Carga y/o Descarga de Explosivos

The study of sport mega-events and of their impacts and legacies, forms part of the growing body of knowledge in the tourism niche area of sport tourism (Cornelissen, Bob & Swart, 2011:307; Knott et al., 2013:574). Swart et al. (2009:3) discovered that hosting a mega-event could leave a range of material and spatial and symbolic legacies, for a city that could be of both a positive and negative nature. Although the

amount of research that has been conducted into mega-event legacies has proliferated (Preuss, 2007:2; Swart et al., 2009:1) surprisingly, there is generally no clear definition of what constitutes an event ‘legacy’ available (Gratton & Preuss, 2008:1923; Swart &

Bob, 2012:4). Cashman (2003:33) alludes that “legacy is an elusive, problematic and even dangerous word”. Nevertheless, the Swart et al. (2009:3) has collected a variety of evidence about legacy, in terms of which it has identified five types of legacies:

sporting legacy, urban legacy, infrastructural legacy, economic legacy and social legacy. According to Bob and Swart (2010a:72), one of the most important areas of legacy is social legacy, yet there is still only a small but growing body of literature examining the social impacts of events on the host community (Balduck et al., 2011:94). Chappelet and Junod (2006:85) suggest that an essential part of the social legacy of mega-events is the change in perceptions of the local residents of the host city or region concerned. Thus, Kim and Petrick (2005:26) state that in order to gain an improved and more exact understanding than there is at present of who the real beneficiaries and victims of mega-events are, one needs to understand the perceptions of different socio-demographic groups towards the impacts of mega-events. Koenig and Leopkey (2009:12) are of the view that large events require the citizens of the city concerned to participate in many ways, such as by volunteering, sponsoring and hosting. As a result, return on investment is important to them; by volunteering, for example, the individuals can gain skills which they can apply in the future, thus proving the existence of the social legacy of an event. It is noteworthy that the real legacy of the 2010 FIFA World Cup^TM will only unfold in the years to come, as its long-term economic and social impact becomes clearer than it is at present (IDASA, 2010:3).

Gratton and Preuss (2008:1924) recognise three legacy dimensions: first, the degree of planned structure, second, the degree of positive structure, third, the degree of quantifiable structure. Thus, considering these dimensions, Preuss (2007:86) defines legacy as follows: “Legacy is planned and unplanned, positive and negative, intangible and tangible structures created through a sport event that remains after the event.” To gain an in-depth understanding regarding the legacy definition, the following legacy cube (Figure 3.4) is given here, as sourced from Gratton and Preuss (2008:1924). As can be seen, it contains eight smaller cubes. According to the latter authors, in reality, most pre-event studies and bid committees focus on only one sub- cube (planned, positive, tangible). Many of the pre-event feasibility and impact studies that consider

legacies are potentially biased, because the ambition of those commissioning the studies is to favour the hosting of the event, leading to them emphasising only this particular sub-cube (Gratton & Preuss, 2008:1924).

Figure 3.4: Legacy cube

Source: Gratton and Preuss (2008:1924)

Given the increased importance of the use of legacy as a justification for government involvement and investment in sport events, researchers and policymakers have called for consideration over a longer term to conceptualise, to plan and to evaluate the economic, social and environmental outcomes from events (Preuss, 2007:1). Indeed, within the sport event context, a paradigm shift has occurred, through which there has been recognition of the need to have strategies and policies in place to plan for broader outcomes to develop from sport events (Chalip, 2006:122; Gratton & Preuss, 2008:1926). As part of the process, the need to limit negative event consequences and to sustain, grow and lever positive event impacts has been recognised (Gratton &

Preuss, 2008:1924). Winning the bid to host a sport event is only half of the process to realising sport event legacies. Consequently, there must be a strategic and encompassing policy framework in place for the host cities to be able to maximise the social, economic and environmental outcomes (Smith & Fox, 2008:1135).

As was already articulated earlier in the current chapter, the legacy of a mega-event can be tangible or intangible and intentional or unintentional. It can also entail both positive and negative effects, often simultaneously (Van Schumann, 2013:19). To facilitate the analysis of the different legacies that a mega-event can bequeath, they have been classified under the following five dimensions, as depicted in Figure 3.5 below.

Figure 3.5: Dimensions influenced by mega-events Source: Van Schumann (2013:23)

According to IDASA (2010:17), there is no doubt that the FIFA World Cup^TM has left a legacy of extensive investment in infrastructure. The construction and the improvement of the transport infrastructure will, most certainly, benefit South Africa as a developing country. Moreover, the time constraints that were imposed by the event ensured that the projects were completed on time and that they left the construction industry with invaluable expertise and skills. The subsequent section elaborates on the legacy impacts that are linked to sport mega-events.