Bidding for Development: How the Olympic Bid Process Can Accelerate Transportation Development

109 Pages·2014·1.56 MB·English

by  Ngiste Abebe

Sports Economics, Management and Policy
Series Editor: Dennis Coates
Ngiste Abebe
Mary Trina Bolton
Maggie Pavelka
Morgan Pierstorff
Bidding for
Development
How the Olympic Bid Process Can
Accelerate Transportation Development
Sports Economics, Management and Policy
For further volumes:
http://www.springer.com/series/8343

Ngiste Abebe (cid:129) Mary Trina Bolton
Maggie Pavelka (cid:129) M organ Pierstorff
Bidding for Development
How the Olympic Bid Process
Can Accelerate Transportation Development
Ngiste Abebe Mary Trina Bolton
Washington , DC , USA Washington, DC, USA
Maggie Pavelka Morgan Pierstorff
Washington, DC, USA Louisville , KY , USA
ISSN 2191-298X ISSN 2191-2998 (electronic)
ISBN 978-1-4614-8911-5 ISBN 978-1-4614-8912-2 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4614-8912-2
Springer New York Heidelberg Dordrecht London
Library of Congress Control Number: 2013952912
© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of
the material is concerned, specifi cally the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,
broadcasting, reproduction on microfi lms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information
storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed. Exempted from this legal reservation are brief excerpts in connection
with reviews or scholarly analysis or material supplied specifi cally for the purpose of being entered and
executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. Duplication of this
publication or parts thereof is permitted only under the provisions of the Copyright Law of the Publisher’s
location, in its current version, and permission for use must always be obtained from Springer.
Permissions for use may be obtained through RightsLink at the Copyright Clearance Center. Violations
are liable to prosecution under the respective Copyright Law.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specifi c statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
While the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of
publication, neither the authors nor the editors nor the publisher can accept any legal responsibility for
any errors or omissions that may be made. The publisher makes no warranty, express or implied, with
respect to the material contained herein.
Legal Disclaimer: The views and fi ndings expressed in this book are solely those of the authors in
their private academic capacity. They do not represent the views of the U.S. Department of State,
U.S. Agency for International Development, the Kentucky Cabinet for Economic Development,
any other entity of the U.S. Government, or Deloitte LLP and its subsidiaries.
Printed on acid-free paper
Springer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com)
Foreword

This volume of the Sports Economics, Management, and Policy series marks the
fi rst foray for the series into the explicitly policy realm. It is also the fi rst in the
series not to be written by academics. While their work in this fi eld grew out of their
experience in academia at Carnegie Mellon University, the four authors are not
researchers. The authors, instead, work in policymaking and implementation capac-
ities in public and private sectors, in both international and domestic realms.
Ngiste R. Abebe, Maggie M. Pavelka, Morgan L. Pierstorff, and Mary “Trina”
Bolton began this project as a master’s level capstone project in the Master’s of
Public Policy and Management program at Carnegie Mellon University’s Heinz
College in Washington, D.C. In lieu of a thesis, students in the program complete a
“Systems Synthesis” project in which teams work with a faculty adviser to analyze
a policy issue. The students also must develop a solution or provide recommenda-
tions for addressing the policy problem and sometimes are involved in implement-
ing those recommendations.
Working with four additional students at Heinz College on their capstone proj-
ect, the group identifi ed the International Olympic Committee’s (IOC) bid process
as a mechanism for fostering transportation development. Their topic selection
refl ected a desire to focus on timely policy topics—globalism and transportation
issues—that are also of relevance to policymakers, scholars, and citizens of many
countries. The group recognized that the allure of the Olympics and the universal
appeal of hosting this prestigious mega sporting event often confl icted with the
realities of the Games, including potential negative aftereffects. They wanted to
address this discrepancy as well as highlight how the Olympics can also have posi-
tive impacts—especially in urban development. The authors wanted to fi nd a way
for the prestige and prominence of the Games to enhance the prospects for long-
term development in cities. If channeled strategically, the energy and efforts to host
the Games could and would serve as the means of improving global and local policy
and improving the welfare of societies in developed and developing nations alike.
