Being a part of the 2010 Vancouver Olympics was an amazing experience. I will never forget how great it felt to be a part of such a large community, and how so many people came together to celebrate something so incredible. Plus, getting two weeks off of university classes to partake in all of the festivities wasn’t so bad either!
Vancouver, 2010 Winter Olympics
I think that the Vancouver Olympics were a global event that had a tremendous effect on the growth of the city in regards to its size and its community. The media coverage and venues that were built for the event attracted millions of people, and ultimately made the city a large amount of money. Events where the whole world is focusing in on one city can really influence the way in which a city grows. For example, the 2014 Olympics are being held in the city Sochi in Russia, a place where MasterCard was not even heard of until they began to plan for the Olympics. Such an event has allowed the city to grow in many diverse ways it may not have if they weren’t elected to host.
The Olympics placed a spotlight on the city of Vancouver and allowed aspects of its urban planning to shine. The transportation routes that were planned and executed throughout the event allowed for mass amounts of people to get to where they needed to be, very quickly. The cost was very reasonable, yet since so many people were using Vancouver transportation, the city made a lot of money off of it. Not only was the Sea to Sky Highway method of transportation in Vancouver efficient, but it allowed for a great sense of community – connecting outer parts of Vancouver to the downtown core. Everyone was there for the same reason and were able to share the experience together.
Overall I believe that global events, such as the Olympics, are very beneficial to the growth of cities in regards to a rapid expansion in population and development for future urban planning. Not only does the city benefit financially, but it grows socially as well. I think that the 2010 Vancouver Olympics relate to our class discussions because we talk a lot about how community and transportation have a large influence on a city as a whole, and the Olympics clearly effected Vancouver in those ways. The city of Vancouver has expanded and grown to be well known to the rest of the world all thanks to the Olympics, which will have the same effects on the cities to host in the future.
I was very intrigued by your analysis of the the 2010 Vancouver Olympics. I agree thoroughly with your conclusion about how global events allow cities to foster a sense of community that may be lacking in a larger urban setting; in addition the extra recognition that a city may gain by hosting a global event is also a large benefit to an urban centre. However, I believe that often times global events are reflective of coercive and over-centralized forms of city government: global events often entail the disruptive uprooting and movement of people (homeless people in the case of Vancouver) and the use of government funds for facilities that are very unlikely to be used for the benefit of all residents (consider the Vancouver Olympic Village).
The Olympics were certainly an event that brought Vancouver to the global stage. But you argued that this event actually made the city a lot of money. I think such a claim is rather unfounded. There is no doubt in mind that the millions in infrastructural development that took place has not been payed for yet.In fact the city of montreal, just recently in the last 5 to 10 years finished paying off the debt it acquired during the 1976 Olympics!!!! I do though agree that the changes made were substantial, and effected radical change. I certainly can say with certainty that the improvements made to the sea to sky have been effective. While this event certainly raised Vancouvers international reputation, i just doubt that it made the city a lot of money, it may have brought infrastructural improvements, and attracted foreign investment, but the event itself, the city of Vancouver did not profit from, and i think there is little doubt in that. Nonetheless there is no doubt that such an event is beneficial both to the people and the economy of a host city, whether direct, or indirectly beneficial is another question.
Thank you both so much for your comments!
I really appreciate the feedback!
What I want to do is clarify what I meant by the idea of Vancouver making money from the Olympics. I completely agree that the city as a whole, just like Montreal, is in debt because of the expansion of building for the Olympics and larger scale concepts. I think the best way to rephrase my argument is to say that “certain parts” of the city made money. For example, many of the small and large businesses that line the streets of downtown Vancouver made tons of money on tourists and the amount of people that visited and shopped at all of these places. Since I was there, I can account for the amount of money that I spent at these places, unfortunately! I should have been much more clear in my argument, thank you for your comments and allowing me to fix it!
This is really interesting. I wrote my essay on the effect of the Paris 1889 International Exhibition on the Urban Planning of the city. Historically, Exhibitions have had a major effect upon the Urban Planning of the city or area which is hosting the Exhibition. Nineteenth-century world’s fairs were the epitome of modern times, as were the cities that hosted them. Cities such as Paris, London, New York and Chicago were metropolitan centers that were truly examples of universal modernity during this period.
These cities were cosmopolitan, financial, and cultural centres that concentrated and combined both national and international trends. World’s fairs were thus, the controlled portrayals of these cosmopolitan cores, as much as they were the cities greatest spectacles showing off the marvels of the city and its capabilities.
I believe that this view of Exhibitions also goes along with your analysis of the Vancouver Olympics and its effect on the city.