Последствия реализации международных спортивных событий для экономики: зарубежный опыт
https://doi.org/10.22394/1726-1139-2019-9-43-54
Аннотация
В академическом и экспертном сообществах до сих пор открытым остается вопрос, насколько спортивные мегасобытия способствуют росту экономики принимающей страны. Подготовка к ним требует колоссальных затрат на строительство и модернизацию инфраструктуры, расширение торговли и развитие туризма. В теории это может показаться благодатной почвой для экономического роста и высоких инвестиционных показателей. Однако на практике крупные спортивные события, как правило, приводят к перерасходу бюджета и огромному росту долга страны; инвестиционные стратегии редко бывают успешными, а финансовые ожидания от таких мероприятий оказываются завышенными. Настоящая статья посвящена сравнительному анализу зарубежного и российского опыта реализации спортивных мегасобытий и позволяет систематизировать эффекты от таких событий для социально-экономического развития страны.
Об авторах
Е. А. Поспелова
Российская академия народного хозяйства и государственной службы при Президенте Российской Федерации
Россия
Россия
Поспелова Екатерина Андреевна, старший научный сотрудник Лаборатории структурных исследований Института прикладных экономических исследований РАНХиГС, кандидат политических наук
Москва
М. В. Казакова
Институт экономической политики имени Е. Т. Гайдара
Россия
Россия
Казакова Мария Владимировна, заместитель заведующего Лабораторией макроэкономических исследований Института прикладных экономических исследований РАНХиГС, заместитель заведующего Международной лабораторией изучения бюджетной устойчивости научного направления «Макроэкономика и финансы» Института Гайдара (Институт экономической политики имени Е. Т. Гайдара), кандидат экономических наук
Москва
Список литературы
1. Agamben G. State of exception. Chicago, IL : University of Chicago Press, 2005.
2. Alegi P. «A nation to be reckoned with»: The politics of world cup stadium construction in Cape Town and Durban, South Africa // African Studies. 2008. 67. P. 397–422.
3. Allen J., Cochrane A. The urban unbound: London’s politics and the 2012 Olympic Games // International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. 2014. 38. P. 1609–1624.
4. Alm J., Solberg H. A., Storm R. K., and Jakobsen T. G. Hosting major sports events: The challenge of taming white elephants // Leisure Studies. 2014. 35. P. 564–582.
5. Almeida B. S. de, Bolsmann C. Junior, Wanderley M., Souza J. de. Rationales, rhetoric and realities: FIFA’s World Cup in South Africa 2010 and Brazil 2014 // International Review for the Sociology of Sport. 2013. 50 (3). P. 265–282.
6. Alves dos Santos Junior O., Gaffney C., de Queiroz Ribeiro L. C. (Eds.). Brasil: os Impactos da copa do mundo 2014 e das Olimpiadas 2016 [Brazil: the impacts of the 2014 World Cup and 2016 Olympics]. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil : Letra Capital Editora, 2015.
7. Andranovich G., Burbank M. J. Contextualizing Olympic legacies // Urban Geography. 2011. 32(6). P. 823–844.
8. Black D. The symbolic politics of sport mega-events: 2010 in comparative perspective // Politikon. 2007. 34. P. 261–276.
9. Borowski J., Boratyn´ski J., Czerniak A. et al. Assessing the impact of the 2012 European Football Championships on the Polish economy // International Journal of Sport Management and Marketing. 2013. 13 (1/2). P. 74–103.
10. Burbank M., Andranovich G., Heying C. H. Olympic dreams: The impact of mega-events on local politics. Boulder, CO : Lynne Rienner, 2001.
11. Clark R. London’s real Olympic legacy: Paying to build the stadium twice // The Spectator. 2014. November 22 [Electronic resource] . URL: https://www.spectator.co.uk/2014/11/londonsrealolympic-legacy-paying-to-build-the-stadium-twice/ (date of access: 26/11/2018).
12. Coaffee J. The uneven geographies of the Olympic carceral: From exceptionalism to normalization // The Geographical Journal. 2015. 181. P. 199–211.
13. Comite Popular. Olimpiada Rio 2016: os jogos da exclusao. [The 2016 Rio Olympics: the exclusion games]. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil : Comite Popular da Copa e Olimpiadas do Rio de Janeiro, 2015.
14. Cook I. R., Ward K. Trans-urban networks of learning, mega events and policy tourism: The case of Manchester’s Commonwealth and Olympic Games projects // Urban Studies. 2015. 48. P. 2519–2535.
