The purpose of this research is to analyse and evaluate the impact of sports mega-event (EURO 2012) on the tourism development of Poland and Ukraine. The goal is to understand the impact of sports mega-event on tourism of the holding country
Globalisation has changed the tradition sports events into international sports mega-events. These international events not limited to local communities but benefit the host nation through global recognition and opportunities. Mega sports event is an important catalyst for the both positive and negative benefits for the host nation through profound effect such as improve country image, socio-economic development and increase tourism (Arnegger and Herz, 2016).
Sports mega-events offer the opportunity to improve urban system hierarchies, cultural and economic activity. The hosting of mega sports event fundamentally required the development and improvement of infrastructure to accommodate a high number of visitors and these infrastructure improvements and developments to deliver economic dividend and social impact is acknowledged as ‘Event legacy’ (Bairner, 2015).
The benefits of sports mega-events generate tourism revenues through transforming the host nation or cities into tourist hotspot as well as an impact on local communities for future generations. The positive impact of mega events is a revitalisation of local economy and act as the catalyst for regenerations of urban landscape. On the other hand, the negative effect of sports mega-event involves crowding out which sports tourist replaces traditional tourism (Chappelet, 2012).
Sports mega-event enjoys great popularity among those sports fans all over the world and is able to attract a large number of fans to travel to the destination. Sports tourism considered as an essential source of the destination’s total tourism revenue since sports mage-event expected to be an effective method of guarantying the income within the tourism industry.
Sports tourism is an essential and effective channel to build a high-profile image in the international market and hence economic and social profits acquired from sports tourism is vital for the legacy of sports mega-events. The hosting country benefits through direct and indirect revenue because of spending from sports tourists such as spectators, including foreign visitors, foreign athletes and officials and foreign media as well as improve the image and future tourism (Higham and Hinch, 2010).
The financial benefits generated from tourism for hosting country includes construction and upgrades of local stadium, hotel and transportation infrastructures. Per the requirements issued by the UEFA, to host UEFA EURO Cup, host country must compliant with a wide range of economic, legal, cultural and even political prerequisite standards.
The fundamental scenario attached to capital expenditures for sports mega event is that whether these large capital investments contributes towards improved living standards of the local communities and after the sports mega-event and contribute to long-term development of host country (Gripsrud, Nes and Olsson, 2010).
Euro 2012 in Eastern European (EU) was first sports mega-event and hosting world third largest sports event required the great amount of human and social capital. Capital-intensive infrastructure developments for developing economies present financial challenges. Moreover, the small-scale economy seems more sensitive to the changes made within the tourism industry and the infrastructure that required by the mega-event is not available.
In the context of Euro 2012, Poland and Ukraine are developing economies and have challenging political, legal and economic situations. At the time of the EURO 2012, Poland had already joined the European Union and Ukraine did not start its plan to apply for the European Union member (Getz, MacDonald and Parent, 2015).
Comparing with the developed countries located in Europe, these ‘two countries’ economics and infrastructure are yet to be improved. Besides, the two countries share the same historical background as members of the Soviet Union, which might draw some colour on their international image.
Sports mega-event like Euro 2012 might provide an opportunity for these two countries’ tourism industry. This research purpose if to analyse and evaluate the impact of sports mega-event on tourism of the holding country which is Poland and Ukraine (Gibson, 2013).
The infrastructure improvement in Poland for Euro 2012 was 110 billion zloty ($ 29 billion). The 63 billion zloty (1.5% of GDP) allocated for infrastructure improvement. The event hosted in four polish cities Warsaw, Gdansk, Poznan and Wroclaw. On the other hand, requires a program with investment value of USDs 25 billion (UAH 125 billion) which is nearly 24% of total GDP.
The positive impact of sports mega event includes state of art stadiums, impressive and masterpiece architectures, as well as modern sports facilities where state of facilities and capital investment failed in urban regeneration (Kennedy and Kassimeris, 2016).
Poland has released economic analysis of Euro 2012 as well as different studies evaluate social, economic and cultural impact independently. On the other hand, Ukraine government has not conduct economic benefits studies after the event as fewer studies explore the impact of Euro 2012 on country.
The purpose of this research is to analyse and evaluate the impact of sports mega-event on the tourism development before and after the event in Poland and Ukraine. The study is exploratory in nature and takes integrated approach to analyse and evaluate economic, social and cultural impact at macro level.
The aim of research is to examine the impact of sports mega-event on tourism of holding country. The specific event selected for this study is UEFA EURO 2012 hosted jointly by Poland and Ukraine
The structure of this study as follow
The first chapter of study enclosed research background and context as well as research objectives of study.
Second chapter of study enclosed critical review of literature on sports mega-event. it enclosed the characteristic of sport-mega event, impact of mega event on tourism development as well as positive and negative benefits associated with hosting the event and impact tourism development.
The third chapter of study review the research methodology and justify the selection of research plan used for this study to achieve the objectives.
The fourth chapter analyses the impact of Euro 2012 on Ukraine and Poland and evaluates the finding to review sports mega-event on tourism of the holding countries.
The fifth chapter of the study discusses the finding to present Impact of sports mega-event on tourism industry of Poland and Ukraine. Moreover, this chapter enclosed lesson other countries can learn from Host countries as well as strength and weaknesses of this research.
The sixth chapter enclosed conclusion of study and review findings in light of previous studies along the summary of positive and negative benefits for Poland and Ukraine.
Seven chapter of study enclosed the recommendation for future sports mega-event hosting to maximise the economic, social and cultural legacies.
Sports tourism involves the travel experience to engage in or view the sports related event and activities (Parent and Chappelet, 2015). Sports tourism includes all passive and active involvement for the sporting events in which participation managed through organised and causality for commercial and non-commercial reasons, which necessitates the away travel from home locality. It involves the characteristic of both travelling and sports participation (Weed and Bull, 2012).
The supply side of sports tourism suggests multiple sports tourism categories, which include sports tourism resort, attractions, tour, cruises, sports event, and sports adventure tourism. In addition, sports management perspective enclosed two categories, which are sports spectatorial travel (sports watching and leisure activities) as well as sports participation travel (participation in sports-related activities) (Solberg and Preuss, 2007). Moreover, Gibson (2003) suggests three research categories for tourism research, which are active sports tourism, event sports tourism and nostalgia sports tourism (Gibson, 2003).
Getz (2008) has analysed the difference between event and sports tourism. Sports event tourism based on the travelling to watch sporting events. Sports tourism development involves the strategy usually carried by the tourism destination with aim to create product differentiation, promotion of socio-economic development and develop competitive advantage. The conceptualisation showed that sports tourism and event tourism are the subset of the tourism in general. Therefore, international tourism has evident that mega sporting events are the important segment of global tourism (Getz, 2008).
Kurtzman and Zauhar (1997) added that Sports event tourism is important to attract international tourism, huge investment from sponsorships, business opportunities and legacy for local communities. The opportunities created by sports event are sports system development, economic development and socio-cultural legacies.
The sports system development involves infrastructure for sports facilities and capacity building to achieve desired results. In addition, economic development highlights the ability of sports tourism to market business and generates economic opportunities. Moreover, socio-cultural legacies youth development, cultural celebrations as well as health benefit for local communities (Theobald, 2005).
The literature in this section distributed into three sections. The first section of the literature enclosed sports mega-event definition, characteristic and impact of sports event tourism. The second section includes the Positive impact of the sporting event on tourism economies of Poland and Ukraine. The third section focuses on the negative impact and externalities of sports event on tourism economies of Poland and Ukraine.
Mega sports event known as an event, which takes place at large scale and have the ability to influence the host nation economies through global media. Mega sports events provide an opportunity to host nation to highlight through global media its economic capabilities and cultural dynamism to become tourism brand. These events attract the global audience and enable the host nation to transform its infrastructure to manage the massive flow of visitors along with the aim to provide the legacy for the future generations (Zimbalist, 2016).
Globalisation has made in Sports event tourism as an international event. The international sporting events based on funding and facilities of the government. However, not every international sporting event is mega sporting event and Dwyer, Forsyth and Spur (2005) elaborated mega-sporting event as a cultural event at large scale, which has mass popular appeal, dynamic and dramatic character as well as international influence with combination of national, international and non-government organisations (Kassens-Noor et al., 2015).
According to Preuss (2007) mega sports event is an important catalyst for the both positive and negative benefits for the host nation and local communities. Moreover, these events boost the tourism and legacies for the local communities for generations. The mega sports event such as Euro 2012 offered valuable opportunities for the host national as well as communities through stimulating local economy enhance economies image and self-esteem, improve local leisure and recreation facilities.
The economic impact has the direct influence on the host countries such as sustainable urban development and foreign investment. Therefore, mega event effect is not limited to local communities. The mega-sporting event transforms the host nation or cities into tourist hotspot as well as impact local communities for future generations. Mega sporting events not just stimulate the local economy but bring international interest of the host nation, which creates direct and indirect impact on the host nation (Fourie and Santana-Gallego, 2011).
Horne and Manzenreiter (2006) elaborated that the features of mega-event includes worldwide large-scale media attention as well as economic and socio-culture effect on the nations (host countries). The table 1 below summarise characteristics of Sports mega event
The figure 1 below shows the scale and scope of mega-event. The scale defines the capacity to involve, mobilise as well as attract the international tourist. The scope involves the diversity of resources to mobilise locally and internationally. The difference between the scale and scope shows level of interest and creativity for the host nation. The bigger is scope of the event, the greater operational demand of the event at the global scale (Taks, Chalip and Green, 2015).
Source: Adapted from Edensor (2015)
The hosting of mega sports event fundamentally required the development and improvement of infrastructure to accommodate a high number of visitors and these infrastructure improvements and developments to deliver economic dividend and social impact is acknowledged as ‘Event legacy’. The hosting of mega sports event enables the host to transform infrastructure, which delivers economic, social and cultural legacy through investment and media exposure, which result in tourism development (Getz and Page, 2016).
