The legacies of the 2010 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games in Vancouver

By Bruce Kidd1

Introduction

On July 31, 1976 in Montreal's Olympic Stadium, with one eye on the Closing Ceremonies of the Montreal Olympics taking place before me¸ tired and hoarse from cheering, I wrote an assessment of the legacy of those games for the Canadian English- language weekly magazine, Weekend. The title of the assessment was 'Future games', and the sub-heading, 'The Olympics cannot survive many more Montreals'. I wrote

For two weeks all the contradictions seemed to stand still. But now that the Olympic flame has been extinguished, I fear that all those moments when we felt we soared—and the athletes who gave us the moments and shared them with us—will be forgotten in the bitter runaround of who's going to pay the bill.

The balance sheet is not a happy one: a $1 billion deficit for facilities that will rarely ever fully be used again and which will cost a small fortune to maintain. In Montreal and all across Canada, funds are desperately needed for the most basis facilities, better physical education and community fitness programs and professional coaches….

The list of black eyes is a long one: the refusal to hold a plebiscite on whether Montrealers really wanted the Games; construction deaths, delays and scandals; commercialism so rampant that it would almost have been more appropriate for the athletes to compete by corporation than by country; social services cut back or postponed; and civil rights ignored in order to keep the Games 'secure'…

The problem is how to reconcile the tremendous highs with their enormous social costs (Kidd 1976).

This grim pronouncement held up for many years. Several of the major facilities, notably the velodrome, the aquatic centre and the rowing basin, had to be de-commissioned for want of program and maintenance funds. The attractive Olympic Village had to be completely retrofitted, and was never made available as promised for social housing. The Olympic Stadium, which became known as the 'Big Owe' because the huge cost over- runs triggered unpopular new municipal and provincial taxes, became the home of non- Olympic professional sports. To this day in English-speaking Canada, Montreal remains a by-word for extravagant and wasteful public projects.

1 Professor, Faculty of Physical Education and Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. Paper written in the framework of the IOC’s OSC Postgraduate Grant Selection Committee (2010 meeting) January 2011 But, slowly, things began to change. Gradually, the generation of sport and physical education leaders inspired by the aspirations and performances of Montreal in 1976, with the support of social democratic provincial governments, turned the Olympic facilities into accessible centres of opportunity and excellence. The aquatic centre and rowing basin were reopened in the 1990s to stimulate significant increases in participation and performance. The Quebec government instituted compulsory physical education right up to junior college, the only province in Canada ever to do so, and encouraged innovative after-school and community sport. These initiatives significantly raised Quebeckers' fitness levels and transformed their participation on representative teams. Prior to 1976, Quebeckers rarely won more than 2% of the places on Canadian Olympic teams, and most of those athletes came from the Anglo-McGill elite. Since Montreal, francophone Quebeckers regularly comprise 25-35% of those teams. The entrepreneurial skills, cadre of volunteers and international branding Montrealers gained from the Olympics enabled them to specialize in sports tourism, too, so that today the city hosts some 80-100 events a year in addition to the events conducted by professional sport. Montreal has become one of the most advanced and accomplished Olympic sports communities in Canada. Moreover, the lessons from the Montreal Olympics were quickly applied to other major events across the country (Kidd 2004).

To be sure, it took more than the Olympics to bring about the transformation of sport and physical activity in Montreal and Quebec. The driving energy for these changes came from the 'quiet revolution' of the 1960s and 1970s—the transformation of a traditional, inward-looking, priest- and Anglo-capital dominated backwater into an au courant, secular, and pluralist centre of politics and culture. It was also enabled by a series of social democratic provincial governments, ideologically predisposed to stand up to the tide of neo-liberalism sweeping other parts of North America and to continue to invest in public opportunities, during the 1980s and 1990s. But the Olympics (and the 1967 World's Fair) gave voice to the aspirations for international engagement, and an expectation of excellence to be upheld long after the athletes departed. Among sport and physical activity leaders, the 1976 Games are always signaled out as playing an important part in the story. Moreover, the investments in environmental controls, public transportation and new technology accelerated by the Games contributed to the economic prosperity of the region, while the experiences of those associated with the Games continue to be played out in still other ways.

These reflections on the long fuse of the Montreal Olympics have led me to adopt three cautionary rules of thumb on issues of legacy. In the first place, following John MacAloon (1987), we must regard games as 'multiple narratives'—in their pursuit and preparation, in the remarkable athletic, cultural, and festive performances they stimulate, and in the environmental, economic and political effects they generate. In almost every games I have witnessed, there have been significant benefits alongside white elephants and abuses, and rarely have the benefits and costs been shared equally. No single sentence or report grade can do justice to the complexity—it has to be a multi-factor calculation. Secondly, we must realize that Olympic benefits can be significantly affected—enhanced or constrained--by the changing social, economic and political

2 context. Thirdly, we must be sensitive to the maturation of Olympic legacies over long periods of time.

