The Emergence and Conceptualisation of Community Stadia

Feature Local Economy 0(0) 1–21 The emergence and ! The Author(s) 2021 conceptualisation of DOI: 10.1177/02690942211003055 community stadia in the UK journals.sagepub.com/home/lec Alexander John McTier University of Strathclyde, UK Abstract New professional sports stadia have been widely advanced as flagship developments that can generate jobs and wealth, support place branding and culture-led strategies, and host mega- events. Public funding for new stadia has been secured on these bases but also challenged as stadia costs are under-estimated and the benefits, particularly for lower income communities, exaggerated. Emerging in this context, community stadia are an intriguing phenomenon as they offer the potential for professional sports stadia to deliver on community aims alongside their sporting, commercial and economic development aims. Public funding has followed with a number of community stadia built or planned in the UK, yet with limited critical analysis of the stadium type and its impact. This paper helps to fill the literature gap by learning from two community stadia case studies: The Keepmoat Stadium, Doncaster and The Falkirk Stadium, Falkirk. It finds that community stadia have the potential to deliver across the four aims, with stadia’s association with the world of professional sport facilitating engagement with multiple, diverse and ‘hard to reach’ communities. However, they are also complex phenomena leading the paper to construct a 12-feature conceptualisation of community stadia that can advance practitioner and academic understanding of the phenomenon. Keywords community, economic development, stadia, stadium, urban regeneration Introduction Since the 1980s, the UK has experienced an unprecedented era of new or redeveloped Corresponding author: professional sports stadia. The modern, Alexander John McTier, University of Strathclyde Curran Building, Cathedral Street Glasgow, Scotland large capacity and commercially minded G1 1XQ, UK. stadia, described as 21st century Email: [email protected] 2 Local Economy 0(0) ‘cathedrals’ (Giulianotti, 2011), now adorn- Stadium, Doncaster and the Falkirk ing many of the UK’s major cities are very Stadium, Falkirk. Learning from these different to the physically dilapidated stadia two stadia and their respective aims, serv- of the 1980s (Bale, 2000; Paramio et al., ices and facilities hosted, and communities 2008; Van Dam, 2000; Williams, 1995). served, this paper offers a conceptualisation Interest and investment in new stadia has of the community stadia phenomenon. It not only been in high profile stadia but concludes by considering whether commu- also, and the focus of this paper, in lesser nity stadia offer an alternative type of flag- scale ‘community stadia’. Conceived as a ship development, one that aligns more stadium type in their own right, community closely to the emergent community entre- stadia can be described as professional preneurialism policy discourse (Devaney sports stadia with additional community- et al., 2017; Schaller, 2018; Southern and facing aims, facilities and services that Whittam, 2015) as opposed to dominant reflect the scale of the professional clubs urban entrepreneurialism. they host and the towns and small cities in which they are situated (City of York Council, 2010; PMP, 2008; Sanders Understanding the context for et al., 2014). community stadia In the UK, new professional sports The emergence of community stadia in the stadia with explicit aims of becoming ‘com- UK needs to be understood within their munity stadia’ have been constructed in political, sporting, social and economic Brentford, Brighton, Chesterfield, context. Politically, the turning point for Colchester, Doncaster, Falkirk and UK stadia developments was the 1989 Wimbledon, while further examples are Hillsborough stadium disaster. The result- planned for Cambridge, Castleford, ing Hillsborough Stadium Disaster Inquiry Grimsby, Truro, and York. It is this report overseen by Lord Justice Taylor increasing number, allied to a sparse com- became a watershed and enforced signifi- munity stadia-specific literature that cur- rently spans just three sources (City of cant investment in British football stadia York Council, 2010; PMP, 2008; Sanders to improve their safety and security et al., 2014), which forms the motivation (Giulianotti, 2011). The Taylor Report behind this paper. Furthermore, the con- was therefore the ‘stick’ to enforce change struction of community stadia in the UK in Britain’s professional stadia but the has typically been (part-) funded by public ‘carrot’ for stadia investments came from monies and, once constructed, public sector the increased professionalisation, media bodies (such as local authorities or