Preuss and Solberg (2015) added that the national image promotion is an integral component of the mega events, which promote host city for tourism locally and globally. The local and national government regenerate the city through investment. The infrastructure improvement and development of local areas allows attracting and meeting the needs of mass tourism and media attention. For example, development of London Olympic Park in 2012 on the ‘brownfield site’ has resulted in regeneration of employment, economic opportunities and retail development (Lees, 2015).
In addition, wildlife and eco-developments have allowed providing eco-village with positive environment impact and market opportunities for local residents. The economic legacy is not limited to pre-event and during the event but the return on investment from the regeneration and development have the long-term impact, which generates tourism and media interest. For example, Barcelona Olympic 1992 transformed the city into popular and vibrant tourist destination as well as event created long-term infrastructure improvement, employment, business opportunities and sustainable housing developments (Ziakas, 2015).
Viehoff and Poynter (2016) elaborated that the social impact of mega sports event is that it delivers urban development, increase capital and land regeneration creates the attractive destination for local and international residents. The effect of mega sports event evolves and continues urban development transform the city as well as it allows maintaining the identity of the long-term attractive and vibrant destination. The urban regeneration is the critical component of sports tourism legacy, which allows the host nation to enhance the facilities and meet the social need of the local communities.
Mega sports event transformed the destination into favourable tourism destination through providing opportunities for local and wider population (Bairner, 2015). The mega sporting event address the urban decline and decay result from traditional industries and hosting event benefit the future generation through transforming the city into favourable and desirable tourism destination.
For example, after use of Manchester City FC as the venue for commonwealth games had implemented £1 billion urban regeneration of 200-acre site. The regeneration provided the local community with thousands of new jobs as well as construction of sporting complex of international standard (Edensor, 2015).
The regeneration of the urban area and global media motivate and inspire youth to participate in the sports as well as provide pre and post event employment. The cultural value is made of three important factors, which are institutional, instrumental and intrinsic. The institutional value represents trust and esteem to engage the user. Instrumental value involves the user of culture to address the social policy and reduce externalities. Moreover, intrinsic value includes individual enjoyment and aesthetic judgement for the tourist (Edgell, 2016).
The institutional and instrument measurement highlight the effectiveness of the public policy to manage the hosting of mega-events. The cultural legacy helps to engage citizen, develop artists as well as mobilise audience. Cultural value allows promoting the positive image and cultural identity the host nation to attract tourist though the proliferation of fantastic architectural features and development of cultural pluralism. For example, Barcelona Olympic transformed the city into ‘cultural city’ of Europe (Canavan, 2016).
The positive contribution to the mega-sporting event is evident in the economy of the country. The amounts of players, visitors, media as well as the spectator are involved in the mega-sporting events. The direct economic benefits of the mega-sports event are revenues of the visitor, increase employment, and infrastructure development. The indirect benefit involves a future development of culture and economic benefit for the host countries. The development of these infrastructures probably will enhance the living standards of the local residents after the sports mega-event and contribute to long-term development of the local economy (Tribe, 2015; Edgell, 2016).
Baade and Matheson (2016) discussed that the mega-sports events create business opportunities as well as employment opportunities. The positive effect adds growth in per capita and employment opportunities are evident in the service-orientated sector through the mega-sports event. The hosting country will definitely benefit from the direct and indirect revenue make by the spending from those spectators, including foreign visitors, foreign athletes, foreign officials, foreign media visitors, foreign sponsor visitors etc.
Mega sports event is lead to job opportunities creation and short-terms jobs are in the construction sector whereas long-term job in spin-off business (hospitality and services). Economic restructuring results in shifting towards service economy. In the duration of foreign spectators ‘visit in the hosting country, they certainly will generate spending on accommodations, meals, beverages, transportations, tickets of the matches or maybe other places which are worth of a visit, and other goods and services within the hosting country (Mitchell and Stewart, 2015).
For example, South Africa World cup 2010 created 300,000 jobs whereas Winter Olympic 2010 added $4.2 to the total GDP of the country. The refurbishment and construction of new facilities and venue stimulate the economy because of investment as well as create new job opportunities. Mega sporting event gives short-term immediate jolt to the host country economy but what really defines the legacy is the long-term impact. The investment before, during and after the event boost the business opportunities and employment throughout the region. The improved infrastructure attracts new business and allows local businesses to expand (Zimbalist, 2016).
The mega-events improve the image of the host country and community view of itself. For example, Barcelona Olympic 1992 revamped the image of Madrid is which allowed it to compete and achieve economic success. The improved image provide incentive to address problems such as reduce crime, urban decay and economic success. For instance, London 2012 Olympic has allowed the deprived communities in the East and helps to become economic centre.
The Mega sporting event is the source of motivation for the local communities through job creation and business opportunities. Economic dividend associated with hosting mega events includes job creation, new market segments, improve trading network as well as increase inflow of tourism (Parent and Chappelet, 2015; Mitchell and Stewart, 2015).
Infrastructure means the sports infrastructure, which is used for training and competition as well as general infrastructure that includes roads, hotels, housing, parks, and airports and how fits in the development of the city. Mega event requires building the new stadium, infrastructure improvements such as communication system, traffic network and housing facilities. Mega sports event required large infrastructure investment, which delivers long-term positive impact on the community (Muller, 2015).
For example, Munich Olympic 1972 prompted a need to build subway system, which is still operational for public today. The Mega sporting event requires specific facilities, which help the hosting cities to improve public infrastructure, and facilities to host the event. The construction of new infrastructure helps the host country to engage in facility effects, which attract 20% more attendance in the first year of completion. For example, FIFA requires that hosting country of World Cup provide 10 modern stadiums with seating capacity for more than 50,000 spectators (Schiller and Young, 2015; Zimbalist, 2016).
The benefits are limited to development of new facilities but it stimulates urban growth. The prompt financial benefits generated from tourism, the hosting country will also generate from the construction and upgrades of local stadium, hotel and transportation infrastructures.
The development of infrastructure improves the living standard and environment for the local public by providing social well-being facilities, transportation improvement. For example, development of Wembley stadium improved infrastructure and renovation of the underground train station with investment of $150 million (Giulianotti, 2015).
Arnegger and Herz (2016) explained that the soft benefit of the mega sports event is image improvement. The number of sports fan drawn from mega events is important because of long-term positive consequences for the communities and host nation. The increased recognition and international publicity improve locality attraction. Identity and consumption develop sense of identification into self-concept and it represents the degree of participation.
Sports mega event have significant symbolic attachment and reposition the image of the host nation. Mega event usually creates positive image of the country and worldwide exposure from the event. The global media elaborate the culture and history of the region, city or country (Getz, MacDonald and Parent, 2015).
Moreover, Houlihan and Malcolm (2015) stated that social identity highlights degree of participation with activity. The place identity plays an important role in branding and consumption. Social identity facilitated by the tourist attraction based on the reference with appropriate belief and subculture. Sports tourists receive information and attach emotion to these events through sharing perception and impression of the host country. For example, France world cup 1998 resulted in nation’s rebirth, which allows connecting the internal and external audiences and delivering synergetic benefit (Brown, 2015).
The destination image transferred from one object and phenomena of brand extension and co-extension improve the image of the host country. Mega event attracts millions of potential customers, visitors and business partners through tourism behaviourism and projecting the positive image of the host country. Moreover, mega event increases the credibility of the host nation in the global marketplace. For example, Beijing 2008 helped the China to project its image as economic power and global image attract new companies improving trade and commerce of the host country (Dong and Duysters, 2015).
Gibson (2013) analysed that Leiper’s model evaluates the tourism development through three elements, which are the human element (Tourist), geographical (destination) and industrial element. (Figure 2) The Mega sporting event is important to source to increase the awareness of the host city or country as a tourism destination. The media is an essential part to promote the image of the host destination and commercial activities and advertisement is useful to attract tourists and bring foreign investment and sponsorship.
The knowledge and skills gained from the major event help the hosting nation to improve its tourism management after the event. The knowledge of the organisation, hospitality, volunteer and other related stakeholders enable the destination effective management the tourism in the country (Park et al., 2015).
Shipway and Fyall (2013) proposed that the cross-cultural knowledge and understanding of efficient infrastructure use allow improving and enhancing the tourism sector in the country. International sports association, media, tourist and business create the network, which facilitates the partnership in both private and public sector. The network selection and knowledge of sports develop the long-term perspective for the tourism management of the host nation. The Mega sporting event results in the profound transformation of the host city which impact on tourism.
For example, Germany 2006 FIFA World Cup with motto ‘time to make friends’ has transformed the image of the country from tradition image of mechanical efficiency to friendly place to visit. The taxi drivers trained to ensure that visitor perceived the good first image of the country and World Cup project Germany as completely transformed destination.
The Mega sporting event involves several urban coalition factors consist of the network of stakeholders such as NGO, public and private organisation, funding, experts and media (Wyludda, 2009; Preuss and Solberg, 2015).
Source: McKelvey and Longley (2015)
Role theory is useful to develop an understanding of working with society and it offers deterministic perspective for the behaviours and norms. The interaction between social structure and the individual is de-emphasized and interpretive approach for the role theory provides an understanding of the leisure roles in the form of sports tourism. The global image of the host country increased its appeal as the tourist destination based on the leisure, fun, excitement and historical perspective it offers (Biddle, 2013).
Mega sporting event brand the host country as the tourist destination. The humanist approach focused on the perspective and experiences of the individuals. Tourists are key stakeholders for the mega-events when exploring tourism impact. Media and marketing exposure would allow attracting tourist during the event as well as after the event (Higham and Hinch, 2002).