What are the legacies of the 2010 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games in Vancouver/Whistler?

It's just been one year since I shouted myself hoarse on the last days of those Games. But my assessment of them will still be a 'work-in-progress' for many years to come, framed by the rules of thumb set out above. This paper sets out my impressions of the post- Games impact to date, my hopes for their further development in the months and years ahead and the lessons they offer for the Olympic Movement. The paper draws upon interviews and regular visits to Vancouver and Whistler, including attendance at the Winter Olympics and Winter Paralympics in February and March of 2010, and the literature to date, including the commendable documentation, monitoring and evaluation provided by the Vancouver Organizing Committee (VANOC).

Enhanced infrastructure

Vancouver sought to improve the transportation, housing and facilities available for sports and physical activity in the communities where the Games would be staged, with a focus on strengthening the Four Host First Nations (Lil'Wat, Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-Wahtuth), on whose traditional lands most of the events would be staged, and ensuring environmental and financial sustainability.2 The investments were substantial.

The Games accelerated the construction of two major transportation improvements, a new rapid transit line from the international airport to downtown, the 'Canada Line', and long overdue safety and capacity upgrades on the 'Sea to Sky' highway between Vancouver and Whistler. They added significantly to the region's housing stock. 1,100 new units, plus a new community centre, day care, retail facilities and space for a regional office of the Canadian Sport Centre Pacific were constructed in the spectacular athletes' village along False Creek in Vancouver (that housed 2,800 athletes, coaches and officials during the Games). 225 of these units, 125 which have been sold and 100 of which is rental housing, are 'affordable', defined as costing no more than 30% of a household’s total gross monthly income. While many of the luxury condos in the new community remain to be sold, a consequence of a downturn in Vancouver's housing market and the premium required for the top-of-the-line environmental features, the City of Vancouver, which acquired the properties, is confident that they ultimately will find buyers: the village was the last development site along the vibrant and attractive False Creek waterway. In Whistler, 20 town houses and a 100-room lodge were built (to house 2,400 during the Games). The townhouses are being privately sold, although they too have not all been sold. The lodge became a dormitory for high performance athletes using Whistler facilities. All of the new Whistler housing is considered 'affordable'. In addition, 156 units were built elsewhere in the province.

2 While strictly speaking the capital costs of infrastructural improvements are not considered part of the Games budget for the IOC's purposes, the benefits they promised were integral to the Games ambition and the popular discussion of 'legacy'. They must be considered in their entirety.

3 Whistler also gained a new central park and plaza, upgrades to its convention centre, and a boundary expansion that will give it greater control over its watersheds and growth management. The Squamish band received a new community centre in Whistler, and the Aboriginal Pavilion located in downtown Vancouver during the Games will be moved and re-assembled on the territory of the Musqueam.

Every aspect of Olympic construction aimed at achieving a minimum of LEED silver standard. The Vancouver village attained LEED gold status, with a neighborhood energy system that draws upon the burning of sewage, solar panels and green roofs to significantly reduce the carbon emissions from heating the buildings. It has reduced water consumption by 50% through the retention of rainwater.

Other environmental improvements achieved through the Games include:

 hydrogen buses for Whistler and fuelling stations for Whistler and Victoria  a new natural gas pipeline to Whistler, which has reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 15 percent through the conversion from propane to natural gas  a new sub-station at Function Junction, increasing overall capacity and reliability of service to the Whistler community  three state-of-the-art weather stations set up by Environment Canada, to help improve Whistler’s mountain weather forecasts  the installation of 286 km of fibre-optic cable between Whistler and Vancouver, bringing about improved telephone, TV and digital services for Whistler residents, with additional fibre-optic cable in the village to add permanent capacity for broadcast and event services (Zimmerman 2010).

Vancouver 2010 thus set an exemplary standard for environmental sustainability. It is hoped that this will become the norm in future Games.

For sports and physical activity, the Games brought attractive, top-quality new facilities, including Nordic skiing, ski-jumping and sliding venues and a new high performance training centre with housing, rehabilitation, strength fitness and cross-training facilities, to Whistler; an award-winning speed skating oval and fitness center to Richmond; new and refurbished skating, hockey and curling rinks in Vancouver, and accessible new children's playgrounds in all three communities. Several of the Olympic facilities were/are being converted to preferred local uses. The speed skating track at the Richmond Olympic Oval was reconfigured for ice hockey, short-track speed skating, an indoor running track and a vast multi-sport training and competition hall. The Olympic/Paralympic Curling Centre is being converted into a community centre with a new rink, indoor and outdoor pools, sport and recreation facilities, a library and child care. The Games also led to the doubling of the Whistler golf driving range as a result of a parking lot being dismantled.

