Economic Impact of Mega Sporting Events

8/20/2019 Economic Impact of Mega Sporting Events

1/38

Economic Impact of Mega Sporting Events 1

Economic Impact of Mega Sporting Events on Host countries

Nitika Mangal


2/38


Table of Contents

Table of Contents.............................................................................................................................2

Chapter 1: Introduction.................................................................................................................... 4

Chapter 2: Aim and Objectives........................................................................................................5

Chapter 3: Literature Review...........................................................................................................6

Chapter 4: Analysis 1 - Economic Impact of Atlanta 1996 Olympics........................................... 9

Positive Impact......................................................................................................................... 9

Negative Impact......................................................................................................................10

Chapter 5: Analysis 2 - Economic Impact of Sydney 2000 Olympics......................................... 12

Positive Impact....................................................................................................................... 12

Negative Impact......................................................................................................................14

Chapter 6: Analysis 3 - Economic Impact of Sochi 2014 Winter Olympics................................16

Positive Impact....................................................................................................................... 16

Negative Impact......................................................................................................................18

Chapter 7: Analysis 4 - Economic Impact of FIFA 2010 World Cup, SA................................... 20

Positive Impact....................................................................................................................... 21

Negative Impact......................................................................................................................22

Chapter 8: Analysis 5 - Economic Impact of FIFA 2014 World Cup, Brazil.............................. 23

Positive Impact....................................................................................................................... 24

Negative Impact......................................................................................................................25

Chapter 9: Overall Critical Analysis of Mega Sporting Events.....................................................27

Olympics.................................................................................................................................27

FIFA World Cup.....................................................................................................................30


3/38


Chapter 10: Challenges in Calculating Economic Impact............................................................. 32

Chapter 11: Conclusion..................................................................................................................35

References......................................................................................................................................36


4/38


Chapter 1: Introduction

Hosting a sporting event, and that too a mega-sporting event is considered to be a proud moment

in the history of any country. It is hard to provide a clear and well defined meaning for the term

mega-event, as its difference from a normal event is not just dependent on the number of actual

participants. It needs the fulfillment of many different factors for an event to be categorized as a

mega event. As per (Hiller, 2012)1, mega events are generally short term, one time events, which

are high profile in nature and are usually hosted by an entire city. Thus, a similar type of mega

event can keep rotating among different cities of the world, after a fixed period of time, which

ultimately serves to heighten its importance and associated curiosity. Such a hosting of a mega

event is normally accompanied by an extensive coverage by media, both digital as well as print.

The sponsorship of the mega event is generally undertaken by a committee or a body, which is

not native to the place in which the event is being hosted. This body determines the rules and

regulations of the mega event and also sets the related parameters for the duration of the event. It

is obvious from the explanation so far that the choice of the host city is not as well as the control

of the proceedings of the mega event, both are in the purview of the sponsoring body. The city is

expected to provide financial resources, social infrastructure, and security for the mega event,

and it is this very state of preparedness that becomes the primary reason for a city being awarded

as the host of the mega event. During the mega event, the normal life of the host city enters into a

state of frenzy, as well as urgency, and it results in undertaking of steps that might look

undemocratic from certain perspectives.

A few well known examples of Mega sporting events across the world are Olympic Games

organized by the IOC (International Olympic Committee), Soccer world cups organized by FIFA

(Fédération Internationale de Football Association), Euro cups in Soccer, Commonwealth Games,

1 Hiller, H. (2012). Host cities and the Olympics. London: Routledge.


5/38


World cup in Rugby, World Grand Prix Championships, to name a few. Hosting of Olympics

events, and Commonwealth games, from an infrastructural perspective, generally entails

construction of new facilities in the form of roadways, interlinking trains, stadiums, sports

villages, and other necessary amenities. In comparison to this, Soccer world cups, and Grand

Prix championships etc., tend to make use of facilities that are already in existence, as these

mega sporting events are relevant to a single sport. The impact of single sport specific mega

events is thus, limited in its scope, compared to the response generated from Olympics and

Commonwealth games as they incorporate a wide array of sports, requiring amenities on a much

larger scale. The most potent argument which is put forth by a country that is aspiring to bid for a

mega sporting event, is the legacy which such an event leaves behind for that city or country.

Also, the governments of the aspiring hosts view such mega sporting events as initiatives that

have primarily an economic meaning attached to them. This presents a necessary trigger to

economies that are in transition, which means the economies that are making a change from

central ownership to market driven ownerships. Also, the hosting of events has a different

economic impact on developing nations compared to the impact on the economies of developed

nations.

Chapter 2: Aim and Objectives

The aim of this thesis is to critically analyze the economic impact mega sporting events have on

their host countries. Various objectives are fulfilled in due course:

1. To analyze the different positive and negative economic impacts caused by mega sporting

events.

2. To critically analyze the overall economic impact of two major Mega Sporting events, viz.,Olympics and the FIFA World Cup.

3. To provide an overview of the motivations that drive countries to bid for such events.


6/38


4. To discuss the challenges faced in the effective calculation of Economic impact of Mega

sporting events

Chapter 3: Literature Review

The economic impact of mega sporting events is usually traced in the increased potentialities that

such an event affords, in terms of an enhanced awareness of the particular region as a possible

destination for tourism, along with possibilities for future activities that are commercial in nature.

These factors help to attract larger number of visitors and investments in the region, thus,

creating more job opportunities which consequently leads to an economic growth of the overall

region. Thus, the major chunk of literature in the area of mega sporting events, concerns itself

with providing an valuation and analysis of how such an event has resulted in an impact that is

socio-economic in nature. A number of authors have examined the economic impact of mega-

sporting events, and the authors paint a clear picture of the cost and benefits of hosting this type

of event.

(Davis, 2012)2 highlights gaps between forecast and actual outcomes for economic and non-

economic rewards. He examines the trade-offs and opportunity cost of these events. (Davis, 2012,

pg 51) also examines the economic impacts of different mega-sporting events such as the

Olympic summer and winter games. The Olympic Games are typically seen to have beneficial

impacts due to the prestige image created for the hosting countries. The attention this event

draws from millions of people around the world puts hosting countries in the spotlight. A

dramatic economic cycle is created by city leaders to create jobs, invest in infrastructure

improvements and attractions. The amount invested into the Olympic Games has dramatically

increased since Athens 1896 games, where only 43 sporting events took place, and that number

increased to 302 events in the London 2012 games. The author highlights both negative and

positive impacts, the study offers insight into decade-long benefits and draw backs that comes

from countries hosting mega-sporting events. Improvements made to host cities infrastructure,

improved transport system, employment and improved local services means an increase in

2 Davis, J. (2012). The Olympic Games effect. Singapore: John Wiley & Sons Singapore.


7/38


ourism after the games have finished. Local businesses like hotels benefit from the boom in

increased tourism, and a new interest in the host county is generated.