Chalip and Costa (2005) analysed that tourists spend money and create the multiplier effect in the economy. (Figure 3) The mega sports event allowed positioning the host city as the tourist destination. Mega-event change the tourist structure of the host nation and diagram below shows the movement of tourist and resident movement from bidding to post-event period.
The pre-switchers (E2) and cancellers (E1) are clearer as E2 prefer to visit the city earlier. The E1 are the source of opportunity cost and resource constraint during mega-event (avoiders) and postpone the trip. Time switcher (H) prefers to visit the destination after the mega-event. The post-event period generates tourism and tourists are interested in the destination through increased awareness by media and experiences from the event (Weed, 2008; Bladen et al., 2012).
Source: Bladen et al (2012)
Mega sporting event transform host nation or city into tourist centre particularly with increase competition between the cities to secure the share from the growing global tourism market. The increase tourist inflows are the important source of revenue from tourism. Spectator effect the visitor attendance and image of the destination, as well as sports fan experience, are a significant source of revenue for the host country (Radzi et al., 2014).
The influence of the push (motivation) and pull factor (destination attributes) are the driver of during and after event tourist. The hosting country will definitely benefit from the direct and indirect revenue make by the spending from those spectators, including foreign visitors, foreign athletes, foreign officials, foreign media visitors, foreign sponsor visitors etc. The relationship between the behaviour and motivations, which are event interest, fan motives, travel motives, attendance attention and travel constraint (Malcolm, 2008).
Higham and Hinch (2010) added that the aesthetic experience provides motivation for the tourist to visit the city. The flow of tourist brings spectators together based on subculture shared. The arrivals of athletes, media, and support team arrive at the host nation and develop the image of pre and post games. The revenues during the event come from ticket sales and visitors spend money into categories such as accommodation, transportation, leisure and entertainment, food and beverage, game tickets, tour sightseeing, services and retail shopping. The tourist visits over the longer distance are likely to spend more money than nearby visitors and first-time visitors spend money. The figure 4 below summarises the consumption of the tourist during the visit (Saayman, 2012).
Source: Preuss et al (2009)
Andersson and Lundberg (2013) elaborated that the positive environment impact of the mega event related to the development of new infrastructure such stadium, transports, communication system, road or other local community projects, which are not viable without with hosting the event. However, ecological impacts of the mega events such as tariff, construction water resources and vehicle emissions are significant as well as irreversible and thus have large social and environmental impact.
The fast-track developments in the city raise the question of environmental impact assessment. The pre-event investment lack correlation with projected benefits as well as post event situation is even complicated to assess quantitatively because of associated complex and extended period (Gaffney, 2013).
In addition, Collins et al (2007) have analysed the negative impact of the mega event on the local communities in terms of excessive waste, pollution and noise. The consumption of the natural capital and energy, carbon emission and water resources result in adverse environment impact on the local communities. For example, the carbon footprint of the FIFA World Cup 2010 was double when compared to the Beijing Olympics (Li and McCabe, 2013).
Mega sporting events not only deliver economic benefits but also result in the problem for the hosting communities. Despite the estimation of significant revenues from the mega-sporting event but the primary cost of these events are high. Mega sporting event hosting needs based on the rigorous framework to produce legacies for the host countries (Higham, 1999).
The mega events are the stage at greater cost and without the proper framework, failure of such event to deliver economic and social legacies is evident through cases such as Athens 2004 and Montreal 1976. The Montreal 1976 resulted in the total debt of CAD $1.5 billion by public funding but it fails to deliver sustainable future developments and meet the promise of local community. Similarly, Greece collapse of 2011 in Eurozone was because of Athens Olympic 2004. The games failed to capitalise economic and social benefits to benefit the local community (Gratton and Preuss, 2008).
Costs associated with hosting mega-sporting event involve improvement of hard structure (stadium and facilities development) as well as soft structure (urban regeneration). Funding is challenging to host nation for two stages. The first is development and renovation of facilities and improvement and operational management of the event (Kesenne, 2005).
Therefore, the cost associated with hosting mega event is the expense for the host nation because it requires building the new stadium, infrastructure improvements such as communication system, traffic network and housing facilities. The cost associated with development and renovation of stadium and facilities includes both on-site as well as off-site costs. The costs include supplies, equipment, and labour as well as the time associated with hosting the mega events (Horne, 2007).
Humphreys and Prokopowicz (2007) analysed the impact of EURO 2012 for the host countries Poland, Ukraine, and economic assessment highlighted that the hidden cost associated with stadiums for renovation and development were significant. The off-sites cost are a high number of visitors in the local communities. The high demand for local services by the visitors has direct affect the life of the local resident. The congestion on the road because of high traffic, environment degradation, restaurants expansion as well as increased retail prices are the off-site cost associated with hosting mega events (Humphreys and Prokopowicz, 2007).
For example, Beijing Olympic in 2008 has prompted the hotel industry added 10,000 up-scale rooms to meet the demand of the visitors. The flow of migrants in the host country to take up jobs in the local communities increases competition the job market. The foreseeable increases in the transportation and food price have direct impact the life of local people. Montreal Olympic 1976 left the legacy of deficit funding and it took two decades to repaying the cost of the event (John, 2008; Short, 2008).
The Mega sporting event attracts many sports fans but this deters other travellers to avoid the peak season and travellers reluctant to travel to the host country in peak season. The mega-sporting event damages the traditional tourism industry. The Olympic event of Sydney, Beijing and Athens have shown the fear of normal in terms of higher price, tariff, crowd and disruption and deter them from visiting the host nation (Shipway and Fyall, 2013).
For instance, the official statistics shows that during the Beijing Olympic the normal visitors decreased by 25% in the pre-event and dropped to 35% during the event. However, it is difficult to define the economic impact based on the consumer spending because consumer diverted from one region should net of the spending in the economy. The time switchers (planning to travel but would come at the different date), as well as casual traveller (travel irrespective of event), cannot attribute towards the event (Novelli, 2007).
Price inflation created by the mega sports event has significant negative impact on the local population as well as local tourist. The substitution effect offsets the net gains as spending by the consumer in the sports events reduce the spending elsewhere as well as increase job results in loss losses in the non-sports segment. The increased demand for business because of event results in the creation of temporary jobs. For example, Athens was successful in delivering short-term benefits through commercial opportunities, improving infrastructure and increase tourism for both temporary and permanent jobs. However, after the event, there was the loss of 70,000 jobs and the sharp decline in the business confidence in the area (Byers, 2015).
Athens 2004 is the primary example of fail social legacy because it fails to provide opportunities for local communities. The multiplier effect in relation to sports activities is lower because of the leak out effect. Moreover, employment related to mega event generate short-term full-time employment but in the long-term employment related to sports facilities are low skilled and part-time jobs and therefore, lack contribution towards the quality of the full-time jobs in the economy (Yiannis and Panagiotis, 2005).
The social problem associated with hosting mega-event involves traffic congestion, cultural conflict and increased crime rate. The income disparities between the guest and host result in the problem of distribution of tourism and socio-cultural problem. Urban regeneration to host the mega sports event requires investment and these funded from increased taxation, which results in crowding out of privates expenditures in the economy (Brown, 2015).
For Montreal Olympic was the disaster because of the tax burden for the games and the social legacy in term of socio-culture growth was not matched. The increased prices during the construction phase of the facilities postponed the normal projects. The opportunity cost associated with mega sports event is the public funds, which has alternative use for the schools and hospitals, human capital, job placement and increase the productivity (Maennig and Zimbalist, 2012).
The host city or country usually wins the right to host the event based on lavish showcase for the event when to compare with competitors. The state of art stadiums, impressive and masterpiece architectures, as well as modern sports facilities, becomes redundant after the event. The maintenance and operational costs are high for such facilities and finding the tenant represents the problem for the local authorities. The pre-event opportunity cost associated with stadium development is difficult to measure (Shipway and Fyall, 2013).
Moreover, after the event, the stadiums largely remain unused as they build specifically for the games. For example, FIFA World Cup 2002 in Korea and Japan has resulted in a development of a number of the stadium, which leads to unfulfilled efforts to revive the economy. It is difficult to define the utilisation legacy built to host one of the mega events, as it is difficult to match the demand (Bray, 2011).
Hosting sports mega-events perceive to improve the image of country and provide socio-economic benefits. The rationale for hosting sports mega-events intrinsically categorised into three areas, which are global expansion, urban landscape transformation and socio-economic dividends for country. The opportunity cost associated with hosting sports mega event is high and economic as well as social cost of event (capital expenditures) benchmarked through next best public project.
The hosting of mega sporting events requires substantial expenditures and security, as well as social support, is critical for success of event. The Mega sporting event requires funding from different source of government (new taxes) and organisation for infrastructure development. The costs of mega sporting event leave high level of debt if financing as well as socio-economic benefits not evaluated. Sports mega-events involve convincing public for the social, economic and cultural impact of event.
The legacies of sports mega event involve economic dividend and social impact. The positive benefits of sports mega event include economic opportunities such as job creation, influx of tourism and expansion of service sector. In addition, tangible legacies infrastructure includes communication, recreational areas and transport network. Sports mega-events offer opportunity to improve urban system hierarchies, cultural and economic activity. To summarise, positive impact of mega events is revitalisation of local economy and act as catalyst for regenerations of urban landscape.
On the other hand, the negative effect of sports mega-event involves crowding out which sports tourist replaces traditional tourism. The state of art stadiums, impressive and masterpiece architectures, as well as modern sports facilities, becomes redundant after the event. The stakes such as displacement of people, inflation, public debts and local price increase. The next stage of study is ‘Research methodology’ to analyse and evaluate appropriate research approach for data collection and analysis. The following chapter enclosed critical review of research approach used for this study to answer the research question.
