1
1
Type of submission: News and Views
2
Title: Leveraging Legacies: Will the Toronto 2015 Pan Am Games really benefit public
3
health?
4
Word count of abstract: 193
5
Word count of body of text: 1564
6
Authors:
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
*Marc Mitchell1,2, PhD (c)
Email: marc.mitchell@mail.utoronto.ca
Heather Manson2, MD, FRCPC, MHSc
Ken Allison2, PhD
Jennifer Robertson2, PhD
Peter Donnelly1, PhD
Jack Goodman1, PhD
1University
of Toronto, Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education, 55 Harbord
Street, Toronto, ON
2Public
Health Ontario, Health Promotion, Chronic Disease, and Injury Prevention, 480
University Avenue, Suite 300, Toronto, ON
2
34
Abstract
35
Toronto and the surrounding area will host the $1.4 billion Pan/Parapan American
36
Games in 2015 (TO2015). TO2015’s 2009 bid document, Your Moment is Here,
37
outlines the anticipated societal benefits, or legacies, of the Games. In this document,
38
TO2015 organizers describe the potential for the Games to create positive ‘public
39
health’ legacies in particular. Public health legacies are operationally defined as all
40
those elements assuring the conditions for populations to be healthy (e.g., access to
41
affordable housing, public transit, and recreation opportunities). We argue that unless
42
certain mechanisms are in place, TO2015 is unlikely to produce all the purported public
43
health benefits outlined in its bid document. While some mechanisms may be in place to
44
facilitate positive public health legacies from TO2015, others are notably absent. In view
45
of persisting global economic instability and government austerity, TO2015 legacies
46
should not be considered as an automatic ‘trickle down’ or by-product – rather, they
47
need to be planned for, organized, and funded in the same way as TO2015. The 2012
48
Summer Olympic Games in London offer an opportunity to reflect on TO2015 and
49
whether mechanisms are in place to produce long-lasting public health benefits from the
50
Games.
51
MeSH: Anniversaries and special events, Public health, Sports
52
53
54
55
56
3
57
Introduction
58
The 2012 Summer Olympic Games in London are projected to cost $30 billion (US)(1) –
59
twice the inflation-adjusted price tag of the notoriously costly 1992 Summer Olympic
60
Games in Barcelona.(2)
61
increased, the trend has been for host cities to focus on the potential for these events to
62
leverage broader societal benefits, or ‘legacies’. In particular, the legacy focus of MSEs
63
has shifted to the creation of positive ‘public health’ legacies, reflecting the rising
64
concern over high rates of chronic disease in developed nations. Public health legacies,
65
operationally defined as all those elements assuring the conditions for populations to be
66
healthy (e.g., access to affordable housing, public transit, recreation opportunities),
67
have emerged as a common legacy pledge in MSE bid documents, despite the lack of
68
supporting evidence. Toronto, host of the $1.441 billion 2015 Pan/Parapan American
69
Games (TO2015), provides a case in point.
As the cost of hosting a mega-sporting event (MSE) has
70
71
According to the TO2015 bid book, Your Moment is Here, Games-related investments
72
will contribute to the “creation of affordable housing and community sports facilities,
73
(and) enhanced access to public transit”.(3; p.68) Since these outcomes are important
74
socioeconomic determinants of health,(4) TO2015 organizers contend that the short-
75
term mega-investment in the Games will also improve the health of Torontonians and
76
Ontarians over the long-term (e.g., that new sports infrastructure will increase public
77
participation in physical activity). This is not the likely scenario, however. Rather, we
78
argue, using existing knowledge and drawing from interviews with key informants, that
4
79
unless certain mechanisms are in place, TO2015 is unlikely to produce the purported
80
public health benefits outlined in its bid document.
81
82
83
84
85
86
Figure 1: 1992 Barcelona and 2012 London Summer Olympic Game cauldrons,
respectively, reflect the increasing cost, and complexity, of mega-sporting events.