The group identifi ed the urban development and transportation projects that benefi t
the host city and country residents and perpetuate positive changes as the most
likely means of meeting this goal.
v
vi Foreword
The authors and their colleagues approached me, as well as a few other professors
and economists, to assist them in developing their capstone project. We had several
phone conversations about issues that they ought to consider for the project. We
discussed specifi c literature to read and the methodology to follow. The entire group,
students and advisers, interacted through videoconferences at specifi c milestones in
the project, with the students giving a brief presentation and taking questions from
the advisers. The students also used this time to ask questions about specifi c aspects
of the project where they felt they needed further guidance.
One aspect of the capstone project is to develop a plan for disseminating the fi nd-
ings. The students developed a website and Ngiste, Trina, Maggie, and Morgan
presented work at a conference in London prior to the 2012 Olympic Games. During
the last videoconference session in which the students presented the fi nal project,
I suggested that the project could be revised for the Sports Economics, Management,
and Policy series. Happily for me, Ngiste, Maggie, Morgan, and Trina enthusiasti-
cally accepted the challenge of making their project into a book.
The authors brought a variety of working experiences to this project having done
extensive professional work in economic and international development with a col-
lective focus on transportation policy. They wrote this book with international gov-
ernment offi cials and their partners in mind. The ultimate goal of this work is to
provide guidance to those individuals who seek to leverage hosting a mega event,
such as the Olympics, into a well-planned, well-fi nanced, valuable expansion and
modernization of a city’s local transportation infrastructure. The authors hope that
by following their suggestions, cities will avoid costly “white elephants” and will,
preferably, draw from their Olympic bid(s)/hosting experience a great legacy of
reduced traffi c congestion and pollution, more rapid and affordable transportation
for people and goods, and increased access to the city, country, and world for their
citizens.
While the book is focused on bidding to host the Olympics, the recommenda-
tions the authors make apply to all international sporting organizations, bidding
organizations, and to the citizens of bidding communities. For the International
Olympic Committee, Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA), and
the other international sport-governing bodies, the recommendations are as
follows:
1. Require cities to demonstrate that Olympic-specifi c transportation plans within
the bid align with preexisting city transportation plans .
2. Require proof of citizen engagement and support for the bid’s urban planning
agenda to ensure support for the Games and a positive Olympic Legacy .
Recommendations to the bid leadership in communities are as follows:
1. Utilize every available resource, IOC and otherwise, to strengthen the intersec-
tion of Olympic plans and local plans to lay the groundwork for a positive legacy
from the conception of the bid .
2. Maximize public and private sector support for proposed transportation
projects.
Foreword vii
3. Actively and continuously engage with local citizens to ensure Olympic plans are
responsive to local needs and mitigate risk of protest.
4. Be prepared to drop out of the bid process.
Finally, citizens of the bidding city or country are recommended to:
1. Proactively infl uence Olympic bid plans to ensure community interests are
refl ected in bid documentation.
The importance of the lessons and recommendations of this analysis has recently
been brought to world attention. In the spring of 2013, demonstrations rocked Brazil
during the FIFA Confederations Cup tournament. While these actions were
responses to an increase in public transit fares, discontent about poor services cou-
pled with billions of reales of spending to refurbish and construct stadiums for the
2014 World Cup soon became an important part of the story.
For context, Brazil was awarded the honor of hosting the 2014 World Cup in
October 2007, 6 months after the only other applicant, Colombia, withdrew from
consideration. At the time, Brazil expected to spend $5 billion to host the event. The
2010 Ministry of Sport economic impact report [1] projected transportation infra-
structure spending of 17 billion reales (US $10.18 billion on December 31, 2010),
with another 5.6 billion reales for stadiums. Among the transportation projects were
upgrades to 13 airports and 47 urban transportation ventures, including rail links
from the airports into the cities, trams, dedicated bus lanes, and new roads and high-
ways. Twelve stadiums were also to be built or modernized.
