucker, 2019). Studies emphasize the experience of players based on the played matches at different competitions as this offers the player with the required institutional capital (Križaj et al., 2016). Family support and its social status also matters as this influences the sports career of the player (Križaj et al., 2016). According to Križaj et al. (2016), any cultural capital generates distinctive structural influences in its social field. 

Symbolic capital is about the outcome of every type of capital when people perceive it through specific habitus due to extended exposure to field forces (Bourdieu, 2021). Based on the theory, only the stakeholders who are invested in and preoccupied with the stakes of soccer have the disposition to identify the importance of the stakes (Bourdieu, 2021). The position of these stakeholders in the field compel them to implement various strategies to challenge or support the rules of the game and to transform or preserve the basic and dominant norms in the field. The soccer sports system as a field exercise power over the value of the different capital forms, their conversion rate, and the generation of social classification, which shapes the decisions of the various actors (Giulianotti, 2015). Therefore, the soccer system is the field in which actors or stakeholders exercise symbolic capital or power. The system contributes to the establishment of different basic beliefs through imposing practical sets of actions, appreciation, and perceptions. Symbolic capital is exercised through bureaucratic acts in which agents in the soccer system engage in different accreditation, certification, and nomination acts by issuing medical, contractual, or work certificates. Agents also determine the various soccer skills of the players (Kim, 2018). These acts grant players different types of identities and offer them different levels of access to specific countries and clubs. The system also determines the validity of the actions of the different stakeholders as the it functions as the center of symbolic capital based on its role as the legitimate source of symbolic power in the soccer sport. According to Bourdieu (2021), the presence of the system is symbolic because it relies on effective and official principles that promote logical conformity and orchestrate the habitus among the various stakeholders in the field. The system can be considered as an illusion that thrives through beliefs as its existences depends on the mental schemas it develops, which stakeholders use to construct the world and actualize the system through materializing the schemas. 

Regarding social capital, the varying ability of the soccer system to function as the center of symbolic power illustrates the importance of social connections compared to individual capital in facilitating migration among soccer players. For instance, soccer players from Europe benefit from the existence of top clubs in the world in that continent as this allows them to join any team they desire. In contrast, a player from a local club in Africa may be forced to undergo extensive tests to demonstrate their skills before being allowed to play in Western European clubs. Thus, soccer principles turn residency in select countries into social capital that can facilitate or deny migration. Social capital refers to the aggregate of resources concerning the possession of a strong network of institutionalized associations (Bourdieu, 2021). The network may entail agents, scouts, soccer clubs, and soccer organizations. The capital includes the social associations that enable players to access resources in the network and the quality and level of the resources (Portes). Social capital offers players with a strong network and the needed support to migrate to different clubs and denies the same support to players without a strong network. The soccer sports field overlaps with different sub-fields within different countries. Engagement with fields across countries is important for the valuation of social capital. Players who establish connections with the different stakeholders in the sport system before migrating gain support from the network as the network facilitates their movement across clubs. Therefore, engagement with actors in the soccer sports field serves to accumulate social capital specific to migration. The actors offer help for players to acquire the needed certification, accreditation, and permit to migrate to their desired clubs. Players also appropriate habitus from the actors that assist in transforming their social capital to symbolic, cultural, and economic capitals (Bourdieu, 2021). Players with strong networks benefit more compared to those without adequate networks. 

Concerning economic capital, stakeholders in the soccer field such as agents, soccer clubs, soccer organizations, and scouts assist aspiring players to acquire the required capital to secure authorized passage into a specific soccer club. The stakeholders are connected through social capital and are driven mainly by financial rewards (Bourdieu, 2021). They act as advocates for aspiring players and contribute through seeking or issuing required certificates and permits, offering opportunities for skill training, and market the players to global clubs. The transformation of different forms of capital is essential for the functions of the different stakeholders (Giulianotti, 2015). Consider for instance how actors in soccer sports operate. Their services range from offering opportunities for skill training in soccer academies, matchmaking with potential soccer clubs and helping players acquire the required official documents such as medical certificates or work permits. They transfer the relevant capital to soccer players, which generates the desired playing status in exchange for a fee. The participants facilitate the accumulation of capital by assisting players to transform their economic capital or the fees the stakeholder get into evidence of the relevant capital that facilitates their entry into their desired clubs. 

