Spatial Analysis of Mega-Event Hosting
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SPATIAL ANALYSIS OF MEGA-EVENT HOSTING: OLYMPIC HOST AND OLYMPIC BID CITIES A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF NATURAL AND APPLIED SCIENCES OF MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY BY SERTAÇ ERTEN IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN CITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING JANUARY 2008 Approval of the thesis: SPATIAL ANALYSIS OF MEGA-EVENT HOSTING: OLYMPIC HOST AND OLYMPIC BID CITIES submitted by SERTAÇ ERTEN in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in City and Regional Planning Department, Middle East Technical University by Prof. Dr. Canan Özgen Dean, Graduate School of Natural Applies Sciences Prof. Dr. Melih Ersoy Head of Department, City and Regional Planning Prof. Dr. Đlhan Tekeli Supervisor, Department of City and Regional Planning, METU Examining Committee Members Prof. Dr. Ayda Eraydın Department of City and Regional Planning, METU Prof. Dr. Đlhan Tekeli Department of City and Regional Planning, METU Prof. Dr. Gencay Şaylan Department of Public Affairs, European University of Lefke Assoc. Prof. Dr. Özcan Altaban Department of City and Regional Planning, METU Assist. Prof. Dr. Ela Babalık Sutcliffe Department of City and Regional Planning, METU January 08, 2008 Date: I hereby declare that all information in this thesis document has been obtained and presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all material and results that are not original to this work. Name, Last name: Sertaç Erten Signature: iii ABSTRACT SPATIAL ANALYSIS OF MEGA-EVENT HOSTING: OLYMPIC HOST AND OLYMPIC BID CITIES Erten, Sertaç Ph.D., Department of City and Regional Planning Supervisor, Prof. Dr. Đlhan Tekeli January 2008, 236 pages The aim of this dissertation is to provide a new perspective to the analysis of mega- event / host city relationship. The significance of the research subject depends on the interest in hosting mega-events such as the Olympic Games and the World Fairs, which generate a competition among cities. Turkish cities are recently being involved in this competition. In addition to that, mega-events have large-scale and long-term impacts on the built environment, which has not been thoroughly discussed in urban studies. The methodology which is based on a qualitative analysis comprises three steps: a historical analysis made on the Olympic host cities, and two case studies. The first case is Athens as the 2004 Olympic city, the second case is Istanbul as an Olympic bid city since 1990. This study recognizes but qualifies the concept of mega- event hosting. It is shown that mega-event hosting is a capacity-building process, whilst it has a potential to generate overdose investments problem in the built environment. The most significant conclusion of the study is that the ability of coping with this problem is correlated with the ability of absorbing the investments made. Key words: mega-event, mega-sports event, mega-event hosting, physical capacity- building, over-capacity problem, absorption capacity, Olympic Games, Olympic host city, bidding, Olympic candidacy. iv ÖZ DEV ETKĐNLĐKLERE EV SAHĐPLĐĞĐ YAPMANIN MEKANSAL ANALĐZĐ: OLĐMPĐYAT KENTLERĐ VE OLĐMPĐYATLARA ADAY KENTLER Erten, Sertaç Doktora, Şehir ve Bölge Planlama Bölümü Tez yöneticisi: Prof. Dr. Đlhan Tekeli Ocak 2008, 236 sayfa Bu tez çalışmasının amacı, dev etkinlikler ve onlara ev sahipliği yapan kentler arasındaki ilişkiye yeni bir bakış açısı getirmektir. Araştırmanın önemi, giderek daha çok kentin Olimpiyat Oyunları, Dünya Fuarları gibi dev organizasyonlara ev sahipliği yapmak istemeleri, bunun için yarışmaları ve bu yarışta Türk kentlerinin de yer almaya başlamasıdır. Ayrıca, dev etkinlikler kapsamında kentlere büyük çaplı yatırımlar yapılması, kentsel araştırma konusudur. Yöntem olarak, Olimpiyat ev sahibi kentlerinin tarihsel analizi ile iki alan araştırmasını içeren nitel bir çalışma geliştirilmiştir. Alan araştırmaları, biri 2004’te Olimpiyatlara ev sahipliği yapmış Atina, diğeri 1990 başından itibaren Olimpiyatlara dört kez üst üste aday olmuş Đstanbul üzerinde yapılmıştır. Araştırmanın sonucunda, dev etkinliklere ev sahipliği yapmanın bir kapasite inşa süreci olduğu ve bu sürecin kapasite fazlası altyapı yatırımları problemi doğurma gücü olduğu ortaya çıkmıştır. Araştırmanın en önemli bulgusu, bu problemle baş etme becerisi, kentlerin bu yatırımları hazmetme becerileri ile ilişkili olmasıdır. Anahtar sözcükler: dev etkinlik, dev spor etkinliği, dev-etkinlik ev sahipliği, fiziksel kapasite inşası, kapasite fazlası altyapı problemi, hazmetme kapasitesi, Olimpiyat Oyunları, Olimpiyat kenti, yarışma, Olimpiyat adaylığı. v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor Prof. Dr. Đlhan Tekeli for his sincere support throughout the study. He gave valuable comments and contributions on evolution of the