Worldwide recognition, tourism dollars and prestige are just some of the great things that are associated with countries that host international sporting events.
There is an increase in tourism and jobs are created but it doesn’t last long. When the event ends, so do the jobs.
After international events, it has become clear that the revenue generated from hosting an event has not funneled down to the people who need it most.
Billions are spent on stadiums that may only be used during the event, on heavy security, and logistics; not on feeding the population that lives below the poverty line.
International sporting events are about making the country look good and more money goes into that than into supporting those who live in poverty even after the event is over.
Recently, there has been a push to market developing countries as international sports destinations.
This summer South Africa hosted the World Cup, and now India was chosen to host the Commonwealth Games which are going on now.
In June, the world’s spotlight was on South Africa to perform during the World Cup.
The globally popular soccer tournament appeared to go very well.
For a nation that was almost $74-billion in external debt, spending about $5 or $6 billion on the World Cup increased the already deep hole.
South Africa has a variety of issues, such as about half of the population living below the poverty line and the highest prevalence of adults with HIV/AIDS in the world.
Did the World Cup money get to those most in need?
The money generated at the World Cup did not go to the country’s disadvantaged but to the Fédération Internationale de Football Association.
The World Cup may have seemed like a good idea for South African's financies, but more significant than any tourism dollars gained, South Africans will continue to deal with the country’s debt.
India will also have debt when the Commonwealth Games are over.
India has already had its share of troubles with the highly publicized conditions of the athletes village and the continued risk of athletes contracting harmful diseases.
With a GDP per capita that is extremely low on the world’s scale and high infant mortality, India has bigger priorities than the Commonwealth Games to worry about.
International sporting events do leave a legacy, but debt is certainly one of the most prominent issues left behind, especially after an event such as the Olympics.
For the 2010 Winter Olympics, Vancouver invested about
$1 billion but is now having trouble selling the expensive condos from the athletes’ village.
The money generated by the
Olympics is still not enough to allow the city to recoup its investment.
Before the Olympics, Vancouver made a point of relocating the homeless and cleaning up the city.
Those who are living on the streets were even further marginalized as a result of this major international sporting event and any profits are still not being distributed to help them.
International debt is a problem that even Canada can’t escape but when countries host international sporting events they end up carrying an even larger debt load.
International sporting events shine a spotlight on the host city and countries often engage in a bidding war for the large events.
A country’s entire population gets excited about the future event.
After the spotlight dims, the country’s poor are left at an even more disadvantages as cities continue to pay off debts for decades.
That load isn’t getting any lighter for a Canadian city such as Vancouver and the losses for New Delhi could be enormous.
International sporting events bring joy to the host country but they also bring millions, if not billions of dollars of debt.
Debt is a negative legacy and a debt that lasts for decades is not worth the temporary payoff of an international sporting event.