The Governance Of Olympic Games Legacy Rebecca Leopkey Thesis Submitted .
The Governance of Olympic Games LegacyRebecca LeopkeyThesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral StudiesIn partial fulfillment of the requirementsFor the PhD degree Human KineticsSchool of Human KineticsFaculty of Health SciencesUniversity of OttawaJanuary 2013 Rebecca Leopkey, Ottawa, Canada, 2013
iiAbstractThe purpose of this study was to understand the governance of Olympic Gameslegacy. Legacy is broadly described as “all planned and unplanned, positive and negative,intangible and tangible structures created by and for a sport event that remain for a longertime than the event itself” (Preuss, 2007a, p. 86). The specific objectives of this studywere: a) to map the historical evolution of legacy throughout the modern OlympicMovement (OM) (i.e., 1896-current day) in order to contextualize and conceptualize themajor trends (e.g., changes in legacy, network actors/stakeholders, governance structuresand processes) over time; b) to understand, explain, and compare/contrast the networkgovernance of Olympic legacy, using Australian and Canadian case settings; and c) tocritically analyze the overall structure and process of the governance of legacy within theOM focusing specifically on the aspects of performance, transparency, accountability,and participation to build a framework and provide policy recommendations for thegovernance of legacy in mega-events. In order to accomplish these objectives, a historicalreview of legacy within the OM and two descriptive case studies (Sydney 2000 andVancouver 2010) were built using interviews and archival materials.Findings showed how the growth of the Games has culminated in the increaseduse and importance of legacy, leading to greater concept complexity. This resulted in theemergence of several trends including: new legacy themes, heightenedinterconnectedness, and formalization of governance mechanisms. Institutional theorywas then applied to further explore the emergence of legacy and its habitualization,objectification, and sedimentation as an accepted norm in the Olympic Field. Theexamination of the legacy governance networks in the two cases showed four legacy
iiinetwork governance phases: legacy conceptualization, legacy planning andimplementation, legacy transfer, and post-Games legacy governance, as well as a numberof governance mechanisms (e.g., contracts, policies) that had an impact on the overallgovernance of the event’s legacy. Finally, a critical analysis of the governance ofOlympic Games legacy was completed. The end result of the research project was atheoretical framework detailing the levels and fluidity of legacy governance in the OM.
ivAcknowledgementsThis project has been made possible thanks to the support of many peopleincluding the faculty and staff of the University of Ottawa, fellow students, friends andfamily. I would especially like to recognize Dana, Steph, and Mandy for all the timespent discussing our projects and analyzing life as a graduate student. Thank you all somuch for your encouragement and support. I would also like to acknowledge Will for hisoutside-the-bubble wisdom and keeping me on track to finish.A special thank you goes to my research supervisor Dr. Milena Parent. Thanksfor continuing to support and encourage me over these past seven years. I reallyappreciated your open door, quick turnaround, and stimulating conversations.Also to my co-supervisor and supervisory committee, Dr’s Christian Rouillard,Eileen O’Connor, and Benoit Sequin, thank you for your valuable feedback andknowledgeable insight that has helped me stay on track and produce work to the best ofmy ability.Finally, thank you to all of my stakeholder and Organizing Committeeparticipants from the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games and the Vancouver 2010 Olympicand Paralympic Winter Games who agreed to share their thoughts and perspectives ininterviews and to provide additional background information on their organizations.Without your help this project would have been impossible.Funding for this research has been gratefully received from the Social Sciencesand Humanities Research Council of Canada in the form of a Doctoral Fellowship grantnumber 752-2009-1807 ( 40,000), a 2008-2009 Ontario Graduate scholarship ( 15,000),
vthe 2008 International Olympic Committee Post Graduate Research Grant ( 10,000CHF), and the International Society for Olympic Historians ( 2,000).
viStatement of Author ContributionsThe author of this dissertation was responsible for the development and design ofthis project on the governance of Olympic legacy. She was the lead researcher in the datacollection, data analysis, and the writing of all three of the individual articles, as well asthe introduction and conclusion sections. The author acknowledges the help of her cosupervisors Dr’s Milena Parent and Christian Rouillard in the discussion and review ofthe project, its subsequent findings, and preparation for the publication and submissionprocess. Dr. Eileen O’Connor is also thanked for her review and helpful comments withregards to article one, which investigated the evolution of legacy from a historicalperspective.
