The Olympics

18 downloads 0 Views 456KB Size Report
willing to accept that the staging of an Olympic Games is acceptable. .... 2001). Recently FIFA made a ruling in relation to the women's football tournament of the first Youth. Olympic ... games is perhaps the most comprehensive (Preuss, 2004).
LENSKYJ, H. & WAGG, S. (eds.) 2011. A Handbook of Olympic Studies, Basingstoke: Palgrave. Chapter 34: The Olympics: Why we should value them Ian Henry

Preface I have accepted the invitation to write this chapter with guarded enthusiasm. My enthusiasm is a product not simply of an intrinsic interest in the project, but also of course in the subject matter, since like many writers on Olympic and sporting matters, whether proponents or critics (or both), I am a sports fan. My guardedness is a product of a recognition of the need to balance involvement and detachment in an Eliasian sense in relation to the subject matter (Elias, 1987). Not only am I a fan but I work in a system in which commentators such as Kevin Wamsley (2004: 233) point out that: A handful of scholars promote the idea of Olympism through their work at conferences, through research and writing, in the classroom. Essentially they suggest the Olympic project is worthwhile, the Olympic ideal is something tangible, and there is hope that the Olympic Games can create a better world … And that for many there is a vested interest in supporting such ideas: Without question, during the twentieth century thousands of athletes, coaches, spectators, even academics have benefited from their experiences, travel and fame or association with the Olympic project. There is perhaps more than a hint in Kevin Wamsley’s claims here that the judgment of those who defend the value or values of Olympism or the Olympic machine may be clouded by, at best naiveté, and at worst self interest. I therefore consider it appropriate to begin by indicating something of my own standpoint. I am currently the director of an Olympic Studies and Research Centre which is a partnership between the British Olympic Foundation (effectively the National Olympic Committee’s charitable and educational wing) and the University in which I am employed. Of course in such arrangements critical independence needs to be safeguarded (independence that is from pressures emanating from within the Olympic movement, or the within the university for that matter). The mechanism we adopted in setting up the Centre to guard against such pressures was to reflect in our governance agreement the fundamental tenet that authors or researchers who work on projects within the ambit of the Centre are expressing their own views (not those of the ‘Centre’) and that neither the Centre nor the University should be in a position to limit freedom of expression. Indeed the BOF and the Olympic movement more broadly does not provide financial support for the Centre which is self funded on the basis of research income from research councils, and governmental and non-governmental bodies (including Olympic bodies). It might be argued that researchers who rely on income from bodies which commission research would be unlikely to voice critical commentary. We leave those who might wish to make such judgements, to consider our work. However our aim is not simply to engage uncritically in the discourse(s) about the ‘ideals’ of Olympism to the detriment of critical discourses about Olympism. Our approach is one of critical engagement with Olympic

The Olympics: why we should value them – Ian Henry

Page 2

actors, whether this be at IOC level or at the level of grass roots projects, seeking to leverage benefits from the staging of the Games, and engaging with Olympic debates. This then is the background against which my commentary in the rest of this chapter is made. One final but important preliminary comment is that this penultimate chapter has been written without reference on the part of the author to the other chapters being provided in this book. The chapter does not therefore engage in debate about the arguments put forward earlier in this text, and should not be taken as a response to the arguments put forward by my fellow authors.

Introduction Like any informed reader I am intensely aware of the failings of some of the individuals and entities associated with the Games. Bidding scandals, environmental problems and waste, political abuses, athlete / coach / management cheating and drug abuse, economic mismanagement, and the bearing of local costs by the most vulnerable, these are undeniably issues which have to be addressed, and which have had a profoundly negative effect on the legitimacy of the Olympic movement. However I approach such matters in seeking to identify the conditions under which such opportunities for abuses can be negated and to define ways in which the product of Olympic activity can be used for positive gains. In short for me the glass is half full. I contrast this approach with that of some colleagues who, adopting a sincerely held, critical position to the Games, indicate that regardless of any changes to policy that might be made, none would satisfy them sufficiently to allow them to feel able to support the staging of the Games. In such circumstance there are by definition no conditions under which those holding this position would be willing to accept that the staging of an Olympic Games is acceptable. This position put me in mind of the debate about the old Marxist claim in relation to the capitalist state being a fatally flawed institution since it always acts in the interests of capital and to the detriment of working class interests. Opponents of the Marxist position would argue that there were clearly occasions in which the state acted in the interests of the working class as, for example, when the state taxed the wealthy to meet the costs of subsidised services. Here the Marxists would argue in reply that such ‘progressive’ taxation was introduced in order to protect the interests of capital by ensuring that social stability was not threatened by the distance between rich and poor in terms of life chances. Taken to its logical extreme this means that no action by the state (other than the rather unlikely action of the state overthrowing the capitalist system) would count as evidence, a counterexample, which would allow us to reject the claim that the state always acts in the interests of capital. Any seemingly progressive action could simply be explained away as buying off working class compliance with a system that allowed capital to continue to exploit its position. At this point it becomes impractical for Marxists and non-Marxists to engage in debate rather than taking entrenched positions. In the same manner the position of those opposed to staging the Games literally under any circumstances regardless of any specific conditions means that there is every likelihood that we will ‘talk past’ one another rather than critically engaging. Thus armed with the knowledge that for some critics I may never produce an account which can challenge their view that the Olympic movement is inevitably fatally flawed, I set out on my quest.

