View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE

provided by Bowling Green State University: ScholarWorks@BGSU

Visions in Leisure and Business

Volume 15 Number 1 Article 5

1996

Sports Tourism Goes Sustainable: The Experience

David Chernushenko

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.bgsu.edu/visions

Recommended Citation Chernushenko, David (1996) "Sports Tourism Goes Sustainable: The Lillehammer Experience," Visions in Leisure and Business: Vol. 15 : No. 1 , Article 5. Available at: https://scholarworks.bgsu.edu/visions/vol15/iss1/5

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at ScholarWorks@BGSU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Visions in Leisure and Business by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@BGSU. SPORTS TOURISM GOES SUSTAINABLE THE LILLEHAMMER EXPERIENCE

BY

DR. DAVID CHERNUSHENKO, SENIOR ASSOCIATE

THE DELPHI GROUP 700- 45 RIDEAU STREET OTTA WA, ONT ARIO, CANADA K1NSW8

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND

The 1994 Winter Olympics in Lillehammer, The Commonwealth Games in Victoria, were the first ever "green games." British Columbia are estimated to have The local organizers demonstrated a new pumped close to $500 million into the local model not only for sports events but for the and regional economy. Forty million dollars tourism that usually accompanies these were spent on hospitality, hotels and events. A goodmarriage of sport promotion shopping alone, with 420,000 bednights and environmentalism can guarantee several recorded in the Victoria area. Clearly the things for tourism: a better event, satisfied economic spinoff of hosting a major sports visitors and a positive reputation as a clean event can besubstantial. and attractive destination. The benefits of more"sustainable" sports tourism go beyond This past winter, the town of Lillehammer major events, however. Ongoing sports and Norway was at the centre of a similar boom recreation-related attractions can equally in sports tourism when it played host to the implement greener practices, with similar biggest event there is: the . economic and environmental results. Any Bui whereas Victoria, a city of 300,000, had sports facility, wilderness attraction or hotel to accommodate some 50,000 daily visitors, would do well to study the lessons of Lillehammer, a town of only 24,000, had to Lillehammer. By protecting the natural fea­ contend with an average daily influx of tures which attract tourists, by preserving 100,000 people. Naturally, local residents healthy local environmental conditions, by anticipated traffic gridlock, mountains of keeping local residents in favour of waste and irreversible environmental dam­ on-going sports/recreation activities and by age to the vicinity. Yet, somehow none of saving money through efficiency conserva­ this materialized. Lillehammer managed not tion, you can guarantee a sustainable future only to cope with this monumental sports forsport-based tourismin your region. event without noticeably harming the environment, it did so in a manner which won praise from commentators world-wide.

65 How did Lillehammer achieve such seem­ Once the goal had been defined new ingly contradictory goals: running a mega working methods and techniques had to be sports event and pleasing hordes of partici­ developed and new alliances forged. pants and tourists while achieving its ambitious environmental goals? How did the Norwegians succeed in showing the CONFLICTINGINTERESTS world that there is a better way of sports tourism? Thatthere is a greenerway to hold Lillehammer had first launched a bid for the our games? winter Olympics in 1982, on the initiative of a group of local businessmen, bankers, politicians and sports personalities. Their THE SUCCESS STORY: aim was to revitalize the region, which -- LILLEHAMMER'SROAD TO A suffered from declining investment and GREEN PROFILE rising unemployment.

A week after Lillehammer was chosen to A bid for the 1994 Winter Games host the XVII Winter Games, the chief emphasized the potential for a "compact environmental officers of Lillehammer and Games", in which all events could be staged County initiated a meeting at the within a few miles of each other. On Ministryof Environment (MoE) in , out September 15, 1988, Lillehammer was de­ of which came a commitment to give the clared host of the 1994 Winter Games. Games a "green profile". An annual budget was approved for these efforts, including While many Norwegians involved in sport funding for a nongovernmental pressure and tourism were jubilant, environmentalists group, known as Project Environment were dismayed. At the outset, environ­ FriendlyOlympics (PEFO). mental concerns were forgotten as other interests competed for a piece of the action; The term "environmental showcase" was the modest "compact Games" concept was later coined by the MoE to describe the abandoned as construction plans and cost overall goal forstandards of development in estimates became ever more grandiose. the Lillehammer/Oppland region. This goal was endorsedby Norway'sparliament which approvedthe followingmandate: PLANNING BY NEGOTIATION