This chapter of study enclosed the research methodology used to explore, analyse and explore the impact of Euro 2012 on the host country (Poland and Ukraine). The design of research and methodology are critical to achieve the objectives of research and i.e. success of research. The research methodology deployed in this study is exploratory which is useful to develop an insight through evaluating the tangible and intangible impact of Euro 2012 on Poland and Ukraine. Moreover, exploratory research is useful to explore the qualitative secondary data through journal articles and document analysis (Maxwell, 2012).
The research design for this study is qualitative research, which is useful to develop an understanding through directly exploring the social event. The usefulness of qualitative approach is that it allows exploring and analysing the data through participative approach. The research strategy selected for this study is case study because it allows collecting and analysing data from different sources and generalising the scenarios (Bernard, 2012).
Rothenberger (2013) elaborated that exploratory research is useful when there is a lack of rigorous information about the issue and researcher objective is to discover new information. The exploratory research is useful to develop new knowledge and additional information of the problem.
Exploratory research known as informal research allows the researcher to develop an insight of problem and build background information to define priorities for research. The useful of exploratory research is that it offers flexible as well as a systematic approach for the researcher to develop insight and knowledge of the issue (Hair et al., 2011).
For this study, exploratory research offers the flexibility to researcher to explore the impact of Euro 2012 on host country and how it has contributed towards the tourism development for the country. The exploratory research is useful to analyse and evaluate data in systematic way to understand the social, economic and cultural impact of Euro 2012 (Stebbins, 2011).
According to O’Dwyer and Bernauer (2013) the difference between the qualitative and quantitative research is the degree of flexibility offered to examine and explore the problem. The key difference and suitability of each research approach is enclosed below.
Flick (2014) stated that qualitative research is useful to develop an understanding through exploring the social event. It allows understanding the problem in social context and researcher understanding of problem enables to derive results from the scenario.
Qualitative research is useful when the researcher cannot separate itself from the situation and thus, the researcher can understand the meaning through analysing and evaluating various variables. The flexibility associated with qualitative research is that allows exploring various concepts and theories, which is useful to develop the deeper perspective of the research question. Qualitative research design is flexible and allows explaining the variation through exploring relationship between the variables (Blaikie, 2009).
The quantitative approach involves rigorous and analytic framework to analyse the problem using numerical data. It involves rigid structure and enables the research to confirm the hypothesis. The useful of quantitative research is that it quantifies the relationship between the variables and participants do not influence the research process. Quantitative research involves the measurement of the relationship between the variables using the numerical data (Ritchie, Jane Lewis and Ormston, 2013).
The useful of quantitative research is that outcome of variables are quantifiable and gain valuable insight based on a concept, meaning and characteristic of the problem. The quantitative approach offers analytic approach and interprets variable through numerical data in social environment. The quantitative research enables to summarise and analyse large volume of data through rigid structure (Sapsford and Jupp, 2006; Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009).
The qualitative approach is useful for this study because of elusive nature of problem and dataset associated with the project. The resources and tie constraint attached to this study makes it impossible to access the large population or define a large number of variables and confirms the result through quantification of variables. The research question of the study is to explore the impact of Euro 2012 on the host countries, which involves a significant number of social, cultural and economic variables that are tangible or intangible in nature.
The benefit of qualitative research is that it enables the researcher to complete research in given tie and resources through analysing the wide range of secondary data sources. The flexible and systematic approach offered by qualitative research is useful to summarise the wide range of data and generate new knowledge highlighting the impact of Euro 2012 on Poland and Ukraine.
The qualitative secondary data is useful to generalise result from large publication and studies, which offers historical perspective and validate finding from data based on large population (Silverman, 2010).
According to Yin (2013), case studies are useful to answer how and why questions through elaborating the secondary data based on existing phenomena. In case of study approach, the researcher does not have an influence on the situation, which offers the opportunity to elaborate the social event and draw a conclusion by analysing the phenomena. The advantage of the case study is that researcher analysed data from multiple sources and explore the problem to generalise the outcome. The insight and perspective develop from case study allow to present better conclusion and finding and thus results are validated and compelling.
Case study generalises result from larger study population and holistic design based on multiple case studies unable to evaluate events and scenario from multiple contexts. Case study generalises results from larger population and i.e. results are likely to more compelling and reliable (Blatter and Haverland, 2012).
The strength of case study research is that it offers researcher flexibility and develops holistic perspective of real life event. Case study focus on the contemporary phenomena, which exist in real life context and thus, multiple sources of data, allows exploring the problem when boundaries of event are blurred. Case study enables the researcher to provide descriptive account of real life situation through analysing problem in wider context (Stake, 2013).
Yin (2009) elaborated three important conditions that allow determining the suitability of case study for research. The first condition is the type of research question, second is the role and control of researcher in the situation and the third condition is the degree of contemporary events involved. This research of this study based on what scenario to determine the impact of Euro 2012 on the Poland and Ukraine. Moreover, there is the lack of enough information, which evaluates in-depth tangible and intangible benefits for the host countries.
This research based on what context, which is effective, explored through a case study. The researcher has no control of the situation and deploying case study analysis as multiple analysis is important factors. The focus of the study is to determine the impact of Euro 2012 in both tangible and intangible perspective. The case study approach for this study is useful to overcome inconsistencies and researcher evaluates the finding in the light of the theory (Miles, Huberman and Saldana, 2013).
Inductive approach is a concern with building theory through analysing the multiple studies in wider context. The inductive approach enables the researcher to investigate the event in wider context and narrow the problem through generalisation of results. On the other hand, the deductive approach is useful to test the theory and existing knowledge. Deductive approach is useful to confirm the hypothesis and validate the findings.
For this study, inductive approach used to analyse and evaluate the impact of the Euro 2012 on the host countries. The inductive approach allows the researcher to analyse the impact of Euro 2012 on Poland and Ukraine and narrow down the finding and present consolidated impact of the mega event (Drummond and Embree, 2013).
Secondary data involves generating information through analysing and interpreting existing information, which is suitable for the objective of the research. Secondary data is a data collected for other purpose and already exist. The sources of secondary data involve journal articles, reports, official publications books. The analysis of secondary data is involved analysing information, which already exists, and secondary data is the core for exploratory studies (Stebbins, 2011).
The advantage of secondary data is it offers cost effective and tie completion of the project. Secondary data analysis is based on analysing the existing information and answer the research question that is different from original research question of the secondary studies.
The advantage of secondary data is that researcher narrative from the secondary data offers valuable insight, qualitative secondary data is a cost-effective approach, and researcher develops a deeper understanding of the problem. The secondary data qualitative analysis is useful to analyse the theory and consolidate the finding from existing studies (Cox et al., 2011).
Document analysis involves analysing existing sources of information and these documents existing already exist independent of the action of the researcher. The secondary documents include books, articles and case studies and thus, the researcher develops better perspective of the problem. The researcher can influence the data analysis and multiple sources of data combined into the single context.
The advantage of the document analysis is that it offers the researcher cost effective as well as unbiased approach to analyse the problem. Case studies offer an insight on the actions and outcomes but are not produce for the specific purpose. The advantage of document analysis is that study can collect information in cost-effective and unbiased manner (Ary et al., 2009).
In 2012, Ukraine and Poland collectively host European football championship. To host the event, Poland spent nearly $25 billion whereas Ukraine costs estimated at $13 billion (Cienski and Olearchyk, 2012). The fundamental remain attached to mega events such as Euro 2012 is the legacy of the event. Despite the fact, mega events attract foreign investors, tourists, building key facilities and improvement in the service industry. However, these mega events do not make the profit but the economic benefits sold to the public are a long-term return on investments.
Mega sporting events have political history to shape a positive image of economies and build a global brand of country. The major issue related to mega event is evaluation and management of expectations (Kennedy and Kassimeris, 2016). Anholt (2007) and Govers-Co (2009), the concept of national competitive identity related to the attractiveness of its politics, culture, tourism, inhabitants and investment opportunities.
Per the requirements issued by the UEFA, the hosting country for a sports mega-event must compliant with a wide range of economic, legal, cultural and even political prerequisite standards. The development of these infrastructures probably will enhance the living standards of the local residents after the sports mega-event. The case of 2012 Euro in Poland and Ukraine chose for in-depth analysis, as both countries are the phase of transition.
In addition, Poland had already joined the European Union and Ukraine did not start its plan to apply for the European Union member. Their political, legal and economic situations are less likely to change due to any domestic and foreign affairs action. Euro 2012 is vital for economics and infrastructure improvement (Humphreys and Prokopowicz, 2007).
Besides, the two countries share the same historical background as members of the Soviet Union, which might draw some colour on their international image. The impact analysis allows understanding how these countries have transformed economic, social and cultural context through Euro 2012 legacy (Edgell, 2016).
In 2004, Poland joined the European Union and located in Eastern Europe with the population of 40 million. The country has transformed through democratic and economic policies and today Poland is the market-orientated economy. The Gross domestic product (GDP) is $474 billion with service sector contribute 56% to total GDP of the country. The infrastructure is modernised and compare to another country in the region, Poland has the advance infrastructure. Tourism in Poland contributes 6% to the GDP with annual visitors to the country reached 67.4 million in 2011 before the Euro 2012.
According to OECD, catering and accommodation sector employed 250,000 people. In Poland, the ministry of sport and tourism manage tourist market policies and national tourism management. The figure 5 below shows the tourism management in the Poland. For Euro 2012, Poland had direct support for the EU to manage the event (OECD, 2014).
Source: OECD (2014)
Tourism development expectation in Poland managed through Ministry of sport and tourism. Euro 2012 preparation and planning examined as polish effect on economy, image and development of country. The modernisation of infrastructure, economic opportunities and international image expected to increase foreign tourism and deliver social and economic benefits. Poland hosting Euro 2012 involved modernisation of infrastructure, social capital and foreign tourism.