(Gold and Gold, 2007, pg 116-125)3 also highlight the improvement of employment as being one

of the key positive impacts. The authors add that mega-sporting events creates three different

types of employment, direct employment for the preparation of building and staging the games,

support employment which includes hotels, construction contracts and buying goods and the last

stage being indirect employment as the games create expenditure for local economy. As a

critique to this, employment does increase in order for sporting events to be successful, but not

all of the jobs created are on full time, permanent basis. For instance, around the time of the

games, hotels usually employ additional staff members on a temporary contract. This benefit is

short term, and this usually leads to the conclusion that games does not cause a huge impact for

locals to better their lives, as they simply do not last long enough. In addition to this (Green,

2003, pg 6)4 argues this point by stating that when host cities put forward the predicted amount

of jobs they expect will be generated from them hosting the games, they fail to consider the fact

that employment migration will occur. Host city workers will come and take away jobs from the

local community. (Green, 2003) carried put a study in Vancouver in 2010 to examine

Vancouver ’s proposed full time employment figures they put forward in their bid, the figures

were 244,000. He thought this number was far too high and wanted to see if this was even

possible.

(Kasimati, 2003, pg 433-444)5 agrees with the previously mentioned above authors regarding

benefits, but in fact furthers his argument by arguing that he has found that despite the large

amount of economic impact studies carried out by other authors between 1984 to 2004 he has

examined in each case he explains each study was carried out prior to summer Olympic Games.

He also adds that these studies were not gathered using primary data, he suggests that the studies

3 Gold, J. and Gold, M. (2007). Olympic cities. London: Routledge.

4 Green, D. (2003). Olympic impacts. Vancouver: Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, BC Office.

5 Kasimati, E. (2003). Economic aspects and the Summer Olympics: a review of related research. InternationalJournal of Tourism Research, 5(6), pp.433-444.


8/38


were commissioned by components of the games. He touches on the fact that these economic

impact studies were likely to have been made to seem all positive, in general they do not take

into account supply-side constraints. These constraints are things such as investment crowding,

price increases happening because of resource scarcity and the displacement of tourists. (Preuss,

2004, pg 209)6 concludes the same as (Kasimati, 2003), and adds that the benefits are over-

estimated when studies are produced by or for the Organizing Committee of the Olympic Games.

(Preuss, 2004) also points out that in order to provide a correct estimation of the true economic

impacts this will require research to be carried out several years prior the games and continue

several years after. In order to carry out this research a huge budget is needed hence the reason

no one has done this yet. This issue highlights that there is a gap in the studies being carried out.

6 Preuss, H. (2004). The economics of staging the Olympics. Cheltenham, UK: E. Elgar.


9/38


Chapter 4: Analysis 1 - Economic Impact of Atlanta 1996 Olympics

The city of Atlanta, in the State of Georgia, was awarded the bid for hosting 1996 Olympics

games in September 1990, by the then president of IOC Juan Antonio Samaranch. The

announcement led to celebrations within the city, as the Olympics would be the last Olympics to

be hosted before the end of century. Looking at the success of Los Angeles Olympics, it was

envisaged that the Olympics in Atlanta would also be a similar financial success. The event

eventually turned out to be a mixed success story for the city.

Positive Impact

As per (NPR.org, 2011)7, close to 5 billion USD worth of impact resulted for the local economy,

and one of the important legacies that was left behind is the Centennial Olympic Park, right in

the middle of the city. It is said to be one of the finest Atlanta’s parks for public, and costed

about 57 million USD for its construction (Olympics' impact on Atlanta still subject to debate,

1992)8. The park has acted as a fulcrum for nearly 1.8 billion USD added in the capital since the

conclusion of the games, due to the construction of many hotels, apartment complexes, office

buildings, and commercial buildings. The park also sowed the seeds for the construction of

further landmarks such as Georgia Aquarium, National Center for Civil and Human Rights,

among many others. The Olympics were also a driving factor in the population boost that the city

7 NPR.org, (2011). The Economic Legacy Of Atlanta's Olympics. [online] Available at:

http://www.npr.org/2011/08/04/138926167/the-economic-legacy-of-atlantas-olympic-games [Accessed 4 Mar.

2016].

8Olympics' impact on Atlanta still subject to debate. (1992). [online] tribunedigital-chicagotribune. Available at:

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-09-21/news/0909200352_1_centennial-olympic-games-billy-payne-atlanta-

committee [Accessed 4 Mar. 2016].


10/38


received over a span of a decade, from nearly 3.5 million to close to 5.5 million in the year 2011.

Due to the awarding of the games, the city went on an infrastructure construction drive, with

many new projects ranging from various venues for the games, to accommodation facility for the

athletes. The Olympic village that was built for the purpose of the games, housed nearly 10,000

athletes during the games, and now is being effectively utilized as university dorms for a couple

of universities. One such university to be benefited was Georgia State University, that got a

dormitory of 2000 beds worth 85 million USD in the village. The other university to receive the

benefits was Georgia Tech University, who got a swimming center worth 24 million USD. Other

colleges which catered historically to the black population of the city received nearly 89 million

USD worth of athletic facilities. With all the facilities that were created, the Olympic games also

resulted in the creation of nearly 580,000 jobs between the years 1991 to 1997 (Malfas, Houlihan

and Theodoraki, 2004)9.

Negative Impact

The fund raising organization who made all the efforts for raising money for the bid, spent nearly

6 million USD in a span of two years, in the effort to win the hosting rights for the games. At the

end of it, they were completely broke, and had to turn to private investors, when they were

handed a 1.5 million USD bill footing for game winning bid party (Olympics' impact on Atlanta

still subject to debate, 1992)10. It was also opined by the city’s development authority that the

funds which were used to develop many of the venues and the facilities for the games, could

have been better put to use by improving the existing city infrastructure such as the sewage

facilities. The later improvement of the sewage system as well as the roadways cost the city a

sum of 9 billion USD in the year 2009. Homeowners who were under the impression that they

9 Malfas, M., Houlihan, B. and Theodoraki, E. (2004). Impacts of the Olympic Games as mega-events. Proceedings

of the ICE - Municipal Engineer, 157(3), pp.209-220.

10Olympics' impact on Atlanta still subject to debate. (1992). [online] tribunedigital-chicagotribune. Available at:

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-09-21/news/0909200352_1_centennial-olympic-games-billy-payne-atlanta-

committee [Accessed 4 Mar. 2016].


11/38


could earn better rates of rent due to the effect of Olympics were left severely disappointed.

Many small scale vendors and owners of small businesses suffered great losses after shelling out

anywhere between 10,000 to 20,000 USD to be able to sell products on the street sides.

Ultimately, most of them ended up suing the city after running into bankruptcy. The city saw

much development in terms of housing facilities than was actually needed. This resulted in many

apartments, condominiums, etc. to lie vacant, or being put up for sale in a property market that

was already facing a down slide.