The Olympics: why we should value them – Ian Henry

Page 3

Six Significant Dimensions of the Arguments for the Costs and Benefits of the Olympic Games / Movement. In considering the case for the Olympic Games we will begin with a statement of why and in what ways the Olympic movement and its core activity, the Olympic Games are important. This can perhaps be best summarised along six dimensions, cultural, political, economic, social, environmental and sporting. Consideration of these dimensions provides arguments both for and against the wisdom of staging the Games. (a) The cultural dimension The cultural importance of the Games is evidenced in the claim by the IOC on the basis of ‘independent’ market assessments that the Olympic Games is the most watched cultural event in the world. Nielsen Intelligence (2008) claim that 4.7 billion people watched some element of the Beijing Games from a world population of 6.5 billion with 94% of the Chinese and S. Korean, and 93% of the Mexican viewing population tuning in. Much of the focus of interest is on the cultural events accompanying the Games (in particular the Opening Ceremony which tends to attract the highest viewing figures) rather than on the sports events themselves. As Maurice Roche points out the Games serve punctuate our existence (at least in peace time) in regular four year intervals in ways which provide a regular ‘chrono-cultural’ framework to our lives. Indeed Roche suggests that the enduring popularity of the Games derives from the significant positive and adaptive roles they continue to play in relation to the interpersonal and public structuring of time (Roche, 2003). Major events, in particular the Olympic Games, become part of a shared cultural memory, one which may be in part positive, in part negative, but which is undeniably significant. We take the Games to be cultural in the sense of reproducing and / or challenging meanings. Sometimes this is overt, as for example when sport is consciously used to promote particular political ideologies, perhaps most famously in the case of the Berlin Games of 1936, but also in the case of East German, Soviet and Cuban uses of sport to promote a positive view of their regimes, or indeed the use by business interests in the cases of Los Angeles and Atlanta to promote a positive view of what can be achieved in a liberal economy. Indeed the Olympic TOP sponsors literally buy into an association of their brands with aspects of the cultural meanings of the Games and the Olympic movement. Cultural meanings (positive and negative) are also conveyed unconsciously within the system, in for example messages in relation to gender, ethnicity, religion etc. In terms of race and geo-political contexts, the sports embraced by the Olympic movement and the governance of these sports (and of the IOC itself) are dominated by Western Europe and the United States. Non-western sport forms are rarely embraced by the Olympic movement and it is clear that Coubertin from the outset had a particular vision of imposing a Eurocentric model of Olympic sport on non-European peoples (Chatziefstathiou, Henry, Al-Tauqi and Theodoraki 2009). The Summer Games has incorporated only two non-Western sports1, judo and tae-kwando, but more recent attempts to introduce wushu in Beijing’s unsuccessful bid to host the 2000 Games engendered significant opposition (Ren, 2008, Brownell, 2008). The growing importance of the Olympic movement and its recognised sports (and their implicit promotion in for example Olympic Solidarity funding programmes) has also militated against the promotion, and, some would say has helped to threaten the survival, of indigenous

1

The origins of some sports such as football or golf may not be derived from the West (see for example FIFA’s recent recognition of the evidence of a form of football in China around 3,000 years ago (http://footballs.fifa.com/Football-Facts ) but its codification and modernisation are predominantly of recent and Western European provenance.

The Olympics: why we should value them – Ian Henry

Page 4

sports and games. The Euro-centric nature of the Olympic movement is also reflected in its leadership since all but one of the eight IOC presidents, has come from Western Europe, while the exception, Avery Brundage, was an American. In terms of gender, since Coubertin’s initial opposition to female participation in the Games, women’s participation has grown with accelerated efforts on the part of the IOC to foster greater equity in this respect (the proportion of female athletes participating in the Games has not yet reached 50% but grew from 14.2% in 1968 in Mexico City, to 25.8% in 1988 in Seoul, and 42.0% in Beijing in 2008. However not all signs are positive in respect of gender. Some sports, most notably beach volleyball, have rules which specify for example the wearing of particular types and shapes of clothing requiring the exposure of flesh to allow the sport to be ‘media friendly’ but which are culturally insensitive to the requirements of modesty for many Muslim women and others (Brooks, 2001). Recently FIFA made a ruling in relation to the women’s football tournament of the first Youth Olympic games which forbad the wearing of the headscarf by the Iranian female football team. This ruling was however subsequently, and fairly promptly, reversed on appeal by the Iranian Football Federation (Persian Football, 2010, Islamophobia Watch, 2010). A more marked phenomenon than underrepresentation of women in sports participation is that of female underrepresentation in executive decision-making in Olympic bodies. While the IOC has made efforts to address this issue by introducing minimum targets for the proportion of women on the Boards and Executive Committees of these bodies nevertheless it has remained a stubbornly difficult problem to resolve (Henry et al., 2004). Nevertheless the IOC has continued to generate action in relation to women’s election to key positions in Olympic bodies. The cultural messages conveyed by the Games and Olympic bodies can thus be problematic. However attempts to use the opportunity of the Games positively have been employed, a recent example being in the London bid to stage the 2012 Games which celebrated the city’s multicultural make-up as part of its bid. The London team in its presentation to the OC in Singapore in July 2005 included a significant delegation of young pupils from the five ‘Olympic Boroughs’ reflecting the local cultural diversity of the population. This was a visual reinforcement of the argument made by the bid team that the Games as a global event was most appropriately staged in a multicultural city like London which “welcomed integration” and would use the games to enhance social cohesion. By implication this message also made capital out of the ‘assimilationist’ philosophy (Henry et al., 2007) evident in the rival bidding city of Paris.2 Thus while it might be true that the Olympic Games, and for that matter the Paralympic Games can convey negative meanings and messages (Howe, 2008) this is not necessarily the case, and conscious use of Olympic phenomena as vehicles for progressive ideas in relation to gender and race in particular have been at least attempted.