Euro 2012 is third largest sport event globally, offered country opportunity to improve country image and deliver socio-economic benefits. The rationale for hosting sports mega-events intrinsically categorised into three areas, which are global expansion, urban landscape transformation and socio-economic dividends for country. The goal of this qualitative study is to evaluate the social, economic and cultural impact in terms tourism development of Poland (Borowski et al., 2013).
Ukraine was the first eastern state, which got independence from the Soviet Union but not part of EU. The population of the country is 44 million with GDP of $144 million. The economy of the country relies on oil export, as well as the democratic process in the country is fragile. The infrastructure of a country is less developed and hosting Euro 2012 had a significant impact on the country. The development cost associated with the mega event was finance by government of Ukraine. Euro 2012 involves building modern Donbass Arena and upgrading the airport to international standards. The figure 6 below shows the tourism management in Ukraine (Hardaway, 2011).
Source: Hardaway (2011)
According to Voroshylova (2014), the potential for tourism development in Ukraine is significant as it has prerequisites for international tourism. Ukraine has cultural, environment and scientific opportunities. Euro 2012 in Ukraine offered contribution towards the image of country as tourist state. In Ukraine, Euro 2012, offered opportunity to develop large-scale construction and infrastructure. Urban landscape improvement enables to attract tourist and improve tourism in Ukraine. The goal of investment is to stimulate international tourism through tourist infrastructure.
Euro 2012 enables to strength social, economic and cultural tourism development opportunities of tourism at the international level. The ministry of infrastructure is central body (figure 6) and manage public policy for sphere of tourism. Therefore, the goal of qualitative study is to evaluate the Euro 2012 event benefits for Ukraine (Grishel, 2015).
The empirical literature shows the impact of mega-events is determined through all remains and consequences on its environment. The impact of mega event enclosed various types. Cashman (2003) propose that the impact of the mega event measured through infrastructure, education and public life, economic and culture. In addition, Gratton and Preuss (2008) evaluated impact through six variables, which are infrastructure, event structures, education and skill development, image, network and culture.
Moreover, Fourie and Santana-Gallego (2011) analysed the impact of the mega event through sports facilities, urban environment, economy and tourism, infrastructure, socio-cultural. Furthermore, Hiller (2013) elaborate impact of mega event through facilitates built environment, economic, community, political and cultural environment.
Adapted: Hiller (2013)
The difference between personal and territorial impact is that territory is the location attached to the organisation of the mega event and personal are those who have experienced the impact of the event. The tangible and intangible impacts are also known as soft and hard legacies. The tangible and territorial impact of Euro 2012 directly related to building facilities as well unrelated development related to sport such as infrastructure improvements.
Moreover, intangible and territorial influence tourism development policies as well as image development of the country. On the personal level, the tangible benefits involved tourism revenues as well as job and skills. In addition, intangible benefits involve the social and cultural legacy of the event.
The impact of Euro 2012 is substantial in territorial context through affecting regional, local, national and global environment. For example, at micro-level effect of building facilities and tourism revenues as well as eco-friendly development (Bairner, 2015).
There are a number of limitations attached to this research. The foremost shortcoming is that the research analyses qualitative data only rather evaluating both quantitative and qualitative data. The lack of quantitative research restricts the tangible scope of the Euro 2012 impact for host countries. Moreover, the size of report and time available to complete research is relatively short, which has restricted the use of qualitative and quantitative.
Moreover, this research based on secondary data that limit the perspective and finding of the study. The shortcoming of secondary is that it collected for some other purposes and thus, it allows evaluating the limited perspective for on tourism of the holding countries. The nature of the study is exploratory rather explanatory, which evaluates the changes in variables, confirm the effects and changes in variables. In addition, the study evaluates macro-environment of the host country to evaluate the direct benefits achieved from the Euro 2012 but intangible and indirect benefits are difficult to evaluate.
Sports mega-events are multi-dimensional and complex phenomenon and exploratory study allow maximising potential to evaluate the impact of Euro 2012 on Ukraine and Poland. The purpose of this chapter was to explain research methodology along with data collection and analysis approached. Case study strategy is useful to develop knowledge from wide context and interpret the meanings. The case study approach along qualitative design allowed answering how what and why scenario.
Qualitative secondary data allowed understanding and exploring experiences, expectation, results and circumstance from the wider population for Euro 2012. The use of multiple qualitative data source provides information in social context and natural setting. In addition, case studies useful to analyse data from a wider context and present holistic perspective. The next of study enclosed result and discussion of the legacy of Euro 2012 hosting of Ukraine and Poland.
This chapter of study enclosed the result and data analysis to evaluate the impact of Euro 2012 on tourism development in the two countries. The result enclosed in this section divided into section to evaluate the impact of sport mega event in Poland and Ukraine separately. The figure 8 below show cites and stadium used for Euro 2012 in Poland and Ukraine.
McNulty (2011) elaborated that triangulation enables the researcher to analyse, elaborate the research problem through different approach, and thus, develop confidence in the finding of the study. The advantage of triangulation is that it improves confidence in the research finding and it is particular useful in social researches. Triangulation approach allows confirming the proposition through analysing multiple independent events and thus, reduces the uncertainty and increase confidence in research. Triangulation approach for this study allows analysing and evaluating multiple sources of data that analyse the impact of Euro 2012 (Loera, Rambau and Santos, 2010).
The data collected from multiple sources varies in context and environment and i.e. data triangulation reduce the error possibilities and increase the confidence in the research. In case study research, triangulation is useful to validate the multiple studies and ensure completeness of study. Triangulation reduces the methodology and personal bias of researcher by generalising the result from various studies. In this study, data triangulation managed through multiple case studies, which increase result validity and reliability through generalisation of results (Amorett and Preyer, 2011).
The desire to host Euro 2012 (world third largest mega event) for Poland is based to get recognition in wider and polish people believe that hosting sports mega event provides opportunity to improve prestige and status of country. Euro 2012 seen as realisation of long-term investment, stimulating development and improve country image as hospitable modern country. UEFA Euro 2012 as sports mega event allows the country to bid for the host through fulfilling the wide range of economic, cultural and legal requirement.
The range of requirement of UEFA is state of art stadiums, five star hotels and upgrade infrastructure. The infrastructure improvement in Poland for Euro 2012 was 110 billion zloty ($ 29 billion). The 63 billion zloty (1.5% of GDP) allocated for infrastructure improvement. The event hosted in four polish cities Warsaw, Gdansk, Poznan and Wroclaw. The infrastructure improvement in Poland was involved building motorways, modern train and airport infrastructure, beautiful stadium in the country.
The economic legacy is not limited to pre-event and during the event but the return on investment from the regeneration and development have the long-term impact. Zimbalist (2016) added that the construction of new infrastructure helps the host country to engage in facility effects, which attract 20% more attendance in the first year of completion. The seating capacity during the event has remained filled up to 98.7% during the Euro 2012. The stadium during the games has managed to attract mega attendance during the game. The figure 9 below shows the attendance during the Euro 2012 match.
Data Source: Kennedy and Kassimeris (2016)
However, after the event, the stadium in the country has failed to fill the stadiums and attendance of game decreased for 2013 polish league. Stadium built for Euro 2012 were nearly empty in polish stadium. Shipway and Fyall (2013) stated that the maintenance and operational costs are high for such facilities and finding the tenant represents the problem for the local authorities. The stadiums in Poland entail significant development cost along with high maintenance cost.
After the event statistics show Warsaw stadium has highest loss because fewer events are organised in the stadium after the event. According to Ministry of economy, construction of stadium in Warsaw was mistake with three stadiums in Poland posted the loss of 44 million on new stadiums.
In Poland, Krakow and Wroclaw have lower income from stadium and operational cost these new facilities are high and stadium are loss. Bray (2011) added that it is difficult to define the utilisation legacy built to host one of the mega events, as it is difficult to match the demand. The only success stadium is Poznan that used as stadium for local football club. Euro 2012 has failed to attract large number of people to football as well as state of art stadium has high operational cost. The figure 10 below summarise the average attendance in consequent years.
Data Source: Grishel (2015)
To summarise the effect of sport related facilities, Euro 2012 sport related infrastructure has experience the problem of high maintenance cost and attracting lower attendance after the event. The data analysis agrees to finding of Shipway and Fyall (2013) and Bray (2011) higholighting the negative effect of lavish showcase stadium unable to deliver longterm social benefits.
On the other hand, general infrastructure in the country has improved after the Euro 2012. Muller (2015) stated that mega sports event required large infrastructure investment, which delivers long-term positive impact on the community. Poland has three international standards airport because large investment for the Euro 2012. The infrastructure development in Poland has improved import and export routes of country. Giulianotti (2015) the development of infrastructure improves the living standard and environment for the local public by providing social well-being facilities, transportation improvement. To evaluate the positive impact of Euro 2012, the official UEFA EURO 2012 report shows that there 83 key projects completed in Poland worth €22 euro billion.
To summarise, 9680 railway connections, 22,873 airport connections and thousands of improvement made for tourist movement around the city. A2 highway, S8 express and improvement made to airports. To summarise, Euro 2012 has delivered long-term positive impact for Poland and consistent with literature of Schiller and Young (2015) and Zimbalist (2016).
Source: Zawadzki (2013)
Poland government has conducted study to analyse the short-term and long-term impact of Euro 2012 on the economy.
Radzi et al (2014) added that Spectator effect the visitor attendance and image of the destination, as well as sports fan experience, are a significant source of revenue for the host country. The inbound tourism revenues from Euro 2012 for Poland were €266 million, which were 34% higher than the initial forecast. The reason for increase revenues attributed to higher attendance during the games. The figure 12 below shows the average number of people in fan zones during matches. The crowding out effect, which discourages the normal tourist to visit the area, is account as 13% of total revenues. The additional, revenues estimated from the sport mega event for 2012 stands at €1.92 billion.