As per (Malfas, Houlihan and Theodoraki, 2004, one of the major examples to provide a clear

negative impact of an event such as Olympics, was the 1996 Atlanta games. It is estimated that

near about 15000 citizens lost their accommodations to help vacate land for constructing

facilities for the Olympic games. The eviction came primarily in projects that were not private,

but public housing, which goes to highlight the kind of negative social impact that can befall

residents who had their accommodations related to state involvement. From 1990 to 1995, in a

duration of five years, the loss that the public suffered in terms of housing that was affordable,

turned out to be nearly 9500 units. Close to 350 million USD worth of state funds were

channeled towards developing infrastructure related to the games. These funds were specifically

meant for providing shelter to the poor and destitute people, providing affordable housing to

lower income strata of the society, along with providing many such services for the socially

weaker sections. The shelters which were meant for homeless people were transformed into

accommodations for backpackers who were visiting the city due to the Olympic games. This act

was exacerbated by the fact that financial incentives were provided to the organizations

providing services to homeless and poor people, to actually take the step of converting the

accommodation, so as to serve incoming visitors rather than needy people. Poverty in the state

was almost criminalized by the passage of several bills, with ‘Street sweeps’ as a drastic example.

This act made it illegal to remove items from trash cans provided by the state in public places,

and that too in a city where a substantial percentage of the population, about 30%, was below the

line of poverty.


12/38


Chapter 5: Analysis 2 - Economic Impact of Sydney 2000 Olympics

The city of Sydney was awarded the bid for hosting the Olympic games of year 2000, in the

month of September 2003. The news was received with country wide celebrations, especially in

the state of New South Wales, considering the well known passion for athletics and sports among

the Australians. In the overall impact of things, the Olympic games did not result in an additional

burden on the State Government, but they also were not considered as a resounding financial

success like the Olympic games held in Los Angeles.

Positive Impact

(Haynes, 2001)11 explains that the staging of the Sydney 2000 Olympic games were held to be a

success, and that schools and offices were closed during the period of the Olympic games.

Contributing factors which help make Sydney’s games successful were the large number of

volunteers, 47,000 people volunteered, which meant saving money for employment of workers.

Transportation within the area ran smoothly followed by friendly smiles from locals making the

atmosphere polite and welcoming. Sydney games organizers and many Australians were excited

with the operational success of the games, and this success was not only appreciated by the

locals, but it also impressed the International Olympic Committee. Due to the success of the

Sydney games, other countries displayed a great deal of interest in the way Sydney games were

executed, incurring a hope that the expertise gained by Sydney would eventually help them in

11 Haynes, J. (2001). SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE SYDNEY 2000 OLYMPIC GAMES. 1st ed. [ebook]

2001 Seminar of the International Chair in Olympism. Available at: http://olympicstudies.uab.es/pdf/od013_eng.pdf

[Accessed 28 Feb. 2016].


13/38


their own experience in future. As per the detailed results provided by (Lboro.ac.uk, 2016)12,

regarding the impact of Olympics on tourism, the following observations were made:

1. Post the Olympics 2000 in the month of September, the number of international visitors

increased by approximately 400,000 compared to the visitors during the same time last year.

2. As per country’s TFC (Tourism Forecasting Council), the number of foreign tourists

attending the Olympic games was roughly 111,000.

3. Again as per data provided by TFC, from the years 1997 till 2004, the country saw an

increased influx of foreign visitors due to the brand impact of the Olympics, and the number

was approximately 1.7 million. Citing the case of the actual year of Olympics, it was found

that the number international visitors saw an increase in margin of about 10.9%. After the

games were concluded, there were active efforts taken by ATC (Australian Tourist

Commission) to cash in on the awareness generated by the Olympics. This resulted in a

jump in foreign visitors by a figure of almost 23% for the month of December in the year

2000.

4. ATC also organized campaigns such New Century, New World, Australia 2001, post the

Olympics exposure, which helped in generation of export revenue in millions due to events

associated with business.

5. As per the figures released by the IOC (International Olympic Committee), the televisionaudience across 220 countries of the world, for the duration of the Olympics reached around

3.7 billion.

6. As per the figures released by the IOC (International Olympic Committee), the Internet

audience, for the duration of the Olympics reached around 20 million.

7. As per TFC, the total economic benefit to the country for the duration 1997 to 2004 reached

a figure of 6.1 billion AUD, due to the effects of the Olympics.

8. There was a significant advancement of the Brand Australia as a result of the successfulhosting of the Sydney Olympics.

12Lboro.ac.uk, (2016). GaWC Research Bulletin 154. [online] Available at:

http://www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc/rb/rb154.html [Accessed 1 Mar. 2016].


14/38


9. Post the Olympics, the ATC was sent an invitation to present the facts, figures and the entire

case study in the year 2001, at the first of its kind IOC conference in Barcelona on Sports

and Tourism.

Negative Impact

(Searle, 2002)13 reported that Sydney had no legacy plans for their stadium calling it a ‘uncertain

legacy’. As per analysis provided by (Malfas, Houlihan and Theodoraki, 2004), prior to the

Sydney Olympics in the year 1998, when the actual infrastructure activities were being

undertaken, there was a sharp increase in the housing prices by a value of 7% over the prevailing

inflation rate; the normal rate being just 2%. Also, in the area called the Olympic corridor, which

primarily housed tenants who were from the lower income strata of the society, and where therehigh degree of unemployment rates to the tune of nearly 38%, the overall percentage of housing

rents saw an increase by a margin of nearly 23% during the same financial year.

(Giesecke and Madden, 2011)14, undertook a detailed study and analysis of the actual measurable

economic impact of Olympics in Sydney in the year 2000, and came up with the following

observations:

1. The cost of construction was covered by the state of New South Wales, and only the GDP of

NSW was affected in a positive manner, and not the GDP of the entire country. In fact there

were losses as far as the consumption in public and private was concerned. This loss figure

was estimated at about 2.1 billion USD.

2. The impact of the Olympics on the construction and finance sector also generated negative

country wide figures. As per Macroeconomic % deviations from actual baseline figures, the

area of Export and Import Volumes saw respective declines by 0.04 and 0.03% for the year

13 Searle, G. (2002). Uncertain Legacy: Sydney's Olympic Stadiums. European Planning Studies, 10(7), pp.845-860.

14 Giesecke, J. and Madden, J. (2011). Modelling the Economic Impacts of the Sydney Olympics in Retrospect -

Game Over for the Bonanza Story?*. Economic Papers: A journal of applied economics and policy, 30(2), pp.218-

232.


15/38


1999-2000. The real GDP had a decline by 0.02%, while Capital stock had a downturn of

0.04%.

3. In terms of State GDP deviations from the baseline data, only the state of NSW showed a

positive deviation of 0.05, and rest all other states like Victoria, Queensland, South Australia,

Tasmania, Western Australia, and NT had negative deviations. This implied that the positive

impact was only localized to the city that was hosting the games, and did not filter to the rest

of the country. In fact the positive deviation figure had an immediate decline of 0.03% in the

next year, which went on to show that the effect of the Olympics was very short lived.

4. The prices of real estate showed an annual increase by 10% from 1993-1999 in the city of

Sydney, but after the conclusion of the games, the property rates dropped drastically, which

again highlighted the fact that the euphoria created by the mega sporting event was a short

term bubble.

5. Also, inadequacy in the management of international visitors saw a decline in the visitors

just immediately after the conclusion of the games.


16/38


Chapter 6: Analysis 3 - Economic Impact of Sochi 2014 Winter Olympics

IOC in the year 2007, selected the city of Sochi in the Krasnodar region of Russia, to host the

Winter Olympics in 2014. It was an important event in the calendar of world events due to the

re-emergence of Russia as a power under Vladimir Putin after the breakup of the erstwhile USSR.