87
Affordable Housing
88
The TO2015 Athletes’ Village may technically “create affordable housing” (3; p.61) in
89
Toronto, with 353 units earmarked for affordable ownership/renting in the West Don
90
Lands area.(5) Past experience suggests, however, that bid-time pledges such as this
91
rarely manifest as intended. For example, half of the 252 units set aside for social
92
housing in Vancouver’s 2010 Winter Olympic Games Athletes’ Village are now being
93
rented out at ‘market rate’ to essential service workers, and not to low-income
94
Vancouverites as initially promised.(6)
95
96
In addition, the meagre number of units earmarked as affordable by MSE organizers
97
usually does not offset the predictable rise in house prices following the event. Indeed,
5
98
evidence from a systematic review of the socioeconomic impacts of major multi-sport
99
events suggests a trend toward higher house prices in Olympic cities following the
100
MSE.(7) The rising cost of a single-family home in Toronto (a nearly 10% increase was
101
observed in the last year alone),(8) along with the anticipated ‘bump’ in house prices
102
from TO2015, may displace more low-income families in Toronto than will be supported
103
by the units earmarked as ‘affordable’. A more comprehensive plan to fulfill TO2015’s
104
affordable housing legacy pledge is required.
105
106
Such a plan might include securing funding for additional affordable housing units, the
107
introduction of ‘laneway housing’ legislation (e.g., permitting detached dwellings in the
108
typical garage/laneway area of single-family lots, as was enacted in Vancouver in
109
2009),(9) and seeking innovative cross-sectoral partnerships. The award-winning
110
partnership between BC Housing, the Vancouver Organizing Committee, and building
111
manufacturer WEQ Britco LP (Britco) offers a model from which to work. The Britco-led
112
partnership reconfigured temporary rooms used during the 2010 Games into permanent
113
social housing units that have been relocated across British Columbia.(10) To provide a
114
more meaningful affordable housing legacy, Infrastructure Ontario could re-evaluate its
115
relationship with developer Dundee Kilmer Developments LP to encourage the
116
reconfiguration and relocation of temporary lodging from TO2015’s Athletes’ Village.
117
118
Sports Facilities
119
TO2015 organizers also claim that new and refurbished sports facilities will “increase
120
physical activity within the general population”.(3; p.210) There is little clear evidence,
6
121
however, that hosting a MSE consistently increases access to sports facilities or
122
produces a ‘trickle down’ effect - the often-cited phenomena where mass physical
123
activity participation is stimulated by exposure to elite sport.(11) According to a
124
systematic review, public access to sports facilities and subsequent use is largely
125
contingent on two factors: 1) facility location (e.g., proximity of facilities to target
126
populations) and 2) thoughtful legacy planning (e.g., ensuring user fees, if any, are not
127
prohibitively costly).(12; p.37)
128
129
A recent announcement by TO2015 CEO Ian Troop indicated that TO2015 competition
130
will be ‘clustered’ almost exclusively in Toronto, and not across southern Ontario as
131
originally planned.(13) The move, it is suggested, will save money. The cost-cutting
132
measure is occurring at the expense of populations living outside Toronto, however,
133
who have limited access to recreation opportunities. Some of the very municipalities
134
that supported the TO2015 bid for a chance at a positive sports facilities legacy are now
135
being cut out of the deal (i.e. 11 municipalities, rather than 16 as first announced, will be
136
involved in hosting TO2015 competitions).(13) Sherwood Forest Park will not be
137
retrofitted to host TO2015 soccer matches as previously described, for instance,
138
disrupting the development of a key infrastructural legacy in Burlington, Ontario. The
139
new, centralized venue cluster design may actually undermine community support
140
outside of Toronto, an important pre-condition for the development of positive MSE
141
legacies.(12) It is recommended that monies saved through further cost-saving
142
measures be re-directed to the fulfillment of bid-time facility legacy pledges.
