City of Cape Town
2010 FIFA World Cup™
Research Report
i
April 2011
ii
Acknowledgements
The research in this report would not have been possible without the assistance and professional
inputs from an exciting and wide range of individuals and organisations from multiple disciplines.
The City of Cape Town (CoCT) and the Cape Higher Education Consortium (CHEC) would like to thank
all who have contributed to the research and report – a full list of all those who were directly
involved is attached as Annexure 4 to the full technical report. However, in particular the following
are acknowledged:
The Cape Higher Education Consortium

Professor Kamilla Swart, from the Cape Peninsula University of Technology; Head: Centre for
Tourism Research in Africa, for, in the capacity of Project Leader, research coordination,
research and analysis, report writing and compilation

Professor Marion Keim, from the University of the Western Cape (UWC), Director:
Interdisciplinary Centre of Excellence for Sport Science and Development (ICESSD), for, in the
capacity of Chairperson of the CHEC Research Reference Group, research advice and report
reviewing

Dr Clemens Ley, from UWC, ICESSD, for research advice and report reviewing

Ms Lois Dippenaar, from UWC, Rector’s Office, for, in the capacity of CHEC Coordinator 2010
Project, research advice and Reference Group meeting venue and project support

Dr Susan Basset, from UWC, Department of Sport, Recreation and Exercise Science, for
research advice, coordination and leadership of public viewing area (PVA) research teams,
and report reviewing

Dr Elizabeth Bressan, from Stellenbosch University (SU), Centre for Human Performance
Sciences, for research advice

Dr Dean Allen from SU, Centre for Human Performance Sciences, for research advice,
coordination support for sports research, and analysis, results and report reviewing

Mr Johan Fourie, from SU, Department of Economics, for the economics research plan,
research advice, and the economics research report

Mr Hassan Essop, from SU, Department of Economics, for the economic research plan,
research advice, economics data collection, reviewing and the economics research report

Mr David Maralack, from the University of Cape Town, Sport Management Postgraduate
Programme, for the sports work stream plan.
Department of Sport and Recreation South Africa

Charl Durand from the Department of Sport and Recreation South Africa (SRSA), Head:
Information and Research Department, Directorate: Communication and Information
Services, for the Sport Event Impact Model (SEIM), research instrument alignment and
development, liaison and support of SEIM developers, research advice and guidance, and
model outputs.
iii
The City of Cape Town

Carol Wright, from the Department of Strategic Development Information and Geographic
Information System (GIS), Manager: Strategic Information, for, in the capacity of Project
Leader and Chair of City work group, research coordination, research analysis, report
reviewing and editing, and contributing to the research budget

Pam Naidoo, from 2010 Operations, for, in the capacity of City work group member, liaison
with 2010 economics and social work stream, research advice, contributing to the research
budget, assistance with data sourcing, and logistical support

Jeremy Marillier, from the Department of Economic and Human Development, for, in the
capacity of City work group member and economics research stream coordinator, research
advice, economics data sourcing, reviewing, and contributing to research budget

Dilshaad Gallie, from the Department of Economic and Human Development, for, in the
capacity of City work group member, research advice and reviewing

Trevor Wright, from the Department of Sport, Recreation and Amenities (SRA), for, in the
capacity of City work group member, liaison with SRSA, research planning support and
advice, sport research planning, report reviewing, and contributing to the research budget

Alric Farmer, from the Department of SRA, for research support and advice, field work
coordination, Research Hub and logistical support, sport research questionnaire, fieldwork
report reviewing, and photographs

Pauline van der Spuy, from the Department of Tourism, for, in the capacity of City work
group member, tourism research stream liaison, research advice, and contributing to the
research budget

Theuns Vivian, from the Department of Tourism, for, in the capacity of City work group
member, research advice and guidance

Marcel Berteler, from the Information Services and Technology Department, Smart Cape
Project, for online questionnaire design and posting online, including to the SmartCape
website, summary and extraction of online information

Colleagues from a range of CoCT Departments for 2010 finance and event- related data,
research advice and support
Research Hub

Brian Shackel, from the CoCT Information Services and Technology Department, for use of
the CoCT IT Training Rooms for the Research Hub and logistical support

Salih Hendricks, from the CoCT Information Services and Technology Department, for
assistance with the use of CoCT IT Training Rooms for the Research Hub and technical advice
and support

Hannetjie Coetzee and Olivia Jansen, from Transnet, for access to, and cards for, the
Research Hub
2010 Teams

Danie Malan, for financial and related data

2010 Operations, for access to the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA)
Fan Fest and advice and guidance, 2010 information
iv

David Dunn, for legal advice and services

Amina Taylor, from the Department of Communication and Marketing, for design of 2010
research accreditation

Aletta Kruger, from the Department of Communication and Marketing, for map of the 2010
footprint

Bruce Sutherland, from the Department of Communication and Marketing, for photographs
Cape Town Tourism

Marisah Smith, from Cape Town Tourism, for liaison re tourism research stream, tourism
data, research advice, and contributing to the CHEC research budget
Provincial Government of the Western Cape – the following Departments:

Office of the Premier, for information and liaison regarding base camps

Department of Treasury, for Provincial Government of the Western Cape (PGWC) 2010 data
for Cape Town

Economic Development and Tourism, for liaison on economic impact assessment

Cape Town Routes Unlimited, for liaison regarding tourism information and base camps
Please note the status of the report:
This is a Research Report, which was produced as part of a range of work around the 2010 FIFA
World Cup™ as an informant to futher research and planning on mega sprts events, events and
tourism.
This report and the Summary Report have not been formally approved by Council or any of its
political structures and therefore the contents, conclusions or recommendations should not be
considered to be the views or policy of the City of Cape Town.
v
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements...................................................................................................................... ii
List of Figures .........................................................................................................................................vii
List of Tables .........................................................................................................................................viii
List of Annexures..................................................................................................................................... x
List of Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................. xi
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Background and context .......................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Structure of the report ............................................................................................................. 6
2. Methodology and Broad Approach ........................................................................................... 7
2.1 Sport Event Impact Model (SEIM) ............................................................................................. 8
2.2 Research scope and methodology .......................................................................................... 11
2.2.1 Study area ..................................................................................................................... 12
2.2.2 Research elements and sampling approach ................................................................. 12
2.2.3 Design of questionnaire and Fact Sheets………….……….……………………………………………..17
2.2.4 Training of fieldworkers and logistical arrangements ................................................. 18
2.2.5 Data inputting and analysis .......................................................................................... 19
2.3 Research challenges ................................................................................................................ 20
2.4 Knowledge management and transfer ................................................................................... 21
3. Economic Impacts .................................................................................................................. 22
3.1 Key findings - Visitors .............................................................................................................. 22
3.1.1 Visitor profile ................................................................................................................ 22
3.1.2 Economic data .............................................................................................................. 25
3.1.3 Tourism ......................................................................................................................... 28
3.2 Key findings - Business ............................................................................................................ 33
3.2.1 Business profile ............................................................................................................ 33
3.2.2 Concluding remarks - Economic impacts ..................................................................... 37
4. Social Impacts ........................................................................................................................ 39
4.1 Key findings - Residents........................................................................................................... 39
4.1.1 Demographic profile ..................................................................................................... 39
4.1.2 Involvement and awareness ........................................................................................ 40
4.1.3 Perceptions of 2010 ..................................................................................................... 41
4.1.4 Perceptions regarding a future Olympic Games ......................................................... 44
4.2 Key findings - Business ........................................................................................................... 44
4.2.1 Perceptions of 2010 ..................................................................................................... 44
4.2.2 Perceptions regarding a future Olympic Games bid ................................................... 48
4.3 Key findings - Visitors ............................................................................................................. 48
4.3.1 Perceptions of 2010...................................................................................................... 48
4.4 Key findings - Sport organisations ........................................................................................... 49
4.4.1 Profile of sport organisations ....................................................................................... 49
4.4.2 Awareness and engagement of sport organisations in 2010 ....................................... 49
4.4.3 Perceptions of 2010...................................................................................................... 50
4.5 Concluding remarks - Social impacts ...................................................................................... 50
vi
5. Sport Impacts ........................................................................................................................ 52
5.1 Key findings - Residents .......................................................................................................... 52
5.2 Key findings - Sport organisations ........................................................................................... 53
5.3 Concluding remarks - Sport impacts ....................................................................................... 54
6. Sport Event Impact Model Input and Output ........................................................................... 55
6.1 Economic Impact Fact Sheet .................................................................................................. 55
6.1.1 Economic Impact Fact Sheet Background ................................................................... 55
6.1.2 The economic data ....................................................................................................... 56
6.1.3 SEIM Economic Impact Output and Index ................................................................... 59
6.2 SEIM Social Fact Sheet ............................................................................................................ 62
6.2.1 SEIM Social Fact Sheet Input ....................................................................................... 62
6.2.2 SEIM Social Impact Output and Index .......................................................................... 63
6.3 Sport (Social) Fact Sheet.......................................................................................................... 64
6.3.1 Sport input .................................................................................................................... 64
6.3.2 Sport Summary Table Output ....................................................................................... 65
6.4 Sport Event Performance Index of SEIM ................................................................................ 65
6.5 Concluding Remarks - SEIM Input and Output ....................................................................... 66
7. Conclusions & Recommendations: 2010 FIFA World Cup™ Research in Cape Town .................. 68
7.1 Background and Methodology ............................................................................................... 68
7.2 Summary of key findings - Short-Term economic impacts .................................................... 69
7.2.1 Visitors .......................................................................................................................... 69
7.2.2. Business ...................................................................................................................... 70
7.3 Summary of key findings - Social and sport impacts .............................................................. 71
7.3.1 Residents ...................................................................................................................... 71
7.3.2 Business ....................................................................................................................... 72
7.3.3 Visitors ......................................................................................................................... 73
7.3.4 Sport organisations....................................................................................................... 73
7.4 SEIM Output ............................................................................................................................ 74
7.4.1 Economic impact .......................................................................................................... 74
7.4.2 Social impact................................................................................................................. 74
7.4.3 Sport impact ................................................................................................................. 74
7.4.4 Sport Event Performance Index of SEIM ...................................................................... 75
7.5 Conclusions and Recommendations ....................................................................................... 75
7.5.1 Future mega-event research ....................................................................................... 76
7.5.2 Longitudinal research .................................................................................................. 76
7.5.3 Use of SEIM for future event research in the City ....................................................... 77
7.5.4 City and CHEC collaboration and future research ....................................................... 77
7.5.5 Green Goal and Responsible Tourism ......................................................................... 77
7.5.6 Knowledge management and transfer ........................................................................ 77
7.6 Concluding remarks ................................................................................................................ 78
8. Annexures ............................................................................................................................. 79
vii
List of Figures
Figure 1: 2010 FIFA World Cup™ host city Cape Town event footprint (CoCT, 2010)
Figure 2: SEIM concept (Urban-Econ, 2010)
Figure 3: Functioning of SEIM (Urban-Econ, 2009)
Figure 4: Main place of residence – foreign visitors (in %)
Figure 5: Main place of residence – domestic visitors (in %)
Figure 6: Attendance at previous World Cups (in %)
Figure 7: Prior visits to South Africa – foreign visitors (in %)
Figure 8: Primary reason for visiting Cape Town (in %)
Figure 9: Type of visitor (in %)
Figure 10: Nights in Cape Town due to World Cup (in %)
Figure 11: Total spend breakdown per category (in Rands)
Figure 12: Number of people in visitor's immediate group spending money together (in %)
Figure 13: Main activities in which intended to participate during visit to Cape Town (in %)
Figure 14: Locations of sighting responsible tourism tips (in %)
Figure 15: Importance of environmental considerations in accommodation choice (in %)
Figure 16: Main mode of transport used to get to matches / fan parks (in %)
Figure 17: Would advise friends, relatives or colleagues to visit Cape Town (in %)
Figure 18: Main capital expenditure categories for 2010 (2006–2010; in %)
Figure 19: Main operational expenditure categories for 2010 (in %)
Figure 20: Direct expenditure for 2010 World Cup (2006–2010; in Rands)
Figure 21: Macroeconomic impact due to CAPEX on business stimulation and the GGP (2006–
2010; in Rands)
Figure 22: Macroeconomic impact due to OPEX on business stimulation and the GGP (2006–
2010; in Rands)
Figure 23: Job creation during the 2010 World Cup (2006–2010)
Figure 24: SEPI of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ in Cape Town
2
10
10
23
24
24
25
25
26
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
59
60
60
61
61
62
66
viii
List of Tables
Table 1: Event attendance volumes – totals per venue for the period 11 June – 12 July 2010
Table 2: Summary of data sources and instruments
Table 3: Project stages, activities and timeframes
Table 4: Summary of the research elements
Table 5: Total number of surveys completed per target sample
Table 6: Sampling approach
Table 7: Summary of key research tasks
Table 8: Perceptions of the event and of Cape Town as a tourism destination (in %)
Table 9: Impression of tourism services in Cape Town (in %)
Table 10: Responsible tourism tips recalled (in %)
Table 11: Business survey respondent profile pre- and post-2010 (in %)
Table 12: Business profile pre- and post-2010 (in %)
Table 13: Business respondents to staffing for 2010 pre- and post-2010 (in %)
Table 14: Business preparation pre- and post-2010 (in %)
Table 15: Business perceptions and impacts pre- and post-2010 (in %)
Table 16: Business awareness of regulations regarding 2010 pre- and post-2010 (in %)
Table 17: Perceptions of responsible tourism by tourism business pre- and post-2010 (in %)
Table 18: Residents' pre- and post-event involvement in, and awareness of, 2010 (in %)
Table 19: Residents' pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 readiness to host (in %)
Table 20: Residents' pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 use of public funds (in %)
Table 21: Residents' pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 infrastructural development (in %)
Table 22: Residents' pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 economic impacts (in %)
Table 23: Residents' pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 social impacts (in %)
Table 24: Residents' pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 regional showcase (in %)
Table 25: Residents' pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 environmental impacts (in %)
Table 26: Business pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 readiness to host (in %)
Table 27: Business pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 use of public funds (in %)
Table 28: Business pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 infrastructural development (in %)
Table 29: Business pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 economic impacts (in %)
Table 30: Business pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 social impacts (in %)
Table 31: Business pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 regional showcase (in %)
Table 32: Business pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 environmental impacts (in %)
Table 33: Visitors' perceptions of 2010 (in %)
Table 34: Sports organisations' perceptions of 2010 (in %)
Table 35: Residents' pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 (in %)
Table 36: Sport organisations' perceptions of the football impacts of 2010 (in %)
Table 37: Summary of capital expenditure (2006–2010)
Table 38: Summary of operational expenditure (2006–2010)
Table 39: Summary of economic input
Table 40: Summary of social input (score out of 3)
Table 41: Social impact output – Social Index of 2010 in Cape Town
Table 42: Summary of sport input (score out of 3)
3
11
12
13
15
15
18
29
30
31
33
34
34
35
35
36
37
40
41
41
41
42
42
43
44
44
45
45
45
46
47
48
48
50
52
53
57
58
59
63
64
64
ix
Table 43: Sport (social impact output) – Sport Index of 2010 event in Cape Town
Table 44: Researchers who contributed to the CoCT–CHEC 2010 Research Project
65
142
x
List of Annexures
Annexure 1: List of 2010 Data and Conditions for Accessing the Data from CoCT .............................. 79
Annexure 2: SEIM Data Collection Instruments (SRSA, SIEM 2010) ..................................................... 80
Annexure 3: Customised CoCT and CHEC 2010 Research Data Collection Instruments .................... 108
Annexure 4: Skills Development ......................................................................................................... 142
Annexure 5: Knowledge Management and Transfer .......................................................................... 151
Annexure 6: High-level Summary of Lessons Learned (as at October 2010) ...................................... 153
Annexure 7: Economic Impact Fact Sheet .......................................................................................... 158
Annexure 8: Social (Sport) Fact Sheets ............................................................................................... 161
xi
List of Abbreviations
ACSA
ACT
BEE
CETRA
CHEC
CoCT
CPUT
CTT
DoH
EHD
EO
ERM
FIFA
GDP
GGP
GP
IC
ICESSD
IP
ITS
LFA
MCDM
OC
PGWC
PRASA
PVA
SAFA–WP
SAM
SAT
SC
SDIGIS
SEIM
SEPI
SPV
SRA
SRES
SRSA
SU
UCT
UWC
Airports Company South Africa
Accelerate Cape Town
Black economic empowerment
Centre for Tourism Research in Africa
Cape Higher Education Consortium
City of Cape Town
Cape Peninsula University of Technology
Cape Town Tourism
Department of Health (PGWC)
Economic and Human Development (CoCT)
Event organiser
Environmental Resource Management Department (CoCT)
Fédération Internationale de Football Association
Gross domestic product
Gross geographic product
Green Point
Inner City
Interdisciplinary Centre for Excellence for Sport Science and Development
International Premier
Inner City Transport System
Local Football Association
Multicriteria decision making
Organising Committee
Provincial Government of the Western Cape
Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa
Public viewing area
South African Football Association – Western Province
Social Accounting Matrix
South African Tourism
SmartCape
Strategic Development Information & GIS (CoCT)
Sport Event Impact Model
Sport Event Performance Index
Special-purpose vehicle
Sport, Recreation and Amenities (CoCT)
Sport Recreation and Exercise Science
Sport and Recreation South Africa
Stellenbosch University
University of Cape Town
University of the Western Cape
Note:
All references to the ‘World Cup’, ‘2010’ and ‘WC’ in this report refer to the 2010 FIFA World Cup™.
Reference in this report to the ‘City’ and ‘CoCT’ refer to the City of Cape Town.
1
1.
Introduction
1.1.Background and context
The Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) World Cup™ is currently considered to
be the largest sporting and media event in the world. In May 2004, the world’s football governing
body, FIFA, awarded the right to South Africa to host the event in 2010. Arguably, hosting the 2010
FIFA World Cup™ is the biggest, most complex and challenging, but, equally important, the most
prestigious, opportune and rewarding event that South Africa has yet attempted to undertake.1
Thirty-two teams played 64 matches in nine South
African host cities, of which Cape Town was one, around
the country. The national vision for hosting the 2010
FIFA World Cup™ sought to “strengthen the African and
South African image, promote new partnerships with the
world as we stage a unique and memorable event. Our
vision will inspire us and drive our collective
determination to be significant global players in all fields
of human endeavour.”2
“New and upgraded infrastructure and facilities must
make Cape Town a happier, better functioning home,
with more economic opportunities for its residents and a
desirable destination for travellers and investors. By
achieving this, people who live here will again have a
sense of purpose and pride.”3
The City of Cape Town’s (CoCT’s) and the Provincial Government of the Western Cape’s (PGWC’s)
strategy for 2010 was threefold:4

compliance with FIFA requirements for hosting the games;

optimising the developmental impact and leaving a legacy; and

maximising the promotional and positioning opportunities: leverage.
Cape Town hosted eight FIFA World Cup™ matches, including a semi-final, at the Cape Town
Stadium. The World Cup™ 2010 footprint also included the official FIFA Fan Fest (Fan Park) located at
the Grand Parade in Central Cape Town, the Fan Walk (extending from the Fan Fest via Somerset
Road to the Cape Town Stadium), four public viewing areas (PVAs or ‘fan jols’) in Athlone, Bellville,
Khayelitsha and Mitchells Plain, and two training venues (Athlone and Phillippi Stadia).
1
Davies. G. 2009. Managing the alchemy of the 2010 Football World Cup. In Eds. U. Pillay, R. Tomlinson &
O. Bass. Development and Dreams: The Legacy of the 2010 Football World Cup, 33–54. Cape Town: HSRC
Press.
2
Dlamini, T. 2008. The 2010 FIFA World Cup™. Legacy Lives Conference Report.
3
CoCT and PGWC. 2006. 2010 FIFA World Cup™ Cape Town and Western Cape Business Plan.
4
CoCT and PGWC. 2007. 2010 FIFA World Cup™ Cape Town and Western Cape Business Plan.
2
The FIFA Fan Fest was aimed at non-ticket-holders, in addition to providing a safe and secure
football environment for international and other visitors and locals. The PVAs were aimed at
broadening access to the FIFA World Cup 2010™ for the communities of Cape Town. The event’s
footprint is illustrated in Figure 1 below.
Figure 1: 2010 FIFA World Cup™ host city Cape Town event footprint (CoCT, 2010)
Attendance
Attendance volumes5 for the Cape Town Stadium, the Fan Walk and the FIFA Fan Fest, as well as for
the PVAs are presented in Table 1 below. Not surprisingly, the main football precinct, namely the
Stadium, the Fan Walk and the FIFA Fan Fest attracted the highest volumes. Peak attendance for the
Stadium occurred on 17 June, whereas peak attendance for the Fan Walk and the FIFA Fan Fest
occurred during the latter part of the tournament, namely 3 and 6 July respectively. The Bellville
Velodrome was the most well-attended PVA, followed by the Mitchells Plain (Swartklip) PVA, with
the least attendance taking place at the Athlone (Vygieskraal) PVA.
5
Volumes are defined as one person entering the Fan Walk or the Fan Fest. It is noted that a person could have
entered the Fan Walk/Fest more than once on a specific day. Number of tickets was used to estimate
attendance at the Stadium.
3
Table 1: Event attendance volumes – totals per venue for the period 11 June – 12 July 2010
VENUE
Cape Town Stadium
FIFA Fan Walk
FIFA Fan Fest
Oliver
Tambo
PVA
(Khayelitsha)
Swartklip PVA (Mitchells
Plain)
Velodrome PVA (Bellville)
Vygieskraal PVA
(Athlone)
TOTAL
ENTRIES
507 332
PEAK
64 100
581 913
558 159
28 971
90 000
18 799
3 409
56 118
7 519
68 593
21 427
6 532
4 450
1 822 873
194 809
PEAK TIME
17 June 2010
13:30
03 July 2010 13:30
06 July 2010 19:30
11 June 2010
17:30
11 June 2010
17:35
11 July 2010 19:30
16 June 2010
21:00
Source: CoCT (2010).
In relation to the above attendance volumes for Cape Town, it is worth noting that the Ministry of
Tourism (2010) reported that 309 000 foreign tourists arrived in South Africa for the primary
purpose of attending the World Cup.6 Gauteng attracted the most (220 000) tourists, given that
most of the matches were played in this region. The next highest number of tourists was the
Western Cape (108 000), followed by KwaZulu-Natal (83 000).
The focus of the current study is on Cape Town. After the 2010 FIFA World Cup™, the CoCT has had
to account for its expenditure and performance, and critical to this is an understanding of the impact
of this event on the city and its people. Sound qualitative and quantitative empirical evidence must
underpin any such explanation.
Province’s contribution to the study in terms of access to their economic data on Cape Town and
their input into the model is acknowledged. Several engagements with Province took place in order
to extend the study to a Western Cape provincial footprint, especially in relation to the team base
camps in George and Knysna, and an attempt was made to align with a PGWC planned study on the
economic impacts of the event. However, these studies were not pursued by Province.
Regretfully, no National research framework was undertaken for 2010. Several attempts were made
from the Western Cape over a period of time to encourage and initiate this framework, from 2008
when the Organising Committee (OC) endorsed a 2010 research audit, right up to April 2010 when
the National Department of Tourism expressed an interest in the 2010 Research Agenda, which was
driven by a group of national and international academics.
Nevertheless, the Cape Higher Education Consortium (CHEC) and the City have drawn on various
national and local workshop outcomes and priorities to inform the research agenda, in particular the
Sport Mega Events Legacies Conference research meeting that was held on 4 December 2009.7
6
South African Tourism (SAT). 2010. Impact of 2010 FIFA World Cup.
The 2010 FIFA World Cup™ Research Agenda. Minutes of the meeting held at the Sport Mega-events and their
Legacies Conference, Stellenbosch, 4 December 2009.
7
4
The National Department of Sport and Recreation (SRSA) has developed an integrated model to
assess the socio-economic impact of sporting events (including mega-events) on South Africa,
namely the Sport Event Impact Model (SEIM). The CoCT Departments of Economic and Human
Development, Sport, Recreation and Amenities, Strategic Development Information and GIS
(SDIGIS), 2010 Operations and Tourism agreed to use the SRSA model (via a Memorandum of
Understanding with SRSA), as it is expected to yield results that are multidimensional and that do
not necessarily lie in the domain of one particular line department. Cape Town Tourism (CTT), also
seeing value in the research in terms of visitor- and marketing-related information, contributed to
the research.
Although there are many different
models for assessing the impacts of
events (each with their own advantages
and/or limitations), one of the primary
reasons why the City chose to use the
SRSA SEIM was to produce as full an
understanding of the short-term
outcomes and impacts of the 2010 FIFA
World Cup™ as possible, and so that it
could further provide a benchmark for
future event evaluations. The City also
acknowledged that adopting a multidimensional stakeholder approach to the evaluation was
important and that use of the model allowed for the incorporation of perspectives from residents,
business, visitors, sport federations and event organisers. In addition, the City recognised the value
of incorporating baseline research into the model and hence pre- and post-event surveys were
conducted with key event stakeholders, namely residents and business. Moreover, while it is
accepted that those who are in closest proximity to a sport event are mostly impacted by the hosting
of a sport event,8 the City focused its research both on the Stadium precinct and on the Fan Park, as
well as extending the research to the broader Cape Town area (including residents and business),
given the City’s developmental objectives of hosting the 2010 FIFA World Cup™, as was highlighted
earlier in the current report. Additional questions not specific to the model, but which were
considered important to the City, such as those pertaining to Green Goal and Responsible Tourism,
were also included in the range of surveys conducted.
Furthermore, the City recognised the value of undertaking comparative research and contributed to
an economic impact assessment study of the South African World Cup 2010 being undertaken jointly
by several national and international academics. The joint study was based on the methodology
utilised for assessing the economic impacts of the 2006 FIFA World Cup™ in Germany.9 The
8
Fredline, E. & Faulkner, B. 2002. Variations in residents’ reactions to major motorsport events: Why residents
perceive the impacts of events differently. Event Management, 7(2): 115–126.
9
The national study was conducted in five host cities (Cape Town, Durban, Johannesburg, Port Elizabeth, and
Pretoria). Prof. Holger Preuss was responsible for conducting the economic impact assessment. The CoCT and
Tourism KwaZulu-Natal partnered with the academics involved in this study.
5
advantage of taking such an approach is that it is ‘bottom–up’, using surveys that have been
conducted with visitors to ask specific questions that allow for more precise economic measures. In
contrast, a ‘top–down’ approach would have had to rely on disaggregated statistical data, mainly at
a national level.10 The differences in contexts and nations, whether developed or developing, hosting
football World Cups is acknowledged. The strength of conducting a comparative analysis is that it
allows for the study concerned to be extended to the 2014 FIFA World Cup™ (to be held in Brazil)
and for a comparative analysis to be drawn across a developing nation context. Given the absence of
a nationally endorsed 2010 research study, visitor data were collected in five host cities (Cape Town,
Durban, Johannesburg, Port Elizabeth, and Pretoria) in order to allow for both a national- and a hostcity-level impact analysis to be conducted.11
It is also important to emphasise that the
research presented in this report focuses on
the short-term impacts of the event, with a
longitudinal approach to assessing the longterm impacts of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
being recommended.
While SRSA developed the event socio-economic impact assessment methodology and model, CHEC
– consisting of the four universities in Cape Town and Stellenbosch12 – led by a Project Manager
from the Cape Peninsula University of Technology (CPUT) was contracted in April 2010 to implement
the 2010 socio-economic impact model in collaboration with the CoCT and other researchers
nationally and internationally.13 The four local universities’ expertise, national and international
research and academic standing, current research networks and mega-event research experience
strengthens and adds to CoCT’s research legacy of the 2010 event.
The 2010 FIFA World Cup™ Research undertaken by the CoCT and CHEC in Cape Town, which, at the
time of the compilation of the report, was the most comprehensive and extensive research
completed in this respect in South Africa provides a strong platform for the undertaking of additional
research relating to event impacts in future. The lessons learned from the research play a significant
role in informing the future planning of mega-events in the City. In addition, the results contribute to
the knowledge creation of mega-event experiences in developing contexts, and have direct
implications for knowledge transfer to Brazil in relation to the 2014 FIFA World Cup™.
10
Preuss, H. 2005. The economic impact of visitors at major multi-sport events. European Sport Management
Quarterly, 5(3): 281–301. Press, H. & Kursheidt, M. 2009. How crowding-out affects tourism legacy. Sport
Mega-events and Their Legacies Conference, Stellenbosch, 2–4 December 2009.
11
The results of the national and city-level economic impact analyses will be added as an annexure when
available by mid-2011.
12
Cape Peninsula University of Technology (CPUT), Stellenbosch University (SU), University of Cape Town
(UCT), and the University of the Western Cape (UWC).
13
CHEC also appointed a Chairperson and a CHEC Reference Group to provide guidance on the research.
6
1.2. Structure of the report
The report is structured as follows:

Chapter 1: Introduction

Chapter 2: Methodology and broad approach

Chapter 3: Economic impacts (as perceived by the targeted groups of visitors and business)

Chapter 4: Social impacts (as perceived by the range of targeted groups, viz. residents,
business, visitors and sport organisations)

Chapter 5: Sport impacts (as perceived by the targeted groups of residents and sport
organisations)

Chapter 6: Input and output of the SEIM and presentation of the Sport Event Performance
Index (SEPI) which combines three indices, namely the Economic Impact Index, the Social
Impact Index, and the Sport-related Impact Index

Chapter 7: Conclusions and Recommendations.
The following annexures are included:

Annexure 1: List of 2010 Data and Conditions for Accessing from the CoCT14

Annexure 2: SEIM Data Collection Instruments

Annexure 3: Customised 2010 Research Data Collection Instruments

Annexure 4: Skills Development

Annexure 5: Knowledge Management and Transfer

Annexure 6: High-level Summary of Lessons Learned (as at October 2010)

