DISSERTATION master thesis

MSc Festival and Event Management
Masters Dissertation
SESSION 2012/13
MEGA-EVENTS, MASS EVICTION AND SOCIAL
MOVEMENTS
-The Real Winners of the Rio de Janeiro’s Mega-Events-
By
Francesca Spinedi
40082527
Supervisor: Stephen Taylor

2
I. Declaration
I declare that the work undertaken for this MSc Dissertation has been
undertaken by myself and the final Dissertation produced by me. The work has
not been submitted in part or in whole in regard to any other academic
qualification.
Title of Dissertation:
Name (Print): ______________________________________________
Signature: ______________________________________________
Date: ______________________________________________

3
II. Abstract
The purpose of this study is to shed light at the phenomenon of mass scale
eviction that is occurring in Rio de Janeiro following the city’s election to host
the FIFA World Cup in 2014 and the 2016 Olympic Games.
The data of this research was gathered directly in Rio de Janeiro, where semi-
structured interviews with resistance members were conducted. Moreover, an
interview with an event planner, expert in the sustainable management of
mega-event, helped in gaining a deeper understanding of the problem.
Analysing the data gathered from the interviews, it was clear that the city
government in Rio de Janeiro is using the mega-events as a pretext to undergo
urban projects which favour the elite’s speculations at the detriment of the
poorer strata of the population.
Even though various critiques have been addressed to the city government, not
only by the multiple local resistance groups, but, also, by international bodies
such as the UN-Habitat or the COHRE, the number of evictions in Rio is not
dropping.
Neither the city government nor the mega-event committees (nor any of their
commercial partners) are willing to stop forced evictions from occurring. In fact,
enormous real estate speculations and other advantages for the elites are
possible when mega-events are hosted.
This research concludes that even if mega-events could potentially promote a
positive urban legacy for the whole population (and not only for the elites), Rio
de Janeiro did not manage to grab this opportunity.

4
III. Acknowledgement
I would like to express my gratitude to Professor Stephen Taylor, my research
supervisors, for his always clear and prompt feedback during the development
of this research work.
Moreover, my sincere thanks go to all the interviewees for providing their
insights and time. I would like to address special thanks to the event organizer
for her time and vision on the phenomenon of eviction. The experience in Rio
de Janeiro and the meeting with the resistance group members was of great
inspiration. The dedication and sacrifices of these people in trying to stop the
phenomenon of eviction touched me deeply. I really hope that their voices will
be heard in the close future.
An important person who assisted me in Rio de Janeiro is Tiago, who oriented
me in the city and assisted me with his presence at the reunion of the
resistance groups, and during the interviews. I am really grateful to him, and I
hope I can return the favor one day…
Finally, I wish to thank my parents not only for their financial support throughout
my studies, but also for having given me chance to always chose the studies I
wished to follow.

5
Content Page
I. Declaration............................................................................................................................. 2
II. Abstract ................................................................................................................................. 3
III. Acknowledgement ............................................................................................................... 4
Chapter 1: Introduction .............................................................................................................. 6
1.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 6
1.2 Aim and Research Questions ........................................................................................ 7
1.3 Research and Sampling Approaches........................................................................... 7
1.4 Limitations of this study................................................................................................... 8
Chapter2: Literature Review..................................................................................................... 9
2.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 9
2.2 Mega-events; catalysers and pretext for urban plans ................................................ 9
2.3 Mega-events; excuses for illegal urban plans ........................................................... 13
2.4 The voice of resistance groups and the image of the mega-events ...................... 14
2.5 Limit the negative impacts of eviction plans7............................................................ 17
2.6 The Rio de Janeiro context .......................................................................................... 20
Chapter 3: Methodology.......................................................................................................... 21
3.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 21
3.2 Methodology ................................................................................................................... 21
3.3 Source of the data ......................................................................................................... 23
3.4 Data collection................................................................................................................ 24
3.5 Data analysis .................................................................................................................. 24
3.4 Limitations....................................................................................................................... 24
Chapter 4: Findings and Analysis .......................................................................................... 25
4.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 25
4.2 Using the Games for urban beautification projects................................................... 25
4.3 Violent evictions in the city of Rio de Janeiro............................................................ 30
4.4 Difficult conditions for the resistance groups............................................................. 33
4.5 Mega-events for all?...................................................................................................... 35
Chapter 5: Discussion and Conclusion ................................................................................. 37
VI. References ...................................................................................................................... 46
V. Appendices....................................................................................................................... 50

6
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Introduction
Since the beginning of the 20th
century, government have been using mega-
events as catalysers and pretext to undergo urban renewal plans. The fact that
mega-events infrastructures are placed in peripheral areas of the city has
important repercussions on the inhabitants or these regions. As a matter of fact,
the price of the land in proximity to the mega-event suddenly increases in value,
making the area interesting for real estate investments. Besides creating a
phenomenon called gentrification (where low-income families are no longer able
to pay the higher rents and have to move to other neighbourhoods), various
cities winning event bids start removal projects not only to build the
infrastructures needed for the event, but, also, to make the area more
aesthetically attractive and to favour real estate investments.
With the excuse of the limited time framework the government of Rio de Janeiro
in partnership with private companies is creating projects which replace various
high profile areas with an upper class, removing poorer people to distant areas.
In this context, resistance groups emerge and make coalitions in order to
protest against the treatment reserved to those families affected by the
removals.
The idea that mega-events can promote a positive urban legacy is contested.
Some authors argue that mega-events such as the Olympics can change the
urban space in a positive way, for example by improving the public
infrastructures for the benefits of the whole population. Unfortunately, the case
study of Rio de Janeiro seems to suggest a quite different reality.
This research was undergone with the aim of shedding light at the phenomenon
of the eviction accelerated by the 2014 FIFA world cup and the 2016 Olympic
Games, discussing the impacts for the local population affected by the
removals, and suggesting possible solutions to the problem.
This research is relevant because it remembers how important it should be for
event practitioners to take into consideration the impacts of urban planning on
the local population. Moreover, this case study could raise the interest of cities

7
interested in hosting a mega-event and in gaining a positive urban legacy. In
fact, even if mega-events can improve the quality of various infrastructures in
the city, there are negative impacts that need to be resolved before deciding if
the mega-event will bring benefits to the city. Finally, academic authors
interested in investigating the phenomenon could be interested to read about
the Rio de Janeiro case study, and use it as an example of abuse by a
government to change the urban space in an illegal way.
1.2 Aim and Research Questions
The aim of this research is to study the strategy by the government of Rio de
Janeiro of using mega-events as catalysers of illegal urban plans in the specific
context of Rio de Janeiro. Moreover, the opposition of the population and
concrete suggestions to limit those impacts will be discussed.
This research will include the following research questions:
RQ 1: Are the Olympic Games and the FIFA world cup used as pretext and
catalyzers for beautification projects in the city of Rio de Janeiro?
RQ 2: Are removals in Rio de Janeiro respecting the legal framework of the
eviction regulation?
RQ 3: To what extent are resistance groups able to denounce their conditions?
RQ 4: What concrete solutions could Rio de Janeiro adopt to reach a positive
urban legacy taking into consideration the needs of the whole population?
1.3 Research and Sampling Approaches
This study is the result of primary and secondary data collection. Primary
sources were gathered directly in the city of Rio de Janeiro where two
resistance group representatives agreed in sharing their opinions on the
phenomenon of eviction. The interview with a mega event organiser, expert in
sustainable event management, was also undergone in order to have a further
vision on the problematic. With the support of secondary data from journal
articles (mainly from the sociology, geography, law and event management) the
data from the interviews were analysed to confirm or deny the results.

8
The data collected was analysed through the division of the interviews
transcription into an analytic coding phase where themes or topics emerged.
These were compared and contrasted among the different interviews. The
results of the three interviews were very similar; therefore, the themes and
hypothesis raised by the research questions produced very clear results.
1.4 Limitations of this study
The possible limitations of this study are those related with the qualitative
studies in general. In fact, the main problems which emerged is the limited
number of people which participated to the data production; consequently, the
difficulty in generalizing on the results of the case study and in comparing
results of this study with those obtained from similar case studies.
Overview
This research is structured as follows:
Chapter number two will introduce the main academic authors who have
already dealt with the phenomenon of evictions caused by mega-events The
literature on the phenomenon of mega-events used as catalysers and pretext
for urban renewal plans is the first topic of the chapter, followed by the
problematic of the arbitrariness of the eviction processes, possible negative
impacts that resistance groups could have on the event’s image. To conclude,
solutions to make evictions processes more sustainable for the population
affected are exposed.
Chapter number three discusses the methodology used to complete this study.
In detail are described the sources of the data used to answer to the research
questions, the time and location where primary data was collected, and the
method used to analyse the data. To conclude, possible limitations of this
research are presented.
Chapter number four presents the analysis of the data collected for each
research question. The main material from which the data analysis is formed
are the interviews and other secondary non-academic sources.

