![Sample our Sports and Leisure journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5949/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Sports-Leisure.jpg"})
Abstract
Many emerging market countries have utilized sport events as a vehicle to develop international relations and enhance their national images while promoting sport and health. For the same reason, South Korea and Taiwan have endeavoured to host mega or major sport events for their own benefits. Over the last three decades, Korea has hosted a series of mega or major events including the 1988 Summer Olympics while Taiwan’s sport events portfolio only includes the 2009 World Games and 2017 Summer Universiade. In this regard, the political geography of each country at both local and national levels accounts for the success and failure (or difficulty) of hosting mega sport events. Consequently, this article discusses the role of political geography in hosting sports events in the case of Taiwan and Korea.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes
1. Busan received 37 votes out of 41 ballots cast
2. Olympic formula refers to an IOC proposed arrangement that both PRC and ROC (Taiwan) could participate in the Olympic Games and other international sporting activities. Under the formula, the Chinese Olympic Committee is the Olympic committee representing the PRC, and Chinese Taipei Olympic Committee is the Olympic Committee representing ROC (Taiwan). Taiwan can only use the new flag, emblem, and anthem (Chan Citation2002).
3. The 1992 Consensus was an agreement of a meeting made by the semi-official representatives of Taiwan and China in 1992. It describes that both Taiwan and China belong to ‘One China’, but the meaning of ‘One China’ was respectively interpreted by their own definitions (Shih Citation2006). Obviously, this Consensus was against Ma’s predecessors’ statements of Two-State theory and One-Country-on-Each-Side.