These facilities, too, were designed and constructed to achieve at least LEED silver standards. The new Vancouver ice rinks use excess heat from ice slab cooling to heat the

4 buildings, and conservation measures that achieve a minimum of 30 percent reduction in water use. The Whistler alpine courses used existing slopes, while the new Nordic centre in the Callaghan Valley was designed to avoid old-growth forests and wetlands (Zimmerman 2010).

For the most part, the new infrastructure has already demonstrated its usefulness. The Canada Line has already reached the ridership expected for 2013, prompting hopes that the debt incurred to build the new transit could be paid off three years earlier as well (Luba 2010). The upgraded Sea to Sky highway seems to have significantly reduced the number of accidents along that heavily travelled stretch of road. The Whistler housing is already helping athletes and service workers in low-paying jobs find affordable places to live. The new central park and plaza provides Whistler a much more accessible and accommodating focal point and gathering place. When all the new units along False Creek in Vancouver are finally sold, they will contribute to a beautiful new community.

What remains to be seen is to extent to which the new and refurbished facilities will be used to enable new and improved levels of sport participation, and whether they can be operated and maintained in ways that are affordable to both participants and the municipalities and non-governmental organizations that now manage them. The first year's results have yet to be reported, but what I hear from colleagues is encouraging, at least in terms of participation. The new and refurbished Vancouver facilities seem to be very well used, although it's unclear whether they have simply accommodated higher levels of participation from those who have been previously active or have stimulated new participation by those inactive before. In Richmond, the reconfigured Oval has become extremely popular. Indoor sports like volleyball, new events (Vancouver's first indoor track and field meet in more than two decades) and community groups (school programs; adaptive rowing, volleyball and basketball programs) have been attracted. On the other hand, the Oval is struggling to make ends meet; revenue has been insufficient to cover operating costs. The revenue challenges undermine accessibility. Each of the new facilities charges user fees. While modest in the case of Vancouver's facilities, and competitive with private fitness centres in the case of the Oval, user fees nonetheless constitute barriers for many individuals and families—national surveys report that children and youth from low-income households are three times less likely to participate in sport and physical activity than those from higher income households (Active Healthy Kids Canada 2009).

In Whistler, the ambition is to turn the Olympic facilities into a centre for development and competition at the elite junior level. The Nordic centre is already contributing significantly to the realization of this vision. A triumph of location and design, with early, plentiful, good snow, it is already getting full use by both high performance and recreational skiers. The new regional complex at the site of the Whistler athletes' village, with housing, rehabilitation and other athletes' services, strength fitness and both indoor and outdoor cross-training facilities is also proving to be transformative. On the other hand, the sliding centre receives limited use, the ski jump has not been re-opened, and the national programs in these sports, as well as in speed skating, remain in Calgary at the

5 facilities built for the 1988 Winter Olympics. Whether a robust model for junior development in all of these sports can be established remains to be seen.

Of course, the possibilities are conditioned by the over-arching funding arrangements for the new facilities and their programs, which in turn are shaped by the current political economy, and the decisions of the responsible governments. One of the achievements of the Vancouver Games (following on the lessons of Montreal and Calgary), was the creation of a Legacy Endowment Fund, with contributions of $55M (in 2002 dollars) from each of the Canadian and British Columbian governments. Interest from the Fund, after protecting against inflation, is to provide operating and major maintenance support for the major new facilities and athlete and coach development (Multiparty Agreement 2002). Although the original $110M had grown to $133M by 2007, with an annual payout of $4M, the subsequent fall in the market reduced the principal considerably by the time of the Games. At current rates of interest, the annual contribution from the Fund is less than $2M, hardly enough to cover the current operating costs, let alone set aside funds for major maintenance and assist with sport development.

The challenges are complex: How do sports leaders capitalize upon the excitement generated by the Games in the months and years ahead? What new programs and approaches will need to be developed? How can they be financed? How can the Olympic Movement assist? I will return to these questions below.

Social legacies and favourable precedents

In many ways, the human legacy from the Games—the new knowledge, technology, relationships, institutions and 'go for it' confidence--has been the most significant legacy from Vancouver 2010. The successful staging of the events, the breakthrough achievements of Canadian athletes (who took Canada to the top of the gold medal table for the very first time in its long Olympic history, with a record 26 medals overall) and the joyous celebrations in Vancouver, Whistler and many other parts of Canada, all seemed to contribute to a new spirit of confidence among Canadians. In his remarks to the Closing Ceremonies, VANOC CEO John Furlong declared that 'I believe we Canadians tonight are stronger, more united, more in love with our country and more connected with each other than ever before.' While the extent and expression of such new-found confidence is difficult to measure, there is no doubt that many Canadians continue to identify with the spirit associated with the Games, and frequently comment upon it as a source of pride and inspiration in personal conversation and public reflections. My favourite example of this spirit is the continued sale and widespread wearing of the Games' red-and-white maple-leafed official mittens. In December, after polling readers, the Globe and Mail, Canada's most influential English-language national newspaper, named Furlong 'nation-builder of the year' for his role in boosting that confidence (Mickleburgh 2010).

