THE IMPACTS OF MEGA-SPORTING EVENTS ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY OF HOST CITIES

Abstract

Hosting of mega-sporting events is a highly costly, yet extremely sought-after challenge by cities around the world, who hope to get a share of the international prestige and chance to shine under the global spotlight. If managed well, mega-sporting events offer a chance to countries to implement green initiatives and kickstart urbanisation projects to achieve the legacy of increased long-term environmental sustainability. However, not all cities have successfully implemented their environmental measures and attained their sustainability goals. Different issues and challenges are faced, varying accordingly to each city’s unique contexts and their availability of resources. This study will seek to conclude that the hosting of mega-sporting events can possibly lead to increased environmental sustainability of host cities. Recent case studies of mega-sporting events held across the world will be examined, including successful and unsuccessful cases, in order to identify the main key factors leading to success. The findings have highlighted key factors and good practices that were possessed by successful host cities, including strong leadership, effective planning and allocation of funding, early implementation of plans and a realistic long-term outlook. Although some cities may have a starting disadvantage due to their lower level of development and available funding, the findings have shown that by practising the key success factors under good management, hosting mega-sporting events can possibly elevate the environmental development of a previously less-developed city, as seen in the transformation of Seoul’s Han River. Based on these findings, recommendations to future host cities were made including establishing reports to analyse the success of their green initiatives and identify room for improvement, on top of adopting the identified success factors. Limitations were faced in the collection of primary past data and in making direct comparisons between case studies due to their different contexts and lack of information in some areas.