Annexure 7: Economic Impact Fact Sheet

Annexure 8: Social (Sport) Fact Sheets
Note: A Summary Report is available from CoCT, from the City’s website www.capetown.gov.za, or
by means of email request directed to 2010surveys@capetown.gov.za.
Please note status of the report and the summary report on page iv
14
A written request for output figures can be made by emailing 2010surveys@capetown.gov.za. Please see
Annexure 1 for further details.
7
2.
Methodology and Broad Approach
An overview of SRSA SEIM together with the broad approach to this
research study is presented below. The approach taken is unique, in that
it allowed for collaboration between the CHEC partners and the City and
ensured alignment with CHEC academic research interests, as well as
internally in the City for planning into the future. Although the emphasis
was on research rigour and validity, simultaneously the approach served
to strengthen and build research capacity by using university staff and
students and some City staff in the various roles of coordinators,
researchers, specialists, and fieldworkers. The research project was
guided by a Reference Group and a work group consisting of CHEC and
City representatives. The research project itself, which was implemented
as a research legacy for the City and CHEC, serves as a baseline for
longitudinal 2010 studies and other events, as well as for more detailed studies into the future using
the rich data gathered. The approach further ensured value for money research and achieved
important links and balance between a sound and rigorous approach, academic credibility, and
practical application.
The approach used was to be as comprehensive as possible, using the SEIM as the framework and
within the available resources. As the SEIM considered a range of social, economic, sport, and some
environmental impacts,15 the aim was to produce as full an understanding of the outcomes and
impacts of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ as was possible.
The SEIM was implemented through a process of research which was designed to gather, capture,
check, and evaluate 2010 World Cup™ data and information required by the SEIM Fact Sheets,
covering economic, social and sport-related data, as outlined next.
A supporting component of the research project was the establishment of the CoCT and CHEC
Research Hub. The purpose of the Research Hub was to support 2010 and City knowledge
management and legacy processes while hosting researchers and research workers (local, national,
and international). Located in the centrally situated 1 Adderley Street Building, the Research Hub
provided secure data management, work, briefing and meeting space, and the opportunity for
seminars, training, interaction, and skills development for CoCT and CHEC staff and others. The
Research Hub was open for the whole period Monday 7 June to Monday 19 July 2010, from 08h00 to
22h30. The Hub was officially launched at a 2010 CoCT and CHEC knowledge-sharing event on 23
15
Environmental questions in the SEIM were limited and included as part of the social impacts. These questions
were supplemented by adding Green Goal and Responsible Tourism questions to the respective surveys.
8
June 2010. The Research Hub became operational again for two weeks in September 2010 for the
post-event data capturing and checking.
2.1. Sport Event Impact Model (SEIM)
The SEIM was developed for SRSA with the primary aim of providing a standard model to measure
and determine the social, economic and sport-related impacts of locally held international sport
events by making use of specific parameters and benchmarks. The output of the SEIM is a SEPI for
the specific event assessed.16 A summary of the model is presented; however, for a more in-depth
review of the model, please contact SRSA.17
The underlying approach in the model is to define and interpret a sport event as a tourism activity.
Economic impact refers to the effects on the level of economic activity in a given area due to an
external intervention, namely the hosting of a sport event, in the economy. Indicators were
developed in the following categories to capture all direct expenditure related to the event being
evaluated:

capital expenditure;

operational expenditure;

injections; and

income.
Direct expenditure figures had to be obtained from local council
and event organisers’ budgets. Visitor expenditure was an
integral part of the economic impact assessment. Direct, indirect
and induced impacts were considered. The Social Accounting
Matrix (SAM) was used as the model tool to determine the
economic impacts of the event. A SAM, which is a
comprehensive, economy-wide database utilised for input–
output analysis, was considered an appropriate tool, given that
visitor spending and event hosting expenditure had to be taken into account. It is also acknowledged
that the debate as to whether input–output analysis (as in the case with SAM) or computable
general equilibrium analysis should be used to assess the economic impact of an event continues
worldwide.
As economic measurement was insufficient to assess the impacts of an event, social and sport
impacts also had to be considered. Social and sport-related indicators were, therefore, factored into
the SEIM framework. Resident perception studies and sport federation / event organiser surveys are
important sources of data for assessing the social and sport impacts of an event. It should be noted
that environmental impacts are considered as part of the social impacts within the framework of the
SEIM.
16
Sport Event Impact Model Research Report. 2010. Urban-Econ and SRSA.
SRSA can be contacted at info@srsa.gov.za.
17
9
Multicriteria decision making (MCDM) is used in the model to determine social and sport impacts.
MCDM frameworks encompass a mathematical model that aims to provide a single score or index
for the option under analysis, despite complex and competing objectives. The aim of the MCDM is to
attach values to those social and sport indicators that are generally difficult to quantify. The Indexing
Model was used to combine the Economic Impact Index, the Social Impact Index and the Sportrelated Impact Index to calculate the SEPI. Weights were assigned to all indicators in the database
attached to the model.
Economic outputs determined by the model generally include the following:

total impact on production;

total impact on employment;

total impact on income;

total value-added impact – gross domestic product (GDP) or gross geographic product
(GGP); and

total impact on government revenues (taxes).
For the purpose of this report, the following economic outputs were determined:18

total impact on production;

total impact on employment; and

total value-added impact – GDP or GGP.
Social and sport-related impacts determined by the model include the following:
18

community development;

legacy building;

quality of life issues;19

urban regeneration;

social inclusion;

transformation;

anti-social behaviour;

disruption of daily lives;

environmental impacts;

sport development;20 and

the image of South Africa with regard to sport.
SEIM will be updated every two years. For the reporting period covered in the current study, the economic
indicators that were available at the time of the research were used.
19
The SEIM Quality of Life indicator was drawn from the following survey and Fact Sheet question and
statements: (1) Are any locals employed pre-event? (2) The hosting of the event ensures extended shopping
hours. (3) The hosting of the event leads to increased spending, thus ensuring economic benefits to members
of the local community. (4) The hosting of the event ensures employment opportunities for local community
members.
20
The concept ‘sport development opportunities’ refers to opportunities (including trading) for South African
footballers competing nationally and internationally, increased tournaments on a national level, and the
creation of new opportunities for the growth of football.
10
The value of SEPI is expressed as a percentage and ranges from 0 to 100, where 0 indicates that the
impact is extremely unfavourable and 100 extremely favourable. The model concept is illustrated in
Figure 2 below.
Inputs
Measurement
Sport-related
Primary research i.e.:
Increase interest &
participation
Raised public awareness
Ranking of the event
Ability to host event
Total expenditure
Total revenue
Jobs created
Contribution to GDP
Industry output
Additional value of demand
# of individuals impacted by
programmes
# of individuals benefiting from
skills training
# of volunteers
# of crime related incidents
Extent of pollution (rate)
Increased investments (# /
rate)
Increased volume of tourists
Ranking of(#)
event (rate)
Increased # of spectators
Increased # of participants
Increased # of opportunities
Ability to host event (rate)
W
i
Sport Event Performance Index (SEPI)
Social
Primary research i.e.:
Crime
Traffic congestions
Pride
Legacy building
Sport Event Impact Model (SEIM)
Economic
Capital expenditure
Operational expenditure
Leverage
Injections
Outputs
W ii
W
iii
Figure 2: SEIM concept (Urban-Econ, 2010)
The steps taken in using SEIM are illustrated in Figure 3 below.
STEP 1:
Do research using instruments
SURVEY DATA
 Visitor surveys
 Resident surveys
 Federation & organiser
OTHER DATA
 Financial data
 Event facts & figures
STEP 2:
Insert data into Input Sheets
STEP 3:
Obtain results
EVENT KEY DATA
INPUT SHEET
 Key economic impact
inputs
 Key social impact inputs
 Key sport impact inputs
SPORT EVENT IMPACT
REPORT
SEIM
 Economic Impact Index
 Social Impact Index
 Sport Impact Index
Figure 3: Functioning of SEIM (Urban-Econ, 2009)21
Step 1 entails conducting primary research using research instruments (the visitor survey, the
resident survey, and the sport federation / event organiser survey) provided in the SEIM. In Step 2,
21
Urban-Econ & SRSA. 2009. Sport Event Impact Model – User’s Guide.
11
the primary research data in the form of financial data, visitor data, and federation and organiser
survey data were inserted into the Data Input Fact Sheets (Economic Impact Fact Sheet and the
Social (including Sport) Fact Sheet) that supported the SEIM. The SEIM used the data provided in the
calculation to generate a Sport Event Impact Report in Step 3.
The visitor questionnaires were used to determine the economic and social impacts, while the
resident’s questionnaires were employed for assessing the social impacts. The Federation and Event
Organiser Questionnaire was used to determine the social and sport development impacts. A
summary of the generic data sources and instruments is presented in Table 2 below.
Table 2: Summary of data sources and instruments
IMPACTS
Economic impacts
Economic and social impacts
Social and sport
development impacts
Social and sport
development impacts
DATA SOURCE
Event organisers
Event attendees (spectators and
participants)
Residents
INSTRUMENT
Economic Impact Fact Sheet
Visitor Questionnaire
Persons representing the
federation and involved in
organising the event
Event organisers
Federation and Event Organiser
Questionnaire
Resident Questionnaire
Social (and Sport) Fact Sheet
Source: Adapted from Urban-Econ (2010).
2.2. Research scope and methodology
As mentioned previously, the approach used was to be as comprehensive as possible, using the SEIM
as the framework and within the available resources, in order to produce as full an understanding of
the outcomes and impacts of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ as was possible. A high-level summary table
of what was completed within the very limited timeframe available is presented next,22 followed by
a description of the study area, the research elements and the sampling approach, the questionnaire
design and Fact Sheets, the training of fieldworkers, the logistical arrangements, and the limitations
of the research.
22
The limited timeframe was largely due to CoCT needing to obtain clarity around the possible scope and scale
of an impact assessment of 2010 and the sourcing of a research budget.
12
Table 3: Project stages, activities and timeframes
TIMEFRAME
April 2010
April–May 2010
May–June 2010
June–July 2010
July–August 2010
August–September 2010
September–October 2010
October– November 2010
November–December 2010
ACTIVITY
Finalisation of contract: CoCT and CHEC
Survey design and implementation of pre-event fieldwork (residents
and business), including training of fieldworkers
Finalisation of visitor survey and finalisation of logistical
arrangements for fieldwork, including training of fieldworkers and
setting up of aggregator templates for SEIM data inputting
Implementation of visitor surveys and data inputting (pre-event and
visitor surveys) and quality checking of data inputting (phase 1)
Quality checking of data (phase 2), and collection of data for
completion of the Economic and Social (Sport) Fact Sheets
Finalisation of post-event surveys (resident and business), fieldwork
implementation and data inputting; collection of data for completion
of the Economic and Social (Sport) Fact Sheets
Finalisation of sport survey, implementation and data inputting;
collection of data for completion of the Economic and Social (Sport)
Fact Sheets
Inputting of data into SEIM; data review and analysis, and drafting
reports and presentations
Rerun of SEIM with additional data from Economic Fact Sheets; data
review and analysis, drafting of reports and presentations
2.2.1.
Study area
The focus of the research was the study area Cape Town, which is defined as CoCT Municipality’s
jurisdictional area, covering the area of the event footprint and, hence, the following venues and
precincts:

Cape Town Stadium precinct (including the Fan Walk) leading up to and on the eight match
days (up to and including the semi-final);

the FIFA Fan Fest (Grand Parade) on all match days (up to and including the final);

the four PVAs: Athlone, Bellville, Mitchells Plain, and Khayelitsha (pre- and post-event); and

the Inner City and Greater Cape Town (pre- and post-event)23.
2.2.2.
Research elements and sampling approach
A range of questionnaires were asked and interviews were held. In addition, fact-gathering research
and analysis was undertaken before, during and after the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ event. Inputs were
requested from a variety of participant groups: residents; visitors; business; sporting bodies; event
organisers; the City; Province; the OC; and FIFA (see Table 4 below). The intended sample and actual
responses received are also indicated.
23
Although the focus of the study was on the specific areas of the event footprint, it was also recognised that
the event was likely to impact on most residents and businesses in Cape Town. Hence, working within the
limited research budget parameters, additional studies were conducted on residents and businesses in Cape
Town (referred to as ‘Greater Cape Town’ to distinguish from the event footprint) to try to assess possible
impacts.
13
Table 4: Summary of the research elements
IMPACTS
STAGE
DATA SOURCES
INSTRUMENT
SURVEY LOCATION /
SPECIFIC SOURCES
OF INFORMATION
CoCT; PGWC;
National; FIFA/OC;
Match; SPVs, e.g.
CTT; Wesgro; ACSA;
PRASA; Eskom
SURVEY METHOD
AND BY WHOM
CONDUCTED
Interviews;
reviewing of
budgets & annual
reports, etc.
(SU & CoCT EHD)
ACTUAL
SAMPLE
All relevant
economic
players, as
listed under
specific
sources of
information
Excludes
input from
FIFA/OC,
Match and
24
business
Economic
Pre-, during
and post-2010
(May–Oct
2010)
Event
organisers
Economic Fact Sheet
(as per SEIM)
Economic
Pre-2010
(Apr–May
2010)
Business
Business survey
(additional to SEIM)
Green Point (GP);
Large Business (ACT);
Chamber of
Commerce;
CTT
Infield (CPUT);
ACT email (CPUT);
Chamber email
(CPUT);
CTT email (CPUT)
100
50
350
350
72
23
21
12
Economic
Post-2010
(Sept 2010)
Business
Business survey
(additional to SEIM)
GP;
ACT; Chamber of
Commerce; CTT
Infield (CPUT);
Online
(SmartCape – SC);
Online (SC)
150
50
350
104
4
27
Economic and
social
During (Jun–
Jul 2010)
Event attendees
(spectators)
Stadium precinct and
Fan Fest
Infield (CPUT,
UCT, SU, UWC
and international
student
volunteers)
3 050
3 376
Social and sport
development
Pre-2010
(Mar–Apr
2010)
Residents
Visitor survey (SEIM
questions and national
economic study
questions included, in
addition to those of
Green Goal and
Responsible Tourism)
Resident’s survey
(SEIM questions, plus
additional questions)
GP Precinct; IC; 4
PVAs
Infield (CPUT);
CoCT email
(CPUT)
Infield (UWC)
GP = 400
IC = 100
PVA = 200 × 4
GP = 400
IC = 11
PVA = 200 × 4
Broader CT
24
TARGETED
SAMPLE
A range of efforts and means were attempted to access the FIFA/LOC and Match data over the research period without success. In addition, while an attempt was made
to assess private sector expenditure and investment, businesses were reluctant to supply the required details. Such reluctance has been found with other similar studies.
14
IMPACTS
Social and sport
development
STAGE
Post-2010
(Sept 2010)
DATA SOURCES
Residents
INSTRUMENT
Resident’s survey
(SEIM questions, plus
additional questions)
SURVEY LOCATION /
SPECIFIC SOURCES
OF INFORMATION
GP Precinct;
IC; 4 PVAs
Broader CT
Social and sport
development
Post-2010
(Sept–Oct
2010)
Persons
representing
the federation
and involved in
organising the
event
Sport survey (SEIM
questions, plus
additional questions)
Social and sport
development
Post- 2010
(Sept–Oct
2010)
Event
organisers
Social and Sport Fact
Sheet (as per SEIM)
ACSA = Airports Company South Africa
ACT = Accelerate Cape Town
EHD = Economic and Human Development
SAFA–WP; LFAs;
World Cup Sport
Federations;
CoCT Facility
Management
Committees;
CoCT;
FIFA/OC
CoCT 2010;
Operations and Sport
and Recreation CTT;
Fan Fest; Fan Walk;
PVA service
providers; Green
Goal, etc.
SURVEY METHOD
AND BY WHOM
CONDUCTED
Online (SC)
Infield (CPUT;
UWC); Online
(SC);
Infield (UWC)
Online (SC)
CoCT email &
infield (UCT
initially; CPUT, SU
& CoCT SRA)
Interviews;
emails; reports,
etc. (CPUT; CoCT
2010 Operations;
SDI; GIS; SRA)
TARGETED
SAMPLE
ACTUAL
SAMPLE
Broader CT =
1 000
Broader CT =
537
GP = 400
IC = 100
PVA = 200 × 4
GP = 400
IC = 4
PVA = 200 × 4
Broader CT =
500
100
Broader CT =
111
17
All relevant
social players,
as listed
under specific
sources of
information
Excludes
input from
FIFA/OC & 1
PVA (Bellville)
15
A summary of the total number of surveys completed per stakeholder grouping is presented in Table
5 below. A total of 6 719 questionnaires were completed during the study.
Additional small studies which CHEC (CPUT) and the City (SRA) directly supported and with which
they assisted during the event included: a volunteer study (200 self-administered surveys, conducted
on behalf of international academics;25 two SRA Internships; and a Green Goal study undertaken by
an international intern hosted by the Environmental Resource Management Department (ERM,
CoCT). Indirect assistance was provided to and interviews were held with a number of international
students researching the World Cup, including to some who were busy with their dissertations.
Table 5: Total number of surveys completed per target sample
TARGETED SAMPLE
TYPE
Residents
Business
Visitors
Sport Federation/EO
NUMBER OF SURVEYS
PRE1748
128
DURING
3376
POST
1315
135
17
OVERALL TOTAL
TOTAL
3063
263
3376
17
6719
The sampling approaches adopted for the respective surveys are summarised in Table 6 below.
Table 6: Sampling approach
SURVEY
Residents
AREA/CATEGORY
GP and 4 PVAs
IC and Broader CT
Business
Chamber of Commerce and
CTT
ACT
Visitors
25
Chamber of Commerce &
ACT (combined) & CTT
Stadium precinct and Fan
Fest
SAMPLING APPROACH
Spatially-based systematic sampling approach used to select
households within a 1–2km radius of the venue
26
Convenience sampling approach used
IC Residents: Questionnaires sent to all body corporates and
chairpersons, property administrators and resident associations
listed on the Cape Town Partnership database
Broader Cape Town: Questionnaires, created specifically for
city-wide residents, were activated online at municipal libraries
using the Smart Cape database
Stratified random sampling approach used to select Chamber of
Commerce and CTT members from their respective member
databases to ensure representation from all subareas of Cape
Town and across different categories of business (pre-surveys)
Convenience sampling approach used (pre-surveys), with all
surveys being sent out to almost all members on the ACT
27
database
Convenience sampling approach used for all business categories
(post-surveys)
Spatially-based systematic sampling approach used to select
28
visitors
The volunteer study, which is an additional study that was facilitated by the CoCT and CHEC, did not form
part of SEIM. The volunteer report was to be submitted as a separate report.
26
Such a methodology is accepted for purposive sampling, as it allows for the inclusion of cases that are
specific to a particular phenomenon, in this case inner city residents. (De Vos, et al. Research at Grassroots for
the Social Sciences and Human Service Professions. Pretoria: Van Schaik.)
27
ACT indicated that the survey would not be relevant to a few of their members.
28
The visitor’s survey was administered to foreign and domestic visitors only, excluding the local residents of
Cape Town. However, the latter were still intercepted at the Stadium Precinct and Fan Fest, but were asked a
different range of questions, as required by the national economic impact study.
16
SURVEY
Sport
Federation /
EO
Volunteers
AREA/CATEGORY
SAMPLING APPROACH
Convenience sampling approach used
Convenience sampling approach used
Sample size – Resident’s survey
Spatially-based systematic sampling was used to target residents, as was outlined in Table 6 above.
For the residents, the total sample was 1 748 and 1 315, pre- and post-surveys respectively.
Sampling bias was reduced by the sample consisting of various subsets of Cape Town residents.
Given that a sample of 384 was required for a population of 100 000, at a 95% confidence level, with
very small increments required in the sample as the population increased,29 the samples for the preand post-surveys are considered statistically significant.
Sample size – Business survey
Similarly to residents, probability and non-probability sampling was used to target the business
respondents. As indicated in Table 5 above, business response to the study was the weakest, with
only 124 (pre-event) and 130 (post-event) businesses responding to the survey. The results can be
considered as only being indicative of business expectations and experiences of the 2010 event.
Sample size – Visitor’s survey
For spectator studies, as the size of the sample increases, more precise sample estimates are
achieved.30 As greater sample sizes often require additional time and financial costs, the researcher
must decide how much variability will be accepted. It is recommended that sample sizes in economic
impact studies be large enough for an approximately 4% to 5% tolerated error level. For events with
over 100 000 attendees, a sample size of 400 is recommended, at a 95% level of confidence. Based
on the German experience, with their research sample of 7 500 for the national economic impact
study of the 2006 FIFA World Cup™, a sampling framework was drawn up for the South African host
cities, with a sample size of 3 050 being determined for Cape Town. To reduce sampling bias, a
sampling schedule was drawn up in order to ensure generalisation to the total population of event
attendees.31
Sample size – Sport federation survey
Convenience sampling was used to target the sport federations. Similar to the business responses,
this aspect also received poor responses. The findings cannot be generalised to the sport fraternity,
with them once again providing some indication of the perceptions of their expectations and
experiences of the event.
It should be noted that the research project was undertaken with care and research rigour, and,
given the challenges of mega-event research as noted in the Section 2.3 below, it is one of the most
comprehensive approaches that has been adopted to event research to date in South Africa. The
sample sizes of two of the most important target research groupings were significantly robust to
provide generalisable results.
29
Isaacs, S. & Michael, W.B. 1981. Handbook in Research and Evaluation. San Diego: Edits Publishers.
Turco, D., Riley, R. & Swart, K. 2003. Sport Tourism. Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information Technologies.
31
The sampling schedule was to accompany the national economic impact study.
30
17
2.2.3
Design of questionnaire and Fact Sheets
The various questionnaires used in the research were designed and aligned with the generic default
questionnaires of the SEIM. They also included questions that were beyond the scope of the SEIM,
and which were specific to the requirements of the City and CHEC, as mentioned previously (see
Annexures 2 and 3). Key questions for ascertaining perceived economic, social and environmental
impacts were also standardised across the different surveys directed at the residents, business,
visitors, and sport. All the questionnaires were based on surveys that had been tested and used,
either as part of the SEIM or as part of the research that had previously been undertaken by
academics on the FIFA World Cup™, thus ensuring the reliability and validity of the research design
instruments used.
Resident’s questionnaires
The resident’s questionnaires were aligned across the various areas / constituent groups. The
presentations were adapted to suit the online version of the questionnaire, which was administered
via the CoCT SmartCape Project. The resident’s questionnaire was also translated into Afrikaans and
isiXhosa for the PVA research element, for ease of completion by the respondent. Aspects covered in
the resident’s questionnaire included awareness of, and involvement in, the 2010 FIFA World Cup™,
and perceptions and attitudes towards the event. The Inner City version of the questionnaire also
included a component on issues related to the FIFA Fan Fest™.
Business questionnaires
The business questionnaires were not part of the SEIM, and were developed through the CHEC–
CPUT collaboration network, with inputs from CoCT EHD. The questionnaire was designed to elicit
information on business engagement and preparation in relation to the 2010 FIFA World Cup™, as
well as perceptions and expectations of the event. Both resident and business pre-event
questionnaires were adapted to suit the post-event survey requirements.
Visitor’s questionnaires
Aside from questions needed for the SEIM, the visitor’s questionnaires were aligned with those used
in studies conducted in Germany during the 2006 FIFA World Cup™. Therefore, for the purposes of
the research, residents’ spend was excluded from SEIM. The questionnaire was translated into eight
foreign languages, namely Dutch, French, German, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Spanish, and
Portuguese, in order to increase the representation of the sample. Alignment with other Cities and
Provinces in South Africa also occurred, through the CHEC–CPUT collaboration network, in relation
to the visitor’s questionnaire, in order to ensure a consistent methodology for the national economic
impact study. The alignment included that with Grant Thornton on behalf of the City of
Johannesburg and in partnership with the University of Johannesburg (host city – Johannesburg);
Tourism KwaZulu-Natal, in partnership with the University of KwaZulu-Natal (host city – Durban); the
University of Pretoria (host city – Tshwane); and Walter Sisulu University (host city – Port Elizabeth).
The key focus of the visitor’s questionnaire was to ascertain visitor spend, consumer behaviour and
perceptions of South Africa and Cape Town as a tourism destination.
Sport questionnaires
The sport questionnaire was designed to ascertain information related to involvement in the 2010
FIFA World Cup™, as well as perceptions and attitudes towards the event, especially in relation to
the sport impacts of the event. The sport questionnaire was also translated into Afrikaans and
isiXhosa, for ease of completion by the respective sport bodies.
18
Economic Impact Fact Sheet
The Economic Impact Fact Sheet consists of four categories, as outlined in the SEIM section above,
namely capital expenditure, operational expenditure, income and injections. It was initially clear that
the model was not designed for such a mega-event as the FIFA World Cup™. The capital expenditure
category, for example, included only three subcategories, while operational expenditure included
many. A revised version was provided by SRSA, drawing on input from their specialists who
developed the model, albeit that the disparities were not thoroughly addressed by SRSA.
Subcategories of expenditure were, therefore, included.
Social (and Sport) Fact Sheet
An overview of the Social (and Sport) Fact Sheet is presented in the SEIM section above. No changes
were made to the Fact Sheet. The data collated included that related to public policy issues;
opportunities for locals, including volunteers; employment and skills development; media coverage;
tourism information; and sport impacts.
Training of fieldworkers and logistical arrangements
2.2.4
All research fieldwork teams (pre-event, during and post-event), as well as all research logistical
arrangements were managed by CHEC, with support and assistance from the CoCT and the members
of the work group. The following table summarises the key research tasks performed from a
logistical perspective.
Table 7: Summary of key research tasks
PRE-EVENT (01 APRIL – 10 JUN)
Workshop with CHEC, SRSA and
CoCT re implementation of SEIM
DURING EVENT (10 JUN – 19 JUL)
Set-up and monitoring of fieldwork
processes and systems
POST-EVENT (20 JUL – NOV)
Data checking Phase 2: CPUT
Preparation of 4 resident preevent surveys (including
Afrikaans and isiXhosa
translations for the PVA surveys)
and implementation, including
training and briefing of
fieldworkers
Preparation of 4 business preevent surveys and
implementation
Preparation of visitor survey and
translation into 8 languages
Training and briefing of fieldworkers
for visitor surveys
Scheduling, debriefing and
management of fieldworkers
Preparation of 4 resident postevent surveys (including Afrikaans
and isiXhosa translations for the
PVA surveys) and implementation,
including training and briefing of
32
fieldworkers
Visitor survey implementation
Development of data capturing
systems (including refining the
aggregator templates)
Data capturing (all residents’ and
business pre-event surveys and
34
visitor’s surveys) and data cleaning
Preparation of 3 business pre33
event surveys and
implementation
Editing of data capturing systems
to suit post-event surveys and
training of data inputters
Liaison with SC and business
stakeholders re online survey
versions
Questionnaire management
procedures and questionnaire
fieldwork quality checking
Sourcing data, collation and
checking of data: Economic Impact
Fact Sheet
Preparation of the Research Hub
Resourcing of the Research Hub
team and fieldworkers drawn
from CHEC universities
Development, testing and
refinement of systems
32
Students were also selected, based on their language skills in all phases of the research.
ACT and the Chamber of Commerce surveys were combined, as the questions that they included were
exactly the same and were administered online, as opposed to those that were asked in the pre-survey.
34
All data captured into an aggregator were required by SRSA. In addition, visitors’ data were also captured
into the SPSS. Refer to data analysis section.
33
19
PRE-EVENT (01 APRIL – 10 JUN)
Training and briefing of research
manager, data managers,
fieldwork manager, field
supervisors and fieldworkers, as
well as data inputters
Reviewing, sourcing data and
updating of Economic Impact
Fact Sheet
Liaison with PGWC and other
stakeholders
DURING EVENT (10 JUN – 19 JUL)
Data quality checking
POST-EVENT (20 JUL – NOV)
Sourcing data, collation and
checking of data: Social (Sport)
Fact Sheet
Calculations for economic spend
Facilitation of post-surveys data
inputting process
Capturing of lessons: fieldwork and
data capturing
Budget management, invoices
and payments
Progress reviews: CoCT and SRSA
Compilation of status reports
Steering Committee meetings
Work group meetings
Checking and alignment of data with
SRSA
Data capturing of all residents’ and
business surveys (including data
cleaning)
Preparation of sport surveys
(including translation into
Afrikaans and isiXhosa) and
implementation
Liaison and workshop with SRSA
and CoCT work group
2 seminars hosted
Research Hub launch with COCT
Media liaison re Research Hub
Data checking Phase 1
Independently done by CoCT SDI &
GIS Team
Closure of Research Hub
Preparation of post-event surveys
Initiation of planning for the
collation of data for the Economic
Impact Fact Sheet by Economic
Work Stream
Initiation of planning for the
collation of data for the Social
(Sport) Impact Fact Sheet by Social
(Sport) Work Stream
Budget management, invoices and
payments
Compilation of status reports
Steering Committee meeting and
debrief
Work group meetings
Data analysis and review
Drafting of reports
Drafting of presentations
Drafting of draft final report
Budget management, invoices and
payments
Compilation of status reports
Steering Committee meetings
Work group meetings
Preparation of draft presentations
and results summary overview
A more detailed overview of capacity building and skills development associated with this project is
presented in Annexure 4.
2.2.5
Data inputting and analysis
The infield data were input into an aggregator template that was set up specifically for each of the
respective surveys. The data were checked twice, and graphs were generated and analysed. The
data for the Economic and Social (and Sport) Fact Sheets were collated and all the data were input
into the SEIM to present the three indices, which were combined to produce the SEPI, as was
discussed in the preceding subsection. The visitor data were also input into the Statistical Package
for the Social Science (SPSS), along with the visitor data for the other host cities.
20
2.3 Research challenges
The following section briefly outlines some of the main research challenges of the study:
Research scope and timing within 2010 FIFA World Cup™ event planning

While comprehensive in scope, the research project was hampered by too short lead times,
which limited and placed pressure on the overall planning and implementation.

The scope of the study was limited to Cape Town. Given the broader impact of the event,
with the team base camps being located in the Eden region of the Western Cape Province, it
would have been valuable to extend the study to this region as well.

The scope of the study was further limited to the event footprint in Cape Town, with some
extension to the Greater Cape Town, largely due to the confines of the available resources.

The study was limited to assessing the short-term impacts of the event, given the timeframe
of the study, and follow-up research is required to assess the longer-term impacts of the
event in the future.

Since no national research agenda existed at the time of the study, Cape Town’s data were
seen in isolation from those obtained from the rest of South Africa.

No worldwide precedent existed for event research of this extent and scope. In addition, it
was the first time that the SEIM was applied to a mega-world event.
Cape Town 2010 research methodology

While an attempt has been made to be as comprehensive as possible in terms of collecting
the data for the Economic Impact and Social (Sport) Fact Sheets, not all the relevant
stakeholders submitted the required information, especially in relation to the injection and
income categories. The responses received from business were also particularly poor,
especially in relation to the details of their turnover and private sector investment for the
event. It is further noted that, although the responses to the sport survey were relatively
low, given that the sport bodies were in the main managed by volunteers, such a response
rate was anticipated.

Despite several attempts being made by means of various methods and sources over an
extended period of time, regretfully no information was forthcoming from either FIFA/OC or
Match.

The multi-year preparation for the event and multi-stakeholder implementation impacted
on obtaining information over a five-year period. Every attempt was made to get as much
information as possible.

The paralleling of CoCT 2010 work streams and implementation plans and timing meant that
there was limited time and opportunity to integrate the data requirements for the model
into the City 2010 operational monitoring and reporting systems. This meant that some of
the required data were not readily available for the research.

A key aspect missing from the current study was a thorough media analysis of the impacts of
the event, especially in terms of the key tourism and investment markets. Several attempts
have been made to propose that such an analysis be conducted and the results analysed,
but little has, in effect, been done in this regard to date.

A limitation of the SEIM, as with many other economic impact models, is the inability to
account for the counterfactual, meaning the impact that would have occurred had
expenditures been diverted to other categories or activities. More specific limitations
associated with the economic impact study are noted in Chapter 3.
21

Given the complexity of mega-event research and the research challenges noted above, the
research results are still valid and reliable, and provide important socio-economic impact
results for and insights regarding the perceptions of various targeted groups of the 2010
FIFA World Cup™ held in Cape Town.
2.4 Knowledge management and transfer
It is acknowledged that knowledge management and transfer is critically important in the future
bidding and planning of mega-events in the developing context. The CoCT secured a Research Hub
for the duration of the World Cup, which served as a base for fieldworkers and data inputters. A
research-oriented, knowledge-, experience- and skills development-focused Seminar Series was
hosted on two days during June 2010 to allow for the sharing of research, for the teaching of good
practice lessons, and for the development of research methods and technologies, with the
assistance of local and international researchers. Annexure 5 presents a summary of this aspect of
the research project. Annexure 4, as mentioned previously, provides an overview of the skills
development aspect of the project, including a list of all the students and academic and CoCT staff
involved in the research, which is also relevant to knowledge transfer. Annexure 6 captures a
summary of all the lessons learned during this research undertaking.
It is further noted that the CHEC and CoCT 2010 research team contributed to an International Sport
and Development Conference – Beyond 2010, which was hosted by the Interdisciplinary Centre for
Excellence for Sport Science and Development (ICESSD) of UWC in September 2010. A 2010 research
workshop proposed by SRSA and a Sport Tourism Events Exchange planned for 2011 are two further
platforms that will be considered as potential opportunities for disseminating the findings of this
research project. It will also be important to share these lessons with Brazil 2014.
22
3 Economic Impacts
In this section, the key findings of the visitor and business surveys are presented as they focus
largely on the economic impacts associated with the event.35
3.1 Key findings – Visitors
Event attendees who were visiting Cape Town to attend the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ from beyond the
boundaries of Cape Town were targeted to respond to the visitor questionnaire. A total of 3 376
visitor responses were obtained over the research period, of whom 3 012 were foreign visitors,
meaning that they were living outside South Africa, and 364 visitors were from within South Africa,
but not living in Cape Town, namely domestic visitors. In addition to profiling a 2010 World Cup™
visitor for Cape Town, the key focus of the study was on ascertaining visitor spend, consumer
behaviour, and perceptions of South Africa and Cape Town as a tourism destination. Use of the term
‘visitor’ or ‘respondent’ includes both foreign and domestic visitors, unless otherwise specified
3.1.1
Visitor profile
Demographic profile
The majority (78%) of visitor respondents, not surprisingly, were
male.36 The average age of the respondents was 33 years. Most of
the respondents were in the younger age group category, with
73.7% being between the ages of 21 and 40 years, followed by
14.4% in the 41- to 50-year-old age category. Most respondents
had high education levels, with 35.5% having postgraduate
degrees, 29.9% having undergraduate degrees, and 20.5% having a
diploma. Most respondents had relatively high levels of disposable
income, with an average monthly net income of R52 919.
Main place of residence
The main place of residence for foreign visitors is presented next.
As per the continental breakdown below, most visitors were from
Europe (50%), Central, South and North America (14% each), and
Africa (11%).
35
As visitor responses are critical in understanding economic impacts, the relevant results are presented first.
The responses of residents and sport organisations, in addition to some visitor and business responses focused
on social impacts, can be found in the social impact section of the current report.
36
Visitor groups were approached using spatially-based systematic sampling, with the man or men in the group
responding.
23
Figure 4: Main place of residence – foreign visitors (in = %)
These results were similar to those in South African Tourism’s (SAT’s) study (SAT, 2010).37 However,
Cape Town attracted more European visitors (with Cape Town attracting 49%, and the percentage
for those in the national study being 24%) and fewer African visitors (with Cape Town attracting 11%
and the percentage for those arriving from other African lands by land or air being 48%). Cape Town,
being the top leisure tourist destination for foreign visitors, was expected to attract more Europeans
than visitors from the rest of Africa. The arrivals for Central and South America (with Cape Town
having 14% and the national study 13%) and North America (with Cape Town having 14% and the
national study 11%) were similar in both studies. The top three countries that were identified as the
main place of residence for foreign visitors to Cape Town for the World Cup were as follows:

England (17%);

