« Previous |
1 - 10 of 13
|
Next »
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. Centralization in National High-Performance Sports Systems: Reasons, Processes, Dimensions, Characteristics, and Open Questions
- Author:
- Wolfgang Maennig
- Publication Date:
- 01-2023
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Chair for Economic Policy, University of Hamburg
- Abstract:
- Centralization provides for the bundling of tasks that are relevant to the achievement of an institution's goals. Centralization is discussed in almost all areas of life: For example, in politics (more centralized structures in France vs. more decentralized structures in Germany), in economics (centrally planned organization as in the former COMECON-Countries), decentralized decision-making at the individual level in market economies), and at the corporate level. Objects of centralization can be, for example, decision-making processes, products, personnel and customer groups. In some cases, the aim is to centralize (only) certain objects, while other activities are to remain decentralized, for example. In some cases, centralization in some areas virtually necessitates decentralization in others: For example, centralization by product usually leads to decentralization by sales area. Synergy effects, specialization advantages and, ultimately, cost degression effects are cited as benefits or advantages of more centralization; duplication of work and infrastructure can be avoided. Decision-making processes can be accelerated and simplified – subordinate or geographically distant units do not participate in the decision-making process. Unified concepts and strategies can be better enforced. “Density effects" must also be taken into account: There often are positive spill-over effects between people with related activities, for example, due to imitation and learning effects, but also due to the exchange of experience, which leads to an increase in the productivity of those involved. However, the decentralization tendencies that have emerged as a result of the Corona pandemic, for example through homeworking, partly question this finding. One of the disadvantages of centralization is that large centralized companies have high demands on information and decision-making systems because the experience, problems and ideas for solutions that arise decentrally have to reach the decisionmakers and therefore often (but not always) react more slowly to external changes. Less consideration may be given to regional peculiarities. Due to the standardization usually associated with centralization the scope for adaptation to specific circumstances may be lost. Centralization can increase the distance of decision-makers from "grassroots" concerns. The non-central units can suffer from devaluation, delegitimization, and demotivation, possibly associated with a long-term decrease of activities. The restricted competition of ideas can lead to a long-term decline in competitiveness, since the reduced competencies of the decentralized employees can inhibit their individual performance development. Centralization leads to a greater burden on central decisionmakers because the quantity and complexity of decisions increase. Individuals affected by centralization (in a different location) may experience family relocation problems and additional financial problems. The Corona pandemic and the current China discussion have brought additional arguments into the discussion with contagion risks for (too) many and (too) strong dependencies/blackmail possibilities on centralized procurement. And Ukraine's energy supply, which is based on relatively few large nuclear power plants, illustrates the possible increased susceptibility of certain centralized structures to crises.
- Topic:
- Sports, Economic Policy, Olympics, and Centralization
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Germany, and Global Focus
3. POWER, NOT PEACE: THE ACHILLES’ HEEL OF THE OLYMPIC GAMES
- Author:
- Timothy D. Sisk
- Publication Date:
- 02-2023
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Political Violence @ A Glance
- Abstract:
- The row between International Olympic Committee (IOC) President Thomas Bach and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky over potential Russian and Belarussian athlete participation at Paris 2024 exposes the Achilles’ Heel of the Olympic Games: the peace-promising celebrations are inescapably ensnared in nation-state power politics. The IOC announced on January 25 a proposal to facilitate participation in the 2024 Olympic Games for individual athletes from Russia (and close ally Belarus) individually and neutrally in the Paris games. The statement reversed an IOC Executive Board decision from February 28, 2022, to impose more sweeping participation sanctions on Russia following the Ukraine invasion.
