Impact of Global Mega Events on Countries

Introduction

Global events refer to events which held for a limited time duration but have global reach and need huge public investment furthermore it has an enormous effect on the people of the host country and their environment (Rojek, 2013). The Olympics, Commonwealth Games, ICC World Cup Cricket etcetera are examples of global mega-events because of the enormous scope and huge nature of the events. These events are arranged after a specific interval in which some countries bid to get the opportunity of arranging the events. To arrange these mega-global events, countries need a huge amount of investment, arrange accommodations for a huge amount of tourists from other countries and build infrastructure for the games and events. Global mega-events have both positive and negative impacts on the economic, social and ecological environment of a country.

You may also feel interested to read similar blogs:
Consumer Behaviour and Insights in Hospitality Industry
Importance of Managing Service Quality in the Tourism Sector
Customer Service Management of Premier Inn
Resort Management Strategies of One&Only
Sustainable Tourism Planning for Costa Rica

Host countries get instant results from global mega-events but it can bring long negative impacts for the country also. For instance, the stadium and big buildings constructed for the Olympics 2012 is in unused condition and which refers to a huge waste of the investment of the country. The events have positive impacts also such as London becoming capable of creating thousands of job opportunities for the unemployed people and earning excess money from the visitors who came to take part in the event. The social impact of the events is also positive because the host country can present their culture to foreigners. Still, the ecological effect of the events is destructive because it pollutes the environment of the country.

Impact of Global Mega Events on Countries:

Arranging mega events like Olympic Games influences a country in various viewpoints like political influence, social influence, economic influence, ecological influence, reputation and others (Dick and Wang, 2010). In this part of the report, the ecological, economic and social influence of arranging mega events are evaluated.

Economic influences of arranging Olympics

It is found in research that mega events such as Olympic Games influence a country in both positive and negative ways (Tien and Lin, 2011). Positive influences of the Olympic game are so many such as many unemployed employees getting employed, the government developing the infrastructure of a country where these types of events take place and many other positive impacts. On the other hand, negative influences of the Olympic game are: the culture of the country get hampered, people’s expenses from taxes increase, the environment of the country get harmed and many other impacts.

Positive economic influences of the Olympics arranged in London:

Work opportunity:

One of the most significant positive influences of the Olympics is it creates job opportunities for many unemployed people. 2012 Olympics created 100,000 jobs in London and all of them were responsible for the arrangement of the Olympics directly (Questia, 2020). For that reason amount of jobless people has reduced to 7.9% and it refers to the great amount of unemployment that was removed by the event. By preventing unemployment in huge amounts, the event has contributed positively to London’s economy and made the unemployed people capable to maintain their living standards. As a result, expenditures of the people have increased and they consume money to fulfil their demands which also contributes to London’s economy.

Customers’ spending:

The Olympic game increased customers’ spending in London’s economy which contributed to the country’s economy. The income of the residents of London increased because of the Olympics, customers spent in the economy and economic output increased. Local expenditures also increase in mega global events like the Olympics because house owners fix their houses for giving rent, and service providers deliver more customer-focused services to the travellers of the foreign country. Customers’ spending was increased to £804 million and economic output increased to £1.21 billion (Around The Rings, 2020). Visitors’ spending also increased to £3.54 million and residents of London’s income increased because they earned more wages, higher revenue from home rent and sell from different services and products (Around The Rings, 2020).

Because of the Olympics, more tourists visited London and spent £749 million which refers to an increased rate of tourist spending by about 18% (Around The Rings, 2020). During the seven-week, Olympic game period, the output of London’s economy increased to £1.21 billion and it indicates the great economic development of London which occurred because of the Olympics (Around The Rings, 2020). The economic legacy which occurred by the Olympics remained from 2013 to 2015; hotels and high street retailers got highly benefited from the economic legacy.

All the above-stated evaluation of valuable and authentic data shows the great influence of the Olympics on London’s economy and the impacts that lasted a long in the country.

The negative economic influence of the Olympics arranged in London:

One of the key negative influences of hosting such mega events is that planners do not show a good attitude when they collect money from different taxpayers of the country where the event will be organized (Xie and Sinwald, 2016). Opposite parties who do not support the events say that such events waste the money of common people and the investment does not bring remarkable development in the economy (Yolal et al., 2016). It happened in the case of the Olympics 2012 because a huge amount was invested in the mega event and the amount was $14.8 billion (Newman, 2020). Some news media and people claimed that the organizer of the Olympics did not utilize the money which was earned by the common people.

The building, constructions and facilities built for mega global events cannot be used for other works which are a waste of money (Sterken, 2012). This fact was happed in the Olympics 2012 and the infrastructure, buildings, and facilities built for the event are not used in other work which refers to a waste of investment. In London, some high-rising buildings were built for the event and these buildings are hardly used for any work which refers to the proof of the claim that the money of taxpayers’ is wasted through this type of mega-events.