Data Source: Central statistical office of Poland (2012)
‘The average spends of tourist was nearly 1,900 zloty during the stay in Poland’
The number of tourist visited the country after the event exceed the three quarter of million which result revenues of 7 billion zloty. For example, it estimated that for game in Poland, 49, 00,000 visitors had watched live matches and other spend time in fun zones such as restaurant and bars. The event manages to attract number of investors from Middle East and Asia and it estimated that they made 25-30% of total tourist.
In Poland, during the games the slogan used ‘feel like at home’ deliver positive success for business. The table 3 below shows the hotel occupancy rate during the Euro 2012 for each game in Poland
Source: Central statistical office of Poland (2012)
The survey among tourist shows that 85% people appreciated the Euro 2012 organisation and 92% impressed with atmosphere in the country. The number of foreign visitors in country was higher and London Brand institute shows that country ranked as highest national brand among the survey of 100 countries. The revenue generated from tourist was 8.1 billion zloty in 2012-2013 and continuously growing. Poland presented its image as clean and secure country.
Higham and Hinch (2002) media and marketing exposure would allow attracting tourist during the event as well as after the event. The figure 14 below summarise the tourist arrivals
Source: Central statistical office of Poland (2012)
The estimated impact of Euro 2012 on the polish economy was 1.3% increase in the GDP in 2012. Euro 2012 has increase GDP of country and value of cumulative GDP in 2012 was 21.3 billion zloty. However, with hosting the event country GDP increase continuously growth trend. It estimates that transport infrastructure improvement has delivered 74.1 increases in Tourism and accounted for 13% of GDP of Poland. The GDP of Poland has continue increasing trend with GDP of $ 45 billion, it rank 11th in Europe. Service sector in Poland has constantly contributing towards the GDP in last couple of years. The figure 15 below summarise the economy growth for Poland from 2011-2015.
According to official publication, Euro 2012 has provided 66,000 jobs for the local community. The unemployment rate in Poland has increased in the Poland in 2013, which possibly result of loss of jobs after the games. However, country unemployment rate has dropped continuously since 2014 and unemployment has continuous downward trend.
Source: World Bank (2016)
Arnegger and Herz (2016) explained that the soft benefit of the mega sports event is image improvement and increased recognition and international publicity improves locality attraction. The promotion of Poland as tourist brand ‘Polska’ used during the host of Euro 2012. Country marketing strategy has adopted slogan ‘Move your imagination’ and UK, France and Italian targeted. The image of country promoted as tourist place where people can feel at home and have nostalgic memories.
The focus was cultural tourism in the country as well as relaxation in natural environment. The focus of country image improvement was involved promoting national and environment connotations. The hosting of Euro 2012 has allowed developing valuable social capital. The polish experience to welcome foreign guests has helped to improve the image of country. The figure shows increased in foreign visitors in Poland
Source: world Bank (2015)
The management of Euro 2012 has allowed gaining technical knowledge. The team of volunteers in the country was set-up to host. However, the official publication in Poland ‘Diagnoza’ reported in 2014 that no increase in terms of social capital in the country. The outcome show that polish society is still least trusted in the European without changing the image of country. In addition, report added that Polish people are least involved in social work and Euro 2012 has delivered least benefit for the society.
The regeneration of the urban area and global media motivate and inspire youth to participate in the sports as well as provide pre and post event employment. Nevertheless, event has provided long-term benefit for the Poland football and in 2016, Poland managed to get to quarters-finals of UEFA Euro 2016. (Czapinski and Panek, 2014)
Gibson (2013) analysed that Leiper’s model evaluates the tourism development through three elements, which are the human element (Tourist) and geographical (destination). The number of hotel in Poland has increased since the Euro 2012 and in 2015, there 10,024 facilities available with average growth rate of 5%. The number of change in number of rooms has double up since 2012 with 1295 hotel in 2010 to 2350 hotels in 2015.
The quality of room and segment has improved in top end segments. The figure below show numbers of hotel and facilities in each segment. There is increase of 47% represent in 3-star category, which represents 11 hotels. There is increase in 5-star hotels to 57 but a decrease reported in lower end of market.
Source: Central Statistical office of Poland
The tourist arrival in Poland has increase since the Euro 2012 it has increased to 17.5 million or 86%. The number of overnight stay has increase 20% from foreign visitors and top five tourists to country are from UK, Ukraine, Italy and Germany. The figure 19 below shows arrivals foreign visitors, and hotel occupancy rate in Poland.
Source: Central Statistical office of Poland
Euro 2012 has provided the local community a reliable and functioning transport system for the city and develop positive image of city. Muller (2015) stated that mega event requires building the new stadium, infrastructure improvements such as communication system, traffic network and housing facilities.
Euro 2012 hosted in the Eastern Europe for first time that has raised environment and transport challenges. The transport concern was associated with environment challenges. Environment burden and resource constraints in context of environment raised the importance of transport challenges. The diagram below shows the transport map of transport strategy for Euro 2012. The transport strategy aim to coordinate all stakeholders, encourage public transport for match day, pedestrian area and legacy for future.
Source: UEFA Euro 2012 – Sustainability report
Polish government issued combi-ticket for the match ticket-holder use of public tickets in host cities through offering subsidy. In Poland, 50% of speculator reached through plane using the new airports. Government provided extra trams and buses for connection between stadiums and airports provided. For example, according to statistics, Poznan city council provided 160 new buses and 63 trams.
Moreover, pedestrian environment used to link fan zones and city centres. For example, in Warsaw 30% of match ticket holders used pedestrians’ facilities. In addition, there were additional 14,000 signs to travel around the city. The post event survey of public transport shows a satisfaction level of 76% in Poland. The figure below shows the initiative for transport system in city of Poznan.
Source: UEFA Euro 2012 – Sustainability report
To meet the air travel challenge in Poland, the addition traffic was absorbed using the temporary terminals. The air traffic in the host cities was increase by 40-50%. There were total of 5,100 flight related to Euro 2012 and nearly 5.25 million people used the air flight to reach the cities. The flight was 60% within Poland whereas 405% increase in air traffic in Poland. The figure 22 below summarise the number of flight from host cities in Poland.
Ukraine was co-host for EURO 2012 and Ministry of sport determined that to host the event, it requires a program with investment value of USDs 25 billion (UAH 125 billion) which is nearly 24% of total GDP. This significant amount of investment in UEFA games has raised the importance of benefits. The figure below shows the required level of investment for EURO 2012 in Ukraine.
The championship requires modern and high-quality transportation, which link cities and states. The summary of investment was 47% for roads and highways, 44% for railways and 9% for airport improvement. The event specific investment in Ukraine for EURO 2012 divided into two important categories, which are construction of hotel (UAH 17 billion) and construction of sport facilities (UAH 8 billion).
Source: Radchenko (2012)
The costs and benefits analysis for the event allows estimating the value added from general and event specific expenditures. The amount spent of general infrastructure is significant as it expects to generate sustainable benefits for the Ukraine Economy. Schiller and Young (2015) added that The Mega sporting event requires specific facilities, which help the hosting cities to improve public infrastructure, and facilities to host the event. The direct benefit from renovation of stadiums in Kiev and Kharkov has allowed providing financial benefit. Immediate benefits are enhanced capacity and improve attendances in terms of attracting spectators for sports. The figure 23 below shows the attendance during the Euro 2012
Data Source: Czapinski and Panek (2014)
Bray (2011) added that the maintenance and operational costs are high for such facilities and finding the tenant represents the problem for the local authorities. These stadiums have full attendance during Ukraine premier league. In addition, Kiev stadium used for national team play with large number of peoples attends the games. Nevertheless, stadium in Lviv has not attracted the local public because of cost attached to stadium and number of games played during EURO 2012. Public prefer to use Ukraine stadium and Lviv stadium has debts of estimated UAH 2 million.
In Ukraine, the sport related infrastructure has provided positive benefit expect the Lviv that perceived unfortunate the public because of less games. The number of sports fan drawn from mega events is important because of long-term positive consequences for the communities. However, in the long-term Euro 2012 has attracted the interest of people in football with figure showing drooping rate of attendance for top-tier matches in Ukraine. The financial as well as political problems in Ukraine have significantly drop number of visitors to games. The figure 24 below shows the number of people attending event in both countries.
Source: Dembek and Wloch (2014)
The infrastructure structure improvement in the country was required UAH 90 billion (72% of total games budget) and involves railroad network as well as motorway. The focus of infrastructure improvement based on transportation to meet the UEFA requirement. In Ukraine, large budget allocated for infrastructure expenses, which include building airport, railways and motorways. The airport renovation for UEFA 2012 has not used to full capacity as road were resurfaced in certain areas only. The electric train for EURO 2012 is victim of frost and Hyundai cruise train has few passenger of cost of ticket.
However, most of the project in Ukraine failed to deliver the desire benefits for the country. Nevertheless, according to statistics provide by German society of international cooperation, the general infrastructure development in Ukraine stood at €11 billion but only €2 billion directly related to event and investment expenditure were planned irrespective of event (Internationale Zusammenarbeit, 2015).
To summarise, general infrastructure development in Ukraine has little impact in relation to event but sport facilities has provided positive impact in host cities.
The benefit of infrastructure improvement divided into three categories that are direct, indirect and induced benefits. Ziakas (2015) added that economic legacy is not limited to pre-event and during the event but the return on investment. The direct income enclosed value added from sport facilitates, indirect facilities involves immediate goods induce benefits is consumption in local economy.
According to UEFA report, Ukraine government has conducted studies to provide the economic benefits. However, independent firms have calculated the economic impact of UEFA 2012. The earning from the Euro 2012 for the Ukraine stands at $ 1.4 billion million but no official data is available.