9
The last chapter discusses the data analysed in chapter four compared with the
literature of chapter two, and concludes with recommendations for those event
stakeholders interested in the use of mega-events as catalyst for positive urban
legacy.
Chapter2: Literature Review
2.1 Introduction
This chapter will deal mainly with the literature related to the four topics arisen
by the research questions. Namely, the strategy by governments of using
mega-events as catalysers and pretext for urban renewal plans, the illegality of
the urban projects and their procedures, the importance of sustainability in the
event management, and, to conclude, the solutions that authors have proposed
to undergo sustainable eviction plans.
2.2 Mega-events; catalysers and pretext for urban plans
Mega-events and the city image
It is widely recognized that mega-events today are part of the marketing
strategy that cities or regions use to stand out in the global market (Ritchie,
2000). In a globalized world, cities compete against each other to attract foreign
investment. A pivotal tool to attract visitors and investors is destination
marketing where cities are sold as products which attract capital and tourists
(Ritchie, 2000). The concept of city’s image is fundamental, since it determines
the success of the city in the global market.
According to various authors (Ritchie, 2000; Greene, 2003; Mascarenhas,
2007), governments have realized that the wide visibility that a city gains when
it hosts a mega-event can be a strategy to show to the world a new image of the
city (re-imagine the city). The mega-event becomes therefore a catalyzer for city
branding. Especially for what concerns developing countries, winning the bid to
host a mega-event is an opportunity to build a city profile which shifts from
stereotypical ideas of less developed destinations (Cornissen and Swart, 2006).
This is one among other reasons for developing countries to harshly compete
against each other to win event bids (Greene, 2003).

10
Sport mega-events, for whom?
Today, sports event are strategically used to reach international recognition by
nations, regions, and cities (Hall, 2006). Politicians have spotted the opportunity
of using sports as a way of standing out in terms of image and competiveness.
In fact, sport today is commercialized and attracts a large audience also thanks
to the technological advance of the media (Hall, 2006).
In order to gain consensus from the population to create the elite’s “vision of the
city” or city’s image, politicians use boosterism to gain the inhabitants’ approval
for their plans of the city. The elite groups send symbolic messages to the
population to convince them of the communal benefits derived from the event
(Hiller, 2000, Law in Hall, 2006). These messages create a sense of expectancy
in the population, which feels due to accept the event and contribute to create a
favorable situation for the event to occur (Pillay and Bass, 2008, Marques,
2012, Hiller, 2000). The consensus from the population is not only necessary
because the money that the mega-event requires to host a mega-event is
mostly public, but, also, it is important because the city is going to modify
drastically its urban space causing important impacts for the local population.
In fact, when a city wins a mega-event bid, many areas and infrastructures of
the city are renewed to make the mega-event city more attractive and
organized. For example, the accommodation choices, the airport condition, the
waste management, the sewage system, the transportation, and many other
commodities are improved to meet the standards set by the mega-event
Committee (Furrer, 2002). However, besides the positive urban improvements,
the urban projects undergone to prepare the city sometimes include negative
outcomes for the population. As a matter of fact, in order for developing cities to
recreate a positive image, the deprived elements of the urban space have to be
concealed.

11
Mega-events and urban regeneration
Removals in cities hosting a mega-event are very frequent, and are undergone
in the name of the already mentioned “city image”, to show the face of a modern
city. As Davis (2010) mentions, most of the international mega-events are held
mainly in areas inhabited by working class people, characterized by lower urban
standards.
Greene (2003) cognates the term “staged city” which describes a city hosting a
mega-event which conceals intentionally poorer areas to create the image of a
developed country. Also, the concept of “beautification of the city” has been
used by various scholars to describe the changes occurring to the city to
eliminate those elements of the city which are aesthetically disturbing (Greene,
2003; Davis, 2010; UN-Habitat, 2007). Clearly enough, in developing countries,
often these elements are poor peripheral areas. Therefore, the urban
beautification is often a process undergone to literally liberate the city from
unaesthetic elements such as poor or degraded areas though a phenomenon
called eviction (UN-Habitat, 2007).
History has already witnessed many cases of mass eviction occurred as a
consequence of mega-events and where basic housing rights have not been
respected. The 1988 Summer Olympic Games in Seoul is one example, where
48,000 buildings sheltering 720,000 people were destroyed during a period of
five years before the Olympics (Greene, 2003). The 2010 FIFA world Games in
South Africa is a similar example of mass eviction even when the event bid was
supposedly centered in the promotion of human rights and the population
cooperation (Pillay and Bass, 2008).
According to the UN-Habitat (2007) the urban beautification has to be
understood as a pretext to undergo eviction processes. Hiller (2000) asserts
that a mega-event can be used by the elites as a cover to conceal other
development plans in which they are interested. Similarly, Pillay and Bass
(2008) describe the phenomenon of city renewal as a “spectacle” where the
elites shape the urban space in a manner which satisfies their “vision of the city”
(Pillay and Bass, 2008: 3). In other words, the elites claim that the works made

12
in the city (including the eviction processes) are necessary to host the mega-
event. However, in reality, they are necessary not for the mega-events to be
hosted but for the elites to modify the city in a way that brings more benefits for
the elites.
Various authors are skeptical about the positive urban legacy that the mega-
event brings to the city, especially to the population living in proximity to the
mega-event infrastructure. Roche (2006) criticizes the excuse of hosting mega-
event in order to send the poorer strata of the population to remote areas,
bringing a middle class (with its consumption patterns) in the these spaces.
Similarly, for Greene (2003) and Hiller (2000), beautification projects are pretext
to eliminate slums from areas of the city which are of great value or are
increasing their value, “making space available for a more lucrative form of
housing” (Davis, 2011: 593). Olds (1998) states that mega-events create a
social class change, where the poor are displaced to distant areas and middle
class inhabitants become the new consumers of these spaces.
The fact that beautification projects are used as pretext to modify the city,
presupposes that there is a longer plan that the elites have of the city which can
be undergone thanks to the excuse of the mega event. In fact, these evictions
programs do not come by themselves, and do not occur because of the mega-
event are held, but have to be understood as longer plans initiated by interest
groups. In Davis’s words, the removals in the city have to be seen as “a
continuum of processes and practices whereby the people of a city-or at least
their leaders-decide what to keep and what to replace (Davis, 2010: 583).
Moreover, Davis (2010) states that it is even possible to foresee the urban
behavior of a government hosting a mega-event if its urban practices of the past
decades are analyzed.
To conclude, the reason why evictions have to be taken into consideration when
a city hosts a mega-event is because cities are using more and more the
justification of the mega-event to change the urban space in an “unethical”
manner. According to the UN-Habitat (2007) international mega-events are one
of the major causes of large scale eviction. Therefore, there is no doubt that
mega-events can act as catalyzers for positive urban planning, and can

13
increase the profile of a city. However, preparing the city to host a mega-event
has also negative impacts (such as the removals of poor people from high
profile areas of the city) which need to be monitored.
2.3 Mega-events; excuses for illegal urban plans
The arbitrariness of eviction processes in cities hosting mega-events
The UN-Habitat (2007) reported that in cities where mega-events were held,
and eviction programs were started, the evictions were done without following
the rules of demolition and with a high grade of “arbitrariness” (UN-Habitat,
2007: 129). As a matter of fact, in normal circumstances, the reorganization of a
city follows legal procedures, however, cities hosting mega-events have a
limited time-framework to prepare the landscape, and, therefore, the economic,
social and environmental procedures that normally apply for urban planning can
be suppressed to make the urban projects possible in a shorter time (Ritchie,
2000; Hiller, 2000). However, for Ritchie (2000) it is important to understand
that mega-events are not necessarily the primary cause of evictions, but are
merely excuses used to accelerate and justify the urban renewal of projects
which origin goes before the decision of hosting a mega-event.
With the excuse of having a limited time framework to prepare the city, the laws
that normally apply for the urban renewal are modified or suppressed. Gaffney
(2010) remembers that when the 2007 Pan American Games were hosted in
Rio de Janeiro a “city within a city” originated; a city with its own norms,
regulations, laws, codes (Gaffney 2010:8).This situation where laws are
changed is ideal to remove the population to a faster pace, avoiding longer (but
more ethical) procedures of urban planning.
Gentrification and forced removals: two ways of capitalizing the city
In some circumstances, the higher value that the land gains following the city’s
election to host a mega-event obliges poor people to move from their areas. In
fact, the price of land, of the rent and of other goods increases, and many of the
people who were living in the area are no longer able to cope financially with the
new prices. As a consequence, they need to move to poorer neighborhoods.

14
This phenomenon is called gentrification and it is typical in areas which are
chosen to host mega-events (UN-Habitat, 2007; Ritchie, 2000).
In other cases, the city decides to forcibly remove people from their houses. In
many cases the evictions made in developing countries are violent and cause
important impacts on the evictees. Sometimes, local community are not
consulted, and their relocation can bring about intense suffering for those
evicted (Jago et all., 2010; Ritchie, 2000). In various reported cases of
developing cities hosting mega-events, people were forcibly taken out from their
houses, with little or no notice at all. Moreover, the compensation was never
given or well under its value (Un-Habitat, 2007). The population is often
removed in large complexes far away from the city, with worse transportation
means, which make the journey to the job place much harder. Additionally, an
important social impact caused by the evictions is that the social network so
important to support the family’s economy and welfare is broken when families
are taken apart from each other (UN-Habitat, 2007).
In short, mega-events can act as catalyzers of urban renewals since they use
the excuse of the limited time framework to change the urban space illegally. As
a consequence, the evictions take the form of violent and disruptive processes.
2.4 The voice of resistance groups and the image of the mega-events
Why city governments and event organizer should care about resistance
groups
Resistance groups, if not consulted, can potentially damage the image and the
plans of mega-event organizers. Therefore, it is paramount to consult the local
population before changing the urban space. In fact, the success of an event
cannot be measured simply by looking at the economic revenue coming from
staging it, but should be measured taking into account the welfare of the whole
society before, during and after the event (Lockstone and Baum in Van Lill and
Thomas, 2006). The eviction of the inhabitant from their houses as a
consequence of a mega-event is a social cost which is often ignored, and most
mega-events are planned in a way that the local population has no voice in
chapter (Hall in Olds, 1998).