"Any development must conform to the The hills and forests to the east of natural and cultural landscape and other Lillehammer are a recreational area for the regional features. In the long run this will local population. Plans to build new arenas be crucial in preserving and enhancing in this wilderness area provoked the first qualities that are already assets to tourism. conflict between environmentalists and For local peopleit will be most important to developers. Several environmental authori­ construct the arenas and other buildings ties opposed building new arenas for needed for the event in an environmentally crosscountry skiing and biathlon in the friendlyway." forest. (Previous plans had sited the arenas near an army camp to the northwest of the town.) The County Governor, whose

66 environmental office is empowered to block importance are protected by law, foremost development in natural habitats of national among them the delta of the river Lagen. importance, played a particularly important Since the arrival of the railway in 1894, role in the negotiations. By serving notice tourism has flourished in Lillehammer. that the development would be stopped, the Many homes and hotels were built in order Governor initiated a process of negotiation to exploit the healthy climate and landscape. with the municipal authorities that resulted Even after the Games, the foundation of in the construction of the skiing venues in tourism in the Lillehammer region will the forest, but with strictregulations curbing remain unchanged: beautiful scenery, virgin further development and access by road. forests, clean air and water. Lillehammer is basically a pretty, small town, and its This process of "planning by negotiation" residents wantedto keep it that way. turned out to be far more practical and efficient than working up a final plan that would inevitably attract opposition from PLANNINGAND DESIGN competing interests. Instead, local and regional authorities collaborated from the The process of analyzing Lillehammer's beginning, dealing with specific objections natural and cultural landscape began as they arose. A "planning forum" was immediately after it was awarded the created to encourage informaldiscussion. Games. The object was to set down on paper those qualities appreciated by everyone in Lillehammer but not reflected in municipal NATURAL LILLEHAMMER planning documents.

In preparing for the 1994 Winter Games, All buildings made for the Games had to town planners sought to make the most of conformto four main principles: Lillehammer's natural landscape while respecting its historical and economic • Norwegiancharacter, comprising context. Development in connection with simplicity, suitability tothe landscape, the the Games was kept to a minimum in areas use of naturalmaterials such as woodand designated "especially valuable" for his­ stone and traditionalcolours torical, scientific or recreational reasons. Any changes to such sites had to be shown • Environmentally friendlydesign and to improve the original amenity values. construction,often involving new solutions Some farmlands were also designated to standardarchitectural problems "valuable"; these, and most areas of woodland, were protected. Major develop­ • Unity and coherence ment work was therefore restricted to areas already subject to relatively intensive • Work by leading Norwegiandesigners residentialor industrialuse. Guidelines werestrictly spelled out: The Lillehammer area has always attracted large numbers of hikers, fishermen and • Designs adapted to existing landscapeand hunters. Several natural areas of national architecture

67 • Permanent buildings conforming to local boards were revised in order to remove or architectural traditions while temporary camouflage eyesores. Local businesses and structuresreflect the unique visual profile of land-owners were encouraged to clean up the Games their properties.