- Topic:
- Sports, Olympics, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia and Global Focus
4. What might have been: Globalization on the medal stand at the Tokyo Olympics
- Author:
- Soyoung Han and Marcus Noland
- Publication Date:
- 04-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)
- Abstract:
- The Summer Olympic Games are the most globalized sporting event on earth. Until now, the Summer Games had been postponed only three times—in 1916, 1940, and 1944—all because of world wars. So, the announcement that in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the 2020 Tokyo Games would be postponed by a year is significant, implicit testimony to the destructiveness of the pandemic. The Tokyo Games were expected to continue the evolution of the Games away from the aristocratic European milieu where the modern Olympic movement began. As poverty has declined and incomes across the global economy have converged, participation in the Games has broadened and the pattern of medaling has become more pluralistic, particularly in sports with low barriers to entry in terms of facilities and equipment. This Policy Brief presents forecasts of medal counts at the 2020 Tokyo Summer Games had they had gone on as scheduled, setting aside possible complications arising from the coronavirus pandemic. The forecasts are not just a depiction of what might have been. They establish a benchmark that can be used when the Games are eventually held, to examine the impact of the uneven incidence of the pandemic globally.
- Topic:
- Economics, Globalization, Sports, and Olympics
- Political Geography:
- Japan, Asia, and Global Focus
5. Governance in Sports Organizations
- Author:
- Wolfgang Maennig
- Publication Date:
- 08-2017
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Chair for Economic Policy, University of Hamburg
- Abstract:
- With the revelation of the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) corruption scandal in May 2015, the integrity and thus the general configuration of (international) sports organizations were publicly contested. The principle of moral behavior in international sports organizations (Arnold, 1994) was clearly violated and the high (self) esteem of sports suffered. The accusations of corruption regarding the Men’s FIFA World Cups1 (BBC, 2015) as well as the bribing scandals during the Olympic bidding processes2 stained the integrity of sports. Sport values, also condensed in the concept of “Olympic spirit” (or “Olympism” (Adi, 2014)), are based on the philosophy that best performances (should) lead to best results and rewards. Sport serves as a symbol for respect, self-discipline, health and deserved rewards as a result of outstanding athletic achievements. The corruption scandals, which include the complete value chain of sports, threaten this philosophy and show why sports organizations require special rules for their governance. This article deals with the general concept of (good) governance in sports organizations, explaining its required particularities through a look at its principles, existing challenges and issues that have yet to be resolved. It will also give an overview of which obstacles need to be taken into account for the implementation of good governance. Furthermore, it lays out some potential ideas for enhanced good governance through the example of mega-events such as the Olympic Games.
- Topic:
- Economics, Governance, Sports, and Olympics
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
6. Public Referenda and Public Opinion on Olympic Games
- Author:
- Wolfgang Maennig
- Publication Date:
- 06-2017
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Chair for Economic Policy, University of Hamburg
- Abstract:
- Public referenda on Olympic bids have drawn considerable interest in the recent past, also because – with few exceptions – the voters decided against the Olympic ambitions of the local governments and/or local bid committees. For example, within the last five years before the finalizing of this text, voters in Vienna and Hamburg decided against bids for Olympic Summer Games in 2028 and 2024, respectively. Ambitions for Olympic Winter Games have been ended by referenda in Graubünden 2026 (Switzerland), Munich 2022 (Germany), St. Moritz / Davos / Graubünden 2022, and Krakow 2022 (Poland). Table 1 presents the data of the history of Olympic referenda and clarifies that Olympic referenda are by no means an innovation of recent times: The oldest reported referenda are from the 1960´s. All public referenda were held on Olympic Winter Games, with the exception of the two Summer Games referenda for Vienna 2024 and Hamburg 2024 mentioned above. There was a balance between positive and negative referenda for Olympic Games bids up to the 1970s. Since the 1980s, the number of negative referenda has clearly outperformed the number of positive referenda.