The analysis demonstrates the role of multiple factors including the sports system, the habitus, and the skills of the player in influencing the decision to migrate to a specific club. While most players desire to join high paying clubs, the analysis shows that their capital, early socialization, and stakeholders in the soccer system also play a role. The ability of players to engage in the soccer sport and generate the relevant capital relies on their possession of embodied and institutionalized capital, which is based on their social sporting history. Players with a soccer habitus that aligns with the field expectations benefit because of their higher capital that are valued in different sport fields. 

Conclusion 

The present paper applied Bourdieu’s theory of practice as a model to understand the issue of global soccer player migration. The paper examined the way the soccer system, the cultural capital of the players, and their habitus affect the decisions of players to migrate. The analysis demonstrates the complexity regarding the structure of the soccer system, its operations, and those who influence it. The model also contributes to the examination of the vital associations between structure and agency as it showed that decisions to migrate rely on rational thoughts. Bourdieu’s theory interprets dispositions as being both informal, rational, and embodied, which is important because players use their dispositions to interact in their field and reshape their habitus through the interactions. The capital, habitus, and field concepts offered deeper knowledge about the relationship players have with the soccer system as they migrate. 

References 

Atkins, L. (2016). The odyssey: school to work transitions, serendipity and position in the field. British Journal of Sociology of Education , 38 (5), 641–655. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2015.1131146 

Boor, S., Hanson, C., & Ross, C. (2018). Rising stars Football Money League Sports Business Group . https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/uk/Documents/sports-business-group/deloitte-uk-sbg-dfml2018.pdf 

Bourdieu, P. (1978). Sport and social class. Social Science Information , 17 (6), 819–840. https://doi.org/10.1177/053901847801700603 

Bourdieu, P. (2021). Forms of capital . Polity Press. 

Cooper, C., & Johnston, J. (2012). Vulgate accountability: insights from the field of football. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal , 25 (4), 602–634. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513571211225060 

Croft-Piggin, L. (2015). “Kick it to me Pierre!” Bourdieu and football: theorizing an Australian rural youth culture. Rural Society , 24 (2), 109–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/10371656.2015.1060716 

Crossley, N. (2008). (Net)Working out: social capital in a private health club. The British Journal of Sociology , 59 (3), 475–500. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-4446.2008.00204.x 

Darby, P., Akindes, G., & Kirwin, M. (2007). Football Academies and the Migration of African Football Labor to Europe. Journal of Sport and Social Issues , 31 (2), 143–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193723507300481 

DeLuca, J. R., & Andrews, D. L. (2016). Exercising Privilege: The Cyclical Reproduction of Capital through Swim Club Membership. Sociological Inquiry , 86 (3), 301–323. https://doi.org/10.1111/soin.12113 

Dunning, E. (1999). Sport matters : sociological studies of sport, violence, and civilisation . Routledge. 

Gelade, G. A., & Dobson, P. (2007). Predicting the Comparative Strengths of National Football Teams. Social Science Quarterly , 88 (1), 244–258. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2007.00456.x 

Gibbons, T. (2019). The Eternal Present of Sport: Rethinking Sport and Religion. Sociology of Sport Journal , 36 (2), 182–183. https://doi.org/10.1123/ssj.2018-0008 

Giulianotti, R. (2015). Bourdieu on Sport: Domination, Distinction and the Public Intellectual . Polity Press. 

