Impact of Major Sports Events on the Economy

Impact of Major mag profitsic declinations Events on the rescueIntroductionThe apply of sports markets to explore questions of frugal quest has a long history as the mass of this belles-lettres analyses US sports, notably Ameri quarter football, basketball, baseball, and ice hockey, whilst there is as tumefy as a considerable interest in soccer, the leading foundation sport (For showcase, the 1998 European Short physique Swimming, 1999 European Show leap and the 2001 World Half Marathon Championships).Over the past two decades there has been change magnitude competition among cities, regions and countries to army mega sporting guinea pigs Therefore Government and opposite prop mavinnts of major(ip) sporting incidents usually seek to back up their claims of the pillow slip providing an sparing boost by commissioning an sparing dissemble statement. For example, Economic Research Associates (1984) pick up of the Los Angeles majestics, Humphreys and Plummers (19 92) let of the Atlanta exceedings, and KPMG Peat Marwicks (1993) work of the Sydney Olympics.Hosting a sport pillowcase has revealed a number of benefits in our communities and of those benefits, each(prenominal) reasons homogeneous increase community visibility, positive psychic income, and enhancing community image atomic number 18 all general and acceptable postulations. Economic wallop in sporting resultant roles brush off be defined as the make change in an parsimony passing from a sport event and the change is cause by practise involving the acquisition, operation, weakenment, and use of sport facilities and services (Lieber and Alton, 1983)which in turn generate visitors go bying, common using up, manipulation opportunities, and levy revenue. In see of sparingal involve Expenditures can be categorized as manoeuver, indirect, and induced proceedss. For example direct expense is the investiture needed to meet the increased demand of visitors for goods and services. Indirect transactions are the ripple effect of redundant rounds of re-circulating the initial spectators dollars. Induced personal do are the increase in employment and household income that dissolver from the stinting application fueled by the direct and indirect effects (Dawson, Blahna, Keith, 1993 Howard Crompton, 1995).Sports Economics possesses substantial find out in scotchal consulting to the sports industry, with specific fellowship of the stinting repair of facilities, events, and teams so considering the packaging and scrutiny contact much(prenominal) studies, it is imperative to select a sure that not only has substantial experience, besides in whatsoever case has a reputation for consistently providing an accurate legal opinion of scotch shock.There are following reasons to clear economic perk up-to doe with studies of sport events and Firstly, because m each sport events in our communities were financed by public tax support, economic tint studies continue to be an important public relations tool for urban center governing body. Secondly, there is distrust that sporting events may actually help develop a community in relative to its economy therefore, accurate estimates should be proposed and the answers should be reported to community members and Thirdly, as sport is not just an diversion but an industry so the results of economic impingement may be a cornerstone to develop m each related businesses in communities. Finally, positive or negative economic results of sport events may be an important method to de preconditioninaline communities draft budget for the coming year so as an example in July of 2001, Beijing was awarded the 2008 Summer Olympic games so most people assume that such an event will bring enormous economic benefits to the legions city not just during the event, but for historic period afterward. The scale of the organization, facilities and infrastructure anticipated for such a huge under taking are such that the Games cannot but have substantial economic effects (Sydney 2000 Games, p 2) but what exactly are these economic effects, and how do they affect the quality of life of local residents?The relevance of studies for example, it seems logical that a less developed region will have more to gain from long term reaping opportunities. Matheson and Baade (2003) argue, however, that the prospects of mega-sporting events are even worsened for developing countries and the chance costs of providing state of the art facilities are much higher and lack of recent infrastructure requires meaning(a) excess investment.This report try ons the wider benefits that move beyond the economic bear upon and proffers the betrothal of the equilibrise scorecard approach to event evaluation. Moreover, the data from the past economic doctor studies were used to produce an economic advert fore shakeing mystify designed to predict the economic impact traceable to an event former to it taking place.This Research have been developed by undertaking wider evaluations of about of the events, for example, the 1998 European Short Course Swimming, 1999 European Show Jumping and the 2001 World Half Marathon Championships. Beyond the economic impact generated by an event, these wider evaluations have also examined the public profile achieved by the events and looked in dispelicular at the media