The hosting country will definitely benefit from the direct and indirect revenue make by the spending from those spectators, including foreign visitors. Euro 2012 has provided the opportunity to promote Ukraine as tourism destination. The three host cities have managed to improve tourism where other cities have failed to attract foreign visitors.
Park et al (2015) the knowledge of the organisation, hospitality, volunteer and other related stakeholders enable the destination effective management the tourism in the country. Ukraine has managed to attract only 2 million tourists to host cities and average spending was around 400 dollars per tourist. Only 7, 00,000 watched the match in the stadium where remaining people watch the match in fanzones.
The key visitors to Ukraine were from UK, Spain, Italy and Sweden. Price inflation created by the mega sports event has significant negative impact on the local population as well as local tourist. According to statistics, there was 20% increase in tourist during Euro 2012. The post era number of tourist in the area has witness an increase of 15% following the games. The revenue earned from the Euro 2012 reached 28 billion that was 2.8% of GDP in 2012.
Data Source: Borzyszkowski (2015)
The hotel industry in the country has evident an increase of 30% revenue to $4.5 million. The figure above shows that hotel development in Ukraine has changed with rooms and hotel has increased Euro 2012 and afterwards. The range of promotional event has allowed improving the image of country The hotel price index shows that price of hotel in Kiev is high when compare to hotel in Poland and European cities. The figure 26 below shows high the hotel prices during Euro 2012
Biddle (2013) stated that the global image of the host country increased its appeal as the tourist destination based on the leisure, fun, excitement and historical perspective it offers Mega sports event transformed the destination into favourable tourism destination through providing opportunities for local and wider population. However, the number foreign visitors to the country have decreased in 2014 significantly. Euro 2012 has managed to attract the foreign visitors in the short term but in the long-run foreign tourism has dropped in the Ukraine. The reason behind tourist decrease is political problems in the Ukraine. The figure 27 below summarise the tourist arrival in Ukraine before and after the event.
Source: IndexMundi (2015)
The GDP of country was 163 billion in 2011, which has increase to 176 billion in 2012. Euro 2012 has provided positive contribution towards the economy of country and it is evident from the data that sport mega event has proved success for the country. However, lack of official publications as well as political conflict has presented challenging scenario of country. The growth in service sector related to hospitality was evident Euro 2012 through increase revenues as well as boost econmy.
Source: Trading economic (2016)
The figure 29 below shows that tourism has contributed towards the GDP of country. The figure below shows that in 2012 and 2013 after the Euro 2013 the contribution of Tourism towards the GDP of country has increased significantly. To summarise, the revenues generated from Euro 2012 has contributed towards the tourism development in Ukraine.
Baade and Matheson (2016) discussed that the mega-sports events create business opportunities. The initial plan associated with hosting of games based on public-private partnership. However, financial crisis of 2008 has made it difficult to attract investor and development of two stadiums Lviv and Kharkov was 75% funded by the government. Despite the problems, Liga business insight (2012) has highlighted that Ukraine after hosting Euro 2012 has attracted more investors. The hosting of Euro 2012 has the country to attract foreign investment in cities expect Donetsk.
The urban regeneration is the critical component of sports tourism legacy, which allows the host nation to enhance the facilities and meet the social need of the local communities. On the positive side, the Euro 2012 has result in emergence of a number of talent players in Ukraine football such as Dynamo Kyiv and Maksym Koval. The football boom after the Euro 2012 has finished and there is little improvement in term of promotion of sport in the country. In fact, FC Kryvbas finished seventh in the premier league did not exist anymore because of financial problems.
Euro 2012 has improved the image of country with documentaries such as ‘high time to see Ukraine’ watched by 2.6 million people and CNN has marked Ukraine among top three destinations in 2012. The street and public transport in host cities provided with English translation but rest of country has remained. Ukraine has managed to impress the visitors with improved infrastructure and public order, which is evident through increase tourism in 2013. Euro 2012 has allowed revamping traditional image of country.
In host cities, fanzones were established and open every day during the games to accommodate and provide positive experience to tourist. The fanzones in Ukraine and Poland accommodate the 7 million fans which represent an increase of 68% when compared Euro 2008. The figure 30 below shows the fanzone in Kharkov and number of attendance in fans for host cities
Source: UEFA Euro 2012 – Sustainability report
Air tariff shows that 65% of people to sports mega event came by plane. The air traffic increased substantially in Ukraine and it estimated that Kharkov air tariff was up 150% whereas in Lviv increase was 200%. The chart below summarise the number of flights for airports in Ukraine.
Source: UEFA Euro 2012 – Sustainability report
For Euro 2012, UEFA was responsible for the transport of officials, teams and staff from airport and hotel transfers. Ukraine railway introduced new trams to link the host cities and increase positive experience of travellers. According to statistics, most people in Ukraine came to match or fanzone by foot. The figure 31 below shows the mean of transport in Ukraine.
Source: UEFA Euro 2012 – Sustainability report
Andersson and Lundberg (2013) elaborated that the positive environment impact of the mega event related to the development of new infrastructure such stadium, transports, communication system, road or other local community projects. The three main environment related to Euro 2012 was energy, water and wastage. The energy for the mega-event provided through redesigning the grids with addition demand of 1,648,440 KWh. The increase in energy demand is because of mild weather in eastern parts and increase air conditioning in fun zones. The water usage for sanitary and pitch is biggest component of mega-sports event.
In Poland through fitting the grease separator, 2,500-m3 water saved. There was total of 630 tonnes of wastage was collected in Poland during and after the Euro 2012. Collins et al (2007) have analysed the negative impact of the mega event on the local communities in terms of excessive waste, pollution and noise. However, the disappointing figures show that only 16% of the waste collected recycled. Moreover, water saving target not met as well as addition energy consumed due to hot weather. The figure 32 below show the recycling statistics for Euro 2012
Source: UEFA Euro 2012 – Sustainability report
Euro 2012, the world third largest sport mega-event has left both positive and negative legacy in both host countries. Poland and Ukraine have spent large amount to develop infrastructure to meet the UFEA requirement. In Poland, sport-related infrastructure has failed to provide long-term legacy and after the event stadium is high operational cost and unable to attract the demand for the venue. For example, Warsaw stadium is unused and failed to generate legacy through urban regenerations.
The official statement shows that Warsaw stadium is a poor investment made the country. The games have managed to attract a large number of tourists during the games but afterwards attendance in the stadium has dropped significantly and stadiums are in loss. However, sport-related infrastructure has proven the national football team uses success in Ukraine. The figure 24 shows that attendance at football matches was higher in Ukraine for 2013 and 2014 after Euro 2012. The football attendance dropped in 2015 in Ukraine that related to political problems in the country.
Ukraine sport related facilities expenditure was lower than Poland (figure 24). However, sport-related infrastructure has delivered better results for Ukraine. Stadium and facilities have successfully delivered urban generation for the country during and after the games.
Poland has spent large money in developing motorways, highways and three-airport expansion. These expansions have managed to link the host cities as well as temporary terminal has allowed handling extra air-tariff during the games. In Ukraine, general infrastructure planned irrespective of Euro 2012 and as analysed only 2 billion euro investment related to general infrastructure was associated directly with Euro 2012.
Poland has successfully provided the positive experience for tourist for travelling in the city. The number of new buses and trams has enable the visitors freely move between fanzones and to the venues. Ukraine has focused on the pedestrian route and large match spectator walked to the venues.
However, in Ukraine, electric train for EURO 2012 is victim of frost and Hyundai cruise train has few passenger of cost of ticket. However, most of the project in Ukraine failed to deliver the desire benefits. To summarise, general infrastructure improvement in Poland has long-term legacy for people.
The transportation cost in Poland and Ukraine during was control through providing a number of combi-ticket to the match ticket holders. Poland provided free services as well as officials and team movement managed by UEFA. Therefore, transport system during the mega-event was controlled. However, in Ukraine, the long-term cost of local travelling through local transport remains high.
After the event, few people benefit from the transport system in the host cities. The average spend by the tourist in Poland was 1900 PLN and figure 26 shows that price was lower in the Warsaw, Poland. The fanzones filled in Poland and the local price has remained stable during the event. On the other hand, price in Ukraine was higher when compared to Warsaw. In Ukraine, tourists spend the average of $400 dollars and tourist came from Russia, Italy and the UK. The price was higher in Ukraine and fewer attended the fanzones when to compare with Warsaw. Euro 2012 has improved the image of country with documentaries such as ‘high time to see Ukraine’ watched by 2.6 million people and CNN has marked Ukraine among top three destinations in 2012.
Euro 2012 has increased the tourism revenues and improved tourism managed in the host countries. The inbound tourism revenues from Euro 2012 for Poland were €266 million, which were 34% higher than the initial forecast. The event manages to attract number of investors from Middle East and Asia and it estimated that they made 25-30% of total tourist. The tourist arrival in Poland has increase since the Euro 2012 it has increased to 17.5 million or 86%.
The official statistics provided by Poland shows that 13% of tradition tourism (time switchers) affect because of the event with crowding out effect of PLN 159 m. However, nearly five million people came to Poland for the sport mega event, which has contributed nearly 1.2 billion to the polish economy. However, Ukraine government did not conduct official economic analysis and no official data provided the government. However, unofficial shows revenues of $ 1.4 billion from the event. Tourism has increased contribution between 2012 and 2013 towards the GDP of country.
Euro 2012 has improved the tourism in Poland after the event especially the hotel industry has double the CGAR after the games. The upper segment of hotel industry has double up and providing better quality accommodation. The employment shows that Euro 2012 provided 66,000 jobs in the Poland but no official data made available for Ukraine. The fanzones in Poland accommodated 5 million attendances, which has provided accelerate the local economy. However, after the event unemployment rate increased in consequently years which related to loss of construction and temporary jobs in Poland.