15
As Jago et all (2010) claimed, the media plays an important role in determining
the impressions of a destination hosting an event. In fact, journalists visit the
city before the event starts, and produce material not only on event itself, but,
also, on other stories. If these stories are not positive, they will jeopardize the
image of the destination. In fact, as Ritchie (2000) observes, the media attention
that is given to a city hosting a mega-event can potentially be given to
resistance groups telling negative stories of their city. Resistance groups have
therefore an opportunity to use the international attention to show to the world
their situation, and, consequently, endanger the image of the city, or of the
event (and its commercial partners).
Another reason why event practitioners and host cites should think of the
welfare of the population when organizing a mega-event is because a
sustainable mega-event will not only improve the experience for the local
population, but that of the tourists as well. In fact, if the local population is
satisfied with the event management, the atmosphere will improve the tourists’
experience as well (Madrigal in Waitt, 2003).
Unfortunately, often event organisers avoid the confrontation with the population
which is affected by the event’s impacts. One reason for this is that consulting
the population for the application of mega-event projects can make the whole
process more slowly and complex (Furrer, 2002). Ritchie (2000), believes that
local authorities and the event stakeholders are afraid of the local reaction and
therefore they prefer to avoid a dialogue with the population.
However, changing the urban space of a city has important repercussions on
the inhabitants affected by the dislocation, and, in some cases, the population
takes action and makes pressure against the mega-event’s plans (Olds, 1998).
Mega-events leaving positive legacies
Some authors are of the idea that if appropriately managed, staging a mega-
event can be the right change to leave the country with a long-term sustainable
legacy. For example, Mascanhares (2007) believes that mega-event can bring
about positive impacts for cities which have chronic urban problems.

16
As a matter of fact, various authors cited examples were mega-events were
seen as opportunities to reach a sustainable legacy. For example, Greene
(2003) claims that the bid for the 2008 Chinese Summer Olympics was created
with the aim by the IOC (International Olympic Committee) to accelerate the
legal reform to avoid abuses by the state, and to give more freedom both
political as well as economic to the population. In other cases, the sustainability
was not planned but ended up being accelerated by mega-events. For example,
in his study on various Canadian cities, Olds (1998) demonstrates how the local
population in three Canadian cities reacted to the staging of mega-events and
their urban restructuring plans. He noted that in some cases the resistance
groups changed the attitude of event organizers, sponsors and the city’s
politicians in relation to the housing issue (Olds, 1998). To cite an example,
when Toronto was bidding for the Summer Olympics of 1996, housing issues
such as tenancy laws, and eviction procedures were arisen by the local
population, and, even if the city did not win the bid, these issues were included
into future bid processes (Olds, 1998).
Mega-event organizers are aware of the consequence that an event of this
scale has on the city and its environment, therefore, they work together with
international bodies such as the human right bodies or environmental bodies to
(theoretically) produce a more sustainable management of the events. Together
with these international bodies, they write documents stating their interest in
struggling for sustainability.
For example, the IOC created a document called Agenda 21, with the aim of
producing more sustainably-friendly Olympic Games. Apparently, also the FIFA
is working to reach a more sustainable event management, starting various
campaigns which, according to the association, are made to improve the world
(see FIFA web-site). Moreover, the FIFA started alliances with international
bodies such as the United Nation Children Fund (UNICEF), the World Health
Organisation (WHO), SOS Children Village, etc., to demonstrate their will to
cooperate for a fairer world.
Unfortunately, many authors do not believe in the interests of these committees
in improving the society and the environment. For example, as COHRE (2007)

17
states, the FIFA is claiming to be using sport for social purposes, however, the
FIFA association is repeatedly stepping over the most basic housing rights.
Unfortunately, as Hiller (in Pillay and Bass, 2008) assert: “embracing principles
and putting them into operation are two different things – constantly endangered
by finances, time constrains and politics” (Hiller in Pillay and Bass, 2008: 11).
2.5 Limit the negative impacts of eviction plans
Raquel, Rolniq (2011) special UN rapporteur on the right on adequate housing
claims that the government should be obliged to adopt a legacy plan to make
sure that these mega-events produce positive impacts not only environmental
but also social, without violating the human rights.
Some authors and other sources have already matured some advices from
previous experiences with mega-events, on how to handle more sensibly the
phenomenon of evictions caused by mega-events. A list of the main suggestion
will follow in the next sub-sections.
Concrete solutions
Offer the local community the chance to be consulted already at the bid
stage
It is paramount to seek the consultation with the population affected by the
removals since they are the best informants which could give alternatives or
advices on how to limit the impacts. For example, the city of Toronto (Canada)
hired consultants who studied the mega-event impacts, and together with the
local population looked for possible solutions. Public meetings were held with
the population, and also $110,000 was given to help the community group
research (COHRE, 2007).
The problems arising from the lack of the consultation with the population is the
alienation of the local community from the event, and the failure in
understanding the necessities and problems of the community.

18
Monitor the possible housing impacts and use a risk reduction approach
One of the first step that city should take into consideration when modifying the
urban space is to have an impact study which monitors the housing impacts
before, during and after the mega-event. To accomplish this, a special
committee should be established. Pre-event social impacts (SIAs) as they are
called, together with event evaluations sponsored by communities and
governments could assist or record effects that mega-events can have on the
local population (COHRE, 2007). Jago et all. (2010: 224) suggest to use a “risk
reduction approach” which imposes an obligation to start early an action to limit
the impacts which are highly probable to happen.
Transform a percentage of the Olympic village to social housings
It could be a sustainable practice to leave part of the accommodation build to
host the mega-event stakeholders (athletes, referees, sponsors, media, etc.,) to
lower class people who were affected by the removal projects (COHRE, 2007).
This is what Athens did reserving part of the Olympic village for subsidized
workers housing. In other cases, such as Barcelona and Sydney, the Olympic
village could not be transformed into social housing since it was privately owned
(COHRE, 2007).
Protect housing rights during the bid-phase
Housing rights need to be reinforced during the bidding-phase of potential host
cities (Hall and Cox in Ritchie: 2000). Sometimes, the cooperation of the State
together with the region makes the protection of people affected stronger
(COHRE, 2007). Moreover, when communities and legal organization merge
during the preparation and hosing phases of a mega event a strong protection
can be assured (COHRE, 2007)

19
Offer the chance to turn to an international court
Because the interest of the State could clash with the needs of the evictees
people (since the state is interested in preparing the city for the mega-event at
all costs, and the evictee are interested in not being affected by the removal
plans), there should exist a neutral forum, besides the state courts, with the aim
of protecting those people who lose their houses as a consequence of mega-
events, and who want to turn to an instance which is not federal but
international (Blumert, 2012).
Assuring fair and ethic management of the removal projects giving
special attention to minority groups
The eviction procedures should follow some basic rules to protect the citizens
from a violent removal with long-lasting psychological, economic and social
effects. According to the General Comment No 7 of the CESOR (1997), the
evictees should have the rights to a good compensation, the chance to have a
consultation, and the notice of the eviction should be given in good advance.
Moreover, the representatives of the government (i.e. government official)
should be present at the moment of the eviction. Another fundamental fact is
that those people who are undergoing the removals should identify themselves,
and no eviction should be made during the night or when the weather is not
good and without the consent of the person affected. Also, the evictee should
be given the chance to address to legal instances in case they need legal
advice or protection (Blumert, 2012). Furthermore, minority groups such as
women, children, elderly and disabled people should be given a special
attention when removed from their houses (Olds, 1998)
The role of the IOC in the sustainable management of the mega-events
It is not to be so clear if mega-event committees are really taking care of the
sustainability of their events. In fact, if, from one side they are signing
agreements with international bodies such as the UN, and producing
documents confirming their intention of bringing a positive legacy to the host
city, on the other side they are practically not expecting host cities to adhere to
any sustainable practice (Blumert, 2012).

20
For example, for what concerns the Olympics, the IOC (International Olympic
Committee) is in a position to determine that host cities (the cities hosting an
event) have to adhere to international housing agreements. The IOC could for
example include in the Olympic charter the need to respect housing rights,
sanctioning the host countries which are not respecting the agreements.
Otherwise, they could change the housing rights policies by obliging the host
country to create respectful housing standards (Blumert, 2012)
Blumert (2012) also urges the IOC to consider the adherence of the host
country to standards of housing when selecting the city which will host the
Games. The city chosen must be one that has already adhered to standards of
property rights.
NGOs and other associations have repeatedly warned the IOC of the strategy
by governments to use mega-events as a pretext for slum clearance. They also
urged the IOC to consider the eviction problematic when choosing the city
where to host these events. However, the IOC has not shown the will to take
any measure against the evictions procedures (UN-Habitat, 2007).
To conclude, various academic authors and international and national bodies
have given suggestions on how to best manage the urban renewal plans. These
suggestions should not only be addressed to the host government, but also to
the mega-event committee which, if really interested in the sustainability of the
event, should adopt stricter rules to impose to the cities wishing to host a mega-
event.
2.6 The Rio de Janeiro context
Rio de Janeiro named cidade maravilhosa (marvelous city), a top touristic
destination, has already hosted a variety of mega-events ranging from the Pan-
American Games (2007), the Military World Games (2011), the UN Conference
on Sustainable Development (2012), etc., In the coming years, Rio will host two
of the most important sport mega-events in the world. In 2014, Rio will welcome
visitors from all over the world to assist the FIFA World Cup, and in 2016, for
the first time in South America, the Olympic Games will be hosted.