• Permanent buildings expressing their characterin naturalmaterials and colours ENVIRONMENTAL "MOM"

• Some temporary structures forfestive use To ensure that all Games buildings would be in strong, clear, light colours safe, built of sound materials, well heated and ventilated and reasonably quiet, • Ceremonial elements expanding on Nordic organizers developed a system of themes--northem lights ice snow, crystal specifications known as "MOM" --manage­ ment, operation, maintenance--intended to Strict specifications were applied to each address such environmental considerations. individual construction site. Architectural Building materials do not as a rule carry suitability was only part of an extensive environmental impact labels; but contractors environmental impact assessment. Noise, were obliged to satisfy the authorities that ermss1ons from cooling and heating materials used for Olympic installations installations, and interior climate were all satisfied a number of environmental criteria taken into account. Low energy consump­ at all levels: production, construction, use tion was standard for all buildings. The and dismantling. A specimen environmental buildings therefore combine the virtues of impact assessment was given to would-be local craftsmanship and new technology. suppliers and contractors, with a range of forms listing the various requirements. These considerations were made an integral FIRST IMPRESSIONS part of the bidding process.

Road and rail approaches to Lille hammer, The MOM system is a "cradle-to-grave" and entry points to the sub sites and arenas approach to building materials and their use, were designed, redesigned or refurbished in covering every step from drawing board to order to ensure that visitors' first impres­ operation and maintenance costs long after sions werefavourable. In fact, preparing for the Olympics, when buildings might beused the Olympics meant taking a fresh look at for other purposes. Bidders for building familiar surroundings. Norwegian Rail contracts were required to supplement the collaborated with PEFO, the MoE and usual specifications with detailed answers to municipal authorities to tidy up the rail cor­ a wide range of environmental questions ridor between Oslo and Lillehammer under concerning construction materials, long­ the slogan "your backyardis our view". term energy use, cleaning and maintenance routines, glues and solvents, security A similar approach was taken to the roads. systems for coolants, waste disposal, and l_n addition to clean-up operations, regula­ treatment of soil and vegetation in the tions for traffic signs and commercial bill- construction area.

68 ENERGY SAVING were preferred, as were recycled and reusable materials. One of the most important environmental criteria forthe Olympic arenas was that they All visitors--spectators, parnc1pants, jour­ be as energy-efficient as possible, con­ nalists and officials--were encouraged to suming at least 30 percent less energy than minimize waste. Even competition pro­ similar buildings following standard grammes were touted as collectors' items Norwegian specifications. As a result, and designed to be so. annual savings in running the giant Olympic Hall alone average 2.5 GWh--­ Commercial sponsors were persuaded to worth approximately $100,000--even allow­ assist in reducing waste. Kodak, for ing for the low cost of power in Norway. example, took steps to reduce the photo­ Authorities hope the hall will become a chemical wastes produced by thousands of national showcase for a wide range of press photographers. Partena, the principal energy-saving devices and techniques, in­ caterer to the Games provided dishes and cluding heat recycling through ventilation cutlery made almost entirely of potato and and a heat pump using surplus power from com starch which, after use, was composted the ice-making machinery. or turnedinto animal fodder.

Many of the demands made by the KEEPINGIT CLEAN authorities would have back-fired without very practical follow-up measures. Sep­ Supplying clean water, food, sanitation and aratingwaste, forexample, would have been waste disposal on an Olympic scale add up useless without localfacilities forprocessing to a formidable challenge, which inspired and recycling. The town could not afford to LOOC organizers to seek new solutions to build a recycling plant with all the financial old problems. Close to 300,000 meals were risksinvolved in. a pilot project. A state-run consume per day. The main strategies for project was therefore established to handle waste treatment and disposal were simple: the recycling of waste for Oppland and preventor reduce the production of waste in counties. As a result, there are the first place; encourage the recycling of now hundreds of local projects in the region materials and energy associated with such supporting household composting of food waste as is unavoidable; and at all times scraps, collection of hazardous waste, and ensureproper treatment. source separationsystems.