Nevertheless, in Poland, foreign tourism has remained. Ukraine unemployment rate decreased which large number of tourist visited the country in 2013 and 2014 before the political problems (figure 28). The intangible benefits provided by the games for Poland and Ukraine are that it has revitalised the image of both countries. Euro 2012 has improved the tradition image of eastern European countries and future tourism increased after the event. In Poland, during the games the slogan used ‘feel like at home’ deliver positive success for business.
Euro 2012 was first to sports mega-event hosted in Eastern countries. During the time of award, Poland was member of European Union (EU) whereas Ukraine has an image of the newly independent Russian state. However, both countries had successfully hosted the event to a ripe number of tangible and intangible benefits. From Poland perspective, it is evident that countries can achieve urban development and attract local and international tourist.
The general infrastructure development in host cities has provided both short-term benefits as well as long-term benefits. The environment and transport management have provided quality transport for tourist and local community. Sports tourism legacy provided 66000 jobs for local people and attracted a large number of tourists to a city, which generates economic opportunities.
Country Image rebranding includes individual enjoyment and aesthetic judgement for the tourist and after the foreign tourism has increased by 86% in Poland. The games have provided greater opportunities for general infrastructure development. The road, motorways and airport have provided long-term development for communities as well as improved and export of country has increased.
The lesson learnt from Ukraine provided two important perspectives especially for sport and general infrastructure. The first is sports facilities designed and developed were managed in such way that after the event stadium are used by national team after the events. This has allowed determining the tradition problem of the unused stadium as well as provided a cultural legacy for local communities. The second lesson for other countries is associated with problems of general infrastructure development.
The infrastructure such as trains deployed which fits the local community needs and deliver long-term benefits. The cost of the ticket, as well as suitability according to local conditions, is critical for the social legacy of infrastructure. Moreover, during the event prices of commodities such as hotel rates should acceptable to attract tourist in long-term.
To evaluate the impact of sports mega event on tourism of the holding country in Poland and Ukraine qualitative case study approach used. The strength of this approach was it allows summarising the qualitative data through analysing wider context. The large volume of qualitative data can be analysed using the case study in short time and cost effective manner.
The study analyses the wide number of secondary analysis sources such as journal and official publication to analyse the data and present holistic perspective. Moreover, study exploratory in nature and emphasis given on macroeconomic analyses to analyse the impact of the event at border level. The macro variables have outlined Euro 2012 legacy at the national level.
The qualitative nature of the study has restrained to study the micro variables in the host cities such local job opportunities and business data. Quantitative analysis of micro variables would have allowed identifying and evaluating the trickle down benefits in local communities. In addition, the study used the secondary data and no primary data has collected for this study.
A survey among the local population would have allowed developing the better legacy of the event in a quantitative manner in local communities. In addition, the size of research presented constraint and number of factors such training, diversity, inclusion and number of micro variables omitted to ensure research completed on time and stay with a predefined scope. The key limitation of secondary data for this is lack of official publication and economic report produced by the official in Ukraine.
Muller (2015) added that Mega event requires building the new stadium and infrastructure and thus required large infrastructure investment, which delivers long-term positive impact on the community. Euro 2012 has resulted in large capital expenditure in Poland (175 billion zloty) and Ukraine (UAH 125 billion). The development of and renovation of seven stadiums in host countries as large infrastructure development took 5 years to complete the construction. In Poland, general infrastructure has managed to deliver to long-term social and economic success but sport related facilities have provided fallen legacies.
Bray (2011) stated that it is difficult to define the utilisation legacy built to host one of the mega events, as it is difficult to match the demand. After the event statistics show Warsaw stadium has highest loss because fewer events are organised in the stadium after the event. In Poland after the event stadium has failed to attract large attendance. In Ukraine, sport-related structures are successful and attracted large attendance during 2012-2013.
Collins et al (2007) have analysed the negative impact of the mega event on the local communities in terms of excessive waste and pollution. The increase number of tourist in the city has produced 150 tonnes wastage (figure 44) and the problem associated with both cities only 16% of material separated and recycled. Similarly, energy consumption was high for Euro 2012 because of hot weather, which has double up the energy consumed during the games. The finding of study is valid with Collins et al in terms of environment problems because of sports mega event.
Shipway and Fyall (2013) mega sporting event attracts many sports fans but this deters other travellers to avoid the peak season and travellers reluctant to travel to the host country in peak season. The finding highlights that Euro 2012 crowding out effect stands at 13% or 38 million euro. The people avoided travel to city during Euro 2012 has affected the traditional tourism in the Poland.
Yiannis and Panagiotis (2005) to mega event generate short-term full-time employment but in the long-term employment related to sports facilities are low skilled and part-time jobs and therefore, lack contribution towards the quality of the full-time jobs in the economy. In Poland, 66,000 jobs created during the Euro 2012 and large number of jobs was in hospitality and construction industry. However, after the games there was increase in the unemployment rate in the country.
Nevertheless, unemployment rate remained lower in Ukraine for 2013 and 2014 and number of foreign tourist to countries jumped after the event. Higham (1999) added that the mega events are the stage at greater cost and without the proper framework, failure of such event to deliver economic and social legacies. Construction of stadium in Warsaw was mistake with three stadiums in Poland posted the loss of 44 million on new stadiums. General infrastructure development in Ukraine such electricity has provided lower economic benefits for local communities.
Park et al (2015) knowledge of the organisation, hospitality, volunteer and other related stakeholders enable the destination effective management the tourism in the country. The improvement in Poland hotel industry after the event is evident and number of hotel in high-end market segment has doubled. The number of tourist arriving to cities has continuous trend since the end of Euro 2012. Consequently, tourism industry has significantly gained from the experiences and knowledge during the Euro 2012.
Weed (2008) opportunity cost and resource constraint during mega-event (avoiders) and postpone the trip. Time switcher (H) prefers to visit the destination after the mega-event. The crowding out effect in Poland was 13% and change in local tourist structure occurs in the end. After games, Germany has become one of the largest sources of foreign tourist to Poland. Similarly, in the case of Ukraine, UK and Spain fans attract to the city after the games. Thus, Euro 2012 has directly affected the traditional and people postponed the trip.
Getz, MacDonald and Parent (2015) sports mega event have significant symbolic attachment and reposition the image of the host nation. Euro 2012 has changed the traditional image of these two Eastern European countries through hosting successful games and memorable experience to people.
Spectator affects the visitor attendance and image of the destination and increases tourism in subsequent years. CNN ranked Ukraine among the top three destinations to visit. The intangible benefit of improving image of the country is evident for two countries.
Radzi et al (2014) the increase tourist inflows are the important source of revenue from tourism. The tourism expenditure in fanzones, hotels and shopping has addition billion dollars towards the GDP of both countries.
The positive impact of Euro 2012 enclosed both tangible and intangible benefits. Euro 2012 was the first sport mega-event in Eastern Europe and its games hosted successfully. The successful mega-event has improved the reputation of countries globally and achieved recognition. Moreover, Euro 2012 provided the countries to improve infrastructure such as roads and railways for urban regeneration. For example, airport expansion and road increase the import and exports of two countries.
The foreign tourist added millions of dollars in the local economy through spending in fanzones and consumption. The hospitality industry in the country flourished and long-term tourism improved in the both countries. Euro 2012 benefits the future generation through transforming the city into favourable and desirable tourism destination and has transformed the long-term traditional image of two countries and foreign tourism increased in subsequent years. The knowledge and experience gained from hosting the event have improved the tourism for host cities.
The negative impact of Euro 2012 for both countries is largely associated with infrastructure expenditures. The large investment in sports related facilities has not delivered urban regeneration and social benefits in the local community in Poland. The state of art facilities has failed to the demand and has losses and debts. Similarly, general infrastructure in Ukraine has failed to deliver long-term benefits.
In addition, after the event, there was significantly increase in unemployment particularly in Poland as well as large price hike for food price in Ukraine. Similarly, the environment problems in both countries have long-term consequences as wastage and energy consumption in the host cities increased which has increased the environment burden for the cities. The long-term development of football as sports in host countries not success as fewer people attending the games and no major achievement in future.
This chapter of study enclosed the recommendation for future sport mega-event hosting to maximise the economic, social and cultural legacies.
The first recommendation is that infrastructure capital expenditure should make according to needs of local communities. Sport facilities should design to meet the needs and requirement of local community. General infrastructure should fit social and economic needs of local community.
The second is environment impact should manage in proactive way and environment standards should be achievable. The three important issues are energy, water usage and waste because of tourist should proactively manage.
Third recommendation is UEFA sport related facilities involves significant capital expenditure that results in large financial burden for countries and state of art facilities fails to deliver long-term economic social legacy. Country should seek addition flexibility for decision making in terms of capital expenditures.
The fourth recommendation of this report is that local communities particularly in host cities should consent before committing large capital expenditures. The flexibility for resource allocation through community consultation is critical for long-term social and cultural legacy.
Fifth recommendation is that sport mega event transport infrastructure should design and develop so that it integrates the needs of local communities. Transport system should deploy according to priorities of cities and public requirement.
Sixth recommendation is that sustainability strategy for sports mega-events should part of games before and after the green and green infrastructures should develop for local communities.
Finally, the seventh recommendation for the hosting sports mega-event is that cost-benefit analysis should conduct before bidding for sports mega event to ensure maximum benefits for local communities. In addition, operation budgets and regional planning should conduct prior to event.
Copyright © Assignment-Ease.com 2018
Academic assignment writing service UK, Cheap assignment writing service, Professional assignment writing service, Best essay writing service, cheap essay writing service, University assignment writing services, best assignment writing services
Assignment-Ease is a renowned academic writing service provider offering academic services in a vast academic fortes. We like to inform our customers that all the content provided by us is only for assistance purpose, which cannot be used likewise.
© 2017. All Rights Reserved