arms- coverage and commodification of sport – length external organisations (ALEOs)) all of which contributed to rising matchday are involved in their ownership and man- attendances (Van Dam, 2000; Walsh and agement. The concern is that large sums Giulianotti, 2001). Larger, safer and more of public investment are being allocated to aesthetically attractive stadia enabled clubs new community stadia but with very little to meet this demand and, in turn, attract critical appraisal or evaluation of the phe- the players and investment that could deliv- nomenon’s objectives and impact. er sporting success on the pitch (Kennedy, This paper aims to help fill the commu- 2012). nity stadia literature gap by integrating the New or redeveloped stadia became a existing knowledge with case study research means of fulfilling sporting ambitions but, into two community stadia: the Keepmoat closely associated with sporting success was McTier 3 the need for stadia to deliver on a commer- from new stadia failed to materialise, the cial front. Whether to fund stadia invest- influence of urban entrepreneurial econom- ments, service stadia finance ic development policy led to more nuanced arrangements, or support the financial sus- assertions tied to new stadia’s contribution tainability of clubs, all professional sports to competitive place strategies. Stadia have stadia have had to increasingly enable and thus been portrayed as symbolic flagship accommodate commercial and revenue gen- developments, assets in culture-led and eration activities (Ginesta, 2017; Paramio place branding strategies, and hosts of et al., 2008; Williams, 1995). No longer sporting mega-events that can attract the monopurpose sports venues of the highly sought after mobile skills, jobs, 1980s, contemporary stadia are instead firms and investment to their cities buildings that seek to maximise revenue (Doucet, 2007; Harvey, 1989; OECD, generation opportunities, including 2007). through corporate and conference suites, Stadia proponents have also advanced hotels, museums and the selling of stadia the contribution of stadia to social naming rights (Ginesta, 2017; Paramio and community aims (Coates, 2007; et al., 2008). Eckstein and Delaney, 2002; Slack, 2014). The societal tension is that professional In the UK, the sustainability agenda clubs and stadia officials have gone too far: initiated by the New Labour government favouring the commercial over the sporting led to new stadia developments being fan. Rising ticket prices and the financial couched within community economic devel- importance of attracting wealthier fans is opment, co-production and sustainable one aspect of this with Giulianotti (2011), communities theories and concepts – Walsh and Giulianotti (2001) and Williams and the emergence of the community (1995) questioning whether stadia are now stadia phenomenon can be traced back to becoming exclusive places that price out this period. many young adult and working class ‘tradi- In this context, community stadia are an tional’ supporters. Kennedy (2012) then notes the wider trend of stadia becoming intriguing phenomenon as they offer the increasingly secular, even calculative, with potential for professional sports stadia to their fundamental focus being on generat- deliver on sporting, commercial, economic ing revenue and developing the club development and community aims – which ‘brand’, rather than expanding corporate this paper conceptualises as the ‘quadruple social responsibility (CSR) and community bottom line’. The vision behind community actions. In becoming ‘tradiums’ (Bale, stadia appears to be apposite to the domi- 2000), clubs and stadia officials consequent- nant urban economic development policy ly encounter challenge when seeking public themes and discourses, with greater empha- support, planning approval and investment sis on the stadia’s use by and impact on for new stadia. their local communities rather than their To counter this, clubs and stadia officials contribution to economic outcomes. A have attached additional aims or layers of question within the emergent community justification to their stadia proposals, with entrepreneurialism policy discourse these evolving over time. From North (Devaney et al., 2017; Schaller, 2018; America, there were wealth and job crea- Southern and Whittam, 2015), therefore, tion justifications (Baade, 1996; Coates, is whether community stadia can deliver 2007; Siegfried and Zimbalist, 2006). on more inclusive and social aims in such However, as the direct economic benefits an economically driven climate. 4 Local Economy 0(0) Community stadia in the leisure opportunities), education facilities literature (e.g. Playing for Success centres, community classrooms and ICT suites), general The only community stadium referred to

Load more