The ambition to host mega sports events is (or can be) perfectly justifiable with various arguments. The most persistently used argument is the supposed financial or direct economic gain for the host economy, of which the compelling body of evidence is discouraging. This implies that the justification for hosting should come from a different, broader economic angle. This paper provides a critical discussion of the myriad of economic and frequently intangible effects that could be put forward in the public debate preceding the submission of a bid. Paradoxically, most of these effects are not, or infrequently employed in public debates.
DOCUMENT
The increasingly multifaceted nature of event impacts makes them even more attractive as a potential solution to a range of urban and regional problems. As a result, competition to stage major cultural and sporting events is intensifying, and the cost of bidding is also rising. Given that such bidding processes only produce one winner, this means that a growing number of disappointed cities have to justify the costs of bidding for major events. In this context, we analyse the bidding process for the European Capital of Culture in the Netherlands (2018) and its impacts on local social structures. In particular the article focuses on the less tangible, non-economic effects of bidding for events, establishing a framework based on network formation, public support for the bidding process and social cohesion. The conclusions point to the key role of sociality and networking for events, which should therefore be developed throughout the bidding process for successful impacts, whether the event is won or not.
LINK
All over the world, sport events are seen as significant tools for creating positive social impact. This is understandable, as sport events have the power to attract enthusiastic participants, volunteers and to reach large audiences of visitors and followers via (social) media. Outbursts of excitement, pleasure and feelings of camaraderie are experienced among millions of people in the case of mega events. Still, a fairly large section of the population does not care that much for sports. Some may experience road blocks, litter and noise disturbance from the events. Sport events generally require investments, often from local or national authorities. Concerned citizens rightfully point at alternative usage of public money (e.g. schools, health care). Thrills and excitement are good things, but does that warrant public money being spent on? Or is there a broader social significance of sport events? Can sport events help alleviate societal issues (like cohesion, inequality and non-participation), do they generate a social impact beyond what spectators experience during the event? In this report the authors have aimed to describe the state of play as regards the evidence for the occurrence of a social impact from sport events and the strategies that are required to enhance social impact from sport events. For the report, an extensive scan of the literature was performed and input was collected from a key group of international experts.
DOCUMENT