Ecological influences of Olympics:

It is found that arranging global mega-events is not good for the environment because it has negative impacts on the environment of the country. In the country where the Olympics takes place, the environment of the country gets polluted. These types of mega events create sound pollution, air pollution, land pollution and water pollution. People of the country where mega events happen reconstruct their buildings, facilities and infrastructures and all of these steps pollute soil and land enormously. London has to accommodate so many new visitors across the world and arranged transportation facilities for them which polluted the air (Paquette, Stevens and Mallen, 2011). Hotels had to arrange spaces for the thousands of visitors and facilities of extra air and water for them which refers to the higher consumption of the resources.

In London, 470,000 people including visitors, athletes and media members have visited to participate in the Olympics, see the program and make reports on the event. Because of the access amount of people, the environment of London including land, soil and air got polluted enormously which refers to the negative ecological influence of the Olympics 2012 on London. To receive these excess people, Heathrow Airport was expended and it was land pollution, building different buildings for the events also polluted the land and water resources of the country. Huge transportation was increased to ensure better movement of the visitors and it increased CO2 emission in London greatly. Hotels of the country had to handle huge amounts of travellers and consumed water too much which caused water pollution enormously.

From the above evaluation, it is noted that mega-events like the Olympics influence the environment of the host country negatively including the world environment. It seems that mega events such as the Olympics should be avoided to save the environment otherwise people will not be able to cope with the environmental impact. These negative impacts could be controlled by International Olympic Committee by making effective plans to minimize the negative impacts on the environment.

Social influences of the Olympics:

Social influences of Olympics is positive for the host country. These types of global events has positive social and cultural influences; therefore people have to focus one this factors. Because of Olympics, host countries enjoy many positive social and cultural influences such as increased community engagement, increases national level patriotism, informing people about the culture of the host country, athletic participation and national pride of the host country also increases (Schöbel and Manzey, 2011).

Sense of patriotism increases because of the Olympic game and it also increases traditions, and local values including cultural engagement the cause is that local communities are involved in the hosting process of the events and get the opportunity to show their traditions. Tourists from different countries come to visit the host country where the events take place and see the culture of the host country closely and the host country gets a great opportunity to present its culture in front of the world. Community engagement increases for the Olympics because the local communities get the chance to be involved with the games. While arranging Olympic 2012 in London, London Olympic Organizing Committee focused on organizing a lot of events in the East London community and developed land which was not used for any purpose and became capable of bringing sustainable cultural and social influence on the community. When the Olympics ended the houses built for athletes were given to the local community and the facilities including stadiums were decided to use to develop local sports and games inheritance.

Recommendations on minimizing the negative impacts of mega-events:

Mega global events like the Olympics influence a country in both negative and positive; therefore avoiding such events might not be a good decision for a country. Countries have to make effective strategies to minimize the negative impacts and maximize the positive impacts.

• Yolal et al., (2016) have referred in their research that the Olympics needs huge investment and it is a waste of money and assets of the public. The country that wants to organize the Olympics has to evaluate the economic, social and environmental impact of the Olympics. It will help them to decide the right decisions after evaluating the scope and threats of the event. If the event does not worth the investment, countries have to avoid the events and the investment can be invested in the sector which will bring more development for the country.
• The underdeveloped area should be selected for global mega-events like the Olympics. While preparing the area for the events, the infrastructure of the area will be developed which will help them to attract new tourists in the area, improve communication of the area and provide housing with lower costs.
• While constructing stadiums, building or infrastructure for the Olympics or such Global events, these should be made in a way in which these can be used for other jobs. As a result, the country will be able to arrange Olympic or global events there and use the place after the event for other jobs which will ensure maximum use of the resources. As a result, costs will also be saved because of the various uses of the place.

Conclusion

Of all the impacts of the Olympic games such as social, ecological and economic influence, economic influence has the most prospective influence on the host country. Economic influence has both positive and negative effects on the host country. Positive effects are removing unemployment from the huge amount of people, communication systems being developed and new constructions being built. Many tourists across the world visit the host country where the Olympics takes place and spend money there which contributes to the economy of the country positively. They spend money on their accommodations, shop for required products, spends on foods of the country and visit many tourist places. As a result, sales of local products increase and the local community get benefits. The social influence of the Olympic program is also positive because countries get the scope to present their culture and traditions. The ecological impact of Olympics is negative because it pollutes soil, air, land and water.

References:

Around The Rings, (2020). Visa Europe Olympic spending report. [Online] Retrieved from: http://aroundtherings.com/site/A__40396/Title__Visa-Europe-Olympic-spending-report/292/Articles [Assessed on: 22 October 2020]

Visit Birtain, (2020). Inbound Tourism during the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games. [Online] Retrieved from: https://www.visitbritain.org/sites/default/files/vb-corporate/Documents-Library/documents/Foresight_113.pdf  [Assessed on: 22 October 2020]

Newman, C., (2020). Olympic Games: Legacy or Money Pit? National Geographic [Online] Retrieved from: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/2/140221-olympics-sochi-rio-de-janeiro-london-boris-johnson-montreal-athens-world/#:~:text=The%20Olympic%20Stadium%20(at%20left,games’%20%2414.8%20billion%20price%20tag. [Assessed on: 22 October 2020]

Questia, (2020). Olympics Boom Created 100,000 Jobs in London. [Online] Retrieved from: https://www.questia.com/newspaper/1G1-305591692/olympics-boom-created-100-000-jobs-in-london [Assessed on: 22 October 2020]