https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1535-0391
![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Mega events are facing a disruption, despite their adaptative nature, in their continued 120-year growth in a context of environmental and energy crisis doubled by increased ethical and social expectations. We put forward the hypothesis, in the middle term, of a gradual disconnection between (1) mega events such as the Olympic Games and (2) a catalyst effect on urban regeneration and attractivity pursued by host cities; and over the long term, we explore a return to the past characterized by more modest and ‘sustainable’ Games. We first unveil how urban planning was implemented through the Olympic Games over the last 30 years to understand how Olympic urban mega projects have been increasingly questioned as risky and unsustainable and how IOC frameworks gradually adapted to articulate sustainability and legacy. Is it a return to the comparatively modest 1900, 1908, and 1924 and 1948 Olympics exemplified by the new quarters built after the failed 1992, 2008 and 2012 Paris bids? How do historiography and narratives compare Paris and London? Last, we analyse Paris 2024 as an example of disconnection between the Olympics and mega urban project, as included in an existing 30-year metropolitan project focusing limited new infrastructure on local needs.
Notes
1 Gold and Gold, Olympic Cities; Müller et al., “Peak Event: the Rise, Crisis”.
2 IOC, Olympic Agenda 2020; IOC, The New Norm.
3 Monclus, “The Barcelona Model”.
4 Gold and Gold, “Bring It Under the Legacy Umbrella”.
5 Davis, “Avoiding White Elephants?”.
6 Chappelet, “The Governance of the Olympic System”.
7 Gold and Gold, “Legacy, Sustainability and Olympism”.
8 UCL, State of the Legacy.
9 IOC, Olympic Games Legacy.
10 UN, 2030 Agenda.
11 IOC, Sustainability Strategy.
12 Doustaly, “Paris 2024”.
13 ODA, Venues Guide; Historic England Research Records, “Empress Hall”.
14 Denzin, “Triangulation: A Case For”.
15 Mallon, The 1900 Olympic Games.
16 Rogan and Rogan, Britain and the Olympic Games.
17 Gold and Gold, “The Enduring Enterprise”.
18 Strohmayer, “Non-events and Their Legacies”.
19 Polley, “The 1908 Olympic Games,” 59.
20 Gold and Gold, “The Enduring Enterprise,” 5, 32; Horne, “From 1908 to 2012”.
21 Zarnowski, “A Look at Olympic Costs”.
22 Beck, “Britain and the Olympic Games”.
23 Schmidt, “Architecture at the Service,” 399.
24 Gold and Gold, “The Enduring Enterprise,” 33; Horne, “From 1908 to 2012,” 18–19.
26 Gold and Gold, “The Enduring Enterprise,” 32.
27 Cook, The Fourth Olympiad, 43–49.
28 London 2012 Olympic Games website.
29 Saint-Martin, “Géopolitique des Jeux de Paris”.
30 Schut and Terret, “Quitte ou double”.
31 See note 29 above.
32 See note 30 above.
33 Jeux de la VIIIeme Olympiade Paris 1924: Official report. 7.
34 See note 30 above.
35 Jeux de la VIIIeme Olympiade Paris 1924: Official report. 7.
36 See note 30 above.
37 Attali et alii, “Jeux sportifs en enjeux de pouvoirs”.
38 Ibid.
39 Guillain, “Quand la capitale des Arts et des Lettres”.
40 Defrance et alii, “Chapitre 3. L’activité physique”; Gounot, “Sport ouvrier et communisme en France”.
41 Thibault, “Les années folles”.
42 See note 37 above.
43 See note 22 above.; Horne, “From 1908 to 2012”.
44 Penrose, “London 1948,” 313.
45 Zarnowski, “A look at Olympic Costs”.
46 Gold and Gold, “The Enduring Enterprise”; Horne, “From 1908 to 2012”.
47 Penrose, “London 1948”.
48 Liao and Pitts, “A Brief Historical Review”.
49 Penrose, “London 1948”; Gold and Gold, “The Enduring Enterprise”.
50 Horne, “From 1908 to 2012”; Doustaly, “London during the 1951 Festival of Britain”.
51 Bolz, “Olympic Heritage,” 235.
52 Horne, “From 1908 to 2012”.
53 Paris 1992, Association pour la candidature pour la XXVème Olympiade.
54 Ibid.
55 Cantelon and Letters, “L'élaboration de la politique environnementale”.
56 Coaffee, “Regeneration and urban renewal”.
57 IOC, 2020 Olympic Agenda; IOC, The New Norm.
58 Davezies, Paris s’endort ; Orfeuil and Wiel, Le Grand Paris ; Gilli, Grand Paris. L’émergence d’une métropole.
59 Bernardi, “Paris 2024: The Games As”.
60 Strohmayer, “Non-events and Their Legacies”.
61 Delaplace and Schut, Hosting the Olympic Games.
62 See note 22 above.
63 Horne, “From 1908 to 2012”; Doustaly and Zembri Mary, “The Role of Heritagization”; Doustaly, “Does Culture Have the Transformative Power”.
64 UEL, Olympic Games Impact Study.
65 Horne, “From 1908 to 2012”.
66 Ibid.; Flyvbjerg et alii, “The Oxford Olympics Study 2016”; Evans, Edizel, “London 2012”.
67 ODA, Venues Guide; Doustaly and Zembri Mary, “The Role of Heritagization”; Davis, “Avoiding White Elephants?”; Evans, Edizel, “London 2012”.
68 See note 8 above.
69 Poynter, “East London post-Olympic Economy”.
70 See note 8 above; Doustaly, “Does Culture Have the Transformative Power”.
71 Raco, “Delivering Flagship Projects”; Smith, “’De-risking’ East London; Wise and Whittam, Regeneration, Enterprise, Sport and Tourism.
72 See note 8 above.
73 See note 12 above.
74 Doustaly, “Does Culture Have the Transformative Power”.
75 See note 57 above..
76 Geffroy et alii, “Projecting the Metropolis”.
77 Buchoud, “Grand Paris, Metropolitan Governance by Design?”.
78 See note 76 above.
79 Pavitt, “Paris 2024 opponents”; Wolfe, “Building a better host city?”.
80 See note 12 above.
81 IOC, Olympic Agenda 2020.
83 Source: INSEE.
84 Jastrząbek, “Third Time Lucky”.
85 Faure, The impact of Paris 2024.
86 Raco, “Delivering flagship projects”; IOC, Host city contract-Games, 47.
87 Paris 2024, Candidature file (phase 3).
88 Doustaly and Zembri-Mary, “The Role of Heritagization”.
89 See note 74 above.
90 Raco, “Delivering Flagship Projects”.
91 Flyvbjerg, et al., “The Oxford Olympics Study 2016”.
92 Zembri-Mary and Linder, “Urban planning law”; See note 74 above.
93 IOC, Cost Savings for Potential.
Additional information
Funding
Notes on contributors
Cécile Doustaly
Cécile Doustaly is Full Professor in Comparative Cultural Policy, Mediation and Management at CY Cergy Paris Université and a member of the research centre UMR Héritages (CY, Ministry of Culture, CNRS) . Her research focuses on urban planning, cultural policies and international projects in Britain and in France, particularly glocal creative and heritage processes.
Geneviève Zembri-Mary
Geneviève Zembri–Mary is Full Professor in Urban and Land Planning at CY Cergy Paris Université and a member of the MATRIS laboratory. She specializes in the planning strategies of urban and infrastructure projects in Athens, London and Paris.