London Assembly research on Olympic Impacts
Article | Legacy | London | Olympics Studies
The London Assembly commissioned research into the long-term benefits of hosting the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games. The research, produced by London East Research Institute at the University of East London, examines the lasting impact of hosting the summer Games had on Barcelona, Atlanta, Sydney and Athens, measuring their achievements in nine key areas including employment, urban renewal, skills and sports participation.
It found:
- London has made a good start to securing a sustainable physical legacy from the Games, with an ambitious programme of urban renewal. But much more work is needed to secure other benefits such as employment, skills, sports participation and disability awareness. Previous cities struggled to make an impact in these areas and unless London learns from their experience, it too risks failure.
- Legacy momentum, or the host city’s capacity to continue to grow after the immediate post-Games downturn in economic activity, is critical. Best illustrated by the Barcelona Games in 1992, legacy momentum is the single most important factor in determining the extent to which the Games can drive the transformation of its host city.
A Lasting legacy for London?
Assessing the legacy of the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games
May 2007
The London Assembly report is available as:
PDF download from A Lasting legacy for London?
RTF download from A Lasting legacy for London?
In addition to the London Assembly's report, the full research document is available from:
A Lasting legacy for London? University of East London research PDF
Lasting legacy for London? University of East London research RTF
Submitted by Martin Slavin on Tue, 12/06/2007 - 13:21.
The CPO Planning Inspector's response
Submitted by Martin Slavin on Tue, 12/06/2007 - 14:21.
I submitted my objection about impacts on those with privatetly rented homes to the Olympic Compulsory Purchase Order Inquiry based on my paper Displacement of Private Tenants'(Scroll down that page to view).
To which I received the following response from David Rose the Planning Inspector
"I am not convinced that the experiences of former Olympic cities around the world, with different social contexts, administrative and regulatory mechanisms and specific characteristics, has any material bearing in anticipating social outcomes in the Lower Lea Valley.
There is no direct evidence to support the proposition; and the LDA has taken account of the experience of other host cities.
Here the actions of the LDA are supported at all levels of Government and one of the lasting benefits of the Games will be the provision of a significant number of affordable housing units.
Any pressures on land values and accommodation, arising from the Games, have to be considered in the context of the very substantial benefits that the project will bring, not least; improvements to the environment; enhanced community facilities; more efficient infrastructure; and increased employment opportunities to complement the new housing provision.[4.19.16-4.19.22]
p 359-360, Report to the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, Application by The London Development Agency For Confirmation of The London Development Agency (Lower Lea Valley, Olympic and Legacy) Compulsory Purchase Order 2005
This London Assembly report and the COHRE report address these issues seriously. In the light of these two reports the Planning Inspectors response shows up as the blinkered and servile work that it is.
» reply
The view from
Submitted by Martin Slavin on Wed, 27/06/2007 - 13:05.
It is instructive to compare the assessment of the UEL research above and the COHRE report when describing the impact of the Olympic Games upon the housing market in Barcelona.
The UEL research states: (From pages 19-20)
"As with any kind of regeneration project, the Games can contribute to an amplification of socio-economic differences, producing new spatial distributions of wealth and well-being and gentrification effects which sometimes polarise local populations in regenerating areas.
For instance, Barcelona is understood to be amongst the most successful cities in terms of legacy. As part of its successful development of its image and infrastructure towards becoming a key European hub – and a renewed centre for global tourism and culture, the city has also seen (as a consequence) massive house price and rental inflation (131% between 1987-1992), and the emergence of a large population of wealthy international resident/visitors and property investors benefiting from long term infrastructure investments more directly than some local populations, whose access to housing and jobs may not have significantly improved." (My italics)
The COHRE report states:(From Page 112)
"The staging of the 1992 Barcelona Olympic Games had a negative impact on the accessibility and affordability of housing. Between 1986 and 1992 (the period from the Olympic candidature to the staging of the Games) the price of housing increased, the availability of rental accommodation was reduced, the construction of public housing decreased, and there were no public housing policies directed at the groups most in need of assistance. Many people in Barcelona were displaced, with over 600 families evicted from areas designated as Olympic sites or because of associated Olympic redevelopment. A reported 240 percent rise in new house prices between the 1986 announcement of the election of Barcelona as a Host City and the 1992 actual event created a more expensive housing environment that led to further secondary displacements.
The preparation and celebration of the Olympic Games took place in the context of minimal state intervention in the area of housing. The Olympic Games served to reinforce and exacerbate the consequences of the privatisation of housing. In Barcelona, the organisation and celebration of the Olympic Games accentuated the decline in housing affordability, demonstrated by strong increases in the prices of housing for rent and for sale (from 1986 to 1993 the cumulative increase was 139 percent for sale prices and nearly 145 percent for rentals), and a drastic decrease in the availability of public housing (from 1986 to 1992 there was a cumulative decrease of 75.92 percent)."
I consider that the viewpoint of the researchers at UEL is not concerned with the predicament of those poor who experience the negative housing impacts of the Olympic Games whereas the COHRE researchers are sufficiently concerned to look at those negative impacts in some detail. I think the difference is critical and significantly diminishes the value of all of the UEL research.
» reply
by
London Assembly research
After a very rapid preliminary skim through this 142 page report I notice three things;
"In addition the Halifax report pointed to other sporting events suggesting links between mega events and the housing market: Halifax says the five-year run-up to Manchester's Commonwealth Games in 2002 brought a 102% house price rise in the city, against 52% for the North-West region and 83% for the UK. (Western Mail 2005 “Olympic Gold for Housing”)
Further work would be required to confirm the validity of these correlations. A 2001 study for MacQuarrie Bank suggested that the Olympic Games only had a minor impact on the rental market and concluded that Sydney, like Atlanta, ‘experienced little or no Olympic related boost.’ The study found that prices in the Olympic [area] increased by less than 0.5% above the city average for 1996 to 2000.".
However no mention is made of homelessness rates as a monitoring indicator of the impacts of price changes in the rental market upon the poor.