- Topic:
- Economics, Sports, Olympics, Voting, and Referendum
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
7. Which countries bid for the Olympic Games? Economic, political, and social factors and chances of winning
- Author:
- Wolfgang Maennig and Christopher Vierhaus
- Publication Date:
- 04-2016
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Chair for Economic Policy, University of Hamburg
- Abstract:
- This contribution analyzes 132 factors on their potential to discriminate countries bidding for hosting the Olympic Games from non-bidding countries. Our binary, clustered model using generalized estimating equations (GEE) shows that countries recording long-term economic growth and pursuing a liberalization and globalization policy will consider an Olympic bid. In addition, countries with an urban population above 10 million, with stable election results and an improvement in health standards as well as more attractive tourism destinations are more likely to bid for the Olympic Games. Finally, the bid decision is shaped by experience in hosting major sports events, a country and regional rotation, persistence and climatic conditions.
- Topic:
- Economics, Globalization, Sports, Economic Growth, and Olympics
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
8. Olympics remind us of the importance of local governance
- Author:
- Jonah Lefkoe and Charles Cadwell
- Publication Date:
- 08-2016
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Urban Institute
- Abstract:
- As the world’s greatest athletes, brave tourists, and the eyes of a global TV audience (London 2012 brought 3.6 billion global viewers, and Rio is expected to break viewership records in the United States) descend on Rio for the 2016 Olympics, Brazil’s political troubles and urban infrastructure are also in the spotlight. Awarding the Olympics to Rio was not a completely foolish act. In 2009, when Brazil won its Olympic bid, the country was recovering from the 2008 financial crisis faster than the United States and enacting new social programs to further assist its poor populations. From 2003 to 2014, 29 million Brazilians were lifted out of poverty, and income inequality, measured by the Gini coefficient, fell 11 percent. When the International Olympic Committee announced Brazil’s selection as the Olympic host, Brazilians threw a party on Copacabana Beach, and then-president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (Lula) declared a new era for Brazil’s progress.
- Topic:
- Development, Poverty, Governance, Sports, and Olympics
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
9. Bringing Home the Gold? A Review of the Economic Impact of Hosting Mega-Events
- Author:
- Douglas Barrios, Stuart Russell, and Matt Andrews
- Publication Date:
- 07-2016
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University
- Abstract:
- There is perhaps no larger sports policy decision than the decision to host or bid to host a mega-event like the FIFA World Cup or the Summer Olympics. Hosts and bidders usually justify their decisions by touting their potential impact. Many organizers and promoters either fund or widely disseminate ex-ante studies that tend to highlight the positive effects of the event. For instance, the consultancy firm Ernst & Young produced a 2010 report prior to the 2014 World Cup in Brazil that painted an optimistic picture of the event’s potential legacy. It estimated that an additional R$ 142.39 billion (4.91% of 2010 GDP) would flow through the Brazilian economy over the 2010-2014 period, generating 3.63 million jobs per year, R$ 63.48 billion (2.17% of 2010 GDP) of income for the population and additional tax collection of R$ 18.13 billion (0.62% of 2010 GDP) for the local, state and federal governments. Ernst & Young estimated that during the same period 2.98 million additional visitors would travel to Brazil, increasing the international tourist inflow up to 79%. Such results, if true, would clearly attractive for governments considering a bid, but these expected impacts don’t always materialize. Moreover, hosting mega-events requires significant investments - and the cost of these investments is rising. Zimbalist notes emerging economies like China, Brazil, and South Africa have increasingly perceived "mega-events as a sort of coming-out party signaling that [they are] now a modernized economy, ready to make [their] presence felt in world trade and politics" (Zimbalist 2015). Their intentions may be noble, but the intention of using mega-events as a "coming-out party" means developing countries hoping to host them need to make massive investments. They are confronted by significant obstacles in that they lack sufficient stadiums, accommodations, transportation systems, and other sports-related infrastructure. As a result, each of the mega-events hosted by emerging economies has been exorbitantly expensive. The 2014 World Cup cost Brazil between USD 15 billion and USD 20 billion, while Beijing reportedly spent USD 40 billion prior to the 2008 Summer Olympic (Zimbalist 2015). Additionally, as the debt-ridden 1976 Summer Olympics in Montreal demonstrates, expensive mega-events are not limited to emerging