USA (12%); and

Germany (8%).
The top three source countries for South Africa during 2010 were the USA (30%), the UK (23%), and
Brazil (15%). While there were similarities in the top three source countries, it is also evident that
the locations where teams played impacted on the source markets on a host city level.
The Western Cape was the main place of residence for most of the domestic visitors (47%), followed
by Gauteng (19%), the Eastern Cape (12%) and KwaZulu-Natal (9%), as is illustrated in Figure 5
below.
37
South African Tourism. 2010. Impact of the 2010 FIFA World Cup. http://www.southafrica.net
24
Figure 5: Main place of residence – domestic visitors (in %)38
Previous attendance at a FIFA World Cup™ and visits to South Africa
The majority (67%) of visitors were first-time attendees at a FIFA World Cup™, proving that 2010
attracted many new World Cup followers to South Africa.39
Figure 6: Attendance at previous World Cups (in %)
The 2010 FIFA World Cup™ also attracted many (79%) first-time visitors to South Africa. Similarly,
albeit that the figure was slightly higher, the SAT study noted that 80% of the visitors had not
38
The following key is provided for the abbreviations of South African provinces in Figure 5 above: EC = Eastern
Cape; FS = Free State; GAU = Gauteng; KZN = KwaZulu-Natal; LIMP = Limpopo; MPU = Mpumalanga; NC
=Northern Cape; NW = North West; WC = Western Cape.
39
The current study includes both domestic and foreign visitors, whereas the SAT study only includes foreign
visitors.
25
attended previous World Cups, while 59% of the visitors were first-time visitors to South Africa, with
the figure concerned being lower than that obtained for the Cape Town study.
Figure 7: Prior visits to South Africa – foreign visitors (in %)
3.1.2
Economic data
Primary reason for visit
For most (88%) visitors, the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ was the primary reason for visiting Cape Town.
Figure 8: Primary reason for visiting Cape Town (in %)
Visitor type
The overwhelming majority (90%) of visitors interviewed were foreign. In addition, most of the
foreign (88%) and domestic visitors (9%) stayed overnight in Cape Town.
26
Figure 9: Type of visitor (in %)
Length of stay in Cape Town
Most (81%) of the visitors stayed in Cape Town for more than five nights, with the average length of
stay in the city being 13 nights. The length of stay was slightly more than the national average of 10
nights (SAT, 2010), which is plausible, as the national average for European visitors was 12 nights
and for African visitors arriving by air and land were 9.3 and 7.3 nights respectively (SAT, 2010).
Figure 10: Nights spent in Cape Town due to World Cup (in %)
Spending patterns in Cape Town
The total spend amount for all (n = 3 505) visitors interviewed in Cape Town and their parties was
just over R98 million.40 The total spend breakdown in Cape Town for all visitors is presented below,
and excludes domestic and international travel spend to South Africa and Cape Town.41
40
All spending was reported in South African currency Rands (R) = ZAR.
The only local transport included was that used for travelling to the Stadium; however, in certain instances
when visitors only gave an overall spend in Cape Town, local transport might have been included.
41
27
Not surprisingly, most of the spend was on accommodation (R19 923 807), which was followed by all
World Cup football game tickets (R14 836 770), food and beverage (R13 105 217) and shopping
(R12 117 049).
The average total spend per person during their stay in Cape Town was R30 264 (including all World
Cup football game tickets, and excluding transport into South Africa). The average total spend per
foreign tourist in South Africa was R11 800 (SAT, 2010). The difference in amounts could be
explained by the differences in detail requested in the two studies and by the inclusion of World Cup
tickets in the study,42 as well as the possible differences in profile of visitors to Cape Town (greater
spend) in comparison with that of other host cities that was captured by the SAT national study.
Shopping, accommodation, and food and beverage were the main categories listed in relation to
visitor spend in the national study conducted by SAT (2010).
Figure 11: Total spend breakdown per category (in Rands)
42
The inclusion of World Cup ticket spend was a requirement of the national economic impact study
mentioned previously.
28
Visitor group size in relation to spend
It is noted that the visitor group size refers to the number of visitors spending money together as an
immediate group unit, which is information required from an economic perspective. Most (64%)
visitors indicated that they only spent money on themselves, followed by 29%, who indicated that,
as a group, they were spending on two to four persons. A minority, 5% and 2%, as a group spent on
between 5 and 10 people, and more than 10 people, respectively.
Figure 12: Number of people in visitor’s immediate group spending money together (in %)
3.1.3
Tourism
Previous visits and tourism awareness
The majority (79%) of visitors were first-time visitors to Cape Town. Almost 70% of the visitors
indicated that they were more aware of other destinations in South Africa as a result of attending
the World Cup. Furthermore, 50% of the respondents indicated that they were more aware of
destinations in the rest of Africa because of visiting the event.
Main activities participated in while in Cape Town
The main activities in which visitors said that they intended to participate during their stay are
presented in Figure 13 below. Nightlife and food/wine (13% each) and shopping and nature
attractions (12% each) were mentioned as the main activities in which the visitors intended to
participate, besides watching the 2010 FIFA World Cup™. Wildlife (9%), cultural (8%), beach (7%),
and adventure (6%) activities were also indicated. Shopping and nightlife were also two of the most
common activities in which tourists engaged, as was cited in the SAT 2010 study.
29
Figure 13: Main activities in which intended to participate during visit to Cape Town (in %)43
Main sources of information on destination used prior to visit
The main sources of information on the destination used prior to visiting Cape Town were the
following: the Internet (34%), television (19%), travel guides (11%), and friends (9%).
Perceptions and general impressions noted by tourists visiting Cape Town for 2010
Data relating to the perceptions and general impressions of visitors to Cape Town for 2010 are
presented in tables 8 and 9 below. Visitors generally had positive perceptions of the event, as well as
of Cape Town as a tourism destination. In terms of awareness of tourism facilities, the 28% who
noted that they were neutral about, or that they disagreed with the statement given them, as is
reflected in Table 8 below, represents an opportunity that becomes available before, during and
after an event for making more information around tourism facilities accessible.
Table 8: Perceptions of the event and of Cape Town as a tourism destination (in %)
Statement
I am satisfied with how this event is organised. (n = 3 288)
I am satisfied with the level of service I received during this event.
(n = 3 347)
I am more aware of tourism facilities in Cape Town due to attending
this event. (n = 3 331)
43
Agree
84
84
Neutral
12
13
Disagree
4
3
72
22
6
Attending of sport events referred to events other than 2010 and sports in which competed referred to other
sport events in which the respondents competed while in Cape Town.
30
General impressions of tourism services are presented in Table 9 below. Cape Town services faired
very well on friendliness (92%), helpfulness (87%), and entertainment (82%). Although still positive,
visitor perceptions were slightly less positive with respect to value for money and personal safety
(67% each) and transport (63%).
Table 9: Impression of tourism services in Cape Town (in %)
Attribute
Friendliness (n = 3 346)
Helpfulness (n = 3 342)
Entertainment (n = 3 274)
Cleanliness (n = 3 329)
Banking (n = 3 200)
Value for money (n = 3 287)
Personal safety (n = 3 337)
Transport (n = 3 317)
Good
92
87
82
76
68
67
67
63
Fair
7
12
17
22
29
28
30
31
Poor
1
1
1
2
3
5
3
6
It should be noted that general perceptions of visitors with regard to the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ are
presented in the next chapter on social impacts, along with the perceptions of other targeted
groups.
Responsible tourism
Cape Town was rated relatively well with respect to responsible tourism (with 74% rating it good).
Just over half (51%) of the visitors noted that they were informed of responsible tourism tips.
Locations where tips were cited are presented below. Main locations included places of
accommodation (33%), followed by tourism attractions (18%), and tourism information centres
(17%). The Fan Park (14%) and Cape Town Stadium (10%) also featured, albeit with slightly less
sightings.
Figure 14: Locations of sighting responsible tourism tips (in %)
Of those who sighted the tips, the main tips that were recalled are presented below. The most
commonly seen tips included disposing of rubbish carefully (78%), using water sparingly (75%),
interacting with locals (74%), and using electricity efficiently (73%). Encouragingly close to two-thirds
31
of those who did recall seeing responsible tourism tips saw tips encouraging the use of local services
and products. Donating to local charities is an opportunity that could be explored in the hosting of
future events in Cape Town.
Table 10: Responsible tourism tips recalled (in %)
Responsible tourism tip
Dispose of rubbish carefully (n = 1 550)
Use water sparingly (n = 1 545)
Interact with locals (n = 1 572)
Use electricity efficiently (n = 1 568)
Make use of public transport (n = 1 528)
Use establishments that make use of local services and products (n = 1 526)
Donate to local charities (n = 1 522)
Yes
78
75
74
73
70
65
54
No
22
25
26
27
30
35
46
Green Goal
Some (42%) visitors indicated that environmental considerations were important in their choice of
accommodation, while 24% noted that they were unimportant, and a further 34% noted a neutral
response, as can be seen in Figure 13 below. This indicates the growing importance of
environmental issues in regard to events and in regard to events and tourism destinations.
Figure 15: Importance of environmental considerations in accommodation choice (in %)
Visitors indicated that they separated their wet and dry waste without exception (14%), almost
always, and sometimes (31% each). Very few (12%) noted that they seldom separated their wet and
dry waste, with a further 12% indicating that they never separated their waste.
32
Transport
Not surprisingly, most visitors arrived in Cape Town by air (78%), followed by car and bus (6% each).
In terms of the main port of entry for visitors, 50% noted Cape Town, followed by Johannesburg
(48%), Durban, and other (1% each). The high prevalence of Cape Town as a port of entry was
influenced by the direct flights to Cape Town that were provided for South American visitors. The
main modes of transport used to get to matches and the Fan Fest are presented in Figure 16 below.
Walking (35%) was the most popular mode of transport, followed by taxi (20%), and then by rental
cars and bus/BRT (15% each).
Figure 16: Main mode of transport used to get to matches / fan parks (in %)44
Recommendations and future visits to Cape Town
The majority (89%) of visitors indicated that they would definitely advise friends and relatives to visit
Cape Town, as is shown in Figure 17 below. Such a finding was very positive for Cape Town, as word
of mouth is the most powerful form of reference for a destination.45 The results were found to be
similar to those in of the SAT 2010 study, as nearly all the tourists surveyed said that they would
recommend South Africa as a tourism destination to their friends and relatives.
Some (28%) of the visitors also indicated that they were likely to visit Cape Town in the next 12
months, with 23% indicating that they would possibly do so, and 49% saying that they were unlikely
to make the trip.
44
Some respondents noted multiple responses.
George, R. 2008. Marketing tourism in South Africa. 3rd ed. Cape Town: Oxford.
45
33
Figure 17: Would advise friends, relatives or colleagues to visit Cape Town (in %)
3.2 Key findings – Business
As mentioned previously, the purpose of the business survey was to elicit information on business
engagement and preparation in relation to the 2010 FIFA World Cup™, as well as perceptions and
expectations of the event. In all, 128 businesses participated in the pre-event survey, with 135
participating in the post-event survey. Businesses were targeted via a range of business
organisations, including the Chamber of Commerce, ACT and CTT, in addition to direct surveying of
businesses in the Green Point precinct. Note that where no response is reflected in tables 11 to 17
below, the question was not asked of the target group.
3.2.1
Business profile
A brief profile of the business respondents to the pre- and post-event surveys is presented below.
Summary findings are presented in the tables and, where appropriate, an initial comment or
observation is made on the findings in the table that follows.
Table 11: Business survey respondent profile pre- and post-2010 (in %)
Business Profile
46
Type of business (sector)
Type of business (size)
46
47
Pre-Event
(n = 72) tourism (35%); other
(26%); financial business services
(13%); wholesale/retail (10%);
manufacturing (7%); commercial
(4%); legal (4%); oil & gas (1%)
(n = 115) micro/informal (20%);
small (22%); medium (27%); large
(30%); other (1%)
Post-Event
(n = 134) trade, catering &
accommodation (53%); transport,
storage & communication (16%);
community, social & personal service
(15%); financial intermediation,
insurance, real estate & business
services (6%); agriculture, forestry &
fishing (4%); construction (3%);
manufacturing (3%)
(n = 133) micro/informal (17%); small
(29%); medium (45%); large (4%);
public (3%); other (2%)
Business classifications used previously by the City was used for the pre-survey. In the post-survey, business
type was aligned with standard industrial classification codes.
47
The difference in the number of large businesses participating was impacted on by the greater response rate
of large businesses in the pre-survey in comparison with their rate in the post-survey.
34
Business engagement in 2010
A summary of the main types of business engagement in 2010 is presented in Table 12 below.
Table 12: Business profile pre- and post-2010 (in %)
Type of Engagement in 2010
Attendance (multiple responses)
Main advertising media used
specifically for 2010
Attendance (multiple responses)
Main advertising media used
specifically for 2010
Pre Event
(n = 64) 72% of employees
attending
(n=47) 28% going as official
representatives
(n=57) 53% attendance at Fan
Parks
Post Event
(n=135) 70% of employees attended
(n=120) 23% attended in official
capacity
(n=134) 72% attendance at Fan Parks
(n=164, multiple responses)
26% none
Comment: highest and possibly
related to strict FIFA advertising
regulations
23% Internet
16% flyers
13% other
Employees (n = 64; 72%)
Official representatives (n = 47;
28%)
Fan Parks (n = 57; 53%)
(n=159, multiple responses)
45% none
Comment: highest and increase post
event
Multiple responses (n = 164)
None (26%)
Comment: Highest and
possibly related to strict FIFA
advertising regulations,
Internet 23%; flyers 16%; other
13%
Multiple responses (n = 159)
None (45%)
Comment: Highest and increased
post-event, Internet 20%; flyers 17%
flyers; other 8%
Comment: Fan Park attendance increased
considerably in relation to pre-event
figure
20% Internet
17% flyers
8% other
Employees (n = 135; 70%)
Official capacity (n = 120; 23%)
Fan Parks (n = 134; 72%)
Comment: Considerable increase in Fan
Park attendance in relation to pre-event
figure
Staffing at 2010
A summary of staffing by business respondents for 2010 is presented in Table 13 below.
Table 13: Business respondents to staffing for 2010 pre- and post-2010 (in %)
Type of staffing activity
Additional business training
received
Staff attended any City support
events
Changing delivery of goods and/or
services to cater for tourists
Opening/opened other branches
Plan to employ more people/
employed more people
During 2010 will/did your business
be offering / offer other services to
the ones it currently offers
Pre-Event
No (n = 128; 80%)
Yes (n = 124; 30%)
No (n = 125; 72%)
No (n = 125; 93%)
No (n = 128; 75%)
Yes (25%, of which 80% 1–10 staff;
10% 20–30 persons; 10% more than
50 persons, with job opportunities
77% temporary; 18% part-time; 5%
full-time)
No (n = 128; 90%)
Post-Event
No (n = 135; 85%)
Comment: Slight increase
Yes (n = 134; 14%)
Comment: Reduction
No (n = 135; 83%)
Comment: Slight increase
No (n = 135; 97%)
No (n = 134; 76%)
Yes (24%, of which 95% 1–10
staff; 5% 10–20 persons, with
job opportunities 44%
temporary; 32% part-time; 24%
full-time)
No (n=134; 93%)
35
Business preparation for 2010
A summary of business preparation for 2010, as indicated by respondents to the business surveys, is
presented in Table 14 below.
Table 14: Business preparation pre- and post-2010 (in %)
Type of business preparation
Approach made by international
corporations to business to form
partnership(s)
Impact of construction on business
Pre-Event
Yes (n = 124; 15%)
Post-Event
Yes (n = 135; 10%)
No (n = 125; 67%)
Direct investment made by company in
48
Cape Town as a result of 2010
Yes (n = 61; 10%)
Noting of the estimated Rand
value OPEX less than 1 million
and more than a million, and
of CAPEX less than a million
and more than 50 million
respectively by two
respondents
Yes (n = 122; 33%)
No (n = 135; 71%)
Comment: Slight increase
Yes (n = 134; 6%)
Of the above, spending on
CAPEX alone, though amounts
unspecified
Improvement of security systems by
business for 2010
Positive or negative for business to have
stadium in Cape Town
Positive (n = 98; 91%)
Yes (n = 133; 8%)
Comment: Considerable
reduction
Positive (n = 132; 89%)
Business perceptions and impacts of 2010
A selection of the main business perceptions and impacts of 2010 is summarised in Table 15 below.
Table 15: Business perceptions and impacts pre- and post-2010 (in %)
Statement
Impact of global economic recession
on the World Cup
Pre-Event
Yes (n = 114; 73%)
Higher incidence of crime during the
World Cup
Yes (n = 124; 67%)
Business impacted negatively or
positively
Securing of future deal(s) from the
World Cup
Increase in company turnover due to
49
2010
Yes (n = 110; 85%)
Positive impacts
–
Problems foreseen / experienced
during 2010
Yes (n = 122; 52%)
Interest in using Stadium after World
Cup, for what type of event(s)
Yes (n = 123; 27%)
48
–
Post-Event
Yes (n = 134; 44%)
Comment: Fewer impacts post2010
Yes (n = 131; 10%)
Very few business experienced
crime during the event.
Yes (n = 130; 88%),
Positive impacts
Yes (n = 134; 6%)
Yes (n = 127; 58%, of which n =
56, with 98% 0–50%; 2% more
than 100%)
Yes (n = 133; 14%)
Comment: Significant drop post2010
No (n = 134; 13%)
Comment: Less interest by
business post-2010
Private sector economic data were required for the Economic Fact Sheet. However, as is noted in section
6.1.1, the data were limited, as the respondents were reluctant to provide the required information, so that it
was excluded from the SEIM Economic Fact Sheet.
49
The increase in company turnover might have been as the result of more small and medium-size businesses
participating in the post-survey in comparison with the pre-survey.
36
Statement
Assisted with improvement and
development of infrastructure in area
where business located
Awareness of Green Goal programme
50
by CoCT
Pre-Event
Yes (n = 29, of which
45% corporate events; 45%
conferences; 10% other)
Post-Event
Yes (n = 20, of which
40% for events; 20% conference;
15% corporate events; 25%
other)
Yes (n = 123; 81%)
Yes (n = 132; 85%)
Comment: More positive post2010
Yes (n = 103; 40%)
–
Business awareness of regulations regarding 2010
Business awareness of the regulations regarding 2010 is presented in Table 16 below.
Table 16: Business awareness of regulations regarding 2010 pre- and post-2010 (in %)
Statement
Plan to market products close to
Stadium
Familiarity with regulations regarding
2010
Familiarity with regulations concerning
parking /use of vehicles
Familiarity with regulations concerning
marketing products close to Stadium
Familiarity with regulations concerning
sale of products/services
Familiarity with regulations concerning
construction/renovations
Familiarity with regulations concerning
safety & security
Familiarity with regulations concerning
entertainment activities
By whom made aware of regulations
Pre-Event
No (n = 122; 82%)
Post-Event
No (n = 130; 81%)
–
Yes (n = 132; 74%)
Yes (n = 122; 54%)
Yes (n = 132; 74%)
Yes (n = 63; 63%)
Yes (n = 134; 66%)
Yes (n = 110; 52%)
Yes (n = 102; 72%)
Yes (n = 122; 43%)
Yes (n = 133; 52%)
Yes (n = 113; 48%)
Yes (n = 133; 53%)
Yes (n = 111; 45%)
Yes (n = 133; 54%)
Multiple responses (n = 136, of
which 44% media; 27% business
organisations; 18% city officials;
11% other)
Multiple responses (n = 150, of
which 69% media; 17% city
officials; 7% business
organisations; 7% other)
Responsible tourism
Perceptions regarding responsible tourism by tourism businesses are summarised in Table 17 below.
The questions were only posed to tourism businesses. Of businesses (n = 128) that participated in
the pre-event survey 19% were tourism businesses, while 39% of the businesses (n = 135)
participated in the post-event survey.
50
This question was not included in the business pre-survey in particular. A range of responsible tourism
questions were asked, given the focus on such an issue by the CoCT and CTT. However, very few tourism
businesses participated in the pre-survey (see section 3.1.2.6).
37
Table 17: Perceptions of responsible tourism by tourism business pre- and post-2010 (in %)
Statement
Promotion of responsible tourism
practices (if yes, specific practices are
listed below)
Procure local services
Use water sparingly
Use electricity efficiently
Dispose of rubbish carefully
Provide visitors with responsible
tourism tip
Participate in social responsibility
programmes
Aware of CoCT’s responsible tourism
campaign
Contribution of World Cup to initiation
of more responsible tourism practice
From whom learned about
51
responsible tourism
3.2.2
Pre-Event
Yes (n = 20; 55%)
Post-Event
Yes (n = 73; 41%)
Yes (n = 11; 100%)
Yes (n = 11; 100%)
Yes (n = 11; 100%)
Yes (n = 11; 91%)
Yes (n = 10; 80%)
Yes (n = 49; 92%)
Yes (n = 50; 94%)
Yes (n = 50; 94%)
Yes (n = 50; 96%)
Yes (n = 49; 84%)
Yes (n = 11; 91%)
Yes (n = 48; 73%)
Yes (n = 33; 48%)
Yes (n = 71; 37%)
Yes (n = 12; 33%)
Yes (n = 66; 14%)
–
Multiple responses (n = 74, of
which 32% print media; 28% CTT;
14% electronic media; 12%
meetings/workshops; 9% other;
5% CoCT)
Concluding remarks – Economic impacts
In this section, key findings with respect to visitors
and businesses are presented and primarily focused
on economic aspects.
Most visitors to the event in Cape Town were
foreigners who had never before attended a World
Cup and who had never before visited either South
Africa or Cape Town before attending the event. The
2010 FIFA World Cup™ was the primary reason for
visiting that was given by the majority of the visitors.
The visitors spent a considerable time in Cape Town
and spent primarily on accommodation, tickets, food and beverages, and shopping.
The 2010 FIFA World Cup™ appeared to be an ideal platform to leverage tourism to the destination,
as not only were many visitors first-time visitors, but they were also more aware of other tourism
destinations in South Africa and Africa as a result of attending the event. Moreover, they also
participated in a range of tourist activities in addition to the World Cup. Nightlife, food/wine,
shopping, and nature attractions were mentioned as the main non-soccer-related activities in which
the visitors participated. Visitors also had generally positive perceptions of the event and of Cape
Town as a tourist destination, and generated, and will continue to generate, significant word-ofmouth advertising among other visitors.
Cape Town’s positioning as a responsible tourism destination achieved positive outcomes with the
majority of visitors rating it relatively well in this regard. Some successes were noted with respect to
raising awareness regarding Green Goal initiatives; however, more could still be done in this regard
for future events. Such a finding was also apparent in the business responses received, with less than
51
This question was not answered by tourism businesses in the pre-survey.
38
half of the businesses indicating familiarity with the City’s Green Goal programmes and almost half
of the tourism businesses expressing familiarity with CoCT’s responsible tourism campaign.
Walking appeared to be the most popular means of transport to get to matches and the Fan Fest,
thus indicating the success of the Fan Walk.
Businesses noted relatively high levels of involvement in
the event in terms of attendance, although many did not
leverage advertising spend as a result of the World Cup,
probably due to the strict FIFA advertising regulations.
Businesses were also more informed about the
regulations as a result of the media and their own
organisations, as opposed to as a result of City efforts
made prior to the event. Businesses did not generally
prepare themselves specifically to cater for the influx of
World Cup visitors (and the related services required), with only a few indicating that they employed
more staff during the period. Few businesses also made direct investments as a result of 2010, which
could possibly be due to the timing and impact of the economic recession. Despite this, businesses
generally viewed the World Cup as positive, and more than half of the businesses indicated that
their turnover increased due to the event, albeit from a low base.
39
4. Social Impacts
The present section of this report includes a range of responses from the targeted groups, namely
the residents, business, visitors, and sport organisations, with respect to the social impacts of the
2010 FIFA World Cup™. Aspects covered included awareness and involvement in the World Cup and
perceptions and attitudes towards the event. Moreover, the section includes pre-event and postevent comparisons for the residents and business responses.
4.1
Key findings – Residents
Residents located in the Green Point precinct, the
four PVA precincts, the inner city, and the
broader Cape Town area were interviewed preand post-2010 to track perception changes
concerning a range of aspects associated with
hosting the event. A total of 3 063 residents
participated in the surveys (1 748 prior to the
event and 1 315 after the event). A description of
the demographic profile of resident respondents
and a comparison of the resident’s survey
responses pre- and post-2010 are presented
below. Summary findings are presented in tables, and, where appropriate, an initial comment or
observation is made on the findings in the tables that follow.
4.1.1
Demographic profile
In both surveys, the majority of the respondents were aged 40 and below. The average age of
respondents was 36 years (pre-event) and 35 years (post-event). Most respondents in the pre-event
survey were men (62%), whereas the post-survey respondents were more mixed, with 56% being
men. For both surveys, most (46% pre-event and 47% post-event) respondents were single.
Similarly, the overwhelming majority (94% pre-event and 96% post-event) of the respondents were
South African citizens. The ethnic grouping of respondents was similar for both surveys, with
Coloured people (52% pre-event and 43% post-event), and African people (30% for both surveys)
dominating, followed by White people (13% pre-event and 20% post-event) and Indian people (3%
pre-event and 4% post-event).
In terms of education level, in the pre-event survey 57% of the respondents had completed their
secondary education or a certificate52, and 25% had an undergraduate or postgraduate degree, with
48% having completed their secondary education or a certificate and 31% having an undergraduate
or postgraduate degree in the post-event survey.
The main employment status of the respondents in the pre-event survey and in the post-event
survey were professional/skilled (32% pre-event and 37% post-event), unemployed (29% pre-event
and 17% post-event), and students (12% pre-event and 19% post-event). The presence of a greater
number of students according to the pre-event survey was possibly due to the survey being
52
The term ‘certificate’ refers to a post-school certificate.
40
conducted during the university holiday period. The average number of people in the respondents’
households was three people (both pre-event and post-event). In terms of monthly individual
income, the majority (53% pre-event and 54% post-event) of the respondents in the pre-event and
post-event survey indicated that they earned less than R10 000 per month. The average monthly
individual income was R9 661 and R10 414 per month, pre- and post-event respectively.
4.1.2
Involvement and awareness
A comparison of involvement in, and awareness of, the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ by residents pre- and
post-event is summarised in Table 18 below.
Table 18: Residents' pre- and post-event involvement in, and awareness of, 2010 (in %)
Involvement and awareness of 2010
Awareness of legacy-related projects
Pre-Event (n = 1 748)
No (n = 1 190; 71%)
Main media used to inform about the World
Cup
Multiple responses (n = 2 785,
of which 38% television; 17%
newspaper; 14% radio)
Will you be or are/were you involved in
2010? If yes, how will you be / were you
involved?
Yes (n = 633; 12%; of which
12% (n = 78) as ticket-holder;
37% (n = 1 092) as spectator at
Fan Park; 32% (n = 1 065)
spectator at a PVA
Fewer residents indicated
involvement in volunteering
(n = 1 312; 13%), direct
employment (n = 1 291; 7%),
and income-generating
opportunities linked to the
event (n = 1282; 7%)
Post-Event (n = 1 315)
No (n = 1 299; 72%)
Comment: Similar limited
awareness
Multiple responses
(n = 3 066; of which 41%
television; 15% newspaper;
15% radio)
Comment: Similar media
used pre- and post-event)
More respondents noted
involvement post-2010
(n = 1 259; 29%)
Similarly, indication of
involvement as ticket-holder
(16%; n = 204)
Increase in involvement as
spectator at a Fan Park to
58% (n = 1 195) and
spectator at a PVA increased
to 41% (n=1226)
Similar results were found
post-2010, with 12%
volunteering (n=1101), 7%
directly employed (n=1087)
and a slight increase in
involvement in incomegenerating opportunities
linked to the event ,13%
(n=1121)
41
4.1.3
Perceptions of 2010
A comparison of residents’ perceptions pre- and post-2010 is presented in tables 19 to 25 below.53
Table 19: Residents' pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 readiness to host (in %)
Readiness to host
Agree
I am confident that this event will be /
was hosted successfully. (n = 1 193;
n = 1 315)
Hosting of the event will achieve /
achieved a legacy for South Africa.
(n = 119; n = 1290)
Pre-Event
Neutral
Disagree
Agree
Post-Event
Neutral
Disagree
87
9
4
95
3
2
85
11
4
88
10
2
Residents were generally positive about South Africa’s readiness to host, and were even more
positive post-2010. Confidence in South Africa’s ability to host increased from 87% to 95% post2010. The hosting of the event was also viewed as achieving a legacy for South Africa by the majority
(85% pre- and 88% post-2010) of residents.
Table 20: Residents' pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 use of public funds (in %)
Use of public funds
Use of public funds in support of this
event is/was acceptable. (n = 1 204;
n = 1 316)
Too much money is being / was spent
on 2010 that could have been spent on
other activities. (n = 1 190; n = 1 315)
Agree
64
64
Pre-Event
Neutral
Disagree
21
15
19
17
Agree
65
63
Post-Event
Neutral
Disagree
22
13
22
15
Residents were slightly less positive about the use of public funds after the event, albeit that similar
responses were expressed both pre- and post-2010. Of the residents, 64% agreed pre-2010 that the
use of public funds was acceptable, with 65% agreeing post-event and 64% agreeing pre-event that
too much money was being spent on 2010 that could have been spent on other activities, with 63%
agreeing post-2010.
Table 21: Residents' pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 infrastructural development (in %)
Infrastructural development
Infrastructural development has taken
place mainly near the stadiums
(n=1201; n=1309)
Facilities created for event can be used
in long-term by residents (n=1202;
n=1319)
Usage of stadia post-2010 and cost of
maintenance will pose challenges
54
(n=998)
Agree
72
77
Pre-Event
Neutral
Disagree
15
13
15
8
Agree
72
Post-Event
Neutral
Disagree
14
14
80
13
7
73
20
7
Most residents agreed that the infrastructural development had taken place mainly near the stadia
(72% each pre- and post-event), but also had more positive perceptions post-2010 regarding the
53
In the tables providing perception data, the first n value refers to the number of responses in the pre-event
survey, while the second n value refers to the post-event.
54
This question was added to the post-event survey; hence no comparative data for the pre-survey.
42
long-term use of the facilities by residents (with 77% pre-event and 80% post-event). However, they
also recognised that post-2010 usage of the stadia and the cost of maintenance would pose a
challenge (to which 73% agreed in the post-survey).
Table 22: Residents' pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 economic impacts (in %)
Economic impacts
FIFA World Cup will only benefit /
benefited the rich and big business.
(n = 1 201; n = 1 313)
Hosting of event ensures/d employment
opportunities for local community
members. (n = 1 199; n = 1 294)
Hosting of event ensures/d extended
shopping hours. (n = 1 198; n = 1 293)
Prices of goods will increase / increased
due to event. (n = 1 182; n = 1 285)
Agree
65
Pre-Event
Neutral
Disagree
16
9
Agree
58
Post-Event
Neutral Disagree
21
21
60
20
20
67
18
15
77
17
6
74
18
8
81
13
6
74
17
9
Fewer residents after the event felt that only the rich and big businesses would benefit from 2010
(65% pre-event and 58% post-event). More residents after the event perceived the event as
ensuring employment opportunities for locals (60% pre-event and 67% post-event), which was
regarded as being indicative of the ‘feel-good’ effect of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™. In addition,
fewer residents after the event felt that the prices of goods had increased during the event (81%
pre-event to 74% post-event).
Table 23: Residents' pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 social impacts (in %)
Social impacts
2010 will be / was a major boost for
nation-building. (n = 1 184; n = 1 242)
I feel proud that this event is/was
hosted in my area. (n = 1 192; n = 1 291)
I feel proud that South Africa is hosting
/ hosted the 2010 FIFA World Cup.
(n = 1 195; n = 1 297)
It is/was important that Bafana Bafana
wins/won matches in the World Cup.
(n = 1 202; n = 1 296)
I feel more part of the African continent
as a result of this event. (n = 1 200;
n = 1 299)
2010 will increase / increased social
inequalities. (n = 1 200; n = 1 288)
Increase in crime is/was experienced
due to 2010. (n = 1 195; n = 1 286)
Extensive alcohol abuse by persons
attending the event will lead / led to
spectator hooliganism. (n = 1 193;
n = 1 288)
Entertainment opportunities related to
the event will be / were provided for
locals. (n = 1 198; n = 1 291)
This event will divide / divided cultural
groups. (n = 1 196; n = 909)
Agree
80
Pre-Event
Neutral
Disagree
13
7
Agree
50
Post-Event
Neutral
Disagree
31
19
84
12
4
85
9
6
90
8
2
89
8
3
78
14
8
79
15
6
70
19
11
74
17
9
53
27
20
49
31
29
69
16
15
30
22
48
67
18
15
32
26
42
63
23
14
57
21
21
34
21
45
28
22
50
43
Social impacts
World Cup causes/d traffic congestion
55
in the local area. (n = 519; n = 1 292)
This event will lead / led to excessive
noise that will annoy / annoyed local
residents. (n = 662; n = 1 281)
An increase in vandalism will be / was
experienced. (n = 659; n = 1 289)
Agree
71
Pre-Event
Neutral
Disagree
17
12
Agree
59
Post-Event
Neutral
Disagree
23
18
45
21
34
47
22
31
38
23
39
24
25
51
Residents were generally very proud that South Africa hosted the event (90% pre-event and 89%
post-event), and that it was hosted in their area (84% pre-event and 85% post-event). The very high
levels of nation-building perceived prior to the event were significantly reduced post-2010, with the
level of agreement decreasing from 80% pre-event to 50% post-event. Such a decrease points to the
fact that the effects of mega-events on nation-building are not long-lasting and are impacted by
issues of the day. After the event, public sector strikes occurred and rumours of xenophobic violence
also attracted much negative media coverage.
There was a slight increase in the percentage of residents who stated that they felt more part of the
African continent after the event, with increases in agreement improving from 70% pre-event to
74% post-event. Such an improvement was possibly the result of the support that Ghana and other
African countries received from residents once South Africa had been eliminated from the event.
Residents tended to be more divided as to whether the event increased social inequities pre-event,
with 53% agreeing, 27% being neutral and 20% disagreeing, with slightly less agreement being found
post-2010, with 49% agreeing, 31% being neutral, and 29% disagreeing.
A significant decrease in perceptions of crime due to the event was experienced post-event, from
69% pre-event to 30% post-event. Similarly, there was a decrease (from 67% to 32%) in perceptions
that extensive alcohol abuse by persons attending the event would lead to spectator hooliganism.
There was even less (38% to 24%) agreement post-2010 that an increase in vandalism would be
experienced due to the event, albeit the increase took place off a lower base. The negative impact of
traffic congestion was also less post-2010, with 71% agreeing pre-2010 to 59% agreeing post-2010.
Table 24: Residents' pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 regional showcase (in %)
Regional showcase
2010 will showcase / showcased South
Africa in a positive light. (n = 1 193;
n = 1 296)
Crime will showcase / showcased South
Africa in a negative light. (n = 1 189;
n = 1 290)
2010 will be / was a major boost for
tourism in the city/province. (n = 654;
n = 904)
Agree
84
Pre-Event
Neutral
Disagree
12
4
Agree
87
Post-Event
Neutral
Disagree
9
4
66
17
7
49
20
31
76
16
8
78
14
8
The residents were generally positive that 2010 provided an opportunity for South Africa to be
showcased in a positive light, with 84% agreeing pre-2010 and 87% agreeing post-2010. Similar to
the decreased negative impact of crime on the event noted previously, respondents also perceived a
55
The answer obtained to this statement was impacted by the non-inclusion of the question in many of the
PVA surveys through technical oversight, with the number being 519 in the pre-survey.
44
decrease in their responses with respect to crime showcasing South Africa in a negative light, with
those in agreement being 66% pre-event to those in agreement being 49% post-event. Most
residents (76% pre-event, with a slight increase to 78% post-event) also agreed that 2010 was a
major boost for tourism.
Table 25: Residents' pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 environmental impacts (in %)
Environmental impacts
Environment is/was degraded due to the
World Cup. (n = 1 199; n = 1 298)
Hosting of event will increase / increased
air pollution. (n = 1 201; n = 1 294)
Hosting of event will lead / led to
significant production of waste.
(n = 1 202; n = 1 295)
Agree
42
Pre-Event
Neutral
Disagree
23
35
Agree
38
Post-Event
Neutral
Disagree
25
37
52
22
26
36
30
34
43
24
33
47
28
25
The residents expressed relatively mixed responses with respect to the environmental impacts of the
event. Prior to the event, 42% of them indicated that the environment was degraded due to the
event and slightly fewer (38%) indicated likewise post-2010. Perceptions of the impact of air
pollution were much less post-2010 than they had been pre-2010, decreasing from 52% to 36%.
Slightly more (increasing from 43% pre-event to 47% post-event) residents agreed post-event that
the hosting of the event would lead to significant production of waste.
Residents also shared their perceptions on the sport impacts of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™.
Reference should be made to the sport impact section 5.1 for a pre- and post-2010 comparison in
this respect.
4.1.4
Perceptions regarding a future Olympic Games
The majority (85%) of residents (n = 1089) agreed that South Africa should bid for the Olympic
Games in the future.
4.2 Key findings – Business
As the profile of businesses that participated in the survey was presented in section 3.2.1 above,
along with aspects relating to the economic impact of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™, this section of
Chapter 4 deals only with the social impacts of the World Cup as perceived by businesses.
4.2.1
Perceptions of 2010
A comparison of business perceptions pre- and post-2010 is presented in tables 26 to 32 below.
Table 26: Business pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 readiness to host (in %)
Readiness to host
I am confident that this event will be /
was hosted successfully. (n = 126; n =
135)
Hosting of the event will achieve /
achieved a legacy for South Africa.
(n = 126; n = 129)
Agree
76
73
Pre-Event
Neutral
Disagree
18
6
21
6
Agree
98
95
Post-Event
Neutral
Disagree
2
0
4
1
45
Businesses were generally more positive post-2010, with confidence in South Africa’s ability to host
the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ being expressed as an agreement with the relevant statement increasing
from 76% pre-event to 98% post-event. The hosting of the event was also viewed as achieving a
legacy for South Africa by the overwhelming majority of businesses that responded post-event, with
the percentages increasing from 73% pre-event to 95% post-event.
Table 27: Business pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 use of public funds (in %)
Use of public funds
Use of public funds in support of this
event is/was acceptable. (n = 124;
n = 135)
Too much money is being / was spent
on 2010 that could be / have been
spent on other activities. (n = 125; n =
135)
Agree
53
47
Pre-Event
Neutral
Disagree
24
23
24
29
Agree
47
48
Post-Event
Neutral
Disagree
24
29
33
19
Business, in common with the residents, was slightly less positive about the use of public funds.
