Hosting the Olympic Games

The Real Costs for Cities

John Rennie Short

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• ISBN:
  9781351000338
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Architecture
• Subtopic: Aménagement urbain et paysager

Hosting the Olympic Games reveals the true costs involved for the cities that hold these large-scale sporting events. It uncovers the financing of the Games, reviewing existing studies to evaluate the costs and benefits, and draws on case study experiences of the Summer and Winter Games from the past forty years to assess the short- and long-term urban legacies for host cities.

Written in an easily accessible style and format, it provides an in-depth critical analysis into the franchise model of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and offers an alternative vision for future Games. This book is an important contribution to understanding the consequences for the host cities of Olympic Games.

1
Setting the scene

I have watched every single Olympic Games, summer and winter, since 1960. I am not alone. The Games are the most-watched event in human history, an athletic competition that draws a worldwide audience. I write these lines as the world is getting ready to witness the opening ceremonies of the 2018 Winter Games in Pyeongchang, South Korea.

The five Olympics rings now have global brand recognition. The Games have evolved into more than just a platform for sporting prowess and athletic brilliance; they are also a television spectacle, a billion-dollar-plus business, an opportunity for corporate sponsorship, and an arena for national expressions and international tensions. These most global of events are also rooted in particular places. The Games shift. Unlike the Games of ancient Greece, they are held in a new location every four years for both Summer and Winter Games. The urban impact of hosting the Games is the subject of this book.

My focus is on the modern Olympic Games. The term ‘modern’ implies not only the Games of the here and now compared to those of ancient times, but is also a reminder that their emergence and organization represent an important and defining moment of modernity: themes of nationalism and globalism, cultural and economic globalization, the cult of the body, the sports-athletic complex, the rise of a corporate capitalism, the creation of the mega-event, and the global spectacular all take place in and through the Olympic Games. It is not too much of a stretch to make a claim that the Olympics helped to create the modern world. And the modern world, with its blemishes as well as its wonders, is reflected back to us in the Olympic Games.

There are a number of detailed case studies of the impact of individual Games. (A detailed bibliography is included in A guide to further reading at the end of the book). There are also studies that focus on specific issues, such as the transport implications, or on econometric cost-benefit analysis. Often, these analyses roll up diverse global mega-events, such as the World Cup and the Games, into one general discussion. This book is distinctive in that it looks across different host cities of the Olympic Games only, to allow a general assessment of the positive and negative impacts on cites of hosting the Olympic Games.

Costs and benefits: winner and losers

The book aims to answer two basic question: what are the real costs? and who pays and who benefits?

There are two possible answers to the first question. There is the winning-gold argument that sees a net benefit to host cities and their citizens. The Games as positive effect on cites is the loudest and, hence, the strongest argument. It is enunciated by powerful business and political groups wishing to host the Games and by the International Olympic Committee (IOC), which, as it gets bigger and richer, exerts a more-powerful force in shaping the narrative about the Olympic Games. Proponents argue that while there may be some inconveniences and costs, cities should host the Games because the benefits outweigh the costs, because the city is guaranteed a great legacy of sports facilities, improved infrastructure, and more-positive global recognition.

This argument is strengthened because globalization pits cities against each other for inward investment, tourists, and enhanced global image. As globalization flattens and shrinks much, but not all, of the world, even small differences between cities are magnified in the relentless drive to be globally competitive. Any possibility of becoming more recognized is widely sought. Hosting the Games, in this narrative, is a potential game-changer, a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for a city to attract money and jobs and create a lasting positive legacy.

On the other hand, mounting criticisms of hosting the Games argues that the costs outweigh the benefits.¹ The term event capture is used to refer to the way that cities, rather than winning gold by hosting the Games, are, in effect, held captured by the Games.²

Event capture

Event capture takes four main forms. First, there is infrastructure capture, where the city’s infrastructure is constructed and reconstructed around the particular needs of an unusual two-week event. Hence, the emphasis is on venues for short-lived sporting events, airport upgrades, and the easing of routes from the airport into and out of the city. This spending distorts the longer-term infrastructure needs of the city. Long-terms plans have to work around the peculiar needs of the Games. Second, there is financial capture, in which public monies are devoted to funding the Games, directly and indirectly. There are associated opportunity costs, as other projects are cancelled or much reduced, and social programs are sacrificed to put on the Games. Third, there is legal capture, as new legislation is introduced. Limitations are places on citizens’ rights in order to secure the financial profitability and the security of the Games. Fourth, there is political capture, as the normal rules of accountability and transparency are displaced and eroded by non-elected organizations, such as the IOC and Olympic Committee Organizing Committees that are given prime roles in the life of the city in the lead-up to and during the Games.