Three years after Brazil was awarded the Games, the planned spending on infra-
structure reached 22.6 billion reales ($13.29 billion, using the October 20, 2010,
exchange rate), a 165 % increase over the expected cost of hosting the event indicated
in press reports just 3 years earlier. In a July 2011 teleconference with international
news organizations, Minister of Sport Orlando Silva, Jr., explained that the planning
efforts for the World Cup were divided into three phases, with the fi rst phase having
begun in 2009. This phase included planning for the infrastructure investment
described above, which Minister Silva reported would cost 24 billion reales ($15 bil-
lion), yet another increase. Describing the planning process, Jose Roberto Bernasconi,
head of a trade association of local engineering and construction fi rms, is quoted by
Andrew Downie in a report for Reuters [2]: “We won the right to host the World Cup
in October 2007 but we didn’t decide what needed to be done until January 2010…
In 2008 and 2009 we did little or nothing. You can call it lack of money, or will, or
competence but there was defi nitely a lack of something.”1 Bernasconi’s comment
highlights precisely the point the authors of this book wish to make—countries bid-
ding to host a mega event will be more successful, and have a positive lasting legacy,
if they start with a bid strategy grounded in a carefully and explicitly specifi ed long-
term plan that must include funding sources and citizen participation.
1 One could also call it a problem of graft, since Minister of Sport Silva resigned offi ce in October
2011, under a cloud of suspicion of padding contracts and receiving kickbacks.
viii Foreword
Downie’s story reported on the problems with Brazil’s transportation plans
including failure to complete rail links to the domestic and international airports
serving Sao Paulo; a stoppage of work on the tram line connecting the Brasilia air-
port to the city; no start to the construction of 20 km of monorail and 21 km of bus
lanes in Manaus; no start to construction of 7 km of highways, tunnels, and over-
passes in Fortaleza; no construction of the roads or rail or metro links in Salvador
that were to be built in time for the Games. Indeed, so many of the transportation
projects are being delayed or canceled that, according to Downie, there is discussion
of declaring a national holiday and closing schools during the event to reduce traffi c
congestion.
Some of these transportation plans are, in fact, part of Rio de Janeiro’s winning
bid to host the 2016 Summer Olympic Games. For example, according to the
Brazilian Ministry of Sports website, Rio 2016 proposed a capital budget of $14.4
billion [4], half of which is allotted for transport infrastructure. Among the transport
infrastructure project costs in the bid were $400 million to extend and upgrade the
Rio International Airport, $600 million for a Rio bypass and other road projects in
the area where most Games venues and the Olympic Village will be, $1.31 billion
for extension and capacity improvements for suburban rail and metro, $1.23 billion
for the development of three Bus Rapid Transit lines connecting the four Olympic
“zones” within Rio, and $1.35 billion for train and metro cars and buses [5].
Rio 2016 also highlights “green” projects in its bid, including low-emission
transport vehicles. The IOC evaluation report highlighted “a feature of Rio’s plans
as the cleaning and regeneration of Rio’s waterways and lakes through government
projects for major new water treatment and sewerage works.” I draw attention to this
claim because a July 18, 2013, N ew York Times story addressed water issues in and
around Rio [6]. Juliana Barbassa reports that more than 20 years after the United
Nations conference on the environment held in Rio, and after nearly $1.2 billion of
spending, none of the four sewage treatment plants is fully operational. The culprit,
according to Barbassa, is “gross mismanagement and corruption.” There are plans
for another $1.3 billion of spending on water collection and treatment facilities, but
Barbassa is not hopeful about the success of these projects as “[j]ust recently, one
shopping mall, four gated communities and one water-front hotel were discovered
to be illegally disposing of their sewage in rainwater mains that fl ow into nearby
beaches or lakes.” In other words, plans for public infrastructure improvements will
fail if the citizenry does not try to infl uence Games organizers regardless of how
competent and uncorrupt their local government might be.