This was the second time that a Russian city was elected to host the Olympics, the prior event

being the 1980 Moscow Olympics.

Positive Impact

As per (International Business Times, 2014)15, the city of Sochi benefited a lot from the

Olympics games, in terms of infrastructure, and construction projects.

15 International Business Times, (2014). The Economic Impact Of The Winter Olympics: Not Great For Russia But

Sochi Stands To Gain. [online] Available at: http://www.ibtimes.com/economic-impact-winter-olympics-not-great-

russia-sochi-stands-gain-1554153 [Accessed 1 Mar. 2016].


17/38


Source: International Olympic Committee

As is evident from the above chart, the growth rate of the region of Krasnodar has been much

more as compared to the growth in other Russian cities. Almost 235 number of development

projects were undertaken in the Krasnodar region, out of which projects related to the

development of roads numbered 37. Benefit to the local residents stems from the fact that, the

facilities developed for accommodating visiting athletes are to be later on turned into housing

that is affordable for the local population. Apart from this many other projects in infrastructure

sector were undertaken which saw development of railways and new restaurants and hotels,

along with upgrading the existing airports. (Bras et al., 2016)16 outline that the economy of the

city of Sochi has seen a growth of nearly 15% from the years 2009 to 2012, which is mainly

because of the expenditure by the Government for developing the facilities for the games.

16 Bras, A., Cofiño, A., Nunnery, J. and Royce, C. (2016). Efficiency of the XXII Winter Olympic Games

in Sochi, Russia. Undergraduate. University of Florida.


18/38


Nearly 85% of the infrastructure of the city was built from the beginning, with the approach of

the government being quite sustainable in terms of infrastructure. The administration plans to use

the same venue as the Olympic stadium for the soccer matches in the world cup to be held in

Russia in the year 2018. Also, many of the facilities that have been created for the games, can be

re-used and re-packed to other destinations in the country, thus adding to the overall

sustainability. Another major benefit for the city has been in the form of tourism. The purpose of

using Sochi as a bidding city was to help in creation of the city as a destination for skiing

vacations. This would potentially help the revenue that Russia gains from the tourism sector, as

tourism just accounts for about 1.5% of the country’s GDP. As per estimates from the

government ministries, the country hopes to attract more than 7 million foreign tourists after the

conclusion of the games, out of which it is expected that nearly half the number of tourists would

be residing in the city itself.

Negative Impact

The cost of Sochi Olympics to the Russian economy was about 51 mrillion USD. The figure

although looks huge, was only about 2.4% of the Russian GDP, which is nearly 2 trillion USD.

By far the winter Olympics in Sochi are the costliest ever in the history of Olympics, and this

puts into perspective the fact that winter Olympics has much lesser athletes, as compared to the

number of athletes in the summer Olympics. It was noticed by (Gorlova and Vidishcheva,

2013)17, that the costs of raw material required for construction activities, i.e, gravel and sands

etc., increased sharply by more than twice in Sochi, to 800 rubles from the earlier figure of about

360 rubles during the implementation phase. Interesting to note was the fact that the prices of

these raw materials remained about half of this value. (Bras et al., 2016) analyzed that Russian

economy already has a very stable rate of employment, and not much of the Russian population

is unemployed. So creation of employment was one area that did not have much positive impact

due to the hosting of the Olympic games. The labor market in Russia is very competitive

17 Gorlova, A. and Vidishcheva, E. (2013). The Financial Matter of Sochi XXII Winter Olympic Games. European

Journal of Economic Studies, 5(3), pp.156-158.


19/38


compared to other markets with similar jobs, and it was proving tough for the administration to

find cheaper and available labor to undertake the construction tasks. This was one of the primary

reasons for a rise in the overall costs of the infrastructure projects related to Olympics, which led

to subsequent rise in the overall costing of the games.

As per government reports released in the year 2006, it was announced that merely 90,000 jobs

would actually be created in the city and its neighboring areas, and about a half of this number

would be permanent in nature and located in the city itself. Out of the figure of 90,000 jobs,

nearly 30,000 vacancies were projected to be filled by the labor from the neighboring countries.

This filling up of labor vacancies by foreign labor offsets all the benefits that are created by the

creation of jobs, and also leads to a lowering of the overall economics of the region. Apart from

the permanent jobs, a number of temporary jobs were also created, about 145,000 in number.

This total number of 235,000 total number of jobs helps Sochi to climb to number third position

in terms of the overall jobs created by Olympic hosting cities. But if a careful analysis is done of

the overall costs involved in the games vs. the number of created jobs, it becomes clear that a

higher number of jobs should have been created with the kind of expenditure that was incurred

for the games. Moreover, there were instances of high level corruption that were reported while

undertaking construction contracts for infrastructure like roads. (Fox News, 2014)18, provides an

example for the most expensive road, called “The caviar road”, which runs from Sochi to

Krasnaya. This was built with an expenditure of a whopping 9.4 billion USD, and the cost of the

road exceeded the entire cost of hosting the winter Olympics in Vancouver in the year 2010. As

per calculations from Wall street experts, the per kilometer costs of the road turns out to be

roughly 200 million USD. In the end, it turns out that although the Olympics did not add on to

any of the existing debt of the Russian economy, it also did not lead to any overall benefits for

the economy of the country, save the setting up of an Olympic legacy in the relatively unknown

18 Fox News, (2014). Russia's $9.4B road to Sochi latest in long line of Olympic boondoggles | Fox News. [online]

Available at: http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2014/02/07/sochi-olympic-price-tag-soars-critic-slams-road-that-

could-have-been-paved-with.html [Accessed 1 Mar. 2016].


20/38


city of Sochi. It woul also be another challenge for the Russian administration to effectively

utilize the legacy left behind the Olympics, and ensure that infrastructure created at the costliest

expenditure do not eventually turn out to be non maintained buildings.

Chapter 7: Analysis 4 - Economic Impact of FIFA 2010 World Cup, SA

2010 FIFA world cup in South Africa, was the first time that a soccer world cup was being held

in the continent of Africa. The announcement was met be cheers from all over South Africa, as it

would provide an opportunity for the country to showcase its economic and sports potential on a

global level. After abolishing Apartheid in the year 1991, this was a proud moment for the

citizens, to showcase a global image and market the brand of South Africa.


21/38


Positive Impact

As per (FIFA.com, 2010)19, nearly 300,000 visitors toured South Africa for the duration of the

world cup, which proved a boon to the tourism sector of the South African nation. It was also

researched that majority of the visitors were likely to visit the country again and tour the country

as tourists. The expenditure by the number of international tourists who visited South Africa,

reached a figure of about 3.64 billion Rands, as per (Southafrica.info, 2016)20. The world cup

also had noticeable impact on the country’s GDP, which was an additional figure of about 0.54%.

Out of this 0.54%, almost 0.06% was due to expenditure by FIFA, and the rest 0.48% came from

international tourists. These statistics were very significant from the perspective of the South

African economy, since the overall GDP growth range was between 2 - 2.5%, which does to

show that a single mega event accounted for nearly a fourth to fifth part of the overall annual

GDP. There were also volunteer activities by nearly 15000 South Africans, helping them to gain

valuable training and experience of hosting a Mega sporting event.