21
Brazil is a developing country which is growing at an impressive pace; the
middle class is increasing exponentially in number; however, the urban space
shows the existence of a large population still living in precarious conditions. In
a country with deep socio-spatial exclusion and chronic problems with housing,
sewage, transport system, and medical infrastructures the city is managing the
mega-events in a way little sensible to the problematic of its inhabitants (Rolnik,
2012).
The country is trying to show to the world its new profile; enormous urban
projects are being built, which have repercussions on the economy, on the land,
on the environment, and on the society as a whole (ANCPC, 2012). Especially
the areas of Barra da Tijuca, Maracana, and Marechal Deodoro will be
restructured. Thousands of families who used to live in these areas interesting
for real estate speculation are being evicted through processes little conform to
the law.
In 2012, the number of people who lost their houses as a consequence of the
mega-events was estimated to be around 170,000 (ANCPC,2012). In this
scenario, resistance groups gather together to fight against the renewal plans.
Some of the resistance groups are new, and other groups have a longer history
of resistance. These groups work together, and together they try to find ways on
how to call the national and international attention on the eviction plans of their
city government.
Chapter 3: Methodology
3.1 Introduction
The aim of this chapter is to introduce the method used to collect and analyse
the data. Part of this chapter are the source of the data, the location and time
when the data was collected, the method used to analyse the data, and, also
the possible limitations of the study
3.2 Methodology
This research followed a qualitative approach, and different research
techniques and sources were used to investigate and analyze the research
questions.

22
Primary data concerning resistance groups and their impacts were collected
through semi-structured interviews and participant observation in the city of Rio
de Janeiro. The personal participation to the reunion of the resistance groups
helped understanding how these groups gathered and organized themselves.
Since the first two research questions were mainly related with the specific case
of Rio de Janeiro, only resistance members were asked to give their opinion on
the situation.
1.The first research question was about the possibility of the mega-event to act
as pretext and catalyzers for beautification projects. This question needed the
answer from somebody who was directly involved in the phenomenon. People
affected by the removal besides being less likely to talk against the government,
could have a less broad understanding of the interests by the various event
stakeholders responsible for the current situation in Rio de Janeiro. On the
other hand, resistance group members, besides being more open to talk freely
about the illegalities that the government is committing against its population,
have also a deeper understanding on the phenomenon of eviction. They know
who are the stakeholders interested in hosting the mega-events and what are
their interests.
2.The second research question investigates the possibility of the eviction
processes to disrespect procedures of eviction at the expenses of the
population. The evidence for this research question should have come from
proper informants such as the resistance groups who witnessed in first person
the modality of the eviction procedures that the government is using to remove
families from their houses.
3.The third research question investigated the likelihood of resistance groups to
call international attention, damaging the image of the mega-event. Both
resistance group members as well as the event organizer were asked to give an
opinion on the possibility of resistance groups to call the attention of the national
and international public, and the extent to which it was possible for resistance
groups to damage the image of the mega-events.

23
4.The same was done with the last research questions which tried to answer to
the question of mega-events and the possibility of promoting sustainable urban
legacies in the host country. This question was more oriented towards the event
organizer who had the experience of more mega-event cases, and could better
judge if there were cases where the mega-events really promoted sustainable
urban projects taking into consideration the wellbeing of the whole population.
3.3 Source of the data
Very appropriate sources were used to gain the information of the research
questions. In fact, nobody would better understand the phenomenon of eviction
and its consequences on the population than the members of resistance groups
themselves. Because of their expertise and knowledge of the topic, because of
the technical nature of the questions, and because of the need to understand
the phenomenon from a historical and political point of view, these people were
appropriate informants for this research.
The first informant has a long experience of resistance since he is the main
coordinator of the resistance groups and activities which are occurring in Rio de
Janeiro against the FIFA world cup and the Olympics, and the urban impacts
they are causing.
The second informant, history professor and researcher for institute of urban
plans in Rio de Janeiro, was chosen because of his knowledge in the historical
dimension of the phenomenon and his practical experience in the management
of the urban space by the city government.
The event organizer worked for sustainable committee of the Olympics in
London. Because of her experience in the management of mega-events, and in
the housing impacts caused by the mega-events, she was a fundamental figure
in giving a vision of the phenomenon from the point of view of an event
organizer.

24
3.4 Data collection
The interviews with resistance group were conducted during one week in
February 2013 in the city of Rio de Janeiro, whereas the Skype interview with
the event manager was undergone in March 2013.
The presence of the researcher to the resistance group reunion gave the
chance to listen to all participants (mainly NGOs representatives and resistance
groups members), and see who of them had the best characteristics to produce
moderate and reliable results.
3.5 Data analysis
The data gathered from the interviews was translated from Portuguese to
English and then transcribed. The data was then coded into categories and sub-
categories. These categories permitted to have clearer information on each of
the research questions.
After the coding of the transcript in categories and subcategories (analytic
coding), the categories of the two interviews with the resistance group members
were compared in order to produce more reliable results.
Because the interview with the event planners was one only, this last step could
not be done with the informant number three, and, therefore, her evidences
were presented in a more narrative form of writing.
3.4 Limitations
The difficulty to get a feedback from the event organizers, as well as from
resistance groups, is a possible factor which could interfere with the validity of
this study. In fact only a limited number of people was interviewed. Moreover,
the fact of the study being undergone in a cultural context which is not the
researcher’s one, could have caused the misinterpretation of some information.

25
To guarantee a higher validity for the study, more participants could have taken
part to the research, and, also they could have had a more differentiated
professional background. For example, beside the resistance groups or the
event planner, also other figures such as politicians, event sponsors, NGOs, or
the media could have participated to the interviews. In fact, data produced by
more varied groups could have given a more complete picture of the reality.
Chapter 4: Findings and Analysis
4.1 Introduction
This chapter will present the main findings which emerged from the interviews
with the informants and with other non-academic sources. The chapter is
divided into four main parts, each dedicated to one of the research questions.
4.2 Using the Games for urban beautification projects
“There are two types of Olympics, the Games that use the city, and the
city that uses the Games”
Eduardo Paes, Mayor of Rio de Janeiro (The Economist, 2012).
According to the interviewees of Rio de Janeiro, the city government’s aim is
that of being presented as an economic strengths and touristic attraction. This
hypothesis cannot be denied since it is included in the 2016 Rio Olympic bid, as
a key strategy of the Olympics (Olympic bid). In fact, the Brazilian Olympic
committee claimed that the mission of the Games is that of delivering:
“Excellent Games, with memorable celebrations that will promote the global
image of Brazil, underpinned by social and urban sustainable transformation
through sport, contributing to the growth of the Olympic and Paralympic
Movements” (Rio2016, 2012)
From the interview with the resistance groups it was obvious that the first
research question about the possibility of the mega-events in Rio de Janeiro to
act as catalyzer and pretext for beautification projects was confirmed. There are

26
various reasons why the elites are interested in having a catalyzer to accelerate
the urban processes. These are themes that emerged from the interviews:
First of all, the people interviewed highlighted the fact that with the discourse of
the limited time at disposal to build the mega-event city, the government has an
excuse to avoid the consultation with the population and can undergo the urban
projects faster. In fact, the pressure that the government makes, asserting that
the city will go through an international shame if the works are not finished in
time, is a pretext to modify the normal procedures of eviction.
Moreover, the fast pace that the city is working to build the mega-event city
does not permit resistance groups to inform the population affected from the
urban plans, and on their rights as citizens. This point is very important
especially when taken into consideration that many people of the poorer areas
of Rio de Janeiro do not have the means of defending themselves because of
their socio-economic conditions. In this way, the government can change the
urban space without having to face a strong resistance.
Another interesting theme that emerged from the interviews is that the excuse
of the short time to prepare Rio de Janeiro contributed to the phenomenon of
law flexibility. Law flexibility is a process where the laws are changed for
example to overcome a new economic, social or technological situation. During
the years prior to the World Cup and the Olympics, the government of Rio is
changing its urban, social, and environmental laws in order to undergo projects
which would not be possible within the existing constitution. The laws
themselves show that during the mega-events, the city is transformed into an
“exception city” where at various levels; national, regional, and local a large list
of “provisional” laws, measures, resolutions, and administrative acts are taken
(ANCPC, 2012). To cite an example, the federal law nr. 11.124/22005 states
that the utilization of the land in the hands of the public power can only be used
for projects of social interest. However, in Rio de Janeiro, a municipal order
n.30.379/2009 was created which stated that the executive power will give all
the necessary land needed to host the 2016 Olympic Games belonging to the
public municipal administration, even if occupied by a third party (ANCP, 2012).

27
Besides the chance to undergo urban projects without the consultation of the
population, and without having to stick to the constitution thanks to the law
flexibility, a further advantage for the elites is that this situation creates multiple
opportunities for real estate investments. To the main plans that the mayor of
Rio de Janerio has for the city, the transformation of the transport means, the
regeneration of the port area and the urbanization of the favelas are the main
points (The Economist, 2012). What exactly Mr. Paes means with “urbanizing
the favela” is not clear, since the city government is not urbanizing the favela
but rather is hiding or removing them (interviews).
Obviously the chance to increase the real estate investments is partly the result
of the mega-event (which increases the value of the land around the
infrastructures), and of the cooperation of the government with private
companies which are allowed to build in public places and under a legislation
that is modified to allow their speculations. For example, around the area called
Barra da Tijuca (Southern part of the city), the Olympic village is being built.
This area is gaining drastically in value and the construction companies
together with the government have already taken advantage of it removing
more than 500 families, from nearby favelas such as Restinga, Vila Recreio,
Vila Armonia (all located in proximity to the Olympic infrastructure) and sending
them to areas which are 40-50 kilometers (mainly Cosmos and Campo Grande)
(ANCP, 2012).
The 2016 Olympic Games’ bid asserts that the 2016 urban regeneration plan is
seen by the three levels of government as being in line with the long-term
regeneration plans of the area. They claim that these areas need to be evicted
to improve the urban mobility, to save the population from environmental risks,
or to improve their quality of life. However, these are excuses to sell land which
has grown in economic value (ANCPC, 2012).
The so called Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) are characterizing the urban
processes in the years prior to the mega-events. These PPPs are characterized
by the cooperation of the government together with private companies to
undergo real estate speculations, where public land is sold to private companies
(interviews). In Rio de Janeiro, resistance groups have criticized the politics