viiTable of ContentsAbstract . iiAcknowledgements . ivStatement of Author Contributions . viList of Tables. xiList of Figures . xiiList of Abbreviations. xiiiCHAPTER 1. 1Introduction . 1Event Legacy . 1Governance . 4Literature Review . 6Sport Event Legacy. 6Governance . 12Sport and Governance. 15Institutional Theory . 17Network Theory . 18Methodology . 20Research Contexts . 22Case Study Approach . 25Comparative Case Studies . 26Case Study 1: Australia (Sydney 2000 Games) . 26Case Study 2: Canada (Vancouver 2010 Games) . 27Data Gathering . 29Data Analysis . 33Quality of Research . 34Dissertation Outline . 35Article 1 . 36Article 2 . 37Article 3 . 37Contributions of the Research . 38References . 40
viiiCHAPTER 2. 57Paper 1: Olympic Games Legacy: From General Benefits to Sustainable Long-term Legacy . 57Olympic Legacy- The Emergence of a Concept . 58Legacy- The Debate. 60Legacy and the Modern Olympic Games . 61Legacy Trends . 69Expanding Types . 69Olympic Changes- Changes in Emphasis Over Time . 69Legacy Complexity and Interconnectedness . 74Governance- Short Term Individual Support to Strategic Long-Term Governance . 75Legacy Decision Makers and Influencers . 79Conclusion . 80References . 82CHAPTER 3. 88Paper 2: The (Neo) Institutionalization of Legacy and its Sustainable Governance within theOlympic Movement . 88Legacy and the Olympic Rhetoric . 90Theoretical Background. 94Institutional Theory and the Sport/Sport Event Context . 96Research Design . 97Data and Analysis . 98Results and Discussion . 99The Habitualization of Olympic Legacy . 99The Objectification of Legacy . 103The Sedimentation of Legacy . 104The Emergence of Legacy Governance . 108Conclusion and Managerial Implications . 113Managerial Implications . 114Future Directions . 115References . 117CHAPTER 4. 123Paper 3: The Network Governance of Olympic Games Legacy: A Look at the Sydney 2000 andVancouver 2010 Models . 123
ixOlympic Legacy. 125Theoretical Framework. 128Network Theory . 128Network Governance . 131Method . 133Context. 134Data Gathering . 134Data Analysis . 134Results . 136Event Legacy Phases . 136Network Governance Characteristics . 140Roles of Central Actors in Legacy Networks . 156Discussion. 156Network Governance . 157Network Actors. 160Network Actor Influences and Focal Organization Strategies . 162Changing Nature of the Network . 164Conclusions, Managerial Implications and Future Directions. 166Managerial Implications . 169Future Directions . 170References . 173CHAPTER 5. 181Discussion and Conclusion . 181The Historical Evolution of Olympic Legacy and its Governance . 182The Evolution of the Legacy Concept . 182The Emergence of Legacy Governance . 184Research Implications . 185The Institutionalization of Legacy within in the Modern Olympic Movement . 185The Introduction of Legacy Governance Mechanisms . 186Research Implications . 187The Network Governance of Olympic Legacy . 188Legacy Governance Phases . 188Legacy Governance Mechanisms . 189
xNetwork Governance Characteristics . 190Research Implications . 191The Democratic Governance of Olympic Games Legacy . 192Accountability . 193Participation . 198Performance . 201Transparency . 205Summary . 206Theoretical Framework. 207Policy Recommendations . 210Limitations of the Research Project . 215Future Research . 217References . 220Appendix A . 223Interview Guide . 223Appendix B . 228Consent Form . 228
xiList of TablesTABLE 1-1: Event Legacy Summary .10TABLE 1-2: Interviewee Information .31TABLE 2-1: Usage of the Word Legacy in Olympic Bid Documents and Final Reports .63TABLE 2-2: Description of Legacy Themes Identified in Bid Documents and Final Reports .70TABLE 4-1: Sydney 2000 Games Legacy Network Governance Phases .142TABLE 4-2: Vancouver 2010 Games Legacy Network Governance Phases . 149TABLE 4-3: Focal Organization Roles in Legacy Network Governance Phases .157
xiiList of FiguresFIGURE 3-1: Institutional Phases of Legacy within the Olympic Movement .100FIGURE 3-2: The Institutionalization of Legacy within the Olympic Movement .109FIGURE 4-1: Olympic Legacy Network Governance Phases .137FIGURE 5-1: Theoretical Framework for the Governance of Legacy within the OlympicMovement .211
xiiiList of Abbreviations2010 BCVancouver 2010 Bid Committee2010 FS2010 Federal Secretariat2010 LN2010 Legacies NowAAFAmateur Athletic FoundationAOCAustralian Olympic CommitteeASCAustralian Sports CommissionASLFAmateur Sport Legacy FundBCBritish ColumbiaBODABeijing Olympic City Development AssociationCACommonwealth of AustraliaCOCCanadian Olympic CommitteeCODACalgary Olympic Development AssociationCOVCity of VancouverCPCCanadian Paralympic CommitteeECEndorsement ContractFHFNFour Host First NationsFIFAFédération Internationale de Football AssociationFINAFédération Internationale de NatationFOFocal OrganizationGDPGross Domestic ProductGOCGovernment of CanadaGOTGames Operating Trust
