Canadian Academy Discover, Publish, Thrive
This paper examines the long-term effects of mega sports events, addressing challenges in measuring and forecasting their legacy. It introduces a bottom-up approach to identify event legacies, encompassing changes in infrastructure, knowledge, image, emotions, networks, and culture, which alter the host city’s location factors. The study emphasizes the significance of tourism legacy among the benefits and costs associated with the transformation of host cities.
The literature extensively discusses the legacies of mega sport events, yet lacks a clear definition of ‘legacy’. The disagreement on its elements hampers accurate measurement. Despite this, cities increasingly vie for such events, often relying on vague ‘event strategies’, neglecting the complexity and uncertainty of event legacies. This trend warrants deeper scrutiny from citizens, politicians, and academics. While mega events can foster optimism and accelerate development, they also pose risks like cost overruns and unforeseen negative legacies. This paper aims to organize research on event legacies, proposing a systematic definition and exploring its dimensions. Existing measurement methods, such as benchmarking and macro-economic indicators, are critiqued, suggesting a bottom-up approach focusing on ‘event-structures’ and tourism legacy. The paper also addresses measurement challenges, including activity redistribution and funding shifts, highlighting opportunity costs and crowding-out effects.
Mega sports events often necessitate the construction of new infrastructure, which may not be fully utilized after the event concludes, as exemplified by the 1976 Olympic Games in Montreal. Academic interest in this area has grown over the past 15 years, with the first paper on tourism legacy emerging in 1992. Despite increased scholarly analysis in the past decade, discussions of legacy primarily focus on economic and tourism impacts rather than sports-related legacies. The term “legacy” lacks a precise definition, often assumed to be self-evident, though etymologically meaning ‘property left by will’, which doesn’t fully apply to event legacies. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) defines event legacy in terms of sport facilities and public improvements transferred to communities post-event, including a ‘legacy-fund’ for ongoing sports facility operations. However, this definition seems narrow compared to the various legacy concepts in the literature.
Various dimensions of legacy include planned/unplanned, positive/negative, tangible/intangible, duration/time, and space affected. A proposed definition of legacy encompasses all structures created by a sport event, planned or unplanned, positive or negative, tangible or intangible, lasting longer than the event itself. Legacy evaluations often focus on specific aspects, potentially biased towards favoring event hosting. Evaluating legacy requires considering redistributions and crowding-out effects, accounting for alternative uses of resources and benefits displaced by the event.
Research on mega sporting events often focuses on their economic impacts, particularly in event tourism, employment effects, and urban development. Additionally, attention is given to environmental and social impacts. Legacy, however, encompasses long-term changes, distinguishing it from short-term impacts. Economic legacies include sustained economic activity due to improved location factors post-event, such as increased tourism. To ensure long-term economic growth, mega events should catalyze structural changes in host cities, leveraging investments in infrastructure and aligning with broader city development goals. Planning for legacy should begin before the event, with commitment and funding in place. Approaches to measuring legacies include benchmarking and top-down methods.
The literature demonstrates that event legacies are complex, dynamic, and influenced by various local and global factors. While many studies focus on singular event legacies, replicating them closely in subsequent events is improbable. Despite initiatives like the IOC’s project OGGI aiming to forecast future legacies, the uniqueness of each event and its context poses challenges for prediction. The legacy cube illustrates different legacies across cities, events, and timeframes, complicating predictions further. Comparisons between events in the same city or different cities reveal diverse legacies influenced by factors like infrastructure, social interests, and political goals. Such complexities render benchmarking previous events for future predictions ineffective, prompting exploration of alternative approaches like the ‘top-down’ method.
Mega events undoubtedly generate significant economic impacts, but their lasting economic legacies are not guaranteed. While the surge in demand during an event can influence the supply side of the local economy, it’s uncertain if these changes lead to sustained economic growth. Various economic models attempt to explain metropolitan growth, but they may not fully capture the impact or legacy of mega events due to their relatively small scale compared to national economies.
Assessing legacies is challenging as they unfold over years and may be overshadowed by broader economic trends. Traditional economic indicators like GDP or employment rates may not adequately reflect event-related changes. For instance, while macroeconomic data suggested minimal impact from the 2006 FIFA World Cup in Germany, visitor spending revealed a more significant economic boost.