143
7
144
In terms of thoughtful legacy planning, TO2015 has established a $70 million Facility
145
Operating Trust Fund to support the ongoing operation and maintenance of TO2015
146
facilities (presumably, from interest gained, as is the case with Vancouver’s $110 million
147
Legacy Endowment Fund).(14) Since the annual contribution from the Legacy
148
Endowment Fund is not sufficient to cover current operating costs of 2010 facilities,(14)
149
additional contributions to TO2015’s Operating Trust are likely needed. The strategic
150
additional investment would help optimize facility use over the long-term (e.g., >5yrs).
151
Additional funding could be leveraged through private sector partnerships, or preferably,
152
through minimizing Games-time spending. Currently, less than 5% of TO2015 capital
153
and operating expenses are dedicated to legacy spending.(3; p.195)
154
155
While clustering competition in Toronto may increase efficiency and curb costs,
156
significant changes to venue plans, on top of recent concerns over “explosive”
157
Organizing Committee salaries,(15) make it hard to believe the Games will be delivered
158
as promised, and on budget. Since final MSE budgets usually surpass initial projections
159
by 300-500%,(2) regular and transparent budget updates, as recently promised by Mr.
160
Troop, will be required (and should be mandated) to maintain the accountability
161
Canadian taxpayers deserve.
162
163
Public Transit
164
TO2015 organizers have also promised “enhanced transportation networks” (3; p.212)
165
to increase social inclusion and economic opportunities. Other jurisdictions have
166
successfully leveraged MSEs to improve transportation infrastructure and yield a wide-
8
167
range of public health benefits (e.g., less automobile use, improved air quality).(7) The
168
‘Canada Line’, for example, a new rapid transit line from Vancouver International Airport
169
to downtown Vancouver, has successfully drawn people from their cars with 20% more
170
Vancouverites now using mass transit compared with before the Games.(14)
171
172
Accelerating the development of transit projects that are in the ‘pipeline’ is a common
173
path through which MSEs create positive infrastructural legacies. Toronto seems to be
174
well-positioned to capitalize on TO2015 as the development of a number of transit
175
projects have been approved and funded far earlier than expected (e.g., new roadways
176
and extensions in the West Don Lands area).(5) As well, while Toronto’s long-overdue
177
Air Rail Link between Union Station and Pearson International Airport will not directly
178
service TO2015 venues, final approval is believed to have been spurred by the
179
successful TO2015 bid.
180
181
In the run up to the Games, however, several notable opportunities are being missed.
182
For example, while the Link is expected to eliminate 1.2 million car trips annually, it
183
appears that in a hasty effort to complete it by 2015 (a seemingly arbitrary deadline) the
184
project may fall short of expectations. The Link currently plans to construct two stops
185
only between the airport and Union Station. City councillors have called for more stops
186
over the concern that the Link will end up better serving those who fly to Toronto for the
187
day, than the communities through which it will pass.(16) It is recommended that
188
Metrolinx, the Government of Ontario agency responsible for Link construction, consider
189
adding stops to the line (but not necessarily by 2015). As well, to maximize ridership, it
9
190
is recommended that user fees be kept in line with those of other major cities (e.g., $5-
191
10). Leveraging TO2015 to increase access to public transit, reduce emissions and
192
promote active transportation, is a public health legacy worth vigorously pursuing.
193
194
Conclusion
195
MSEs provide unique opportunities for new policies, partnerships and infrastructure
196
investments that may improve public health. The 2012 Summer Olympic Games in
197
London offer an opportunity to reflect on TO2015 and whether mechanisms are in place
198
to produce purported public health benefits. While some mechanisms are in place to
199
facilitate positive public health legacies, others are notably absent. Namely, a lack of a
200
comprehensive plan linked to TO2015 to counteract rising house prices in Toronto; an
201
Operating Trust that may be too small to support facility use over the long-term; and a
202
rapid transit line that may not benefit the local population, may block the development of
203
the public health legacies outlined in TO2015’s bid document. In view of persisting
204
global economic instability and government austerity, MSE legacies should not be
205
considered as an automatic ‘trickle down’ – rather, they need to be planned for,
206
organized, and funded in the same way as MSEs. After all, legacies are the reason
207
cities choose to bid for these events, right?