28
which gives public lands for the private sector. In fact, in exchange for a private
investment of 1,3 billion Reais (£ 426 million) the city hall will give 1.180.000
square meters of public land, or 75% of the Olympic Park, for private initiative to
construct residential buildings and hotels after the Olympic Games (Cidades
Possiveis, n.d).
It is not the first time that the government in Rio de Janeiro is hosting a mega-
event and is making partnership with other powers in order to gain an income
from selling the land. As Mascarenhas and Borges (2009) mention, already
when the 2007 Pan-American Games were hosted in Rio de Janeiro the public
federal, state, and municipal powers together with the COB (Brazilian Olympic
Committee) and other private companies tried to change the city and transform
it to gain a profit (Mascarenhas and Borgers, 2009). During these Games, the
city government decided to privatize areas which were public land. One
example is the famous seafront Marina da Glòria in the Flamengo area, which
the city tried to transform to a place for the elites and the tourists. However,
some inhabitants formed resistance groups such as the Comitê social do Pan
and the S.O.S Parque do Flamengo, which reacted harshly against the plans.
Today, the same phenomenon is occurring around the famous Maracanà
stadium, a historical Brazilian heritage, where the government is trying sell
public land, and resistance groups such as the indigenous groups living there
and other resistance groups such as the popular committee against the World
Cup and the Olympics are fighting against the project.
The increase of the land value and the clearance of poor families from high
profile areas is also bringing a new upper class to areas where the real estate
speculation occurred. This is a benefit for a government interested in shaping
the image of the city as a modern and rich place. In fact, the important goal that
cities have when they win mega-event bid, is that they have to prepare the
image of the city for tourists and investors. As a matter of fact, in order for the
image of the city to be broadcasted in the whole world, and to attract tourists
and investors, those elements of the city which are not aesthetically pleasant
are being hidden (interview).

29
Rio de Janeiro is trying to hide unaesthetic elements to give a modern face of
its landscape and the elements supporting this thesis are multiple. The
informants mentioned the case of the various walls build by the city government
to hide the favelas to the eyes of the tourists. An example, is the Mare favela (in
the Northern area of the city) where an enormous wall of the cost of 20 million
reais (£ 6,25 million), and of the dimension of 7.6 km was built to hide the
poverty of this part of the city. The city government claimed that it was built to
protect the inhabitants from the acoustic disturbance coming from a main road
close by (virusplanetario, n.d.), however, as one of the interviewed claimed,
everybody knows that the walls are built in order to hide the favela from the
tourists.
The destruction of favelas in places where there is no need to remove them is
another element demonstrating that the government is only interested in its
economic advantages, and so are cases of poor neighborhoods destroyed even
if there were alternative plans made by the local population together with
university members which could have avoided the removal of many families. An
example is given from the case of Vila Autodromo, a favela in the West area of
Rio de Janeiro, where the association of the inhabitants together with the
Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ) and the Federal Fulminense
University (UFF) created an alternative urban plan called “Plano Popular da
Vila Autodromo” (popular plan of Vila Autodromo) in which a project was studied
taking into consideration the habitations, the sewage system, the
infrastructures, the environment, the public services and the cultural and
community development. The plan showed that from the point of view of the
environment as well as from the point of view of the finances, there was no
necessity to displace the community (Rolnik, 2012a). This plan would have
served to demonstrate that mega-events are not only for the interest of the
market and of its sponsors, but they could also be an opportunity to face the
socio-environmental debt which has accumulated in the last decade in Rio de
Janeiro (Rolnik, 2012b). However, the reason why the government did not
accept the alternative plan was because this space was already given to the
private sector thought the contract PPP (public private partnership). Besides
giving the public land to private companies, the money needed for private

30
companies to clear up the area (and to remove its inhabitants) was public
(Cidades Possiveis, n.d).
To conclude, the research question about the possibility of mega-events to be
used as excuse to undergo the urban projects more rapidly is confirmed from
the interviews. In fact, the above mentioned reasons support the fact that the
elites benefit from the mega-events and see in this situation the chance to
undergo their projects without the consultation of the population and to
circumvent the law.
4.3 Violent evictions in the city of Rio de Janeiro
In the previous chapter the benefits and interest that the elites have in hosting a
mega-event were illustrated and the hypotheses that the mega-events permit to
accelerate the work was confirmed. The aim of this chapter is to show that
mega-events not only are used as pretext to accelerate the evictions in Rio de
Janeiro, but also they contribute to the violation of the most basic human rights
before, during and after the removal processes.
In Rio de Janeiro the main responsible for the removals are the city government
and sub-government bodies (interviews). The elites are interested in building a
city which best represents their interests, and are managing to change the
urban space in a very intelligent way (interviews).
The strategy used to convince the population to accept the negative
consequences of the Games is that the elites and the media in Rio de Janeiro
create ideas of patriotism asserting that those who are against the mega-events
are not carioca (inhabitants of Rio de Janeiro), that they are against
development or against progress. This idea of the patriotism is used to commit
acts which are against the law, against the poor, taking out the poor from areas
of valorization (interview).
Various are the cases of people evicted from their houses without an
appropriate compensation and through a violent and unethical process of
removal. The informants claimed that the transformation of the city caused

31
important impacts to the population; these can be divided into sociologic,
economic and psychological impacts.
The loss of the social network so important for many working class families is a
very important social impact that has dramatic repercussions for poor families.
In fact, in Brazil many people surviving with a limited budget live in extended
families (more than two generations in the same house) and use to leave the
children or sick parents together with neighbors or friends. When these people
are removed from the favelas and are relocated in separate buildings they lose
the support so important to raise the children or to take care of the elderly
members of the family. In general, the important social impacts is this shift from
a very united community, where families support each other reciprocally (called
communidade a toa), and a mercantilist way-of –life, where families are living in
separated buildings and cannot rely on the support of their friend or neighbors.
Moreover, another problem that the new families will have to face when moving
to new neighborhoods is that those people already living in these places will see
the arrival of so many people as a threat since the quality and quantity of the
most basic services such as schools or hospitals is really poor. This shortage in
the quality and number of places available in hospitals and schools makes
groups of people enter into conflict with each other.
Among the economic impacts there are the consequences of living far away
from the city centre; the possibility of losing one’s job, the higher costs of the
public transports (because of the longer travel to the work place). Moreover, the
price of the rent is often much higher, and the size of the flats is often smaller
than the house people were living before being removed. The reason for this is
that when a large number of people moves to a new neighborhood, the owners
of flats of that neighborhood take advantage of the large number of evictees to
increase the price of the rent.
Additionally, the costs that the families have to pay to put children in day
nurseries or to leave somebody taking care of the older members of the family
are too high for working class people. As a consequence, often one person of

32
the family has to leave the job in order to take care of the member of the family
who used to be cared by neighbors or by other family members in the favelas.
The psychological consequences that the poor population has to bear are
intense, and they can be divided into consequences before, during and after the
removal. Before being removed, people are informed with a very short notice of
their removal, with a letter that does not mention the reason for them to be
removed, which creates lot of pressure to the families. People are not given
appropriate alternatives (normally they are asked to choose between a house in
a distant area of the city, or a compensation well below the real value of the
house). The government uses strategies to make them move out as quickly as
possible. For example, the interviewee described the psychological war that the
people responsible for the evictions are using to convince the population to
leave the favela. Trucks are sent to the favela, to destroy the houses of those
families who have already agreed to leave the house. However, instead of
removing the houses entirely, the trucks destroy just part of them, leaving ruins
on the floor. The reason for this procedure is that the people who still did not
accept the compensation or the new flat in another area will feel as if they are
living in a war-zone, and will desist from their fight against the government.
The removal itself is a very violent practice where government people armed
with gun assist the trucks in destroying the houses. Often, these people
threaten the families to demolish the houses even with people inside if they do
not leave the house immediately. The whole processes are done without taking
into consideration the presence of children.
For what concerns the families who accepted to be removed, the psychological
consequences are linked with the loss of the social network; the fear of not
having somebody taking care of the grandparents or the children. All fears
related to the transition from a social network system, to a mercantilist way of
life.
In general, according to the Articulação Nacional dos Comitês Populares da
Copa (ANCPC), a document created by various resistance groups in Brazil to
fight against the forced evictions, the International Olympic Committee, the
Brazilian Olympic Committee, local mega-event organizers, the proper city and

33
large bodies that the city delegates public responsibility are not seeking for a
conversation with the population affected, and, therefore, they are undergoing
eviction projects in an unethical and illegal way.
As a matter of fact, according to the informants, eviction processes are
undergone against the municipal, state and country constitution. Moreover, they
are also violating international agreements that Brazil has recently ratified. For
example, Brazil has ratified the Conventant of the UN Committee on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), and the country in 1988 decided that the
Union, the State, the Federal District and the Municipalities were responsible
mutually to improve the living conditions and to promote the housing right
projects. Therefore, removals are against the international, the federal as well
as the domestic Constitution (Ultima Instancia, 2012).
In short, the elites manage to undergo their plans of demolition using discourses
of a collective interest in hosting the event and of city patriotism (which avoids
the resistance from the local population). In this way, the negative outcomes
such as the brutal psychological, social and economic consequences that
affected people have to bear are excused.
4.4 Difficult conditions for the resistance groups
For what concerns the third research question about the resistance groups and
their fight against the illegal removals, it emerged that the resistance in Rio de
Janeiro occurred in all cases where removals were undergone. However, the
extent to which they were effective and served to resist against the municipal
urban projects vary from case to case, and, according to the interview with the
event organizer expert in the sustainable management of the event, the
resistance groups can only make the news but cannot really harm the image of
the mega-events.
The resistance is visible in public and private manifestations in Rio de Janeiro,
however, the issue has also called the attention of foreign actors.
Documentaries on the issue are not few; youtube videos are also large in
number. Moreover, the social media is playing a role in this fight. Groups such
as WITNESS (a nonprofit organization which spreads the human right abuses

