Conceptualizing Mega-Event Flagships—A Case Study Of
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Frontiers of Architectural Research (2013) 2, 107–115 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com www.elsevier.com/locate/foar CASE STUDY Conceptualizing mega-event flagships—A case study of China Pavilion of Expo 2010 Shanghai China Ying Dengn Department of Civil Engineering, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China Received 28 August 2012; received in revised form 30 October 2012; accepted 12 November 2012 KEYWORDS Abstract Mega-event flagship; Mega-event flagship (MEF) is a dual instrument for staging a mega-event and catalyzing regional Case study; urban renewal. Despite its unfailing popularity and controversial nature, many initiators seem Conceptualize; to equate MEF development with signature architecture, resulting in a persistent issue of China Pavilion; underuse among MEFs in the post-event era. Although research findings indicate that the early Expo 2010 Shanghai stages hold the key to the future of MEFs, insufficient research on this crucial matter has been China; done to provide useful analyses as to how to achieve this. To rectify this, this paper presents a Clustering case study of China Pavilion (CP) as the most spotlighted MEF initiated by Expo 2010 Shanghai China. Through participant observation, archival records, and documentation, the case of CP was extensively explored to learn how the client organization has addressed the issues of form, function, and future positioning at the early stages. By linking the pre-Expo conceptualization with its post-Expo performance, the case brings a renewed attention to the early stages of MEF development. Although it is a single-case study, this research yields results that indicate the possibility of having beneficial spillover impact on broader-scale urban renewal by balancing an MEF’s dual mandate. & 2013. Higher Education Press Limited Company. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction n 1.1. Mega-event flagships Tel.: +852 2241 5896. E-mail address: [email protected] Peer review under responsibility of Southeast University. The term ‘‘flagship’’ has come out of its naval realm and into the common parlance in order to define the best or most prominent product, building, service, etc., among a group, series, network, or chain (Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary and amp; Thesaurus, 2011; Macmillan 2095-2635 & 2013. Higher Education Press Limited Company. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2012.11.004 108 Y. Deng Dictionary, 2012). Developing a flagship product aims to study of China Pavilion (CP) initiated by Expo 2010 Shanghai highlight an organization’s core competitiveness and sustain China. The focus is placed on the challenges encountered the business by making the most profit among all its during its early decision-making process and the solutions products. This logic also applies to the construction industry explored to endure this most spotlighted flagship of Expo where flagship development is built on a single or a handful 2010. It is concluded that CP constitutes an indispensable of prestigious projects to set the stage for synchronized or part of a holistic urban strategy: the ‘‘Big Four’’ (Big4) MEF subsequent regional renewal (Smyth, 1994). cluster, the Expo site redevelopment, and the ongoing Led by global mega-events such as the Olympics or the citywide cross-river renewal. By linking the pre-Expo con- Expos, mega-event flagships (MEFs) constitute a spotlighted ceptualization with its post-Expo performance, the case subset of flagship development (Deng, 2011). MEF develop- brings a renewed attention to the early stages of MEF ment is envisaged by policymakers as not only a global development. Although it is a single-case study, the present platform for place branding, but also an event-based research yields results that indicate the possibility of having mechanism to accelerate the process of urban renewal. Its beneficial spillover impact on broader-scale urban renewal popularity has been fueled by successful urban renewals led by balancing an MEF’s dual mandate. Such a holistic by Expo 1962 Seattle USA and Olympics 1992 Barcelona approach to enduring MEF development is therefore recom- Spain. However, the heavily underused MEFs in Montreal, mended for realizing the bigger objective of place- Moscow, Sydney, and Athens after the Olympics 1976, 1980, branding-oriented renewal for future practices. 