208
209
Declaration of competing interests: None.
210
Acknowledgements: We gratefully acknowledge Dr. Scott Thomas for contributing to
211
project conception and collaborations as well as Michelle Brownrigg for critically
10
212
reviewing the paper. We also acknowledge the key informants who offered content
213
expertise throughout the development of this paper.
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
11
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
References
1. Sky News. Sky Investigation: Olympics Bill Tops £12 bn. Available at:
http://news.sky.com/home/london-olympics/article/16156780 (Accessed May 12, 2012).
2. Zimbalist A. Is it worth it? Hosting the Olympic Games and other mega sporting
events is an honour many countries aspire to-but why? Finance Dev March 2010;8-11.
3. Canadian Olympic Committee and City of Toronto. Toronto 2015: Your Moment is
Here, 2009. Available at: www.toronto2015.org (Accessed August 15, 2011).
4. Dahlgren G, Whitehead M. (1991). Policies and strategies to promote social equity in
health. Institute of Future Studies. Available at: http://www.framtidsstudier.se/wpcontent/uploads/2011/01/20080109110739filmZ8UVQv2wQFShMRF6cuT.pdf
(Accessed May 12, 2012).
5. Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration. West Don Lands Waterfront Project
Accelerates Community's Development and Provides New Infrastructure. Available at:
http://www.panam2015.gov.on.ca/en/news/20120522-factsheet.asp (Accessed May 12,
2012).
6. Williams K. Olympic Village Gets First Low-Income Tenants. Canadian Broadcasting
Corporation. Available at: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britishcolumbia/story/2010/12/22/bc-olympic-village-tenants.html.
Accessed May 12, 2012.
7. McCartney G, Thomas S, Thomson H, Scott, J, Hanlon, P, Morrison, DS, et al. The
health and socioeconomic impacts of major multi-sport events: Systematic review
(1978-2008). BMJ 2010;340:2369-2378.
8. Living in Canada. Canadian House Prices. Available at: http://www.livingincanada.com/house-prices-canada.html (Accessed May 12, 2012).
9. City of Vancouver. Laneway Housing. Available at:
http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/lanewayhousing/ (Accessed May 12, 2012).
10. BC Housing. Olympic Housing Legacy. Available at:
http://www.bchousing.org/Initiatives/Creating/OLH (Accessed May 12, 2012).
11. Donnelly P, Nakamura Y, Kidd B, et al. Sport Participation in Canada: Evaluating
Measurements and Testing Determinants of Increased Participation. 2011. Draft report
of findings of SSHRC
standard Research Grant No: 410 2006 2405S.
12
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
12. Weed M, Coren E, Fiore, JA, Mansfield L, Wellard I, Chatziefstathiou D, et al.
Systematic review of the evidence base for developing a physical activity, sport and
health legacy from the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games. 2009.
Department of Health.
13. The Canadian Press. Toronto Pan Am plans to cluster sport venues. Canadian
Broadcasting Corporation. Available at:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2012/05/11/toronto-panam-venues.html
(Accessed May 28, 2012).
14. Kidd B. The legacies of the 2010 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games in
Vancouver. Framework of the International Olympic Committee's OSC Postgraduate
Grant Selection Committee. 2011.
15. Talaga T. High salaries for 2015 Pan Am Games staff face scrutiny. The Toronto
Star 2012 April 5. Available at:
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1157472--high-salaries-for-2015pan-am-games-staff-face-scrutiny (Accessed May 12, 2012).
16. Alcoba N. More stops demanded for Air Rail Link. The National Post 2012 April 7.
Available at:
http://www.nationalpost.com/More+stops+demanded+Rail+Link/6423923/story.html
(Accessed May 12, 2012).