Canadian Academy Discover, Publish, Thrive
Introduction
In 2012, London hosted the Olympic and Paralympic Games, while Glasgow hosted the Commonwealth Games in 2014. The decision to host these events in these cities was driven by the anticipation of various benefits, collectively referred to as the “legacy,” including improvements in employment, the economy, housing, national pride, the environment, and sports facilities. These factors are significant determinants of socioeconomic health. The potential health impact of hosting such events was discussed in the Department of Health’s review of the 2012 London Games and the Scottish Government’s consultation on the 2014 Commonwealth Games legacy. However, subsequent reassessment and remarks from the former UK Olympics minister, Tessa Jowell, raised doubts about the wisdom of hosting these events. Despite existing research on the impact of major sports events on host populations, there is a lack of systematic synthesis to guide decision-makers. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the impact of major sporting events between 1978 and 2008 on the health and determinants of health in host populations.
Discussion
Between 1978 and 2008, major multi-sport events showed little evidence of delivering health or socioeconomic benefits to the host country’s population. Existing studies on these outcomes were limited in number and quality, particularly regarding health. While restrictions on car use and promotion of public transport during events might reduce air pollution, the relationship to decreased childhood asthma hospital admissions is uncertain. Economic growth and unemployment were suggested to be associated with events, but findings contradicted this in high-quality data evaluations. Biases in study commissioning and publication towards positive results were noted. Overall, the available evidence does not confirm significant positive or negative effects of past events on health or socioeconomic factors, challenging official event promotion. The potential impacts varied across events, and no consistent patterns or positive outcomes were observed. Opinions on community regeneration, gentrification, and rising inequalities lacked evidence, making it inconclusive for future events. The quantity and quality of evidence varied among events, with recent North American and Australian events receiving more extensive research. Changes in event organizers’ focus over time, from entertainment to regeneration, limit generalization of earlier events’ impacts to contemporary ones.
Strengths and limitations of study
Our review’s strength lies in its comprehensive assessment of a wide range of outcomes, encompassing both health and socioeconomic determinants. We made significant efforts to include various study designs, incorporating economic models, and diligently sought both published and unpublished studies. However, a limitation arose as we encountered difficulty accessing some relevant studies. Out of 255 identified references, 34 were inaccessible for screening and appraisal, mainly due to unavailability from institutions or authors. While these unobtainable studies were often of lower quality and not peer-reviewed, the extensive international search strategy justified itself by enabling the inclusion of numerous additional studies that would have otherwise been overlooked.
Policy implications
Decision makers should reconsider their approach to organizing future events, ensuring that the costs are justified by benefits for the host country’s population. Possible strategies include enhancing democratic control over event-related expenditures, such as directing funding through elected bodies, portraying events as more economical sports events, or employing impact assessments to optimize the event’s effects. To enhance the understanding of major multi-sport event impacts, evaluations should be based on a comprehensive framework outlining a “theory of change” for the event. Improving evaluation reporting, utilizing appropriate contemporaneous comparison groups (preferably within longitudinal studies), and considering long-term outcomes would enhance the quality of future evidence. Economic studies, in particular, could benefit from real-time data usage instead of estimates and incorporating opportunity costs into their models.
Conclusions
Over the past two decades, the expenses associated with hosting major multi-sport events like the Olympic Games or Commonwealth Games have escalated, making it challenging to rationalize the costs solely for entertainment or national exhibition purposes. Cities vying for hosting rights are now evaluated based on the potential creation of a lasting positive legacy for the local population and other factors. However, our review revealed insufficient evidence to either confirm or dismiss expectations regarding the health or socioeconomic advantages for the host population from previous events. Anticipating benefits from future events, such as the 2012 Olympic Games in London or the 2014 Commonwealth Games in Glasgow, cannot be automatic. The absence of evidence on the impacts of major multi-sport events on the host population underscores the need for decision makers to incorporate thorough, long-term evaluations in the event design and implementation process. Without such evaluations, justifying the costs in terms of host population benefits remains unclear.
Source:
McCartney, G., Thomas, S., Thomson, H., Scott, J., Hamilton, V., Hanlon, P., Morrison, D. S., & Bond, L. (2010). The health and socioeconomic impacts of major multi-sport events: systematic review (1978-2008). BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 340, c2369. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c2369