To be sure, some criticism of the choices made and represented by the Games also continues. A public opinion poll two months after the Games showed that the proportion of British Columbians who judged them successful—60%--was less than the proportion

6 that voted in favour of the bid in the 2002 plebiscite—63% (Angus Reid Public Opinion 2010). The Vancouver-based Impact on Communities Coalition (2010) gave mostly Ds and Fs in its final evaluation of the Games. But even critics acknowledged the new confidence. Ellen Woodsworth, a prominent Vancouver city councilor and persistent opponent of the Games told me that 'despite all the mistakes, the Olympics have forced us to think of ourselves as a world city, with all of the opportunity and responsibility that entails.'

The Games gave strong affirmation to Aboriginal peoples. The Four Host First Nations enjoyed lasting benefits in terms of investment in facilities, employment, education and training, small business opportunities, and improved relationships with Canadians and their governments. Each of them received $17.5M in cash, and the Squamish and Lil’wat received 300 acres of land in Whistler, worth an additional $13.5M. There were 4,000 job opportunities for members of First Nations and 100 Aboriginal businesses were engaged in the Games, in activities from construction to earning $56.7 million from construction to artistic performances and the production of crafts. These benefits have been estimated to total $200M. More than 140 pieces of Aboriginal art were purchased for various venues, and a line of Games-related souvenirs was designed by Aboriginal artists and sold under the joint brands of the Four Host First Nations and the Games. A licensing agreement with the Nunavut Development Corporation employed more than 1,000 Inuit artists to hand-carve Inuksuit, the official symbol of the 2010 Vancouver Olympic Winter Games. One third of VANOC’s royalties from the sale of these products has been donated to the Aboriginal Sport Legacy Fund, benefiting Aboriginal youth across Canada in the areas of sport, culture, education and sustainability. In addition, the Aboriginal Pavilion in downtown Vancouver gave tremendous visibility to Aboriginal visual and performing artists and to Aboriginal businesses (Zimmerman 2010, p. 101).

There were tensions in these relationships throughout, a consequence of the deep mistrust engendered by generations of failed land negotiations between the First Nations and the BC and Canadian governments, and most recently, the decision by the federal government not to implement a comprehensive 2005 agreement between five major Aboriginal federations and the federal, provincial and territorial governments known as the Kelowna Accord. Most controversial was the symbolic legacy of First Nations' participation in the Games. The Olympic Torch Relay was welcomed in 115 Aboriginal communities, and leaders were careful to distinguish their support for the Olympics from their determination to wrest better conditions for themselves. Yet some activists feared that their support of the Games strengthened the position of the BC and Canadian governments for future negotiations much more than they did the First Nations (Pacific Free Press 2010). O'Bonsawin (2010) proposes that the International Olympic Committee (IOC) institute an independent judicial review process in the vetting of bids to ensure that future host nations do not violate Aboriginal rights.

Other contradictions trouble the lived and symbolic legacies for women. Vancouver set a new record for women's participation, with 1,066 competitors, 40.5% of the total number (up from 38.3% in Turin.) There were 25 female flag-bearers in the opening ceremonies, also a record. The Games showcased exceptional female athletes from many countries,

7 dazzling in their performances, heart-warming in their personal journeys, exuberant in their celebrations. It could be said that the successful Canadian team was led by women, beginning with flag-bearer Clara Hughes, the compassionate, articulate six-time medalist (in both summer and winter Games) who personifies the very best of the Olympic Movement in Canada. Canadian women took home more medals than their male counterparts, although they enjoyed fewer medal events. Women from all countries demonstrated over and over again the strength, élan, teamwork and confidence that women develop through sport and showed that there are no feats of athleticism of which women are not capable.

But these remarkable achievements and stories were undermined by two decisions that suggested that the Olympic Movement is still not prepared to provide equal opportunity for women nor relinquish a stance of paternalistic control. The first of these was the decision not to grant female ski jumpers an event in the Games, despite their strong, internationally-coordinated desire to do so, their clear abilities, and the fact that Justice Lori Ann Fenlon declared the decision discriminatory according to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Supreme Court of British Columbia 2009; Vertinsky, Jette & Hoffman 2009; Kidd 2010). The second was the decision to reinstate a gender verification test for selected women. These decisions significantly damaged the reputation of the Olympic Movement in every stratum of Canadian society, from participants and leaders in sport to the general public to the head of state (Angus Reid 2009; Ebner 2010). The fact that the IOC Executive Board has announced that there is likely to be a women's ski jump on the program in Sochi has done little to erase the stain.

