Once the preserve of Scottish links and American country clubs, golf is now at the heart of an ambitious global expansion project. Governing bodies like the R&A, USGA and PGA have invested significant resources in “growing the game” campaigns, emphasizing inclusivity, youth engagement and sustainability. But Ethan V. Mangum’s dissertation at the University of St Andrews challenges whether golf’s globalization is democratizing access or reinforcing elite models.
Drawing on case studies from Kenya, Rwanda and Ghana, Mangum highlights a sharp imbalance: while global golf’s revenues and media attention surge in North America, Europe and Southeast Asia, grassroots infrastructure in emerging economies lags. Scotland’s municipal-access model shows golf as a civic amenity, yet in Germany, licensing schemes keep the sport exclusive. The U.S. sits in between — with public courses available but dominated by private enclaves that stratify participation along income lines.
In Africa, the Kenya Golf Union and junior academies demonstrate promise, partnering with NGOs and the R&A’s African Development Programme to make golf accessible to young people and women. But these initiatives are often underfunded, fragmented or too dependent on short-term donor grants. Without systemic investment in land access, coaching and governance, Mangum argues, grassroots programs risk fading at the margins while international tours continue to monopolize prestige and sponsorship.
The central question, then, is one of justice: who benefits from golf’s global growth? Market research indicates a focus on high-income earners and luxury brands, while underserved communities continue to face barriers of cost, culture and infrastructure. The result is a widening gap between golf’s glossy global branding and the lived realities of access on the ground.
Mangum’s study is both critical and hopeful. Kenya’s junior golf successes and inclusive equipment initiatives (like Paragolfers for disabled athletes) prove that alternative models exist. However, for golf’s globalization to be genuinely inclusive, international institutions must go beyond branding and commit to structural equity — shifting resources, representation and opportunities toward communities that are too often left out of the game.