The real success of the world cup for South Africa came in the form hosting a hiccup free event

in terms of logistics, and very few crimes for the duration of the event. The event was televised

to an international audience of nearly 32 billion, and it helped to create a brand image of South

Africa in times of an ongoing international economic crisis. Also, as per released statistics, the

night units sales saw an increase of almost 15.3% in the month of the world cup, compared to the

values of the last year. This helped in generation of an additional revenue of nearly 2.3 billion

Rands for the month of the world cup, as compared to the last year revenue of about 1.4 billion

Rands. This total increase of revenue in the industry of tourism accommodation was an increased

percentage value of almost 55.3 from the last year figures.

19FIFA.com, (2010). Study reveals tourism impact in South Africa. [online] Available at:

http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/news/y=2010/m=12/news=study-reveals-tourism-impact-south-africa-1347377.html

[Accessed 1 Mar. 2016].

20Southafrica.info, (2016). World Cup impact 'still massive'. [online] Available at:

http://www.southafrica.info/2010/2010spend-220410.htm#.VtXi0h_S3VN [Accessed 1 Mar. 2016].


22/38


Negative Impact

According to (Bond and Cottle, 2016)21, the government of South Africa was more of a

guarantor to FIFA and all of its commercial venture partners in terms of net revenue earnings,

and accumulation of capital. In fact the main body that actually benefited from the 2010 world

cup was FIFA, and its business associates. As per facts and figures by FIFA, the event resulted in

an overall earning of about 25 billion Rands, an equivalent of about 3.4 billion USD. The entire

sum of the earnings was totally tax free for FIFA, and it was jump of about 50% from its earning

from the last 2006 world cup held in Germany, making the African world cup a highest grosser

so far for the international body. As per a release from a survey of the labor force in South Africa

post the conclusion of the world cup, it was found that the total number of jobs that were created

actually saw an annual decline of nearly 4.7%, which meant a reduction of almost 627,000 jobs,

which a significant number for the economy overall. The main sector that faced the actual

decrease in number was the construction sector, as most of the construction projects got over

after the world cup. The total downturn in this sector turned out to be an annual number of nearly

111,000 jobs. The investment made by the South African government to the tune of 17.4 billion

Rands for the construction of world cup stadiums, was totally financed by the public funds,

unlike in the case of Germany where almost 60% of the expenses were financed via private

investors. (Maennig and du Plessis, n.d.)22 conclude after a thorough research, that the overall

economics related to the international visitors to South Africa during the world cup was much

smaller compared to initial estimates, at least if short term impacts were to be seen. An economic

impact from tourism is directly proportional to the actual number of arrivals, and their analysis

presents a statistics anywhere between 40,000 and 90,000 visitors. The cities where the actual

soccer matches were held, were found to have accommodation occupancy rates lesser than 100%,

which implied that there was deficiency in tapping of resources by the administration. The levels

21Bond, P. and Cottle, E. (2016). 1st ed. [ebook] CCS. Available at:

http://ccs.ukzn.ac.za/files/Bond%20Cottle%20World%20Cup%20economics.pdf [Accessed 1 Mar. 2016].

22 Maennig, W. and du Plessis, S. (n.d.). The 2010 World Cup High-Frequency Data Economics: Effects on

International Awareness and (Self-Defeating) Tourism. SSRN Electronic Journal.


23/38


of occupancy in the city of Cape Town for the initial couple of weeks of the tournament, were at

a disappointing figure of almost 34% and 40% respectively. Also, there was no substantial

increase observed in the number of international flights that landed in the country between the

months of April and August.

There was also a review setup by the Competition Commission of South Africa to look into the

pricing that were quoted for product and services during the implementation phase of the world

cup (Bond and Cottle, 2016). It was eventually found that there were many artificial escalations

in overall pricing, and the major companies of the country that were awarded construction

contracts for the world cup were actively involved in prohibited practices such as bid rigging and

collusion. This resulted in a escalation of prices of raw materials required for construction

activities, and caused the administration to spend a larger amount of money collected from tax

paying citizens for the completion of the projects. Also the hype and excitement resulting from

the world cup, caused an increase in spending from the consumers, which served to raise the

indebtedness of about 11 million population to record new levels.

Chapter 8: Analysis 5 - Economic Impact of FIFA 2014 World Cup, Brazil

The executive committee of FIFA chose Brazil as the host city in the year 2007, for the FIFA

2014 world cup. This led to a country wide rejoicing among its citizens, given the well known

passion of Brazilians for the game of soccer. It was projected by the government that the world

cup would pave way for creation of many jobs, as well infrastructure overhaul of the venue cities.As per government estimates, an approximate of 15 billion USD were funneled into the

country’s economy, leading to a creation of around a million jobs, which was approximately


24/38


about 15% of the annual job creation figure as per (VOA, 2016) 23. It was also highlighted that

the world cup will highlight Brazil on the world map, and will also lead to its citizens

understanding more about international hospitality. Another area which was stated to get a major

boost due to the award of the mega sporting event was tourism, and it was expected that Brazil

would attract about 600,000 tourists from all over the globe, which would further generate

revenue for the economy apart from an international recognition. After the conclusion of the

world cup, there were mixed reactions about the impact of the mega sporting event. According to

some analysts, the government of Brazil had grossly overestimated the revenue and job creation

figures, while the analysts who discussed the positives pointed to the boom in tourism for the

world cup duration, along with the building of new infrastructure facilities. Following is an

analysis of the positive and negative impacts of the FIFA 2014 world cup on the economy of the

host country Brazil:

Positive Impact

One of the major positive impacts of the 2014 world cup for Brazil was in the tourism sector.

The number of foreign tourists to have visited the country turned out to be about a million, as

opposed to nearly 600,000 estimated earlier, and the domestic tourist movement across the

country was nearly about 3 million. As per further projections from the Ministry of Sport the

benefits from the increase in tourism were not a one off phenomenon, and would potentially

result in revenues upto 90 billion USD over the next decade (Kcleconomics.com, 2016)24. As per

23 VOA, (2016). Mixed Opinions About World Cup Impact on Brazilian Economy. [online] Available at:

http://www.voanews.com/content/mixed-opinions-world-cup-impact-on-brazilian-economy/1948184.html

[Accessed 29 Feb. 2016].

24 Kcleconomics.com, (2016). Brazil and the World Cup’s economic impact – A look back | KCL EFS. [online]

Available at: http://kcleconomics.com/a-look-back-to-2014brazil-and-the-world-cups-economic-impact/ [Accessed

28 Feb. 2016].


25/38


(Harris, 2014)25, the expenditure by total 3.7 million tourists led to an addition of about 11.1

billion USD to the country’s economy, which is an increase of roughly about 0.5% in Gross

Domestic Product (GDP).

Negative Impact

The 2014 world cup ultimately resulted in more negatives than positives for Brazilian economy.