34
through the use of videos) is involved in the resistance, and also internationally
recognized bodies such as the UN-Habitat (a branch of the UN), and the Centre
of Housing Rights and Eviction (COHRE), a human rights organization based in
Geneva, are condemning the procedures used to forcibly evict people from their
houses. However, till now, their voice seems to be little heard. The main
reasons for the local voices to be so weak are the socio/economic conditions of
the population affected by the removals as well as the impossibility for weak
stakeholders such as resistance groups to fight against powers such as the
Brazilian elites.
The resistance was particularly strong in those areas which have already had a
history of resistance against the removals such as Vila Autodromo. However, as
the informants claimed it was very difficult for resistance groups to form. In fact,
the condition of the population affected by the removals is not optimal to
participate to the opposition groups. Among the reasons why the population is
not participating the lack of time and the little instruction that characterizes the
life of many people in the favela are two main reasons. In fact, many people
wake up very early in the morning, travel very far to their job place, and arrive
home late and tired. This way of life does not permit them to have the energy
and time to participate to the resistance activities. Moreover, another important
reason why the people affected do not participate is their fright of the authorities
and their historical marginalization from the society.
Moreover, making one’s voice be heard in Rio de Janeiro is really hard since
both the city’s elite, as well as the media which are sponsoring the mega-events
are too strong opponents. The two main TV channels Rede Globo and Rede
Record are both sponsoring the mega events and this explains to a certain
extent why the phenomenon of eviction is not discussed in national TV channels
and does not call much national attention.
To resume, for the facts of poor Brazilian people being historically oppressed by
the elites, and for not having the necessary means to defend them-selves, the
population is not in the condition of participating actively to the resistance
activities which could possibly damage the image of the mega-events.
Moreover, the government, the media, and other elites involved are too strong

35
stakeholders to fight against. Therefore, the resistance did not manage to really
call the attention of the world to the cause of the illegal removals that are
happening in Rio de Janeiro as a consequence of the FIFA world and the
Olympic Games’ preparation.
Moreover, the event organizer was very skeptical about the possibility of mega-
events to be interested in producing a positive urban legacy for the city. For
example, it emerged that the IOC is not making any interference with
governments which are criticized for being harming their population. The main
reason of that is the lack of interests from the mega-event committee (IOC in
this case) to intervene in matters of human rights violation. In fact, the informant
believed that the sole matter that interests the IOC is to go anywhere were “they
are going to have a good party” (interview) even if this means to deal with
people (or politicians) who are corrupted or do not care about human rights.
Neither the mega-event committees nor the government of Brazil are interested
in hearing the voices of the resistance groups. Therefore, it is difficult to imagine
who could really stop these illegal evictions procedures, even when important
bodies such as the UN-Habitat or the COHRE have already criticized the
management of the urban space and the removals of thousands of people in
Rio de Janeiro.
4.5 Mega-events for all?
The interviews with the resistance members raised interesting ideas on how a
fair Brazilian government could limit the impacts of the eviction and bring
positive outcomes also for the evictees.
The transport legacy and the urban legacy should include advantages also for
the poor population and not simply for tourism and the upper classes.
Therefore, if a true transport legacy was to be created, not only the construction
of highroads should be planned, not only the taxes to produce and sell cars
diminished, but also the public transports (so important for working class
people) should be improved. Therefore, the train and metro lines which
currently offer bad conditions could be ameliorated.

36
Additionally, the Olympic Village could turn into social housing especially for
those families who earn from 0 to 3 minimum salaries and cannot access to the
housing program “minha casa, minha vida” (a financial help to build a house
given by the government to families earning more than 3 minimum salaries). In
fact, the Olympic Village which is being built in Rio de Janeiro will have a bed
capacity of 17,700 beds, which could host part of the population affected by the
removals.
Also, the sponsors and partners of the FIFA and the IOC should pay the taxes
for working in Rio, and part of this money should go to the victims of the
negative impacts of the mega-events such as the evictees.
The importance of not giving to private companies public land guaranteeing all
the risks of the areas is another suggestion since this could be a very harmful
idea not only because it could turn to a very costly operation, but, also, because
the projects which private companies have (such as shopping centres or
parking places) are eliminating the identity of the city. Instead, the government
could think of popular projects. For example, in the port area, an area which lost
its importance in the last decades, the government could create a popular
market with local food, Brazilian art craft shops, places where the Brazilian
culture and art can be showed. This kind of project could attract tourists, and
could avoid transforming an area which has plenty of history into an anonymous
area.
Most importantly, the eviction processes, if really necessary (and not because
the elites want to use the land for real estate speculations), should be done
consulting the population affected, and the conditions of the new houses should
be better or, at least, the same as those that they had in their place of origin.
Moreover, the new houses should be in proximity of the old places of residence
in order not to lose the social network and many other important elements for a
good living such as a job, a school or a nursery.

37
Chapter 5: Discussion and Conclusion
Introduction
This chapter compares the data emerged from the interviews with those present
in the literature review, and concludes with recommendations for event
practitioners on the sustainable management of eviction processes. The main
subchapter include: the comparison of the literature on the use of mega-event
as catalysers and pretext of beautification projects with the results of the Rio
case study, and the association of the literature on the illegality of the eviction
processes in general, and with the case of Rio de Janeiro. Moreover, the
influence of the resistance groups in harming the image of the mega-event will
be presented in this chapter, and, to conclude the comparison of concrete
solutions to the problem of removals by academic authors and by the resistance
group members will be resumed.
Discussion and Conclusion
The aim of this research was to investigate the procedures of eviction which
followed the election of a Rio de Janeiro as the host city of two of the most
important sports-event; the FIFA World Cup in 2014 and the 2016 Olympics.
The formation of resistance groups and their role opposing to the modus
operandi of the city government was also an important part of the research,
which also proposed solutions for the city in order to reach a positive urban
legacy.
Many of the themes that emerged from the interviews have already been
discussed by academic authors who have investigated the urban processes that
follow mega-events. These are the most important results which emerged from
this study, and which can be related to the existing literature.
The first research question was about the possibility of mega-events to act as
catalysers and pretext to undergo urban projects. This hypothesis was
confirmed in the case of Rio de Janeiro.

38
As Ritchie and Hall (2000) already claimed in their text “Mega-events and
human rights”, cities are perceived by elites as products to be sold. Rio de
Janeiro is no exception. Rio de Janeiro is hosting the mega-events as an
opportunity to show to the world a modern image, what Cornisel and Swart
(2006) had already witnessed in other developing countries hosting mega-
events.
The image of the city is a very important concept repeatedly mentioned in the
literature (Jago et all., 2010; Ritchie, 2000; Greene, 2003; Mascanhas, 2007).
These authors are of the idea that cities are interested in winning an event bid
in order to re-imaging the city to the eyes of the tourists and investors.
Therefore, when a city is elected to host a mega-event, the urban space is
modified in order to make the city more aesthetically attractive, often concealing
poorer areas of the city (Greene, 2003; Davis, 2010)
The interviews revealed the interest of the Rio de Janeiro government in hiding
poorer areas of the city to make the city more aesthetically attractive. For
example, the case of the 7.6 kilometers long wall in the Marè favela, is a clear
example of how the elites are trying to hide the poor areas of the city from
tourists and investors, and thousands of favelas, especially around the mega-
event areas are being eliminated. The expression “staged city” by Greene
(2003), perfectly fits with the case of Rio de Janeiro, where favelas are
concealed with walls, or destroyed even if not necessary, even when there are
very valid alternative plans such as the case of Vila Autodromo where the local
population together with two local universities created an alternative plan to the
removals (which took in consideration all the important urban and social aspects
of the renewal) but which was refused by the city government because the land
was already sold to private investors who had already their urban projects.
Moreover, poor houses are not only being removed for them being unaesthetic,
but, as Roche (2006) claimed, also because their inhabitants have not the same
consumption patterns as those of the upper classes. This phenomenon is not
new in the literature and was already described by various authors (Roche,
2006; Greene,2003; Hiller, 2000; Davis, 2010; Olds, 1998). The same is
happening in Rio de Janeiro were the evictees instead of being given a house in

39
the proximity (as the law states) are sent to distant neighborhoods such as
Campo Grande or Cosmos.
Besides creating a city which best attracts tourists and investors, the elites are
also interested in shaping the city that best represents their interests. In fact,
when mega-events are hosted in a city, the value of the land increases
considerably. This attracts investors, especially from the real estate sector.
Urban projects which are not required by the mega-events committee are
undergone. For example, public land is sold to private companies, which create
shopping centres or parking places. These projects are not for the mega-events
to occur, but are for the government together with private companies to shape
their “vision of the city” (Pillay and Bass, 2008). Rio de Janeiro is led by a
government which uses mega-events to undergo a series of urban
restructuration which are part of the elite’s longer urban plans, a phenomenon
already mentioned by Davis (2010).
To conclude, mega-events are used as pretext to undergo urban projects and
this can be seen by the rapid increase of the real estate speculations that are
occurring in Rio in the last years, where the government is taking advantage of
the situation to sell public land to private companies. Those low-income families
living in the area sold to private companies are displaced and sent to distant
neighborhoods of the city, what creates the elites “vision of the city”, or the
“staged city” which best conceals poverty and where the middle and upper
classes are favored by the new urban space.
2. The second research question investigated the legality of the procedures that
the government of Rio de Janeiro is using in order to undergo the removals.
To a deep analysis, hosting a mega-event brings multiple advantages to the
elites of a city, and allows a government to change the urban space in a way
and through processes of evictions which would not be possible in other
circumstances. As a matter of fact, in Rio de Janeiro the discourse of the limited
time at disposal that the government has to prepare the city for the mega-
events is used to suppress existing urban, social and environmental laws. In