The focus here is on measuring legacy rather than immediate economic impact. Isolating event-related changes from general metropolitan development is complex, requiring comparisons with hypothetical scenarios without the event. Two common methods for estimating this ‘control case’ involve comparing with similar cities or extrapolating trends.
However, these methods have limitations, such as overlooking non-event-related factors affecting economic outcomes. Complex regression models have been used to assess specific event impacts, revealing transient effects on employment for events like the Olympics. Overall, while hosting mega events may divert resources from other uses, they can also bring unique benefits, including publicity and intangible legacies that contribute to long-term economic stimulation when viewed holistically.
The current discourse highlights shortcomings in both benchmark and top-down approaches to adequately gauge event legacies. It is proposed that a more inclusive alternative involves a bottom-up assessment considering all structural changes resulting from the event, aligned with the city’s long-term development plan. Mega events often necessitate substantial alterations in both tangible and intangible aspects of a city, such as infrastructure and emotional resonance. Elements like image and emotions, though considered ‘soft’, significantly impact location factors and must be factored into the evaluation. For instance, hosting the FIFA World Cup can reshape a country’s image, as seen in Germany’s transformation from perceived rigidity to hospitality. Additionally, events like the Olympics evoke profound emotions, fostering national pride, international recognition, and economic aspirations, as exemplified by Seoul 1988 and Beijing 2008.
A city’s bid for a major sporting event prompts self-assessment and strategic planning for its future development. Feasibility studies offer insights into potential future city improvements, serving as a pre-bid legacy. Once selected, hosting such an event necessitates significant urban reconstruction, impacting the host city in various ways. Scarce resources may be redirected towards event infrastructure, potentially slowing overall city development, a perceived negative externality. Additionally, debate arises over which costs should be attributed to the event versus long-term city plans. Despite controversies, hosting mega events often accelerates a city’s development, though this can lead to overlooked constraints and increased costs, disadvantaging certain groups. Political consensus surrounding mega events aids in securing public investment, yet may divert resources from other essential projects. Infrastructure financing from various sources raises questions about temporary versus permanent constructions and long-term utilization. Analyzing global trends and event infrastructure reveals opportunities and risks for the city’s long-term development. However, balancing conflicting goals and addressing potential negative legacies poses challenges in this bottom-up approach, which primarily focuses on integrating event requirements with existing city plans.
Mega sports events necessitate specific infrastructure, both physical and organizational, which temporarily alter the quality of a location. These alterations, termed event-structures, impact a site positively or negatively. Location quality is determined by various factors crucial for living, industry, events, and tourism. Mega cities vie globally to attract economic activity, raising questions on how hosting such events can enhance a city’s competitive edge. Strategic integration of events into broader development processes is key to leveraging event legacies effectively. Decision to bid for a mega event initiates the legacy-building strategy, tailored to the event’s requirements and the city’s long-term needs. During the bid process, mandatory and optional measures are developed to enhance the city’s bid position. While mandatory infrastructure is completed pre-event, embedding optional measures strengthens long-term location factors. The event itself generates emotions and influences the city’s image. Post-event, certain event-structures endure, such as infrastructure, networks, and culture, all of which shape the host city’s location factors. For instance, in tourism, these structures include new attractions, improved transportation, and cultural enhancements. Beyond tourism, other aspects like business destination require tailored measures such as infrastructure upgrades and skilled labor to capitalize on the event’s legacy. Although the economic benefits of enhanced location factors may not be immediately apparent, sustained tourism activity can spur long-term economic growth and job creation.
The assessment of mega sporting event legacies is intricate, with discussions suggesting a bottom-up approach as most viable, yet facing three key obstacles. Firstly, distinguishing ‘net’ from ‘gross’ legacy proves challenging, as without the event, resources would be allocated differently, generating alternative legacies. Secondly, determining whether a legacy holds positive or negative value poses a subjective challenge, requiring evaluation through methods like cost-benefit analysis, considering both tangible and intangible factors. Thirdly, tracking legacy effects over time is problematic, as they intertwine with broader city development, making it difficult to isolate specific impacts attributable to the event. Consequently, addressing these challenges requires further research and methodological development to comprehensively understand the tourism legacies of mega sporting events.
Source:
Holger Preuss (2007) The Conceptualisation and Measurement of Mega Sport Event Legacies, Journal of Sport & Tourism, 12:3-4, 207-228, DOI: 10.1080/14775080701736957