On the other hand, the Pride Houses in Vancouver and Whistler, an Olympic first, were a tremendous success, and demonstrated the Olympic Movement's commitment to struggles for human rights. The two Pride Houses provided a welcoming space for lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, trans-identified/two-spirited sportspersons, communities and their allies, a place to celebrate diversity and the accomplishments of LGBT athletes, and a rallying point and resource for the ongoing struggle against homophobia. It is still illegal to be gay in 70 countries. Homophobia is the most cruel and vicious form of discrimination remaining in sport. While not officially associated with VANOC, the Pride Houses received much informal support from Olympic organizers, and their presence became well known. More than 20,000 people visited to one or both of the Pride Houses during the Games, including many athletes and officials from competing teams, and there are moving stories of the support they found. Many more participated in the Pride House artistic and educational outreach programs, speaker series and film nights. As one result of their efforts, the London Olympic Organizing Committee (LOCOG) has committed to an official Pride House in 2012, and has already circulated an official 'gay pride' pin to reach out to the LGBT community and express its commitment to diversity. The organizing committee for the 2015 Pan American and Parapan American Games in Toronto has indicated that it will create a Pride House for those Games, and turn it after the Games into a permanent LGBT human rights centre (Jones 2010).

The 2010 Winter Paralympic Games gave tremendous visibility and affirmation to persons with a disability, demonstrating in exhilarating, inspiring ways that permanent

8 injury or disability is not an unconquerable barrier to excellence. All facilities associated with the Games were built and renovated to be barrier-free. This too created a powerful symbolic legacy. For the Paralympic Games, VANOC completely cleaned, redecorated and re-energized the venues, open sites and thoroughfares in Vancouver and Whistler for the Paralympics. The tickets were more accessibly priced, with the result that most venues were packed and audiences more closely reflected the demographics of Canada today than the Olympics. (Audiences at the Olympics older, with a much higher proportion of European descent--the Olympics felt like the Canada I grew up in; the Paralympics the Canada I live in today.) Many children attended with their families. It was heart-warming to see spectators wear and proudly display Paralympic clothing and memorabilia, including the jerseys (with names on the back) of the Paralympic competitors. The Paralympics were also widely televised. In Canada, for example, the Olympic broadcast consortium provided 65 hours of coverage, reporting a total audience of 13.6 million viewers.

The 2010 Games also strengthened the network of Canadian Olympic athletes, through the provision and volunteer staffing of an Olympic Reunion Centre in downtown Vancouver. It was only the second time in the history of Winter Games that such a centre was operated.

Vancouver also initiated a large number of other progressive policies and programs that should be emulated by other host communities. My list would include:

 the provincial plebiscite on the bid held before the IOC vote, which ensured that the decisions to direct such a tremendous investment of money and creative and emotional energy to Olympic Games enjoyed majority support after a full debate in a democratic process.

 VANOC's fair trade purchasing policy, which ensured that uniforms, merchandise and official memorabilia were produced according to fair labour practices, thereby extending the Olympic Movement's commitment to human rights to this highly visible component of the Games. On at least one occasion, the enforcement of the policy led to significant changes in working conditions in a supplier's factory. While a similar agreement for Olympic employees and volunteers was never realized, the VANOC purchasing policy constituted an important step forward. It should be continued and strengthened in future Games. The advocacy group that helped develop the policythe Ethical Trading Action Group, has some useful proposals (Maquilla Solidarity Network 2008). It is hoped that this successful precedent will persuade the IOC to extend the same requirement to future organizing committees, and National Olympic Committees for their athletes' uniforms.

 The transparent monitoring and evaluation of the effect of the Games. VANOC, along with researchers from the University of British Columbia and the community, took this essential process several giant steps forward. Drawing upon Agenda 21, the IOC's statement of principles for sustainable development

9 approved at the 1999 session in Seoul (IOC 1999), the bid committee publicly committed to 'sustainable economic, social and environmental practices', open communication, and 'participation by persons of diverse ethnic, socio-economic and cultural backgrounds, including persons from Vancouver's inner city (and) persons with disabilities' (Vancouver 2002). Once Vancouver was awarded the Games, VANOC set out ambitious objectives for itself under six headings-- Accountability; Environmental Stewardship and Impact Reduction; Social Inclusion and Responsibility; Aboriginal Participation and Collaboration; Economic Benefits; and Sport for Sustainable Living—and then reported five times on its performance, with a final report completing the process in December 2010 (VANOC 2010) VANOC also contributed significantly to the transparent reporting of the Olympic Games Impact study conducted by researchers at the University of British Columbia (2009—the final report has still be released), providing a rich mine of data for scholarship, policy analysis, education and training. That work has led UBC (2011) to establish a new interdisciplinary research centre, the Centre for Sport and Sustainability in its School of Human Kinetics to 'capture and transfer knowledge … of how sport can help advance economic and social development, urban renewal, cultural identity and ecological well-being'. In particular, the Centre will track the long-term impact of the efforts of those associated with Vancouver 2010 to 'social leverage' resources for policy objectives (VanWynsberghe, Derom & Maurer forthcoming).

