Views
9 months ago

Reviving the Flame

Travail de Master de Tiffany Duc

9. Conclusion In this

9. Conclusion In this work, the context of the candidacy for the Winter Olympics in 2026 reveals a huge debate, specifically focusing on the budget and investments needed, as well as the fear of costs overrun and white elephants. To see things from a different perspective, the authors shifts away from this economic and tangible side to concentrate her study on intangible and social aspects. In this optic, she proposes to look at a set of “communities’ legacies” that target themes linked to the society, in relation to the case study of Sion 2026. During the interviews, the author unveiled three key topics: o The “human size event”, for which a definition is given to better grasp this concept. o The risks that Sion 2026 is facing in the actual context, that are broken down into three main phases: before the candidacy; during the candidacy; during and after the Games’ organisation. o The desired legacies and their leverages, that are classified in five key categories: tourism; environment; national identity; human capital; and youth & sport. Based on these findings, the author proposes key recommendations, firstly for the committee of Sion 2026, and secondly some suggestions target the IOC. These counsels focus of both immediate action that can be taken in the ongoing context and future planning to design and implement in relation to the Games’ organisation and legacies. To summarize, the capital suggestions are the following: o The OCOG’s communication strategy must be open and straightforward to foster trust in the population and political parties to avoid misinformation or misunderstandings. o The OCOG needs to bring forward leader representatives, or ambassadors like sportspeople for the public to be inspired by the Games and generate enthusiasm. o The OCOG should think about ex ante analysis and initiatives to strengthen their argument to support their candidacy, like the SBTs for example. o Ensure the IOC understands its role as elector of host cities that have to develop green games. In this optic, countries with no or few infrastructures being chosen can engender suspicion of corruption and collusions. o The Legacy Organisation must be founded with an independent team but still closely collaborate with the OCOG. Their agenda should be synchronised for key milestones in all domains. o All teams should be built on a shared authority model to optimise all projects o New workshops should be organised to: avoid placebo legacies; define the capital heritages to focus on and enshrine these in the Games organisation; set SMART objectives for each legacy. While, most respondents are enthusiastic about the idea of legacies, some respondent reminded the author that all OCOGs must stay realistic and not believe the Games will become a solution to all issues in a destination. Conclusion 51

In addition, the question can be asked on whether the proposed initiatives to leverage Games’ legacies could be realised without the mega-event, or if the OG are capital to their happening. Overall, one can see that organising and planning for legacies can bring many positive aspects, not only for the future, but also within the organisation of the Games and the IOC. Furthermore, a key element here is that OCOGs can change many things in the organisation, specifically by using the Agenda 20 20 as a reminder to the IOC of their goal for ethics and human size event. What needs to be kept in mind, is that these recommendations need to be applied if one desires to achieve such positive impact. While the findings revealed many information, the present study also has limitations. First of all, the ex ante perspective specifically offers opinions from the interviewees. There is, for now, no guarantee the Sion 2026’ plan will work out, and all legacies are hypothesis based on the committee’s vision. Furthermore, the entire focus looks at intangible heritages that are, already in ex post analysis, very difficult to assess. Here the challenge is to target specific heritages, fitting in the present context. However, any context can quickly evolve, particularly during the pre-bid and bid stage (national referendum, IOC electing another country, etc.), and also during the seven-year Games’ organisation, which this can modify the interest for any legacy. A restraint for this study was to find interviewees with enough knowledge on the candidacy file and IOC to answer questions on legacies. This challenge greatly tightened the number of respondents’ possibilities. Another limitation to this study is the current transition phase the Olympic Games are starting because of the Agenda 20 20. Therefore, all proposed vision or plans to renew the OG are uncertain, since there is no proof yet that the goals from the Agenda 20 20 will be achieved. Lastly, the Sion 2026’ committee is on a very short schedule to convince Swiss people and finalise their candidacy file. Hence, their Legacy Master Plan is still under study and was not available to the author, which rendered the research a bit more challenging. From this set of information, it would be good for future ex ante studies to have access to legacy files in advance to better specify the focus and select capital desired legacies with more precision and details. This work being based on qualitative researches, future studies should consider a quantitative aspect through surveys. Questioning the public on legacies could help estimate their knowledge on the topic. Given most people focuses on economic aspects, it seems they do not grasp the potential of heritages yet. Finally, to be able to propose, on the longer term, a standard file for managing legacies, future studies should be done before, during and after the various Games phase. In other words, legacies should be monitored from the start of the candidacy. This would allow the researchers to better understand the effects leveraging have on legacies, but also determine the potential causes to a successful and/or unsuccessful heritage. Conclusion 52