determine associated with video coverage and place marketing effects linked to such coverage.This Report also provides additional summary which helps to put IPL event into context byOutlining the generic economic benefits and return on investment to a countrys economy of hosting a major event such as IPL.Profiling IPL and comparing it to other standardized international events in respect of the key elements underpinning economic impact.Identifying regional promoters and drivers that may affect the economic impact of IPL in different regionsOutlining t he affirmable contribution to a Host Nations Government via taxation, as a result of hosting IPL, investment and cost associated with IPL.Literature Review on Economic Impact StudiesPrecursorThe aim of this literature review is to understand direct and indirect impact of major sports events on economy and understand how major sports can open impudently proportionality in economy. This has been done by means of referring various journals, articles and magazines also a survey has been carried out as part of primary look to analyze impact of major sports event on Economy however validation of data collected is subject to sources and prevailing conditions. Final soma of this lease on IPL covers analysis of contribution of IPL to Indian economy, It analyze that how IPL has opened a new dimension for Indian economy to grow and attracts domestic and foreign investors. This phase also covers SWOT analysis of IPL, reasons sarcastic to success of IPL and future ahead.Statement of Purp osePreviously many research studies have contributed to understand economic impact of sport and/or recreational events however most studies are found upon the researchers personal scholarship and arguable methodology. The purpose of this study was to review previous economic impact studies and to construct framework for conducting an economic impact study. This entire theoretical framework has been tested by analyzing a case study of economic Impact of mega sports events like Indian Premier league on Indian economy.Literature ReviewTo study Economic impact of sports is challenging topic in the field of management fields because estimating the economic impact of sporting events and make some constructive statement is very difficult and subjective. Due to the subjective personality of social science, ideas and methodology vary from person to person for conducting economic impact studies. The main bar shadow conducting social science research is based on the level of competitiven ess and belief in spirit of the material. and also social objects are hidden behind a screen of pre-constructed discourses which present the worst barrier to scientific investigation, and countless sociologists believe they are talking about the object of study when they are but relaying the discourse which, in sport as elsewhere, the object produces about itself, whether by dint of its officials, supporters or journalists (Bourdieu, 1999). Therefore, construction of actually scientific objects implies a break with public representations, which can notably be effected by taking these pre-notions as the object of study so this report examines the wider benefits that move beyond the economic impact and proffers the adoption of the balanced scorecard approach to event evaluation. This consolidated piece of research builds on the original quantity Success in 1999 which was based on the premise that major sports events have the potential to achieve substantive economic impacts for the host town, city or area but economic impact is now one of the parameters upon which an events success is broadsided.Major sports events have the potential to achieve significant economic impacts for the host town, city or area, Countries, who host the mega sports event, should make a roadmap for significant investments in sports venues and other infrastructure. It is generally assumed that the scale of such event and roadmap of the preparation for it will create macro and long lasting economic benefits to the host country. This would result in huge economic benefits that would have significant economic impact. However unfortunately these studies are constructed nearly misapplications of economic theoretical framework that virtually guarantee their projections will be expectant. Ex-post studies have consistently showed no evidence of positive economic impacts from mega-sporting events even remotely approaching the estimates in economic impact studies. For example, in the 20 08 Summer Olympic Games in Beijing, China have put up huge investments in infrastructure and facility recreation to a new level. The opportunity for long term economic benefits from the mega sports event like Beijing, critically depend on how well mega sports events related investments in venues and infrastructure can be integrate into the overall economy in the years following the GamesIn current scenario economic impact studies have become standard operating procedure for supporters of public funding for sports events. It has led to acceptance of their findings by the government and public collect to their prevalence with no critical evaluation. Due to the huge investment involve in such high profile mega sports events, large and positive Economic effects are taken as given the studies confirm what is already believed. The