There was slightly less agreement that the use of public funds was acceptable post-2010, with 53%
agreeing pre-event and 47% agreeing post-event. Similar responses regarding agreement that overexpenditure had occurred on 2010 of funds that could have been spent on other activities were
expressed, with 47% agreeing with the related statement pre-event and 48% post-event.
Table 28: Business pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 infrastructural development (in %)
Infrastructural development
Infrastructural development has taken
place mainly near the stadia. (n = 56;
n = 134)
Facilities created for event can be used
in long term by residents. (n = 55;
n = 135)
Agree
48
62
Pre-Event
Neutral
Disagree
16
36
25
13
Agree
81
68
Post-Event
Neutral
Disagree
13
6
19
13
A significant change in perception occurred post-2010 amongst businesses, with 81% of businesses
agreeing that the infrastructural development had taken place mainly near the Stadium, in
comparison with 48% agreeing with the statement prior to the event. Businesses had slightly more
positive (62% pre-event and 68% post-event) perceptions post-2010 concerning the long-term use of
the facilities in question than did the residents.
Table 29: Business pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 economic impacts (in %)
Economic impacts
Hosting of event ensures/d
employment opportunities for local
community members. (n = 124; n = 132)
Hosting of event leads / led to increased
spending in the local area. (n = 125;
n = 135)
Hosting of event ensures/d extended
shopping hours. (n = 124; n = 135)
Prices of goods will increase / increased
due to event. (n = 109; n = 135)
BEE* will improve / improved due to
the event. (n = 126; n = 135)
Agree
61
Pre-Event
Neutral
Disagree
23
16
Agree
57
Post-Event
Neutral
Disagree
32
11
66
21
13
64
25
9
61
28
11
76
16
8
75
17
8
77
17
6
34
48
18
46
36
18
46
Economic impacts
Local businesses will increase /
increased their sales and profits during
the event. (n = 125; n = 135)
In the area where the Stadium is
located, businesses will strengthen. (n =
125; n = 135)
Agree
74
73
Pre-Event
Neutral
Disagree
20
6
20
7
Agree
74
57
Post-Event
Neutral
Disagree
20
6
37
6
*BEE = Black economic empowerment
Slightly fewer business respondents post-event perceived the event as ensuring employment
opportunities for locals, with a decrease from 61% pre-event to 57% post-event. More businesses
post-2010 indicated that the hosting of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ increased spending in the local
area, with those in agreement increasing from 61% pre-event to 76% post-event. Businesses also
noted that BEE improved as a result of the event, albeit that such improvement took place off a
lower base, increasing from 34% pre-event to 46% post-event. Businesses expressed a noticeable
decrease (from 73% pre-event to 57% post-event) in the perception that businesses in the area
where the Stadium was located would strengthen. Such a decrease might have been related to
concerns about the sustainability of the Stadium post-2010.
Table 30: Business perceptions of 2010 social impacts pre- and post-event (in %)
Social impacts
2010 will be / was a major boost for
nation-building. (n = 102; n = 134)
I feel proud that this event is/was
hosted in my city. (n = 82; n = 134)
I feel proud that South Africa is hosting
/ hosted the 2010 FIFA World Cup.
(n = 55; n = 134)
It is/was important that Bafana Bafana
wins/won matches in the World Cup.
(n = 61; n = 134)
Increase in crime is/was experienced
due to 2010. (n = 123; n = 133)
Extensive alcohol abuse by persons
attending the event will lead / led to
spectator hooliganism. (n = 55; n = 79)
This event will divide / divided cultural
groups. (n = 55; n = 129)
World Cup causes/d traffic congestion
in the local area. (n = 101; n = 133)
An increase in vandalism will be / was
experienced. (n = 123; n = 133)
Event will stimulate / stimulated
training and skills development for
locals. (n = 110; n = 135)
Agree
81
Pre-Event
Neutral
Disagree
14
5
Agree
96
Post-Event
Neutral
Disagree
4
0
88
6
6
97
3
0
88
6
6
95
4
1
88
6
6
71
16
13
61
24
15
32
25
43
44
29
27
27
27
46
15
18
67
36
20
44
84
10
6
65
14
12
38
39
23
27
21
52
48
31
21`
43
40
17
Businesses were prouder post-event that South Africa had hosted the event, with 88% agreeing with
the related statement pre-event and 95% post-event. They were also prouder that Cape Town had
hosted the event, with 88% pre-event and 97% post-event agreeing with the related statement, than
were the residents.56 In contrast to changes in perceptions of nation-building by residents post-2010,
56
Residents remained consistently very positive during the pre- and post-event, while there was an increase in
agreement for businesses post-event.
47
businesses expressed more positive perceptions of the nation-building impact of the event, with
those agreeing with the statement in question increasing from 81% pre-event to 96% post-event.
The importance of Bafana Bafana winning during 2010 decreased post-2010 from 88% agreeing preevent to 71% post-event, which indicates that the success of the World Cup was not as dependent
on the team’s performance as was initially anticipated. Similar to the residents’ responses, a
significant decrease (from 61% pre-event to 32% post-event) in perceptions of crime due to the
event was experienced post-event.
Similarly, there was a decrease (from 44% pre-event to 27% post-event) in perceptions that
extensive alcohol abuse by persons attending the event would lead to spectator hooliganism. Also
similar to residents’ responses, there was even less (from 38% pre-event to 24% post-event)
agreement post-2010 that an increase in vandalism would be experienced due to the event.
Businesses perceived that the event caused a cultural divide, with post-2010 responses agreeing to
the statement increasing from 15% to 35%, albeit still a low level of agreement. The perception of
the negative impact of traffic congestion was also less post-2010 for businesses, than that which was
noted by the residents, with 84% of businesses agreeing with the statement pre-event to 65%
agreeing with it post-event.
Table 31: Business pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 regional showcase (in %)
Regional showcase
2010 will showcase / showcased South
Africa in a positive light. (n = 75; n = 31)
Crime will showcase / showcased South
Africa in a negative light. (n = 123;
n = 133)
The hosting of 2010 will be / was a
major boost for tourism in Cape Town.
(n = 74; n = 31)
The event will attract / attracted future
business to Cape Town. (n = 125;
n = 134)
Agree
77
Pre-Event
Neutral
Disagree
16
7
Agree
100
Post-Event
Neutral
Disagree
0
0
62
23
15
54
18
28
78
15
7
74
23
3
68
22
10
83
15
2
Businesses were overwhelmingly positive that 2010 provided an opportunity for South Africa to be
showcased in a positive light, with all businesses agreeing with the statement post-2010, in
comparison with 77% prior to the event. Similarly to the residents’ responses, businesses also
expressed a decrease (from 62% pre-event to 54% post-event) in their perception of the impact of
crime showcasing South Africa in a negative light. Most businesses (similarly to the residents’
responses, albeit that such agreement was slightly lower post-2010, with 78% pre-event and 74%
post-event) also agreed that 2010 was a major boost for tourism. More importantly, businesses
generally (with 68% pre-event increasing to 83% post-event) perceived the long-term impacts of the
event for future business to be positive.
48
Table 32: Business pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 environmental impacts (in %)
Environmental impacts
Environment is/was degraded due to
the World Cup. (n = 125; n = 135)
Hosting of event has no significant
environmental impacts. (n = 124;
n = 135)
Agree
18
27
Pre-Event
Neutral
Disagree
25
57
39
Agree
30
34
42
Post-Event
Neutral
Disagree
24
36
30
28
Businesses, in common with the residents, expressed more mixed responses with respect to the
environmental impacts of the event. Prior to the event, 18% of businesses indicated that the
environment was degraded due to the event, with more businesses (30%) expressing the same
opinion post-2010, highlighting concerns about the potential negative environmental impacts of
such mega-events as the 2010 FIFA World Cup™. However, more (42%) businesses indicated postevent that the hosting of the event had no significant environmental impact, in comparison with
27% that had indicated this pre-event.
4.2.2
Perceptions regarding a future Olympic Games bid
In terms of the post-2010 survey question as to whether South Africa should make a bid for the
Olympic Games, 69% (n = 131) of businesses affirmed this response. This response was much lower
than that of residents, who indicated an 85% agreement.
4.3 Key findings – Visitors
As mentioned previously, visitor responses were critical to understanding the economic impacts of
the 2010 FIFA World Cup™, as was presented in section 3.1. However, visitors tend to have an
impact on (and are impacted on by) the social environment of a host destination. This section of the
report deals only with the social impacts of the World Cup, as perceived by the visitors.
4.3.1
Perceptions of 2010
In addition to questions related to the economic impacts of the World Cup, the visitors were also
surveyed during 2010 with respect to the social impacts of the event. The visitors’ perceptions of the
impacts of 2010 are summarised in Table 33 below.
Table 33: Visitors' perceptions of 2010 (in %)
Statement
I am confident that this event has been successfully hosted in South
Africa / Cape Town. (n = 3 351)
I feel proud that South Africa is hosting this event. (n = 364; South
Africans only)
This event causes no traffic congestion in the local area. (n = 3 304)
This event leads to increase in crime in the local area. (n = 3 283)
This event has no significant negative social impact. (n = 3 174)
South African athletes/teams are major competitors in this sport.
(n = 3 212)
This event increased pollution. (n = 3 280)
Environment in Cape Town is being degraded due to the event.
(n = 3 238)
Agree
89
Neutral
9
Disagree
2
90
6
4
36
20
36
38
35
42
36
31
29
38
28
38
27
23
41
30
32
47
Similar to residents’ and businesses’ perceptions regarding South Africa’s ability to host a successful
mega-event, the majority (89%) of visitors expressed similar sentiments. South African visitors (90%)
were also very proud that South Africa was hosting the event; the responses regarding this
49
statement were once again similar to those that were noted by the residents and businesses.
Visitors had mixed responses with respect to traffic congestion associated with the event, possibly as
most tended to walk to the Stadium and Fan Park.
While only a few (20%) visitors noted that the event would lead to an increase in crime, there were
also as many as 42% neutral responses, as visitors did not have a base with which to compare the
crime levels that they encountered. Visitors were also fairly divided (with 36% each agreeing and
neutral, and 28% disagreeing) with respect to whether the event caused significant negative social
impacts. Not surprisingly, visitors were also divided about whether South African football players
were major competitors, with 38% each agreeing and disagreeing with the statement and a further
31% expressing their neutrality about it. The visitors were also almost equally divided with respect
to the environmental impacts of the event. While 27% noted that the event increased pollution
levels, 41% remained neutral on the issue, and 32% disagreed with it. Slightly fewer (23%) visitors
noted that the environment in Cape Town was being degraded due to the event, while 30% were
neutral about the statement, and 47% disagreed with it.
4.4 Key findings – Sport organisations
The sport questionnaire was designed to ascertain information related to involvement in the 2010
FIFA World Cup™, as well as perceptions and attitudes towards the event, especially in relation to its
sport impacts. The profile of the sport organisations, followed by a discussion of their involvement
and general perceptions and attitudes towards the event, is presented below, after which the
sporting impacts are discussed, along with the residents’ perceptions of the sporting impacts of the
2010 FIFA World Cup™.
4.4.1
Profile of sport organisations
Only 17 sport organisations, including the South African Football Association – Western Province
(SAFA–WP), the Local Football Associations (LFAs), CoCT Facility Management Committees and SRA
CoCT, participated in this post-survey.57 While it is acknowledged that the number of respondents is
relatively small, so that the results should only be seen as indicative, they, nevertheless, provide
useful information with respect to the sport organisations’ perceptions of the 2010 FIFA World
Cup™.
4.4.2
Awareness and engagement of sport organisations in 2010
Under half (47%) of the respondents were aware of 2010-related legacy projects in their area.
Similarly to the residents’ responses, most (30%) sport organisation respondents were informed
about the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ via television. However, 15% stated that email and 13% that either
newspaper or radio were their main sources of information about the event.
A third (33%) of the respondents indicated that they were involved in the events as volunteers by
way of their clubs. Only 12% of the respondents noted that they were involved via incomegenerating opportunities linked to the event.
57
Ideally, the survey should have been conducted both pre- and post-2010. However, due to the limited
research resources and logistical challenges, only a post-survey was conducted.
50
4.4.3
Perceptions of 2010
Sport organisations’ perceptions of the impacts of 2010 are summarised in Table 34 below. Selected
impacts are included in this survey that was conducted only after the event had taken place.
Table 34: Sports organisations' perceptions of 2010 (in %)
Social impacts (n = 17)
The event was successfully hosted by South Africa.
The hosting of the event in South Africa has resulted in achieving a
legacy.
Facilities created for the event are suitable for long-term use.
This event causes significant traffic congestion in the local area.
An increase in crime was experienced due to this event.
An increase in vandalism was experienced due to the hosting of this
event.
Alcohol abuse by spectators led to incidents of hooliganism during the
event.
The event generated excessive noise, which annoyed residents in the
vicinity of the event.
Entertainment opportunities related to the event were provided for
local residents.
This event divided cultural groups.
Agree
100
76
Neutral
0
18
Disagree
0
6
82
24
0
0
12
18
94
94
6
58
6
6
6
35
59
6
35
59
47
29
24
12
12
76
Similarly to the residents and businesses who were also positive about South Africa’s hosting of the
2010 event, sports organisations were all in agreement with the statement. Most (78%) also agreed
that hosting the event had resulted in South Africa achieving a legacy.
The sport organisations were positive about the long-term use of the facilities created for the event,
with 82% being in agreement with the related statement. Most (58%) respondents did not think that
the event caused significant traffic congestion in the area. Sport organisation respondents were
largely neutral with respect to the impact of crime and vandalism as a result of the event. Such
findings differed from those the patterns that were detected in the responses from residents and
businesses.
Most (59%) respondents disagreed that alcohol abuse by spectators led to incidents of hooliganism
during the event. Similarly, 59% disagreed that the event caused excessive noise that annoyed
residents in the area of the event. Nearly half (47%) of the respondents agreed that entertainment
opportunities related to the event were provided for local residents. Most (76%) respondents also
disagreed that the event divided cultural groups. Similarly to the residents, relatively fewer sports
organisations felt that the event resulted in increased community development through sport by
foreign and local organisations, with the percentage in each group being 58%.
4.5 Concluding remarks – Social impacts
Residents had limited awareness of legacy-related projects related to the World Cup, which perhaps
indicates the need for more or improved communication for future events. Residents were primarily
involved in the event as spectators at Fan Parks and PVAs, with higher levels of involvement
experienced post-event.
51
All stakeholder groupings generally had positive
perceptions of the event, with some aspects being
rated even higher after the World Cup, due to the
success of the event and also perhaps as an
indication of the ‘feel-good’ effect. It is interesting
to note, however, that feelings of nation-building
post-event dropped significantly for residents,
possibly indicating that such feelings are not likely
to be sustained and are impacted by the issues of
the day. Businesses, in contrast, seemed to have
been even more positively impacted by the ‘feelgood’ effects of the World Cup post-event. Such a finding is also perhaps indicative of the more
cautious approach that was adopted by businesses to the impact of the World Cup prior to it being
hosted, especially given the concerns expressed with respect to levels of readiness and crime.
Both residents and businesses expressed significantly less concern about the negative impact of
crime on the event, which could likely be attributed to the relatively high levels of visible policing,
resulting in the holding of a safe and secure World Cup. Concerns around traffic congestion were
also less after the event. Both residents and businesses expressed the value of the event as a
regional showcase for South Africa, with positive impacts on tourism and future business relations.
There were, however, more mixed feelings about the negative environmental impacts of the event,
thus pointing to increasing concern around environmental matters which needed to be recognised
for the importance that they might hold for future major and mega-events.
The 2010 FIFA World Cup™ seemed to have a positive impact on the sport, marking an upsurge in
levels of awareness and interest in the sport. However, there was a recognition that community
development via foreign and local organisations would be likely to drop off post-event, thus again
reflecting concern regarding sustainability issues of development through sport.
52
5. Sport Impacts
The sporting impact of an event is regarded as an important component of the SEIM. Consideration
should be paid the impacts of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ on the development of the sport of football
in Cape Town. The responses of residents and sport organisations regarding their perceptions of the
sporting impacts of the World Cup are presented below.
5.1 Key findings – Residents
Residents located in the Green Point precinct,
the four PVAs, the inner city and broader Cape
Town were interviewed pre- and post-event to
track perception changes with respect to the
sporting impacts associated with hosting the
FIFA World Cup 2010™ event. A summary of
their perceptions pre- and post-2010 is
presented in Table 35 below.
Table 35: Residents' pre- and post-event perceptions of 2010 sport impacts (in %)
Sport impacts
I am more aware of soccer due to
hosting of this event. (n = 1 203; n = 1
295)
I am more interested in football due to
hosting of this event. (n = 1 200;
n = 1 292)
I will consider participating in soccer in
the near future. (n = 1 188; n = 1 292)
Event will lead / led to increased
community development through
sport by foreign organisations.
(n = 1 193; n = 899)
Event will lead / led to increased
community development through
sport by local organisations. (n = 1 193;
n = 905)
Agree
71
Pre-Event
Neutral
Disagree
11
18
Agree
78
Post-Event
Neutral
Disagree
11
11
64
17
19
68
18
14
52
21
27
55
22
23
74
19
7
66
21
13
75
18
7
67
22
11
Residents were generally more aware and interested in football as a result of South Africa hosting
the 2010 FIFA World Cup™. There was an increase from 71% pre- to 78% post-event in the
awareness of soccer post-2010, with the interest in football also increasing, albeit to a lesser extent
post-2010, from 64% agreeing with the relevant statement pre-event to 68% agreeing with it postevent. Consideration of future participation was marginally higher post-2010, with an increase from
52% pre-event to 55% post-event.
However, with respect to community development through sport by foreign and local organisations
as a result of the event, it is evident that the residents felt that, once the event was over, that less
development would take place by these organisations, with agreement decreasing from 74% pre-
53
event to 66% post-event for foreign organisations and from 75% pre-event to 67% post-event for
local organisations.
5.2 Key findings – Sport organisations
Sport organisations were asked a relatively broad range of questions concerning the football impacts
of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™. The responses are summarised in Table 36 below.
Table 36: Sport organisations' perceptions of the football impacts of 2010 (in %)
Football impacts (n = 17)
The event is an important one within the international sporting arena.
The international community recognises South Africa as a major player.
The event ensured increased opportunities for South African
footballers competing both nationally and internationally.
The successful hosting of the event resulted in trading opportunities for
South African footballers.
Top South African football players are world-class.
The successful hosting of the event has resulted in increased national
and international sponsorships.
The number of spectators at football games in South Africa / Cape
Town has increased as a result of the event.
An increased number of participants has been attracted to football
since the event was hosted.
The event has led to an increased number of football tournaments,
competitions and events on a national level.
The event creates new opportunities for the growth of football.
This event has resulted in increased community development through
sport by foreign organisations.
This event has resulted in increased community development through
sport by local organisations.
Agree
100
88
70
Neutral
0
6
6
Disagree
0
6
24
70
12
18
35
47
35
24
30
29
47
35
18
76
18
6
52
24
24
76
58
6
18
18
24
58
18
24
Not surprisingly, all (100%) sport organisations acknowledged the event as an important one in the
international arena. Moreover, they perceived South Africa to be recognised as a major player by the
international community, with 88% agreeing. The event was also seen to increase opportunities for
South African footballers competing national and internationally, with 70% agreeing, as well as
resulting in trading opportunities for South African footballers, with 70% agreeing.
Once again, there were mixed perceptions with respect to the recognition of South African football
players as world-class (with 35% each agreeing and neutral, and 30% disagreeing). Less positive
responses were received concerning increased national and international sponsorships as a result of
the successful hosting of the event, with 47% agreeing, 24% neutral, and 29% disagreeing.
While the number of spectators at football matches was viewed as increasing by only 47% of the
respondents, 76% of the respondents indicated that the event had attracted an increasing number
of participants, which was encouraging. Similarly, although only 52% of respondents indicated that
the event had led to an increased number of football tournaments, competitions and events on the
national level, the event was perceived as creating new opportunities for the growth of football by
76% of the respondents. Such findings were a positive indication for the future of football.
However, closely allied with the residents’ perceptions concerning community development through
sport by foreign and local organisations as a result of the event, only 58% of the sport organisations
indicated that development would take place by the organisations.
54
5.3 Concluding remarks – Sport impacts
The 2010 FIFA World Cup™ seemed to
have a positive impact on the sport, with
greater levels of awareness and interest
being expressed in the sport. However,
there was recognition that community
development by means of foreign and
local organisations would drop off postevent, thus again reflecting concerns
regarding sustainability issues relating to
development through sport.
55
6. Sport Event Impact Model Input and
Output
The aim of the SEIM was to quantify the impact
of the economic spend and injections of the
2010 FIFA World Cup™ on Cape Town, together
with the other two impact types – visitor and
social, including sport, impact – into one single
overall estimate, as was outlined in Chapter 2.
In this chapter, the input and output of the
Economic and Social (Sport) Fact Sheets, along
with SEPI are presented and discussed.
6.1 Economic Impact Fact Sheet58
6.1.1
Economic Impact Fact Sheet Background
The economic impact sheet consists of four categories: capital expenditure; operational expenditure;
income; and injection. In a mega-event such as the FIFA World Cup™, capital expenditure for the
event over an extended period of time always exceeds operational expenditure, and often
significantly so. This was also the case with the 2010 World Cup™ event in Cape Town,59 and the
potential distortion that the event might have created was highlighted. Ideally, in an economic
impact assessment, all costs and income related to the World Cup should be included. Public
spending – the costs incurred by local, provincial and national government – is relatively easy to
delineate and aggregate into the various categories. Such was is the primary objective of the current
study.
Private spending, however, required an independent business survey to ascertain exact levels of
spending by sector. The quality of the private spending data depended on several factors, such as
the response rate and the quality of the responses received by participants. In addition, the survey
results received might not necessarily be a statistically representative sample of the business
population.60
As outlined in the research section above, as with many similar surveys requesting sensitive financial
business data, the response to the business surveys was not strong, and the information on private
58
A summary of the Economic Impact Fact Sheet is presented here, with the detailed Fact Sheet being provided
in Annexure 7.
59
In this instance, capital expenditure was nearly 25 times larger than was the operational expenditure.
60
This aspect was discussed extensively with the reference group, including the difficulty in identifying specific
private sector investments for 2010. Although the exact size of the economic impact created by private sector
investments was unclear, it can be stated with a fair degree of confidence that the overall economic impact of
the 2010 World Cup was mainly driven by the public sector, especially given the large investments required to
build the stadia for the event.
56
sector’s own investment and turnover received only a poor response. This meant that the private
sector spending data gathered as part of the research could not be extrapolated to the whole
population. Therefore, the private sector data should be viewed as being indicative of World Cup
expenditure and not as conclusive evidence of actual expenditure.
To
avoid
double-counting
and
overestimation,
only
expenditures
directly related to the 2010 FIFA World
Cup™ were included. The indirect effects
were captured in the SEIM. Due to the
involvement of FIFA in the event and the
fact that the event had a nationally based
OC, some expenditure and income items
might, however, have been excluded
from the model, even though they
accrued to the people and economy of Cape Town. Some examples of such items would be the use
of Cape Town-based service providers for the event elsewhere in the country, as well as
expenditures incurred by FIFA relating to matches in Cape Town not recorded in the City or
Provincial data used in the current report. This was certainly true of direct income and injections,
which accrued directly to FIFA or its affiliates (Match, for example). While income and injections
might be important components for smaller events, the nature of a mega-event was such that direct
income and injections (i.e. through ticket sales and broadcasting rights) was limited. Furthermore,
the impact sheet did not allow for outflows (such as for the recording of domestic ticket sales that
flowed to FIFA and that, therefore, exited the domestic economy), which implied that the income
section was likely to overestimate the benefit of the World Cup to CoCT.
6.1.2
Economic data
Expenditure data for Cape Town were obtained from the CoCT 2010 Project Team. The period under
consideration included data that was collected from 2006 until the current period,61 with the sources
of funding including the economic dataset from the CoCT, the PGWC, National Government, ACSA
and the Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (PRASA). The PRASA data were cross-checked with
datasets received directly from CoCT Transport and Roads and Storm Water Departments.
Moreover, expenditure data were obtained from the CoCT Sport and Recreation Department and
several other Departments within the City (refer to the tables below). In addition, data from specialpurpose vehicles (SPVs), such as CTT, were also included (see Annexure 3 for more detail).
As a final check, the expenditure categories with the budget allocations of the CoCT that were
available online were cross-checked. While the budgets provide some indication of the relative
expenditure size, they do not reflect real expenditure and therefore should only be used as a last
resort. The expenditure categories used by the 2010 Project Team were more disaggregated than
those found in CoCT budgets for 2010; however, there was a high correlation between the two
datasets. Therefore, the 2010 Project Team data proved to be the best reflection of available total
World Cup expenditure in CoCT, which was used in the model.
61
Financial data were obtained for the years 2006 to 2010, as at 30 November 2010. Some financial data used
were based on unaudited information, and might be subject to adjustments.
57
In order to reflect expenditure for 2010 in Cape Town that was incurred by the Provincial
Departments, the Western Cape Department of Economic Development and Tourism, the Western
Cape Provincial Treasury, and the Premier’s Office were approached for access to data. Data were
also sourced directly from the Department of Health (DoH). However, transfers to the City from the
Provincial Departments were excluded from the study.
In order to obtain estimates of private sector capital and operational expenditure relating to the
2010 FIFA World Cup™, survey questions were designed and included in the research Business
Surveys, which were sent to a large number of businesses (refer to sections 2.2.2 and 2.2.3 above).
Unfortunately, the response rate was muted, with no respondents providing any data on capital
expenditure or operational expenditure relating to the World Cup. Consequently, no data on private
sector activity were recorded in the data for the model.62
Capital and Operational Expenditure 2006 to 2010
Total capital expenditure for the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ in Cape Town amounted to R12 495 010
over the period 2006 to 201063 (see Table 37 below; please see Annexure 7 for the detailed
breakdown). The overall amount included construction of the Cape Town Stadium, road
infrastructure around the Stadium and the Central Cape Town area, an inner-city transport system,
new and improved access roads to the city, airport improvements, and the upgrading of rail
infrastructure, as well as expenditure on emergency services, including vehicles and medical
equipment. Capital expenditure for a mega-event such as the FIFA World Cup™ dominated total
expenditure, with 96% of all related expenditure being classified as such. The original capital
expenditure categories section was found to be insufficiently disaggregated compared with the
operational expenditure section and extra expenditure categories, which were not included in the
SEIM Economic Fact Sheet, also being included.
Table 37: Summary of capital expenditure (2006–2010)
Capital expenditure refers to the funds required for the building and the construction of the proposed
facilities or infrastructure.
DEFINITION/DESCRIPTION
INDICATORS
VALUE (Rands)
Spending, usually by public sector on facilities
that will be used by the general public e.g.
roads.
CoCT
WCPG
Private sector leverage
Total spending on
infrastructure e.g.
roads, stadia, etc.
12 495 995 010.23
12 438 799 010.23
57 196 000.00
N/A
Table 38 below shows a summary of the operational expenditure incurred for the 2010 FIFA World
Cup™ in Cape Town (please see Annexure 7 for a detailed breakdown). Overall, the operational
expenditure included expenditure on maintenance, salaries, volunteers, advertising, media, medical,
security, travel, costs related to the staging of the event, the International Premier’s Cup (an event
62
Studies by Du Plessis and Venter, FEDHASA (2010a and 2010b) and Grant Thornton (2010) included some
qualitative and quantitative estimates of the impact of the World Cup on certain tourist-related services, such
as accommodation and the restaurant industry. Most of the data, however, were aggregated to the national
level and, more importantly, provided no indication of the actual expenditure incurred by the private sector in
preparation for the 2010 FIFA World Cup.
63
Drawing on available data and excluding the private sector.
58
taking place prior to the World Cup), security, and other spending items. While only comprising 4%
of total expenditure, the absolute amount was still significant, standing at R510 million. The figure is
likely to represent an underestimation of the actual operational expenditure, as several
Departments might have under-reported World Cup spend within this category for several reasons,
such as not recording the expenditure specifically as being 2010 World Cup expenditure, with staff
shifts being made from other activities to World Cup activity, and so on.
Table 38: Summary of operational expenditure (2006–2010)
Operational expenditure refers to expenditure incurred by event organisers to make event happen
DEFINITION/DESCRIPTION
VALUE (Rands)
Total OPEX
510 382 310.01
Total spending on maintenance (CoCT)
43 486 923.88
Total salaries, wages and personal income (CoCT; CTT; PGWC)
130 788 464.87
Total spending on volunteers, e.g. catering, clothing, etc. (CoCT)
4 671 635.20
Total rent paid for the hiring of facilities and/or equipment, including rates and
5 552 629.00
taxes (CoCT)
Total spending related to advertising and promotion of the event, branding for
21 747 154.81
sponsors, etc. (CoCT; CTT)
Total spending on media, broadcasting/coverage (CoCT)
7 899 118.00
Total spending on catering, hospitality, functions, special guests, sponsors,
633 171.29
entertainment, etc.
Total spending relating to first aid, doctors, physiotherapists, dope testing,
25 123 128.00
emergency services, etc. (CoCT; PGWC)
Total spending related to administrative functions and organising of the event
16 500 000.00
e.g. stationary, printing, telephone costs, etc. (CoCT)
Total spending related to travelling costs for the event (CoCT)
86 381 495.46
Total spending related to accommodation costs during organising, planning the
777 656.93
event (CoCT)
Costs related to ensuring that the event is safe e.g. hiring of security guards
11 828 731.00
(CoCT)
Spending on the insurance of equipment, public liability, etc. (CoCT)
705 214.00
Remuneration of professionals involved in organising and hosting the event, e.g.
0.00
event management fees, federation fees, consulting fees, accounting fees, legal
fees, membership fees, etc.
Costs related to the staging of the event e.g. opening and closing ceremonies,
18 822 042.00
entertainment, music, preparations, set up costs, physical products, etc. (CoCT)
Other spending (CoCT; CCDI; Wesgro; CFC; CTRU; PGWC; Metrorail)
135 458 945.57
A summary of the economic input into the SEIM, based on the capital and operational expenditure
data, is presented in Table 39 below. It is further noted that the direct, indirect, induced, and total
economic impact with respect to production, GGP and jobs is summarised, with the output being
graphically presented and discussed in the following section.
59
Table 39: Summary of economic input
Summary of Economic Input (absolute values) (Rands)
Direct
Indirect
Induced
Total
R12 495 955 010.23
R15 980 341 686.40
R14 272 700 500.04
R42 748 997 196.67
R2 173 400 417.04
R5 839 500 543.41
R6 307 458 095.21
R14 320 359 055.66
Capital Expenditure (CAPEX)
Production (Rm)
GGP (Rm)
Jobs
68 472
45 337
34 235
148 044
Operational Expenditure
(OPEX)
Production (Rm)
R409 172 009.14
R389 495 625.67
R658 451 680.98
R1 457 119 315.79
GGP (Rm)
R178 339 092.07
R183 510 521.14
R291 048 728.38
R652 898 341.59
836
953
1 583
3 372
Jobs
6.1.3.
SEIM Economic Impact Output and Index
The Economic Impact Index score from the SEIM for the 2010 event in Cape Town was found to be
84%, which meant that the economic impacts of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™, as defined by the SEIM,
was favourable, as it was found to fall within the range (75%–100%) of a Category A event. The
respective indicators, which are presented below, were obtained from the capital and operational
expenditure categories outlined above. Infrastructure, not surprisingly, dominated capital
expenditure, with it consuming 98% of the capital expenditure spend, in comparison with 2% for
facilities and equipment.
Figure 18: Main capital expenditure categories for 2010 (2006–2010; in %)
Trade,64 salaries and wages and transport can be seen as being the main operational expenditure
categories, as can be seen in Figure 19 below.
64
Use of the term ‘trade’ included expenditure on maintenance, volunteers, staging (trade items), goods,
hospitality, advertising, etc.
60
Figure 19: Main operational expenditure categories for 2010 (2006–2010; in %)
Direct expenditure during the event was dominated by capital expenditure with R12 495.96 billion
being spent in comparison with R510.38 million operational expenditure, as can be seen in Figure 20
below.65
Direct expenditure for 2010 World Cup (R million)
Figure 20: Direct expenditure for 2010 World Cup (2006–2010; in Rands)
The macroeconomic impact of capital expenditure associated with the World Cup on business
stimulation and GGP is presented in Figure 21 below. As a result of CAPEX, the event contributed a
total of R14.3 billion to the Western Cape GGP, with R2 173.40 billion being a direct contribution to
the GGP.
65
Expenditure excluded that of the private sector, FIFA and Match and included all information that could be
learned in the amount of time available.
61
Macroeconomic Impact due to CAPEX (R million) on Business Stimulation and the GGP
R42,799.00
R12,495.96
Direct
Total
Figure 21: Macroeconomic impact due to CAPEX on business stimulation and the GGP (2006–2010;
in Rands)
The macroeconomic impact of operational expenditure associated with the World Cup on business
stimulation and GGP is presented in Figure 22 below. As a result of OPEX, the event contributed a
total of R653 million to the GGP, with R178 million being a direct contribution to the GGP.
Macroeconomic Impact due to OPEX (R million) on Business Stimulation and the GGP
Direct
Total
Figure 22: Macroeconomic impact due to OPEX on business stimulation and the GGP (in Rands)
(2006–2010)
62
Job Creation during 2010 World Cup
Figure 23: Job creation during the 2010 World Cup (2006–2010)
The 2010 FIFA World Cup™ created a total of 151 416 jobs (148 044 due to CAPEX spend and 3 372
due to OPEX spend) over the period from 2006 to 2010. Almost 70 000 were direct jobs and an
additional 82 108 was leveraged in the Western Cape economy.
SEIM bases its definition of job creation on the principle of one person being employed for one year.
Given the nature of the employment opportunities created during the course of hosting a sport
event, the results reflect the employment opportunities created per year (Urban-Econ, 2011).
It is, therefore, evident that, since capital expenditure dominated the overall expenditure of the
public sector on the 2010 FIFA World Cup™, the impact on production, GGP and jobs was
consequently higher than capital expenditure.
In conclusion, the model clearly shows that the impact of the World Cup has been much larger than
the financial inputs, as spent by National, Provincial and Local Government for the period from 2006
to 2010. SEIM estimates that over 150 000 jobs were created, with an estimated direct impact of
approximately R15 billion and an initial investment of approximately R13 billion.
6.2 SEIM Social Fact Sheet
6.2.1
SEIM Social Fact Sheet Input
A summary of the social input into the SEIM is presented in Table 40 below. The data included in the
summary were derived from those survey questions that focused on social impacts as well as the on
the data collated from the Social Fact Sheet. The questions were aligned with indicators in the model
and were scored out of three. The scores are interpreted in the discussion of the summary table of
the output in the following section.
63
Table 40: Summary of social input (score out of 3)
Summary of Social Input (score out of 3)
National pride
2.50
Destination awareness
2.60
Disrupt daily lives
0.29
Community pride
2.00
Destination experience
3.00
Increase crime
0.67
Public policy issues
3.00
Special needs
3.00
Specific violence
1.50
2.17
Women empowerment
2.00
Greening
3.00
Entertainment
opportunities
67
Social upliftment
2.50
Youth empowerment
2.00
Risk management
3.00
-
HDSA empowerment
2.00
Pollution
0.30
Infrastructure
improvement
Regeneration
3.00
Social cohesion
1.00
Environmental degradation
1.00
1.00
Social inclusion
1.00
Price Increase
2.50
Profile of RSA
1.33
Disabled access
2.00
No negative social impacts
0.17
Profile of City
3.00
Attitude- public experience
2.00
No negative environmental
impacts
0.50
Quality of life
66
6.2.2
SEIM Social Impact Output and Index
The Social Impact Index score from the SEIM for the 2010 event in Cape Town was found to be 80%,
which also indicates a favourable impact, though at the lower end of a Category A event, in
comparison with the Economic Impact Index Score of 84%. The output of the Social Impact Index is
presented in Table 41 below. The index values are interpreted as follows:

extremely unfavourable (-1–0);

favourable (0–1);

moderately favourable (1–2);

very favourable (2–3); and
 extremely favourable (3).
It is evident that all the responses ranged from favourable to extremely favourable. It is further
noted that risk management, event greening and event aspects focusing on special needs were rated
as extremely favourable. In addition, how the destination was experienced and the profiling of the
City were also rated as extremely favourable, once again emphasising the positive destination
marketing impact of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™. Risk management and the manner in which public
policy issues were dealt with were also rated extremely favourable. It is interesting to note that
social inclusion and social cohesion were rated less favourably, although still favourable (a score of
1) in comparison.
66
The Quality of Life indicator was drawn from the following survey and Fact Sheet question and statements:
(1) Are any locals employed pre-event? (2) The hosting of the event ensures extended shopping hours. (3) The
hosting of the event leads to increased spending, thus ensuring economic benefits to members of the local
community. (4) The hosting of the event ensures employment opportunities for local community members.
67
Questions related to this variable were not included, due to FIFA not providing post-event information.
64
Table 41: Social impact output – Social Index of 2010 in Cape Town
INDEX VALUE AND INTEPRETATION
Favourable
(0–1)
Moderately favourable
(1–2)
Very favourable
(2–3)
Extremely
favourable
(3)
Risk management
Pollution
Attitude – public
experience
Destination
awareness
Increase in crime
Specific violence
Entertainment
opportunities
Greening
Disrupt daily lives
Social inclusion
Disabled access
HDSA empowerment
Quality of life
National pride
Special needs
Destination
experience
Social cohesion
Regeneration
Youth empowerment
Women empowerment
Price increase
Profile of the City
Infrastructure
improvement
No negative social impacts
No negative environmental
impacts
Profile of RSA
Community pride
Public policy issues
6.3 Sport (Social) Fact Sheet
6.3.1
Sport input
The summary of the sport input derived from the Sport (Social) Fact Sheet is presented in Table 42
below. Similarly, the input was derived from those survey questions that focused on sport impacts,
as well as on the data collated from the Sport (Social) Fact Sheet. The questions were aligned with
the sport indicators in the model and were scored out of three. The scores obtained are interpreted
in the discussion of the summary table of the output in the following section of the report.
Table 42: Summary of sport input (score out of 3)
Summary of sport input (score out of 3)
Ranking
68
Awareness of sport
Bidding success
69
Confidence in hosting
Ability
70
Successfully hosted
68
3.00
International recognition
2.33
Sport development opportunities
1.00
2.50
Participant calibre
-0.67
Long-term facilities
3.00
Increased sponsorships
0.50
Negative media coverage
3.00
2.75
Increased interest
1.93
Dope testing
1.50
–
Increased exposure
2.00
Injuries
–
71
–
The term ‘ranking’ refers to the importance of an event within the national sporting arena.
These variables were not included in the research, as they were not applicable, given that the World Cup is a
mega-event that is hosted in a different country every four years, and that it was the first time that South
Africa hosted the event.
70
Refer to footnote 88 above.
71
This variable was not included, due to FIFA not providing post-event information.
69
65
6.3.2
Sport Summary Table Output
The Sport Impact Index Score from the SEIM for the 2010 event in Cape Town was found to be 75%,
which was lower than both the Economic Impact Index Score and the Social Impact Score, albeit still
favourable, though at the lower end of a Category A event. The output of the Sport Impact Index is
presented in Table 43 below. It is evident that all responses ranged from favourable to extremely
favourable, except for the participant calibre that referred to the perceived quality of South African
players on the world stage, and, in all likelihood, to the general performance of Bafana Bafana in
relation to other national teams, which was rated extremely unfavourable. In addition, negative
media coverage, the use of the facilities in the long term and the ranking of South Africa as a
competitive football nation were all rated extremely favourable. With reference to the negative
media coverage, the question only confirms the presence of, and awareness about, negative media
coverage of the event. However, a focused analysis of the media coverage is needed to establish its
actual impact.
Table 43: Sport (social impact output) – Sport Index of 2010 event in Cape Town
INDEX VALUE AND INTEPRETATION
Extremely
unfavourable
(-1–0)
Participant calibre
Favourable
(0–1)
Moderately favourable
(1–2)
Very favourable
(2–3)
Sport development
72
opportunities
Increased exposure
International
recognition
Extremely
favourable
(3)
Negative media
coverage
Increased sponsorships
Increased interest
Confidence in hosting
ability
Long-term
facilities
Awareness of sport
Ranking
6.4 Sport Event Performance Index of SEIM
The respective indices making up the SEPI are as follows for the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ in Cape
Town:

Economic – 84%;

Social – 80%; and

Sport – 75%.
The overall index is 2.4 out of a possible three or 80%, thus indicating that the World Cup had a very
favourable impact on Cape Town, as can be seen in Figure 24 below.73 Moreover, the 2010 FIFA
World Cup™ was found to fall within the range (75%–100%) of a Category A event.
72
The term ‘sport development opportunities’ refers to opportunities (including trading) for South African
footballers competing nationally and internationally, increased tournaments on a national level, and the
creation of new opportunities for the growth of football.
73
The economic factor was downscaled to 2.8 from 3. As the national SAM is slightly more positive than the
Western Cape SAM, it would have been overstated in the model, because the model uses national figures. For
inputs by residents in the social and sport values, an average value was input for the pre- and post-event
results.
66
Figure 24: SEPI of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ in Cape Town
6.5 Concluding Remarks – SEIM Input and Output
Direct expenditure in Cape Town for the period 2006 to 2010 by the public sector and parastatals for
the 2010 World Cup event was dominated by capital expenditure of over R12 billion, in comparison
with the R510 million operational expenditure. As a result of CAPEX, the event contributed a total of
R14.3 billion to the Western Cape GGP, with R2 173.40 billion being a direct contribution to the GGP.
As a result of OPEX, the 2010 World Cup event contributed a total of R653 million to the GGP, with
R178 million being a direct contribution to the GGP.
The 2010 FIFA World Cup™ created a total of 151 416 jobs74 (148 044 due to CAPEX and 3 37275 due
to OPEX). Almost 70 000 of the jobs were direct, with an additional 82 108 being leveraged in the
Western Cape economy.
SEIM illustrates that the impact of the World Cup was much larger than the financial inputs, as spent
by National, Provincial and Local Government. SEIM estimates that over 150 000 jobs were created,
with an estimated direct impact of approximately R15 billion and an initial investment of
approximately R13 billion.
All the social and sport impact indicators were rated as favourable to extremely favourable, except
for the category ‘participant calibre’ in terms of the sport impact output.
74
SEIM based its definition of job creation on the principle of one person employed for one year. Given the
nature of the employment opportunities created during the course of hosting a sport event, the results are
unlikely to reflect the actual number of jobs created. Rather, they are likely to reflect the employment
opportunities created per year, based on the assumption that one employee works for one year (Urban-Econ,
2011).
75
As such job creation figures refer to one person employed for one year, the actual figure is probably higher,
due to the fact that sport events, such as the World Cup, tend to create short-term job opportunities.
67
The 2010 FIFA World Cup™ had a favourable impact on CoCT, with an overall index of 80%, which fell
within the range of a Category A-rated event. All three indices that made up the SEPI scored
relatively well: economic (84%); social (80%); and sport (75%).
68
7. Conclusions & Recommendations:
2010 FIFA World Cup™ Research in
Cape Town
CoCT completed a full 2010 FIFA World Cup™ research plan,
together with CHEC and SRSA. The research was considered to
be the most comprehensive research process for a host city,
compared with other South African host cities and possibly
others in the world thus far. By means of value-added and
good-value partnerships, CoCT supported the development of
mega-event tools and research methodologies, as well as the
development of local academic, student and public sector skills. CoCT has access to local mega-event
data and research, which, most importantly, provide a credible and comprehensive understanding of
the short-term impacts of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ on Cape Town. The research will all add
considerably to the growing body of knowledge and expertise on the subject in South Africa and
internationally. A brief overview of the key sections of this report are summarised below, followed
by recommendations emanating from the outcomes of the study.
7.1 Background and Methodology
The approach that was taken in the current study is unique, in that it allowed for collaboration
between the CHEC partners and the City and ensured alignment with CHEC academic research
interests, as well as internally with the City for planning into the future. The emphasis was on
research rigour and validity, while simultaneously the approach served to strengthen and build
research capacity and to ensure value for money research. The research achieved important links
and balance between the adoption of a sound and rigorous approach, academic credibility and
practical application. The approach used entailed being as comprehensive as possible, using the
SEIM as the framework and within the available resources. As the SEIM considers a range of social,
economic, sport and environmental impacts, its aim is to produce as full an understanding of the
outcomes and impacts of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ as possible. A total of 6 719 questionnaires
were completed pre-, during and post- study amongst a range of targeted groups, namely residents,
business, visitors, and sport organisations.
The main research challenges of the study included the following:
Research scope and timing within 2010 FIFA World Cup event planning

Too short lead times limited and placed undue pressure on the overall planning and
implementation of the event.

The scope of the study was limited to CoCT, whereas it would have been valuable to extend
the study to the Eden region of the Western Cape Province, which hosted the team base
camps.

The scope of the study was further limited to the event footprint in Cape Town, with some
extension to Greater Cape Town, largely due to the confines of available resources.
69

The study was limited to assessing the short-term impacts of the event, given the timeframe
of the study.
Cape Town 2010 Research Methodology

Response from business was relatively poor, with it being especially weak in relation to the
details of their turnover from, and investment in, the event.

Only limited responses were received from sport organisations.

The study excluded information from FIFA/OC and Match.

Some of the required data from the City 2010 operational monitoring and reporting systems
were not readily available for the research due to a lack of work stream integration.

A key aspect missing from the current study was a thorough media analysis of the impacts of
the event, especially in the key tourism and investment markets.

A limitation of the SEIM, as with many other economic impact models, is the inability to
account for the counterfactual, namely what the impact of the event would have been had
expenditures been diverted to other categories or activities.
Undertaking research at mega-events of this nature has
several challenges and limitations, as outlined above. The
approach for the current research drew on best practices,
as well as on previous research undertaken by the city and
partners. Consequently, the research results were still,
valid and reliable, and provided important short-term
socio-economic impact results of, and insights into, the
perceptions of various targeted groups of the 2010 FIFA
World Cup™ held in Cape Town. General conclusions with respect to the key findings are
summarised below.
7.2
Summary of key findings: Short-Term economic impacts
7.2.1
Visitors
Most visitors interviewed were male, from a younger age group, and highly educated. They were
mainly foreign visitors from Europe, with England providing the highest number of visitors in terms
of country. Most domestic visitors were from the Western Cape. Most visitors were first-time
attendees at a FIFA World Cup™, as well as being first-time visitors to South Africa and Cape Town.
In all, the World Cup was given as the primary reason for visiting Cape Town for the majority of the
visitors. Most of the visitors were overnight visitors to Cape Town, and stayed more than five nights,
with an average length of stay of 13 nights. The total spend amount for all visitors was just over
R92 million (excluding domestic and international travel), with the average total spend per person in
Cape Town being approximately R30 000. Most of the spend was on accommodation, tickets, food
and beverages, and shopping.
Most visitors indicated that they had become more aware of other destinations in South Africa and
Africa as a result of the World Cup. Nightlife, food and wine, shopping, and nature attractions were
the main activities in which visitors participated during their stay in Cape Town. The Internet was by
far the most popular medium for accessing information on Cape Town prior to them visiting the
70
destination. Most visitors generally had good impressions and experiences of Cape Town as a
tourism destination, and would definitely recommend it to family and friends. Some visitors also
indicated that they would be likely to return to Cape Town during the following 12 months. Cape
Town was also generally perceived to be a value for money destination in terms of the experience
offered and the quality of services.
Cape Town rated fairly well as a responsible tourism destination, with about half of the visitors
indicating that they were informed of responsible tourism tips. In terms of Green Goal initiatives,
some visitors noted that environmental considerations were important in their choice of
accommodation, with very few visitors indicating that they never separated their wet and dry waste.
Most visitors arrived by air, with the main port of entries being Cape Town and Johannesburg. Most
visitors also walked to the Stadium.
The visitor results in the study were generally fairly similar to the results of the exit survey study
conducted by SAT (2010). However, some variations are noteworthy, especially in relation to the
main source markets, with Cape Town attracting more European visitors, and also positively
impacting on a greater spend in Cape Town. The match schedule also evidently influenced the
distribution of visitors to the host city destinations.
7.2.2
Business
Despite relatively few businesses participating in the pre- and post-2010 surveys, the results of the
study provide some insight into business responses. Of the businesses surveyed, the majority did not
seem to take extra steps to prepare their organisations to leverage potential opportunities
associated with the World Cup. While such a response might have been impacted by the global
economic recession that occurred immediately prior to the event, the lack of business engagement
could also be related to the fact that the World Cup was primarily driven by the public sector.
Perhaps a greater share of private sector investment in the funding of
mega-events might result in more engagement by local business.
In terms of post-event experiences by business, the global economic
recession was also deemed to have had less of an impact on business
perceptions. The majority of businesses also felt that the World Cup
had had a positive impact. Some businesses indicated turnover
increases due to the event, with others citing broader impacts, such
as the improvement and development of infrastructure in those areas
where their businesses were located. However, businesses indicated
less interest in using the Cape Town Stadium after the World Cup,
which remains a challenge for the City in terms of post-event
sustainability. The strict regulations imposed by FIFA in terms of marketing and advertising seemed
to have limited business interests to the leveraging of potential opportunities in this regard. Most
businesses noted that the main source from which they had gained awareness of the regulations
was the media, as opposed to the City, other public sector or OC efforts in this regard.
Some businesses indicated that they were aware of the City’s Green Goal programme to enhance
environmental awareness and practices. About half of the tourism businesses in the pre-survey and
slightly less in the post-survey indicated that they promoted responsible tourism practices. While
71
some businesses were aware of CoCT’s tourism campaign, very few businesses indicated that the
World Cup contributed to initiating more responsible tourism practices. Furthermore, most
businesses learned about responsible tourism via the media and CTT, thus again illustrating the
importance of using business organisational channels to communicate key aspects of future events.
7.3 Summary of key findings – Social and sport impacts
7.3.1
Residents
Awareness of legacy-related projects among residents was limited, which possibly points to the need
to enhance communication with communities in the future. Those residents who were interviewed
were informed about the World Cup by a range of media, with television, newspaper and radio
being the most popular media used. More residents expressed involvement in 2010 post-event than
had done so prior to the event. Very few were involved as ticket-holders, with most being spectators
at Fan Parks and PVAs. Such a finding was anticipated by the City, accounting for the provision of
PVAs throughout the metropole, so as to increase participation in the event. A similar experience is
anticipated for Brazil in 2014, thus providing important lessons for the next host.
Residents were generally positive about South Africa’s readiness to host the FIFA 2010 World Cup™,
and were even more positive post-2010. The hosting of the event was also viewed as achieving a
legacy for South Africa by the majority of residents, although the research was not able to probe
residents’ detailed understanding of this term. Residents were slightly less positive about the use of
public funds for 2010, albeit that similar responses were expressed both pre- and post-2010.
Most residents agreed that infrastructural development had taken place mainly near the Stadium,
but also had more positive perceptions post-2010 about their long-term use of the facilities.
However, like business, they also recognised that post-2010 usage of the stadia and the costs of
maintenance would pose a challenge to their upkeep.
Residents were more positive about the economic benefits post-event, which is perhaps indicative
of the ‘feel-good’ effect of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™, or else of them having experienced and/or
heard of the benefits that had accrued to South Africa as a whole from its hosting of the World Cup.
The residents were generally very proud that South Africa had hosted the event, and that it had
been hosted in their area. It is, however, interesting to note that the perception of very high levels of
nation-building held prior to the event was significantly reduced post-2010, which points to the fact
that the effects of mega-events on nation-building are not long-lasting, and are impacted by issues
of the day. Post-event, public sector strikes occurred that attracted much negative media coverage.
There was a slight increase in the feeling of being more a part of the African continent post-event,
possibly as a result of the support that other African countries, including Ghana, felt once South
Africa was eliminated from the World Cup. However, the residents were more divided as to whether
the event had increased social inequities, in respect of which factor they expressed slightly less
agreement post-2010.
One of the most significant impacts of the World Cup was the marked decrease in perceptions of
crime post-event. Similarly, there was a decrease in perceptions that extensive alcohol abuse by
persons attending the event would lead to spectator hooliganism, with there being even less
agreement post-2010 that an increase in vandalism would be experienced due to the event.
72
Residents appreciated the image enhancement platform created by 2010 for South Africa as a
destination. They were generally positive that 2010 had provided an opportunity for South Africa to
be showcased in a positive light, and that the event was a major boost for tourism.
Residents expressed more mixed responses with respect to the environmental impacts of the event.
Perceptions of the impact of air pollution were much less post-2010, while slightly more
respondents agreed post-event that the hosting of the event would lead to significant production of
waste.
Another noteworthy impact related to the sport of football. Respondents generally were more
aware and interested in football as a result of South Africa hosting the 2010 FIFA World Cup™.
Consideration for future participation was marginally higher post-2010. However, with respect to
community development through sport by foreign and local organisations as a result of the event,
residents clearly felt that, once the event was over, less development would take place by the
organisations concerned.
Generally, residents seemed to have experienced 2010 positively, and, when they were asked
whether South Africa should bid for a future Olympic Games, the majority were in agreement that it
should.
7.3.2
Business
Businesses generally were more positive post-2010 with respect to confidence in South Africa’s
ability to host the 2010 FIFA World Cup™, with the event also being viewed as achieving a legacy for
South Africa. Businesses, similarly to the residents, were slightly less positive about the use of public
funds. In contrast, however, a significant perception change occurred post-2010 amongst
businesses, with the majority of them agreeing that infrastructural development had taken place
mainly near the Stadium.
Businesses indicated mixed economic impacts, with slightly fewer businesses post-event perceiving
the event as ensuring employment opportunities for the local residents. More businesses post-2010
indicated that the hosting of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ had increased spending locally. Businesses
also noted that BEE levels had improved as a result of the event, although they expressed a decrease
in the perception that businesses in the vicinity of the Stadium would strengthen, possibly as a result
of concerns regarding the sustainability of the Stadium.
Post-event, businesses were even more proud that South Africa had hosted the event, and that it
was hosted in Cape Town. In contrast to the changes in the perceptions of nation-building by the
residents post-2010, businesses expressed more positive perceptions of the impact of such a force
post-event. Similarly to the residents’ responses, a significant decrease in business perceptions of
crime due to the event was experienced post-event. However, businesses perceived that the event
caused a cultural divide, with post-2010 responses increasing, albeit still at a low level.
In common with the residents, businesses also were overwhelmingly positive that 2010 provided an
opportunity for South Africa to be showcased in a positive light, offering a boost to tourism and
investment. More importantly, businesses perceived the long-term impacts of the event for future
business as being positive.
73
Businesses, like residents, expressed more mixed responses with respect to the environmental
impacts of the event, and also highlighted concerns about the potential negative environmental
impacts of such mega-events as the 2010 FIFA World Cup™. Business, like the residents, generally
experienced the event positively, and also indicated that South Africa should bid for the Olympic
Games in the future, albeit that there was slightly less agreement on this factor in comparison with
the residents’ responses.
7.3.3
Visitors
Similarly to the residents’ and business perceptions regarding South Africa’s ability to host a
successful event, the majority of visitors expressed similar sentiments. South African visitors were
also very proud that South Africa hosted the event. Whereas only a few visitors noted that the event
would be likely to lead to an increase in crime, many neutral responses were also received, as the
visitors lacked a base from which to compare crime levels. The visitors were also fairly well divided
with respect to whether the event caused significant negative social impacts.
As was to have been expected, visitors were also divided about whether South African football
players were major competitors. The visitors were also almost equally divided with respect to the
environmental impacts of the event.
7.3.4
Sport organisations
The sport organisations were positive about the long-term use of the facilities created for the event.
Most respondents thought neither that the event caused significant traffic congestion in the area
nor that it caused excessive noise that annoyed residents living in the vicinity of the stadia and Fan
Parks. Nearly half of the respondents agreed that entertainment opportunities related to the event
were provided for local residents. Most respondents disagreed that 2010 divided cultural groups.
Similarly to the residents, fewer sport organisations felt that the event had resulted in increased
community development through sport by foreign and local organisations.
Surprisingly, under half of the respondents were aware of 2010-related legacy projects in their area,
despite most of the sport organisations involved being football associations and clubs. Some
respondents indicated that they were involved in the events as volunteers via their clubs, which was
positive; however, few respondents noted that they were involved in income-generating
opportunities linked to the event.
Unsurprisingly, all sport organisations acknowledged the event to be an important one in the
international arena. Moreover, they perceived South Africa as being recognised as a major player by
the international community. The event was also seen to increase opportunities for South African
footballers competing national and internationally. Once again, there were mixed perceptions with
respect to the recognition of South African football players as world-class. Fewer positive responses
were received concerning increased national and international sponsorships as a result of the
successful hosting of the event, which perhaps points to the limited impact of the event on
grassroots football development, as well as to the potential lack of sustainability of projects initiated
as a result of the World Cup. However, the positive impact of 2010 on participation in football was
recognised.
74
7.4 SEIM Output
7.4.1
Economic impact
The Economic Impact Sheet included capital and operational expenditure, income, and injections.
Only expenditures directly related to 2010 were included. Expenditure data were obtained from the
City’s 2010 Project Team and included data from parastatals and SPVs for the period 2006 to 2010
(November). PGWC data were also taken into account, where such data were available. No private
sector data were included, due to limited responses to the business survey.
Total capital expenditure for the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ in Cape Town was nearly R12.5 billion and
dominated total expenditure, with 96% being classified as such. Operational expenditure amounted
to nearly R510.5 million and comprised 4% of total expenditure over the period 2006 to 2010. The
main capital expenditure categories were infrastructure, while trade, salaries and wages, and
transport were the main operational expenditure categories.
As a result of CAPEX spend, the event contributed a total of R14.3 billion to the Western Cape GGP,
with R2 173 billion being a direct contribution to the GGP. As a result of OPEX, the event contributed
a total of R653 million to the GGP, with R178 million being a direct contribution to the GGP.
The 2010 FIFA World Cup™ created a total of 151 416 jobs (148 044 due to CAPEX and 3 372 due to
OPEX). Almost 70 000 were direct jobs and an additional 82 108 jobs were leveraged in the Western
Cape economy. Thus, over 150 000 jobs were created, with an estimated direct impact of
approximately R15 billion and an initial investment of approximately R13 billion.
While limitations to the data were acknowledged, the results point to interesting features of megaevents. Nearly all the expenditure was of a capital nature, which is of importance to the hosting of
future events, as it suggests that, where possible, public institutions should partner with the private
sector to alleviate some of the capital expenditure burden and to maximise the potential economic
and job impacts of such hosting.
With FIFA as a partner, very little direct income from the event accrued to the City. The scenario
would, however, be significantly different for smaller events, which is another factor that should
weigh heavily when future decisions are made regarding the hosting of mega-events in Cape Town.
7.4.2
Social impact
The social output indicators all ranged from favourable to extremely favourable. Risk management,
event greening and event aspects focusing on special needs were rated as extremely favourable. In
addition, how the destination was experienced and the profiling of the City were also rated as
extremely favourable, once again emphasising the positive destination marketing impact of the 2010
FIFA World Cup™. Finally, risk management and the manner in which public policy issues were dealt
with were also rated extremely favourable.
7.4.3
Sport impact
Similarly, with respect to sport output, it is evident that all the responses ranged from favourable to
extremely favourable, except for the response to participant calibre. Such calibre referred to the
perceived quality of South African players on the world stage and, in all likelihood, to the general
performance of Bafana Bafana in relation to other national teams, which was rated extremely
75
unfavourable. In addition, negative media coverage, the use of the facilities in the long-term, and
the ranking of South Africa as a competitive football nation were all rated extremely favourable. A
focused analysis of the negative media coverage that prevailed during 2010 in respect of the above
is needed to establish the actual impact that such coverage had.
7.4.4
Sport Event Performance Index of SEIM
The respective indices comprising SEPI were as follows for the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ in Cape Town:

Economic – 84%;

Social – 80%; and

Sport – 75%.
The 2010 FIFA World Cup™ was found to fall within the range (75%–100%) of a Category A event.
The overall index was 2.4 out of a possible three, or 80%, thus indicating that the World Cup had a
very favourable impact on Cape Town.
7.5
Conclusions and Recommendations
Reflecting on the City’s strategic objectives of compliance, legacy and leverage, the following
conclusions can be drawn, based on the short-term findings of this report.
Compliance with FIFA requirements for hosting the games
CoCT achieved the objective of compliance, as expressed in the following results76:

The expression of confidence in the event being successfully hosted, and satisfaction as to
how the event was organised by visitors, residents, business and sports bodies lends
credence to the compliance that was achieved with FIFA requirements.

The reduction in the perception of crime expressed by both residents and business postevent, bears testimony to compliance regarding safety and security.

The expectations of major inconveniences as a result of traffic congestion or possible
vandalism or hooliganism for both residents and business did not materialise.
Optimising the developmental impact and leaving a legacy
The findings of the study suggest that the City achieved mixed results in relation to the objective of
optimising developmental impact and the leaving of a legacy. The result was not surprising, given
the competing demands faced by a host city in meeting compliance requirements, while
simultaneously using the event as a platform for achieving developmental objectives.
All key targeted groups (residents, business and sport bodies) felt that the event achieved a legacy
for South Africa. However, upon further examination the short-term results were mixed, especially
in relation to the social and sporting impacts, as can be seen below.

76
From a business perspective, the World Cup seemed to have a positive impact economically,
as well as with respect to the improvement and development of the infrastructure.
However, concerns were also expressed by business post-event that infrastructural
development took place mainly near the Stadium and that there was a decrease in the
perception that businesses in the area would strengthen.
While the aim of the research programme in question was not to assess compliance, the results serve as
indicators of the degree of compliance being achieved.
76

The economic impact of the event, as measured by SEIM, was generally felt to be positive by
both business and residents.

In terms of social impacts, the nation-building boost of the event was much less for residents
post-event, while it increased for business, but high levels of pride for Cape Town and South
Africa hosting the event were expressed by both business and residents. Post-2010, business
felt more than the residents that the event divided cultural groups.

The sport impacts were generally positive in terms of creating interest in and awareness of
football, and, to a slightly lesser extent, participation. However, residents and sport bodies
were less positive about community development through sport by foreign and local
organisations post-2010.
Maximising the promotional and positioning opportunities – leverage
CoCT achieved the strategic objective of leverage with respect to maximising the promotion and
positioning opportunities associated with the World Cup, as can be seen in the following results:

The World Cup was the primary reason for visiting Cape Town for the majority of visitors,
with the event attracting many first-time visitors to Cape Town and South Africa.

Good impressions and experiences of Cape Town generated positive word of mouth, with
Cape Town standing to benefit from additional tourism generation in the future.

Residents and business were also positive about the creation of a platform by the event as a
regional showcase, with it providing a major boost for tourism during the event and
increasing the capacity to attract future business.
In conclusion, it is evident that, in terms of the City’s strategic objectives of hosting the 2010 FIFA
World Cup™, compliance and leverage was achieved, although the short-term developmental
impacts of the event and the associated legacy remain unclear. Follow-up research should be
pursued in order to create a longitudinal research base with the capacity to reflect further on the
City’s attainment of the strategic objectives in the longer term.
Based upon the key outcomes of this report, the following recommendations are advanced.
7.5.1
Future mega-event research
For future research of a similar nature, it is recommended that the City starts planning at least two
years in advance and that it integrates the research plan upfront into the overall event
implementation plan, monitoring and reporting processes.
7.5.2
Longitudinal research
The 2010 FIFA World Cup™ Research undertaken by CoCT and CHEC in Cape Town will provide a
strong platform for further event impact-related research in future. It is also acknowledged that the
research presented in this report focuses on the short-term impacts of the event and that a
longitudinal approach to assessing the long-term impacts of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ is
recommended.
In relation to such findings, the following suggestions are made:

Follow-up research should be conducted in 2011 and 2013 with residents and business and
the public sector and parastatals.
77

Retrospective media analysis should be conducted to assess any changes in media coverage,
pre-, during and post-event, in the key source markets.
Use of SEIM for future event research in the City
7.5.3
Bearing in mind that the lessons learned from the research should play a significant role in informing
the future planning of mega-events in the City, the following recommendations are made:

CoCT and SRSA should conduct a debriefing to review the process and methodology in order
to inform impact assessments of other events to be hosted by the City and the City’s events
planning and management processes.

Discussions should also include the use of SEIM as a forecasting tool in relation to
prospective event bidding.

Lessons from, and refinements to, SEIM should be discussed with SRSA in order to
strengthen SEIM.

A more comprehensive environmental component should be included in SEIM, particularly in
relation to the important current greening focus and initiatives concerning events.
7.5.4
City and CHEC collaboration and future research
Regarding collaboration between the City and CHEC, as well as future research, the following
recommendations are made:

The City and CHEC should conduct a debrief with respect to the implementation of the
project, as well as in relation to discussing a way forward, with further analysis of the
respective survey data relevant to the range of the targeted groups (i.e. residents and
business) and subgroups (e.g. residents in those areas that hosted the PVAs).