2

The French Republican model of citizenship does not officially recognise the cultural diversity of its population, as evidenced, for example, in banning of the wearing of the veil in schools and other public spaces such as sports centres (VIVIAN, B. 1999. The veil and the visible. Western Journal of Communication, 63, 115139.). All citizens of France are ‘French’, and thus the French state in its censuses, unlike its British counterpart, has not differentiated its citizens by country of origin. Thus the British census has identified the number and location of British Indians, for example, while the French census gives us no data relating to French Algerians or French Tunisians (KASTORYANO, R. 2002. Negotiating Identities: states and immigrants in France and Germany, Princeton, New Jersey, Princeton University Press.)

The Olympics: why we should value them – Ian Henry

Page 5

(b) The Economic Dimension In economic terms it has been clear since the 1984 Los Angeles Olypics that there is potentially considerable financial value in hosting the Games. Of course the model on which the LA 1984 Games was built was one which emphasised private sector funding and the use of existing rather than new, purpose built facilities, a model which has not been fully emulated since (Preuss, 2004). The closest attempt to follow this model was unsurprisingly that of Atlanta, though this was deemed to be something of a problematic summer games (Senn, 1999). In most Olympic Games since 1984 newbuild facilities have predominated, resulting in considerable overspends, and in cases such as Sydney, Athens, and London there have been problems in attracting the projected levels of private investment (Cashman, 2006, Henry, 2009). Post-games under-utilisation is also a product of the new build approach. In relation to the economic impact of the games Holger Preuss’s account of the effects of hosting the games is perhaps the most comprehensive (Preuss, 2004). Preuss seeks to identify for previous editions of the Games, how costs and benefits to the host city should be conceptualised and measured. His analysis takes account not simply of the positive stimuli on demand in terms of consumption and investment, it also highlights the displacement or crowding out of investment and consumption. Preuss underlines the fact that in almost all cases the costs of staging the Games is much greater than originally calculated. This has proved to be the case in for example London where the original capital costs for the staging of the games was calculated as £2.4 bn. In 2003 but had increased to close to £9.4 bn. when reported in response to a parliamentary question in 2007 (British Library, 2010: p. 21). The issue of what should count as ‘Olympic expenditure’ (as opposed, to expenditure which took place at the point of the Games) is critical. Some projects such as transport or housing may well be investments that should and would have been made regardless of whether the Games were staged or not. In London for example the five Olympic Boroughs represent some of the poorest communities and some of the most environmentally degraded areas in the country. They represented the only remaining parts of London, for example, to have above-ground electricity pylons and power lines. Such costs as the burying of power lines should not be attributed to the Olympic budget. These types of investment have already been made in other communities because of local needs and without reference to an event such as the staging of an Olympics. Similarly provision of high speed transport links between central London and this deprived area of the metropolis should not be included in the costs attributed to the games. As Preuss (Preuss, 2004: p. 275) points out According to [Preuss’s] decision-making model …. for differentiating between Gamesrelated and non-Games related costs for facilities used during the Olympics, an OCOG should only have to cover the costs for temporary facilities, overlay and rent. Indeed, when calculation of the costs of hosting the Games is limited in this way to direct expenditure, Preuss argues that most recent host cities have made a profit from staging the Games. Of course regardless of the health of the bottom line of the balance sheet it may well be the case that any costs fall disproportionately on one group while benefits accrue to another. Blake (2005) for example in estimating the economic impact of the 2012 Games for the UK, calculates that while there may be an overall positive impact nationally of £2 bn., that this represented a very positive impact for the London Region of £6 bn. while other Home Countries and Regions would experience a negative impact of £4 bn. collectively.