promise of worldwide exposure and economic gain has made hosting these major and regularly scheduled sporting affairs a lucrative goal for aspiring cities aro und the world (Short 2000, p. 320).Hosting a mega sport event like Olympic, has exhibited a number of large and long lasting benefits in our communities like enhancing community image, increasing community visibility and positive psychic income are all common and acceptable postulations. However, sport is not just limited to an entertainment, also it act as full parent industry, the results of economic impact may be a cornerstone to develop many related businesses in communities. Positive or negative economic results of sport events may be a critical factor to determine communities draft budget for the coming year.Mega-events such as the Olympic Games require large sums of public funds to be spent on venues and infrastructure improvements. Economic impact studies are often commission In order to justify the use of large sum of public money towards invariably large inflows of money that will have a long-term positive effect on the economy by such means as job creation and visitor expenditure. Scale of the mega sports event which attract large amounts of money from outside a local economy, are forecasted to have economic impacts in the billions of dollarsThe simple elegance of economic impact studies, injections of money circulating over and over in an economy to create a multiplier factor effect, has an alluring something for-nothing quality that is hard to refute. However to justify a counter argument can be difficult due to numerous mistakes made in economic impact studies. Critics have centre on numerous subjective areas like 1) using multipliers that are too large, 2) treating costs as benefits, 3) ignoring opportunity costs and 4) using bring in spending instead of net changes.In hosting mega sports event the major part of investment required on constructing fields, which to a large degree is spent on hiring construction workers and acquire materials from local suppliers, is counted as a benefit to the local economy. However It is backward lookin g and the most glaring error in economic impact studies, which looks on production cost benefit of the project and ignores the effect of the actual consumption of the products on economy.Ex-post studies, however, have consistently found no evidence of positive economic impacts from mega-sporting events even remotely approaching the estimates in economic impact studies. In a study of the impact of Super whorls on local economies, Philip Porter (1999) found no measurable impact on spending associated with the event. The projected spending and spill over benefits of regional impact sticks ever materialize (Porter 1999, p. 61) Porters news report is that capacity constraints in the hotel industry cause room prices to increase with no change in line of work rates. Higher rates contribute to the crowding out of regular traffic and net spending in areas other than hotel rooms changes little or not at all.Longer term sports programs, usually involving stadium subsidies to attract or ke ep professional teams, have also failed to deliver on projected economic benefits. Even for cities that usually are considered success stories for sports development strategy, such as Baltimore (Hamilton and Kahn 1997) and Indianapolis (Rosentraub 1994), empirical research does not find evidence of statistically or economically significant positive impacts.Sports economists, on the other hand, have found economic impact studies lacking both in theory and practice. Ex-post studies have consistently failed to find evidence of any economic benefits related to sports teams and facilities. In examining recent retrospective studies, Coates and Humphreys (2003, p. 6) concluded grammatical construction new sports facilities and attracting new professional sports teams did not raise income per capita or total employment in any US city. A closer look at the methodology of such studies reveals an appealing but basically flawed line of economic reasoning that virtually guarantees a forecast o f large economic benefits.The term economic impact analysis refers to rigorous surveys, research, and modeling to estimate the direct and indirect economic effects of an entity or event on the local, county, state, or U.S. economy, as measured by employment, tax revenue, income, or crude(a) product (overall economic output).The impact of an economic event is the summation of direct effects and indirect effects. For example, when a hundred dollars is invested in building a new library in a city, that money (the foreplay) flows by the local economy multiple times as construction supplies are purchased, and as construction workers spend their paychecks at local supermarkets, restaurants, and other retailers, who in turn buy more inventory, and so on. That is, an initial stimulus triggers a chain of spending. This chain of spending is estimated via multipliers.The term economic impact used in isolation can be interpreted in different ways in both the short term and long term. Theref ore, in order to be clear what is meant in the context of the sixteen events reviewed in this report, UK Sport has adopted the following definition within its major events strategyThe net economic change in a host community