During the same time frame in 2013, protests in Turkey raised questions about
the suitability of Istanbul as host for the 2020 Olympic Games [7]. The authors’
focus on Istanbul as a case study in the book makes these demonstrations of added
relevance—even in the context of urban development. While Maggie, Morgan,
Trina, and Ngiste did not yet know the IOC’s decision for the host city of the 2020
Games at the time of writing of the book, the newfound knowledge that Istanbul was
not selected reiterates the authors’ discourse on Istanbul as a case study. Aligning
with the book’s recommendations, Istanbul may continue to take what it has gained
over the course of its “failed” bid track record, reprioritize further improvements for
Foreword ix
civil society, and understand that winning the Games is not the “end all and be all.”
Regardless of this bid loss, the city may move forward with its plans to improve
transportation infrastructure for its residents.
These critiques, combined with the 2013 civil unrest in Brazil, illustrate the rel-
evance of this book. The need for informed and transparent bid development—
especially in transportation projects of long-term relevance and benefi t to citizens—is
a critical component of any city and country hoping to host a global mega sporting
event. Even as a repeat bidder for the Olympics, Rio may still not be ready to host
its fast-approaching mega events. The negative impacts and backlash in Brazil bring
to light the added signifi cance of engaging in pre-, mid-, and post-bid planning and
implementation thoroughly and with informed public participation. Entering the
process without a solid foundation of planning, fi nance, and consent can bring
unwanted publicity, as the attention the unrest in Brazil and Turkey have demon-
strated, just as surely as a successful stint as host can bring positive publicity.
If they work together, the cities that engage in the bid process and the sport-
governing bodies that select event hosts can avoid the pitfalls of hosting the Games.
To do so is challenging, but following the recommendations set forth by Ngiste,
Maggie, Morgan, and Trina is a good step toward doing so. And by following these
urban development–focused recommendations of thorough due diligence by bid-
ders and bid evaluators alike, careful planning, proper implementation, and citizen
involvement, a positive legacy is achievable.
References
1. Ministerio do Esporte (2010) Impactos economicos da realizacao da Copa 2014 no Brasil,
Brasilia. http://www.esporte.gov.br/arquivos/futebolDireitosTorcedor/copa2014/estudoSobre-
ImpactosEconomicosCopaMundo2014.pdf . Accessed 12 Aug 2013
2. Downie A (2013) Soccer-as Brazil World Cup nears, public transport worries mount. h ttp://
uk.reuters.com/article/2013/03/05/soccer-world-brazil-idUKL1N0BW1DL20130305 .
Accessed 12 Aug 2013
3. (2009) Jogos Olímpicos e Paraolímpicos de 2016 no Rio deixarão legados socioeconômicos de
grandes proporções. http://www.esporte.gov.br/snear/rio2016/noticiaRioDetalhe.jsp?idnoticia=
5754 . Accessed 12 Aug 2013
4. International Olympic Committee (2009) Report of the 2016 IOC evaluation commission,
games of the XXXI Olympiad. h ttp://www.olympic.org/Documents/Reports/EN/en_report_
1469.pdf . Accessed 12 Aug 2013
5. Barbassa J (2013) A river runs over with it. h ttp://latitude.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/07/18/a-
river-runs-over-with-it/?src=xps . Accessed 12 Aug 2013
6. Duff A, Kayakiran F (2013) Turkish protests put Istanbul’s 2020 Olympic bid on back foot.
h ttp://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-30/turkish-protests-put-istanbul-s-2020-olympic-
bid-on-back-foot.html . Accessed 20 Aug 2013