 The recruitment of sponsors to sustainable legacy projects. For example, the telecommunications sponsor Bell agreed to allocate $2M from its $100M overall contribution to community sports and recreation projects in disadvantaged neighborhoods, one in Vancouver and the other in the town of Prince George.

 A strengthened culture of voluntarism. More than 25,000 people contributed to the Games as volunteers. They were selected from 65,000 applicants, and given extensive training and mentoring.

 Strengthened knowledge about the Olympic and Paralympics Movements in Canada and internationally, through VANOC’s interactive, bi-lingual educational programs for elementary, secondary and university audiences.

Legacies Now

Undoubtedly the most ambitious and innovative intervention associated with Vancouver 2010 was Legacies Now, the Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) set up during the bid process to ensure community engagement. Once the Games were awarded, the BC government turned it into a funding and programming agency to create new province- wide programs of educational enrichment, arts and sport development, and volunteering. The idea was to give citizens tangible Olympic-related benefits as soon as possible, well before the opening ceremonies. Essentially Legacies Now took over responsibility for new initiatives from the relevant ministries during the build-up to the Games, in an effort to encourage innovation, inter-disciplinary and inter-agency collaboration, and heighten

10 awareness of the Olympic spirit. While most of the funds came from the provincial government, the NGO status enabled Legacies Now to raise funds from other sources, including other levels of government and the private sector. In a very short time, Legacies Now blanketed the province with new locally-planned initiatives, encouraged new forms of activity, and strengthened accessibility for persons with disabilities, Aboriginal peoples, seniors and others. The reported metrics are impressive:

 4,000 families discovering life-altering lessons in literacy and early childhood learning  200,000 people participating in new sport programs, creating a legacy of active British Columbians  95 Spirit of BC committees creating Olympic and Paralympic legacies in their communities  107 communities improving accessibility for people with disabilities and seniors  200 national and international sport events which were hosted in 34 communities and funded by Hosting BC  530,000 students making healthy choices through Action Schools! BC  101 task groups working with over 1,000 community partners to improve literacy for people of all ages  445 arts and cultural projects which engaged British Columbians throughout the province  1,900 organizations and close to 10,000 volunteers using VolWeb.ca to find volunteers and volunteer opportunities  65 provincial sport organizations and multi-sport organizations who receive annual and project funding, along with other support and resources  1,300 high-performance athletes supported by Game Plan BC and the Targeted Sport Strategy each year, as they strive to reach the national team level  16,000 students who experienced high-quality summer camps in arts, sport and recreation  125 Aboriginal organizations offering sport and recreation programs for youth (Legacies Now 2010).

But shortly before the Opening Ceremonies, Legacies Now ground to a halt, terminating programs and grants and laying off staff. At the same time, public funds for sport and recreation across British Columbia were slashed as governments struggled with the economic downturn. A new board has been created, with a pan-Canadian mandate, and it still has some $13M in the bank, but it remains to be seen when and how it will it be resurrected and how those funds will be distributed. While many of the new programs continue to benefit participants, the fear is that Legacies Now as an organization has become Legacies Then. The current political context in British Columbia is volatile and uncertain.

What the Olympic Movement can do to enhance legacy

I am confident that in time governments, NGOs and community-minded corporations in British Columbia will find a way to revive Legacies Now and/or find other ways to build

11 upon the impressive community-building achievements of Vancouver 2010. I am also confident that the Canadian sports community will find a way to ensure that a viable financial plan is realized to ensure that the new and improved facilities in Vancouver, Richmond and Whistler that address local and regional needs are effectively utilized. It may take time, as it did in Montreal, to sort out the facilities that need to be sustained and find the necessary funds, but it will be achieved.

But there needs to better way to ensure that the promised democratization of sport and physical activity through the hosting of major games is effectively realized. It is more crucial now that the entire world faces a crisis of physical inactivity: sport participation, even in the leading Olympic nations, seems to be on a continuous path of decline. In Canada and Australia, the two countries I know best, participation in sport has steadily dropped despite the successful hosting of Olympic and Winter Olympic Games, and a steady improvement in athletic performances. In Canada, no matter how improved the performances, the national rates of participation have steadily dropped, as the following table (Donnelly et all 2010) makes clear:

12 There is a widespread belief—one deputy minister in Canada told me it is 'intuitive'—that outstanding performances inspire new participation. But while the dazzling feats of Olympic champions certainly inspire, the research suggests that those elevated feelings do not by themselves lead to new or more effective participation. Unless those so enthused enjoy full access to sustainable programs with safe, adequate facilities, conducted by competent, ethical leadership, they won't be able to turn those feelings of admiration and aspiration into lived experiences. As a result, the take-up from major games—and the benefits of sport and physical activity—can be short-lived and ineffective (Australia, 2009; Donnelly et al 2010). Moreover, in the increasingly more complex and expensive effort to stage 'best ever' games and prepare the host nation's best athletes for spotlighted competitions on home soil, very few host nations have the time, energy or resources to plan and prepare for an increase in participation after the Games. In the Canadian case, the Donnelly study cited above found that not one of the 29 Canadian sports organizations whose athletes had won medals at Olympic and Winter Olympic Games during the 20-year period between 1988 and 2008 had made any preparations for increased participation as a result of major games. In fact, in the case of speed skating, hundreds of would-be participants showed up at the track in one major city only to be turned away because it was already at capacity. No effort had been made by the national sports organizing or the local club or the responsible municipality to plan for increased participation as a result of the enthusiasm stimulated by the Games. Legacies Now got part of it right idea—linking the creation of new programs to the excitement generated by hosting a games. But there was no plan to make it sustainable. On the contrary, Legacies Now closed down just weeks before the opening ceremonies, nor to link the BC programs to opportunities elsewhere in the Canadian sport system.

To be sure, the traditional focus of games has been the construction of facilities and the successful staging of events. 'Legacy' has been rhetorical and left to chance. Moreover, there are other contributors to the decline in sport and physical activity in many countries, including the revolutionary transformations of work, family and urban life and the world- wide migrations brought about by the electronic revolution, globalization and ongoing conflict and war. The determinants are much more complex than the lack of planning for an increase in participation by the organizers of the Olympics and other major games. Many other agencies ought to be involved.

But the Olympic Movement has a responsibility to see that the funds invested in its name do have a sustainable benefit to the host communities. It can and should make it a requirement of every bid that there be a viable, sustained program to enhance sport and physical activity before and long after an Olympic Games. While governments and corporations are notorious for making promises and not delivering, the IOC has developed an effective strategy for ensuring that Games bidders actually deliver on their promises—through contracts signed before the Games are awarded and close monitoring in the long preparation for the Games. If one of the contractual requirements of bids was an effective, long-term sport and physical activity enhancement strategy, with clear measurable targets and transparent reporting along the way, it would certainly make a difference. That would create a much better chance of ensuring that inspiration provided

13 by the Games actually enhances opportunities for sport and physical activity in the host population.

Conclusion

I began this paper by arguing for the contingent nature of Olympic legacies. There are no automatics—the legacies from Games can be significant or insignificant, sustained or short-lived, widespread in their impact or narrowly focused, depending upon a range of factors, some of which only come into play after the Games have been concluded. The good news is that even though hosting communities can collapse with exhaustion immediately after Games, the stimulus can mature considerably over time.

In the case of Vancouver 2010, it is clear that the Games stimulated a largely uplifting public spirit right across Canada, if not the world, and the infrastructure they created is already being well and beneficially used. But in the area of greatest concern to the Olympic Movement—the legacy for sport and physical activity—some familiar questions remain.

While there is tremendous public appetite to use the new and refurbished facilities created by the Games, whether there will be adequate program, operating and major maintenance funds to make these facilities accessible and sustainable has still not been determined. The extent to which public funds for sport and physical activity can be restored, and the initiatives put in place by Legacies Now sustained are also uncertain at the time of writing. The outcome will be in large part determined by the future of the British Columbian economy and the ambition and capacities of the provincial and municipal governments. Moreover, Vancouver provided another case study of the disconnect between the performances of high performance athletes at the top and the broad provision of opportunity.

With the excitement generated by the Games, and the examples of Montreal and Calgary, I am confident that satisfactory answers to the immediate challenges of facility operation and maintenance will ultimately be found for the Vancouver and Whistler facilities. But the bigger questions of ensuring a much more predictable, confident Olympic legacy for sport and physical activity remain. The Olympic Movement must help by placing a transparent, accessible legacy plan into the contractual requirements of future Games.

References

Active Health Kids Canada. (2010). Healthy Habits Start Earlier Than You Think: The 2010 Active Healthy Kids Canada Report Card on Physical Activity for Children and Youth. http://www.activehealthykids.ca/ecms.ashx/2010ActiveHealthyKidsCanadaReportCard- longform.pdf, accessed January 23, 2011.

14 Angus Reid Public Opinion (2009). Canadians Want Supreme Court to Hear Case of Women Ski Jumpers. Dec. 18. http://www.visioncritical.com/public- opinion/3489/canadians-want-supreme-court-to-hear-case-of-women-ski-jumpers, accessed January 25, 2011.

Angus Reid Public Opinion (2010). Vancouver Olympics a Success for Most British Columbians. March 10. http://www.visioncritical.com/wp- content/uploads/2010/03/2010.03.10_Metro_Final.pdf, accessed January 18, 2011.

Australia. (2009). Independent Sport Panel: The Future of Sport in Australia. (Crawford Report). http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/1DDA76A44E5F4DD4C A257671000E4C45/$File/Crawford_Report.pdf, accessed January 27, 2011.