that results from spending attributed to a sports event or facility. Turco Kelsey (1992)The change is caused by activity involving the acquisition, operation, development, and use of sport facilities and services (Lieber Alton, 1983). These in turn generate visitors spending, public spending, employment opportunities, and tax revenue. Specifically, the economic impacts of expenditure are composed of direct, indirect, and induced effects. Direct effects are the purchases needed to meet the increased demand of visitors for goods and services. Indirect effects are the ripple effect of additional rounds of re-circulating the initial spectators dollars. Induced effects are the increase in employment and household income that result from the economic activity fueled by the direct and indirect effects (Dawson, Blahna, Keith, 1993 Howard Crompton, 1995). The initial construction of a $10 million sports facility provides an initial impact of $10 million on the local economy. This is the direct impact. Clearly, the construction of the facility will require concrete, steel, construction workers, and so forth. The money spent on these materials and services comprises the indirect expenditures, or the indirect impacts. (Hefner 1990, pp. 4-5)In high level name economic impact studies aim to measure the increased economic activity surrounding an event. For sporting events, the key stimulants of activity are the expenditure of spectators, event organisers and other stakeholders, which flow through the local economy to expand total regional and national GDP. The diagram below illustrates the principal components of economic impact. There are three broad areas in which impact will occur, as followsCore impacts in general comprising expenditure by, or generated from, international spectators attending sports events from tickets and match day cateringOther direct impacts comprising spending by spectators and other visitors on accommodation, food and beverage, transport and other spending, as well as investment in infrastructure andIndirect and induced impacts relating to the ripple effect as the direct spending is recycled through the economy. The primary components are indirect impacts, achieved largely by businesses spending on suppliers, and induced impacts, as recipients reinvest money in the economy themselves. In addition, there is also significant expenditure by domestic residents. municipal spending comprises an important element of the full value of sports event to a Host Nation.Economic impact is based on the theory that a dollar flowing into an economy, that otherwise would not have been spent, is a benefit to the economy. Economic impact studies not only measure economic impact, but are also used to provide informat ion in the decision to publicly fund sports venues or sports commissions/authorities, or to measure the success of events hosted in a local community in generating positive economic outcomes for both the event owners and the locale.Economic impact analysis measures new spending in a local economy due to the presence of, for example, a facility or an event. The change in the economy is measured in terms of total new spending, fiscal impact (total new taxes collected), personal income generated, and jobs created, both directly and indirectly. By increasing the new money in an economy, the economic benefit is serving a greater good by increasing government tax revenue, augmenting business income, and ultimately resulting in more jobs and higher personal income for residents of that economy. In developing the model there are specific regional factors and drivers that will have an influence on the economic impact The diagram below illustrates the key components in determining the potenti al economic impact Event Economic Effects/Impacts (Pre-event Post-event phases)Economic growth (GDP) and impactTargeted growth in economic relevant sectorsDirect and indirect employment createdDirect, indirect and induced impacts (Multipliers Analysis)Economic-social Net Present ValueTouristy flows (visitors economy)Olympic legacy (stadia infra-structures)Globalization (Global branding exposure)Sports Economics possesses substantial experience in economic consulting to the sports industry, with specific knowledge of the economic impact of facilities, events, and teams. Considering the publicity and scrutiny surrounding such studies, it is imperative to select a firm that not only has substantial experience, but also has a reputation for consistently providing an accurate assessment of economic impact. Sports Economics methodology is sound and defensible, and we are qualified to and capable of affirming our results to any audience requiredThe benefit in economic terms to a host e conomy is defined according to the additional expenditure by visitors to that economy which is directly attributable to the staging of the event. These visitors can come from elsewhere in the analogous country or from oversea. If the visitors come from elsewhere in the same country, any economic impact is actually a redistribution of money around that countrys economy and is not necessarily new money to the economy. Visitors from overseas actually provide new money in the form of invisible exports and potentially a net export effect on overall GDP. One might argue that the quality of economic