Baade R. A. and Matheson V. A. (2004) The quest for the cup: assessing the economic impact of the World Cup, Reg. Studies 38, 343-354. Hosting the World Cup, the world's second largest sporting event, is a potentially expensive affair. The co-hosts of the 2002 games, Japan and South Korea, spent a combined US$4 billion building new facilities or refurbishing old facilities in preparation for the event. An ex post analysis of the 1994 World Cup held in the US suggests that the economic impact of the event cannot justify this magnitude of expenditures and that host cities experienced cumulative losses of $5�5 to $9�3 billion as opposed to ex ante estimates of a $4 billion gain touted by event boosters. Potential hosts should consider with care whether the award of the World Cup is an honour or a burden.Sports, Soccer, Football, World Cup, Stadiums, Sports, 'Soccer', Football, Coupe du Monde Stades, Sport, Fussball, Weltmeisterschaftspokal Stadien, Deportes, Futbol, Copa del Mundo, Estadios,

In this paper, we explore the costs and benefits of hosting the Olympic Games. On the cost side, there are three major categories: general infrastructure such as transportation and housing to accommodate athletes and fans; specific sports infrastructure required for competition venues; and operational costs, including general administration as well as the opening and closing ceremony and security. Three major categories of benefits also exist: the short-run benefits of tourist spending during the Games; the long-run benefits or the “Olympic legacy” which might include improvements in infrastructure and increased trade, foreign investment, or tourism after the Games; and intangible benefits such as the “feel-good effect” or civic pride. Each of these costs and benefits will be addressed in turn, but the overwhelming conclusion is that in most cases the Olympics are a money-losing proposition for host cities; they result in positive net benefits only under very specific and unusual circumstances. Furthermore, the cost–benefit proposition is worse for cities in developing countries than for those in the industrialized world. In closing, we discuss why what looks like an increasingly poor investment decision on the part of cities still receives significant bidding interest and whether changes in the bidding process of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) will improve outcomes for potential hosts.

No abstract

ABSTRACT:Supporters of mega-sporting events such as the World Cup and Olympics claim that these events attract hoards of wealthy visitors and lead to lasting economic benefits for the host regions. For this reason, cities and countries compete vigorously for the right to stage these spectacles. Recently, developing countries have become increasingly vocal in demanding that they get the right to share in the economic benefits of these international games. China, for example, has been awarded the 2008Summer Olympics, and an African nation seems destined to host the 2010 World Cup. The specialized infrastructure and operating expenses required to host these events, however, can be extremely costly, and it is not at all clear that either the long or short-term benefits of the games are anywhere nearly large enough to cover these costs. This paper reviews other researchers' as well as our own previous work on mega-sporting events such as the Super Bowl and World Series as well as international events like the World Cup and Olympics. Independent researchers nearly unanimously find that boosters' projections of the economic impact of sporting events exaggerate the true economic impact of these competitions by a wide margin.In particular, in this paper we focus on the particular circumstances that face developing countries hosting these games. Our research suggests that in most cases mega-sporting events are an even worse investment for developing countries than for industrialized countries.

This paper examines taxable sales in the Los Angeles and Miami metropolitan areas to find evidence of the short- and long-run effects of the Rodney King riots and Hurricane Andrew on their respective economies. The comparison of these two events shows that the King riots had a long-term negative effect on Los Angeles' economy while Hurricane Andrew had a short-term positive effect on the Miami economy. The paper also applies the contrasting experiences of Los Angeles and Miami to New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina. In some ways, Katrina is a hybrid of these two events since it combines elements of both a natural disaster and a social disaster. The paper examines how Katrina is similar to each of the previous incidents and how these similarities might affect the recovery of New Orleans following the storm.