The expenditure on the world cup was close to 13 billion USD, with an additional expense of

about 2 billion USD for purposes of security as per (VOA, 2016). Also, even though there was a

net increase in the tourist influx of the country, reports by Brazilian Airline Association put forth

a different picture. As per statistics, the number of tourists utilizing air traffic services actually

saw a decline compared to the number for the past year. This decline was about 11 to 15%, and

the main reason for them was the higher rates of ticket prices due to the onset of the world cup.

In the area of job creations, the statistics recorded in the Ministry of Labor actually show a

decline in the hiring rates since the year 1998. Apart from this, the country ’s inflation also tipped

to the higher mark of about 6.5% for the month of June, and this ultimately impacted the

consumers within the country. This rise in inflation due to an increase in product prices brought

about by the world cup were quickly curtailed by the government, as soon as the world cup got

over (Kcleconomics.com, 2016). As per (WSJ, 2016)26, a report released by the country’s

National Confederation of Industry indicates that since the year 2010, the production in

industries was at the lowest for the month of the world cup, with about 32% of the industrial

capacity remaining non utilized. The citizens of the country predominantly utilized their days

watching the soccer matches, and the same trend was observed in the automotive and steel

sectors as well. The industrial production of crude steel feel down from the last year ’s figures by

about 4.9%, while the steel sales to the local market from the domestic steelmakers saw a decline

25 Harris, W. (2014). FIFA World Cup Financial Impact to Brazil Economy. [online] Business of Soccer. Available

at: http://www.businessofsoccer.com/2014/06/20/fifa-world-cup-financial-impact-to-brazil-economy/ [Accessed 29

Feb. 2016].

26WSJ, (2016). World Cup Hit Brazil’s Economy Hard. [online] Available at:

http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/07/18/world-cup-hit-brazils-economy/ [Accessed 28 Feb. 2016].


26/38


of nearly 21%. More worrying were the statistics for the automotive sector, where the June

month production of auto-motives fell by nearly 33%. The auto industry forms about one third of

the economy of the country that is service oriented, and hence the decline of production and sales

had an overall impact on GDP as well, which pretty much remained as a flat curve for the

duration of the mega event.

The expenditure incurred by the country fails to justify all the investments made for construction

of amenities and infrastructure. As per (Kcleconomics.com, 2016), a new stadium was built in

Manaus costing about 319 million USD, and that too only for for the purpose of four games. It is

highly unlikely that the stadium will ever be put again to use, while its monthly maintenance

costs stand at a whopping 250,000 USD. Most of the investment bankers, economists and the

analysts put the hosting of the world cup as a case of an opportunity had the potential to be

fruitful for the country’s economy, but that was ultimately wasted. Whatever boost was provided

in the short term to the country’s service sector by an increase in tourism, was promptly

counterbalanced by the losses in the industrial and auto sector. The critics remark, and perhaps

rightly so, that short term excuses such as mega sporting events are not the answers for dipping

economies, but it is a combination of solid planning and investment that helps to brings in the

desired results.

Chapter 9: Overall Critical Analysis of Mega Sporting Events

Olympics

Bidders for the Olympic Games must be committed to creating sustainable legacies, this is a

requirement from the Olympic movement. It is the host city’s responsibility to create these

legacies that will help the environmental, social and economic issues that the country faces. This


27/38


is done by bidders setting specific legacy plans in which they hope to fulfill. Different

participating stakeholders understand different things by ‘legacy’. Individual bidders generally

mobilize the use of legacy plans in their favor, and these documents focus on politics, the

community, volunteers and the overall impact on the city. In addition to that, whatever is

understood as legacy will be completely intangible, if adequate long term planning is not put in

place before the beginning of the mega sporting event.

(Sanburn and Sanburn, 2016)27 point out that perhaps the most risky of the mega sporting event

in terms of economics are the Olympics. A few observations of the aftermaths of the Olympics:

1. Most of the times, mega-sporting events, such as the Olympics, serve to exacerbate social

problems and deepen existing divides among residents. Since the year 1960, each and every

Olympic game that has been hosted has failed to meet its initial budget, and has invariably

shot over by almost 179%. Barcelona Olympics, which took place in the year 1992, overshot

the budget by a margin of about 417%, and London 2012 Olympics have by far turned out to

be the most expensive of the sporting event, almost at 14.8 billion USD.

2. In the case of Athens 2004 games, the Olympic site was eventually abandoned and the

economy was financially crippled as a result of the games. Even if there were any positives,

the negatives have far outweighed them. Athens was not the only city that suffered from the

lack of use for their specialized facilities. Sydney also faced the same issue after the

conclusion of Olympics, and (Searle, 2002) reported that Sydney had no legacy plans for

their stadium calling it an ‘uncertain legacy’.

3. Nagano, the host city of the 1998 Winter Olympic Games, faced severe financial

consequences for hosting such a big event and taxpayers suffered debts of up to £20,000 per

household to balance the city’s books, and similar city debts were created from hosting the

1976 Olympics in Montreal, Canada. (Malfas, Houlihan and Theodoraki, 2004) reported thatthe job generation due to the Olympics was only temporary in the Barcelona 1992 games,

27 Sanburn, J. and Sanburn, J. (2016). London's Loss? Why Hosting the Olympics Is Bad Business. [online]TIME.com. Available at: http://olympics.time.com/2012/07/26/londons-loss-why-hosting-the-olympics-is-bad-

business/ [Accessed 28 Feb. 2016].


28/38


and during the duration of the games, there was an overall decline in unemployment rates to

9.6%, from the normal rate of about 18.4%.

4. The impact of initial studies is often overstated in many respects. In the case of Sydney 2000

Olympics, the accommodation occupancy was reported to be at the level of 100%, but it was

overlooked that other cities like Melbourne had a corresponding decline of nearly 19% from

the last year levels, and that the decrease observed in city of Brisbane was about 17%, as per

(Bond and Cottle, 2016).

(The economic impact of the Olympic Games, 2004)28 provides with a detailed financial impact

of the Olympics held till the Sydney event.

28 The economic impact of the Olympic Games. (2004). 1st ed. [ebook] PricewaterhouseCoopers EuropeanEconomic Outlook. Available at:http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~rosenl/sports%20Folder/Economic%20Impact%20of%20Olympics%20PWC.pdf [Accessed 2 Mar. 2016].


29/38


Source: (The economic impact of the Olympic Games, 2004)

1. The Olympics held in Montreal city in the year 1976, resulted in great negative financial

impact to the overall its economy. So much so that it took almost three decades to pay off

the deficits generated by the Olympics. The city utilized almost all of its public funding

collected from the tax payers in building the amenities and infrastructure needed for hosting

the games. The resulting deficit from the Montreal Olympics led to a sharp decline in

countries subsequently bidding for the Olympics.

2. The Los Angeles Olympics held in the year 1984 were a huge commercial success and this

led to a large number of cities again bidding for Olympics, post the financial disaster

observed in Montreal. The citizens of Los Angeles overwhelmingly voted against the

utilization of public funds for financing the games, and thus they were the first Olympics to

allow the entry of private sponsors. This paved the way for commercialization of this Mega

sporting event, and also led to an establishment of global deals of sponsorship for the

Olympics. Due to these factors, the Los Angeles games resulted in a surplus of finances after the conclusion of Olympics, but the long term economic impact of the games was not much

as the games did not result in any building up of new infrastructure.