Who gains and who loses?

Costs are unequally shouldered and benefits are unevenly realized. Another question needs to be asked: who gains and who loses when cities host the Games? In subsequent chapters, I will try to identify the winners and losers.

The rest of the book will provide answers to these two big questions: what are the real costs of hosting the Games? and who pays and who benefits? But first, we need to place the contemporary Games in an historical context.

Notes

1 Zimbalist, A. (2016, 2nd ed.) Circus Maximus: The Economic Gamble Behind Hosting the Olympics and World Cup. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

2 Müller, M. (2015) The mega-event syndrome: Why so much goes wrong in mega-event planning and what to do about it. Journal of the American Planning Association 81: 6–17.

Müller, M. (2016) How megaevents capture their hosts: Event seizure and the World Cup 2018 in Russia. Urban Geography 1–20.

2
The Olympics

Past and present

The modern Olympics make claim to a much longer history, a connection with a major foundation of Western civilization, ancient Greece. But, as we shall see, despite the claims to historical associations, the connection is more tenuous than steady, and more improvisational than a simple updating of the original.

Ancient games

The ancient Greeks honored their heroes after they died with running and wrestling competitions, often close to the burial site. A prehistoric tumulus at Olympia, a remote and secluded site close to the city of Elis and 210 miles southwest from Athens, was, according to legend, the burial place of a famous charioteer Pelops. At the foot of Mt. Kronos, close to two small rivers with groves of olive, pine, and oak trees, Olympia emerged as an early site for athletic competitions.

King Iphitos of Elis, almost 3,000 years ago, believed he could save Greece from plague and civil war by reinvigorating athletic competitions in a more formal and Panhellenic form. He invited all of the Greek states to compete at Olympia. The Greeks only started to number their Games for this one held, in 776 BCE. It was a small affair; there was only one race, won by a local athlete. But from this small start, the Games grew to a major event of the Classical world, held every four years for the next 1,200 years.

The Games at Olympia, the original Olympics, were a religious ceremony honoring the Greek god Zeus. The religious devotion to Zeus and the Panhellenic competition cemented the Greek identity. As athletes travelled to the Games and during the competition, a truce was declared between perennially warring city-states. Weapons were barred from the Games. The Olympia Games were not the only games of ancient Greece: at Delphi, games celebrated Apollo, and in Athens they were held in honor of Athena; Poseidon was honored at Corinth, and Zeus at Nemea.

At Olympia, as in the other games, athletes competed for money and honor, their own personal honor and that of the city-states they represented. The site at Olympia contained a hippodrome, a stadium, a swimming pool (for relaxation as there were no swimming events), and a gymnasium, all spread out around the Temple of Zeus that housed a 13-meter-high statue of Zeus, one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World.¹

The Games were held every four years in August. In the spring of an Olympics year, as the warming weather coaxed a profusion of wild flowers in Olympia, heralds from Elis traveled around the Greek world announcing an Olympics truce. Up to 50,000 spectators gathered for the Games, drawn from near and far. The mainland cities of Athens, Corinth, and Sparta were well represented, as were Greek colonies from around the Mediterranean. The later Games were filled with Romans eager to see and experience the Greek world. All contestants had to be freeborn males of Greek descent. Women, slaves, and foreigners (barbarians to the Greeks) were not allowed to participate. Only unmarried women were allowed to attend the Games. A women’s race was held every four years between the main Games, and the winner had her likeness painted on the walls of the Temple of Hera that sat close to the Temple of Zeus.

