Análisis del contexto internacional

This section intends to merge the two distinct literatures of MELT and ANT. It considers the significance of material things and infrastructures (i.e tangible elements), humans and other dynamic hybrids (their practices) and immaterial thoughts and knowledges (i.e. in tangible things) in research on mega event outcomes. This approach draws attention to well established lines of inquiry

(previously highlighted both in this chapter and in Chapter Two), and also generates new discourses and visions such as the largely neglected practices of humans in post-event spaces. By combining the two key works of Preuss’ (2007) legacy cube and Jöns’ (2006) trinity of actants, this chapter propose the underpinning theoretical approach for this research project in the form of the novel framework of the ‘legacy rings’, a multidimensional concept aiming to offer a broader understanding of sport mega events.

Figure 5. The legacy rings. Source: Own design.

The main research dimensions of the legacy rings are taken from Preuss’ (2007) legacy cube; intention, evaluation and agency. Yet, Preuss’ (2007) two additional categories of time and space are added to the illustration of conceptual (Olympic) rings to create the five key dimensions of the legacy rings: agency, evaluation, intention, time and space (Figure 5). Within these categories, it is possible to unfold distinct sub-categories but in order to overcome the much discussed restrictions of binaries in social theory (Latour 1993), the legacy rings use triads of sub-categories that allow for more complexity than the previous binaries of the legacy cube (Preuss, 2007) These triadic legacy rings are thus more inclusive but still manageable and easy to comprehend. It is likely that no single case study will be able to consider 15 sub-categories at the same time because extensive, single, long-term studies of mega events are rare. This extended concept is, however, extremely useful for informing a systematic research agenda and developing new, contextual specific research perspectives by emphasising some categories and sub-categories more

3.4.1 Agency

The central ring is the most prominent contribution to the conceptual debate and to this research project. This is due to the way in which the agency ring allows research to differentiate the constitutive actors of network-building around mega events.

Drawing on Jöns (2006), the main constituents of actor-networks formed around mega events can be addressed as dynamic hybrids (notably humans) negotiating material and immaterial entities. Material entities relate to the tangible aspects previously explored by Preuss (2007) and others and being most evident in the built environment and physical infrastructure associated with event development such as travel transport (Kassens-Noor, 2015) and urban regeneration (Bolz, 2016).

Immaterial entities comprise the intangible aspects of events revolving around the concepts of knowledge and ideas, expectations and experiences, memories and discourses, emotions and feelings. Such immaterial entities include aspirations for legacy and the knowledge transfer connecting former and future host cities

(Halbwirth and Toohey, 2015).

The third dimension added to the established legacy cube’s research perspectives recognises the practices of people when using of associated mega event spaces. Previously, practices of humans have not been mentioned in MELT. This is

highlighted by the lack of research perspectives that have focused on people when compared to the expected outcomes and trickle-down effects. Preuss’ (2015) outline of five expected event structures of infrastructure, knowledge, policy, networks and emotions created to a greater or lesser extent through mega events reflects this disengagement with the practice based ‘legacy’ of mega events because in his concept, structures are prioritised over agency. People’s practices such as sports participation, consumerism and sightseeing are bound to the dynamically hybrid nature of people and their capability of interactions with built environments and knowledge transfer (Cooper, 2006).

The triadic nature of this actor-network perspective highlights the need for mega event research to be addressed as heterogeneous actor-networks involving all three types of material, dynamically hybrid and immaterial actants. These should include not only the (im)material structures such as the swimming pools and Olympic ideals but also typical patterns of how post-event spaces are used on an everyday basis. Looking at this notion allows researchers to analyse typical, predominant and rare

visitor profiles, practices and perceptions as an outcome of mega events that warrant closer academic attention because of their policy relevance. These three sub-

categories ultimately tie each of the actor-networks studied into the other four categories.