The Olympics: why we should value them – Ian Henry

Page 6

(c) The Political Dimension The political significance to the host nation of staging the Games has been widely recognised, and in particular since the 1936 Berlin Olympics. Indeed the somewhat controversial decision to award the 2008 Games to Beijing was regarded by some as having echoes of the Berlin decision, though the issue of China’s human rights record is of a completely different order to that which resulted in the holocaust. It is clearly the case that from a Western standpoint on human rights (and indeed from what Western commentators would regard as a universal standpoint) China has failed to respect human rights. I have no intention here of defending the Chinese position though I do regard it as important that one should familiarise oneself with the Chinese case if one is to make an informed critique of China’s performance in this field (for such an account from a Western perspective see for example Gerald Chan’s review; Chan, 2006: pp. 177-8). Some Olympic apologists pointed, somewhat hopefully, in the run up to the Beijing Games to the rather opaque allusion made by the Chair of the Bidding Committee and Mayor of Beijing that winning the right to host the Games would “further development of our human rights cause” (quoted in Worden, 2008: p. 26), and indeed there was some opening up of access to regions which had previously been off limits to Western media. The Games, it was claimed might serve to make China more sensitive to criticism of its human rights record and thus likely to behave more ‘ethically’ in Western terms. This hope faded when protests by various groups most notably those from or on behalf of Tibet, the Uighur Muslim population of the Xinjiang Autonomous Region and the Falun Gong were met with a swift and occasionally brutal response (Worden, 2008). Thus, while it is certainly the case that huge change did not occur perhaps the most that could be claimed is that without the spotlight of the media being upon China an even more harsh response might have been adopted. However while China’s human rights record attracted protests in a range of international settings, most notably during the Olympic Torch relay, had the games been about to take place in leading Western nations similar protests might have been anticipated. The United States and Britain had attracted considerable opprobrium for what was widely seen as an illegal war in Iraq, and for the infringement of human rights in respect of holding prisoners without trial (Guantanamo Bay) and for the torture of such prisoners (for example in Abu Ghraib) . If then it becomes difficult to identify nations with an untainted record in respect of human rights should we discontinue the Games? Rather than seeing the Games as rewarding the poor record of China, Britain or the US in respect of human rights, these events might be seen as an opportunity to raise the profile of such criticisms in the public arena. In relation to the domestic political context, decisions about whether to bid for the games are required by the IOC to reflect local public opinion. In 2002 for example Berne withdrew its bid to stage the 2010 Winter Olympics following a negative vote in a local referendum (GamesBid.com, 2002). In most political systems however opinion polls are employed (with the IOC commissioning its own independent polls) to demonstrate majority support. An active and sizeable lobby group can be effective in mobilising sufficient opposition to the bid, as was the case for example in Toronto’s bid to host the 2008 Games (Lenskyj, 2000). The Games and the Olympic movement are however politically important to nation states in promoting their identity and legitimacy. The scramble by new NOCs in the first wave of decolonisation in Africa and Asia in the 1960s-1970s, and the subsequent decolonisation of the former Soviet republics or the Pacific Island states in the 1990s to gain recognition by the IOC bears testimony to the political significance of becoming part of the Olympic movement. Recognition by

The Olympics: why we should value them – Ian Henry

Page 7

the United Nations and by the IOC seem to be the twin pillars of political and cultural legitimacy most immediately sought by newly independent nation states.

(d) The Social Dimension The staging of the Games certainly has implications for the uneven dispersal of social and economic costs and benefits. One of the difficulties to be faced is that even where a majority may support the bid, the costs of making the bid fall disproportionately on some of the more vulnerable groups. The United Nations Human Rights Council makes this clear in a report on the impact of mega-event on local housing and the displacement of populations (United Nations, 2009). The Centre for Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE) based in Geneva claims in a report on housing rights that the Olympic Games have displaced more than two million people in the last 20 years, disproportionately affecting the homeless, the poor, and minorities such as Roma and African-Americans (Centre for Housing Rights and Evictions, 2007), and concludes with a range of recommendations to be adopted by bodies such as the IOC and host cities responsible for staging the Games. Of course insensitive application of development projects is not a phenomenon restricted to the case of the Olympics, nor is the possibility of applying good practice infeasible for Olympic developers. However, it may well be the case that insensitive planning and implementation is fostered by the relatively rapid development associated with the tight seven year planning cycle from acceptance of a successful bid to the hosting of the Games. Nevertheless is the issue here less an Olympic issue as such than an issue for how interests are dealt with more generally in redevelopment projects? For example the account of development interests at play in the Vancouver bid provided by Shaw (2008) makes the claim that the interests of large-scale and local capital were disproportionately favoured. However the urban political economy and urban studies literature is replete with such critiques of development projects which are not associated with megaevents but which make similar claims (Barlow, 1995). Is it the case that such undemocratic and unjust outcomes are the product of a lack of legal protection of weaker interests in development in general? Or is it the case that the Olympic system, because of its need for speedy, on-time delivery of infrastructure, is simply unable to respect citizen’s rights? One might wish to agree with many of the aspects of the claims that suggest Olympic projects have been inappropriately implemented and have infringed the rights of groups of citizens, but still wish to disagree with concluding that the Olympic delivery system is inevitably fatally flawed. The Centre for Housing Rights and Evictions (Centre for Housing Rights and Evictions, 2007) for example tries to set out in the final sections of its report the conditions which should prevail for the organisers to meet appropriate standards for fair and just development strategies. Critical analyses of poor practice in the Olympics, and indeed any urban development project, perform an important service. However if the ends of urban development in some critical respect are feasible and desirable (as they should be in terms of enhancing the life chances of the local population in the East London boroughs with the London 2012 development), then positive proposals for desirable means by which such desirable ends are to be achieved perform a potentially even more valuable role.

(e) The Environmental Dimension A major critique of staging the Games relates to the environmental costs of the event and its infrastructure. Stadia, access and transport improvements are often built quickly with significant environmental costs. In particular waste is incurred when the stadium capacities, or the specialist

