Do Olympics And Major Sports Events Benefit Or Harm Local People? No Evidence Either Way

Are the costs involved in hosting major multi-sport events, such as the Olympic, beneficial or detrimental to the local population? According to a study published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) today, there is insufficient evidence to make a conclusion either way. The authors are calling on decision-makers to make sure that comprehensive evaluations are ready for the London 2012 Olympics and Paralympics and the Glasgow 2014 Commonwealth Games, so that it is evident that costs "can be justified in terms of benefits to the host population."

Decision-makers have always argued that bidding for these sports events are worth it, because of the wide range of benefits for the host population, the authors say. Benefits include employment advantages, skills, an economic boost, improved housing, national and local pride, the environment and sport - collectively termed the legacy.

Lead author, Dr Gerry McCartney, a specialist in public health from Glasgow, Scotland, wonders whether events like the Olympics do help local people.

McCartney and team examined 54 studies that assessed the health and socioeconomic impacts of major multi-sport events. The researchers claim that the quality of most of the studies were deficient and at risk of bias. They add that there were large gaps in a number of outcomes evaluated, especially health.

"There is not sufficient evidence to confirm or refute expectations about the health or socioeconomic benefits for the host population of previous major multi-sport events ... future events such as the 2012 Olympic Games and Paralympics, or the 2014 Commonwealth Games, cannot be expected to automatically provide benefits," the authors conclude.

They maintain that better long-term assessments are required before justifications about costs can be attributed to host population benefits.

In an accompanying editorial, Professor Mike Weed from Canterbury Christ Church University, writes that the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games will cost more than £9 billion ($13.5 billion), £150 ($225) for every man, woman and child in Great Britain.

Weed argues that "the risk for the UK population is not that we will not get the benefits for our £150 a head investment in London 2012, but that there will be no robust evidence of what we have paid for."

"Research: The health and socioeconomic impacts of major multi-sport events: systematic review (1978-2008)"
Gerry McCartney, Sian Thomas, Hilary Thomson, John Scott, Val Hamilton, Phil Hanlon, David S Morrison, Lyndar Bond
BMJ 2010;340:c2369
doi:10.1136/bmj.c2369

Editorial: "How will we know if the London 2012 Olympics and Paralympics benefit health?"
Mike Weed
BMJ 2010;340:c2202
doi:10.1136/bmj.c2202