From 'event-led' to 'event-themed' regeneration: the 2002 Commonwealth Games Legacy Programme

Hosting large events has long been associated with the physical regeneration of cities. To supplement these ‘hard’ impacts, cities are now attempting to use events to stimulate ‘softer’ social and economic regeneration. This paper evaluates the impacts of a regeneration Programme adopted in conjunction with the 2002 Commonwealth Games held in Manchester, UK. Alongside its emphasis on social and economic regeneration, this Programme was unusual in that the projects were Games-themed, rather than being directly linked to the event. Despite some concerns about the organisational structures employed and the sustainability of impacts, target beneficiaries have received valuable assistance from the Programme. As such there appears to be valuable lessons that other cities can learn from this example of event regeneration

The mega-event syndrome: why so much goes wrong in mega-event planning and what to do about It

Problem, research strategy, and findings: Mega-events such as the Olympic Games and the Football World Cup have become complex and transformative under- takings over the last 30 years, with costs often exceeding USD $10 billion. These events are currently planned and governed in ways that produce adverse effects for cities, regions, and residents. This study identifies a mega-event syndrome, a group of symptoms that occur together and afflict mega-event planning, including overpromising benefits, underestimating costs, rewriting urban planning priorities to fit the event, using public resources for private interest, and suspending the regular rule of law. I describe each of these symptoms, providing empirical examples from different countries and mega-events, examining the underlying causes. The research is based on material from field visits to mega-event sites in 11 countries as well as 51 interviews with planners, managers, politicians, and consultants involved in mega-event planning. Takeaway for practice: To curb the mega-event syndrome, I propose both radical and incremental policy suggestions. The most crucial radical change that an event host could make is to not tie mega-events to large-scale urban development, avoiding higher risks that create cost overruns, substandard construction quality, and oversized infrastructure not suitable for post-event demands. Further, event hosts should bargain with event-governing bodies for better conditions, earmark and cap public sector contributions, and seek independent advice on the costs and benefits of mega-events. Event-governing bodies, for their part, should reduce the size and requirements of the events