study. He also encouraged me writing from a new and original point of view. I would like to express my thanks to the members of my doctoral steering committee, Prof. Dr. Ayda Eraydın and Prof. Dr. Gencay Şaylan, for all valuable critics and contributions to the study. I also thank to my examining committee members, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Özcan Altaban and Assist. Prof. Dr. Ela Babalık Sutcliffe; for significant evaluations. I would like to thank to Assoc. Prof. Baykan Günay, who always kept his doors wide open for the PhD students. I would like to thank to TMOK, for their archive, to ARIT for providing me the scholarship (W.D.E. Coulson & Toni Cross Aegean Exchange Fellowship) to continue my studies in Athens. Special thanks to all of my friends, especially to Devrim Çimen and Ayşegül Özbakır, for supporting me in many ways. Special thanks to Yiannis Bonos, Yiannis Mucis and Alekos Lamprou for their academic and social support during the days spent in Athens. And finally very special thanks to my family for their love and support. vi Dedicated to Cüneyt Koryürek vii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT …………………………………………………………………………………..iv ÖZ ………………………………………………………………………………………………v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS …………………………………………………………………..vi DEDICATIONS …………………………………………………………………………….vii TABLE OF CONTENTS …………………………………………………………………..viii LIST OF TABLES ………………………………………………………………………….xiii LIST OF FIGURES ………………………………………………………………………..xv LIST OF ACRONYMS ……………………………………………………………………xvii CHAPTERS 1. INTRODUCTION: SPATIAL ANALYSIS OF MEGA-EVENT HOSTING ……...1 1.1. INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………..……………………………..1 1.2. OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE …………………………………………………………………………..2 1.3. LITERATURE REVIEW ON MEGA-EVENTS ………………………………………………….…3 1.3.1. Contextual Evaluation of Mega-Events ………………………………………….…4 1.3.2. Definition and Classification of Mega-Events ……………………………………8 1.3.3. Research on Mega-Sports Events ………………………………………………….14 1.3.3.1. Tourism / Leisure Studies ………………………………………………14 1.3.3.2. Economic Impact Studies ………………………………………………17 1.3.3.3. Spatial Analysis Studies …………………………………………………20 1.3.4. Evaluation of the Literature ………………………………………………………….23 1.4. RESEARCH QUESTIONS ……………………………………………………………………………27 1.5. OUTLINE OF CHAPTERS …………………………………………………………………………..29 2. A NEW CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR MEGA-EVENT HOSTING ……..31 2.1. INTRODUCTION: THE MEGA-EVENT PHENOMENON……………………………………31 2.1.1. Observations on Mega-Events ………………………………………………………31 2.1.2. Categories of Mega-Events …………………………………………………………..35 viii 2.1.2.1. Non-Sports Mega-Events ……………………………………………….36 2.1.2.2. Mega-Sports Events ………………………………………………………39 2.1.2.3. Proposed Model of Categorisation for Mega-Events …………40 2.1.2.4. Proposed Definition for Mega-Events ………………………………43 2.1.3. Olympic Games as a Mega-Event ………………………………………………….43 2.1.3.1. Motivations behind Hosting the Olympic Games …….…………46 2.1.3.2. Phases of the Olympic Games …………….………………………….49 2.2. PROPOSED CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK .………………………………………………….52 2.2.1. Physical Capacity Building In The City ……………………………………………56 2.2.1.1. IOC and Its Description of Physical Capacity ……………………56 2.2.1.2. Spheres of Physical Capacity: Primary, Secondary and Tertiary Infrastructure …………………………………………………………….…60 2.2.2. Over-Capacity Problem In The City ……………………………………………….63 2.2.2.1. White Elephant Phenomenon …………………………………………64 2.2.2.2. Factors of Over-Capacity Problem …………………………………..65 2.2.3. Absorption Capacity of the City …………………………………………………….77 2.2.3.1. Squeezing (Absorbing the Sudden Agglomerations during Mega-Event) ………………………………………………………………..78 2.2.3.2. Absorbing (Absorbing the Built Capacity Over Time) …….….78 2.3. CONCLUSION ………………………………………………………………………………………….79 3. METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK ……………………………………………...84 3.1. INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………………………………………84 3.2. RESEARCH DESIGN …………………………………………………………………………………85 3.2.1. Research Strategy ……………………………………………………………………….86 3.2.1.1. Historical Analysis: Olympic Host Cities ……………………………87 3.2.1.2. Case Study 1: Athens - 2004 Olympic Host City ……………….87 3.2.1.3. Case Study 2: Istanbul - Olympic Bid City ……………………….87 3.2.2. Data Collection Instruments and Procedures ………………………………….88 3.2.2.1. Documents …………………………………………………………………..88 3.2.2.2. Interviews ……………………………………………………………………89 3.2.2.3. Observations ………………………………………………………………..89 3.2.3. Data Analysis ………………………………………………………………………………90 3.3. CONCLUSION ………………………………………………………………………………………….90 ix 4. HISTORICAL ANALYSIS OF OLYMPIC HOST CITIES ……………………….91 4.1. INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………………………………………91 4.2. EMERGENCE AND EVOLUTION OF THE MODERN OLYMPIC GAMES ……………..91 4.2.1. World Expos (Fairs) ….…………………………………………………………………93