economies alone. Flyvbjerg and Stewart have even shown that every Olympics since 1960 has gone over budget (Flyvbjerg and Stewart 2012). Such incredible figures, in terms of both costs and benefits, beget the question: are mega-events worth it? Which type of reports should governments focus their attention on? What economic consequences should a government reasonably expect? With such high stakes, policymakers need to choose wisely. We attempt to answer these questions and aid the decisions of policymakers by providing a concise review of the rich academic literature on mega-events. For the purposes of this paper, we mainly focus on the Summer Olympic Games and the FIFA World Cup as mega-events. However, we also leverage information regarding events like the Winter Olympic Games, the UEFA football championships, and the Commonwealth Games. These events are organized on a smaller scale than the previous two, but they might provide some insights on how to best understand mega-events. We focus on claims surrounding the direct or indirect mechanisms that facilitate the impact that ex-ante studies predict. We provide a review of these claims and their validity according to the existing literature. Section 1 focuses on the argument that mega-events lead to increased economic activity in the host economy. Specifically, we evaluate whether or not mega-events leads to access to previously inaccessible funds and increased investments. These investments could theoretically come from supranational organizations, private stakeholders, or public stakeholders. We also consider whether or not these new expenditures and investments have the multiplicative effect that many ex-ante studies assume they have. We finally investigate if the economic activity surrounding mega-events leads to increased revenues and tax collection for host governments. Overall, the existing academic literature suggests that any increased economic activity resulting from the event is routinely dwarfed by additional public budgetary commitments. Moreover, the arguments regarding multiplicative effects and increased revenues also tend to be exaggerated. Section 2 shifts the focus to the potential impact of mega-events on a specific industry: tourism. We explore the effect of mega-events on the number of tourists visiting the host region and their spending habits. We explore this channel both for analyses specific to a single mega-event and for cross-country evaluations incorporating many events. Next, we consider the impact of a mega-event on a region’s brand and image in the international community with the idea of testing if hosting the competition will impact future tourism. Finally, we consider if mega-events lead to increases in the capacity of a city or country to welcome future tourists as a result of improved airport infrastructure, accommodations, and/or transportation systems. As was true in Section 1, the academic literature suggests that the claims of many ex-ante studies are misleading. Our review finds that there is some evidence for increases in tourist arrivals to certain events, but those increases are far smaller than what is generally predicted beforehand. These effects are also usually dependent on factors, such as the timing of the competition, that are specific to the host region and the event itself. Section 3 briefly discusses other potential qualitative and social impacts of mega-events such as international business relations, crime reduction, and the "feel-good effect." In the penultimate section, Section 4, we discuss how these conclusions should impact the decision-making of policymakers. Finally, in a short conclusion, we summarize the findings of our review.
- Topic:
- Infrastructure, Sports, Economy, Olympics, and World Cup
- Political Geography:
- China, South Africa, Brazil, and Global Focus
10. Who Wins Olympic Bids?
- Author:
- Wolfgang Maennig and Christopher Vierhaus
- Publication Date:
- 10-2015
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Chair for Economic Policy, University of Hamburg
- Abstract:
- The prospect of hosting the Olympic Games is attractive to many cities around the world. This article examines 147 variables’ potential to discriminate successful from unsuccessful Olympic bids. Our stepwise, rank-ordered logistic regression model includes 10 determinants supporting the contention that economic, political and sports/Olympic factors are important for winning the host city election. IOC members favor cities if more than 2/3 of the population support the bid, but disfavor bidding cities of fewer than 2.5 million inhabitants and bids lacking a sufficient number of existing stadiums. Hosts are characterized by larger markets and higher medium-term growth economies. Olympic bids that follow a political liberalization are rewarded with additional votes. Moreover, successful bids are more experienced at hosting and have no dispute with the International Olympic Committee (IOC). Finally, we observe “it is the country’s turn” election behavior – countries that have not hosted the Olympics for a long period are preferred.
- Topic:
- Elections, Sports, Olympics, and Bids
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus