MEGA EVENTS: OPPORTUNITIES FOR STRATEGIC GLOBAL LEADERSHIP OR VEHICLES OF DOMESTIC POLITICAL LEGITIMACY? PROFESSOR MALCOLM...
COMMENT AND SHARE <ul><li>Blog:  http://d gmcgillivray.posterous.com </li></ul><ul><li>Twitter username: @dgmcgillivray; @...
TODAY’S COVERAGE <ul><li>Why events (now?) </li></ul><ul><li>Why event policy (and Leadership)? </li></ul><ul><li>Event po...
WHY EVENTS? <ul><li>Events are, indisputably, of local, national and international importance  </li></ul>
WHY EVENTS? <ul><li>They are important signifiers of personal, community, national and globalised identity  </li></ul>
WHY EVENTS? <ul><li>They are political and politicised, ritualistic and regenerative  </li></ul>
WHY EVENTS? <ul><li>They are written into history and can be utilised to alter it </li></ul>
WHY EVENTS? <ul><li>They are planned and unplanned, small and large, sporting and cultural, hallmark and special </li></ul>
WHY EVENT ‘POLICY’ (AND LEADERSHIP)? <ul><li>Events (esp mega) touch us all one way or another, yet our understanding of t...
EVENT POLICY DILEMMAS   <ul><li>Mega sporting events conceived and exploited for regenerative imperatives to secure a plet...
BIDDING STRATEGIES <ul><li>Bidding itself has now become a complex game where hosts try to strike a balance between: </li>...
THE LIMITS OF DEMOCRACY? <ul><li>In event policy terms, advanced liberal democracies (economically, politically and cultur...
WHAT KIND OF LEADERS? <ul><li>The global event circuit creates the need for different types of leaders </li></ul><ul><li>L...
CASE STUDY: GLASGOW 2014 <ul><li>Distinctive shift in bidding from technical, infrastructure to emotional and ideological ...
CASE STUDY: QATAR 2022… <ul><li>Deliberate and intentional strategy to secure global sporting extravaganzas since 2001 </l...
CASE STUDY: BRAZIL 2014/2016 <ul><li>Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva made an impassioned plea in the last sta...
C O NCLUSIONS <ul><li>Mega sporting events are now a public policy tool and not just in the liberal democracies of the wes...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

OPPORTUNITIES FOR STRATEGIC GLOBAL LEADERSHIP OR VEHICLES OF DOMESTIC POLITICAL LEGITIMACY?

555 views

Published on

Presentation given at the International Leadership Association conference in London in October 2011. Focused on leadership challenges created by the proliferation of bidding and hosting mega events

