deceptive development and democratization: stadium construction and securitization in the fifa world cup host countries of south africa and brazil jasper peet-martel, macalester college (2014) ABSTRACT The past few decades has seen increasing attention given toward mega sporting events in the context of development. As countries, especially in developing regions of the world, strive to enhance their political, economic, and social standing, hosting mega events is viewed as an opportune path to growth. However, this view often does not take into con- sideration how fall-out, particularly for local communities, affects a country's overall ex- perience with the event it hosts. The question I pose to test these two competing views of mega event hosting is the following: are mega-sporting events, specifically the FIFA World Cup, a viable avenue for furthering development and democratization? I examine the dual processes of stadium development and securitization for the 2010 and 2014 FIFA World Cups to answer this question, and argue that the neoliberal governance that drives FIFA World Cup securitization and stadium construction results in significant consequences for local development and compromises democratization for developing host countries. INTRODUCTION process of selecting a host nation. More recently, FIFA n June 21, 2013, bonfires, torched cards, de- appears to have been making a concerted effort to have molished lampposts, and a million people the Cup hosted in developing countries. In the past 15 filled the streets of Brazil. The protesters gath- years, FIFA has accepted bids to host the event from Oered to denounce corruption, poor public services, countries in both Asia and Africa. The 2010 games police brutality, and — to the disbelief of FIFA (Inter- were held in South Africa; and the 2014 event will be national Federation of Association Football) organiz- held in Brazil, while the 2018 and 2022 Cups will occur ers and investors — the upcoming 2014 World Cup.1 in Russia and Qatar, respectively. While this was not the first time that a host country This pivot to developing countries underscores had experienced political and social unrest in the days the commercialization of the World Cup, manifested and months leading up to FIFA’s flagship event, most through deregulation and privatization, hallmarks observers had believed that the fabled Brazilian attach- of corporate-driven governance. Corporate-driven ment to soccer would prevent any large-scale protests, governance in this paper refers to actions that large, even in the face of ballooning government spending on private associations take to dictate political decisions, the event. Popular opinion of the 2014 World Cup in thereby circumventing existing democratic procedures. Brazil seemed headed in the same direction as that of While politicians and corporate bodies often claim that the South African FIFA World Cup in 2010, which suf- mega-events such as the World Cup spur development fered a similar controversy in light of unpopular multi- and ultimately benefit the public, this paper will billion-dollar stadium construction costs and conten- demonstrate that corporate-driven governance, tious securitization policies. manifested through stadium construction and Much of the discontent revolved around the belief securitization, subordinates the interests of those living that corporate interests determined political decision- on or near the mega-event sites to corporate interests. making. Ever since Uruguay held the inaugural 1930 I look specifically at stadium construction and FIFA World Cup, the mega-event has been used as a securitization and their effects on local development platform to rebrand countries, regenerate economies, and local democratization in the South Africa and and accumulate social capital.2 These benefits weigh Brazil World Cups and argue that the processes of FIFA heavily on the minds of bidding countries during the World Cup stadium development and securitization are deceptive development and democratization guided by corporate-driven development principles toward stadium construction despite the effects such that significantly and negatively impact local policies have on displaced residents. development and democratization. The paper is divided into five main sections, I have chosen the 2010 South Africa World beginning with the grounding of the theory of Cup and the 2014 Brazil World Cup as case studies corporate-driven governance in the common because they are highly comparable examples literature of mega-event research. It then examines of securitization and stadium construction. the processes of securitization and stadium Furthermore, because the two countries undertook construction using the cases of the 2010 South Africa the momentous tasks of securitization and stadium FIFA World Cup and the 2014 Brazil FIFA World construction very recently and within just a few Cup. years of each other, temporal bias can be eliminated. The twin processes of securitization and Because Brazil will also host the 2016 Summer stadium development are the most glaring Olympic Games, there is some overlap with World manifestations of corporate-driven governance in Cup and Olympic Securitization policies. Similarly, mega-event planning. The processes of FIFA World South Africa has hosted mega-events such as the Cup stadium construction in developing countries Rugby World Cup in 1995 and also plans to host like South Africa and Brazil result in a governance other major sporting events in the future with its structure “where decisions of public policy are made greatly augmented mega-event infrastructure. by business coalitions and international organizations As the world’s largest single-event sporting like the IOC and FIFA.”6 Informed by corporate- competition, the World Cup has substantial political, driven governance, securitization and stadium economic, and social implications for the host construction curb or suspend the civil liberties of the countries.3 It is thus reasonable to assume such local community, under the assumption that mega- countries will pursue securitization measures for the events such as the World Cup are held for the “good World Cup. Securitization is the process through of the public.”7 To further explain this, I turn to the which an actor enacts and enforces measures to phenomenon Cornelissen calls discursive framing, protect an object it feels is threatened; relevant which legitimizes stadium building and securitization stakeholders identify security risks and risk groups as “extraordinary and extra-legal [practices] to and then implement risk-management policies. protect the collective.”8 While these processes may In this study, corporate and state interests are the provide the local community with development and actors creating and enforcing such policies that aim democratization, corporate-driven governance still to protect the World Cup. When the whole world dictates priorities, thus subordinating the public is watching, the stakes are high. The securitization interest. process consists of exclusion zones, stringent stadium Discursive framing, a concept originally defined design requirements, and heightened security at by French social theorist Michel Foucault, is a the transnational, national, and local-urban levels.4 rhetorical framework employed by a privileged group Some of these policies are designed to ensure that the in order to direct and shape particular ideas, actions, World Cup games run smoothly, yet many of these and preferences in the larger group. When Swiss required rules and policies exist primarily to promote football administrator Sepp Blatter, the eighth and the financial interests of FIFA and its corporate current president of FIFA, outlined FIFA’s legacy in a sponsors. This trend toward a policy of profit-seeking recent interview about the upcoming games in Brazil, can also be seen in FIFA’s gradual expansion of he framed the prevailing discourse around football monopolistic control over event venues, surrounding and the “greater good:” areas, and — more recently — main infrastructure “In football, the whole country gets the legacy… (airports, train stations) and accommodation sites Football involves the whole country. The (hotels, training centers, etc.).5 country improves airports, hotels, highways, The other manifestation of corporate-driven telecommunications, [and] sustainability governance, stadium construction, operates under programs.”9 similar market rationalities. Large corporate bodies While there are undoubtedly some immediate influence national policies to direct public tax dollars short-term benefits from World Cup securitization 139 columbia university journal of politics & society and stadium construction policies, the systemic influence development and democratization in influence of FIFA through corporate-driven developing contexts. governance channels power away from local With this recent trend of successful bids from communities and toward mega-event organizers, developing countries of the Global South in mind, international corporate sponsors, and government however, it becomes increasingly important to officials, thereby inhibiting sustainable local analyze the impacts of the Cup on the host country. development. Proponents of the cup insist that economic growth Securitization measures are not illogical. As generated by the Cup makes hosting it a net gain successful bids for hosting mega-sporting events for the country. Detractors point to the enormous pivot from Western nations