Figure 2.1 Olympia, Greece: the site of the Olympic Games from 776 BCE to 426 ACE

Source: John Rennie Short

Olympia was dedicated solely to hosting the Olympics. It lay empty most of the rest of the time and since there were no amenities, the thousands of spectators brought their own tents and shelters and camped out in the heat of summer, with little sanitation. (You could probably have smelled as well as heard the crowds.)

The Games were a five-day event. Athletes arrived as much as a month before the formal start in order to train and prepare. On the first day, athletes took a solemn oath to observe the rules. Because months and even years of training could not guarantee results, some athletes would also make an animal sacrifice to ensure victory. The judges also swore to be fair. On the second day, boys competed in boxing, running, and wrestling. The athletic competitions got underway on the morning of the third day, with chariot races. These were the blue-ribbon events, the cost of good horses making them only open to the very rich. The Roman emperor Nero competed in 65 ACE. He bribed the judges in order to secure a victory (so much for the judges’ oath). He was declared the winner, despite the awkward fact that he fell off his chariot before the finish line. In the afternoon came the discuss hurlers and javelin throwers.

On the morning of the fourth day, 100 oxen were sacrificed at the Temple of Zeus and the meat was eaten later that evening at a public banquet. In the afternoon, the runners competed. In the 3,800-meter race, run runners would often try to trip their competitors. The main event was a 192-meter dash. Day four also saw wrestling, boxing, and running in armor – a reminder that the Games owed their origin to forms of martial training. On the final day, victors in each event led competitors and trainers in a procession to the Temple of Zeus. The winners were crowned with a wreath of wild olive. Those able to drum up financial support had statues of themselves placed in the grounds. There were no prizes for those coming in second or third. The afternoon and evening was devoted to celebrations, feasting, drinking, and the singing of hymns of victory as well as the drowning of sorrows of defeat.²

Over time, the link between the Games and the worship of Zeus loosened; Alexander the Great built statues of himself at Olympia, making it less a site for religious devotion and more a setting for the cult of personality. The first Roman emperor, Augustus, had one of the temples converted into a shrine to himself. The temples were plundered and their walls pulled down for defensive walls elsewhere. Finally, in ACE 393, the Christian emperor Theodosius, appalled at the pagan nature of the ceremonies, abolished the Games entirely and had all the statues destroyed. The site at Olympia, which had lasted for roughly 1,200 years and hosted 293 consecutive games, was subsequently ravaged by thieves and destroyed by earthquakes, and sank into oblivion.

While the modern Games make a nod to the ancient Games, we should be wary of seeing a straightforward adoption of an ancient tradition. Not only are there the obvious differences – such as the creation of the Winter Games, that had no ancient parallel – but the spirit and conduct of the ancient Games are situated in a very different cultural context from the modern world. The ancient Games were intimately bound up in a profound religious devotion and a Panhellenic celebration that reaffirmed the connection between Greeks and their gods. The Games were a platform for Greek identity.

In the ancient Games, flute music accompanied boxing matches, and long jumpers had to carry weights. And there is a more obvious difference. All the athletes, as well as the trainers, were completely naked: the Greek word for naked is gymnos, the source of our word gymnasium. To protect themselves, the athletes rubbed their body with olive oil and smeared on sand.³

An invented tradition

The modern Games are not a straightforward modern adoption of an ancient tradition that included such things not seen today: chariot races, naked athletes, animal sacrifices, devotions to Zeus, or flute-accompanied long jumpers and boxers. The modern Olympics are an invented tradition that built on an idealized picture rather than on the actual practice of the ancient Games.⁴

Baron Pierre de Coubertin (1863–1937) first raised the idea of a modern Games. It was not a simple resuscitation but a re-creation in a specific context of growing and intense national competition. The Games were not devised to replace nationalism, but to channel it. Coubertin, the initiator of the modern Games, came from a wealthy French family, and his early interest in sport was situated in a ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• List of tables
• List of figures
• 1 Setting the scene
• 2 The Olympics: past and present
• 3 Financing the Games
• 4 Bidding
• 5 Rising costs
• 6 Costs and benefits
• 7 Urban legacies
• 8 Alternatives to event capture
• A guide to further reading
• Bibliography
• Index