ON THE FRONT LINES: Do not bring Olympics to your city
This Sunday, the Paris 2024 Summer Olympics concluded. The world witnessed humanity's peak physical capabilities. Many records were broken, and memorable moments occurred, but it was nice that the world could put aside some of its differences to watch this kind of event.
It might seem glamorous to hold the Olympics in your city. After all, it would be great to see these events in person without buying a plane ticket. But trust me, you do not want to host the Olympics.
The economic damage caused by the games is often understated. Although the Olympics appear to be a fun sporting event, they are best considered a large infrastructure problem.
When a city hosts the Olympics, it requires new infrastructure, such as building new roads and rail lines, to accommodate the large amount of sports tourism coming into the area. It also requires enhancing existing infrastructure, such as airports, to handle the number of people coming.
All of these costs eventually add up. For example, the 2016 Summer Games in Rio de Janeiro cost $20 billion, and the 2024 Summer Olympics in Paris are estimated to have cost $8.2 billion, making it the sixth-most expensive Olympics.
This situation worsens because these Olympic costs often blow out of budget. No Olympics have come in within budget, and 47 percent of Olympic Games have cost overruns above 100 percent. For many of these Olympics, it is astronomical how badly blown the budget can be.
For example, the Sochi 2014 Winter Olympics and the Montreal 1976 Summer Olympics had cost overruns of 289 percent and 720 percent, respectively.
Some might argue that even though the Olympics cost a lot, the host cities can make back the money from sources like tourism and the multiplier effect of these infrastructure projects.
But that is not the case. For example, certain road closures had to occur for the Olympics in Paris this year, leading to some local businesses relying on foot traffic for revenue to be blocked out of that. Furthermore, half of the event's broadcasting revenue goes back to the International Olympic Committee.
The infrastructure developed may give a small bump up in employment, but it does not necessarily translate to permanent employment. Furthermore, most of the jobs that come from hosting the Olympics go to workers already employed.
Even still, much of this infrastructure is rarely used after the games. For example, the Deodoro Olympic Park in Rio de Janeiro for the 2016 Summer Olympics was abandoned after the government could not get a private company to run the park.
This means taxpayers are often responsible for shouldering the costs of these unused facilities. For example, the Canadian government spent $17 million to maintain the stadium used for the Montreal 1976 Summer Olympics, and the facility needed $300 million for repairs and a new roof.
And that is the truth about the Olympics. The people who bear the costs and issues associated with the Olympics are not the members of the International Olympic Committee or the local politicians who clamor to host the event; it is the poorest in the city who deal with the consequences.
For example, for the Atlanta 1996 Summer Olympics, the city gentrified the area by destroying the first housing project in the U.S. and displacing 30,000 people to make way for the Olympics. The same is true for Rio de Janeiro, Tokyo and London. If the proponents of hosting the Olympics claim this is a way to strengthen the local community and economy, the event fails on both levels.
If it is the case that the Olympics are terrible for the host city, what can be done? One solution might be to have the host city hold the Olympics for two consecutive years instead of just one. It would reduce the need to constantly build up these short-term infrastructure projects and have them collapse once the fanfare is over.
Another solution would be to encourage host cities to utilize existing infrastructure to host the games. The current bidding process should focus on economic feasibility, not ambitious planning, and taking advantage of the local support system would be more beneficial.
The Olympics are still important. The benefits of national pride and global unity with this sporting event bring us a little closer. But, the economic damage this event causes to local communities is not worth the benefit that comes with it. Until further reforms happen, the Olympics should not be in your city.
Kiran Subramanian is a School of Arts and Sciences senior majoring in economics and political science.
Columns, cartoons, letters and commentaries do not necessarily reflect the views of the Targum Publishing Company or its staff.
YOUR VOICE | The Daily Targum welcomes submissions from all readers. Letters to the editor must be between 350 and 600 words. Commentaries must be between 600 and 900 words. All authors must include their name, phone number, class year and college affiliation or department to be considered for publication. Please submit via email to oped@dailytargum.com and eic@dailytargum.com to be considered for publication.