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
555
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
20
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • In order to deceive you with spectacle, we’re going to start with a series of images which provide an illustration of the wide ranging importance of events, globally in the early 21st century. In essence, we can ask ‘why study events’? These images and short commentaries provide the answers. Here we have the Beijing Olympics - China’s coming out in the international marketplace and demonstrating (through propaganda) their ‘soft power’ offensive. We also have the ‘local’ with Pamplona’s Bull Running - albeit, we could see this as increasingly globalised as it is differentiated by the safe and sanitised events of the present. Finally we have Glasgow’s Mela - local, national and globalised at the same time. The common thread to these events, which make them of interest to the book that we’re producing is that they are each open to planning and management to achieve outcomes not necessarily part of their original purpose.
  • Events have always been about identity, and continue to be so. Here we see the Burning Man - a festival which encourages its participants to develop an alternative, anti-commodification identity in the face of intense commercialisation of the wider events ‘industry’. Our major sporting (and cultural) events are heavily dependent upon the support of some of the world’s most recognised brands - albeit as we’ll reflect upon later, there are some real issues around our public spaces being colonised by private capital - a feature of the urban entrepreneurial governance approaches which dominate in the local states of US, UK and Australia. In terms of national identity, we have the Brazilian samba supporters and, at the bottom we have the Scottish Highland Games and the now infamous Homecoming celebrations. Clearly these events are markers of identity - but crucially, this identity is often contested.
  • As we will argue later, events have moved from being ritualistic, chaotic, unstructured and ‘meaningful’ to being increasingly planned, organised, formalised and designed to achieve external outcomes. Here we see the political and politicised nature of events - Obama’s inauguration, Hitler’s Berlin Olympics - the propaganda games, and Thaipusam - the Singaporean festival which is full of rich symbolism which remains inaccessible to the marauding western tourist tribes. As the Glasgow 1990 image suggests, events are now frequently used for regenerative purposes - as a catalyst, or step change, for destinations. We review the emergence of this set of affairs in terms of urban governance and suggest that it is a reflection of the post-industrial shift to managerialism and civic boosterism in the local state.
  • Events are, as Roche (2001) argued tied into personal biographies in a way that we could never have imagine before mass media and communication. They are reflective of their times (e.g. Mexico Olympics and civil rights, Munich Olympics and terrorism) and they are written into history. They are the site for propaganda and for mass dissent and protest - albeit there are power relations at work which enable the former and limit the latter (I.e. dissent). With Gay Pride, a social cause became a movement mobilised through public parades, though some now argue that the ‘rights’ which were fought for have now been sidelined in favour of spectacle and display.
  • Event are increasingly ‘tiered’ - from mega events (Olympics, soccer World Cup, Expos), through hallmark events (Calgary stampede, Rio Carnival, Mardi Gras New Orleans), to national and local/community. Cities manufacture or bid for (if they are on a circuit) events in order to achieve a place at the global table. Semi-peripheral nations wish to secure promotion to the elite group and events is a mechanism for achieving this. For example, Scandanavian countries are now actively courting major sports events as a means of generating additional profile. However, there are also limits to what cities can do - only Rio can have its Carnival, only Calgary can have the stampede - or can it?
  • increasingly, as recent bid announcements confirm, the emerging BRIC nations (Brazil, Russia, India and China) and those in the Middle East (e.g. Qatar, Dubai, Bahrain) are succeeding over their western counterparts. This success can, in part, be put down to the absence of democratic processes and the presence of alternative social contracts between rulers (or leaders) and their populations, whereby resources and legitimation are far less of a problem than for the nations off the west
  • the economic rationale which is dominant at present, may be changing with the surge of BRIC nations winning events. Will we see the West win a major event in the next few years. The terms of bidding has changed. It is not enough to meet just economic growth or targets of sponsors but there is a shift taking place, more than just legacy. Legacy can be an add on or worse rhetoric but the move to use events as leverage to building in social and cultural benefits that are planned from outset is gaining a pace. Misener talks about a holistic approach to embedding events, engaging communities, the end results are able to be felt long after the event has left town. Part two is more conceptually oriented, drawing upon the underpinning theoretical discourses which frame policy formations. So, we look at urban political economy, urban geography, social theory to ‘think about’ events and how they are utilised in the early 2st century. Finally, Part 3 is concerned with applying the theory into strategic case studies which illustrate theory in action. These chapters are deliberately international in focus, to illustrate that variable geographical territories and modes of governance therein, implement policy differently. So, while in the UK and Australia, the prevailing environmental agenda is framing policy choices and the social value of events is seeping into strategy, in the undemocratic state of Dubai, such agendas are sidelined in favour of events as an economic generator.
  • OPPORTUNITIES FOR STRATEGIC GLOBAL LEADERSHIP OR VEHICLES OF DOMESTIC POLITICAL LEGITIMACY?

