Prologue: Guarantees of Global Goodwill: Post-Olympic Legacies – Too Many Limping White Elephants?¹

Legal Guarantees for Olympic Legacy

“…In the light of comprehensive pre-existing legislation, many consider these additional legal instruments wholly unnecessary (e.g., Scassa, 2008). Such is the allure and perceived, though often illusory, material benefit of hosting the Olympic Games (J. R. Gold & Gold, 2007c, p. 6;Mangan, 2008), that national authorities are willing to expend significant scarce resources, such as time and tax revenues, to protect the IPR of an external agency: the IOC. 1 8 Potential candidates are evidently willing to enact national legislation protecting the IOC's IPR in order to be considered eligible in the Olympic Games host bidding process (Townley, et al, 1998).…”

“…159 -160;Evans, 2007, p. 300;M. M. Gold, 2007, p. 279;Mangan, 2008) and, in line with other mega projects, with no real clarity regarding where long-term responsibility and accountability lie (Flyvbjerg, et al, 2003, p. 111). The Games-related outcomes from this are often increased capital costs to convert stadia to more appropriate post-Games usage (Warner, 2010a), ongoing stadia and other venue-related infrastructure maintenance costs (M. M. Gold, 2007, p. 280) and a lack of long-term public usage (J. R. Gold & Gold, 2008, p. 309).…”

“…This allows most OCOGs to break even or return a profit (Pound, 2009) whilst the host city and nation can incur residual and lasting economic and social deficits (Latouche, 2007;Monclús, 2007). In many ways, the IOC itself creates this situation: benefiting from the kudos associated with successful Games delivery and yet distancing itself from inevitable and significant cost overruns associated with necessary, though not required, infrastructure improvements and the many demonstrable instances of Olympic 'white elephants' (Mangan, 2008): the often unfulfilled and unsustainable legacies of the Games.…”

“…301, 309;M. M. Gold, 2007, p. 280;Kelso, 2009;Mangan, 2008;Mendick, 2009;Moore, 2008;Preuss, 2007;Scott, 2008;Toohey, 2008).…”

Going for gold: A prospective assessment of the economic impacts of the Commonwealth Games 2014 on the East End of Glasgow

“…The notion of legacy has become both institutionalised from the international awarding body's point of view, and sought after and expected by the host city. For organisations like the International Olympic Committee (IOC), concerns about 'gigantism', very high costs and the possibility of criticism for leaving 'white elephants' in cities (Gold and Gold 2009;Mangan 2008), has led to the revision of the Olympic Charter to state that leaving a positive and sustainable legacy to host cities is a 'fundamental commitment' (IOC 2012). Alongside this, host cities are now required to report on a suite of over 100 outcome indicators over a 12 year period in order that there be accountability for delivering on legacy promises.…”