By Scott Salmon
RIO DE JANEIRO, BRAZIL – In this era of virtual reality, the four-yearly spectacle of the Summer Olympics may already be on the wane. Like World’s Fairs before it, the Games may gradually fail to galvanize global attention and fade from prominence.
But, as it stands, the Olympics face a more immediate threat: they have become prohibitively expensive to host.
Even as their budgets soared, every Olympics since 1960 has involved major cost overruns. The Olympic trope of the debt-laden host is now as commonplace as that of improbable athletic success against overwhelming odds.
Montreal’s 1976 Olympics left the city with debt it took three decades to pay off, the 2004 Games in Athens are often cited (unfairly) as a precursor to the Greek debt crisis. Rio’s 2016 Olympic debt has subsequently tripled and upcoming 2020 host, Tokyo, has already gone well over budget.
The list of final candidate cities bidding to host the Olympics over the last two decades reveals not only progressively fewer contenders (dwindling to just two for the 2024 Games) but the growing predominance of larger cities in more developed countries.
With the recent exception of Rio de Janeiro, hosting the Olympics is increasingly the preserve of the rich city.
Given the ever-growing size of the Olympics, constantly changing hosts also entails enormous waste. The price tag for preparing a bid, consistently between US$50 and US$100 million, necessitates an enormous outlay just to enter the contest.
Then, according to the Olympic cycle, the same constellations of stadia, specialized sporting facilities, and athlete housing are constructed anew in crowded urban centers – on a scale that far outstrips everyday need.
On top of this, expenditure on more general infrastructure, such as hotel accommodation and transportation networks are required, not to mention the escalating costs of adequate security.
Each host must then address the “white elephant” dilemma: the re-use or re-purpose of unneeded facilities. Because of their size or specialized nature, such facilities have limited post-Olympics use and may incur costs for years to come.
Sydney’s Olympic stadium costs the city US$30 million a year to maintain. Beijing’s famous “Bird’s Nest” stadium cost US$460 million to build, requires US$10 million a year to maintain, and sits mostly unused.
Recognizing this threat, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) adopted “Olympic Agenda 2020” which it claims will reduce burdens on host cities by requiring fewer “deliverables” and encouraging the use of existing or temporary venues with the ultimate aim of reducing the costs incurred by host cities.
But the reality of the Olympic cost burden surely begs an obvious question: Why not just hold the Games in the same place every four years?
Rather than investing billions – often wastefully – in new host cities each cycle, it would be cheaper, more efficient and environmentally responsible, to designate a fixed locale where the Summer Games, the most expensive Olympic event, could find a permanent home.
A dedicated site would have fewer social or environmental costs, avoid massive liability for host cities and provide the framework for an ongoing experiment in sustainable architecture and design.
Administratively, it would enable significant economies of scale, obviate the competition to select a host (with all its attendant problems), and provide the IOC an opportunity to dramatically downsize its sprawling operations.
A single venue could also serve to level the athletic playing field. A setting of consistent altitude and climate would provide a reliable context to benchmark performance. In off-years all athletes could train in the real Olympic facilities, precluding the phenomenon of host-nation advantage.
In fact, the IOC could simply recover an ancient formula and select a Greek island which could be dedicated to hosting the Olympics (and pre-Olympic training) in perpetuity. This is hardly a new idea.
After all, for some 12 centuries, the ancient Olympic Games were held in Olympia. Perhaps it’s time to revert to tradition?