The Olympics: why we should value them – Ian Henry

Page 8

facilities, required for the Games are in excess of anything that might regularly be required subsequently. Post-Games use of the facilities in Sydney, Athens and Beijing have been subject to considerable criticism with Athens in particular manifesting the consequences of overprovision with brand new facilities falling into disrepair through underuse (Ringas, 2008). In Sydney there was something of a post-games panic about how to bring the out-of-city Homebush site into wider use (Cashman, 2006), and in Beijing the principal post-Games use of the centre piece elements of the Olympic Green, the ‘Bird’s Nest Stadium’and the ‘Watercube’ swimming and diving facility has been for domestic tourism rather than the staging of sporting events3 (Xu and Chisholm, 2009), with a prospective anchor tenant (a Chinese professional football club, Beijing Guo’an) withdrawing because of its embarrassment in trying to fill an 80,000 capacity stadium given an average home gate of 10,000) (Demick, 2009). In 2009 it was announced that the area surrounding the Olympic stadium would be converted into an entertainment and shopping zone (ABC News / Associated Press, 2009). However though there are significant examples of poor practice in relation to post-Games usage and the unrealistic claims made in this respect, good practice is possible. The enhancing of the physical, social and economic environment of London’s Olympic site is seen as a critical condition for successful regeneration of the area. Positive post-Games use of the core Olympic facility (which will be reduced in size after the Games from a capacity of 80,000 to less than 40,000) is seen as a key goal with negotiations underway for an anchor tenant in the form of a Premiership football club in partnership with a local authority (Hayman, 2010). Plans to develop a world class sport and health education and research facility on site post-Games are underway, as well as for education and other social and economic services for the local community which has been both subject to poverty and lacking in terms of service provision on many of the indicators of deprivation commonly employed in UK planning (Garlick, 2009, Hayman, 2009). Thus the enhancement of the physical environment planned for the areas around the Olympic site, and the related social and economic goals are key. Of course plans and priorities are not without controversy, particularly in the light of the unfolding global economic crisis, but socially and environmentally progressive goals are to the fore, even though economic strictures may limit the ability to pursue some environmental goals. The IOC has since the Winter Games in Lillehammer and the Summer Games of Sydney placed increasing emphasis on bidding cities spelling out the environmental dimension of the impact of their plans. The problem is that once the contract between bidding city and the IOC is signed it becomes increasingly difficult to insist on the delivery of some of these promises, and to a degree the IOC thus becomes dependent on the strength of local stakeholders to hold city and national governments to their promised commitment in this respect.

(f) The Sporting Dimension The United Nations in its Declaration of the Rights of the Child recognised the right to play and recreation (United Nations, 1959), while the IOC advocates extending this to a universal right to all to sport.

3

Interestingly an article on the BOCOG website entitled ‘Architect: After-Games use is taken into consideration’ actually makes no mention at all of post-Games usage (BEIJING ORGANISING COMMITTEE FOR THE OLYMPIC GAMES. 2006. Architect: After-Games use is taken into consideration [Online]. Beijing: BOCOG. Available: http://en.beijing2008.cn/63/44/article212044463.shtml [Accessed 4 April 2010].

The Olympics: why we should value them – Ian Henry

Page 9

The practice of sport is a human right. Every individual must have the possibility of practising sport, without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play. (InternationaI Olympic Committee, 2007: p. 7) Of course there will be those who suggest that the actual operation of the Olympic system militates against “mutual understanding, … friendship, solidarity and fair play” since what is referred to here are western sports, and sports in which certain nation-states enjoy built in advantages through their access to sports science and technology, facilities for training, and through cultural resources or cultural barriers. I will place these arguments to one side for the moment since although these are significant issues which may require their own solutions (see for example Sigmund Loland's advocacy of equity in access to technology in sport: Loland, 2002), I will restrict myself here to considering the claims that elite performance in the Olympic Games promotes participation in mass sport. There are in fact relatively few studies which directly address this issue, and of those which do the evidence provided is of limited quality. In a recent systematic review of the literature entitled ‘The health and socioeconomic impacts of major multi-sport events: systematic review (1978-2008)’ McCartney et al. (2010) review the evidence in the literature concerning the health and participation impacts of the Games. The systematic review process was reasonably thorough, searching the following sources: Applied Social Science Index and Abstracts (ASSIA), British Humanities Index (BHI), Cochrane database of systematic reviews, Econlit database, Embase, Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) database, Health Management Information Consortium (HMIC) database, International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS), Medline, PreMedline, PsycINFO, Sociological Abstracts, Sportdiscus, Web of Knowledge, Worldwide Political Science Abstracts, and the grey literature. However, this identified only four studies which related to the impact of the games on participation in sport (MORI., 2004, Truno, 1995, Brown et al., 2004, Newby, 2003), One study reported that overall sports participation (four or more times in the past four weeks, except walking) decreased in the Manchester area of the UK by 2% after the 2002 Commonwealth Games, and that the gap in participation rates between individuals in affluent areas and those in deprived areas widened significantly (MORI., 2004). On the other hand, there was an upward trend in sports participation from the early 1980s until 1994 in association with the 1992 Olympic Games in Barcelona, Spain (Truno, 1995) A second study examining the 2002 Commonwealth Games in Manchester suggested that it was difficult to reap sports legacy gains in this case because of problems with funding and capacity, the exclusion of voluntary groups from using event branding, and a failure to retain key staff after the games. It was also suggested that the provision of new sports facilities benefited elite athletes after the event more than the host population (Brown et al., 2004). However, satisfaction with green spaces in Manchester did increase after the event (from 28% to 75%) (Newby, 2003). The provision of elite facilities for shared use with the community resulting in decreased levels of participation is a finding which echoes Peter Taylor’s conclusions in respect of Sheffield and swimming participation rates following the city’s investment in a major central facility for both competition and recreational swimming when preparing to stage the World University Games in 1991. The construction of the new facility was in part paid for by the savings from closure of aging community swimming pools which were located in working class communities. Participation in swimming fell in the city in the mid-1990s against the national trend and Taylor attributes this to increased travel and entry costs, and to user frustration at partial closure of facilities whenever a major swimming event was to be staged in the city (Taylor, 1998).