All completed research using CoCT data should be shared and used actively by CoCT and
CHEC partners to support the development of Cape Town as an events destination.
7.5.5
Green Goal and Responsible Tourism
While positive steps have been taken to green events, it is recommended that the greening of
events should feature even more strongly in future events. The importance of greening events
should be communicated and implemented by all targeted groups. Similarly, the City should build on
its programmes to integrate responsible tourism into future event planning, as its hosting of the
2010 FIFA World Cup™ demonstrated that there are many potential opportunities for improvement
that should impact on all targeted groups.
7.5.6
Knowledge management and transfer
Importantly, the socio-economic impact research results will contribute to knowledge creation of
mega-event experiences in developing contexts and have direct implications for knowledge transfer
to Brazil in relation to that country’s hosting of the 2014 FIFA World Cup™. It is, therefore,
recommended that the City, as 2010 host city, facilitates a knowledge exchange with Brazil 2014 that
extends to event research and to the monitoring and evaluation of the event impacts. As mentioned
in section 7.5.4 above, the City should continue its collaboration with CHEC to support the future
development of Cape Town as an events destination. Moreover, the City should make use of any
upcoming knowledge exchange platforms to share the results as well as the learnings stemming
from the current research programme.
78
7.6
Concluding remarks
The unique approach taken in this study, including using
the four local universities’ and SRSA‘s expertise, the rich
information that is now available to the City, CHEC and
SRSA, and the important lessons learned from the entire
experience add to the CoCT research legacy of the 2010
event. The lessons learned from the research play a
significant role in informing future planning of megaevents in the City. In addition, the results contribute to the
knowledge creation of mega-event experiences in developing contexts, and have direct implications
for knowledge transfer to Brazil in relation to the 2014 FIFA World Cup™.
79
8. Annexures
Annexure 1: List of 2010 Data and Conditions for
Accessing the Data from CoCT
The following list of output figures is available for the
respective surveys:

visitor’s survey;

resident’s surveys (all pre- and post-event);

business surveys (all pre- and post-event); and

sport survey.
A written request for the output figures to be forward to the CoCT:
A written request for output figures can be made by emailing 2010surveys@capetown.gov.za. The
request should specify who will be using the figures, for what purpose the data will be used, and
when a copy of the product outcome (i.e. academic paper, poster, proceedings, report, etc.) will be
returned to the City as part of the City’s ongoing 2010 knowledge management process. The City’s
role in providing access to the output figures and for funding the research should be acknowledged.
80
Annexure 2: SEIM Data Collection Instruments (SRSA, SEIM 2010)
Resident’s Fact Sheet
Name
of
event
Date
Yes
1 No
2010
FIFA
World Questionnaire
Cup
no.
11
June –
11 July
Interviewer
2
Indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with each statement by making an 'X' in the
right-hand column.
SOCIAL & SPORT IMPACTS OF LOCALLY HELD
SPORTING EVENTS
STATEMENT
Indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree
with each STATEMENT
Strongly
Disagree
disagree
Undecided
or don’t
know
Agree
Strongly
agree
X2
I feel proud that the World Cup is
hosted in my town, city or area.
1
2
3
4
5
R2
X4
The World Cup leads to increased
spending in the local area, thus
ensuring economic benefits to
the local community.
1
2
3
4
5
R3
X4
The World Cup ensures
employment opportunities to the
local community.
1
2
3
4
5
R4
X4
The World Cup ensures extended
shopping hours in the area.
1
2
3
4
5
X9
Entertainment opportunities
related to the World Cup are
provided for the local
community.
1
2
3
4
5
R6
X9
I think that the facilities created
for the World Cup can be used in
the long term by the local
community.
1
2
3
4
5
R7
X21
I feel that the use of public funds
in support of the World Cup is
acceptable.
1
2
3
4
5
R1
R5
81
R8
X22
The World Cup causes no traffic
congestion within the local area.
5
4
3
2
1
R9
X22
The World Cup leads to excessive
noise that leads to the
annoyance of local residents.
5
4
3
2
1
R10
X23
An increase in crime is/was
experienced due to the World
Cup, e.g. theft, muggings, etc.
5
4
3
2
1
R11
X23
An increase in vandalism
(damage to properties) is/was
experienced due to the World
Cup.
5
4
3
2
1
R13
X30
The World Cup has NO significant
negative social impacts.
1
2
3
4
5
R14
X27
The World Cup increases air
pollution in the local area.
5
4
3
2
1
R15
X28
The World Cup leads to
significant production of waste.
5
4
3
2
1
R16
X28
The environment is degraded
due to the World Cup.
5
4
3
2
1
R17
X29
I think that the prices of goods in
the area have increased due to
the World Cup.
5
4
3
2
1
R18
X31
The World Cup has NO significant
negative environmental impacts.
1
2
3
4
5
R19
Y2
I am more AWARE of football
due to the World Cup.
1
2
3
4
5
82
R20
Y10
I am more INTERESTED in
football due to the World Cup.
1
2
3
4
5
R21
Y10
I will consider PARTICIPANTING
in football in the near future
1
2
3
4
5
Y5
I feel confident that the World
Cup has been / is being
successfully hosted in South
Africa / the hosting city.
1
2
3
4
5
R22
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND COOPERATION
©
Urban-Econ , 2008
83
Federation’s Fact Sheet
SPORT IMPACTS OF LOCALLY HELD SPORTING EVENTS
STATEMENT
Indicate the extent to which you agree or
disagree with each STATEMENT
Strongly
Disagree
disagree
Undecided
or don’t
know
Agree
Strongly
agree
F1
Y1
The World Cup is an important event within the
international sporting arena.
1
2
3
4
5
F2
Y4
I feel confident in South Africa's ability to bid
competitively with regard to similar events.
1
2
3
4
5
F3
Y7
The international community recognises South
Africa as a major player in the field of football.
1
2
3
4
5
F4
X9
The World Cup leads to the establishment of
facilities that can also be used by communities in
the long term.
1
2
3
4
5
F5
Y8
South African athletes in this sport are worldclass athletes.
1
2
3
4
5
F6
X2
The World Cup causes no traffic congestion
within the local area.
1
2
3
4
5
F7
Y11
The World Cup ensures increased opportunities
for local athletes for competing both nationally
and internationally.
1
2
3
4
5
F8
Y12
The World Cup creates new opportunities for the
growth of the sport.
1
2
3
4
5
F9
Y12
The World Cup has resulted in an increased
number of training opportunities for local
athletes.
1
2
3
4
5
Only answer the following questions if the event has been hosted more than once.
Y5
I feel confident that the World Cup has been /
can be successfully hosted in South Africa / the
host city.
1
2
3
4
5
F11
Y9
An increased number of (national and
international) sponsorships resulted from the
successful hosting of the World Cup.
1
2
3
4
5
F12
Y10
1
2
3
4
5
F13
Y10
1
2
3
4
5
F14
Y10
1
2
3
4
5
F10
I think that the number of SPECTATORS that
have been attracted to football, has increased
since the event was hosted
I think that the number of PARTICIPANTS that
have been attracted to football, has increased
since the event was hosted
The World Cup has led to an increased number
of tournaments on a national level.
84
F15
X20
Facilities of the World Cup are accessible to
people with disabilities via e.g. ramps, adapted
ablution facilities, wider doors and paths, etc.
1
2
3
4
5
F16
Y13
The facilities for the World Cup are suitable for
long-term use.
1
2
3
4
5
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND COOPERATION
©
Urban-Econ , 2008
85
Economic Impact Fact Sheet
SPORT EVENT IMPACT MODEL – ECONOMIC IMPACT SHEET
EVENT NAME e.g. Super 14
2010 FIFA World Cup
ORGANISATION/FEDERATION
e.g. SARU
CONTACT PERSON
TELEPHONE NO.
CELLPHONE NO.
FAX
EMAIL
TYPE OF EVENT e.g.
international/local level
CATEGORY e.g. mass
spectator, mass participation,
championship event,
speciality event
CAPITAL
EXPENDITURE
(CAPEX)
Capital expenditure refers to the funds required for the building and the
construction of the proposed facilities or infrastructure
DEFINITION/
DESCRIPTION
Spending, usually by public
sector on facilities that will
be used by the general
public, e.g. roads.
INDICATORS
CODE
CODE
VALUE
Total spending on
infrastructure, e.g.
roads, stadia, etc.
PUB_INF
E1
20.00
Public spending
10.00
Private sector leverage
10.00
Spending on sporting
facilities, e.g. building or
upgrading of a stadium
Total spending on
facilities
FAC
E2
1.00
86
Spending on equipment (e.g.
lights, extra stands
(temporary), etc.) needed for
event
OPERATIONAL
EXPENDITURE
(OPEX)
Total spending on
equipment
EQUIP
E3
1.00
Operational expenditure refers to expenditure incurred by event
organisers to make event happen
DEFINITION/
DESCRIPTION
INDICATORS
CODE
CODE
Total spending on
maintenance
Cost incurred in order to
ensure the upkeep of
facilities, e.g. cleaning,
painting, general repairs, etc.
VALUE
1.00
Total spending on
maintenance
MAIN
Total salaries, wages and
personal income
E4
1.00
E46
5.00
Remuneration of staff directly
involved in the organising and
hosting of the event (casual
staff)
Total spending on
direct salaries
SALARIES
E5
1.00
Remuneration of staff directly
involved in the organising and
hosting of the event (casual
staff)
Total spending on
direct wages
WAGES
E6
1.00
87
Subsistence allowances,
incentives, bonuses,
volunteer allowances, etc.
Total spending on
allowances
E7
1.00
Prize money for category
winners participating in the
event
Total spending on
prize money
E8
1.00
Other remuneration-type
expenditure, e.g. commission
E9
1.00
Total spending on
volunteers, e.g. catering,
clothing, etc.
E10
3.00
Volunteer expenses
1
E10i
1.00
Volunteer expenses
2
E10ii
1.00
Volunteer expenses
3
E10iii
1.00
PROF_FEES_T
E11
4.00
Space (i.e. offices)
PROF_FEES1
E11i
1.00
Facilities
PROF_FEES2
E11ii
1.00
FEES
E11iii
1.00
REGIST
E11iv
1.00
Total rent paid for the hiring
of facilities and/or
equipment, including rates
and taxes
Equipment
Other
88
Total spending related to
advertising and promotion of
the event, branding for
sponsors, etc.
E47
3.00
Total spending on
promotions and
advertising
LEVIES
E12
1.00
Total spending on
marketing
LICENCES
E13
1.00
Total spending on
branding
RENT_T
E14
1.00
Total spending on media and
broadcasting/coverage
2.00
Expenses related to
press releases,
media conferences,
interviews, social
responsibility, etc.
PR
E15
1.00
Expenses related to
the broadcasting /
media coverage of
the event
MEDIA_E
E16
1.00
HOSP_T
E17
3.00
Hospitality &
catering costs 1
HOSP_1
E17i
1.00
Hospitality &
catering costs 2
HOSP_2
E17iii
1.00
Total spending on catering,
hospitality, functions, special
guests, sponsors,
entertainment, etc.
89
Hospitality &
catering costs 3
HOSP_3
E17iii
Total spending relating to
first aid, doctors, physiotherapists, dope testing,
emergency services, etc.
1.00
3.00
Medical expenses 1
MED
E18
1.00
Medical expenses 2
1.00
Medical expenses 3
1.00
Total spending related to
administrative functions and
organising of the event, e.g.
stationary, printing,
telephone costs, etc.
ADMIN_T
E19
3.00
Admin expense 1
ADMIN_1
E19i
1.00
Admin expense 2
ADMIN_3
E19iii
1.00
Admin expense 3
ADMIN_4
E19iv
1.00
TRANS_T
E20
3.00
TRANS_3
E20iii
1.00
Total spending related to
travelling costs for the event
Travelling expenses
1
Travelling expenses
2
Travelling expenses
3
1.00
TRANS_4
E20iv
1.00
90
Total spending related to
accommodation costs during
organising/planning of the
event
ACC_T
E21
3.00
Accommodation
expenses 1
ACC_3
E21iii
1.00
Accommodation
expenses 2
ACC_4
E21iv
1.00
Accommodation
expenses 3
Costs related to ensuring
that the event is safe, e.g.
hiring of security guards
1.00
SEC
E22
3.00
Security 1
1.00
Security 2
1.00
Security 3
1.00
Spending on the insurance of
equipment, public liability,
etc.
INS
Insurance 1
E23
3.00
E48
1.00
Insurance 2
1.00
Insurance 3
1.00
91
Remuneration of
professionals involved in
organising and hosting the
event, e.g. event
management fees,
federation fees, consulting
fees, accounting fees, legal
fees, membership fees, etc.
RENT_2
E25
3.00
Professional fees 1
RENT_3
E25i
1.00
Professional fees 2
RENT_4
E25ii
1.00
Professional fees 3
PROMOTIONS
E25iii
1.00
STAGING_T
E30
3.00
STAGING_3
E30iii
1.00
Costs related to the staging
of the event, e.g. opening
and closing ceremonies,
entertainment, music,
preparations, set-up costs,
physical products, etc.
Staging costs 1
1.00
Staging costs 2
STAGING_4
E30iv
1.00
E49
1.00
Staging costs 3
Other spending
Total spending on goods, i.e.
medals, trophies, clothing,
etc.
92
INCOME
Donations to charities for
social work, human
development, sport
development, etc.
OTHER2
E39
1.00
Government taxes
OTHER4
E41
1.00
Staff training costs
E42
1.00
Other costs related to trade
E50
1.00
Income or sponsorships generated for hosting of the event
DEFINITION/DESCRIPTION
INDICATORS
Income received from
granting a corporate sponsor
the right to the event
CODE
CODE
VALUE
NAME
RIGHTS
IN1
12.00
Income received from
granting a corporate sponsor
the right to attach the
organisation’s name to the
name of the event
Income from
naming rights
IN1i
4.00
Income received from
granting a public and/ private
broadcaster the right to
broadcast the event or to
ensure media coverage
Income from
broadcasting/media
rights
IN1ii
4.00
93
Income received from other
rights granted to corporate
sponsors
Other rights
IN1iii
Income received from
royalties
4.00
15.00
Royalties 1
IN3
5.00
Royalties 2
5.00
Royalties 3
5.00
Public and private sectors
sponsorships received for the
hosting of the event
SPONS_T
IN2
6.00
SPONS_1
IN2i
2.00
SPONS_2
IN2ii
2.00
SPONS_3
IN2iii
2.00
Income received from
donations
IN8
1.00
Income generated by the
expo held during the event (if
applicable)
IN9
2.00
Income received from the
hiring of facilities or
equipment
IN10
3.00
Income received from
advertising
IN11
4.00
IN5
5.00
Sponsorship 1
Sponsorship 2
Sponsorship 3
Other income
Income received from selling
tickets to spectators
SALES_1
94
Total Rand value for
subscriptions
Other income
INJECTIONS
OTHER_T
IN12
6.00
IN7
7.00
Spending drawn into the local economy from outside its borders
DEFINITION/
DESCRIPTION
INDICATORS
CODE
CODE
VALUE
Spending by participants or
spectators within the local
economy on products or
services
Spending by participants or
spectators within the local
economy on products, e.g.
food & beverages, shopping,
souvenirs, etc.
Trade
VISIT_1
J1i
1.00
Spending by participants or
spectators within the local
economy on accommodation
Accommodation
VISIT_2
J1ii
1.00
Spending by participants or
spectators within the local
economy on transport, e.g.
hired cars
Transport
VISIT_3
J1iii
1.00
95
Spending by participants or
spectators within the local
economy on services, e.g.
tours, entertainment, etc.
Activities and
services*
Outside (foreign or from
other regions) investment in
the local economy due to the
event
Investments 1
J1iv
1.00
INVEST_T
J2
3.00
INVEST_1
J2i
1.00
1.00
Investments 2
Investments 3
INVEST_2
J2ii
1.00
LEVER_1
J3i
1.00
LEVER_2
J3ii
1.00
LEVER_3
J3iii
1.00
LEVER_4
J3iv
3.00
Spending by corporate
sponsors, in addition to
sponsorship provided, on
e.g. branding, hospitality,
expos, supporting events,
etc. (Leverage spending)
Total additional
spending on
hospitality
Total additional
spending on
accommodation
Total additional
spending on
advertising
Other spending on leverage
(specify)
96
Urban-Econ Development
Economists©, 2008
Other injections 1
OTHER1
J4
1.00
Other injections 2
OTHER2
J4i
1.00
Other injections 3
OTHER3
J4ii
1.00
97
Visitor’s Questionnaire
Name of
event
2010
FIFA
World
Cup
Questionnaire
no.
Date
11
June –
11 July
2010
Interviewer
Section A:
Please complete the following questions as accurately as possible.
Is the World Cup your primary
reason for visiting the area?
V1
V2
Participant
Yes
1
No
2
If 'NO',
end the
interview
Indicate whether you are a PARTICIPANT or a SPECTATOR
1
Spectator
2
Other
3
If 'OTHER',
end the
interview
V3
I am a local
resident
living in the
immediate
area.
I am a
foreign
visitor
visiting the
area for the
day only.
V4
Indicate which ONE of the following is applicable to you
1
I am a
domestic
visitor
living
elsewhere
in South
Africa and
visiting
the area
for the
day only.
2
4
I am a
foreign
visitor
staying
overnight
in the
area.
5
I am a
domestic
visitor
living
elsewhere
in South
Africa, but
am staying
overnight
in the area.
3
If you are NOT a day visitor and your primary purpose of visit is due to the event, how many nights have
you stayed or will you stay in the area?
98
1 night
1
4 nights
4
2 nights
2
Specify
number of
nights, if
longer than 4
nights
5
3 nights
3
Not applicable
(day visitor or
local resident)
6
V5
0–1
V6
Amount
V7
How many people, including yourself, are in your IMMEDIATE group (i.e. spouse/partner, children,
friends, support staff, etc.) attending this event?
5–
2–4
10
10+
Currency
In a breakdown of this sum (indicated in A6), what is the TOTAL AMOUNT of money that you spent or
are likely to spend on the following during your entire stay in the AREA?
Spending
category
Amount
Currency
Accommodation
Transportation
Food and
beverages
Entertainment
Sporting
equipment
Souvenirs &
shopping
Indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with each STATEMENT by placing an 'X' in the
appropriate right-hand column.
Section B:
STATEMENT
V8
Y5
I feel confident that the World Cup has been
successfully hosted in South Africa / the
hosting city.
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Don’t
know
Agree
Strongly
agree
1
2
3
4
5
99
V9
X13
I am satisfied with how the World Cup is
organised.
1
2
3
4
5
V10
X13
I am satisfied with the level of service that I
have received during the World Cup.
1
2
3
4
5
V11
X12
I am more aware of tourism facilities in the
area due to attending the World Cup.
1
2
3
4
5
V12
X22
The World Cup caused / is causing no traffic
congestion within the local area.
1
2
3
4
5
V13
X23
The World Cup leads / has led to an increase
of crime in the local area.
1
2
3
4
5
V14
X27
The World Cup increases pollution, e.g. air
pollution, waste, etc.
V15
X30
V16
X1
1
2
1
2
Only answer the following question if you are a South African
I feel proud that South Africa is hosting the World
Cup.
1
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
3
4
5
2
3
4
5
1
2
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND COOPERATION
3
4
5
Only answer the following question if you are a foreigner
V17
X12
V18
Y7
©
Urban-Econ , 2008
I am more aware of other destinations in South
Africa after attending the World Cup.
1
100
Social Impacts and Sport Impacts
SPORT EVENT IMPACT MODEL – FACT SHEET
SECTION B – SOCIAL IMPACTS
Indicator
X3
Code
FSB1
Information needed
Were any public policy issues flagged before or at the World Cup?
FSB2
If yes, indicate number of public demonstrations.
Answer
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
If yes, indicate nature:
X4
X5
X6
FSB3
Indicate number of locals employed during the World Cup.
FSB4
Indicate number of locals employed pre-event, e.g. construction (if applicable). [i]
FSB5
Were entertainment opportunities created for locals (and others) as part of the
World Cup?
FSB6
If yes, how many entertainment opportunities?
FSB7
Indicate the number of projects/programmes or charities supported.
FSB8
Indicate the total number of individuals benefiting from such initiatives.
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
Value
Commen
t
101
X8
X7
X11
X12
FSB9
Indicate number of ongoing projects/programmes or charities.
FSB10
Indicate the R value of infrastructure investment. [ii]
FSB11
Indicate the R value of maintenance on public facilities. [iii]
FSB12
Indicate number of individuals impacted by skills training (if applicable).
FSB13
Indicate number of volunteers participating in the World Cup.
FSB14
Indicate the R value of private sector investments.
FSB15
Indicate the R value of public sector investments.
FSB16
Has the destination received any media coverage, e.g. print coverage, event footage,
website, etc.?
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
FSB17
Indicate number of tourism bookings (if available). [iv]
No. of group
bookings
FSB18
102
FSB19
Accommodation booked
(beds)
FSB20
FSB21
X14
X15
FSB22
Has the number of visitors to the area (because of the World Cup) increased?
FSB23
Indicate number of linkages to travel and tourism services (e.g. official travel agent;
tourism board or forum, etc., via advertisements; website; other, such as
broadcasting of destination, etc.).
FSB24
Indicate the number of volunteers with disabilities (if available).
FSB25
Indicate the number of persons with disabilities benefiting from participation,
training, etc. (if applicable).
FSB26
Indicate the number of female volunteers.
FSB27
Indicate the number of women employed.
FSB28
Indicate the number of women benefiting from skills training.
103
X16
FSB29
Indicate the number of youth volunteers.
FSB30
Indicate the number of youth employed, e.g. casual labour.
FSB31
Indicate the number of youth benefiting from skills training.
FSB32
Indicate the number of HDSA volunteers.
FSB33
Indicate the number of HDSAs employed.
FSB34
Indicate the number of HDSAs benefiting from skills training.
X22
FSB35
Do you believe that traffic congestion is a major challenge with regard to the World
Cup? [v]
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
X23
FSB36
Are you aware of crime-related incidents or have any such incidents been reported?
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
FSB37
If yes, how many?
X17
If yes, indicate nature:
X24
FSB38
Are you aware of any incident related to spectator violence or sport hooliganism? (if
applicable)
FSB39
If yes, how many?
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
If yes, indicate nature.
X25
FSB40
Have any measures or initiatives been implemented to green the World Cup?
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
104
FSB 41
If yes, how many?
If yes, indicate nature.
X26
FSB42
Have risk management measures been implemented?
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
SECTION C – SPORT IMPACTS
Y1
FSC1
Do you perceive the World Cup to be an important event within the international
sporting arena? [vi]
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
FSC3
Volume of media coverage of event. [vii]
R value
# of
countries
# of viewers
# of print
exposure
105
# of hits on
official
website
Y3
FSC4
Indicate the R value of public resources invested in supporting the sport directly or
indirectly. [viii]
Y5
FSC5
Do you have confidence in South Africa’s ability to host the World Cup? (see source
[ix] below)
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
Y6
FSC6
Has the World Cup taken place in South Africa before?
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
FSC7
Has the World Cup taken place on more than one occasion?
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
FSC8
Does the World Cup take place on a regular basis?
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
FSC9
Does the chance exist that the event will take place in South Africa again in the near
future?
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
Y7
FSC10
Does the international community recognise South Africa as a major competitor with
regard to the sport? [x]
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
Y8
FSC11
Is the South African team defending an international title?
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
FSC12
Are South African athletes medal winners in this sport?
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
106
Y9
FSC13
Has an increased number of sponsorships been attracted to the sport due to the
World Cup?
FSC14
If yes, how many sponsors?
FSC15
Indicate the number of sport development programmes connected to the World Cup
[xi].
FSC16
Indicate the total number of individuals benefiting from such programmes annually.
Y14
FSC17
Has the World Cup received any negative media coverage over the past few years?
[xii]
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
Y15
FSC18
Has dope testing been carried out?
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
FSC19
If yes, how many athletes tested positively?
FSC20
Have there been any sport-related injuries?
FSC21
Have precautions been taken in this regard?
Y12
Y16
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
SOURCES:
[i] Information to be obtained from government agencies if they were responsible for the construction of facilities
[ii] Same value as E1 on Economic Impact Sheet
[iii] Same value as E4 on Economic Impact Sheet
[iv] If data not at hand consult provincial, district or local government departments responsible for tourism as possible sources
[v] Consult local traffic departments
[vi] International federation input
[vii] Information obtained from media monitoring companies
107
[viii] R value of all sponsorships from the public sector
[ix] International federation input
[x] International federation input
[xi] Sport federation or event organiser input
[xii] Information to be obtained for media monitoring companies, if available
©
Urban-Econ ,
2008
108
Annexure 3: Customised CoCT and CHEC 2010 Research Data Collection Instruments
Resident’s Survey (Pre-Event)
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Questionnaire #: _______
Surveyor: _____________
Date: May 2010
Area: A / MP / K / B
Street: ________________
CITY OF CAPE TOWN & CHEC (UWC)
2010 FIFA WORLD CUP™ RESIDENT PRE-EVENT SURVEY
1. 2010 World Cup
(Please circle your answers)
TM
Are you aware that the 2010 FIFA World Cup is being held in your city during June/July 2010?
If yes, please continue:
Are you aware of any 2010 World Cup-related legacy projects in your area?
If yes, please name the legacy project(s) of which you are aware.
Yes
No
Yes
No
How were you most informed about the World Cup?
Television
Newspaper
Internet
Community meetings
Friends
Other (specify):
Email
SMS
Radio
Posters
Do you have any suggestions for improving the communication relating to the 2010 event?
How are you / will you be involved in the 2010 World Cup?
A spectator with tickets to a soccer match(es) (If yes, which one[s]?)
11/6 Urg–Fra
14/6 Ita–Par
18/6 Eng–Alg 21/6 Por–Kor 24/6 Cam–Ned
29/6 Rnd of 16
If
you
have
bought
a
ticket
for
another
game
somewhere
where:_________________________________________
Were you happy with the price of the 2010 World Cup tickets?
Happy
A spectator at the Fan Park in Cape Town
A
spectator
at
the
PVAs
(If
yes,
which
one[s]?)
______________________________________
Watching the games with my family on my own TV at home
Watching the games on TV with a group of friends at someone’s home
A volunteer at soccer matches
Directly employed
Income-generating opportunities linked to the event, e.g. business opportunities and tourism
Uncertain / Don’t know
Other (specify)
Yes
3/7 Quarter-F
else,
please
No
6/7 SemiF
specify
Satisfactory
Yes
Yes
Overpriced
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
109
2. Perceptions and Attitudes towards the 2010 World Cup
Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements that relate to different aspects of the 2010
TM
FIFA World Cup . Use the codes below and choose one response for each statement:
SA = Strongly agree
A = Agree
N = Neutral
D = Disagree
SD = Strongly disagree
SA
A
N
D
SD
South Africa’s readiness to host the 2010 FIFA World Cup
I feel confident that this event will be successfully hosted by South Africa.
The hosting of the FIFA World Cup in 2010 will result in South Africa achieving a legacy.
Use of public money / funds
I feel that the use of public funds in support of this event is acceptable.
Too much money is being spent on the 2010 event that could be spent on other activities.
Perceived infrastructural development and service delivery impacts
Infrastructural development has taken place mainly near the stadia.
I think that the facilities created for this event can be used in the long term by local residents.
SA
Perceived economic impacts of hosting the 2010 FIFA World Cup
The FIFA World Cup will only benefit the rich and big businesses.
The hosting of this event ensures employment opportunities for local community members.
The hosting of this event leads to increased spending in the local area, thus ensuring economic
benefits to the members of the local community.
The hosting of this event ensures extended shopping hours in the area of the event.
I think that the prices of goods in the area will increase due to the event.
Perceived social impacts of hosting the 2010 FIFA World Cup
The 2010 event will be a major boost for nation-building in South Africa
Reason for the above answer:
I feel proud that this event is hosted in my area.
I feel proud that South Africa is hosting the 2010 FIFA World Cup.
It is very important that Bafana Bafana (South African national soccer team) wins matches in the
World Cup.
I feel more a part of the African continent as a result of this event.
The 2010 event will be a major boost for the province.
The 2010 event will increase social inequalities.
An increase in crime will be experienced due to this event, e.g. theft, muggings, etc.
Extensive alcohol abuse by persons attending this event will lead to spectator hooliganism.
Entertainment opportunities related to the event will be provided for local residents.
This event will divide cultural groups.
Regional Showcase
The event will showcase South Africa in a positive light.
Crime will showcase South Africa in a negative light.
A
N
D
SD
110
Perceived environmental impacts of hosting the 2010 FIFA World Cup
The environment is being degraded due to the hosting of the event.
The hosting of the event will increase air pollution in the local area.
The hosting of the event will lead to a significant production of waste.
The event has NO significant negative environmental impacts.
Sport impacts
I am more AWARE of football/soccer due to the hosting of this event.
I am more INTERESTED in football/soccer due to the hosting of this event.
I will consider PARTICIPATING in football/soccer in the near future.
The World Cup will lead to increased community development through sport by foreign organisations.
The World Cup will lead to increased community development through sport by local organisations.
3. Resident profile
What is your age?
<20
21–30
Gender
Marital status
Are you a South African citizen?
Cultural group
How do you see yourself in your country?
31–40
51–70
Single
Married
Separated
African
Indian
Majority
Coloured
Minority
61–70
Male
Divorced
Yes
White
Neither
If you have indicated that you belong to a minority or majority grouping, on what do you base that status?
My language
My religion
Political affiliation
Other:
No formal education
Primary completed Secondary completed
Highest educational level
attained:
Undergraduate degree
Postgraduate
Other (specify):
Employment status:
No. of people in household
Monthly household income:
(in Rands)
Student/Scholar
Unemployed
Retired
Administrator/Manager
Home executive
Labour/Unskilled
0
1
2
3
4
5
Certificate/diploma
Sales/Marketing
Business person
Self-employed
6
7
8
Other:
______
Female
Widowed
No
NA
Not sure
Artisan/Technician
Professional
Other:
9
None
0–10 000
11 000–20 000
31 000–40 000
41 000–50 000
51 000–60 000
10
Other:
____________
21 000–30 000
>60 000 (specify):
R_______________
111
Resident’s Survey (Post-Event)
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Questionnaire # PVA: ___
Date: August 2010
Area: ________________
Street: ________________
Surveyor: ______________
CITY OF CAPE TOWN & CHEC
2010 FIFA WORLD CUP™ RESIDENT POST-EVENT SURVEY
1. 2010 FIFA World Cup™
(Please answer the following by marking your answers with an X.)
TM
Are you aware that the 2010 FIFA World Cup was held in your city during June/July 2010?
If yes, please continue:
Are you aware of any 2010 World Cup-related legacy projects in your area?
If yes, please name the legacy project(s) of which you are aware.
Yes
No
Yes
No
How were you most informed about the World Cup?
Television
Newspaper
Internet
Email
Community meetings
Friends
Other (specify):
SMS
Radio
Do you have any suggestions for improving the communication relating to:
The 2010 event:
Future events:
How were you involved in the 2010 World Cup?
A spectator with tickets to a soccer match(es) (If yes, which one[s]?)
11/6 Urg–Fra
14/6 Ita–Par
18/6 Eng–Alg 21/6 Por–Kor
24/6 Cam–
29/6 Rnd of 16
Ned
Other (specify):
A spectator at the Fan Park in Cape Town
A spectator at the PVAs (If yes, which one[s]?) ______________________________________
Watching the games with my family on my own TV at home
Watching the games on TV with a group of friends at someone’s home
A volunteer at soccer matches
Directly employed
Income-generating opportunities linked to the event, e.g. business opportunities and tourism
Uncertain / Don’t know
Other (specify):
Posters
Yes
3/7 Quarter-F
No
6/7 SemiF
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
2. Perceptions and Attitudes towards the 2010 World Cup
Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements that relate to different aspects of the 2010
TM
FIFA World Cup . Use the codes below and choose one response for each statement:
SA = Strongly agree
A = Agree
N = Neutral
D = Disagree
SD = Strongly disagree
SA
South Africa’s readiness to host the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
I feel confident that this event was successfully hosted by South Africa.
The hosting of the FIFA World Cup in 2010 has resulted in South Africa achieving a legacy.
Use of public money/funds
A
N
D
SD
112
I feel that the use of public funds in support of this event was acceptable.
Too much money was spent on the 2010 event that could have been spent on other activities.
Perceived infrastructural development and service delivery impacts
Infrastructural development took place mainly near the stadia.
I think that the facilities created for this event can be used in the long term by local residents.
Perceived economic impacts of hosting the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
The FIFA World Cup will only benefit the rich and big businesses.
The hosting of this event ensured employment opportunities for local community members.
The hosting of this event led to increased spending in the local area, thus ensuring economic
benefits for the members of the local community.
SA
The hosting of this event led to increased spending in the local area, thus ensuring economic
benefits to the members of the local community.
The hosting of this event ensured extended shopping hours in the area of the event.
I think that the prices of goods in the area increased due to the event.
The cost of maintenance for the use of stadia after the World Cup will pose challenges.
Perceived social impacts of hosting 2010 FIFA World Cup™
The 2010 event was a major boost for nation-building in South Africa
Reason for your above answer:
I feel proud that this event was hosted in my area.
I feel proud that South Africa hosted the 2010 FIFA World Cup.
It was very important that Bafana Bafana (SA national soccer team) won matches in the World
Cup.
I feel more a part of the African continent as a result of this event.
This event caused significant traffic congestion in the local area.
The 2010 event increased social inequalities.
An increase in crime (e.g. thefts, muggings, etc.) was experienced due to this event.
An increase in vandalism (damage of properties) was experienced due to the hosting of the event.
Extensive alcohol abuse by persons attending this event led to spectator hooliganism.
The event led to excessive noise, which annoyed local residents.
Entertainment opportunities related to the event were provided for local residents.
This event divided cultural groups.
This event had NO significant social impacts.
Regional Showcase
The event showcased South Africa in a positive light.
Crime showcased South Africa in a negative light.
The 2010 event was a major boost for tourism in Cape Town.
Perceived environmental impacts of hosting the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
The environment was degraded due to the hosting of the event.
The hosting of the event increased air pollution in the local area.
The hosting of the event led to a significant production of waste.
The event had NO significant negative environmental impacts.
Sport impacts
A
N
D
SD
113
I am more AWARE of football/soccer due to the hosting of this event.
I am more INTERESTED in football/soccer due to the hosting of this event.
I will consider PARTICIPATING in football/soccer in the near future.
The World Cup led to increased community development through sport by foreign organisations.
The World Cup led to increased community development through sport by local organisations.
3. Future mega-event bids
No
Do you think that South Africa should bid to host future mega-events such as the Olympic Games?
Yes
Provide reasons for your response: ______________________________________________________________________________
4. Resident profile
What is your age?
18–20
21–30
Gender
Marital Status
Single
Are you a South Africa citizen?
Cultural group
African
How do you see yourself in your country?
31–40
41–50
Married
Separated
Indian
Majority
Coloured
Minority
51–60
Male
Divorced
Yes
White
Neither
61–70
Other: ______
Female
Widowed
No
N/A
Not sure
If you have indicated that you belong to a minority or majority grouping, on what do you base that status?
My language
My religion
Political affiliation
Other:
Highest educational level
attained:
Employment status:
Number of people in household
Monthly household income:
(in Rands)
No formal education
Primary completed
Undergraduate degree
Student/Scholar
Unemployed
Postgraduate
Retired
Administrator/Manager
Home executive
Labour/Unskilled
0
1
2
3
4
5
Secondary completed
Certificate/Diploma
Other (specify):
Sales/Marketing
Business person
Artisan/Technician
Professional
Self-employed
6
7
8
None
0–10 000
11 000–20 000
31 000–40 000
41 000–50 000
51 000–60 000
Other:
9
10
Other:
____________
21 000–30 000
>60
000
R_________
(specify):
114
Business Survey (Pre-Event)
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Questionnaire #: A____
Date: May 2010
Area: ______________
CITY OF CAPE TOWN & CHEC
2010 FIFA WORLD CUP™ BUSINESS PRE-EVENT SURVEY
SECTION A: Business engagement in 2010 FIFA World Cup™
1.0 Will you or any employees of your business be attending any 2010 FIFA World Cup™ matches
at Cape Town Stadium?
Yes
No
Not sure
1.0.1
Yes
If yes, will you or any employees be attending as official representatives of the business?
No
Not sure
1.1
Will you or employees of your business be watching any 2010 FIFA World Cup™ matches at
official public viewing areas/Fan Parks in Cape Town?
Yes
No
Not sure
1.2 Is your business a sponsor of any of the following because of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Local soccer clubs
Youth soccer clubs
School teams
Official World Cup activities
Local tourism 2010 initiatives (specify):
Other (specify):
1.3 What advertising mediums will your business use specifically for the 2010 World Cup™?
None
Internet
TV
Flyers
Radio
Billboards
Street-pole ads
Other (specify):
SECTION B: Staffing at the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
2.0 Has your business staff received any additional training related to the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
2.0.1 If yes, what type(s) of training?
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
115
2.1 Has your staff attended any City-supported events on doing business in relation to the 2010
FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
Not sure
2.2 Is your business changing its delivery of goods and/or services to cater for the tourists visiting
South Africa for the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
2.2.1 If yes, how?
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
2.3 Will your business be opening other branches in the city for the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
2.3.1 If yes, where?________________
2.4 Do you plan to employ more people in the city during the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
2.4.1 If no, why not?_____________________________________________________________
2.4.2 If yes, how many people do you plan to employ?
__________ temporary _________full-time
_________part-time
2.4.3 If yes, for what purposes? ___________________________________________________
2.5 During the 2010 FIFA World Cup™, will your business be offering other services/products to
those that it currently offers?
Yes
No
2.5.1 If yes, what type(s) of services?_______________________________________________
2.5.2 If yes, why? ______________________________________________________________
SECTION C: Business preparation and the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
3.1 Have any international corporations or local companies approached your business to form
partnerships/relationships for the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
3.1.1
If
yes,
specify
type
of
partnership
and
for
what
purpose:
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
3.2 Has the construction of the Cape Town Stadium impacted on your business?
116
Yes
No
3.2.1 If yes, specify in what way(s):_____________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
3.3 Has your company made any direct investment in Cape Town as a result of South Africa
hosting the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
3.3.1 If yes, specify how: _____________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
3.3.2 If yes, provide the estimated Rand value.
OPEX
CAPEX
3.4 Will your business be improving its security system for the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
3.4.1 If yes, specify how: __________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
3.5. Is it positive for your business to have a 2010 FIFA World Cup™ stadium in Cape Town or is it a
negative?
Positive
Negative
3.6 Will there be an official public viewing area / Fan Park near your business?
Yes
No
Not sure
3.6.1 If yes, will the public viewing area / Fan Park be positive for your business or negative?
Positive
Negative
N/A
3.6.2 Please specify how: ___________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
SECTION D: Perceptions of 2010 FIFA World Cup™
4.0 Do you think the global economic recession will have an impact on the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
4.0.1 If yes, how? ___________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
4.1 What are you most concerned about regarding South Africa’s hosting of the 2010 FIFA World
Cup™?
__________________________________________________________________________________
117
4.2 Do you think that there will be a higher incidence of crime in Cape Town during 2010 FIFA
World Cup™ matches held at the Stadium?
Yes
No
4.2.1 If yes, how/why? _______________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
4.3 Do you think your business will be impacted upon negatively or positively during the 2010 FIFA
World Cup™?
Positively
Negatively
4.4 Do you foresee experiencing any problems during the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
4.4.1 If yes, what type of problems do you foresee experiencing?____________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
4.4.2 If yes, how can these problems can be addressed?
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
SECTION E: Perceptions of 2010 FIFA World Cup™ – Post-Event
5.0 How do you think your business will be impacted upon after the World Cup?
__________________________________________________________________________________
5.1 Would your business be interested in using the Stadium after the World Cup?
Yes
No
5.1.1 If yes, for what purposes?
Corporate hospitality suites
Conference venue
Other (specify):
5.2 Do you think that hosting the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ has assisted with the improvement and
development of infrastructure in the area where your business is located?
Yes
No
118
SECTION F: Business expectations of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
6. Business expectations of the 2010 World Cup
Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements in relation to the codes
provided.
CODE: 1 = Strongly agree; 2 = Agree; 3 = Neutral; 4 = Disagree; 5 = Strongly disagree (SD)
South Africa’s readiness to host the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
I feel confident that this event will be successfully hosted by South Africa.
1
2
3
4
5
The hosting of the FIFA World Cup™ in 2010 will result in South Africa achieving 1
a legacy.
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Too much money was and is being spent on the 2010 event that could be spent 1
on other activities.
Infrastructural development impacts
2
3
4
5
Infrastructural development has taken place mainly near the stadia.
1
I think that the facilities created for this event can be used in the long term by 1
local residents.
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
2
3
4
5
2
3
4
5
Use of public money/funds
I feel that the use of public funds in support of this event is acceptable.
Perceived economic impacts of hosting the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
The hosting of this event ensures employment opportunities for local 1
community members.
The hosting of this event leads to increased spending in the local area, thus 1
ensuring economic benefits for the members of the local community.
The hosting of this event ensures extended shopping hours in the area of the
event.
I think that the prices of goods in the area will increase due to the event.
1
2
3
4
5
Levels of black economic empowerment will improve.
Local businesses will increase their sales and profits during the event.
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
In the area where the Stadium is located, businesses will strengthen.
Perceived social impacts of hosting 2010 FIFA World Cup™
1
2
3
4
5
I feel proud that this event is being hosted in my city.
1
2
3
4
5
I feel proud that South Africa is hosting the 2010 FIFA World Cup™.
1
2
3
4
5
It is very important that Bafana Bafana wins matches in the 2010 FIFA World 1
Cup™.
2
3
4
5
I feel more of a part of the African continent as a result of this event.
This event will divide cultural groups.
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
An increase in crime (e.g. thefts, muggings, etc.) will be experienced due to this 1
event.
Extensive alcohol abuse by persons attending this event will lead to spectator 1
2
3
4
5
2
3
4
5
The 2010 event will be a major boost for nation-building.
119
hooliganism.
This event will cause significant traffic congestion within the local area.
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
1
2
3
4
5
The event will showcase South Africa in a positive light.
Crime will showcase South Africa in a negative light.
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
The hosting of 2010 will be a major boost for tourism in Cape Town.
1
2
3
4
5
The event will attract future business to Cape Town.
1
2
3
4
5
An increase in vandalism (damage of properties) will be experienced due to the
hosting of the event.
The event will stimulate training and skills development for members of the
community.
Regional Showcase
Perceived environmental impacts of hosting the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
The environment is being degraded due to the hosting of the event.
1
2
3
4
5
The event has NO significant negative environmental impacts.
1
2
3
4
5
SECTION G: Awareness of regulations regarding the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
7.0. Do you plan to market your product(s) or service(s) close to the Cape Town Stadium during the 2010
FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
7.1 Indicate whether you are familiar with regulations/restrictions regarding the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
relative to the following:
Yes (specify)
Parking/use of vehicles in designated areas around the Stadium
Marketing products/services close to the FIFA World Cup™ Stadium
Sale of products/ services during the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
Construction/renovations during the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
Security and safety
Entertainment activities
7.2. If you are aware of any of the regulations/restrictions, how were you made aware of them (i.e.
source of information)?
Media (TV, newspapers, radio, etc.)
City officials
Business organisation/forum
Other (specify):
No
120
SECTION H: Responsible Tourism and the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
(This section is only applicable to tourism businesses)
8.0 Do you promote responsible tourism practices in your business?
Yes
No
8.0.1 If yes, specify how from the following list:
Responsible tourism practices
Procure local goods and services
Yes
No
Use water sparingly and efficiently, e.g. drink tap water
Use electricity efficiently, e.g. switch off lights/TV when not in room
Dispose of rubbish carefully, recycle and reuse
Participate in social responsibility programmes
Provide visitors with responsible tourism tips
Other (specify):
8.1 Has the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ contributed to you initiating more responsible tourism
practices in your businesses?
Yes
No
8.1.1. If yes, state specific initiatives:
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
8.2 Are you aware of the City of Cape Town’s Responsible Tourism Campaign?
Yes
No
__________________________________________________________________________________
SECTION I: Business Profile
9.0 In what sector is your business?
Commercial – Asset Management
Wholesale and Retail
Legal
Commercial – Financial Business Services
Oil and Gas
Manufacturing
Tourism and Hospitality
Other (specify):
9.1 Where is your head office located? _________________________
121
9.2 How long has the business been located in Cape Town?
0–1 year
2–5 years
6–10 years
11–20 years
>20 years
Don’t know
9.3 Specify estimated turnover or income in 2009?
>50 million ZAR
<1 million ZAR
>100 million ZAR
1–5 million ZAR
>5 million ZAR
5–10 million ZAR
>500 million + ZAR
>10 million ZAR
Cannot tell
Uncertain
>20 million ZAR
9.4 How many full-time employees are currently employed by the business in Cape Town? (State
number) _________________
9.4.1 What proportion of your total employees in Cape Town are:
Full-time
%
Part-time
Contract basis
%
%
9.5 How far (in KM) is your business located from the Cape Town Stadium? If more than one
outlet/branch, please state the distance of the business closest to the Stadium: _________(in KM)
Thank you for your participation/contribution.

