Question

Becoming an Olympic host city was long considered a crowning achievement. That is no longer the case as voters reject shouldering the considerable expense involved. Most recently, voters in Calgary, Canada, said no to the 2026 Winter Games, joining Sapporo, Japan; Graz, Austria; Sion, Switzerland; and Erzurum, Turkey. What are the primary benefits for a country to invest resources to host international sporting competitions?Explain why these cities have rejected hosting the Games?

Thanks!

Answer 1

PRIMARY BENEFITS OF HOSTING OLYMPICS

1. Raise the profile of the city/country

Increasing the profile of a city can lead to lasting economic benefits. For example, cities which host the Olympics can be assured of a persistent increase in recognition and tourism. Barcelona, Sydney, Beijing have all seen this from hosting the Olympics

2. Long term investment

A significant benefit is the long-term investment which comes from preparing for a major event. The city/country will have a legacy of improved sporting venues. Also, cities will usually have to invest in infrastructure and transport to cater for an influx of tourists

3. Jobs and Investment

The several years of planning and investment will help create jobs and can revitalise depressed cities. This was an important claim of the London Olympics, choosing a site in East London, which at the time was relatively depressed. It is estimated the London Olympics 2012, will create 8,000 full-time jobs and lead to a boost in economic output of close to £2bn

4. Enthusiasm

It is often easy to find reasons not to host a major sporting event, too much debt, more important priorities. But, a major sporting event can create enthusiasm and excitement for such an event. It can help promote uptake of sport which has lasting benefits for the nation’s health. Also, a major sporting event can lead to a rise in volunteerism which promotes civic virtues.

5. Short term economic benefits

The Olympics will see a surge in visitors, athletes and media. This will provide an increase in spending and injection of money into the local economy. However, this injection of money, will only be short-term (a few weeks) and make little overall impact on the wider economy. Also, the injection of foreign visitors may be offset by locals leaving to avoid the influx and over-crowding.

REASONS FOR SOME OF THE COUNTRIES TO REJECT OLYMPICS IS BECAUSE-

1. The cost of building stadiums

To host a major sporting event like the Olympics can cost significant sums, which have to be paid for by the taxpayer. Costs of the Olympics have a tendency to rise over time and be much greater than expected. The Montreal Olympics was estimated to have cost $120 million (1970) and then rising to $310 million (1973). The final cost was around 13-times greater at $1.6bn. It took 30 years to pay off the Olympic debt

2. Short-Term use

Many facilities built for the Olympics can never be fully used again. e.g. an 80,000 athletic stadium will rarely be full outside of the Olympics. This can be mitigated by careful planning. e.g. the London Olympic Stadium will be used by West Ham football team and was used for legacy athletic events such as the 2017 World Championships. Other Olympic facilities, like the Olympic village, will be converted into affordable housing. However, some cities which failed to plan for the legacy of the Olympic were left with unused giant stadiums.

3. Potential for negative publicity

If things go well, a city can benefit from positive publicity, but if things go badly, it can cause the opposite. For example, the Winter Olympics has received adverse publicity because of corruption and cost overruns. The football World Cup in Qatar could backfire if players complain about the heat and conditions of migrant workers. Delhi suffered negative publicity over the state of its facilities at the Commonwealth Games.

4. Cost of Security

Major sporting events increasingly have to implement higher levels of security. This is both costly and can restrict freedom of movement of local citizens during games.

5. Higher taxes to pay cost

Some cities have seen an increase in tax post games to finance a loss of putting on the sporting event. The post-games cost of London is uncertain. This increase in cost has made hosting the Olympics less politically popular.