The Real Cost of International Competition: Do the Ends Justify the Means

Gigi Glover

Since the first modern Olympic Games in 1896, large-scale international competition has stood as a bastion for intercontinental cooperation and goodwill. Throughout the past century, prestigious international sports events such as the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) World Cup, the Cricket World Cup, the Rugby World Cup, tennis Grand Slam tournaments, and the America’s Cup, to name a few, have supplemented the biannual Summer and Winter Olympic Games. Each event has aimed to promote national pride and, for competitions with rotating host nations, to develop the industry of the venue. However, for contests that necessitate bidding for the right to host, the costs of the honor can be disastrous. 

Only one site has ever financially profited from the privilege of hosting. Following the financial devastation of the 1976 Summer Olympics in Montreal, Los Angeles was the only city to bid for the 1984 Summer Olympics. Los Angeles’ de facto win enabled the city to arrange for advantageous terms with the International Olympic Committee (IOC). The city’s pre-existing infrastructure reduced the base costs of hosting which, coupled with the drastic increase in television profit, allowed Los Angeles to be the only Olympic host city to turn a profit in the history of the Games. The result: bids by developing nations more than tripled after 1988.

A further benefit to hosting such an elaborate competition was the increased publicity and prestige such contests would bestow upon the host. The aforementioned competitions each attract hundreds of millions of viewers and have a significant impact on buoying the economy of the host nation while also drawing attention to the local culture, providing job opportunities, and obtaining tourism revenue. Following the Olympics held in South Korea, Spain, Australia, and Greece, each of the respective host countries became more visible in international media, which ameliorated the media portrayal of these nations in the long run. Host nations have strategically utilised the unparalleled reputation enhancement that comes as a byproduct of hosting large-scale international competition.

However, a more inexpedient consequence of hosting these contests is the insurmountable debt the host nations and cities can accrue. The 2016 Summer Olympics in Rio de Janeiro emphasized the debate over the costs and benefits of such an event. Years later, the city is still reeling from the economic burden of debt and maintenance costs for new construction, causing other potential bidders to withdraw their candidacy or reduce the scale of their plans. The costs for the Rio de Janeiro Summer Olympics in 2016 were more than $20 billion, for the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi more than $50 billion, and for the 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics more than $45 billion against $3.6 billion in revenue.

The extensive International Olympic Committee (IOC) requirements for hosting candidacy force the development of host-city infrastructure that more often than not fall into poor condition on account of disuse following the closing ceremonies. Nearly all of the arenas developed for the Athens Olympics in 2004 are dilapidated and the costs of the Olympics were a great contributor to the Greek debt crisis, helping to bankrupt the country. It also took more than thirty years for the city of Montreal to pay off the debts that arose from hosting the 1976 Summer Olympics. 

Finally, the construction of the elaborate arenas and facilities necessary to put on such a spectacle inevitably results in casualties, none more so than in the construction of the facilities for the 2022 FIFA World Cup to be held in Doha, Qatar. In the more than a decade of work on Doha since Qatar won the bid, journalists and authorities estimate that more than 6,500 workers have perished in construction. The majority of these workers were migrants from nearby India, Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka. The death toll is likely even higher as the figures do not account for workers from countries such as the Philippines and Kenya, who send many workers. The subject of the suffering of workers is handled with increasing furtiveness to protect the states’ image. Rather than working to improve construction conditions, the Qatari government is more troubled by stories of working conditions getting out, as evidenced by the arrest of a BBC news team investigating the matter. 

The death rate of construction in Qatar is an extreme example, but as Tokyo 2020 Olympics preparations enter their final stage, fatality estimates for construction enter scores. The rapid schedule for the development of facilities has caused construction sites to throw safety regulations by the wayside and focus intently on getting as much done in as little time as possible, jeopardizing the safety of thousands of workers. In Sochi, the fatality rate is nearly inestimable because of the thousands of illegal migrants who came seeking work. A 2013 Human Rights Watch report estimated that nearly 70,000 migrant workers helped in construction for the Sochi Games. Mahsud Abdujabbarov, who spent two months in a prison cell in Tashkent for lobbying for illegal migrant rights, claimed that at least 120 Uzbeks died during construction. He said, “There are a mixture of reasons for workers' deaths, but the main culprits are employers. Dangerous work was conducted by people without professional education and without proper control.” 

In contrast, there were no fatalities in the construction of the 2012 London Olympics and only one prior to the 2010 Vancouver Olympics. Clearly, the allocation of hosting duties to nations with a lessened regard for human rights and a greater need to bolster national image causes increased injury to those responsible for the development of competition facilities. These nations seem to be treating the mega-games that come with intense media attention as opportunities for gross exhibitionism to stimulate their national image with little concern for the workers whose deaths pave the way for this national glory. 

Heavy financial burden and indifference for safe workplace measures make it difficult to justify the costs of the industry against the relatively small returns. It begs the question whether or not such extravagance is needed? The excess facilities required by governing organizations such as the IOC and FIFA seem exploitative and unethical when coupled with the lack of protective sanctions to defend the local economy and population—both local and migrant. As costs for these grand events rise by billions with each iteration, it seems pertinent to reassess the need for such substantial development and pare down the costs and consequences events have on the people of the host country. 

Bibliography

McBride, James. “The Economics of Hosting the Olympic Games.” Council on Foreign Relations, 2018, https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/economics-hosting-olympic-games.

Pattisson, Pete, and Niamh McIntyre. “Revealed: 6,500 migrant workers have died in Qatar since World Cup awarded.” The Guardian, 23 February 2021, https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2021/feb/23/revealed-migrant-worker-deaths-qatar-fifa-world-cup-2022.

Shaw, Craig, et al. “Ghosts Of Sochi: Hundreds Killed In Olympic Construction.” Radio Free Europe Radio Liberty, 6 January 2015, https://www.rferl.org/a/ghosts-of-sochi-olympics-migrant-deaths/26779493.html.

Stephenson, Wesley. “Have 1,200 World Cup workers really died in Qatar?” BBC News, 6 June 2015, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-33019838.

Suzuki, Miwa. “Tokyo Olympic construction race raises worker safety questions.” Phys.org, 2019. Phys.org, https://phys.org/news/2019-07-tokyo-olympic-worker-safety.html.

Yao, Jiajun. The effect of hosting the Olympics on national image: An analysis of US newspaper coverage of host countries with reputation problems. Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 2010. Iowa State University, Iowa State University, https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2658&context=etd.