impact can be gauged according to the net export effect associated with an event, namely the extent of any new money brought into the UK economy from overseas visitors (and other sources) as a result of staging an event. However, this may be of little concern to local organisers who do not care whether any additional expenditure is attributable to someone from for example the USA or elsewhere in the UK, hence redistribution is not an issue.The main brain of note is that only some people are eligible for inclusion in the economic impact calculations i.e. visitors to the host city or area specifically as a result of an event creation staged. The remainder live locally and their expenditure would have been made regardless of a specific event taking place, hence such expenditure is termed deadweight and not eligible for inclusion in the calculations.Obtaining a value for the initial impact of a team or event is the first step in any economic impact study. The initial impact is then magnified through the use of a multiplier, based on the idea that money brought into a local economy will be respent over and over, enough income for others in the economy.In this way a multiplier also magnifies the errors made in calculating initial impact, especially by once again failing to recognize opportunity costs. The multiplier is applied to any new spending in the economy regardless o f the source. If the multiplier does not depend on the spending source, then it is useless in the comparison of alternative projects.The multiplier effect accounts for the overall economic impact of a sport event. The multiplier effect demonstrates the process through which initial spending in a region generates get on rounds of re-spending within the region. The ripping process of subsequent re-spending is the multiplier effect. The basic principle of the multiplier effect begins with an initial spending as an increased income into an economy. A portion of the increased income is spent and further re-spent within the region (Archer, 1984 Crompton, 1995 Wang, 1997). In summary, there are three elements that contribute to the total impact of visitor spending Direct impact (the first-round effect of visitor spending), Indirect impact (the ripple effect of additional rounds of re-circulating the initial visitors dollars), and Induced impact, which is further ripple effects caused by e mployees of impacted business spending some of their salaries and wages in other business in the host community (Howard Crompton, 1995).A variety of multiplier used modeling techniques are available TEIM (Travel Economic Impact Model), RIMS (Regional Input-output Modeling System) (Donnelly, Vaske, DeRuiter, Loomis, 1998 Wang, 1997), TDSM (Tourism Development Simulation Model) (Donnelly, et al., 1998), RIMS II (Regional Input-output Modeling System, version II) (Wang, 1997), ROI (measuring financial Return On Investment) (Turco Navarro, 1993), and IMPLAN (Impact Analysis for Planning) (Bushnell Hyle, 1985 Dawson, Blahna, Keith, 1993 Donnelly, et al., 1998 Howard Crompton, 1995 and Wang, 1997). Of those modeling techniques, IMPLAN is one of popular methods. The IMPLAN model was developed by the U.S. Forest Service and Engineer Economics Associates, Inc. The IMPLAN develops input-output models for all states and counties in the United States. This model was used to estimate the em ployment, income, and net sales and adopted as the regional impact analysis program-of-choice. another(prenominal) often-used model is RIMS, which was developed by the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). This model also offers input-output tables deplete to the country level (Turco Kelsey, 1992). Also, a lot of simple formulas were developed to conduct economic impact study of sport events by local sport commission companies.In addition to the standard projections of economic impact, Olympic studies also include longer term benefits sometimes referred to as the Olympic Legacy. These legacy effects, derived from positive publicity from the Games, include increased tourism after the Games, attraction of business, and infrastructure investments that improve the urban environment. Legacy impacts are generally not incorporated into the economic impact numbers, but rather offered as an additional, unquantifiable benefit. The lack of any ex post study that fin ds improvements in economic growth or living standards due to mega events should cast some suspicion on the legacy effects of Olympics, or at least the ability of such effects to be transformed into real economic benefits to the local economy. Baade and Matheson (2002) found the evidence suggests that the economic impact of the Olympics is transitory, onetime changes rather than a steady-state change (p. 28).Empirical Analyses of Economic Impact StatementsIt is one thing to evince out bias that could potentially be introduced in impact studies. It is another thing altogether to examine whether actual economic impact studies are, in practice, truly flawed. One tool that can be used to determine the accuracy of economic impact studies is ex post comparisons of predicted economic gains to actual economic slaying of cities hosting sporting events. Empirical studies have been conducted on the observe economic impacts of large sporting events as well as on the construction of new