Residents' Perception of the Social-Cultural Impacts of the 2008 Formula 1 Singtel Singapore Grand Prix

Abstract

The Formula 1 Grand Prix was held in Singapore for the first time in September 2008. While Singapore had previous experience hosting international events, nothing in the past could be compared to this inaugural event because it brought with it a unique set of impacts, as evidenced by past research into car races held elsewhere. For this reason, this study explores how this major motor sport event impacted its host residents through their perceptions of social-cultural aspects. This is important because it can affect the well-being and quality of the life of local residents, two necessary antecedents for their continued support of the car race in the future. A survey of 96 residents was conducted to elicit responses to host residents' perceptions of social-cultural impacts of the F1. Chi-square analysis was used to explore relationships between different types of respondents and their perceived social-cultural impacts. Residents were largely homogenous with regard to attitudes toward the positive and negative impacts, although there were more discrepancies associated with the negative issues. Results were compared to previous studies of car race events and social exchange and social representation theories were used to help contextualize the data. While residents largely supported the F1 event suggestions were provided so as to better manage the social-cultural impacts.

The London Summer 2012 Olympic Games: Threat of Disruption and Business Reaction

“…Studies would suggest that residents' attitudes towards impacts affects their support for such events (Ap, 1992;Cheng & Jarvis, 2010;Nunkoo & Ramkisson, 2012;Perdue, Long, & Allen,1990;Ward & Berno, 2011) and host communities question to what extent the benefits of hosting megaevents offsets the costs (Haxton, 1999). Strategies to accommodate mega-events, such as changing commuter behavior, create complex indirect effects on both workers and the work place (Giuliano, 1992), as mega-event visitors share common location and similar travel times as the host population (Robbins, Dickinson, & Calver, 2007).…”

“…These represent opportunities that need to be gained by at least one of the participants in the exchange relationship. Rationality is concerned with the reward/ benefit that the actor envisages the event would as a result of the received experiences (Ap, 1992;Cheng & Jarvis, 2010;Haralambopoulos & Pizam, 1996;Nunkoo & Ramkisson, 2012;Pranic, Petric, & Cetinic, 2012;Waitt, 2003). The host population will view the event as either positive or negative depending on the expected benefits they will receive or costs that they will incur as a result of the level of service/effort they employ.…”

Residents' Perceptions of Convention Centers: A Distance Decay Analysis

“…Wang & Pfister, 2008). Some have traced residents' opinions over time using longitudinal approaches (Getz, 1994;Lee & Back, 2006;Ritchie, Shipway, & Cleeve, 2009), while others have added novelty by concentrating on sectors that contribute indirectly to tourism, such as the casinos (Lee & Back, 2006;Lee, Kang, Long, & Resisinger, 2010) and events (Cheng & Jarvis, 2010;Fredline & Faulkner, 2002; S. S. Kim & Petrick, 2005;Lorde, Greenidge, & Devonish, 2011;Ritchie et al, 2009;Yang, Zeng, & Gu, 2010;Zhou, 2010). Zhou (2010) suggests that research into resident perceptions of locally hosted events have tended to focus on one-off megaevents such as the Olympics, the FIFA World Cup, and world exhibitions (Lee & Taylor, 2005;Waitt, 2003;Yang et al, 2010).…”

“…A similar positive picture emerges when sociocultural impacts are considered. For example, positive perceptions have been associated with cultural activities, destination's image (Cheng & Jarvis, 2010;Fredline, 2005;Gilbert & Clark, 1997), and negative perceptions concerning drugs uses and crime (Andereck et al, 2005;Gilbert & Clark, 1997;Haralambopoulos & Pizam, 1996;Tosun, 2002;McCool & Martin, 1994). Generally, the literature shows that when the local residents have closer connections with the tourism industry or derive economic benefits from it, they are more likely to hold positive perceptions of the impact (Andereck et al, 2005;Haralambopoulos & Pizam, 1996;McGehee & Andereck, 2004).…”

“…"Strength" is concerned with how intensive the perception is in one direction, such as ranging from strongly agree to slightly agree (Krosnick & Petty, 1995). Most studies of residents' perceptions of tourism or events apply both valence and strength dimensions such as using Likert scale ranging from agree to dis agree (Cheng & Jarvis, 2010;da Cruz Vareiro et al, 2013;Fredline & Faulkner, 2002;Gursoy & Rutherford, 2004 The study evaluates both valence (agree or disagree) and strength (agree or strongly agree, and disagree or strongly disagree) aspects of residents' perceptions towards two types of impacts-positive and negative impacts. Responses to the questions were measured on 5-point Likert-scales, where 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = agree, and 5 = strongly agree.…”