40
this way, the city can be changed without having to stick to the constitution
which protects its inhabitants, its environment and space (Un-Habitat, 2007).
For example, even if the law stated that determinate areas of the city could only
be modified for social purposes, the city managed to change its law and create
new regulations which permit to make use of this land in the way that best
benefits the government.
One consequence of the law flexibility and the discourse of the limited time-
framework to prepare the city for the mega-events is that the removal of the
people living in these high profile areas are accelerated and undergone totally
against the law (Ritchie, 2000; Hiller; 2000).
The violence and arbitrariness that characterizes removals in developing
countries has already been described by various authors (Jago et all., 2010;
Ritchie, 2000; Davis, 2010, UN-Habitat, 2007). Ritchie (200) and Jago et all
(2010) wrote on the negative consequence that emerge when the local
community is not consulted before undergoing urban projects which comport
their removal. UN-Habitat (2007) reported of various cities hosting mega-events
where the people affected by the removals did not receive an adequate
compensation (or no compensation at all), where the population was forcibly
removed, and sent to distant areas of the city, leading inevitability to the lost of
the social network so important for low-income families (UN-Habitat, 2007).
Similarly, in Rio de Janeiro probably the most important consequence of the
removal, besides the violence and psychological pressure that the government
is making against the people, is the transition from a community of support
(characterized by the mutual help among neighbors and friends) to a
merchandising community where families are individual unities facing their
problems autonomously.
Further data on the impacts which emerged from the meeting with the
resistance groups are related to the specific case of Rio de Janeiro. However,
they could be revealing also for other situations especially in developing
countries. Such as the loss of the job, the lack of places in the basic social
services (schools or hospitals) in the new areas, the higher prices of the

41
transport means, the higher prices of the rents and the worse living conditions
that the evictees have to face when they move to the new distant area that was
given by the government.
To conclude, removals in Rio de Janeiro are certainly not respecting the
constitution nor the human dignity of the people displaced. A practice that the
government is constantly using is to give public land to private construction
companies, what automatically leads to the eviction of the low-income families
living in these areas through very violent and “unethical” processes.
3. The resistance groups in Rio de Janeiro did not manage to reach much
international nor national interest. However, it is too early to answer to the
question of the resistance in the case of Rio de Janeiro. In fact, the resistance
has managed to change some urban projects that the city government wanted
to impose, however, at an international scale they did not manage to call much
attention, certainly not enough to make the IOC intervene in the situation.
Hall (in Olds, 1998) mentioned various cases of cities hosting mega-events
were the local population was not consulted at any stage of the event
management. The same is happening in Rio de Janeiro, where the population
of the favelas making part of the areas to be removed was not asked the
opinion on the project nor was given the chance to propose alternative plans.
There are various groups in Rio de Janeiro who are fighting against the way the
city governments is undergoing the removals; even important international
bodies such as the UN-Habitat and the COHRE criticized Brazil for the illegal
manner that the country is dealing the evictions. However, the conditions that
the poor population has in Brazil (low level of instruction, marginalization from
the society, oppression by the city government, lack of acquainted people to
defend them, oppressing working-hours), are elements which make them desist
from fighting. This could be a reason why the resistance did not manage to call
much national and international attention, and why they were not successful in
damaging the image of the mega-events.

42
In fact, as the resistance group representative claimed, the difficulty emerged
when the same people that are being evicted are not able to participate to the
resistance activities (because of their socio-economic conditions) to make
pressure against the government. Therefore, the number of people affected by
the removals is enormous, however, just few of them are in the condition of
opposing themselves against the government’s urban plans.
Moreover, the fact that the resistance has to fight against very strong
stakeholders such as the government, the construction companies, and the
mega-event committees or the media, is a further element which indicates the
difficulty for resistance group members to be heard. In fact, as the interviewees
mentioned, the main responsible for the eviction processes is the city
government, which, together with construction companies is gaining the most
from hosting the mega-events and has no interest in stopping the removals from
being undergone.
However, if Jago et all. (2010) are right in claiming that the international press
plays an important role in telling about the negative stories that host event
produce when they prepare the space for the mega-events to occur, then, there
is still a chance for the resistance groups in Rio de Janeiro to denounce their
condition and to harm the image not only of their government but also of the
mega-events.
To resume, the local population in Rio de Janeiro is not managing to really
denounce the situation internationally for various reasons. First of all, the
difficulty for the population affected by the removals to be part of the resistance
groups, and, secondly, for the harsh opposition made by the city government
together with the media partners of the mega-events, and other strong
stakeholders. However, there is still a chance for resistance groups to be heard
when the international press visit the city prior to the mega-event, and which will
probably report of the current conditions that evicted people are experiencing.
4.Finally, the research question number four revealed that there were possible
solutions to the removals, which could be managed in a more sustainable way,
bringing positive legacy for all the strata of the population. However, these

43
solutions would only be applicable with a government interested in the welfare
of the whole population and not only in the profits that the elites would make
hosting a mega-event.
Solutions which emerged from the interviews proposed are: a stronger
involvement of the local population in the urban projects. Moreover, if the works
are really necessary, they should be done respecting the law (short distance
from the original place, adequate condition of the new houses, etc.,). The
interviewees added that the legacies for the city should not only be directed to
the elites, but should include the poorer population. For example, the transport
legacy could comprehend the amelioration of public transport means and not
only the highways used principally by the middle and upper classes. Another
element that the resistance members mentioned was the need to give to the
population affected by the removals at least a percentage of the houses of the
Olympic Village. Finally, the government is undergoing projects which are
destroying large parts of the identity of the city. For example, the port area
where the slaves arrived from Africa has the potential of being transformed into
a popular area much more interested also for the tourists.
The interviewees mentioned procedures that the government should adopt in
order to make the mega-event management more sustainable for the city’s
inhabitants, especially those hit by the eviction projects. However, there are
further solutions proposed by other academic writers or international bodies.
Blumert (2012) suggests the creation of an international forum where people
risking the eviction can seek for advice or support. Moreover, the author adds
that the mega-event committee (such as the IOC or the FIFA committee) should
be responsible for choosing candidate cities which are less likely to step on the
basic human rights.
To conclude, the solutions to undergo more sustainable eviction processes are
multiple. However, the problematic arises when the only stakeholders interested
in applying the sustainable practices are working class families who are likely to
be removed. In fact, both the government as well as the construction companies
are interested in accelerating the works and in removing as fast as possible the
poor population from high profile areas.

44
CONCLUSION
The aim of this research was to study the strategy by governments of using
mega-events as catalysers of illegal urban plans in the specific context of Rio
de Janeiro. Moreover, the opposition of the population and concrete
suggestions to limit those impacts were discussed.
The importance of this study relies in its practical results which can be helpful
for event practitioners or governments who are interested in understanding the
implications for the population when urban processes oblige people to move out
from their houses. Moreover, academic authors could take advantage of this
study to broaden their vision on the topic, which, unfortunately, was little
researched (Pranic et al, 2012).
The mains results that emerged from this research are that mega-events are
used as pretext to undergo urban projects. Evidences of this is the increase of
the real estate speculations, such as the speculation of the government in
selling public land to private companies.
The low-income families living in these areas are displaced and sent to distant
neighborhoods of the city, the processes through which they are displaced are
violent and against the national and international laws.
The resistance did not manage to raise much negative publicity on a national
nor an international stage yet. Therefore, neither the government nor the mega-
event committees are worried about the important human right abuses that are
occurring in Rio de Janeiro. In fact, their image is not being harmed in an
important manner.
To conclude, the solutions proposed both by the academic sources as well as
from the interviewees are not so relevant if neither the event organisers nor the
host cities are interested in the promotion of a positive urban legacy which
benefits all the strata of the population.
These realities seem to suggest that the interests at stake are those of the elites
(especially politicians, real estate companies and investors) who can use public
money to gain a private income. Therefore, the idea by Hiller (in Pillay and

45
Bass, 2008) that what is promised by the event organizers to the population is
often not what the reality proposes. In fact, politicians who are behind the
scenes and who are given the responsibility to prepare the mega-event city
interfere with the sustainability of the mega-event, and chose not to use the
mega-event for the benefit of the whole population, but use them at the elites’
advantage and at the detriment of the poorer people.
This study has focused on the real interest of the government of Rio de Janeiro
in hosting mega-events. However, a further interesting topic to investigate could
be the real committed of the mega-event in trying to promote sustainable
solutions to the countries hosting the events. In fact, the case of Rio de Janeiro
is not the only one showing how detrimental could be to host a mega-event in a
country which still does not have human rights standards such as Rio de
Janeiro. The IOC and the FIFA committee are aware of the impacts on the
urban space that the mega-events have already had in other countries such as
Korea, China and South Africa. Rio de Janeiro will be a further example of
human right abuses and mass evictions. Therefore, the spontaneous question
which arises at this point is: are mega-events really interested in promoting
positive legacies to the host countries?