In preparation for the Games, Lillehammer encouraged local homes and businesses to WATCHFUL EYES separate waste at source, and opened a new recycling plant. As a result, the quantity of In order to ensure that the long lists of rubbish dumped locally has declined by 60 standards and demands really did safeguard percent by weight. All companies supplying the environment, new and more accurate the LOOC had to comply with certain ways of measuring the impact of the Games environmental demands. Products and had to be invented. A specific environ­ packaging carrying the Nordic "swan" label mental audit was developed. It was wide-

69 ranging, starting not with technical spec­ against the advice of the environmentalists, ifications but with leadership. Auditors roads they opposed were built nonetheless, visited the various authorities involved in and, worst of all, plans were drawn up for a the organizationof the Games, checking that huge speed-skating hall which threatened an they were aware of their responsibilities, internationally recognized bird sanctuary at properly trained and running their offices Akersvika in Hamar. efficiently. Auditors looked at standards of stafftraining and analyzed arrangements for When Samaranch next visited Lillehammer controlling contractors, or suppliers' goods in December 1990, he met a full and services. complement of angry, chanting demonstra­ tors. He responded by encouraging all Only then, in a detailed study of four arenas, parties to avoid further conflict through did the auditors turn their attention to such mediation. As a result of his and higher technical criteria as potential pollution of domestic political pressure, the plans were air, water and soil; waste, noise, energy modifiedafter several roundsof negotiation. consumption, interior climate, architecture and landscaping. The four arenas selected The Akersvika controversy was a turning for audit were in fact testing the efficiency point. Previously the LOOC had paid only of this new procedure at the same time as lip service to the stated ambition of a they were themselves assessed. Findings "green" Olympics, doing little to fulfill such and recommendations were passed to the a goal. Now environmental concerns were builder, who was expected to act on them centre stage. An environmental coordinator wherever possible. was appointed, and the LOOC made haste to draw up environmental specifications for prospective contractors. GREENS GO FOR GOLD A unique, collaborative process was also Norwegian environmentalists were pre­ developed involving the key interested dictably opposed to Lillehammer's bid for parties. Every Thursday from mid-1991 the 1994 Winter Games. But once the bid until the end of the Games, environ­ was successful, an important decision was mentalists, officials from LOOC, the MoE, taken: instead of fighting, the activists the County Governor's office and the local would work with the authorities to minimize authorities met to discuss the environmental adverse effects. implicationsof preparationsfor the Games.

PEFO, the umbrella organization for the During the lead-up to the 1994 Games, various pressure groups, invited IOC PEFO was deluged with media requests, as President Juan Antonio Samaranch to its the sport-environment connection was cramped office in Lillehammer. Much to finally being recognised internationally as their surprise, he accepted and made a visit an issue of importance. Interest in in March 1989 to hear their views on the Lillehammer's environmental efforts peaked upcoming Games. Despite this encourage­ during the Games itself, with several ment, early negotiations with the LOOC thousand stories being filed on this topic were unsuccessful. Venues were sited alone by the world'sjournalists.

70 THE LEGACY OF LILLEHAMMER TheNSCN foundboth negative and positive resultsof the Games: Opinions vary on how profound the legacy of the Lillehammer Games will be. The Negative results MoE concluded that Lillehammer demon­ strated how intelligent planning, research • extensive use of land for arenasand roads and development can help to make the Olympic Games more environmentally • protective forestbelt and hillside forest friendly. Environmental goals must be lost to construction and infrastructure accepted as a joint responsibility, to which development · appropriate financial resources are allocated as a matter of course. The Ministry con­ • Lynx habitat severely affected cluded that cooperation and negotiation at all levels is probably the key to a successful • valuable wetland lost in Akersvika and environmental approach. because of landfills

Hundreds of individual steps were taken to • birds hurtor killed when hitting glass address environmental concerns at facadesand noise barriers Lillehammer, with varied success. Some steps that should or could have been taken · • recreationalpaths and greenspace lost in were not. The Norwegian Society for the Lillehammer area Conservation of Nature (NSCN) prepared an assessment of the Games, which attempts to • commercializationof previously public answer two questions: recreationareas

Did any changes take place as a result of the • increased post-games use of private carsas 1994 WinterOlympics? a resultof road and parking lot building