Donnelly, P., Nakamura, Y., Kidd, B., MacNeill, M., Harvey, J., Houlihan, B., Toohey, K., and Kim, K.Y. (2010). Sport Participation in Canada: Evaluating Measurements and Testing Determinants of Increased Participation. Unpublished research report.

Ebner, D. Governor-General Joins Fight for Women Ski Jumpers. Globe and Mail. Feb. 23. http://www.caaws.ca/e/gender_equity/article.cfm?ID=3129, accessed January 25, 2011.

Impact on Communities Coalition. (2010). Impact On Communities Coalition 2010 Olympic Oversight Interim Report Card 3. Feb. 25. http://iocc.ca/documents/2010-02- 25_IOCC_3rdInterimReportCard.pdf, accessed January 25, 2011.

Jones, J.B. (2010). Pride House Legacy Report. Vancouver: Pride House Steering Committee, November.

International Olympic Committee. 1999. Olympic movement’s agenda 21: Sport for sustainable development. http://multimedia.olympic.org/pdf/en_report_300.pdf, accessed January 11, 2009.

Kidd, B. (1976). Future games. Weekend, August 21.

Kidd, B. (2004). Montreal 1976. In Findling, J.E. and Pelle, K.D. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of the Modern Olympic Movement. Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2004, 191-198.

Kidd, B. (2010). Ladies don’t leap. The Beaver, December 2009-January 2010, 33-35

Legacies Now. (2010). 2010 and Beyond Scrapbook. http://www.2010legaciesnow.com/fileadmin/user_upload/About_Us/Annual_Reports/201 0_and_Beyond_Scrapbook.pdf, accessed January 27, 2011.

Luba, F. (2010). High ridership means Canada Line could hit break-even point three years earlier. Vancouver Province, August 6.

15 http://www.theprovince.com/news/vancouver/High+ridership+means+Canada+Line+could +break+even+point+years+early/3364862/story.html, accessed January 22, 2011.

MacAloon, J. (1987). The Seoul Olympics in Korean Society. In Kang, S-P., MacAloon, J. and DaMatta (Eds.), The Olympics as Cultural Exchange. Seoul: Hanyang University Institute for Ethnological Studies, 8.

Maquilla Solidarity Network. (2010). ETAG's proposals to improve VANOC's SmartBuy program. http://en.maquilasolidarity.org/node/811, accessed January 26, 2011.

Mickleburgh, R. (2010). John Furlong is Canada's Nation Builder of 2010. Globe and Mail, December 23. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/nation-builder/john-furlong- is-canadas-nation-builder-of-2010/article1848922/, accessed January 23, 2011.

Multiparty Agreement for the 2010 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games. November 12, 2002. http://www.canada2010.gc.ca/role/gc/020102MPA-eng.cfm, accessed January 23, 2011.

O'Bonsawin, C. (2010). 'No Olympics on stolen native land': contesting Olympic narratives and asserting indigenous rights within the discourse of the 2010 Vancouver Games. Sport in Society, 13 (1), pp. 143-156.

Pacific Free Press. (2010). Resistance 2010: No Olympics on Stolen Land. http://www.pacificfreepress.com/news/1/2095-resistance-2010-no-olympics-on-stolen- land.html, accessed January 25, 2011.

Supreme Court of British Columbia. (2009). Sagen vs Vancouver Organizing Committee for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games, 2009 BCSC 942, July 10.

University of British Columbia. (2009). Olympic Games Impact (OGI) Study for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games Pre-Games Results Report. http://www.publicaffairs.ubc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/OGI-UBC-Pre-Games- RESULTS-Report-2009-12-01b.pdfrt, accessed January 26, 2011.

University of British Columbia, School of Human Kinetics, Centre for Sport and Sustainability, http://css.educ.ubc.ca, accessed January 26, 2011.

VanWynsberghe, R. Derom, I. and Maurer, E. (forthcoming. Social leveraging of the 2010 Olympic Games: "sustainability" in a City of Vancouver initiative. International Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure & Events, in submission.

Vancouver Olympic Organizing Committee. (2010). Vancouver Sustainability Report. http://media.olympic.ca/files/gamedocs/SUS-1261_Sustainability_Report_09-10.pdf

16 Vertinsky, P., Jette, S. and Hoffman, A. (2009). Skierinas in the Olympics: Gender Justice and Gender Politics at the Local, National and International Level over the Challenge of Women’s Ski Jumping. Olympika, 18, pp. 25-56.

Zimmerman, K. (2010). Legacies of North American Olympic Winter Games: Volume Four: Vancouver 2010. Vancouver: VANOC, June 7. http://www.2010legaciesnow.com/fileadmin/user_upload/About_Us/Media_Releases/Legac ies_of_the_2010_Vancouver_Olympic_and_Paralympic_Games_Report_June_2010_Final. pdf, accessed January 18, 2011.

17