What is going to happen to Beijing's economy after the 2008 Olympic Games?
How to take advantage of the many Olympic venues after the competitions are
over? Will Beijing have to pay a lot for their post-Games maintenance?
Construction workers
build a new road near the National Stadium and the National Aquatics
Centre in Beijing July 14, 2006. Beijing Olympic Games 2008 officials
showed journalists on Friday the progress in the construction of Olympic
venues. [Reuters] |
Though it is still two years to go before the Games, Chinese scholars are
already studying the post-Games issues. The following is a translation of an
interview between Chen Jian, deputy president of the Beijing Olympic Economy
Research Association, and the Chinese newspaper Guangming Daily.
The post-Olympic issue is a universal headache faced by almost all host
cities. What do the post-Olympic risks include?
There are generally two sides to the issue. One is called the rock-bottom
effect, the other is the utilization of Olympic venues after the Games.
During the preparations for the Olympic Games, investment usually surges
dramatically due to the mass construction of Olympic venues and urban
infrastructural facilities. For instance, Beijing is expected to invest more
than 180 billion yuan (US$22.5 billion) in the construction of infrastructure
during its preparations for the Games. However, when the Games comes to an end,
such investments will decline considerably. If the city fails to take
precautions ahead, its economy might suffer a low growth rate or even slow to a
standstill, which would do harm to the city's economic development in the long
term. The rock-bottom effect takes place because economic growth is pulled back
by the drop in investment.
And how to use the Olympic venues after the Games is another hard nut to
crack. Beijing has been building a number of new sports venues for the Games.
However, these venues would be left idle after 2008 if we do not think of how to
use them ahead. The annual maintenance fees alone would be a huge financial
burden to the host city.
Do you have any suggestions on how Beijing could avoid such a scenario?
From my point of view, city planners should readjust the urban development
plan. Now, most of the Olympic venues and related facilities are located in the
northern part of the city. The municipal government should take administrative
and economic measures to encourage private capital to be invested in the
southern part and the outskirts of the city, in order to avoid too much
concentration of investment in the downtown area.
And the city leaders should consider how to arrange the fixed asset
investment in a more balanced way so as to prevent a sharp decline of investment
after the Games. For instance, the city could postpone some projects that are
not urgent and have little connection with the Games, and then launch them after
2008.
Are there any good experiences of ex-host cities in the utilization of
Olympic venues in the post-Olympic period?
We can draw on the experience of Athens in this regard. During the design and
construction of a sports venue, the city did not take the venues alone into
consideration, but rather combined them with the development of surrounding
areas, so that the venues could better serve the local community after the
Games. And all the Olympic venues have different applications, so that they
would not compete with one another. Moreover, the Athens government invited
private investors to be involved in the management and operation of the venues,
and it is also a good way of reducing post-Olympic risks.
Apart from Athens, we can also learn from Seoul, which was one of the host
cites of the World Cup 2002. The designer of the Seoul Stadium took the
post-tournament utilization into consideration first and built the stadium into
a multi-functional one. Now the stadium can host not only football matches, but
also baseball games and large-scale performances. The stadium also has auxiliary
buildings such as a movie centre, a shopping mall and a swimming pool. Due to
its multi-purpose functions, it can earn US$1 million for the Seoul city
government every month.
What can we do to reduce risks of limited post-Games use of our Olympic
venues?
First, we should take full consideration of how the venues could serve the
public in the long run during the design. And the city has cut off some projects
and plans to use more temporary buildings and facilities, which can reduce some
risks.
Second, the government should encourage more private capital in the
construction and management of Olympic venues. I'm glad to see that private
capital is more than half of the total investment in the venue construction.
Third, the designers should equip the venues with various functions, which
may increase their post-Games utility. For instance, in the central Olympic area
in northern Beijing, there are not only sports arenas like the National Stadium
and the National Aquatic Centre, but also shopping malls, exhibition halls,
hotels and many other auxiliary buildings, which are good for post-Games use.
Last but not the least, proper management and operation mechanisms are of
great importance. At present, many comprehensive sports venues in China are
rented separately to different individuals and companies. This situation hampers
the full use of the venues and brings many inconveniences to customers. We
should introduce professional management companies and integrate all the
resources of sports venues. This may reduce costs and lengthen the usage period
of each venue.
(China Daily 08/18/2006 page5)