2000, and 2004 caused this formula to come under question. As revealed by previous research findings (Deng and Poon, 1.3. Approach 2011, 2012), what is not well noted by the organizers is that for an MEF to play a catalytic role in the bigger renewal The early stages fall into the research area of planning, process, a spectacular shell can be a bonus, but a properly organization, and management where extensive local issues sized and configured layout is a prerequisite. An ignorance mustbedrawnuponthroughthecasestudyapproach(Davies, or disregard for this may lead to potential consequences, 2001; Easterby-Smith et al., 1991; Yin, 2009). Moreover, the including over-capacity, functional obsolescence, mainte- case study approach is suitable for in-depth investigation of nance difficulties, and extra cost for regeneration in the explorativenatureandisflexibletoaccommodatemultiple long term. This would eventually cause negative impacts on data sources (Baxter and Jack, 2008; Flyvbjerg, 2006). In the affiliated renewal initiative. particular, participant observation was used because the author has worked as a key project coordinator for the Expo 2010 1.2. Aim and significance organizer, Bureau of Shanghai World Expo Coordination (SEB), from 2004 to 2007. Since the author was detached from any of the project clients of the Big4, the impact of potential bias In principle, an MEF aims to provide a global platform on which (Easterby-Smithetal.,1991)wasminimized. the vision of place branding can build and offer a unique selling The rest of this paper is structured into three parts. To point for attracting sustained resources. This makes it a perfect set the international scene for MEF development and high- candidate for signature architecture. However, because of too light its post-event difficulty, the first part briefly introduces much attention given to short-term image building, the devel- the national pavilion as a special building type and reviews opment often ends up as a loser in playing its long-term flagship two previous reutilization attempts. To explore the com- role. Given this inherent controversy, a challenging question is plexities and challenges of enduring MEF development, the raised:IsitpossibletohaveanMEFthatcanfulfillitsdual second part presents an in-depth analysis of its urban mandate? This leads to the need for exploring the early stages connectivity as well as its planning, programming, and of an MEF where decisions on its form, function, and future design competition stages. The last part offers insight into position are framed. To date, MEF development is not well MEF development based on the findings of the case study. researched in terms of this crucial dimension. Case data were acquired through participant and non- Amid the global boom of national branding and city participant observations, as well as documentation and marketing, many mega-event organizers in emerging markets archival records from key stakeholders involved in the tend to exhibit more enthusiasm than their counterparts in Big4 development from 2004 to 2010. They are the SEB, developed countries in building spectacular showpieces. which is the Expo organizer and the coordinator of the Big4 Nevertheless, there is nothing necessarily wrong with that: development, and Shanghai World Expo (Group) Co. Ltd. creating landmarks is an ongoing tradition that has existed (Expo Group), which is the initial developer of CP. The data for centuries in the course of urban development worldwide. collected mainly range from official publications, factual The sticking point is an overwhelming emphasis on short-term records, and technical documents (e.g., master site plans, formal expression over long-term functional performance. To detailed regulatory plans, urban design reports, feasibility define a framework for future improvement, both methodo- study reports, and client’s programs). logical issues and contextual complexities in decision-making process should be taken into careful consideration. However, the literature is especially scarce in an era where MEF 2. National pavilions and Expos development is exploring new territories such as East Asia, Middle East, and South America. National pavilions, a type of exhibition facility dedicated for a To highlight the unequivocal obligation to endure MEF World Expo, originated from Expo 1867 Philadelphia USA where development in general and to open up research on MEFs in 11 countries built their national pavilions for the first time in emerging economies in particular, this paper presents a case history (Gross and Snyder, 2005). As a lasting attraction on the Conceptualizing mega-event flagships—A case study of China Pavilion of Expo 2010 Shanghai China 109 exhibition grounds, each national pavilion constitutes a brand- of Expo 2010, the Expo 2010-led riverfront development, ing platform for the country it represents. According to the and Shanghai’s comprehensive renewal. The Big4 refers to regulations of the Expo’s sanctioning body, national pavilions an MEF cluster that comprises CP, Theme Pavilion, Expo are usually constructed on a temporary basis (Bureau Center, and Performing