The Olympics Games are major international sporting event in which thousands of athletes compete against each other. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) elects the host from a list of cities that have decided to bid. The prospect of hosting a big event is a serious consideration as there are both advantages and disadvantages. The main question is that if it is worth it or make sense for a country or city to be the host. Hosting the Olympics may be seen as a great investment, and in the past, some countries definitely benefited from it (Herstein & Beger, 2013, p.106). Despite that, it is likely to be a mistake to host the Games because it is extremely costly, can unsettle the city and distract the city from effective, long-term planning.
…show more content…
Zimbalist (2012) says that the planning for the Olympics is not usually carried out properly as the proposals are rushed to satisfy the International Olympic Committee (p.116). Therefore, the plans are likely to be limited and ineffective (Zimbalist, 2012, p.116). Only the facilities suitable for the Olympics are prioritized and sports venues take up a large amount of valuable urban land area as well (Zimbalist, 2012, p.116). Although a large amount of costs is involved in construction projects, only a small fraction is spent on infrastructure that may be useful in the future (Zimbalist, 2012, p.116). Since the 2004 Olympics, the stadiums in Athens are abandoned, and it somewhat signifies its collapse (Carpenter, 2015, p.111). Similarly, the stadiums built for the 2014 World Cup in Brazil are essentially useless right now (Appelbaum, 2014, p.113). These stadiums do not bring much economic benefits, and it would be better to focus on improving the general infrastructure that could be useful in the future (Appelbaum, 2014, p.113). Appelbaum (2014) points out that the Los Angeles Olympics were one of the successful ones, and they did not build new stadiums …show more content…
Cities capable of hosting the Olympics are likely to be prominent and thus, it is improbable that doing so would increase their international exposure (Zimbalist, 2012, p.116). Moreover, Appelbaum (2014) points out the research showing that people’s perceptions of the country barely changed due to the Olympics (p.114). On the other hand, being on the international stage means that the country is more likely to expose itself of its problems. Greece’ economic crisis is highlighted by its abandoned stadiums, and Sochi’s Olympics exhibited its security issues and unfavorable weather conditions for the Olympics (Appelbaum, 2014, p.114). Additionally, previous host cities such as London, Beijing, and Nagano, had been exposed by their respective issues ranging from disorganization to pollution problems to corruption scandals. Because of such problems, negative views of the country may arise. The South African World Cup and Commonwealth Games of India were not as successful, and questions regarding their infrastructure and social problems were raised (Nurko, 2014, p.122). Due to the problems in the Sochi Games and the way Russia mishandled the situation, the world community questions Russia’s politics and challenges its views on global values and progressive policies (Nurko, 2014,
Zimbalist (2012) says that the planning for the Olympics is not usually carried out properly as the proposals are rushed to satisfy the International Olympic Committee (p.116). Therefore, the plans are likely to be limited and ineffective (Zimbalist, 2012, p.116). Only the facilities suitable for the Olympics are prioritized and sports venues take up a large amount of valuable urban land area as well (Zimbalist, 2012, p.116). Although a large amount of costs is involved in construction projects, only a small fraction is spent on infrastructure that may be useful in the future (Zimbalist, 2012, p.116). Since the 2004 Olympics, the stadiums in Athens are abandoned, and it somewhat signifies its collapse (Carpenter, 2015, p.111). Similarly, the stadiums built for the 2014 World Cup in Brazil are essentially useless right now (Appelbaum, 2014, p.113). These stadiums do not bring much economic benefits, and it would be better to focus on improving the general infrastructure that could be useful in the future (Appelbaum, 2014, p.113). Appelbaum (2014) points out that the Los Angeles Olympics were one of the successful ones, and they did not build new stadiums …show more content…
Cities capable of hosting the Olympics are likely to be prominent and thus, it is improbable that doing so would increase their international exposure (Zimbalist, 2012, p.116). Moreover, Appelbaum (2014) points out the research showing that people’s perceptions of the country barely changed due to the Olympics (p.114). On the other hand, being on the international stage means that the country is more likely to expose itself of its problems. Greece’ economic crisis is highlighted by its abandoned stadiums, and Sochi’s Olympics exhibited its security issues and unfavorable weather conditions for the Olympics (Appelbaum, 2014, p.114). Additionally, previous host cities such as London, Beijing, and Nagano, had been exposed by their respective issues ranging from disorganization to pollution problems to corruption scandals. Because of such problems, negative views of the country may arise. The South African World Cup and Commonwealth Games of India were not as successful, and questions regarding their infrastructure and social problems were raised (Nurko, 2014, p.122). Due to the problems in the Sochi Games and the way Russia mishandled the situation, the world community questions Russia’s politics and challenges its views on global values and progressive policies (Nurko, 2014,