The Olympics: why we should value them – Ian Henry

Page 10

One of the critical limiting factors identified by McCartney et al in their review of impact studies was that such studies tended to be cross sectional rather than longitudinal and that no comparator groups were built into the research design. One of the few studies which has used a longitudinal approach is that of Dawson (2010) whose initial results at least suggest a relationship between participation and the winning of the Olympic bid for 212 in 2005. Perhaps the most sustained effort to review the data on participation impacts for a specific Games is that of Tony Veal and his colleagues (Veal et al., 2009, Veal and Frawley, 2009). These studies which focus on estimation of the impact of the Sydney Games on participation in Australia point to (a) the difficulties of making claims on the basis of government statistics over the period before and after the Games since the indicators of participation used by government for measuring participation changed over time; but that (b) even the imperfect data available would appear to indicate that, if anything, it was non-Olympic sports which increased in participation rather more than Olympic sports, some of which may even have experienced declining levels of participation. Although McCartney et al., Veal et al. and Weed et al. (Weed et al., 2009) all manifest a lack of enthusiasm for the case with regard to the case for stimulation of participation by the hosting of mega-events in general and the Olympics in particular, there are perhaps two points to emphasise. The first is that they conclude that the case is “not proven” rather than rejected. The second is that even if there is a potential link, exposure to an elite performance will not of itself be likely to generate participation unless measures are adopted to leverage that increased participation. In other words the question policy makers and researchers might usefully address is not whether hosting the Games will enhance recreational sporting participation rates but rather what should be done (in the form of policies, projects, promotional campaigns etc.) to promote increased participation. In other words the question is not whether increased participation has occurred as a matter of happenstance in the past, but rather one of what measures might be taken to seek to ensure that this does happen in the future.

Conclusions My approach to maintaining a case for the Games has been to identify, admittedly in short hand, those dimensions along which the debate between critics and supporters of the staging of the Games has been waged. Critics will argue that in cultural terms negative messages relating to gender or post-colonial / Orientalist imagery have been promoted. In economic terms they may argue that the cost of staging the Games, problems of gigantism, and the redistribution of economic benefits generate waste and inequity. In social terms the Games may promote social ills such as the displacement, in particular of vulnerable populations. In environmental terms there may be significant negative impacts for example on carbon emissions in the construction of facilities, delivery of services, and the travel of participants and spectators. In sporting terms there may be little evidence of the positive impact of exposure to elite performance on recreational participation. All of this of course is in the context of a track record of an Olympic movement which has been subject to corruption on the part of some of its members and associates. These negative conclusions are not claims that I wish to dismiss, but my arguments is that these conditions need not prevail. Simply to throw up ones hands in horror, saying that because the Olympic project like most human projects has been subject to serious flaws the project has to be abandoned, is not the only possible response. One might for example have the same reaction in relation to the United Nations as an institution, or the international aid system. Abandoning these projects is not regarded by most commentators as a desirable or viable option. Our approach with these latter institutions is to seek to find ways of improving their governance systems, and their

The Olympics: why we should value them – Ian Henry

Page 11

mode of delivery to ensure that as far as possible the positive aims of such systems are realised while the negatives are minimised or eliminated. We can use the Games to promote positive cultural messages such as positive inter-cultural engagement. The examples of sensitive adjustment of the laws in relation to clothing which take account of the cultural norms and needs of various groups represents a positive step forward in terms of sensitising western sensibilities to the need to think beyond western norms. The delivery of initiatives such as the International Inspiration programme (UK Sport, 2008) with its focus on, for example, aiding the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals, can, if it is able to steer between the dangers of cynical self interest, and post-colonial paternalism, result in mutual benefits. In political terms although he Berlin Games may provide a shocking example of what can happen in terms of the hijacking of the Games by political interests, it is also clear that the sporting world helped to deliver (albeit reluctantly on the part of some, such as Avery Brundage) an anti-apartheid campaign which helped to bring about positive change in South Africa. In economic terms there are massive costs associated with staging the Games. However in many instances the costs of the Games are calculated in ways which ignore the context. In Barcelona and East London for example there were changes to the transport infrastructure and to the physical environment which were regarded as essential, whether or not the Games were to be staged. It is unthinkable that the UK government and the City of London could have left the area which became the Olympic zone to descend further into economic, social and environmental dilapidation and deprivation. Thus to describe such costs as ‘Olympic costs’ is entirely misleading. Of course large scale development projects do have environmental implications and these should be addressed, and it is to the Olympic movements credit that such issues are on the agenda, and environmental impact is a criterion for judging candidatures for hosting the Games. Critics might argue they are not taken seriously enough, though this may be the case of other forms of development also, and is an argument for improving environmental accountability rather than necessarily abandoning forms of urban development. In the same way protecting the interests of the socially most vulnerable is a crucial requirement of any development project and though it may be more critical in the case of the rapid development cycle of the Olympics it is not beyond the wit of politicians and planners to derive just means for deciding between incompatible interests – indeed it is an essential task in any development project. In terms of sporting impact of the Games my view is that the major effort should not be on whether data from the past is robust enough to demonstrate that increased participation has occurred (‘naturally’) but rather should be on ways in which the benefits of increased participation might be leveraged given the public focus on, and fascination with, the Games. The Olympic Games has been an imperfect phenomenon, dogged with problems of poor governance which had left leeway for the bribery of some IOC members, with corrupted values in for example or the doping of athletes, and with negative economic, social and environmental impacts of staging the games. These problems at least are recognised and are being addressed by various parties within and outside the Olympic movement, and though there may be ongoing imperfections in the way the new Olympic governance system, or the world anti-doping system, operate, or in the efforts to deal with problems such as gigantism and post-Games usage of facilities, I find these more compelling as arguments for tightening up the rules and processes of bidding and staging the Games, and the moral norms and cannons of Olympic competition, than for abandoning the attempt to celebrate what for many is the pinnacle of human physical endeavour in the field of sport conducted within the context of Olympism which is not present in any other global sporting contest. The Olympic Games takes place in a world which is subject to increasing change in terms of speed and scope and in Habermasian terms the increased interaction between (and within) cultures requires not simply political and economic institutional avenues, such as the UN and WTO or World Bank, for communicative action and the discursive construction of general ethical standards at the inter and

