Every loser wins: leveraging ‘unsuccessful’ Olympic bids for positive benefits

Abstract

Research Question:In what ways can cities leverage an unsuccessful Olympic Games bid to bring them positive benefits?Research Methods: A multiple case study approach using the bids of Cape Town and Toronto for the 2004 and 2008 Olympic Games, respectively. Interviews were conducted with 31 stakeholders across both bids; including 19 members of the respective bid teams and a further 12 interviews with external stakeholders. This data is supplemented by documentary analysis of candidate files, promotional materials and city/council documents.Results and Findings: Despite the differing political and social contexts of the two cities studied, both utilized similar leveraging strategies. The Olympic bid process focuses those in a city, bringing together coalitions, forcing a city to take stock of its current situation and brings national interest. The bid teams utilized the threat of not being successful to lever national government funding and created leveraging bodies to deliver the strategies. Implications:The implications of this study are twofold. First, it provides cities with insight into how even an unsuccessful Olympic bid can provide benefits. Crucially, only legitimate bidders contributing to already existing plans can access government funding. Second, this research contributes to the bidding literature, providing new empirical material derived using a diverse case study approach, and to the leveraging literature through adapting, extending and updating Chalip's (2004) conceptual model of event leverage.

Leveraging strategies of recurring non-mega sporting events for host community development: a multiple-case study approach

“…In particular, the focus is on mega-sporting events (e.g. Bason and Grix, 2020; Chen and Tian, 2015), which are used by politicians and event managers to justify sporting event bids.…”

Sports Mega-Events and Economic Growth: A Synthetic Control Approach

“…Accordingly, Maening and Richter observed no export effect claimed by Rose and Spiegel, neither for the actual hosts nor for the bidding countries. More recently, the issue of benefits even of unsuccessful bids was undertaken by Bason and Grix (2020) who argued that they may also be beneficial.…”

Understanding South Korea’s Use of Sports Mega-Events for Domestic, Regional and International Soft Power

“…Further, a state's soft power relates to its 'ability to achieve goals through attraction rather than coercion' [24] (p. 98), linking this concept to the notion of a 'politics of attraction' [25]. Such attraction, then, converts into power outcomes when those on the receiving end of the soft power strategy look to the state producing it for affirmation, guidance and leadership, or seek to imitate their domestic and/or international achievements [25] (see [9,13] for a thorough review of soft power).…”

“…With this, Kang and Kim [87] note that South Korea was trying to raise local residents' pride in the province, since showing consistency and resilience paid off and helped officials promote Pyeongchang to keep their promise to Gangwon residents [81]. It took a third bid for Pyeongchang to be awarded the rights to host the Winter Olympics, which is usually the case with many bidders [9].…”

“…Countries from every continent in the world (apart from Antarctica) and across a wide range of regime types (for example, democratic, illiberal, autocratic) have or will host an SME. There is a wide and growing literature on the so-called "legacies" that are thought to accrue from SMEs [5][6][7], and debates rage on whether such legacies can actually be "leveraged" through strategies developed prior to the event [8,9]. In general, the "legacies" that SMEs are said to bring range from economic benefits, a boost to tourism, international prestige, a feel-good factor among the home nation and urban regeneration [5,10].…”