Historical focus on event impacts has often been economic, as governments and other stakeholders look to justify investments (Bowdin 2010: 630). Potential for positive economic impact and investment in the host economy is often emphasised to validate planning large scale and mega events. Public perception of local financial gain has been shown to be positive towards hosting large events (Puem et. al 2020). However, it can be to the organiser or bidder’s benefit to exaggerate potential benefits whilst neglecting costs (Getz and Page 2016) and huge investments can turn out to become a long-term cost to the community, with the most economically vulnerable citizens paying the price in “social dislocation and resource diversions” as well as long term costs of maintaining under-utilised infrastructure (Zimbalist 2016). The public are becoming aware that mega events can leave disused stadiums in their wake (Marrs 2003). Event legacies present a complex and sometimes dark reality. As event professionals we must look beyond economic impact to social and environmental impacts, i.e. the future our host economy faces post-event, whilst also understanding that proving positive economic benefits and financial ROI will continue to be an important factor in gaining financial support for events of any scale.
This week’s content involved using the eventIMPACTS toolkit (eventIMPACTS 2022) to calculate the direct economic impact of a hypothetical event. I approached the task by going through the provided overview stage by stage and putting in the numbers as I went along to help me gain deeper understanding of how the numbers are reached. I also reflected on my practice as I went through the calculation. Our dance performances are relatively small-scale events by and for the local community. According to the eventIMPACT methodology they bring negligible benefit from overnight visitors as any traveling visitors to our events are usually close family who don’t need hotel stays. As most attendees and visitors are local it can be assumed that they would have been in the local region spending elsewhere such that our economic impact on the host region is negligible. However, there will also be no negative leakage, as there are no visiting traders associated with our events.
Economic impacts have been well studied and continue to be an important aspect of event studies. However, as we find the place of events in a greener, fairer, future; we must recognise that they should be seen alongside social and environmental impacts. Getz (2009) advocates for the institutionalization of a new paradigm, taking a triple bottom line (TBL) approach (Elkington 1997) to evaluate the impacts of events in their social and environmental as well as their economic contexts. There is some contestation that the TBL approach is flawed, and that it is nonsensical to try and reduce an economic or social impact to an arbitrary number, especially whilst there is no agreed standard in methodology (Norman and MacDonald 2004).
Although we have not yet found the perfect methodology if there indeed is one, a good starting point would be to use the UN Sustainable Development Goals (United Nations online) as a framework for evaluation. Their familiarity is advantageous as governments and businesses globally are already using these as a blueprint for sustainable development. Considering economic impact alongside social and environmental impact allows us to take a holistic, ethical approach, minimising negative impacts whilst ensuring that events don’t just benefit those who stand to gain financially. We must ensure that event legacies benefit all layers of their host communities.
Cover image: Author unknown, Pexels free photos (via WordPress).
References:
BOWDIN, Glenn. 2010. Events Management. London; Amsterdam: Butterworth-Heinemann.
PUEM, Lucy Batchy Gabriel, Ranee ATLAS, Tina Stephen ENGGONG, Nuraini PUTIT and Patrick ATAN. 2020. “Public perceptions of the Economic Impacts of Government Funded Events”. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business. 8(2) 114-125.
GETZ, Donald and Stephen PAGE. 2016. Event Studies: Theory, research and policy for planned events. 3rd edn. Oxon: Routledge.
ZIMBALIST, Andrew S. 2016. “Circus maximus: the economic gamble behind hosting the Olympics and the World cup” 2nd edn. Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
MARRS, Colin. 2003. “Olympic bid divides regenerators.” Regenaration and renewal. May issue.
EVENT IMPACTS. 2022. Economic Impact Calculator. EventIMPACTS [online]. Available at: https://www.eventimpacts com/Calculator.
GETZ, Donald. 2009. “Policy for sustainable and responsible festivals and events: institutionalization of a new paradigm.” Journal of policy research in tourism, leisure and events, 1 (1), 61-78.
ELKINGTON, John. 1997. “Cannibals with forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business. Stony Creek: New Society Publishers.
NORMAN, Wayne and Chris MACDONALD. 2004. “Getting to the bottom of triple bottom line”. “Business Ethics Quarterly” April issue.
UNITED NATIONS. No date on website. “Do you know all 17 SDGs?” United Nations. [online]. Available at: https://sdgs.un.org/goals.
Rachel Mills 