The Olympics: why we should value them – Ian Henry

Page 12

intra-societal levels (Habermas, 1990), the world also requires cultural institutions which allow the development of forms of cultural engagement and consensus. In principle the Olympics retains a potential for such ends which is virtually unique.

References

ABC NEWS / ASSOCIATED PRESS. 2009. Beijing’s Bird’s Nest to anchor shopping complex. AP News [Online], 30 January 2009. [Accessed 4 April 2010]. BARLOW, J. 1995. The Politics of Urban-Growth - Boosterism and Nimbyism in European Boom Regions. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 19, 129-144. BEIJING ORGANISING COMMITTEE FOR THE OLYMPIC GAMES. 2006. Architect: After-Games use is taken into consideration [Online]. Beijing: BOCOG. Available: http://en.beijing2008.cn/63/44/article212044463.shtml [Accessed 4 April 2010]. BLAKE, A. 2005. The Economic Impact of the London 2012 Olympics. Nottingham: Nottingham University BRITISH LIBRARY. 2010. Olympics 2012: Parliamentary questions select bibliography. Sport and Society: The Summer Olympics through the lens of social science [Online]. Available: http://www.bl.uk/sportandsociety/exploresocsci/parlaw/parliament/articles/questions.pdf [Accessed 10 June 2010]. BROOKS, C. M. 2001. Using sex appeal as a sport promotion strategy. Women in Sport & Physical Activity Journal, 10, 1-16. BROWN, A., MASSEY, J. & PORTER, C. 2004. The sports development impact of the 2002 Commonwealth Games: post games report. . Manchester: Institute for Popular Culture, Manchester Metropolitan University,. BROWNELL, S. 2008. Beijing's Games: what the Olympics mean to China, Pymouth, Rowman and Littlefield. CASHMAN, R. 2006. The Bitter-Sweet Awakening: The Legacy of the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games, Petersham, NSW, Walla Walla Press in conjunction with the Australian Centre for Olympic Studies, University of Technology, Sydney. CENTRE FOR HOUSING RIGHTS AND EVICTIONS 2007. Fair Play for Housing Rights: Mega-Events, Olympic Games and Housing Rights. Geneva: COHRE. CHAN, G. 2006. China's Compliance in Global Affairs: trade, arms control, environmental protection, human rights., Singapore, World Scientific. DAWSON, P. 2010. Hosting Major Sporting Events and Participation in Sport: A Longitudinal Perspective. Visiting Lecture Series. Loughborough: Centre for Olympic Studis and Research, Loughborough UNiversity. DEMICK, B. 2009. Beijing's Olympic building boom becomes a bust. Los Angeles Times [Online], February 22, 2009. [Accessed 4 April 2010]. ELIAS, N. 1987. Involvement and Detachment. Contributions to the Sociology of Knowledge, Oxford, Blackwell. GAMESBID.COM. 2002. Berne Officially Withdraws Bid. Available: http://www.gamesbids.com/eng/index.php?news=1033135422 [Accessed 18 May 2010].

The Olympics: why we should value them – Ian Henry

Page 13

GARLICK, R. 2009. Games deal to close poverty gap [Online]. London: Regeneration and Renewal. Available: http://www.regen.net/resources/bigIssues/article/949687/Games-deal-closepoverty-gap/ [Accessed 4 April 2010]. HABERMAS, J. 1990. Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action, Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press. HAYMAN, A. 2009. Games framework sets out targets to 2030 [Online]. Regeneration and Renewal. Available: http://www.regen.net/resources/bigIssues/article/966780/Games-frameworksets-targets-2030/ [Accessed 4 April 2004]. HAYMAN, A. 2010. West Ham and Newham make joint Olympic Stadium bid [Online]. London: Regen.net. Available: http://www.regen.net/resources/bigIssues/article/992510/West-HamNewham-joint-Olympic-Stadium-bid/ [Accessed 4 April 2010]. HENRY, I. 2009. Strategies of the 2012 London Olympic Games in an Era of Global Economic Depression. Asian Association of Sport Management. Taipei: Taiwan Naitonal Sport University HENRY, I., AMARA, M. & AQUILINA, D. 2007. Multiculturalism, interculturalism, assimilation and sports policy in Europe. Transnational and Comparative Research in Sport: Globalisation, Governance and Sport Policy. London: Routledge. HENRY, I. P., RADZI, W., RICH, E., THEODORAKI, E. & WHITE, A. 2004. Women, Leadership, and the Olympic Movement, Loughborough, Institute of Sport & Leisure Policy, Loughborough University and I.O.C. HOWE, P. D. 2008. The Cultural Politics of the Paralympic Movement: Through the Anthropological Lens London, Routledge. INTERNATIONAI OLYMPIC COMMITTEE 2007. Olympic Charter. Lausanne: InternationaI Olympic Committee. ISLAMOPHOBIA WATCH. 2010. FIFA lifts ban on Iranian girls football team [Online]. Islamophobia Watch. Available: http://www.islamophobia-watch.com/islamophobia-watch/2010/5/1/fifalifts-ban-on-iranian-girls-football-team.html [Accessed 1 May 2010]. KASTORYANO, R. 2002. Negotiating Identities: states and immigrants in France and Germany, Princeton, New Jersey, Princeton University Press. LENSKYJ, H. 2000. Inside the Olympic industry : power, politics, and activism, Albany ; [Great Britain], State University of New York Press. LOLAND, S. 2002. Technology in sport: Three ideal-typical views and their implications. European Journal of Sport Science, 2, 1 - 11. MCCARTNEY, G., THOMAS, S., THOMSON, H., SCOTT, J., HAMILTON, V., HANLON, P., MORRISON, D. S. & BOND, L. 2010. The health and socioeconomic impacts of major multi-sport events: systematic review (1978-2008). BMJ, 340, c2369-. MORI. 2004. The sports development impact of the Commonwealth Games 2002—post-games research. Final report. Research study conducted for UK Sport in Greater Manchester, Blackburn, Congleton and Liverpool. . London: UK Sport. NEWBY, L. 2003. To what extent have the Commonwealth Games accelerated the physical, social, and economic regeneration of East Manchester? Glasgow: University of Glasgow. PERSIAN FOOTBALL. 2010. FIFA ban Iranian women football national team [Online]. Persian Football. Available: http://www.persianfootball.com/live/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=272 4:fifa-ban-iranian-women-football-national-team&catid=17:asian-competitions&Itemid=176 [Accessed 1 May 2010]. PREUSS, H. 2004. The economics of staging the Olympics : a comparison of the Games 1972-2008 Cheltenham Edward Elgar. REN, H. 2008. Embracing Wushu: globalisation and cultutral diversification of the Olympic Movement. In: PRICE, M. & DAYAN, D. (eds.) Owning the Olympics: narratives of the new China. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

The Olympics: why we should value them – Ian Henry

Page 14

RINGAS, C. 2008. Greece assesses costs, benefits of Athens Olympiad. South East European Times [Online], 7 August 2008. Available: http://www.setimes.com/cocoon/setimes/xhtml/en_GB/features/setimes/features/2008/0 8/07/feature-02 [Accessed 1 May 2010]. ROCHE, M. 2003. Mega-events, time and modernity - On time structures in global society. Time & Society, 12, 99-126. SENN, A. 1999. Power, Politics and the Olympic Games: a history of the power brokers, events, and controversies that shaped the Games, Champaign, Ill. SHAW, C. 2008. Five Ring Circus: myths and realities of hte Olympic Games, Gabriola Island BC., New Socieity Publishers. TAYLOR, P. Year. Sports Facility Development and the Role of Forecasting: A Retrospective on Swimming in Sheffield. In: GRATTON, C. & HENRY, I., eds. Sport in the City, 1998 Sheffield. TRUNO, E. 1995. Barcelona: city of sport. . Barcelona: Centre d’Estudis Olimpics, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona. UK SPORT. 2008. UK Leads 'International Inspiration' as Developing Countries Get Sporting Boost [Online]. London: UK Sport. Available: http://www.uksport.gov.uk/news/uk_leads_international_inspiration/ [Accessed 3 April 2010]. UNITED NATIONS 1959. Declaration on the Rights of the Child. New York: United Nations. UNITED NATIONS 2009. Report of the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living, and on the right to non-discrimination in this context, Raquel Rolnik. Report of the Human Rights Council to teh General Assembly of the UN. New York: United Nations VEAL, A. & FRAWLEY, S. 2009. ‘Sport for All’ and Major Sporting Events: Trends in Sport Participation and the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games, the 2003 Rugby World Cup and the Melbourne 2006 Commonwealth Games. School of Leisure, Sport and Tourism Working Papers. Sydney: Australian Centre for Olympic Studies, School of Leisure, Sport and Tourism, Faculty of Business, University of Technology Sydney. VEAL, A. J., FRAWLEY, S., TOOHEY, K. & CASHMAN, R. 2009. 'Sport for All" and major sporting events: Project paper 1: Introduction to the project. School of Leisure, Sport and Tourism: Working Paper Series. Sydney: University of Technology Sydney. VIVIAN, B. 1999. The veil and the visible. Western Journal of Communication, 63, 115-139. WAMSLEY, K. 2004. Laying Olympism to Rest. In: BALE, J. & CHRISTENSEN, M. K. (eds.) PostOlympism? Questioning sport in the Twenty First Century. Oxford: Berg. WEED, M., COREN, E., FIORE, J., MANSFIELD, L., WELLARD, I., CHATZIEFSTATHIOU, D. & DOWSE, S. 2009. A Systematic Review of the Evidence Base for Developing a Physical Activity and Health Legacy from the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games. Canterbury: Centre for Sport, Physical Education & Activity Research (SPEAR), Canterbury Christ Church University. WORDEN, M. (ed.) 2008. China's Great Leap: the Beijing Games and Olympian Human Rights Challenges, New York: Seven Stories Press. XU, P. & CHISHOLM, M. 2009. China tourists twig to Beijing's Bird's Nest. Reuter's News Agency [Online]. Available: http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE53L10L20090422 [Accessed 4 April 2010].