Social Capital for the Resilience of Sport Tourism Destinations in Iraq: A MACTOR Analysis of Stakeholder Power and Strategic Convergence

Abstract

Introduction: This study examined how stakeholder power, dependence, and strategic convergence shape the structural capacity to mobilize social capital in support of resilient sport tourism destinations in Iraq. It focused on whether alignment among stakeholders is accompanied by sufficient institutional and operational capacity to translate shared priorities into coordinated action.

Methods: A strategic stakeholder analysis was conducted using the MACTOR method. Twenty-four key stakeholders and ten strategic objectives related to governance, institutional trust, destination security, host-community participation, risk management, resilient infrastructure, sport-event hosting, destination image, data-driven governance, and responsible sport tourism were assessed. Direct and indirect influence–dependence relationships, relative power, actor positions toward objectives, weighted mobilization, convergence, and actor ambivalence were analysed.

Results: The findings revealed broad positive alignment across the stakeholder network, with no explicit opposition and no actor ambivalence. However, power was unevenly distributed. International partners, national tourism institutions, security agencies, the Ministry of Youth and Sports, and local governments occupied stronger strategic positions, whereas host communities, micro-enterprises, travel agencies, transport providers, and several service actors had lower relative power. The strongest weighted mobilization was associated with destination image recovery, standardised sport-event hosting, and multi-level stakeholder governance. Although investors and sponsors held relatively strong power, their neutral position toward equitable host-community participation and locally grounded responsible sport tourism indicated a potential implementation gap. Overall, the network displayed substantial potential for strategic convergence, but this convergence did not necessarily imply actual collaboration, mutual trust, or equal implementation capacity.

Conclusion: The central governance challenge is not the absence of agreement on resilience-related objectives, but the conversion of normative alignment into inclusive and institutionalised collective action. The current configuration is better positioned to mobilize formal and linking forms of social capital than to support horizontal cooperation and local empowerment. Strengthening destination resilience therefore requires multi-stakeholder governance mechanisms that connect institutional power with local knowledge, operational capacity, equitable benefit distribution, shared data, and sustained participation.