- What are the six major cost and benefits categories for hosting an Olympic games?
The three major classification of costs are; the general infrastructure, sports infrastructure and operational costs. On the other hand, the benefits of hosting the Olympic Games has been classified as either being short-run, long-run or intangible benefits. The short-run benefits arise from the tourist’s expenditures during the games whereas the long-run benefits occur as a result of an increase in trade, foreign investment, tourism after the Games and infrastructural improvements. The intangible benefits include civic pride or the “feel-good effect” (Baade et al. 201).
- Who benefits more from the Olympic Games, the Organizing Committee or the International Olympics Committee?
The International Olympics Committee tends to benefit more in comparison to the Organizing Committee. This is because, aside from the International Olympics Committee taking complete control over the event, it also decides on how to share the revenues generated from the Games whereas the Organizing Committee has little or no say on the generated revenues (Baade et al. 204).
- Do you think the system should be changed?
I believe it’s time for the system to be changed. First and foremost, the International Organizing Committee ought to provide generous subsidies to the host cities so as to enable the host cities to reduce on the costs of holding the international games. In addition, the International Organizing Committee should not have full control of the generated revenue. This is so as to reduce any unnecessary or extravagant forms of expenditures that are usually incurred by the International Organizing Committee.
- What are the ‘substitution and crowding out effect”?
The ‘crowding out effect’ is an economic theory that describes how an increase in government or public sector spending reduces or eliminates private sector spending. The substitution effect is a resultant of a crowding-out effect as an increase in price induces the customer to purchase an alternative commodity that is less expensive.
- How do these concepts influence economic impact studies?
The ‘substitution effect’ occurs when the local residents alter their normal spending patterns on goods in the local economy to spending on goods and services that are associated with the Olympic games. On the other hand, the ‘crowding out effect’ occurs when hen the crowds and congestion associated with a mega-event dissuades other regular tourists or business travelers from visiting the host region (Baade et al. 209).
- What was unique about the 1984 Summer Olympics in Los Angeles?
As opposed to the years before when different cities would bid to host for any international games, in the year 1984, Los Angeles was the only city to place a bid with the intent of serving as the host city for the Summer Olympics. In this case, Los Angeles was able to dictate the terms of bid to the International Organizing Committee. In doing so, the city was able to make massive profits (Baade et al. 214).
- Did these games improve the economic viability of the Olympic Games for subsequent host cities?
No, the games did not improve the economic viability of the Olympic Games for the subsequent host cities. This is because, after the Summer Olympic Games, most of the host cities spent a lot of money on infrastructural developments and improvements. This is due to an increase in number of cities that were captivated to place bids for the upcoming games. In order for a city to cut an edge over its competitors, it had to display advanced form of infrastructure. Thus, the city had to incur more on infrastructural improvements and developments thereby increasing its budget expenditures.
- Based on what you have learnt in this module, would you support or oppose a bid for your host city to host the Olympic Games?
I would oppose a bid for my city to host the Olympic Games. This is because the government will have to incur more cost on creating proper world-class infrastructures. As the citizens, we would suffer from having to pay more taxes so as to increase the government’s revenue which would in turn be spent on infrastructures among other necessary expenditures that would be associated with just one Olympic Game.
Baade, Robert A., and Victor A. Matheson. “Going for the Gold: The economics of the Olympics.” The Journal of Economic Perspectives 30.2 (2016): 201-218.