15. Cornelissen S. The geopolitics of global aspiration: Sport mega-events and emerging powers // The International Journal of the History of Sport. 2010. 27 (16–18). P. 3008–3025.
16. Flyvbjerg B., Stewart A. Olympic proportions: Cost and cost overrun at the Olympics 1960–2012 // Said Business School Working Paper. 2012 [Electronic resource]. URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=223805 (date of access: 26/11/2018)..
17. Freeman J. Neoliberal accumulation strategies and the visible hand of police pacification in Rio de Janeiro // Revista de Estudos Universitarios 2012. 38. P. 95–126.
18. Gaffney C. Mega-events and socio-spatial dynamics in Rio de Janeiro, 1919–2016 // Journal of Latin American Geography. 2010. 9 (1). P. 7–29.
19. Gaffney C. The urban impacts of the 2014 World Cup in Brazil. In R. Gruneau & J. Horne (Eds.), Mega events and globalization: Capital, cultures and spectacle in a changing world order (p. 167–185). Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 2015.
20. Gold J. R., Gold M. M. (eds.). Olympic cities: City agendas, planning, and the world’s games, 1896–2020 (3rd ed.). London, England : Routledge, 2016.
21. Golubchikov O., Badyina A., Makhrova A. The hybrid spatialities of transition: Capitalism, legacy and uneven urban economic restructuring // Urban Studies. 2014. 51. P. 617–633.
22. Haferburg C. South Africa under FIFA’s reign: The World Cup’s contribution to urban development // Development Southern Africa. 2011. 28. P. 333–348.
23. Harvey D. From managerialism to entrepreneurialism: The transformation of urban governance in late capitalism // Geografiska Annaler B. 1989. 71 (1). P. 3–17.
24. Hiller H. The urban transformation of a landmark event: The 1988 Calgary Winter Olympics // Urban Affairs Quarterly. 1990. 26. P. 118–137.
25. International Olympic Committee (IOC). Olympic legacy. Lausanne, Switzerland : Author, 2012.
26. James M., Osborn G. London 2012 and the impact of the UK’s Olympic and paraolympic legislation: Protecting commerce or preserving culture? // The Modern Law Review. 2011. 74. P. 410–429.
27. Jennings W. Olympic risks. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012.
28. Jones J. Legal tremors in the lead-up to Vancouver’s 2010 winter Olympic Games // 2010. February 26 [Electronic resource]. URL: http://www.vcn.bc.ca/~jjones/legaltremors.html (date of access: 26/11/2018).
29. Kassens-Noor E. Planning Olympic legacies: Transport dreams and urban realities. London, England : Routledge, 2012.
30. Kassens-Noor E. Transport legacy of the Olympic Games, 1992–2012 // Journal of Urban Affairs. 2013. 35 (4). P. 393–416.
31. Kinossian N. ‘Urban entrepreneurialism’ in the post-socialist city: Government-led urban development projects in Kazan, Russia // International Planning Studies. 2012. 17 (4). P. 333–352.
32. Lauermann J., Davidson M. Negotiating particularity in neoliberalism studies: Tracing development strategies across neoliberal urban governance projects // Antipode. 2013. 45. P. 1277–1297.
33. Maharaj B. 2010 FIFA World CupTM: (South) «Africa’s time has come»? // South African Geographical Journal. 2011. 93. P. 49–62.
34. Maharaj B. The turn of the south? Social and economic impacts of mega-events in India, Brazil and South Africa // Local Economy. 2015. 30. P. 983–999.
35. Makarychev A., Yatsyk A. Brands, cities and (post-) politics: A comparative analysis of urban strategies for the Universiade 2013 and the World Football Cup 2018 in Russia // European Urban and Regional Studies. 2014. 22. P. 143–160.
36. McCallum K., Spencer A., Wyly E. The city as an image-creation machine: A critical analysis of Vancouver’s Olympic bid // Yearbook of the Association of Pacific Coast Geographers. 2005. 67. P. 24–46.
37. Muller M. State dirigisme in megaprojects: Governing the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi // Environment and Planning A. 2011. 43. P. 2091–2108.
38. Muller M. After Sochi 2014: Costs and impacts of Russia’s Olympic Games // Eurasian Geography and Economics. 2014. 55. P. 628–655.