122
Business (Post-Event)
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Questionnaire #: ____
Date: ______ Sept 2010
Area: ______________
CITY OF CAPE TOWN & CHEC
2010 FIFA WORLD CUP™ BUSINESS POST-EVENT SURVEY
SECTION A: Business engagement in the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
2.0 Did you or any employees of your business attend any 2010 FIFA World Cup™ matches at Cape
Town Stadium?
Yes
No
Not sure
1.2.1
Yes
If yes, did your employees attend as official representatives of the business?
No
Not sure
1.3
Did you or employees of your business watch any 2010 FIFA World Cup™ matches at official
public viewing areas / Fan Parks in Cape Town?
Yes
No
Not sure
1.4
Is your business a sponsor of any of the following because of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
Local soccer clubs
Youth soccer clubs
School teams
Official World Cup activities
Local tourism 2010 initiatives (specify):
Other (specify):
1.3 What advertising mediums did your business use specifically for the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
None
TV
Radio
Street-pole ads
Internet
Flyers
Billboards
Other (specify):
SECTION B: Staffing at the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
2.0 Did your business staff receive any additional training related to the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
2.0.1 If yes, what type(s) of training/information sessions/courses, etc.?
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
123
2.1 Did your staff attend any City-supported events/conference/sessions on doing business in
relation to the FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
Not sure
2.2 Did your business change its delivery of goods and/or services to cater for the tourists visiting
South Africa for the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
2.2.1 If yes, how?
__________________________________________________________________________________
2.3 Did your business open other branches/outlets in the city for the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
2.3.1 If yes, where?________________
2.4 Did you employ more people in the city during the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
2.4.1 If no, why not?_____________________________________________________________
2.4.2 If yes, how many people did you employ? __________ temporary
_________part-time
_________full-time
2.4.3 If yes, for what purposes? ___________________________________________________
2.5 During the FIFA World Cup™, did your business offer other services/products to those that it
currently offers?
Yes
No
2.5.1 If yes, what type(s) of services?_______________________________________________
2.5.2 If yes, why? ______________________________________________________________
SECTION C: Business preparation and the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
3.1 Did any international corporations or local companies approach your business to form
partnerships/relationships for the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
3.1.1 If yes, specify type of partnership and for what purpose:
__________________________________________________________________________________
124
3.2 Has the construction of the Cape Town Stadium impacted on your business?
Yes
No
3.2.1 If yes, specify in what way(s):
__________________________________________________________________________________
3.3 Did your organisation secure any business / future deal flow from the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
3.3.1 If yes, indicate type of project and estimated value:
Type
Rand value
Type
Rand value
3.4 Has your company made any direct investment in Cape Town as a result of South Africa
hosting the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
3.4.1 If yes, what types of expenses were incurred? (Estimate the Rand value for capital (CAPEX)
and operational (OPEX) expenditure)
CAPEX
Rand value
OPEX
New buildings
Maintenance
Building expansions
Total salaries, wages and personal
income
New vehicles
Administrative costs
Roads
Rent paid for hiring of facilities
Other infrastructure, e.g.
Advertising, media and promotion
costs
purchase of equipment, e.g.
lights,
stands,
fridges,
furniture, etc.
Catering and hospitality
Safety and security
Travelling and accommodation
Insurance
Other (specify):
3.5 Did the company’s turnover increase due to the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
3.5.1 If yes, by how much? (Use a percentage increase) ____________%
3.6 Did your business improve its security system for the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
Rand value
125
3.6.1 If yes, specify how:
_____________________________________________________________
3.7 Was it positive or negative for your business to have a FIFA World Cup™ stadium in Cape Town?
Positive Negative
3.8Was there an official public viewing area / Fan Park near your business?
Yes
No
Not sure
3.8.1 If yes, was the public viewing area / Fan Park positive for your business or negative?
Positive
Negative
N/A
3.8.2 Please specify how:
_________________________________________________________________________________
SECTION D: Perceptions of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
4.0 Do you think the global economic recession impacted on the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
4.0.1 If yes, how?
__________________________________________________________________________________
4.1 Did your business experience any incidence of crime in Cape Town during the 2010 FIFA
World Cup™?
Yes
No
4.1.1 If yes, how/why?
______________________________________________________________________________
4.2 Was your business impacted upon negatively or positively during the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Positively
Negatively
4.3Did your business experience any problems during the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
4.3.1 If yes, what type of problems did your business experience?
__________________________________________________________________________________
5.0 How do you think your business will be impacted upon after the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
__________________________________________________________________________________
126
5.1 Would your business be interested in using the Cape Town Stadium after the 2010 FIFA World
Cup™?
Yes
No
5.1.1 If yes, for what purposes?
Corporate hospitality suites
Conference venue
Events
Other (specify):
5.2 Do you think that hosting the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ has assisted with the improvement and
development of infrastructure in the area where your business is located?
Yes
No
6. Were you aware that the city had a Green Goal Programme to ensure that it hosted a
responsible event?
Yes
No
SECTION E: Business expectations of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
7. Business expectations of the 2010 World Cup
Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements in relation to the codes
provided.
CODE: 1 = Strongly agree; 2 = Agree; 3 = Neutral; 4 = Disagree; 5 = Strongly disagree (SD)
South Africa’s readiness to host the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
I feel confident that this event was successfully hosted by South Africa.
1
The hosting of the FIFA World Cup™ in 2010 resulted in South Africa achieving a 1
legacy.
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
1
2
3
4
5
Too much money was spent on the 2010 event that could have been spent on 1
other activities.
Infrastructural development impacts
2
3
4
5
Infrastructural development has taken place mainly near the stadia.
Facilities created for this event can be used in the long term by local residents.
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
The hosting of this event ensured employment opportunities for local 1
community members.
2
3
4
5
The hosting of this event led to increased spending in the local area, thus 1
ensuring economic benefits to the members of the local community.
2
3
4
5
The hosting of this event ensured extended shopping hours in the area of the
event.
I think that the prices of goods in the area increased due to the event.
1
2
3
4
5
Levels of black economic empowerment improved.
1
2
3
4
5
Use of public money/Funds
I feel that the use of public funds in support of this event was acceptable.
1
1
Perceived economic impacts of hosting the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
127
Local businesses increased their sales and profits during the event.
1
2
3
4
5
In the area where the Stadium is located, businesses will strengthen.
Perceived social impacts of hosting 2010 FIFA World Cup™
The 2010 event was a major boost for nation-building.
1
2
3
4
5
I feel proud that this event was hosted in my city.
1
2
3
4
5
I feel proud that South Africa hosted the 2010 FIFA World Cup™.
1
2
3
4
5
It was very important that Bafana Bafana won matches in the 2010 FIFA World
Cup™.
1
2
3
4
5
I feel more of a part of the African continent as a result of this event.
1
2
3
4
5
This event divided cultural groups.
1
An increase in crime (e.g. thefts, muggings, etc.) was experienced due to this 1
event.
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
Extensive alcohol abuse by persons attending this event led to spectator 1
hooliganism.
2
3
4
5
This event caused significant traffic congestion within the local area.
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
2
3
4
5
1
1
An increase in vandalism (damage of properties) was experienced due to the
hosting of the event.
The event stimulated training and skills development for members of the 1
community.
Regional Showcase
The event showcased South Africa in a positive light.
1
2
3
4
5
Crime showcased South Africa in a negative light.
The hosting of 2010 was a major boost for tourism in Cape Town.
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
The event will attract future business to Cape Town.
1
2
3
4
5
Perceived environmental impacts of hosting the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
The environment was degraded due to the hosting of the event.
1 2
3
4
5
The event had NO significant negative environmental impacts.
3
4
5
1
2
SECTION F: Awareness of regulations regarding the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
8.0. Did you plan to market your product(s) or service(s) close to the Cape Town Stadium during the
2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
8.1 Indicate whether you were familiar with regulations/restrictions regarding the 2010 FIFA World
Cup™ relative to the following:
Yes (specify)
Parking/use of vehicles in designated areas around the Stadium
Marketing products/services close to the FIFA World Cup™ Stadium
Sale of products/services during the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
Construction/renovations during the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
No
128
Security and safety
Entertainment activities
8.2. If you were aware of any of the regulations/restrictions, how were you made aware (i.e. source of
information)?
Media (TV, newspapers, radio, etc.)
City officials
Business organisation/forum
Other (specify):
SECTION G: Responsible Tourism and the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
(This section is only applicable to tourism businesses)
9.0 Do you promote responsible tourism practices in your business?
Yes
No
9.0.1 If yes, specify how from following list:
Responsible Tourism Practices
Procure local goods and services
Yes
No
Use water sparingly and efficiently, e.g. drink tap water
Use electricity efficiently, e.g. switch off lights/TV when not in room
Dispose of rubbish responsibly, recycle and reuse
Participate in social responsibility programmes
Provide visitors with responsible tourism tips
Other (specify):
9.1 How did you learn about responsible tourism?
Cape Town Tourism
CoCT Responsible Tourism Campaign
Meetings/
workshops
Other (specify):
Print media
Electronic media
9.2 Has the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ contributed to you initiating more responsible tourism
practices in your business?
Yes
No
9.2.1. If yes, state specific initiatives:
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
9.3 Are you aware of the City of Cape Town’s Responsible Tourism Policy?
Yes
No
129
SECTION I: Future mega-events bids
10.0 Do you think that South Africa should bid to host future mega-events, such as the Olympic
Games? Please provide reasons for your response.
Yes
No
SECTION J: Business Profile
11.0 Select the industrial classification that best describes your firm:
Agriculture, forestry and fishing
Mining and quarrying
Electricity, gas and water
Construction (contractors)
Transport, storage and communication
Manufacturing
Trade, catering and accommodation services
Financial intermediation, insurance, real estate and
business services
Community, social and personal services
11.1 What specific type of tourism or hospitality business is your organisation? (Only applicable to
tourism businesses)
Accommodation (specify):
Hotel
B&B
Car hire
Travel agent
Guest-house
Backpackers
Conference organiser
Attraction
Other (specify):
11.2 Where is your business located? (If more than one branch, please state location of head
office.)
__________________________________________________________________________________
11.3 How long has the business been located in Cape Town?
0–1 year
11–20 years
2–5 years
>20 years
6–10 years
Don’t know
11.4 What type of enterprise is it?
Micro/Informal (1–4 employees)
Small (5–10 employees)
Large (>50–<150 employees)
Public
Medium (11–50 employees)
Other (specify):
130
11.5 Specify estimated turnover for the latest financial year:
<1 million ZAR
1–5 million ZAR
5–10 million ZAR
>10 million ZAR
Uncertain
Cannot tell
11.6 How many full-time employees are currently employed by the business in Cape Town? (State
number) _________________
11.6.1 What proportion of your total employees in Cape Town are:
Full-time
%
Part-time
Contract basis
%
%
11.7 How far (in KM) is your business located from the Cape Town Stadium? If more than one
outlet/branch, please state the distance of the business closest to the Stadium: _________(in KM)
Thank you for your participation/contribution.

131
Visitor’s Survey
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Questionnaire # V: _______
Date:
2010
Area: Fan Park O Stadium Precinct O
2010 FIFA WORLD CUP™ VISITOR SURVEY
Name:
_______________
Time:
________________
We are conducting a survey important for future international sport events. The aim is to collect data regarding the sport of football in general and in particular to evaluate
tourist and economic impacts of the FIFA World Cup 2010™ in Cape Town specifically, and in South Africa generally. Your answers are very important to us. Please note
that all answers will be kept confidential and presented anonymously and scientifically. Thank you for your participation!
VISITOR INFORMATION
1. Where is your main domicile / place of residence? (V3)
1.1 If South Africa, specify region:
Eastern Cape
Free State
Gauteng
KZN
Limpopo
Mpumalanga
Northern Cape
North West
Western Cape
1.1.1 For South Africans only: Did you forgo a vacation / holiday trip in order to attend the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
If yes, specify country:
No
If yes, specify City destination in South Africa:
1.1.2 If no, did you shift your vacation/holiday due to the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
Yes
No
1.1.3 If you forewent a vacation/holiday, how much money (in Rands) would you have spent on it? _____________________ (expenditures for yourself and your family)
132
1.2 If foreign visitor, specify country of residence:__________________________
2.How many tickets do you personally have for yourself for the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ matches?
2.1 O I have no tickets
2.2 O I have tickets for the following cities/stadia (indicate number of tickets per city)
Bloemfontein
Cape Town
Durban
Johannesburg
(Ellis Park)
Johannesburg
(Soccer City)
Nelspruit
Included in travel package
Competition
ticket
Port Elizabeth
Polokwane
Pretoria
Rustenburg
2.3. If have tickets, how did you obtain them? (Specify number)
Official FIFA ticketing agency
Corporate guest
winner
/
free
Other means (friends/family/website, etc.)
3.How many times will you visit an official FIFA Fan Park in total during the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ in the following cities?
Bloemfontein
Cape Town
Durban
Johannesburg
Polokwane
Port Elizabeth
Pretoria
Nelspruit
Rustenburg
Others in South
Africa
4. How many matches are you watching or are you going to watch today in the official Fan Park? O None O One O Two O Three O Four
5. Did others come with you to South Africa (if foreign tourist) or to the host city (if domestic tourist) who watched no football/soccer, neither in stadia nor at Fan
Parks, during the entire stay?
5.1. O Yes, specify number of people ________
5.2 O No
CONSUMER BEHAVIOR
6. Was your South African visit arranged as a tour package?
6.1. If yes, what was the total cost per person: (R)____________
6.2. What was included in your package?
O Yes
O No
133
Air travel
World Cup tickets
Accommodation
Food/beverage
Coach tours
Car hire
Other (specify):
7. Approximately how much money will you spend during the WHOLE 2010 FIFA World Cup? (Please write ‘0’ if no expenditure, or ‘x’ = I cannot guess that.)
Tickets (all World Cup tickets)
(R) ____________
Merchandise / 2010 fan-related articles
(R)____________
Shopping
(R)____________
Transportation, including air fares & other forms within South Africa (Stadium, public viewing)
(R)____________
Accommodation
(R)____________
Others (entertainment, visits to attractions, etc.)
(R)____________
7.1. For how many persons are these expenditures?
O For myself or O For ______person(s)
8. Approximately how much money will you spend TODAY? (V6/7) (Please write ‘0’ if no expenditure or ‘x’ = I cannot guess that.)
Food and drink
(R) ____________
Tickets (all World Cup tickets)
(R) ____________
Merchandise / 2010 fan-related articles
(R)____________
Journey to Stadium, public viewing…
(R)____________
Accommodation
(R)____________
Shopping
(R)____________
Others (entertainment, visits to attractions, etc.)
(R)____________
8.1. For how many persons are these expenditures?(V5)
O For myself or O For ______person(s)
9. Rate your purchasing behaviour at the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ on a scale of 1 = I purchase only what I really need to 5 = I purchase whatever I want.
1
2
3
4
10. Did you get financial support for your trip to this World Cup? O Yes
5
O No
11.How important was the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ in your decision to travel to South Africa (foreign visitors) / this host city (domestic visitors)? (V1)
1. Very unimportant
2. Unimportant
3. Neutral
4. Important
5. Very important
134
11.1. If very unimportant, unimportant or neutral, what was your primary reason?
Holiday
Business
Visiting friends/relatives
Shopping
Health/medical
Other (specify):
12. Please answer ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to the following statements.
Yes
No
I am watching this match because I happen to be in the region at this moment.
I extended my holiday to see this match.
13. How many overnight stays did / will you spend during the World Cup in South Africa (foreign visitors) in total or in other host cities (domestic tourists) and in what
type of accommodation?(V3/4) (Indicate number of nights where applicable.) In the last row include number of day trips as well.
Accommodation
type
Number of nights in each host city
Bloemfontein
Cape Town
Durban
Johannesburg
Nelspruit
PE
Polokwane
Pretoria
Rustenburg
Other
4–5 star hotel
1–3 star hotel
Guesthouse / B&B
Car/camping
Private room / flat /
house rental
Private accommodation
(friends/family)
No. of day trips
14. For overnight stays only: Did you plan to visit the following places regardless of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ during the next two years? (South Africa is not applicable
for domestic tourists.)
South Africa
Yes
No
Bloemfontein
Cape Town
Durban
Johannesburg
Nelspruit
Polokwane
Port Elizabeth
Pretoria
Rustenburg
135
PREVIOUS ATTENDANCE/VISITS
15. Have you attended a previous FIFA World Cup™?
O Yes Number of prior World Cups attended_________
16. Have you visited South Africa before this trip? (foreign tourists only)
O Yes Number of prior visits_________
17. Have you visited this city before this trip?
O Yes Number of prior visits to this city __________
18. Will you visit another country in Africa during this trip?
O Yes
18.1. If yes, which country/countries and for how many nights? How much money in total will you spend in the other African country/countries?
Country 1: _______________________________ nights_________
Total spending (R)____________
Country 2: _______________________________ nights_________
Total spending (R)____________
DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE / STATISTAL DATA
19. Country of origin (nationality) ____________________________
20. Gender
Male
Female
21. Age _______ years
22. Highest level of education attained
No formal education
Primary completed (7 yrs of schooling)
Secondary completed (>7 yrs of schooling)
Undergraduate degree
Postgraduate
Other (specify):
Certificate/diploma
23. Your monthly net income (after deduction of taxes and social security) ____________ (specify currency €/£/$/R)
24. Would you be willing to participate in a post-event survey after the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
O Yes O No
24.1. If yes, please provide your electronic mail address: ___________________________________________________________________
O No
O No
O No
O No
136
PERCEPTIONS OF SOUTH AFRICA AND CAPE TOWN
25. Indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with each STATEMENT with an ‘X’ in the right-hand column.
STATEMENT
Strongly
disagree
V8
I feel confident that this event has been successfully hosted in South Africa / Cape
Town.
V9
I am satisfied with how the World Cup is organised.
V10
I am satisfied with the level of service I have received during the event.
V11
I am more aware of tourism facilities in the area due to attending the event.
V12
The World Cup caused / is causing no traffic congestion in the local area.
V13
The World Cup leads / has led to increased crime in the local area.
V14
The World Cup increases pollution, e.g. air pollution, waste, etc.
V15
The World Cup has NO significant negative social impacts.
V16
Only answer the following question if you are a South African:
I feel proud that South Africa is hosting this event.
V17
Only answer the following questions if you are a foreigner:
I am more aware of other destinations in South Africa because of visiting the event.
V18
I think South African athletes or teams are major competitors in this sport.
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Agree
strongly
I am more aware of other destinations in the rest of Africa because of visiting the event.
The environment in Cape Town is being degraded due to the hosting of the 2010 FIFA
World Cup™.
During the 2010 FIFA World Cup™, I go out of my way to purchase goods and services
from local businesses.
26. What are were the main activities you intend participating in / have participated in during your stay in Cape Town? (Multiple responses):
Shopping
Business
Wildlife
Trading
Visiting natural attractions
Medical
Night-life
Theme parks
Visited a casino
Social (VFR)
Beach
Health
Cultural/Heritage
Competitive sport
Food & wine
137
Attended sport (other than 2010)
Adventure
Other (specify):
27. Indicate the main sources of information on the destination used prior to departure to Cape Town:
Television
Radio
Magazine
Newspaper
Internet
Travel guide
Previous visits
Work-related / professional colleagues
Social media platforms
Friends or relatives who have visited Cape Town or who are
residents
Other (specify):
28. Would you advise friends, relatives or colleagues to visit Cape Town?
Yes, definitely
Possibly
No, definitely not
29. Are you likely to take a trip to Cape Town in the next 12 months?
Yes, likely
Possibly
No, not likely
30. Have you been informed of any responsible tourism tips during your visit to Cape Town?
Yes
No
30.1 If yes, where have you seen these tips? (multiple responses)
Place of accommodation
Tourism attraction
Cape Town Stadium
FIFA Fan Park
Tourism information centre
Other (specify):
30.2 If yes, can you recall any of the responsible tourism tips? (multiple responses, unprompted)
Responsible tourism tips
Yes
No
Yes
Interact with locals and buy local goods and services
Use water sparingly and efficiently, e.g. drink tap water
Use establishments that make use of local services and products
Dispose of rubbish carefully, recycle and reuse
Donate to local charities instead of giving money to street children
Make use of public transport
Use electricity efficiently, e.g. switch off lights/TV when not in room
Other (specify):
31. How would you rate your general impressions / experiences of Cape Town in terms of the following?
Good
Friendliness
Fair
Poor
Good
Banking
Fair
Poor
No
138
Helpfulness
Entertainment
Transport
Value for money
Personal safety
Responsible tourism destination
Cleanliness
32. How important were environmental considerations in your choice of accommodation during the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
1. Very unimportant
2. Unimportant
3. Neutral
4. Important
5. Very important
33. How often did you separate your wet and dry waste in the correct bin during the 2010 FIFA World Cup™?
1. Never
2.Seldom
3. Sometimes
4. Almost always
5. Always, without exception
34. What was the main mode of transport you used to get to match / Fan Park from your place of accommodation today?
O Personal automobile O Motor coach / bus
O Rental car
O Walked
O Taxi
O BRT
O Other (specify): _____________
35. How did you arrive in this city?
O Air
O Rail O Personal automobile O Motor coach / bus
O Rental car
O Taxi
O Other (specify): _____________
36. What was your port of entry to South Africa? (Foreign tourists only) O Cape Town
O Durban
O Johannesburg O Other (specify): ____________
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION.
139
Sport Survey
OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Questionnaire # Sports: ___
Date: September 2010
Captured by:_____________
CITY OF CAPE TOWN & CHEC
2010 FIFA WORLD CUP™ SPORT FEDERATION & EVENT
ORGANISER SURVEY
1. 2010 FIFA World Cup™
(Please answer the following by marking your answers with an ‘X’.)
Are you aware of any 2010 FIFA World Cup
TM
-related legacy projects?
Yes
No
If yes, please name the legacy project(s) of which you are aware.
How were you most informed about the World Cup?
Television
Newspaper
Internet
Email
SMS
Radio
Posters
Community
Friends
meeting
Other
(specify)
Do you have any suggestions for improving the communication relating to:
The 2010 event?
Future events?
Did your club/organisation book tickets to a World Cup soccer match(es) via group booking (If yes, which one[s]?)
11/6
14/6
18/6
21/6
24/6
29/6
3/7
6/7
Urg–Fra
Ita–Par
Eng–Alg
Por–Kor
Cam–Ned
Spa–Port
Arg– Ger
Neth–Uru
How were you involved in the event?
Volunteers at soccer matches via club involvement
Yes
No
Income-generating opportunities (e.g. business opportunities and tourism) linked to the event
Yes
No
Uncertain / Don’t know
Yes
No
Other (specify):
2. Perceptions and Attitudes towards the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements that relate to different aspects of the
TM
2010 FIFA WORLD CUP . Use the codes below and choose one response for each statement:
SA = Strongly agree
A = Agree
N = Neutral
D = Disagree
SD = Strongly disagree
140
SA
South Africa’s readiness to host the 2010 FIFA World Cup™
The event was successfully hosted by South Africa.
The hosting of the event has resulted in South Africa achieving a legacy.
The event is an important event one within the international sporting arena.
The international community recognises South Africa as a major player.
The facilities built for the event can be used by communities.
Top South African footballers are world-class.
The event caused significant traffic congestion.
The event ensured increased opportunities for South African footballers competing both
nationally and internationally.
The successful hosting of the event has resulted in increased training opportunities for
South African footballers.
The successful hosting of the event has resulted in increased national and international
sponsorships.
The number of spectators at football games in South Africa / Cape Town has increased as a
result of the event.
An increased number of participants has been attracted to football since the event was hosted.
The event has led to an increased number of football tournaments, competitions, and
events with regard to football on a national level.
Facilities used for the event were accessible to people with disabilities via e.g. ramps,
adapted ablution facilities, wider door and paths, etc.
Facilities created for the event are suitable for long-term use.
The event creates new opportunities for the growth of football.
An increase in crime (e.g. thefts, muggings, etc.) was experienced due to the event.
An increase in vandalism (damage to properties) was experienced due to the hosting of the
event.
Alcohol abuse by spectators led to incidents of hooliganism during the event.
The event generated excessive noise that annoyed residents in the vicinity of the event
Entertainment opportunities related to the event were provided for local residents.
This event divided cultural groups.
This event had NO significant social impacts.
Sport impacts
The event has resulted in increased involvement/investment in community development
initiatives through sport by foreign donors.
A
N
D
SD
141
SA
A
N
The World Cup led to increased community development through sport by local organisations.
3. Future mega-event bids
3.1 Do you think that South Africa should bid to host future mega-events, such as the Olympic
Games? Please provide reasons for response.
Yes
4. Federation / Organisation Profile
This Section to be completed by a member of the Executive Body
Organisation’s type
Organisation’s
name
formal
Respondent’s full name
Designation
Contact no.
Fax no.
Physical address
No. of members of your
federation/
organisation
No
D
SD
142
Annexure 4: Skills Development
A key aspect of the project was to provide students with an opportunity to develop their research
skills and to build capacity in the four CHEC institutions and CoCT. Students who also had foreign
language skills were also targeted. Students from a broad range of disciplines (see Table 44 below
for further details) were involved. Students also had the opportunity to interact with four
international university groups that came to assist with the research programme in a voluntary
capacity (also see Table 44 below). In total, approximately 169 students and staff (18 local staff, 110
local students, 4 international staff, and 37 international students) were involved in pre-, during and
post-2010 research.
A number of staff from the various CHEC institutions also participated in the research programme,
primarily in relation to survey design, fieldwork training, and implementation. They served as field
supervisors during all phases of the 2010 event research programme. Additional academic specialists
were also used to lead the economic work stream and to advise on the sports work stream.
Some CoCT staff were also involved, one as a fieldwork manager77 and others in phase 1 of the data
quality checking.
Once again, the collaborative nature of the project was demonstrated with skills development across
both academia and the public sector. In addition, a few local and international students and staff
contributed to the translation of the residents’, sport and visitor’s surveys (see Table 44 below).
Table 44: Researchers who contributed to the CoCT–CHEC 2010 Research Project.
Cape Peninsula University of Technology
Capacity and Name
CHEC CoCT Project Manager
Prof. Kamilla Swart
Research Manager
Dion Chain
Supervisors
Brendon Knott
Hilary Bama
Ncedo Ntloko
Research Administration
Gayatoenesa Barends
Bukelwa Mbinda
Sport survey (liaison with sport
federations / fieldworker)
Jacob Moroe
Sport survey (isiXhosa translation)
77
Foreign
language
Department
Centre for Tourism Research in Africa (CETRA)
Tourism Management (CETRA)
Sport Management
Tourism Management
Tourism Management
Tourism Management (CETRA)
CETRA
Sport Management
The role of the fieldwork manager in the 2010 World Cup was recognised as forming part of the top 50 2010
Champions in the City of Cape Town by the Mayor and review panel.
143
Khayelethu Njana
Business survey
Norbert Haydam
Data Checkers
Erin Hardenberg
Qudoos Stofberg
Tracy Daniels
Fieldworkers
Ernest Safari
Gershwin Knowlden
Levurne Goodman
Lionel Mtetwa
Mugisha Rurangwa
Nelly Bama
Oliver Kanyabikale
Riyad Peters
Steven Visser
Data capturers
Abigail Whithair
Alice Cousins
Frizzy Achu
Maswane Seemane
Megan Jurd
Nuraan Hendricks
Moebara Levy
Sadia Jacobs
Sikhona Mtotywa
Taariq Abrahams
Wandile Matandela
Yumnah Isaacs
Zizongke Sigodi
Sport Management
Marketing and PR
Tourism Management (CETRA)
Tourism Management (CETRA)
Tourism Management (CETRA)
French
French
French
French
Tourism Management
Sport Management
Tourism Management (CETRA)
Tourism Management (CETRA)
Tourism Management
Project Management
Tourism Management & Event Management
Sport Management
Sport Management (CETRA)
Sport Management (CETRA)
Sport Management
Tourism Management (CETRA)
Tourism Management (CETRA)
Tourism Management (CETRA)
Tourism Management (CETRA)
Opthalmic Science
Tourism Management
Sport Management
Construction
Sport Management
Tourism Management (CETRA)
Sport Management
University of the Western Cape
Capacity and Name
CHEC CoCT Reference Group
Prof. Marion Keim Lees (Chair)
Dr Clemens Ley
Dr Sue Bassett
Lois Dippenaar
Foreign
language
Department
ICESSD
ICESSD
SRES
CHEC Coordinator 2010 Project
Fieldwork Supervisors
Candise Stroud
HIV & AIDS Unit (Education Faculty)
Clever Chikwanda
ICESSD
John Edas
SRES
Simone Titus
Rochshana Kemp
Data Supervisors
SRES
SRES
Innocent Karangwa
Statistics
Philomene Nyirasafari
Statistics
Fieldworkers
Dr Clemens Ley
French
ICESSD
144
German
Spanish
Alvine Bih
French
Economics and Management Science
Anastacia Ferus
Law
Anele Ndabeni
ICESSD3.3
– Women for Peace
Bantu Ackhard Sidloyi
ICESSD3.4
– Women for Peace
Doreen Nchang
French
Linguistics
Joshua Oghenetega
Economics and Management Science
Kebareng Tsiane
Computer Science
Khaya Msughwana
ICESSD3.5
– Women for Peace
Lameck Sacka
Occupational Therapy
Maribel Tichaawa
French
Business Administration
Melvis Funiba
French
Women and Gender Studies (Faculty of Arts)
Mncedisi Mbatha
ICESSD3.6
–World Cup Network
Nandhipha Filani
ICESSD3.7
– Women for Peace
Nchenge Eyong
French
Business Administration
Olga Bongkiyung
French
Health Science
Ruth Kwenchi
Computer Science
Shuaib Holland
Economics and Management Science
Timothy Oghenetega
Management
Zainoenisa Johaadien
Economics and Management Science
Zukiswa Kopo
ICESSD3.8
– Women for Peace
Data Capturers
Aneeqa Desai
Education
Ebrahim Abrahams
Economics and Management Science
Latiefa Karriem
Information Systems
Nabeel Ely
Economics and Management Science
Sadieq Abrahams
Economics and Management Science
Thaakieb Samodien
Life Sciences
Washeemah Isaacs
Bachelor of Arts
PVA Resident’s Survey
Dr Susan Bassett (Project
Coordinator)
SRES Department Coordinators
Marie Young (Afrikaans
translation)
Barry Andrews (Questionnaires)
Vivien Kensley (Administration)
Sino Stofile (isiXhosa translation)
ICESSD Coordinators
Prof. Marian Keim Lees
Dr Clemens Ley
Bellville PVA
Brendan Edas
Chandre Reddy
Elandi Coetzee
Halima Lila
145
Kobwino Norbert
Martha Kabaka
Mgwinnam Mulu
Therina Mulder
Athlone PVA
Blake Parks
Elizabeth Nibagwiri
Lee Goliath
Louise Uwamaliya
Marie Claire Uwihirwe
Naathirah Hendricks
Philomeini Niyasafari
Rucia November
Khayelitsha PVA
Clever Chikwanda
Mcedise Mbatha
Bantu Ackhard Sidloyi
Nadipha Filani
Zukiswa Kopo
Khaya Msufwana
Anele Ndabeni
3.9
3.10
3.11
isiXhosa
isiXhosa
isiXhosa
isiXhosa
isiXhosa
isiXhosa/
Afrikaans
ICESSD
ICESSD – World Cup Network
ICESSD – Women for Peace
ICESSD – Women for Peace
ICESSD – Women for Peace
ICESSD – Women for Peace
ICESSD – Women for Peace
Mitchell’s Plain PVA
Bianca Kennedy
Chrisander McArthur
Chrishae Nutt
Faustino McArthur
Jill Caster
Lee-Roy Saville
Merna Nicholls
Nathan Charles Kayser
Solminic Joseph
University of Cape Town
Capacity and Name
Foreign
language
Department
Sport Survey (Initiation, Plan
preparation)
Dr David Maralack
Management Studies (Sport)
Fieldworkers
Language
Department
Ignacio Casarone
Spanish/
Portuguese/
Italian
Film and Media Production
Leandro David
Spanish/
Portuguese
Information Technology
Ricardo de Almeide
Spanish/
Portuguese
Bachelor of Arts
Data Capturers
Blaise Ntweli
Engineering
Yumna Ogier
Humanities
146
University of Stellenbosch
Capacity and Name
Foreign
language
Department
CHEC Reference Group
Prof. Liz Bressan
Human Performance Sciences
Supervisors
Dr Dean Allen
Human Performance Sciences
Gareth Fulton
Human Performance Sciences
Fieldworkers
Emmanuel Mambela
Geography
Ternille Emandine
Sport Science
Trudine Nell
Sport Science
Ulrich Kongo
French
Geography
Economic work stream (Plan, data
coordination, review, report)
Johan Fourie
Economics
Hassan Essop
Economics
Sport survey (Coordination,
supervision)
Dr Dean Allen
Human Performance Sciences
College of Cape Town
Name
Foreign
language
Rishqa Davids
Department
Education
Ummul – Qurra University (Makkah)
Name
Ebrahim Barends
Foreign
language
Arabic
Department
Language
Drexel University (USA)
Capacity and Name
Supervisor
Prof. Doug Turco
Fieldworkers
Alaine Delorme
Christopher Linnehan
Crystal Baird
Cullen Hynes
Daniel Mullin
Daniel Patrick Colombo
Grace Bellato
Jessica Gotlieb
Foreign
language
Department
147
Kristin Jones
Laura Young
Mai-Thy Vuong
Melvin Gaunt
Michael T. Blume
George Mason University (USA)
Capacity and Name
Foreign
language
Department
Supervisor
Prof. John Nauright
Fieldworkers
Alexandra Amrtin
Andrew Mackay
Ashley Searer
Christopher Knoizen
Daniel Zimmet
Diana Chamorro
Erik McCool
George Cooper
Jason Pereles
Jonathon Haynie
Laura Campbell
Michael Isaacs
Molly McManamom
JAMK University of Applied Science (Finland)
Capacity and Name
Foreign
language
Department
Supervisor
Risto Rasku
Fieldworkers
Asko Parkkasaari
Jarrko Pitkanen
Johanna Siikaluoma
Niklas Kuosmanen
Osmo Laitla
Velli – Mikko Palovaara
HAAGA-HELIA University of Applied Sciences (Finland)
Capacity and Name
Supervisor
Dr Kari Puronaho
Fieldworkers
Esa Naukkarinen
Foreign
language
Department
148
Jari Jarvi
Juoni Kangasniemi
Kai Pihlainen
Mikko Pajunen
LOCAL: 128
INTERNATIONAL: 41
78
TOTAL: 169
78
Numerous researchers assisted with more than one component of the project. However, in order to avoid
duplication, names were only counted once.
149
City of Cape Town
Capacity and Name
Foreign
Language
Department
CoCT Project Leader
Carol Wright
SDIGIS
COCT Work Group
Jeremy Marillier
Economic and Human Development
Dilshaad Gallie
Economic and Human Development
Pam Naidoo
2010 Operations
Pauline van der Spuy
Tourism
Theuns Vivian
Tourism
Trevor Wright
SRA
Alric Farmer
SRA
Sport Survey (Coordination,
Fieldwork)
Trevor Wright
SRA
Alric Farmer
SRA
Fieldworker Coordinator
Alric Farmer
SRA
CoCT interns Sport survey
John Hill
Junain Jassiem
Kyle Southgate
CoCT Sport interns
Dutch
Anouk Goudriaan
Dutch
Ilse Houtman
CoCT Green Goal international
intern
Sanja Heric
Data Checking – Phase 1
Alric Farmer
Carol Wright
Janet Gie
Jeremy Marillier
Jonathan Stewart
Karen Small
Nontembeko Poswa
Sivuyile Vuyo Rilityana
Sport Management & Business University of
Applied Science, Amsterdam, Netherlands
Sport Management & Business University of
Applied Science, Amsterdam, Netherlands
SRA
SDIGIS
SDIGIS
Economic and Human Development
SDIGIS
SDIGIS
SDIGIS
SDIGIS
TOTAL: 16
150
Translators
Name
Foreign language
Capacity
Ignacio Casarone
Portuguese
UCT student
Leandro Davids
UCT student
Ursula Knott
Portuguese
Spanish and
(editing)
Prof. Scarlett Cornelissen
Japanese
Pamela Serra
Italian
Facilitator and contributor to the Japanese
translation
University of Johannesburg student
Ilse Houtman
Dutch
CoCT Sport intern (student)
Anouk Goudriaan
Dutch
CoCT Sport intern (student)
Mounir Bjijou
French
Student (Spain)
Dr Ching Hoon LIm
Korean
University of Indiana, USA
Prof. Holger Preuss
German
Mainz University Professor
French
Language specialist (based in Cape Town)
TOTAL: 10
CoCT also facilitated a range of other research studies related to 2010, including the study Successful
Impact Assessment of World Sport Events: Case Studies FIFA World Cup™ 2006 Germany and FIFA
World Cup™ 2010 Cape Town, which was conducted by CoCT SRA interns, Ilse Houtman and Anouk
Goudriaan. The Environmental Resource Management International intern, Sanja Heric, also
conducted a study entitled Sustainable Impacts of the World Cup and its Legacy: The Example of the
Fan Walk in Cape Town.
151
Annexure 5: Knowledge Management and Transfer
Research Hub and Seminar Series
The CoCT/CHEC Research Hub Centre, which was located on the 9th floor of 1 Adderley Street
Building was a central component of the 2010 Research Programme. The purpose of the Research
Hub was to support 2010 and City knowledge management and legacy processes, whilst hosting
researchers and research workers (local, national, and international). The Hub also provided a secure
project and data management environment, briefing and meeting space, and a venue for the holding
of seminars, training, interaction and skills development for CoCT and CHEC staff and others. The
Research Hub operated from 7 June to 19 July 2010, as well as during the post-event phase in
September 2010.
The first of two seminars hosted by CoCT during the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ to foster knowledge
management and knowledge transfer was held on 17 June 2010. Risto Rasku conducted a
presentation, together with one of the Master’s students, Kai Pihlainen, on behalf of the Finnish
delegation. In addition to their presentation on football in Finland, they also provided an overview of
the research that they were conducting on the 2010 FIFA Fan Fest. A copy of the 2010 research
report, once completed, will be forwarded to CoCT.
The official launch of the Research Hub, including the second seminar in the 2010 seminar series,
took place on 23 June 2010. The launch and seminar were coordinated by CoCT Project Leader Carol
Wright. Alderman Marion Nieuwoudt, Executive Councillor for Strategy and Planning, CoCT, gave the
keynote address, sharing the podium with Lokiwe Mtwazi, CoCT Executive Director of Community
Services, and Lois Dippenaar and Kamilla Swart from CHEC, who delivered speeches of welcome and
other addresses.
The winners of the pre-event resident’s survey lucky draw were also invited to attend the seminar
for the prize hand-over. The sharing and learning seminar was attended by over 60 staff from CoCT,
CHEC and visiting universities.
Academics from CHEC member universities who presented papers included the following:

