From the socio-economic standpoint (in a capitalistic/market-based system), a large, expanding middle class is the pre-requisite of political stability which in turn is an important condition for economic wellbeing and sustainability, as it also attracts foreign direct investments. But rising affluence also signals fewer people taking up professional sports unless the rewards are worth it.
Tennis, golf ,for example are viewed as richly rewarding,even table-tennis is considerably more so than badminton I was told. That seems to be the crux of the problem facing badminton in China presently. The need for badminton prize money to match the other more financially rewarding sports will become increasingly pressing in time to come if the sport is not to lose its lustre.
Otherwise,China would have to, sadly speaking, depend to a considerable extent on a sizeable army of unemployed for sports to be resorted to as a means of livelihood for those athletically inclined. Which also indicates the need for more state funding to make up for any slack in private sector sponsorships - it's a truism to say businesses invest in sports primarily to make money;just ask Yonex ,Li-Ning, OSIM,Citroen,etc.
It's almost like a chicken and egg question - which comes first,popularity of the sport or private sponsorships? For a start where either is missing or inadequate,state funding and support is essential as a catalyst to get things going before private sponsorships play a bigger role,everything else flows from there.
Not being knowledgeable in sport management,what I wrote above may be short on cogency or even flawed. Just my two-cents worth.
