In some respects, the short-term impact appears from a preliminary reckoning to have been disappointing, as overall tourist numbers have been down on previous summers and many retailers have reported lighter than expected activity. But what of the longer term effects? Just as importantly, what lessons can be learned from these and previous games for future host cities and countries, and the businesses that operate in them?
We at the Economist Intelligence Unit and Economist Conferences have sought to address these questions in a series of initiatives during 2012. In May we surveyed business people in China, the UK and Brazil on their views of the impact of the Beijing 2008, London 2012 and Rio 2016 games. A global webinar hosted on July 12th brought together key stakeholders from these three cities in a lively discussion of what kinds of benefits – and challenges – could be expected. And on September 12th we will be publishing a report which takes a more in-depth look at the key areas of contention in what might be called "the legacy debate".
[[{"type":"media","view_mode":"media_large","fid":"231","attributes":{"alt":"","class":"media-image","height":"382","width":"480"}}]]
If one thing is clear from these undertakings, it is that there is no meeting of minds when it comes to the "Olympic legacy". In the survey, for example, China and Brazil executives were decidedly more positive than their UK peers about the economic and business impact of the games. Similar contrasts were in evidence in the webinar, with one sceptical economist warning that civic officials' optimism about tangible economic or public-health gains is misplaced. There was more agreement, however, about the "soft power" benefits which can accrue to host cities and countries that are seeking international prestige.
More blogs will follow in the coming weeks with excerpts from our final report on the games. In the meantime, enjoy phase two of the London extravaganza, as the Paralympics get under way from August 29th.