xivHCCHost City ContractIFInternational (sport) FederationsIOCInternational Olympic CommitteeISOInternational Organization for StandardizationLALos AngelesLAOOCLos Angeles Olympic Organizing CommitteeLEFLegacy Endowment FundLIFTLIFT Philanthropy PartnersMPAMultiparty AgreementNAONetwork Administration OrganizationNCNew ContractNOCNational Olympic CommitteeNSONational Sport OrganizationNSWNew South WalesOCOlympic CharterOCAOlympic Coordination AuthorityOCOGOrganizing Committee for the Olympic GamesOGIOlympic Games ImpactOGKMOlympic Games Knowledge ManagementOMOlympic MovementORTAOlympic Roads and Transportation AuthorityPart OrgsLegacy partner organizationsPPPPurchasing Power ParityRMOWResort Municipality of Whistler
xvROIReturn on InvestmentSLOCSalt Lake Organizing CommitteeSOBLSydney Olympics 2000 Bid LimitedSOCOGSydney Organizing Committee for the Olympic GamesSOPSydney Olympic ParkSOPASydney Olympic Park AuthoritySSCState Sport CentreSSOState Sport OrganizationVANOCWACVancouver Organizing Committee for the 2010 Olympic andParalympic GamesWhistler Athletes CentreWLSWhistler Legacies SocietyWOPWhistler Olympic ParkWSCWhistler Sliding CentreWSLWhistler Sport Legacies
1CHAPTER 1IntroductionThe growth and increasing complexity of the Olympic Games has resulted in aheightened interest on the part of the academic community. Research on sport events is found inmany fields, including history (Guttman, 2002), sociology (Toohey & Veal, 2007), andmanagement (Parent, 2008). In recent years, one area receiving frequent attention has beenevent legacy, especially as it pertains to the Olympic Games. This chapter will first introduce theconcepts of event legacy and governance followed by the overall purpose of this dissertation.Next, brief reviews of the event legacy, governance, institutional theory, and network theoryliteratures are provided. The methodology is then described including the research contexts anddata gathering and analysis aspects of the project. The chapter concludes with details regardingthe outline of the dissertation, as well as contributions of the overall research project.Event LegacyLegacy is broadly described as “all planned and unplanned, positive and negative,intangible and tangible structures created by and for a sport event that remain for a longer timethan the event itself” (Preuss, 2007a, p. 86). The expanded importance of event legacy isreflected in the fact that stakeholders are increasingly scrutinized and held accountable for theirpolicies and actions in hosting a sport event. For this reason, the issues of event impacts andevent legacies are now incorporated into the planning and delivery processes of these events.Early research on event legacy has mainly focused on the economic impacts of sportevents, such as tourism (Burgan & Mules, 1992; Crompton, 1995; Walo, Bull, & Breen, 1996).Although the financial outcomes of hosting a sport event continue to be of interest (Allmers &Maennig, 2009; Gratton, Shibli, & Coleman, 2006; Preuss, 2005), additional research has alsoexplored different types of legacy (Cashman, 2006; Gold & Gold, 2007; Ritchie, 2000; Vigor,
2Mean, & Tims, 2004), including urban (Pillay & Bass, 2008; Pillay, Tomlinson, & Bass, 2009),social (Raco, 2004; Smith, 2009: Waitt, 2003), and environmental (Chappelet, 2008; Collins,Jones, & Munday, 2009; Levett, 2004) legacy to name a few. Although other events such as theWorld’s Fair in New Orleans (e.g., Dimanche, 1996), and sporting events including theCommonwealth Games (e.g., Nichols & Ralston, 2012; Smith & Fox, 2007; Matheson, 2010),the FIFA World Cup (e.g., Cornelissen, Bob & Swart, 2011; Preuss, 2007a), and local eventssuch as triathlons (e.g., Sallent, Palau & Guia, 2011), have been examined, there tends to be astrong research focus on Olympic Games related impacts (e.g., Cashman, 2006; Girginov, 2011;Gold & Gold, 2007; Ritchie, 2000; Vigor, Mean, & Tims, 2004).In November 2002, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) held the InternationalSymposium on Legacy of the Olympic Games (1984-2000), to identify potential inconsistenciesin event legacy management and planning for long-term legacy (de Moragus, Kennett, & Puig,2003). Following this call for more research to investigate managing the long-term sustainabilityof legacy associated with the Olympic Games an increase in management research began tosurface. For example, Doherty (2009) explored the volunteer legacy at large-scale events and itsimpact on event policy and management. Agha, Fairley, and Gibson (2011) looked at eventlegacy as a multidimensional construct and discussed implications on stakeholder managementand event delivery. Additionally, event and sport event management books have begun toinclude chapters that focus on legacy such as Masterman’s most recent book on strategic sportevent management that dedicates a section to impacts and legacies (2012).Girginov (2011) connected the concepts of legacy and governance in research thatexamined the lead-up to the hosting of the 2012 Olympic Games in London. During this researchhe explored the creation and sustainability of Games legacy by examining four modes of
