Mega-Event: Urban Duality
When it comes to Mega-event and urban planning, the main question is whether hosting a ‘hallmark event’ is a ‘chance’ or a ‘disaster’ for cities. A careful examination also reveals a growing and genuine concern among host cities seeking to reconcile the economic lure of Mega-events with popular local priorities of sustainability and social development. Thus, in order to thoroughly understand this debate, first we should dismantle the main advantages (catalysing the urban development, economic growth, image improvement) and disadvantages (gentrification, pricing-out and displacing) of hosting these events for cities and citizens. The literature on ‘planning by hosting a spectacle’ suggests that the Games are increasingly neoliberal in their consequences for host cities; however, they can also play as a high-profile platform for marginalised communities to raise their voice and gain political power.
KeywordsNeoliberal urbanism Urban spectacle Place promotion Private sector
- Boykoff, J. (2014). Activism and the Olympics: dissent at the games in Vancouver and London. Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
- Castells, M. (1997). Power of identity: the information age: economy, society, and culture. Blackwell Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
- Cohen, P., and Watt, P. (2017). London 2012 and the post-Olympics City. Springer.Google Scholar
- Cottle, E. (ed.) (2011). South Africa’s World Cup: a legacy for whom? Scottsville, South Africa: University of KwaZulu-Natal Press.Google Scholar
- Eisinger, P. (2000). The politics of bread and circuses: building the city for the visitor class. Urban Affairs Review, 35(3), pp. 316–333.Google Scholar
- Flyvbjerg, B. (2011). Over budget, over time, over and over again: managing major projects. In: P. Morris, J. Pinto and J. Söderlund (eds.), The Oxford handbook of project management. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Gornostaeva, G. (2011). The Olympics’ employment and skills legacy: a literature review. University of Greenwich, Work and Employment Research Unit.Google Scholar
- Grabher, G., and Thiel, J. (2015). Perspectives in metropolitan research I.: self-induced shocks: mega-projects and urban development. Jovis Verlag GmbH.Google Scholar
- Gratton, C., et al. (2005). The economics of sport tourism at major sports events, pp. 233–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-7506-5937-6.50024-9.
- Gruneau, R., and Horne, J. (2015). Mega-events and globalization: capital and spectacle in a changing world order. Routledge.Google Scholar
- Hall, C. M. (1992). Hallmark tourist events: impacts, management and planning. Belhaven Press.Google Scholar
- Ibert, O. (2015). Out of control? Urban mega-projects between two types of rationality: decision and action rationality. In: Self-induced shocks: mega-projects and urban development. Berlin: Jovis, pp. 31–49.Google Scholar
- PricewaterhouseCoopers. (2011). Game on, mega-event infrastructure opportunities. [online]. Retrieved August 26, 2015, from https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/capital-projects-infrastructure/pdf/mega-events_with_abadie_change.pdf.
- Roche, M. (2002). Megaevents and modernity: Olympics and expos in the growth of global culture. Routledge.Google Scholar
- Vigor, A., et al. (2004). After the gold rush: a sustainable Olympics for London. IPPR.Google Scholar
- Watt, P., and Bernstock, P. (2017). Legacy for whom? Housing in post-Olympic East London. In: London 2012 and the post-Olympics city. Springer, pp. 91–138.Google Scholar