46
VI. References
-ANCPC, (2012) Megaeventos e Violações de Direitos Humanos no Brasil.
[Online] Available
at:http://comitepopulario.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/dossie_megaeventos_vio
lacoesdedireitos2012.pdf[Accessed 13/03/2013].
-Barron, P. (2012) Qualitative Methods, SOE 11131 Research Methods.
Edinburgh Napier University, Unpublished.
-Barros, D. and Marques, G. (n.d) PAN Rio 2007: Manifestações e
Manifestantes. [Online] Rio de Janeiro, IPPUR. Available
at:http://www.ettern.ippur.ufrj.br/central_download.php?hash=3c6a1a1779425c
ac297e99fcf4d12d8c&id=72 [accessed 12/01/2013]
-Blumert, J. (2012) Home Games, Human Issues Concerning the Displacement
of Property Owners at the site of Olympic Venues. Cardozo Journal of
International and Comparative Law, Vol 21 (1), pp. 153-194
-Cornelissen, S. and Swart, K. (2006) The 2010 Football World Cup as a
Political Construct: the Challenge of Making Good on an African Promise,
Sociological Review, Vol.54, pp. 108-23.
-CBC News, (2010) Vancouver cuts Olympic Village Social Housing. [Online]
Available at http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-
columbia/story/2010/04/23/bc-olympic-village-social-housing.html [accessed on
14/03/2013]
-Cidades Possiveis, (n.d.) Parque Olímpico: especulação oficial e por contrato
em benefício de quem? [Online] Available at:
http://www.cidadespossiveis.com/post/12227427252/parque-olimpico-
especulacao-oficial-e-por-contrato-em [accessed 19/03/2013]
-COHRE, (2007) Fair Play for Housing Rights. [Online] Available at
http://www.ruig-
gian.org/ressources/Report%20Fair%20Play%20FINAL%20FINAL%20070531.
pdf [accessed 13/02/2013]
-Comite Popular da Copa e das Olimpiadas, (2012) Mega-eventos e violaçao
dos dereitos humanos no Rio de Janeiro. [Online] Available at:
http://comitepopulario.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/dossic3aa-megaeventos-e-
violac3a7c3b5es-dos-direitos-humanos-no-rio-de-janeiro.pdf [accessed
02/02/2013]

47
-Davis, L. (2011) International Events and Mass Evictions: a Longer View.
International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. Vol 35(3), pp. 582-599
-Durgante, H. (n.d) Give Them Bread and Circuses: Mega-Events and Urban
Eviction the Successful Case of Resistance of Nova Santa Marta, RS, Brazil.
[Online] Available at:
http://www.isca.ox.ac.uk/fileadmin/ISCA/JASO/Durgante_4-2.pdf [accessed on
11/02/2013]
-Emery, P.R. (2002) Bidding to Host a Major Sports event: The local organising
committee perspective. International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol.
15 (4), pp. 316 – 335
-Epoca Negocios (2012) Fifa Muda Estrutura dos Patricionadores. [Online]
Available at
http://colunas.revistaepocanegocios.globo.com/negociosfc/2012/12/18/fifa-
muda-estrutura-de-patrocinios-da-copa/ [accessed 21/03/2013]
-Furrer, P. (2002) Sustainable Olympic Games: A Dream or Reality? [Online]
Available at: http://www.omero.unito.it/web/Furrer%20(eng.).PDF [accessed
13/01/2013]
-Gaffney, C. (2010) Mega-events and socio-spatial dynamics in Rio de Janeiro,
1919-2016. Journal of Latin American Geography. Vol 9, pp. 7-29.
-Gold, J. R., and Gold, M. M. (2007). Olympic cities: city agendas, planning and
the world's games, 1896-2012. London, Routledge.
-Greene J. G. (2003) Staged Cities: Mega-events, Slum Clearance and Global
Capital’, Yale Human Rights and Development L.J, Vol 6, pp. 161-187
-Guilmaraes. A. S. (2009) Rio 2016, E Agora? Oportunidades e Desafios.
[Online] Available at
http://www.senado.gov.br/senado/conleg/textos_discussao/TD67-
AlexandreSidnei.pdf [accessed 09/03/2013]
-Hall, M. (n.d.) Sustainable Mega-Events: Beyond the Myth of Balanced
Approaches to Mega-event Sustainability. International Journal of Urban and
Regional Research, 35(3), pp. 582-599.
-Hall, M. (2006) Urban Entrepreneurship, Corporate Interests and Sports Mega-
Events: the Thin policies of Competitiveness within the Hard Outcomes of
Neoliberalism. The Editorial of the Sociological Review 54(2):59-70
-HRA, Human Rights Advocates (n.d.) Mega-events, Urban development, and
human Rights: The Duty to Prevent and Protect Against evictions and ensure
Right to Adequate Housing. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 13/01/2013]

48
-Hiller, H. (2000) Mega-events, Urban Boosterism and Growth Strategies: An
Analysis of the Objectives and Legitimations of the Cape Town 2004 Olympic
Bid, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 24(2): 439-458.
-Indymedia (2011) Denuncia sobre Remoçoes Forçadas na Cidade do Rio de
Janeiro. [Online] Available at
http://brasil.indymedia.org/media/2011/02//486908.pdf [accessed 02/02/2013]
-IOC, (n.d.) Agenda 21: Sports for Sustainable Development. [Online] Available
at: http://www.omero.unito.it/web/Furrer%20(eng.).PDF [accessed: 10/02/2013]
-IOC, (2011) 2020 Candidature acceptance procedure. [Online] Available at:
http://pt.scribd.com/doc/102537304/6/VI-The-360-Games-Management-
Philosophy [accessed 13/03/2013]
- Jago,L, Dwyer,L, Lipman,G. Van Lill, D. Vorster, S. (2010) Optimising the
potential of mega-events: an overview, International Journal of Event and
Festival Management, Vol. 1 (3): pp. 220 - 237
- Lunenburg, F. C., and Irby, B. J. (2008) Writing a Successful Thesis or
Dissertation: Tips and Strategies for Students in the Social and Behavioral
Sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA, Corwin Press.
-Olds, K. (1998) Urban mega-events, evictions and housing rights: The
Canadian case, Current Issues in Tourism 1(1): pp. 2-46.
-Marques, G., (2012) Interview on Vozes das Comunidades.
[magazine]September, 2012
-Mascarenhas, G. and Borges, F. C. (2008) Entre o Empreendedorismo Urbano
e a Gestao Democratica da Cidade: Dilemas e Impactos do Pan-2007 na
Marina da Gloria. Esporte e Sociedade: Entre o emprenedorismo e a gestão
democratica. Vol 4, pp. 1-26
-Pillay, U. and Bass, O. (2008) Mega-Events as a Response to Poverty
Reduction: the 2010 FIFA World Cup and its Urban Development Implications,
Urban Forum. Vol 19: pp.329–346
-Pranic, L, Petric L. and Cetinic, L. (2012) Host Population Perceptions of the
Social Impacts of Sport Tourism Events in Transition Countries: Evidence from
Croatia, International Journal of Event and Festival Management, Vol. 3 (3): pp.
236 - 256
- Ritchie, B. and Hall, M. (2000). Mega Events and Human Rights. In Tracy
Taylor (Ed). How You Play the Game: The Contribution of Sports to the
Protection of Human Rights, Sydney: Faculty of Business, University of
Technology: 102-115.

49
-Roche, M. (2006) Mega-events and Modernity Revised: Globalization and the
Case of the Olympics, in Horne, J. and Manzenreiter, W. eds. Sports Mega-
Events: Social Scientific. Ch.2, pp.27-40
-Rolnik, Raquel. (2011) Brazil off-course for World Cup and Olympics – UN
housing expert. [online] Available at
http://www.ohchr.org/en/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=10960
&LangID=E [accessed 02/02/2013]
-Rolnik. R. (2012) Vila Autódromo: Eemoção e Eleições. [Online] Available at:
http://raquelrolnik.wordpress.com/2012/08/20/vila-autodromo-remocao-e-
eleicoes/ [accessed 12/02/2013]
-Rolnik, R (2012b) Entrevista com Raquel Rolnik sobre os megaeventos e as
violações ao direito à moradia. [online] Available at:
2http://conselhopopular.wordpress.com/2012/02/25/entrevista-com-raquel-
rolnik-sobre-os-megaeventos-e-as-violacoes-ao-direito-a-moradia/#more-204
[accessed 13/02/2013]
- Silverman, D. (2011). Interpreting qualitative data. London, SAGE.
-Terra de Dereitos (2011) Copa 2014, Olimpiadas 2016 e Megaprojetos-
Remoçoes em Curso no Brasil.[Online] Available at:
http://terradedireitos.org.br/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Dossie-relatoria-
remoc3a7c3b5es-megaeventos-brasil-2011.pdf [accessed 02/03/2013]
-The Economist, (2012) Legacy 2012, Understanding the impact of the Olympic
Games. [Online] Available at
http://www.managementthinking.eiu.com/sites/default/files/downloads/Legacy%
202012%20Summary%20Paper%20WEB.pdf [accessed 02/01/2013]
- UN- Habitat (2007). Enhancing Urban Safety and Security. London, Earthscan
-Van Lill, D. and Thomas, A. (2012) The Contribution of a Mega-event to the
Sustainable Development of South African tourism. African Journal of Business
Management. Vol 6(10), pp. 3662-2672
-Virus Planetario (n.d)Mais um muro para esconder pobre na Maré.[Online]
Available at http://virusplanetario.wordpress.com/tag/olimpiadas-2016/
[accessed 03/03/2013)
-WAITT, G (2003) Social impacts of the Sydney Olympics. Annals of Tourism
Research, Vol. 30(1), pp. 194–215

DISSERTATION master thesis

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (11)

Similar to DISSERTATION master thesis

Similar to DISSERTATION master thesis (20)

DISSERTATION master thesis