sport facilities.On the sport facility side, numerous researchers have examined the relationship between new facilities and economic growth in metropolitan areas (Baade Dye, 1990 Rosentraub, 1994 Baade, 1996 Noll Zimbalist, 1997 Coates Humphreys, 1999). In every case, autonomous analysis of economic impacts made by newly built stadiums and arenas has uniformly found no statistically significant positive correlation between sport facility construction and economic development (Siegfried Zimbalist, 2000). This stands in stark contrast to the claims of teams and leagues, who assert that the large economic benefits of professional franchises merit considerable public expenditures on stadiums and arenas.On the events side, nearly every national or international sporting event elicits claims of huge benefits accruing to the host city. For example, the National Football League typically claims an economic impact from the Super Bowl of around $ cd million (National Football League, 1999), M ajor League Baseball attaches a $75 million benefit to the All-Star Game (Selig et al., 1999), and the NCAA Final Four in Mens hoops is estimated to generate from $30 million to $110 million (Mensheha, 1998 Anderson, 2001). Multi-day events such as the Olympics or soccer World Cup produce even larger figures. The pre-Olympics estimates for Atlantas Games in 1996 suggested the event would generate $5.1 billion in direct and indirect economic activity and 77,000 new jobs in tabun (Humphreys Plummer, 1995).In many cases, variation in the estimates of benefits alone raises questions about the validity of studies. A series of economic impact studies of the NBA All-Star game produced numbers ranging from a $3 million windfall for the 1992 game in Orlando to a $35 million bonanza for the game three years earlier in Houston (Houck, 2000). The ten-fold disparity in the estimated impact of the event in different years serves to illustrate the ad hoc nature of these studies. Similarly, ahead of the 1997 NCAA Womens Basketball Final Four, an economic impact of $7 million was estimated for the local economy in Cincinnati, while the same event two years later was predicted to produce a $32 million impact on the San Jose economy (Knight Ridder News Service, 1999). Such increases cannot be explained by changes in general price levels or growth in the popularity of the tournament. Instead, they are explained by the fact that economic impact studies are highly subjective and undefendable to significant error as well as manipulation.In further cases, the size of an estimate can strain credulity. The Sports Management Research Institute estimated the direct economic benefit of the U. S. Open tennis tournament in Flushing Meadows, NY, to be $420 million for the tri-state area, more than any other sporting or entertainment event in any city in the United States this sum represents 3% of the total annual direct economic impact of tourism for New York (United States Tennis Associ ation, 2001). It is simply impossible to believe that 1 in 30 tourists to New York City in any given year are visiting the city solely to attend the U. S. Open. Similarly, the projected $6 billion impact of a proposed World Cup in South Africa in 2006 would suggest that soccer games and their ancillary activities would represent over 4% of the entire gross domestic product of the country in that year (South Africa Football Association, 2000).As in the case of sports facilities, single-handed work on the economic impact of mega-sporting events has routinely found the effect of these events on host communities to be either insignificant or an order of magnitude less than the figures espoused by the sports promoters. In a study of six Super Bowls dating back to 1979, Porter (1999) found no increase in taxable sales in the host community compared to previous years without the game. Similarly, Baade and Matheson (2000) found that hosting the Super Bowl was associated with an increase in employment in host cities of 537 jobs, for a total impact of approximately $32 million, less than one-tenth the figure trumpeted by the NFL. In a study of 25 Major League Baseball all-star games held between 1973 and 1997, Baade and Matheson (2001) found that, in the case of three all-star games in California (1987, 1989, 1992), the events were correlated with worse-than-expected employment growth in host cities and were furthermore associated with an average reduction in taxable sales of nearly $30 million. Finally, Baade and Mathesons examination (1999) of the Olympic Games held in Los Angeles in 1984 and Atlanta in 1996 found total observed increases in economic activity of $100 million and of $440 million to $1.7 billion, respectively. While the range of the economic impact for Atlanta exhibits a great deal of uncertainty, even the most favorable figure is only deuce-ace of the amount claimed by the host committee.Tax impactWith its large economic footprint, long duration and significant international visitor numbers, mega sports event delivers substantial tax revenues to a Host Nations government. This section outlines the potential types of tax revenue that can accrue to a sport event host government and an indication of the possible levels of such tax revenue. In summary, the tax revenues to the government of the Host Nation includeSales t