30/38


3. Both the cities who subsequently held the next Olympics, Seoul in the year 1988 and

Barcelona in 1992, vastly improved upon the existing infrastructure of the cities, and

simultaneously generated extra cash as well. The main improvement sectors for both these

countries were that of telecommunications, transportation, housing facilities, and other

community specific facilities.

FIFA World Cup

(Bond and Cottle, 2016) provide the following critical analysis of hosting FIFA world cups

across various host cities:

1. FIFA’s criteria for granting hosting rights to cities, does not really incorporate whether there

is a mass appeal, or much existing amenities and infrastructure for the sport. As long as

commercial interests of FIFA are served well, and its budgetary considerations are taken into

account, the other factors as outlined earlier do not hold much ground in favor of exploring

newer markets. This was aptly highlighted by the awarding of bid to Korea and Japan for

hosting the 2002 world cup. Korea and Japan had very less number of existing stadiums for

soccer, and after the bid was awarded Korea spent nearly 2 billion USD for building 10

stadiums, and Japan spent nearly 4 billion USD to build as many as 7 stadiums, while

renovating 3 of the existing ones.

2. The statistics related to number of tourists for the world cup held in the year 2002 in Korea

and Japan are bit stretched. Around 400,000 tourists from Europe visited Korea during the

world cup duration, but it was overlooked that nearly a similar kind of decline was observed

in visitors to Korea from Japan, when comparisons are made from the last year figures.

3. Looking at the analysis of the 2006 world cup held in Germany, it was opined by the GIER

(German Institute for Economic Research) director that there were only two gainers in the

world cup, FIFA and Association of German soccer. FIFA earned close to 187 million Euros,

while the German association earned nearly 21 million Euros. It was also found that there

were almost nil impacts on unemployment post the conclusion of world cup, with hardly any

economic impact to the country as a whole.


31/38


4. When it comes to the economics of the building stadiums for the world cups, there are very

specific requirements from the apex soccer body. FIFA requires that there be a provision of

a minimum of 8 stadiums, that are completely modernized, and also can hold anywhere

between 40,000 to 60,000 spectators. The following chart provides an overall representation

of the expenditure made by the host cities so far for world cups. This data excludes the data

from the 2014 Brazil world cup. The cost for France for the stadium construction for hosting

the 1998 FIFA world cup was almost 700 million USD. South Korea and Japan co-hosted

the 2002 world cup, and had respective expenditures of about 2 billion and 4 billion USD.

The stadium construction cost for Germany for hosting 2006 world cup was around 2.2

billion USD, while South Africa incurred an expenditure of nearly 2.5 billion USD.

Source: (Bond and Cottle, 2016)

Chapter 10: Challenges in Calculating Economic Impact

It is not always easy to ascertain the direct economic impact of the Mega sporting events on the

host cities. Many times, there are many intangible factors that lead to cities opting for a bid for

these events. These intangible factors ultimately go on to have a tangible economic impact on the

economies of the individual cities, in fashion that gradually reveals itself over a period of time.

One such major intangible factor is that of the legacy that is left behind by such events. This


32/38


legacy factor manifests itself in various ways for different cities around the world, and thus, there

is no single fixed formula to ascertain the actual economic impact of these mega sporting events.

A few challenges that are normally encountered while conducting economic impact studies are

as follows:

1. The impact estimated by sporting studies has generally turned out to be less accurate as

compared to the real impact afforded by such mega sporting events. The agencies

calculating such impacts have been often criticized for the fact that the organizations who

prepare such analysis reports often possess a hidden, or sometimes no so hidden vested

interest in the award of such events. More often that not, the basis of such reports is a

premise that is purely academic in nature and many times far removed from reality. Such a

premise is based on the convenient assumption that an event of such a grand scale, would

invariably lead to an economic development of the area in which they are held. Thus, the

main challenge lies in identifying appropriate bodies or organizations that can make a

detached study, and present an unbiased view of what is likely to be the actual economic

impact of holding a mega sporting event.

2. It is not always possible to know whether the visitors who are visiting a city which is

holding a mega sporting event, are there for the purpose of attending the current event or for

any other purpose. The number of visitors are directly taken to impact the economics of theevent, and if this figure is not accurate, then the resulting study and estimates cannot present

an accurate picture. Many scenarios arise in such a case. It is possible that a visitor who

visited a city and watched a sporting event, could have been a tourist at some other place had

the event not been happening. And if such were the case, he possibly could have spend more

while visiting another tourist attraction. This scenario results in an overall loss to the

country’s economy, and is often overlooked in the economic impact studies.

3. Another important point that is many times difficult to capture for an accurate analysis of the

economic impact, is the factor of overcrowding. The loss that is presented by potential

visitors getting dissuaded from visiting an overcrowded host city, is tough to estimate

accurately, thus further diluting the economic impact.


33/38


4. Mega sporting events can be understood to be more of self contained economic centers by

themselves. Businesses, firms, vendors who are allowed to display and sell their products,

often come within the premises of the event venues, and more often than not, may be total

outsiders to the hosting city’s or even country’s local economy. In such a case whatever

revenue generation is credited to such authorized firms, may not be a direct reflection of the

actual impact on the host economy.

5. The construction of new stadiums and facilities is often cited as an economic impact to the

host city. There is an important fact that is often overlooked in the zeal to go for a bid for a

mega sporting event. In many cases in the past games, it has been observed that a great

percentage of the newly constructed infrastructure remains unused after the conclusion of

the event, and only serves to add to the economic burden of the city in terms of maintenancecosts. If the new infrastructure is somehow re-used, or can exist with the existing local

economy in a symbiotic fashion, then its inclusion as an indicator of positive economic

impact is justified. If it does not result in a seamless integration with the city ’s economy,

then its actual economic impact needs to be revised and re-assessed accurately.

6. There are many hidden costs that are associated with holding an event. The point just

described above is a good example of a hidden cost, which incorporates the upkeep of the

constructions undertaken before beginning of the games. Another hidden costs relates to the

hotel infrastructure industry. Many hotels and restaurants undergo massive upgrades to their

existing amenities due to the holding of mega sporting event. After the event is concluded,

such additional facilities and amenities upgrades, may be rendered unusable due to

downward spiral of tourists. This has a negative impact on the hotel industry and the

assessment of its appropriate economic impact also proves to be a challenge.

7. When new facilities are constructed for the mega sporting events, they often involve a direct

impact on the economically backward sections of the society. Many times poor population

needs to be relocated to different areas, or the event may cause an un-affordable increase in

the rent of accommodation. If poorer sections of the society are relocated they may

introduce poverty, and other social problems in the destination area. Taxpayer is also


34/38


overburdened in this whole scenario, as to foot the costs of such a relocation, subsidies may

need to be granted to the poor, and additional transportation links and associated facilities

may need to be constructed. Often, the state government is directly involvement in the

eviction and relocation of the people, and it adds on to the existing burdens of the

administration. This results in an overall negative impact on the economy of the city, and

also poses a challenge in the accurate determination of the economic impact.

Chapter 11: Conclusion

Every city has its own reason to bid for a Mega sporting event. A supporting argument that is

often put forth in supporting the bid of a city in front its own populations, is that the city stands

to rise in status, and can climb to the unique club of global cities who have been actual hosts.


35/38


With the advent of globalization across the world, such an argument does hold some merit in the

perceived potential of the events to attract high degree of capital investments from around the

world, as well as a large amount for international tourists. However, it is increasingly being

argued that hosting of Mega sporting events such as the Olympics and the FIFA world cup

provides a very short lived impulse to the overall economy of the host cities, and to the country.

The long term benefits are rarely seen, as the impulse that was injected to the economy

eventually weakens over a period of time, and the economy once again returns to the same state

as it existed previously. It has been opined by many observers, as well as those who have been

closely associated in hosting of the games in their respective cities, that Olympics are not about

making a quick buck, and nor are they about real economic impact to the host cities. They are

more about being large scale mega corporate events, rather than events which actually benefit the

common man, or help in the development of the city and its institutions. Thus, Mega sporting

events are more of a mixed bag for any country that plans to host such an event. A careful

planning and analysis needs to be done on the best way to effectively utilize the resources during

such an event. Due care also needs to be taken that improvements so made during the event have

a long lasting legacy, and actually prove beneficial to the city and the country that hosts them.


36/38


References

Books

Humphreys, J. and Plummer, M. (1992). The economic impact on the state of Georgia of hosting the 1996

Summer Olympic Games. [Athens, Ga.]: Selig Center for Economic Growth, Terry College of Business,

University of Georgia.

Preuss, H. (2004). The economics of staging the Olympics. Cheltenham, UK: E. Elgar.

Hiller, H. (2012). Host cities and the Olympics. London: Routledge.

Davis, J. (2012). The Olympic Games effect. Singapore: John Wiley & Sons Singapore.

Gold, J. and Gold, M. (2007). Olympic cities. London: Routledge.

Dissertation

Bras, A., Cofiño, A., Nunnery, J. and Royce, C. (2016). Efficiency of the XXII Winter Olympic Games in

Sochi, Russia. Undergraduate. University of Florida.

Journals

Malfas, M., Houlihan, B. and Theodoraki, E. (2004). Impacts of the Olympic Games as mega-events.

Proceedings of the ICE - Municipal Engineer, 157(3), pp.209-220.

Green, D. (2003). Olympic impacts. Vancouver: Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, BC Office.

Kasimati, E. (2003). Economic aspects and the Summer Olympics: a review of related research.

International Journal of Tourism Research, 5(6), pp.433-444.

MMller, M. (n.d.). After Sochi 2014: Costs and Impacts of Russia's Olympic Games. SSRN Electronic

Journal.

Searle, G. (2002). Uncertain Legacy: Sydney's Olympic Stadiums. European Planning Studies, 10(7),

pp.845-860.


37/38


Haynes, J. (2001). SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE SYDNEY 2000 OLYMPIC GAMES. 1st ed.

[ebook] 2001 Seminar of the International Chair in Olympism. Available at:

http://olympicstudies.uab.es/pdf/od013_eng.pdf [Accessed 28 Feb. 2016]..

Giesecke, J. and Madden, J. (2011). Modelling the Economic Impacts of the Sydney Olympics in

Retrospect - Game Over for the Bonanza Story?*. Economic Papers: A journal of applied economics and

policy, 30(2), pp.218-232.

Gorlova, A. and Vidishcheva, E. (2013). The Financial Matter of Sochi XXII Winter Olympic Games.

European Journal of Economic Studies, 5(3), pp.156-158.

Maennig, W. and du Plessis, S. (n.d.). The 2010 World Cup High-Frequency Data Economics: Effects on

International Awareness and (Self-Defeating) Tourism. SSRN Electronic Journal.

Webliography

Sanburn, J. and Sanburn, J. (2016). London's Loss? Why Hosting the Olympics Is Bad Business. [online]

TIME.com. Available at: http://olympics.time.com/2012/07/26/londons-loss-why-hosting-the-olympics-

is-bad-business/ [Accessed 28 Feb. 2016].

Kcleconomics.com, (2016). Brazil and the World Cup’s economic impact – A look back | KCL EFS.

[online] Available at: http://kcleconomics.com/a-look-back-to-2014brazil-and-the-world-cups-economic-

impact/ [Accessed 28 Feb. 2016].

VOA, (2016). Mixed Opinions About World Cup Impact on Brazilian Economy. [online] Available at:

http://www.voanews.com/content/mixed-opinions-world-cup-impact-on-brazilian-

economy/1948184.html [Accessed 29 Feb. 2016].

WSJ, (2016). World Cup Hit Brazil’s Economy Hard. [online] Available at:

http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/07/18/world-cup-hit-brazils-economy/ [Accessed 28 Feb. 2016].

Harris, W. (2014). FIFA World Cup Financial Impact to Brazil Economy. [online] Business of Soccer.

Available at: http://www.businessofsoccer.com/2014/06/20/fifa-world-cup-financial-impact-to-brazil-

economy/ [Accessed 29 Feb. 2016].


38/38


International Business Times, (2014). The Economic Impact Of The Winter Olympics: Not Great For

Russia But Sochi Stands To Gain. [online] Available at: http://www.ibtimes.com/economic-impact-

winter-olympics-not-great-russia-sochi-stands-gain-1554153 [Accessed 1 Mar. 2016].

Fox News, (2014). Russia's $9.4B road to Sochi latest in long line of Olympic boondoggles | Fox News.

[online] Available at: http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2014/02/07/sochi-olympic-price-tag-soars-critic-

slams-road-that-could-have-been-paved-with.html [Accessed 1 Mar. 2016].

FIFA.com, (2010). Study reveals tourism impact in South Africa. [online] Available at:

http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/news/y=2010/m=12/news=study-reveals-tourism-impact-south-africa-

1347377.html [Accessed 1 Mar. 2016].

Bond, P. and Cottle, E. (2016). 1st ed. [ebook] CCS. Available at:

http://ccs.ukzn.ac.za/files/Bond%20Cottle%20World%20Cup%20economics.pdf [Accessed 1 Mar. 2016].

Southafrica.info, (2016). World Cup impact 'still massive'. [online] Available at:

http://www.southafrica.info/2010/2010spend-220410.htm#.VtXi0h_S3VN [Accessed 1 Mar. 2016].

The economic impact of the Olympic Games. (2004). 1st ed. [ebook] PricewaterhouseCoopers European

Economic Outlook. Available at:

http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~rosenl/sports%20Folder/Economic%20Impact%20of%20Olympics%20P

WC.pdf [Accessed 2 Mar. 2016].

NPR.org, (2011). The Economic Legacy Of Atlanta's Olympics. [online] Available at:

http://www.npr.org/2011/08/04/138926167/the-economic-legacy-of-atlantas-olympic-games [Accessed 4

Mar. 2016].

Olympics' impact on Atlanta still subject to debate. (1992). [online] tribunedigital-chicagotribune.

Available at: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-09-21/news/0909200352_1_centennial-olympic-

games-billy-payne-atlanta-committee [Accessed 4 Mar. 2016].

Documents

Economic Impact of Mega Sporting Events