Evaluation of the perceived social impacts of the Formula E Grand Prix of Santiago de Chile

Abstract

The aim of this study is to analyse residents' perception of the social impact of the Formula E Grand Prix of Santiago de Chile. A sample of 414 residents was collected through a questionnaire made up of 46 items regarding possible positive and negative impacts. Descriptive analysis, confirmatory factorial analysis and cluster analysis were performed. The results showed two groups with different perceptions of this sporting event: realistic (n=152) and favourable (n=162). Sociodemographic variables referring to education level, civil status, income level, location of the family residence and political orientation contribute to significantly differentiating the clusters. The variables related to interest in the event, support for the celebration, attendance, participation and frequency of contact also contributed to significantly differentiating the groups. Citizens’ high degree of support for holding the sporting event could be identified by a positive social representation of the event.

Involvement, Social Impact Experiences, and Event Support of Host Residents Before, during, and after the 2021 UCI Road World Championships

“…Additionally, hypothesis 3d cannot be accepted as fandom only had a positive significant direct influence on support after the event. Contrary to past research [3,13,15], participation in cycling and event attendance showed no significant direct influence on support before, during, or after the event. Consequently, hypotheses 3e and 3f cannot be accepted.…”

“…Therefore, hypothesis 3c can only party be accepted. Parra-Camacho et al [15] also evidenced this relationship, as they observed a relationship between attitudinal involvement (in terms of interest in the event) and support for the Formula E Grand Prix of Santiago de Chile in 2018 (which can be categorised as a non-mega SSE) after the event. Additionally, hypothesis 3d cannot be accepted as fandom only had a positive significant direct influence on support after the event.…”

“…In the context of the 2018 UCI Road World Championships in Tyrol, Bursa and Mailer [13] found a more positive influence on sportive behaviour and higher levels of event support among spectators after the event occurred. Lastly, Parra-Camacho et al [15] concluded that residents who were more favourable towards the Formula E Grand Prix of Santiago de Chile 2018 were more interested in the event and showed higher attendance levels as well as support towards the event. In past research, involvement was often not (or very seldomly) captured in research on support of SSEs and was therefore highlighted as a limitation of prior studies [3,4,7,9,11].…”

“…Lastly, most research on event support is focused on mega sports events such as the Olympic and Paralympic Games (e.g., [4,7]) or the FIFA World Cup (e.g., [5,14]). Research focusing on non-mega sports events investigating event support is limited, as it rather focused on social impact perceptions (e.g., [15,16]), revisit intention (e.g., [17]), or willingness to host the event the year afterwards (which can be seen as a proxy for event support, e.g., [18]). Therefore, the purpose of this study is to (1) examine the variation of social impact experiences of a publicly funded, non-mega SSE over time (i.e., before, during, and after the event) and (2) investigate how social impact experiences and various forms of sport and event involvement influence event support for a non-mega sports event.…”

Analysis of the contribution of sport events to sustainable development: Impacts, support and resident's perception

“…There is a rising interest in social impact research in identifying the elements that assist to explain the correlations between the positive and negative impacts felt by the host community and support for staging sporting events. In this regard, some papers have tested the relationship of these variables with constructs such as satisfaction with the quality of life of residents [ [4] , [5] , [6] ], attitude towards events [ 7 ], perception of fair social distribution of event benefits and costs [ 8 ], trust in organizers [ 9 ] and in government [ 10 ].…”