    1. 1. MEGA EVENTS: OPPORTUNITIES FOR STRATEGIC GLOBAL LEADERSHIP OR VEHICLES OF DOMESTIC POLITICAL LEGITIMACY? PROFESSOR MALCOLM FOLEY, DR DAVID MCGILLIVRAY AND PROFESSOR GAYLE MCPHERSON
    2. 2. COMMENT AND SHARE <ul><li>Blog: http://d gmcgillivray.posterous.com </li></ul><ul><li>Twitter username: @dgmcgillivray; @gmp01 </li></ul><ul><li>Twitter conversation: #eventpolicy #ILA2011 </li></ul><ul><li>Email: [email_address] ; [email_address] </li></ul>
    3. 3. TODAY’S COVERAGE <ul><li>Why events (now?) </li></ul><ul><li>Why event policy (and Leadership)? </li></ul><ul><li>Event policy dilemmas </li></ul><ul><li>Bidding strategies </li></ul><ul><li>The limits of democracy </li></ul><ul><li>What kind of leaders? </li></ul><ul><li>Case studies </li></ul><ul><li>C o ncluding comments </li></ul><ul><li>Questions and discussion </li></ul>
    4. 4. WHY EVENTS? <ul><li>Events are, indisputably, of local, national and international importance </li></ul>
    5. 5. WHY EVENTS? <ul><li>They are important signifiers of personal, community, national and globalised identity </li></ul>
    6. 6. WHY EVENTS? <ul><li>They are political and politicised, ritualistic and regenerative </li></ul>
    7. 7. WHY EVENTS? <ul><li>They are written into history and can be utilised to alter it </li></ul>
    8. 8. WHY EVENTS? <ul><li>They are planned and unplanned, small and large, sporting and cultural, hallmark and special </li></ul>
    9. 9. WHY EVENT ‘POLICY’ (AND LEADERSHIP)? <ul><li>Events (esp mega) touch us all one way or another, yet our understanding of their (planned) impacts and outcomes remains underdeveloped </li></ul><ul><li>There exists a fierce debate about how we might evaluate who ‘owns’ events; who should resource them; which of them should be resourced; which other public investments should be curtailed at their expense; how they can best be used to assuage social and economic problems, and so on … </li></ul><ul><li>These are questions of policy – of choices about how public funds should be allocated to address an identified problem, whether that be political, economic, social or environmental </li></ul><ul><li>These are also questions of leadership – how decisions are made/implemented and by whom? </li></ul>
    10. 10. EVENT POLICY DILEMMAS <ul><li>Mega sporting events conceived and exploited for regenerative imperatives to secure a plethora of planned social, political, economic and environmental externalities </li></ul><ul><li>Nations (and cities) now talk of the ‘need to bid’ – global competition is fierce when it was once non-existent (e.g. LA1984) </li></ul><ul><li>From Copenhagen to Auckland, state-driven units have been formed over the last decade to provide strategic and operational support for event bidding </li></ul><ul><li>But , overly ‘corporate’ and ‘instrumental’ policies can create disaffection and apathy on behalf of citizens, drawing attention to the notion of ‘who gains’ and ‘who pays’ for events – a question of legitimation </li></ul><ul><li>Problem exacerbated if evaluation is bereft of meaningful participation or debate from ‘public’ stakeholders other than those from the realms of commerce and political elites </li></ul>
    11. 11. BIDDING STRATEGIES <ul><li>Bidding itself has now become a complex game where hosts try to strike a balance between: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Internal stakeholder needs (economic, social, cultural) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Sanctioning body priorities (profile, sponsors, brand value) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Need to out-manoeuvre other potential host candidates: technical capacity and emotional pull: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>‘ the World Cup is not only important for football, but it will help strengthen and consolidate our democracy’ (SA2010) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>‘ it is no longer enough to simply meet the requirements of the event specification. In order to win over the evaluators, the media and the decision makers it is often necessary to add a strong emotional and/or cultural element to the bid’ (Brighenti, et al , 2005: 51) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Black (2007: 266-268) talks of Delhi 2010, South Africa 2010 and Vancouver 2010 following narrative types to strengthen bid – emphasising legacy ambitions: </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Unity - The bidders’ narrative stresses that hosting the event will help bring together people in the nation, and also even the region </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Transcendence – The narrative encompasses themes of transcending both historical divisions and economic problems </li></ul></ul></ul>
    12. 12. THE LIMITS OF DEMOCRACY? <ul><li>In event policy terms, advanced liberal democracies (economically, politically and culturally) face a changing world order in major sport event bidding terms </li></ul><ul><li>It is no longer enough to demonstrate the technical capacity and advanced political and economic systems to guarantee success </li></ul><ul><li>Nations with alternative governance systems in place have secured a number of recent mega event successes – e.g. Beijing (2008), Brazil (2014 & 2016), Russia (2014 & 2018) and Qatar (2022) </li></ul><ul><li>The absence of (or at least less well developed) democratic processes and the presence of alternative social contracts between rulers (or leaders) and their populations provides some competitive advantage </li></ul><ul><li>Mega event owners are re-visiting their purpose as a force for good—whereby event owners can now contribute positively to a growing global consciousness </li></ul><ul><li>China secured 2008 Beijing Olympics on basis of becoming rather than being , satisfying sanctioning body priorities and out-manoeuvering other candidates </li></ul>
