Is Peru’s Bid to Host the 2016 Summer Olympics Genius Move or Gigantic Blunder?

May 27, 2008 · Print This Article

Perhaps encouraged after their recent success in hosting the European Union and Latin American and Caribbean Summit, the office of Peru’s President, Alan Garcia Peréz, announced last week that Peru would bid to host the 2016 Summer Olympics. Never mind that the application deadline was in September of last year.

Critics of the plan emerged quickly, and Peru’s prime minister was equally fast to label the critics as “the same ones that some day ago said Peru couldn’t host the EU-LAC summit and were pessimistic when it was announced.” Peru’s current infrastructure does raise numerous doubts about how successful the Olympics could be in Peru. Lima would no doubt host the lion’s share of events, while Cuzco, Trujillo, Arequipa, and others cities might play a part as well. Traffic problems, environmental and social issues, and financial difficulties could all manufacture the Olympics a disastrous and harmful event for Peru. But, additionally, despite what the critics might say, the move to bid for the Olympics might have been a brilliant and ingenious action thought up by President Alan Garcia’s staff.

An interesting scientific study and analysis by two researchers in a 1998 edition of the journal Leisure Studies points to a few tips for Peru. In their commentary “Olympic Games: Catalyst of Urban Change” (subscription required) Stephen Essex and Brian Chalkey discuss how most Olympics play a transformational role in the cities where they take place. They quote Barcelona, Spain’s excellent use of the 1992 Olympics to revamp its transportation routes and system, upgrade its sewage system, rehabilitate a “run-down coastal area” that housed failing industries with a marina and beaches, and additionally upgrade telecommunications technology, helping facilitate the growth of new business opportunities. Sydney, Australia is credited in 2000 with starting a new wave in sustainable development and green design for the Olympics. The authors plus mention how Tokyo, Japan in 1964 and Seoul, South Korea in 1988 were successful in their efforts to build roads and enhance public health through revisions to sewage and waste disposal systems, air pollution programs, and water quality improvements. So when does an Olympics go wrong?

One of the key factors that causes a city to suffer from hosting an Olympics, according to Essex and Chalkey, is when the city chooses to construct new facilities through private funding, rather than restoring and enhancing old facilities through a combination of government and private funding. These “show facilities” are meant to supply a new image for a city and country, but often end up costing more money they are worth and are paid for and subsequently used by businesses and corporations that do little to supply jobs and economic development for local communities. In fact, they might help to widen the gap amoung those humans who are most in need of economic jump-starts in their communities, and the wealthy tourists and locals who can afford to use these new facilities and attend Olympic events.

This privatized hijacking of sorts has been one of the criticisms made toward

the Beijing, China Olympics that will be held later that year. It was additionally one of the major failings of the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta, Georgia. On the other hand, in 1996, Montreal, Canada folded miserably by attempting to build an “Olympic Park” solely with public financing, and consequently put itself and its citizens in serious debt. Essex and Chalkey note that the Los Angeles, California Olympics of 1984 was a huge financial success largely considering older facilities were used, and events were spread out all through the city and outlying communities, so as to lessen the burden on traffic.

Traffic and transportation systems seem to be a major issue for hosting a successful Olympics. Essex and Chalkey describe how Mexico City’s 1968 Olympics caused a tremendous burden upon the transportation needs of the local population. They mention how protests were additionally initiated considering many Mexican citizens believed that the money to pay for the Olympics should have been used to alleviate poverty instead. Atlanta likewise suffered in 1996 from terrible traffic congestion, as private funders did not invest in improving infrastructure like roads and public transportation.

So what does that all mean for Peru and Lima? It’s hard to say. Lima’s transportation system is currently inadequate for hosting an event on the scale of the Olympics. Recycling, waste management, and water treatment facilities are in need of tremendous improvements. But while it’s easy to dwell on these negatives, perhaps President Garcia and his staff envision the Peru Olympics mirroring those took place in Barcelona, Seoul, Tokyo, and Sydney. plus on the side of positive thinking, even those cities that fail in their efforts to win an Olympic bid sometimes are left with city improvements considering of their efforts to try to win the right to host an Olympics.

While we can only speculate as to whether or not Lima and Peru would be able to have a successful Olympics, it still remains to be seen whether the International Olympic Committee will accept Peru’s application after the deadline. In June of that year, the committee will create a short list of applicant cities who are still in contention. The final selection of which city will host the 2016 Olympics will occur in October of 2009. Other cities who have submitted applications include

Baku, Azerbaijin
Chicago, United States
Doha, Qatar
Madrid, Spain
Prague, Czech Republic
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
and Tokyo, Japan

Good luck, Peru. And cheers to your ambition and optimism President Garcia to advance your country, despite what challenges an Olympics in Peru might create.

Related on the GO Network:

Football: Euro 2008 to be “One Big Toilet” by Mark Seall

Beijing’s Olympic Forest Goes for Gold with Sustainability by Michael dEstries

Korean Environmental Leader Refuses the Olympic Torch by Gavin Hudson

Photo Credit: Striatic at Flickr under a Creative Commons license

[Source] Levi Novey

Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.