H so, was this enough to give the Games a • increasedtraffic on newly-built roads "green profile"? Positive results They concluded that changes did take place: "For the first time serious attempts were • increased awarenessof environment and -made to increase · environmental awareness nature-protection issues and allow this to be reflected in practical action in· connection with a major inter­ • goodcooperation between private, public national sports event". This actually gave and non-governmentalsectors as well as the Lille hammer Games a "green" profile various levels of governments and started an important process.... However, [there] is a very long way to go • off-shootprojects established to improve and basic changes must be undertaken "green tourism" and to monitor the before the Olympic Games can be called constructionof a new national airport "environmentally friendly". • creationof usefulplanning toolsfor large scale constructionand road building

71 • thoroughinvolvement of public in • Even if many peopleare not impressed planning processes resulted in significant with the resultsof the environmental efforts, improvementsat certain sites (Hakons Hall, they representan importantfirst step in an bobsled tracks) ongoing process. Enthusiasm and readiness to take responsibility becamethe hallmark • comprehensive, joint solutions with public of organizers, sponsors, business in general, sector(sewage, solid waste ) sportsfederations and the environmental movement. It is importantto maintain this • environmentaltendering criteriadeveloped momentum

• Remediationof many of the instances of • It is equally importantto anchor damage to the landscape environmental responsibilityfirmly within the IOC, sports federations and partners • Remedial effortsin connectionwith road fromtrade and industry forthe future construction

• aesthetic improvements in towns and WHAT CAN BE LEARNED FROM THE along highways and railroads LILLEHAMMEREXPERIENCE

General assessment Lillehammer's Green Games efforts demon­ stratedto the world that there is a better way • By definingcommon goals and creating of designing event-based sports tourism. It cooperativepartnerships to achieve them, was clearly demonstrated that steps can be partners with differentmotivations were taken which reduce the environmental able to achieve results thatnone of them impact of a major sports event on the host could have obtained working alone region. Best of all, those steps do not detract from the event. Lillehammer showed • Total environmental damage was less than that they improved the quality of the feared, although some groups and areas experience for all v1s1tors, generated were moreadversely affected than others positive media attention, saved money for the organizers and left an important legacy • The enormous consumption of resources for local residents and for the tourism demands furthercritical evaluation industry of not just Lillehammer but the countryof Norway. • Behind event the smallest solutions lay cooperationand hardwork by many parties The key to Lillehammer's green profile lies in the comprehensiveness of their efforts. • The watchdog role of the NSCN (through We can nevertheless highlight some of the its sub-projectPEFO) was important,even if key principles involved in designing more it led to criticism fromsome environmental sustainable sports tourism: groups that the NSCN was providinga convenient alibi for LOOC. Comparedto 1. Recognize the value of the goal of the altemative--non-involvement-­ sustainability fromthe outset considerable positiveenvironmental achievements wererealized

72 2. Design all structures and processes with practicesin all sectors,including tourism; sustainability in mind preservingand enhancing natural spaces; amelioratingair, water and soil conditions 3. Get all "players" involved in the quest for a greenergames 9. Capitalizeon successful greeningeffort to promote the attractivenessof the region 4. By reducingthe amount of resources as a touristdestination consumed you limit the quantity of waste produced, saving twice A good marriage of sport promotion and environmentalism can guarantee several 5. Develop a transportation plan which things for tourism: a better event, satisfied curtails individual car use, encourages active visitors and a positive reputation as a clean modes and promotespublic means of and attractive destination. The benefits of transportation more sustainable sports tourism go beyond major events, however. Ongoing sports and 6. Plan building constructionthat: recreation-related attractions can equally encourages use of environmentally-preferred implement greener practices, with similar materials; cuts or diverts construction waste; economic and environmental results. conservesenergy and water; ensures good indoorair quality By protecting the natural features which attract tourists, by preserving healthy local 7. Work directlywith tourism officials environmental conditions, by keeping local (hotels, restaurants,caterers, etc.) to residents in favour of on-going sports/ encourage and assist them to limit their recreation activities and by saving money environmental impact. through efficiency and conservation, you can guarantee a sustainable future for sport­ 8. Ensure a positive environmental legacy based tourism in your region. forthe sports event by: instilling new

73