3governance (coercive, voluntarism, targeting, and framework regulation) and testing a range ofpolicy instruments. Although Girginov (2011) explored the governance of Olympic legacy, heonly focussed on the upcoming London 2012 Games, an event that has yet to occur, and as aresult, did not take into consideration post-Games legacy issues. In order to better understand theconcept of legacy governance, it is important to look at previous editions of the Games tounderstand the institutionalization process of legacy and the specific forces that played a role inshaping the structure. As a result, the governance and sustainability of event legacy remainsunder-investigated. As such, the research presented in this dissertation further explores theconnection between governance and Olympic event legacy by filling some gaps in the literaturesuch as the historical evolution of the concept, its adoption into the OM, as well as thecharacteristics of its governance, including both the structure and process.Also notable is the more recent link between event legacy and sustainable development.For example, a Centre for Sport and Sustainability at the University of British Columbia wasestablished in connection with the 2010 Games to help capture and transfer knowledge on howsport can create sustainable benefits locally, regionally, and internationally (UBC, 2010). VanWynsberghe, Kwan, & Van Luijk (2011) went on to argue that sustainability mandates now playimportant roles in the event delivery process in their research which focused on communitycapacity building during the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games. As such,it is suggested that future of legacy research will continue to advance in this direction withconnections between sustainable development and governance.Within this research project, several legacy issues will be highlighted. Conceptually,there are many terms used to describe the notion of legacy in the literature, from benefits andimpacts to heritage and outcomes. There remains, however, a lack of consensus on a definition
4of legacy and how to measure it (Mangan, 2008; Preuss, 2007b). Timing plays an important rolein the development and planning of an event’s legacy. Previous experiences of Olympic Gameshosts have shown that legacy should be incorporated from the beginning of a bid for the Games,and should remain important throughout the planning and delivery, in order to maximize benefits(Cashman, 2006). As such, legacy planning has evolved from
network governance phases: legacy conceptualization, legacy planning and implementation, legacy transfer, and post-Games legacy governance, as well as a number of governance mechanisms (e.g., contracts, policies) that had an impact on the overall governance of the event's legacy. Finally, a critical analysis of the governance of
Olympic Winter Games medals Olympic Winter Games posters Olympic Summer Games posters Olympic Summer Games mascots Olympic Winter Games mascots The sports pictograms of the Olympic Summer Games The sports pictograms of the Olympic Winter Games The IOC, the Olympic Movement and the Olympic Games The Olympic programme evolution Torches and torch .
Olympic Summer Games posters Olympic Summer Games mascots Olympic Winter Games mascots The IOC, the Olympic Movement and the Olympic Games The Olympic programme evolution The Olympic stadiums of the Summer Games The sports pictograms of the Olympic Summer Games The sports pictograms of the Olympic Winter Games .
May 02, 2018 · D. Program Evaluation ͟The organization has provided a description of the framework for how each program will be evaluated. The framework should include all the elements below: ͟The evaluation methods are cost-effective for the organization ͟Quantitative and qualitative data is being collected (at Basics tier, data collection must have begun)
Silat is a combative art of self-defense and survival rooted from Matay archipelago. It was traced at thé early of Langkasuka Kingdom (2nd century CE) till thé reign of Melaka (Malaysia) Sultanate era (13th century). Silat has now evolved to become part of social culture and tradition with thé appearance of a fine physical and spiritual .
On an exceptional basis, Member States may request UNESCO to provide thé candidates with access to thé platform so they can complète thé form by themselves. Thèse requests must be addressed to esd rize unesco. or by 15 A ril 2021 UNESCO will provide thé nomineewith accessto thé platform via their émail address.
̶The leading indicator of employee engagement is based on the quality of the relationship between employee and supervisor Empower your managers! ̶Help them understand the impact on the organization ̶Share important changes, plan options, tasks, and deadlines ̶Provide key messages and talking points ̶Prepare them to answer employee questions
Dr. Sunita Bharatwal** Dr. Pawan Garga*** Abstract Customer satisfaction is derived from thè functionalities and values, a product or Service can provide. The current study aims to segregate thè dimensions of ordine Service quality and gather insights on its impact on web shopping. The trends of purchases have
Olympic Games and other Olympic Games marks, mascots, pictograms and posters, the wordmarks "Olympic", "Olympic Games" and "Olympiad", the Olympic motto "Citius, Altius, Fortius" and any English or other language translations of the same, and other Olympic-related terminology.
