Estimating the Cost and Benefit of Hosting Olympic Games: What Can Beijing Expect from Its 2008 Games?

Industrial Geographer, The, Fall 2005 by Owen, Jeffrey G

Legacy effects listed in the Atlanta study emphasized three categories: facilities, media exposure for Atlanta and the state of Georgia, and community benefits. "The longterm beneficial effects on decisions regarding investment, trade, corporate relocation, government spending, convention sites, the location of major sporting events, and vacation plans will likely be among the most enduring, yet statistically untraceable, legacies of the Games" (Humphreys and Hummer 1995, p. 6).

The study also claims, "world-class facilities will be among the most enduring legacies of hosting the 1996 Olympics" (Humphreys and Hummer 1995, p. 4). The facilities noted by the study include the Horse Park, Shooting Range Complex, and Rowing Center; none of which are likely to be heavily used after the Games. The primary facility, Olympic Stadium, became the new home stadium for Atlanta Braves baseball. Instead of providing a venue of high quality and instant historical significance for future track athletes, the stadium now serves as yet another chapter in the story of public subsidies for professional sports teams. Overall, Baade and Matheson (2002) found "only 31 percent of the ACOG expenditures were in areas that could reasonable be expected to provide a measurable economic legacy" (p. 30).

Atlanta's media exposure from the Olympics was not all positive. Traffic problems were oft-cited during the first week, but then overshadowed by the Centennial Park bombing. "As a result of the traffic congestion, administrative problems, security breaches and over-commercialization, Atlanta did not receive the kind of media attention it would ideally have liked" (Essex and Chalkey 1998, p. 194).

Salt Lake City (Winter 2002)

The State of Utah included expected migration in its economics impact study of the 2002 Winter Games in Salt Lake City. The relationship between jobs and population growth was not lost on those who prepared Utah's economic impact report. In fact the job growth projections were used to estimate the population growth "based on the historical relationship between job growth and population growth" (p. 15). What was lost is that job creation is not necessarily a net benefit to the current residents of Utah if population growth absorbs the jobs.

Table 4 shows population and employment impacts from 1996 to March of 2002. There are roughly three new jobs available for every four migrants into Utah during this period, and about eleven jobs for every ten migrants between the ages of 18 and 65. Migrants of working age are projected to be slightly less than the number of new jobs created. If the majority of migrants between the ages of 18 and 65 plan to work, then most of the job creation due to the Olympics is countered by an increase in the labor force. The employment prospects of current residents of Utah improve only slightly.

The Utah study cites many of the same Olympic legacy effects as in the Atlanta study with one interesting difference. The Utah study surprisingly predicts population growth from the Olympics will be temporary, despite the transformational effect they will have on the economy. Instead, Olympics related migration into Utah "declines to zero within a year of the Games" (p. 2). Urban growth was already putting a strain on infrastructure and resources before the Games. Evidently the Olympic legacy that showcases your city to the world only attracts people when you want them to be there.