Dr Clemens Ley (UWC/ICESSD), on the Sport Leadership Academy;

Brendon Knott (CPUT), on nation branding – the legacy of the 2010 FIFA World Cup™;

Prof. Scarlet Cornelissen (Stellenbosch University), on securitisation of the 2010 FIFA World
Cup™;

Prof. Kamilla Swart (CPUT), on CoCT/CHEC research overview; and

Prof. Turco (University of Drexel, USA), on residents’ perceptions in a non-host area
(Upington) during the World Cup.
Members of the CoCT and CHEC 2010 research team also participated in a panel discussion, The
South African 2010 Soccer World Cup: Outcomes, Opportunities & Challenges, at the International
152
Sport and Development Conference – Beyond 2010. The Conference was hosted by ICESSD of UWC
on 3 September 2010. The paper, Collaborative Research in Action: 2010 FIFA World Cup in Cape
Town™, has been submitted for publication in the conference proceedings.
The City and CHEC 2010 researchers will continue to look for platforms on which they can share the
results and learnings of the 2010 research programme conducted in 2011 and beyond. Such
platforms will start with the Sport Tourism Event Exchange, which is due to take place in Cape Town
from 27 to 28 July 2011. Other collaborations, including that with Brazil 2014, are likely to follow.
153
Annexure 6: High-level Summary of Lessons Learned (as at October 2010)79
1. General lessons

An overall National Research Framework is required.

The absence of a City – Western Cape Province research framework was noted, and requires
action.

Forecasting in the South African Bid Book had not been updated in line with changes that
were made to the 2010 plan.

Goals and objectives for evaluating and preparing an integrated research plan require
defining a minimum of 3 years in advance.

The relevant research was neither part of, nor integrated seamlessly into, the 2010 event
planning process.

Planning and integration of research should be started as soon as possible as part of the
mega-event planning process, rather than forming a parallel or separate process.

Working with the National SRSA SEIM be an ongoing process, which can be used to
benchmark future events. In the present context, such work was challenging, as it was the
first time that the Model was used for such a complex mega-event.
2. SEIM lessons

The Model application was demanding, resulting in many challenges being experienced.

Private sector investment data were difficult to obtain, especially in relation to the Economic
Impact Fact Sheet. A dedicated plan and methodology should be devised as to how best to
manage the process.

The ability to add additional questions to standard questionnaires assisted and added value
to the research undertaken.

Data management and the use of an aggregator was hampered by too short lead times for
refining and aligning the aggregator to the questionnaires, as well as for training and
implementing an appropriate system for capturing and checking. The exercise could be
managed better in future.
3. CHEC–CITY partnership lessons
79

The partnership worked relatively well, given the limited timeframes.

The working group that was established across CoCT Departments assisted with specialist
inputs regarding the different aspects (economic, tourism, sport and recreation, strategic
information, and 2010 operations) of the research.

The reference group that was established to guide the research in relation to specialist areas
of expertise and experience. assisted with specialist inputs regarding the different aspects
(economic, sport, and community) of the research undertaken. The group allowed access to
The CHEC Reference Group and CoCT Work Group were to hold a full debriefing on the project in March
2011. The lessons presented in this section are preliminary, and will be expanded on in a separate document.
154
a pool of both senior and undergraduate students who were interested in participating in
the research, as well as to local, national and international networks.
4.

Individual representatives of reference and working groups could have played a greater role
during the intense research phases during the World Cup.

Potential for collaboration on other projects was demonstrated.
Skills development lessons

Opportunities were created for capacity-building in terms of skills, experience and exposure
to a large local government and academic research project, with practical application.

The students involved came from a number of different disciplines, including sport, tourism
and event management.

Opportunities were created for knowledge sharing with international students, who also
volunteered to act as fieldworkers.
5. Research Hub lessons

The central work location worked well, as it was accessible to the event footprint, secure,
and close to the transport hub.

The location near the FIFA Fan Fest gave data inputters an opportunity to feel part of the
event.

As a single, centralised location, the Research Hub was available for the duration of the
World Cup and for post-2010 data inputting.

Students were provided with hands-on experience of a complex, collaborative mega-event
research project.

Seminars provided an opportunity to share knowledge on different levels and with
international counterparts, who assisted with the research and implemented their own
research.
6. Fieldwork lessons
6.1.
General

The research and fieldwork plan specifically should take into consideration the academic
term timeframes, including their possible differences between universities.

Potential research workers should be interviewed and assessed ahead of time in terms of
their existing skills and experience, so that they can be matched to the research
requirements (in terms of capacity for fieldwork, data capturing, data checking, or data and
research management).
6.2.

Visitor’s survey
Ideally, researchers should be accredited and permission obtained to administer surveys in
the Stadium. Such accreditation and permission were not obtained in the present instance
due to lack of sufficient time.
155

Initially, the fieldwork was very challenging (especially during the first match day in the
Stadium precinct) for the following reasons, among others:
– People were focused on getting into the Stadium.
– The noise of vuvuzelas was not factored in.
– Fieldworkers were unfamiliar with the questionnaire.
– The questionnaire was perceived as being time-consuming and lengthy.
– Fieldworker supervisors did not conduct adequate quality control checks to ensure
all responses were complete and correct.
– Language barriers were experienced with non-native English speakers administering
the questionnaire.

To accommodate the initial challenges and to achieve the set targets, the following actions
were taken:
– Fieldworkers started work earlier than on the first day.
– Non-native English speakers were relocated to the Fan Park, where the atmosphere
was much more relaxed and more conducive to interviewing football fans.
– Self-administered surveys were introduced while other attendees were being
interviewed.

Fieldworkers were able to reach their targets once they were more familiar with the survey.

Locals were identified upfront to ensure that the correct survey and local resident template
were completed.

On those days on which the Fan Park reached full capacity ahead of time, access was
facilitated via the accreditation and assistance of the CoCT fieldworker manager.

When the weather was good, which it was on many of the days, fans were more amenable
to completing surveys. On such days, targets were also exceeded (serving as backup for
those days on which bad weather was experienced). Targets were, consequently, exceeded.

Fieldworker guidelines worked and were well used, as they provided a reference point when
unexpected queries were raised.

A backup team emerged, consisting of a competent group of fieldworkers who were able to
ensure that a large number of surveys were completed correctly. The team was sent to
assist whenever targets were not being achieved on certain match days.

All fieldworkers were supplied with a full range of foreign language surveys, as initially they
were surprised by requests for a particular language on a given match day, as the surveys
were targeted to match the teams playing on a specific day.

The fieldworkers were encouraged as far as possible to try to obtain specific spend data,
despite such being a challenging task.

On days of bad weather, timeframes should be factored in to a greater extent, as they
impacted on safety and security issues, especially for female fieldworkers. To cope with such
a phenomenon, it was suggested that fieldworkers should pair up.

Issues around fieldworker payments were challenging, due to delays that were experienced
in payment by the different institutions. Arrangements should be made for fieldworkers to
be paid an allowance subsistence for each workday, and that students should only get paid
156
once all their submitted surveys have been checked for correctness. Moreover, students
should contractually commit to this arrangement.

Social networking and bulk SMS should be used to inform volunteers about new schedules,
as well as about changes in existing ones.

Properly supervised satellite fieldwork stations, equipped with radio communication, would
be useful especially on busy match days for facilitating fieldwork management, and for
coordinating, and for communicating with, fieldworkers.
7. Pre-event survey (PVA) lessons
8.

The checking of surveys during the survey design phase should be meticulous.

Fieldwork supervisors should consistently check for accuracy, especially during the initial
stages of fieldwork, so that potential errors can be picked up early in the process.

The local authority and community organisations, prior to entering the field, ensured safety
and security in some high-risk areas by informing the police of their presence.

Days on which there was bad weather were factored into the planning.

To help ensure their safety, fieldworkers should work in pairs, which will also help to
improve research quality control.
Data inputting lessons

In order to overcome the challenge of too short lead-times resulting in inadequate planning
for efficient data capturing and quality checking, systems for data capturing should be set up
and tested well in advance, enabling the data managers to gain familiarity with the systems
used.

The aggregator template should be completed and tested prior to the data inputting phase
in order to ensure consistency between questionnaire and aggregator, with the questions in
the aggregator being in the same order as they are in the questionnaire.

In order to overcome the delay in setting up the aggregator template for data inputting, the
data inputter training should be conducted on the same level as that for the fieldworkers
prior to the event.

The correct use of the aggregator template should be emphasised, including the use of the
aggregator master copy, not deleting numbers, double-clicking on a cell to start a new row
and to make sure that the row changes to the next number.

One or two core data capturing teams should be used in future. The presence of new people
on a daily basis in the data room made it difficult to identify and address any mistakes that
they made and led to more time being spent on training and on the retraining of data
capturers, who had to be equipped with numerical skills.

Quality checking of data inputting should be included from the beginning of the process. The
pressure to have all the data inputted before the end of the World Cup resulted in more
time being spent on inputting the data and less time being spent on quality checking.
Another round of quality checking was conducted to counter this shortcoming.
157

Consideration should be given to the flow and grouping of questions in order to facilitate
data inputting.
158
Annexure 7: Economic Impact Fact Sheet80
Capital expenditure (2006–2010)
Capital expenditure refers to the funds required for the building and construction of the proposed facilities or
infrastructure
DEFINITION/DESCRIPTION
INDICATORS
VALUE (R)
Spending, usually by public sector, on facilities
(e.g. roads) that will be used by the general
public.
Public Spending
Total
spending
infrastructure,
e.g.
stadia, etc.
on
roads,
12 495 995 011.23
12 495 955 010.23
CocT: Cape Town Stadium (Based on estimated
final costs)
CoCT: Access to Stadium in CBD Proximity
4 393 104 539.00
CoCT: GP Common and Precinct (Including Ph 2
scheduled for current year)
575,896,412.00
CoCT: Inner City Transport System
41,900,000.00
CoCT: Allied CBD Infrastructure and Upgrading
CoCT: Local Roads and Sport Complexes
589,531,573.00
512,538,502.23
297,950,000.00
CoCT: Major Access Roads to the CBD
CoCT: Emergency Services vehicles and equipment
1,811,752,984.00
56 835 000.00
CoCT: Public Transport
4,158,800,000.00
Upgrading of CT Airport
Rail rolling stock
2,335,000,000.00
800,000,000.00
Upgrading of rail infrastructure
Upgrading of CT Station
606,000,000.00
330,000,000.00
Rail-based park
infrastructure
Airport IRT Station
39,800,000.00
and
ride
Long-distance coach terminals
WCPG: DoH Emergency Services and medical
equipment
PGWC: Department
Private sector leverage
18,000,000.00
30,000,000.00
34 700 000.00
22 496 000.00
N/A
CBD = central business district
80
Financial data was obtained for the years 2006-2010 as at 20 November 2010. Some financial data used is
based on unaudited information and may be subject to adjustments.
159
Operational expenditure (2006–2010)
Operational expenditure refers to expenditure incurred by event organisers to make event happen
DEFINITION/DESCRIPTION
INDICATORS
Total OPEX
VALUE
510,382,310.01
43,486,923.88
3,806,509.88
Total spending on maintenance
CoCT: Electricity Services
Maintenance and standby
CoCT
Stadium Operator (Feb 2009 – Jun 2010)
39,680,414.00
Total spending on direct salaries
130,788,464.87
31,877,709.00
Total salaries, wages and personal income
CoCT: Remuneration of staff directly
involved in the organising and hosting of
the event (casual staff) (including general
expenses)
CoCT: Dept of Transport – staff directly
involved with SWC
CoCT: Electricity Services
Cheryl Hull
CoCT: Electricity Services
Metrorail (SWC wages)
CTT
CoCT: Solid Waste Management
PGWC
PGWC: DoH
30,000.00
Wages
Wages
Volunteer wages
Wages
Wages
Wages
Wages
Wages
140,615.71
280,000.00
68,492.16
38,700,000.00
18,638,623.00
11,474,861.00
4,504,000.00
25.074,164.00
Total spending on volunteers, e.g. catering, clothing, etc.
CoCT: Volunteer Centre
CoCT: Dept of Transport – Volunteers
CoCT: Volunteer Programme
CoCT: IP Cup – Volunteers
4,671,635.20
745,339.00
184,880.00
3,737,563.00
3,853.20
Total rent paid for the hiring of facilities and/or equipment, including rates and taxes
CoCT: IP Cup
Venue hire
CoCT: IP Cup
Equipment and other hiring
CoCT: Dept of Transport
Hiring of equipment
Total spending related to advertising and promotion of the event, branding for sponsors,
etc.
CoCT
Event branding and marketing
CTT
Marketing
CoCT: IP Cup
Marketing
5,552,629.00
1,810,939.00
76,100.00
3,665,590.00
21,747,154.81
4,361,866.00
17,081,708.00
303,580.81
Total spending on media, broadcasting/coverage
CoCT
2010 Communication
7,899,118.00
4,005,845.00
CoCT
Pre-events media awareness
CoCT
Media centre
Total spending on catering, hospitality, functions, special guests, sponsors, entertainment,
etc.
CoCT: IP Cup
Entertainment
CoCT: IP Cup
Catering
Total spending relating to first aid, doctors, physiotherapists, dope testing, emergency
services, etc.
CoCT
Health
PGWC: DoH
FIFA Health Unit (Total)
PGWC: DoH
Operational costs
PGWC: DoH
Training
Total spending related to administrative functions and organising of the event, e.g.
stationary, printing, telephone costs, etc.
1,581,913.00
2,311,360.00
633,171.29
120,000.00
513,171.29
25 123,128.00
502,964.00
1 320,164.00
10,100,000.00
13.200,000.00
16,500,000.00
160
CoCT: Dept of Transport
Admin
16,500,000.00
Total spending related to travelling costs for the event
CoCT: IP Cup
Air travel
CoCT: IP Cup
Team transport
CoCT: IP Cup
Public transport
CoCT: Dept of Transport
Travelling cost
CoCT
Transport Operational Plan (including test
events)
Total spending related to accommodation costs during organising and planning of the
event
CoCT: IP Cup
Accommodation and meals
CoCT: Electricity Services
Meetings, accommodation, etc.
86,381,495.46
1,288,530.00
165,629.46
257,415.00
16,216,363.00
68,453,5588.00
Costs related to ensuring safety of the event, e.g. hiring of security guards
CoCT
Event safety and security
CoCT: Dept of Transport
Security
11,828,731.00
10,072,021.00
1,756,710.00
Spending on the insurance of equipment, public liability, etc.
CoCT
Insurance
Remuneration of professionals involved in organising and hosting the event, e.g. fees
relating to event management, federation, consulting, accounting, legal issues,
membership, etc.
Professional fees 1
Costs related to the staging of the event, e.g. opening and closing ceremonies,
entertainment, music, preparations, set-up costs, physical products, etc.
CoCT
Final Draw – 4 Dec 2009
CoCT
Stadium Test Events 1, 2, 3, 4 (excl. transport)
CoCT
Preparing of practice venues
Other spending
CoCT
CoCT
CoCT
CoCT
CCDI
CTT
Cape Film Commission
Wesgro
CTRU
CoCT
CoCT
CoCT: Fairuz
CoCT: IP Cup
PGWC: Department
CoCT: IP Cup
Metrorail
Event cleaning and waste removal
FIFA Fan Park
Fan Walk
Public viewing areas
All SWC expenditure
Operating cost
All SWC expenditure
All SWC expenditure
All SWC expenditure
Green Goal and City Beautification
Social and Economic Development Programme
Thank You Cape Town Staff event
General items
Goods and services
Gym display
SWC: Other expenditure
777,656.93
697,172.57
80,484.36
705,214.00
705,214.00
0.00
0.00
18,822,042.00
14,281,653.00
4,002,728.00
543,661.00
135,458,945.57
23,364,009.00
26,637,018.00
4,463,655.00
21,688,450.00
2,500,000.00
9,609,227.00
350,000.00
460,000.00
2,688,485.07
5,867,712.00
3,276,708.00
70,110.00
19,051.50
29,806,000.00
58,520.00
4,300,000.00
161
Annexure 8: Social (Sport) Fact Sheets
SPORT EVENT IMPACT MODEL – FACT SHEET
SECTION B – SOCIAL IMPACTS
Indicator
X3
Code
FSB1
Information needed
Were any public policy issues flagged before or at the World Cup?
FSB2
If yes, indicate number of public demonstrations.
Answer
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
Value
Yes
The location of the
Stadium in Cape Town;
then following the location
decision; the location of
the Stadium on the GP
Common. The Outdoor
Advertising By-Law. The
2010 By-Law. The
Municipal Finance
Management Act, with
implications for
partnerships/sponsorships.
The GP Residents'
Association had
mentioned possible legal
action (Court) over the
location.
None
If yes, indicate nature.
X4
X5
FSB3
Indicate number of locals employed during the World Cup.
FSB4
Indicate number of locals employed pre-event, e.g. on construction (if applicable). [i]
FSB5
Were entertainment opportunities created for locals (and others) as part of the
World Cup?
4743
672
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
Yes
Comment
162
X6
X8
X7
X11
FSB6
If yes, how many entertainment opportunities?
FSB7
Indicate the number of projects/programmes or charities supported.
FSB8
Indicate the total number of individuals benefiting from such initiatives.
FSB9
Indicate number of ongoing projects/programmes or charities.
FSB10
Indicate the R value of infrastructure investment. [ii]
FSB11
Indicate the R value of maintenance on public facilities. [iii]
FSB12
Indicate number of individuals impacted by skills training (if applicable).
FSB13
Indicate number of volunteers participating in the World Cup.
FSB14
Indicate the R value of private sector investments.
FSB15
Indicate the R value of public sector investments.
1684
20
4555
0
12 288 369 471.23
43 486 923.88
1678
Yes
904
City 498; other 456.
Despite questionnaire
requesting the data, no
responses received.
check
163
X12
FSB16
Has the destination received any media coverage, e.g. print coverage, event footage,
website, etc.
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
FSB17
Indicate number of tourism bookings (if available). [iv]
No. of group
bookings
Yes
CTT made use of media
monitoring vehicles in the
form of NewsClips media
monitoring for print and
broadcast media
(NewsClips) and online
media (Meltwater News) –
see summary for further
details.
No information from CTT.
FSB18
FSB19
Accommodation
booked (beds)
Yes
71%
Establishments in the City
Bowl, Waterfront and GP
areas experienced a 71%
average occupancy during
the first two weeks of the
tournament – a 20%
increase over the
preceding year’s
percentage.
Yes
200000
This total is based on
domestic and international
arrival and departure
figures provided by Cape
Town International
Airport.
FSB20
FSB21
FSB22
Have the number of visitors to the area (because of the World Cup) increased?
FSB23
Indicate number of linkages to travel and tourism services (e.g. official travel agent,
tourism board or forum, etc., via advertisements, website, or other, e.g. broadcasting
of destination, etc.).
Not available
Not available
164
X14
FSB24
Indicate the number of volunteers with disabilities (if available).
FSB25
Indicate the number of persons with disabilities benefiting from participation,
training, etc. (if applicable).
41
FSB26
Indicate the number of female volunteers.
468
FSB27
Indicate the number of females employed.
1350
FSB28
Indicate the number of females benefiting from skills training.
847
Other 40.
FSB29
Indicate the number of youth volunteers.
366
Youth defined as aged 18–
35 years. City 326.
FSB30
Indicate the number of youth employed as e.g. casual labour.
1393
FSB31
Indicate the number of youth benefiting from skills training.
1171
FSB32
Indicate the number of HDSA volunteers.
586
FSB33
Indicate the number of HDSAs employed.
1302
FSB34
Indicate the number of HDSAs benefiting from skills training.
1600
X22
FSB35
Do you believe that traffic congestion is a major challenge with regard to the World
Cup? [v]
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
No
No details received
X23
FSB36
Are you aware of crime-related incidents, or have any such incidents been reported?
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
Yes
No details received
X15
X16
X17
Not available
5
Not available
City 202; other 248.
Black, Coloured, Asian
457; other 129.
165
FSB37
X24
X25
If yes, how many?
No details received
If yes, indicate nature.
No details received
FSB38
Are you aware of any incident related to spectator violence or sport hooliganism? (if
applicable)
FSB39
If yes, how many?
No details received
If yes, indicate nature.
No details received
FSB40
Have any measures or initiatives been implemented to green the World Cup?
FSB 41
If yes, how many?
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
No
Yes
10
If yes, indicate nature.
X26
FSB42
Have risk management measures been implemented?
No details received
Soccer & Environment
Programme; Responsible
Tourism; colourful bus shelters,
Green Goal Expo; Eco Taxi's; City
Beautification; Waste
management; Water
access/awareness
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
Yes
Detailed planning, monitoring
and oversight. Defined risk
scenario preparation for 2010
operations.
SECTION C – SPORT IMPACTS
Y1
FSC1
Do you perceive the World Cup to be an important event within the international
sporting arena? [vi]
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
FSC3
Volume of media coverage of event. [vii]
R value
Yes
Advert Equiv: Dec 09 & Jul 10
(Netherlands)
Advert Equiv: Dec 09, Jun 10 &
Jul 10 (Germany)
PR Equiv: Dec 09, Jun 10 & Jul
10 (Germany)
R1.067606.09 and R4.203271.68
(Netherlands)
R750068, R27.986959 and
R23.168332 (Germany Ad)
R3.000272, R1.1194784e8 and
R5.792083 (Germany PR)
The Netherlands only
reflected a value for
advertising equivalent,
whilst Germany reflected a
value for both advertising
and PR Equivalent – see
summary.
166
Y3
FSC4
Indicate the R value of public resources invested in supporting the sport directly or
indirectly. [viii]
Y5
FSC5
Do you have confidence in South Africa’s ability to host the World Cup (see source [ix]
below).
# of countries
Yes
12
# of viewers
Yes
442081
# of print
exposure
Yes
104053
# of hits on
official website
Yes
6032
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
Yes
CTT had foreign
representatives in three
(The Netherlands, United
Kingdom and Germany)
out of the four key source
markets that send news
clippings about Cape Town
on a daily basis. CTT also
received 2010 World Cup
global coverage from nine
regions: Africa; North
America; South America;
Central America; Asia;
Europe; Asia Pacific;
Middle East; and
Australia/Oceania.
Represents the number of
2010-related page views
between 1 June 2010 and
12 July 2010 on the social
media networking site,
Facebook.
Represents the
approximate number of
2010-related print
exposures between 1 June
2010 and 12 July 2010 for
CTT (SA coverage).
Represents the number of
clicks to CTT website
between 1 June 2010 and
12 July 2010 on the social
media networking site,
Facebook.
No details received.
14 out of 17 sport
federations/organisations
strongly agreed that South
Africa had hosted 2010
successfully.
167
Y6
FSC6
Has the World Cup taken place in South Africa before?
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
No
FSC7
Has the World Cup taken place on more than one occasion?
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
Yes
FSC8
Does the World Cup take place on a regular basis?
{No/ Don’t
know/ Yes/
N/A}
Yes
FSC9
Does the chance exist that the event will take place in South Africa again in the near
future?
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
No
Y7
FSC10
Does the international community recognise South Africa as a major competitor with
regard to the sport? [x]
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
Yes
Y8
FSC11
Is the South African team defending an international title?
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
No
FSC12
Are South African athletes medal winners in this sport?
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
N/A
FSC13
Have an increased number of sponsorships been attracted to the sport due to the
World Cup?
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
Don't know
FSC14
If yes, how many sponsors?
FSC15
Indicate the number of sport development programmes connected to the World Cup
[xi].
FSC16
Indicate the total number of individuals benefiting from such programmes annually.
Y9
Y12
Every four years.
15 out of 17 sport
federations/organisations
strongly agreed or agreed.
No details available
168
Y14
FSC17
Has the World Cup received any negative media coverage over the past few years?
[xii]
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
Yes
Y15
FSC18
Has dope testing been carried out?
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
Yes
FSC19
If yes, how many athletes tested positively?
FSC20
Have there been any sport-related injuries?
FSC21
Have precautions been taken in this regard?
Y16
{No / Don’t
know / Yes /
N/A}
SOURCES:
[i] Information to be obtained from government agencies, if they were responsible for the construction of facilities
[ii] Same value as E1 on Economic Impact Sheet
[iii] Same value as E4 on Economic Impact Sheet
[iv] If data not at hand, consult provincial, district or local government departments responsible for tourism as possible sources
[v] Consult local traffic departments
[vi] International federation input
[vii] Information obtained from media monitoring companies
[viii] R value of all sponsorships from the public sector
[ix] International federation input
[x] International federation input
[xi] Sport federation / event organiser input
[xii] Information to be obtained for media monitoring companies, if available
©
Urban-Econ ,
2008
CTT categorised negative
media coverage over the
past few years – see
summary for further
details.
No details available ,
although we understand it
to have been a ‘clean’
World Cup.
No details available
No details available
No details available