39. Muller M. (Im-)Mobile policies: Why sustainability went wrong in the 2014 Olympics in Sochi // European Urban and Regional Studies. 2015. 22. P. 191–209.
40. Newman P. «Back the bid≫: The 2012 summer Olympics and the governance of London // Journal of Urban Affairs. 2007. 29. P. 255–267.
41. Persson E., Petersson B. Political mythmaking and the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi: Olympism and the Russian great power myth // East European Politics. 2014. 30 (2). P. 192–209.
42. Poynter G. The 2012 Olympic Games and the reshaping of East London. In R. Imrie, L. Lees, M. Raco (eds.), Regenerating London. Governance, sustainability and community in a global city (p. 132–150). London, England : Routledge, 2009.
43. Poynter G., MacRury I. (eds.). Olympic cities: 2012 and the remaking of London. London : Ashgate, 2009.
44. Preuss H. Calculating the regional economic impact of the Olympic Games // European Sport Management Quarterly. 2004. 4 (4). P. 234–253.
45. Raco M., Tunney E. Visibilities and invisibilities in urban development: Small business communities and the London Olympics 2012 // Urban Studies. 2010. 47. P. 2069–2091.
46. Raco M. Delivering flagship projects in an era of regulatory capitalism: State-led privatization and the London Olympics 2012 // International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. 2014. 38. P. 176–197.
47. Scherer J. Olympic villages and large-scale urban development: Crises of capitalism, deficits of democracy? // Sociology. 2011. 45. P. 782–797.
48. Siemiatycki M. Implications of private-public partnerships on the development of urban public transit infrastructure the case of Vancouver, Canada // Journal of Planning Education and Research. 2006. 26. P. 137–151.
49. Silver J J., Meletis Z. A., Vadi P. Complex context: Aboriginal participation in hosting the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games // Leisure Studies. 2012. 31. P. 291–308.
50. Smith A. «De-risking» East London: Olympic regeneration planning 2000–2012 // European Planning Studies. 2014. 22. P. 1919–1939.
51. Steinbrink M., Haferburg C., Ley A. Festivalisation and urban renewal in the global South: Socio-spatial consequences of the 2010 FIFA World Cup // South African Geographical Journal. 2011. 93. P. 15–28.
52. Taal M. Their cup runneth over: Construction companies and the 2010 World Cup. In E. Cottle (Ed.). South Africa’s World Cup: A legacy for whom? (p. 73–100). Scottsville, South Africa: University of KwaZulu-Natal Press, 2011.
53. Tang K. The World Cup: Changing country’s laws, one tournament at a time // Berkeley Journal of International Law Blog. 2013. October 26 [Electronic resource] . URL: http://berkeleytravaux.com/world-cup-changing-countrys-laws-one-tournament-time (date of access: 26/11/2018).
54. Tomlinson R. Whose accolades? An alternative perspective on motivations for hosting the Olympics // Urban Forum. 2010. 21 (2). P. 139–152.
55. Van Wynsberghe R., Surborg B., Wyly E. When the games come to town: Neoliberalism, megaevents and social inclusion in the Vancouver 2010 winter Olympic games // International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. 2013. 37. P. 2074–2093.
56. Watt P. «It’s not for us»: Regeneration, the 2012 Olympics and the gentrification of East London // City. 2013. 17. P. 99–118.
57. Wurster S. Homes for games: A filmic interpretation of Sochi 2014 and resettlement in Imeretinskaya Bay // European Urban and Regional Studies. 2015. 22. P. 210–217.
58. Zimbalist A. Circus maximus: The economic gamble behind hosting the Olympics and the World Cup. Washington, DC : Brookings Institution Press, 2015.
59. Zirin D. How the Rio Olympics could cement a Brazilian coup // The Nation. 2016. March 21 [Electronic resource]. URL: https://www.thenation.com/article/how-the-rio-olympics-couldcementa-brazilian-coup/ (date of access: 26/11/2018).
Рецензия
Для цитирования:
Поспелова Е.А., Казакова М.В. Последствия реализации международных спортивных событий для экономики: зарубежный опыт. Управленческое консультирование. 2019;(9):43-54. https://doi.org/10.22394/1726-1139-2019-9-43-54
For citation:
Pospelova E.A., Kazakova M.V. Impact of International Sporting Events on the Economy: Foreign Experience. Administrative Consulting. 2019;(9):43-54. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22394/1726-1139-2019-9-43-54
Просмотров: 910
Послать статью по эл. почте 