Giulianotti, R., & Robertson, R. (2012). Mapping the global football field: a sociological model of transnational forces within the world game. The British Journal of Sociology , 63 (2), 216–240. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-4446.2012.01407.x 

Hodkinson, P., & Sparkes, A. C. (1997). Careership: a sociological theory of career decision making. British Journal of Sociology of Education , 18 (1), 29–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142569970180102 

Houlihan, B., & Mick Green. (2016). Comparative elite sport development : systems, structures and public policy (pp. 195–217). London Routledge. 

Kim, J. (2018). Migration-Facilitating Capital: A Bourdieusian Theory of International Migration. Sociological Theory , 36 (3), 262–288. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735275118794982 

Križaj, J., Leskošek, B., Vodičar, J., & Topič, M. D. (2016). Soccer Players Cultural Capital and Its Impact on Migration. Journal of Human Kinetics , 54 (1), 195–206. https://doi.org/10.1515/hukin-2016-0052 

Kuper, S., & Szymanski, S. (2010). Soccernomics: why England loses, why Germany and Brazil win, and why the US, Japan, Australia, Turkey--and even Iraq--are destined to become the kings of the world’s most popular sport. Choice Reviews Online , 47 (07), 47–387847–3878. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.47-3878 

Magee, J., & Sugden, J. (2002). “The World at their Feet.” Journal of Sport and Social Issues , 26 (4), 421–437. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193732502238257 

Marques, R. F. R., & Júnior, W. M. (2020). Migration for Work: Brazilian Futsal Players’ Labor Conditions and Disposition for Mobility. Journal of Sport and Social Issues , 019372352092859. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193723520928592 

McGillivray, D., & McIntosh, A. (2006). “Football is My Life”: Theorizing Social Practice in the Scottish Professional Football Field. Sport in Society , 9 (3), 371–387. https://doi.org/10.1080/17430430600673381 

Mills, C. (2008). Reproduction and transformation of inequalities in schooling: the transformative potential of the theoretical constructs of Bourdieu. British Journal of Sociology of Education , 29 (1), 79–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425690701737481 

Morris, T., & Summers, J. J. (2004). Sport psychology : theory, applications and issues (pp. 529–546). Wiley. 

O’Rourke, D. J., Smith, R. E., Smoll, F. L., & Cumming, S. P. (2011). Trait Anxiety in Young Athletes as a Function of Parental Pressure and Motivational Climate: Is Parental Pressure Always Harmful? Journal of Applied Sport Psychology , 23 (4), 398–412. https://doi.org/10.1080/10413200.2011.552089 

Oliver, C., & O’Reilly, K. (2010). A Bourdieusian Analysis of Class and Migration: Habitus and the Individualising Process. Sociology , 44 (1), 49–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038509351627 

Öztürk, Ş. (2011). Pierre Bourdieu’s Theory Of Social Action . Semantic Scholar. https://sbd.aku.edu.tr/VI2/sozturk.pdf 

Poli, R. (2010). Understanding globalization through football: The new international division of labour, migratory channels and transnational trade circuits. International Review for the Sociology of Sport , 45 (4), 491–506. https://doi.org/10.1177/1012690210370640 

Poli, R., Ravenel, L., & Besson, R. (2018). Ten years of demographic analysis of the football players’ labour market in Europe . CIES Football Observatory. 

Rhynas, S. J. (2005). Bourdieu’s theory of practice and its potential in nursing research. Journal of Advanced Nursing , 50 (2), 179–186. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03377.x 

Smith, R., Spaaij, R., & McDonald, B. (2018). Migrant Integration and Cultural Capital in the Context of Sport and Physical Activity: a Systematic Review. Journal of International Migration and Integration , 20 (3), 851–868. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-018-0634-5 

Tucker, L. (2019). Football capital: what is it and why is it important? Managing Sport and Leisure , 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/23750472.2019.1644966 

Velema, T. A. (2020). Globalization and player recruitment: How teams from European top leagues broker migration flows of footballers in the global transfer network. International Review for the Sociology of Sport , 101269022091967. https://doi.org/10.1177/1012690220919676