3.4.2 Intention

The bidding process for mega events such as the Olympics often includes

sophisticated development plans, tied to the development opportunities of the event (London 2012, 2005). These plans stress the creation of beneficial legacies for people and places involved and are bundled into planning strategies and a multitude of promises for the event outcomes. Whilst the planned developments of mega events are often evaluated at different stages during and after the actual event, the legacy rings suggest that to achieve a comprehensive understanding of mega events it is equally necessary to understand those outcomes that are planned and

unplanned, as stressed by Preuss (2007),and those that are planned but not

implemented. Given that host bodies develop plans up to a decade (and often longer) in advance and often overindulge these in order to be seen as the most attractive bid city, a systematic long-term review of the plans and policy documents offers an understanding of these three sub categories of the intention dimension. This will be further explored in Chapter Six.

3.4.3 Evaluation

Undoubtedly, changes and shifts within a nation’s various ‘scapes’ (Appadurai, 1991) are a predominant reason for hosting mega events. Changes associated with this are often considered either positive or negative. This binary perception is dependent on the particular researcher, organisation or interest group. Many authors stress that the evaluation of event legacies remains ambivalent because the positive outcomes for one group can mean negative results for other groups (Gaffney, 2015). Most official evaluation studies have focused on positive aspects of legacy (Preuss, 2007), primarily for political rationales. In turn, recent academic literature has

overemphasised the negative outcomes of events (e.g. Lenskyj, 2002; Gaffney, 2015).

By applying triadic thought, the framework of the legacy rings suggests that the binary of positive and negative event outcomes, as depicted in the legacy cube

(Preuss 2007), could usefully be complemented by a third category that reflects neutral and indifferent aspects resulting from events. These neutral perceptions link positive and negative legacies along a spectrum of relational evaluations and

acknowledge that positives and negatives might balance themselves out for

stakeholders. For instance, local community groups may be able to take advantage of events in the long-term but suffer from construction related disruption initially. This can be further extended in the sense that individuals on the outside or periphery of the event centre may have little engagement with change and have neither positive nor negative perceptions. This conceptual move allows for contextualised debates about a greater variety of perceptions rather than categorically placing event-related change as either positive or negative.

3.4.4 Time

Brimicombe (2015) stresses that measuring legacy should not begin too soon after the event because the emergence of main transformations take fifteen to twenty years. Yet, the nature of events means that success is expected. Accordingly, in this study, the terminologies of effect, impact and legacy are used as distinct categories. The temporal ring outlines that the term legacy should be applied solely to longer term outcomes whereas other outcomes should be considered as ‘short term’ effects or as medium term ‘impacts.’

The overarching notion of legacy can thus be differentiated into three overlapping phases. First, effects are caused in the period prior to the event up until the end of all key components of the event. In the example of the Olympics, this end point would be the closing ceremony of the Paralympic Games. Secondly, impacts are most clearly visible in the period from the beginning of the event (highlighting the

overlapping nature of time) through to the end of the first post-event decade. Thirdly, legacy emerges one or more decades after an event’s closing ceremony.

Accordingly, new research conducted at the time of writing on the outcomes of the Barcelona 1992 Games could be understood as legacy research, while scholarship on the London 2012 and Rio 2016 Games should be considered as impacts. The three differently labelled timespans for measuring outcomes of events constitute a continuum in which boundaries become blurred if one tries to separate them neatly. They do, however, provide conceptual clarity about different research areas and help to compare evaluation studies with similar rather than different time frames. Such a

differentiated triadic understanding of impact – effect – legacy also helps to reduce the overambitious expectations about the creation of ‘instant legacy’ that seems to exist amongst various stakeholders.

3.4.5 Space

Considering the literature around event-hosting saw a focus on space in most

studies. This focus was predominantly on the immediate spatial environments of the host city or region (Kissoudi, 2009; McRury and Poynter, 2009). Only recently have studies begun to scrutinise the wider geographical reach of mega events. This is best exemplified by studies exploring physical activity levels outside of the urban centre (MacKintosh et al., 2014). A triadic understanding of space would not only mean to differentiate micro-meso-macro scales when examining event outcomes but also to seperate scalar intensity levels to make various combinations between triadic sub- categories possible. An example would be that the emotional impact of London 2012 was at times more profound on a national level than for the residents in local

neighbourhoods (Kohe and Bowen-Jones, 2015). Such a conceptual shift towards a relational understanding of space links with the view of mega event spaces as central nodes of heterogeneous actor-networks that display complexity and are continuously changing.