    13. 13. WHAT KIND OF LEADERS? <ul><li>The global event circuit creates the need for different types of leaders </li></ul><ul><li>Leadership arrangements in mega event bidding and delivery are complex and contested: </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Politicians (central and local state) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Event owners </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Sports administrators </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Local Organising C o mmittees </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Sporting celebrities? (PR wars) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>At different points in the process of bidding and delivering diverse leadership skills required </li></ul><ul><li>T h ere are significant challenges in securing professed benefits when leadership focus is on delivery for event owner (e.g. IOC) and associated stakeholders (e.g. sponsors) – some signs of change as social leverage approach gaining ground </li></ul>
    14. 14. CASE STUDY: GLASGOW 2014 <ul><li>Distinctive shift in bidding from technical, infrastructure to emotional and ideological </li></ul><ul><li>Glasgow’s main competitor, Halifax, dropped out due to intense opposition from local host citizens – halifaxnoway.com </li></ul><ul><li>Abuja’s (Nigeria) strategy was an emotional one – “complete the circle” the Commonwealth Games had never been to Africa </li></ul><ul><li>Ultimately, the sanctioning body priorities won over as technical capability and ‘risk’ factors counted against Abuja </li></ul><ul><li>Glasgow won by stressing technical capacity/capability (a safe pair of hands) Additionally, citizen support (in the form of ‘Back the Bid’ campaign) proved decisive </li></ul><ul><li>G l asgow 2014 the culmination of planned and governed event policy over two decades - nothing left to chance as e conomic, social, cultural and environmental ‘legacies’ required in the name of accountability and transparency </li></ul>
    15. 15. CASE STUDY: QATAR 2022… <ul><li>Deliberate and intentional strategy to secure global sporting extravaganzas since 2001 </li></ul><ul><li>S p ort event ‘visibility’ a key strategy for global positioning </li></ul><ul><li>Ruling family patronage and absence of need for democratic consent provides competitive advantage in competition for global events (albeit popular uprisings in region recently could alter social contract) </li></ul><ul><li>Citizen involvement in policy formulation and implementation is minimal, part of a social contract that trades citizen rights for affluence </li></ul><ul><li>Though, determination to secure mega events (e.g. Olympics) has brought about change in civic realm – policy pragmatism </li></ul>
    16. 16. CASE STUDY: BRAZIL 2014/2016 <ul><li>Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva made an impassioned plea in the last stages of voting to the South Americans and African IOC’s to give their votes to Brazil for 2016. He said: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Brazil is the only great world economy never to have staged the Olympics…it would bring the games to the South American continent for the first time. This cannot be a privilege reserved for the rich nations” (27 Sept, 2009, Gamesbid.com) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>The emotional bid that was lost in Abuja, for the 2014 Commonwealth Games was won for Rio, 2016. It was their turn, it could be used to unite, develop and connect communities </li></ul><ul><li>Yet, already doubts expressed over 2014 World Cup and its likely ‘beneficiaries’: </li></ul><ul><li>If FIFA is not put in its rightful place, FIFA will soon have more power than our president and the World Cup will be the way FIFA wants it and not the way we should do it…FIFA could earn a little bit less so that the Brazilians can take part (Romario, Oct, 2011) </li></ul>
    17. 17. C O NCLUSIONS <ul><li>Mega sporting events are now a public policy tool and not just in the liberal democracies of the west </li></ul><ul><li>Events (the circuses) represent a good news story in times of political, economic and social uncertainty, but their legitimacy is open to greater critique as neo-liberal market models shows signs of fatal failure </li></ul><ul><li>Event leaders in the liberal democracies of the W e st face significant challenges to compete with nations with alternative governance arrangements if they are to be in contention for hosting mega events in the next decade </li></ul><ul><li>The responsibilities for ‘leadership’ of mega events is complex and contested, making the accrual of long-term, sustainable benefits problematic – ‘legacy’ continues to win over ‘leverage’ </li></ul><ul><li>This analysis is only the starting point on a journey towards creating a more critical engagement on the future of events as a credible policy vehicle </li></ul>

    ×