The international experience in terms of net value of major sports events to hosting countries has been mixed.

In a year time Ukraine will co-host the UEFA EURO-2012 championships. When the country won the right 4 years ago, it was one of the rare occasions when all political parties and social groups were united in their commitment to welcome the event. We can also observe, how fiercely cities and countries of the world compete every time for the right to host international sports events. However, in practice not all major championships turned to be a success and delivered expected benefits to hosting countries. There is an ongoing discussion concerning whether the currently existing stir for hosting major sporting event is worth the potential outcomes, especially for developing countries.

Is betting on large sports projects the right strategy for a country? Can the resources be better employed in other areas? Do potential benefits outweigh the risks of inadequate preparation?

Arguments FOR the motion 

It fosters effective prioritization and implementation of major infrastructure projects which drive country’s competitiveness

In order to host a sporting event a country has to meet a certain set of standards. In the case of developing countries it often involves substantial investments in sporting, transport and tourism infrastructure upgrades. It forces a country to prioritize its investments, which is particularly important in case of limited resources, and to meet fixed deadlines of project delivery, ensuring speeded up modernization of obsolete infrastructure. Modern airports, good quality roads and new stadiums which a country receives as a result - all those motivate further investment inflow, growth of business activity and quality of life improvement after the championship is over.

It is a unique opportunity to showcase the country to the world, foster relationships with political and business partners, promote tourism and other sectors

If a country manages preparation correctly and successfully hosts a championship, it can substantially improve its image in the world, contribute to strengthening of its geopolitical role, foster economic integration, tourism and other sectors development. For example, 2008 Olympic games delivered by China have motivated substantial improvement in the world reception of the country. Ukraine, in spite of 20 years of independence, remains largely undiscovered and unknown to the world, except to our direct neighbors. It is yet to be placed into the radar of European and world investors, tourists and community at large and EURO 2012 creates the necessary opportunity to do that. Furthermore, the championship can also help to promote Ukraine as a reliable partner for Europe.  

Arguments AGAINST the motion

It contributes to proliferation of inequality and government debt increase and diverts government’s resources from its true long-term priorities

Major sports events are usually conducted in the largest and most developed cities with already existing infrastructure to decrease the costs. Investment inflow during the preparation to the games further widens the gap between major cities and the rest of the country creating economic and social imbalances. Furthermore, concentration of resources into development of limited number of large projects increases the risks of corruption. Employment creation fostered by such events is usually of short term nature. Meanwhile, it requires redistribution of budget finance and often accumulation of government debt, taking money away from long-term government priority programs such as education and health care system development and relaying the burden of paying off government debt on future generations.

Wide mass media coverage can well lead to international embarrassment if a country does not deliver necessary quality 

Preparation to the games is a complex project. It requires good project management skills and substantial financial resources. Countries, especially developing once most likely lack both. Mass media coverage and foreign visitors inflow into the country can well lead to national embarrassment in the world arena, if country is not up to the standards to host the games. For example, 2010 Commonwealth games, hosted by India turned to be a huge disappointment and negative media highlight all over the world.  

The pros and cons of hosting major sports events will be discussed during the public debate organized by the Foundation for Effective Governance in cooperation with BBC World News and Intelligence Squared on June 16, 2011 in Kyiv.  

print friendly version

The debate will moderate 

Borys Krasnyansky