As cities compete for jobs and capital in the context of limited federal aid and increasing global economic competition, a new and potentially high-risk strategy for stimulating local economic growth has emerged. This strategy, called the mega-event strategy, entails the quest for a high-profile event to serve as a stimulus to, and justification for, local development. We examine how the mega-event strategy has played out in the three US cities with contemporary Olympic experience: Los Angeles (1984), Atlanta (1996), and Salt Lake City (2002). We analyze the approaches taken by these three cities to bidding for and staging an Olympic mega-event. Our comparison focuses on the decade long period that cities use to prepare to host the games. We conclude with a discussion of lessons learned and the policy implications of the mega-event strategy on urban politics.

No abstract

As cities compete for jobs and capital in the context of limited federal aid and increasing global economic competition, a new and potentially high-risk public policy strategy for stimulating local economic growth has emerged. This megaevent strategy entails the quest for a high-profile event to serve as a stimulus to, and justification for, local development. How and why do American cities commit their resources to seeking a mega-event? And, if a city lands a megaevent, how does that event affect local development policy? To address these questions, we examine the experiences of three American cities which have bid for and organized the Olympics in the contemporary era: Los Angeles, Atlanta, and Salt Lake City. Copyright 2002 by The Policy Studies Organization.

No abstract

No abstract