Mega events:
A mega event is something that is of a high profile that runs for a fixed duration of time on a short term basis. All over the world there seems to be an interest linked to a mega event. Also there is a sustainable and measurable economic outcome from a mega event.
The event in the end doesn’t necessarily have to be financially successful, but it will have some sort of impact on the economy as a hole for example by generating tourism and infrastructural improvements. It also improves employment in both short term and long term basis.
A mega event also involves political role playing in terms of decision making and the strategies of a country’s government. It can be either on a direct basis but the policy can also be indirect. The states usually advocate for the economic benefit that a mega event would have for the country. A mega event is conceived as an economic initiative.
Mega events don’t take place yearly. They have their own unique duration; the time of which they take place in is related the place where it takes place, examples of this is the Olympics Games in Athens in 2004. The place that a mega event takes place in dose not necessarily has to be a city. It can be a country like for example Germany hosted the World Cup in soccer in 2006.
These events do not have to be linked to sports. Exhibitions can also be classified as a mega event, for example the town of Hanover in Germany hosted the EXPO-exhibition in 2000.
The Term Paper on Global North and South in Terms of Economic Prosperity
Therefore to address the question as to why the north became rich and the south poor, once must ask the question why the north was able to become so productive and the south not. Throughout history world GDP growth has followed a fairly equal linear trajectory up until the industrial revolution takes hold (Sachs, 2005). From there we see a rampant acceleration of productivity, rapid acceleration ...
The impacts that mega events have on the host country
Mega events have an impact on tourist arrival in the host country. When a mega event is taking place in a certain country it results in a great amount of tourists visiting that particular country.
The growth of the tourism industry in South Africa over the last two decades signal the country’s ability to sustainably export travel services, improving the balance of payments, creating jobs and boosting economic growth (Fourie 2010).
The South African travel and tourism sector, of which sport tourism is a subsection, will contribute 8.7% to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2009 (WTTC 2009).
One determinant of the rise in tourism is event tourism; tourists attracted to a country or region with the specific aim of consuming event-specific goods. Mega-sport events, in particular, are considered to entail significant benefits for the host country in terms of tourism arrivals, both concurrently with the event and as a legacy (Baade and Matheson 2003; Baade and Matheson 2004; Matheson and Baade 2004; Preuss 2004; Solberg and Preuss 2006; Preuss 2007; Preuss 2007; Hagn and Maennig 2009).
South Africa has hosted major sporting events in the recent past, including the 1995 IRB Rugby World Cup, 1996 African Cup of Nations, 2003 ICC Cricket World Cup, 2007 World Twenty20
Mega-events and their impact on tourism
The appeal of hosting a mega-event, or more specifically a mega-sporting event, has grown significantly
over the last two decades. Not only have the advent of professionalism in sport, combined with
higher per capita income worldwide and improvements in broadcast technology, made mega-events a
truly global experience (Horne and Manzenreiter 2006), but also countries and regions increasingly
consider these events as possible lucrative opportunities encapsulating large potential tangible and
intangible benefits for the host.
What has been less apparent is the size of these benefits. Although scholars have attempted
The Essay on Web Host Hosting Hostquote Sales
We focus on your business Clic. net knows more about the Internet than merely the Interface design and pretty graphics. In fact, even if we have experienced and talented graphic designers within our team, our real interest is ensuring that you truly benefit from the use of Internet technology We share knowledge Clic. net has been servicing hundreds of Canadian businesses and managing the back-end ...
to measure the economic gains that result from hosting a mega-event since the 1980s, it is in the
most recent decade that the debate about the potential gains, both in terms of economic returns
and intangible benefits (including various non-quantifiable advantages as broad as national pride,
patriotism and country image), has intensified. Comparisons are fraught with difficulties; ex ante
studies differ from ex post analyses while methodologies depend on data availability and the skills of
the researcher (Kesenne 2005).
However, the central problem remains similar across the spectrum:
isolating the impact of one mega-event and determining its counterfactual. Put more plainly: Are
the costs for infrastructure, stadia, security and marketing worth the gains from tourism, trade
and tickets? And, if not directly, does the event spark — maybe indirectly — long-run economic
development?
Empirical results vary considerably across papers. Measuring only the economic returns to host
the Summer Olympic Games, Preuss (2004; 2007) and Baade and Matheson (2003) show that the
gains are ambiguous [see also Kasimati (2003)]. The benefits from hosting the FIFA World Cup are
similarly doubtful (Szymanski 2002; Baade and Matheson 2004; Lee and Taylor 2005; Allmers and
Maennig 2009).
As the two largest mega-sport events on the planet and with a seemingly endless
interest from countries in hosting these events, such results come as a surprise. ‘Smaller’ megaevents
have received less attention. There are only a few recent articles, for example, reviewing
the economic impact of the Winter Olympic Games (Rose and Spiegel 2009), Rugby World Cups
(Jones 2001), Cricket World Cups and British/Irish Lions tours (Higham 2005) which are some of
the mega-events analysed in this study.
Yet, hosting these events is not only about the direct monetary gains. If the interest in hosting
2
these events does not wane even in the face of negative financial returns, then surely some other
positive, intangible gains must be at play. This view is purported by more recent work, mostly
related to the two major global events, the Summer Olympics and FIFA World Cup (Maennig and
The Term Paper on Sport Tourism in India
1.1 INTRODUCTION Tourism is a travel for recreational, leisure or business purpose. The World Tourism Organization defines tourists as people travelling from one place to another and staying in places outside their usual environment for not more than one consecutive year for leisure, business and other purposes. The importance of tourism, as an instrument of economic development and employment ...
Du Plessis 2007; Maennig and Porsche 2008).
While the costs and benefits (tangible and intangible) remain a source of debate, the focus
has shifted recently towards those aspects of mega-events that are quantifiable, such as tourist
behaviour (Solberg and Preuss 2006; Preuss 2007).
Preuss (2007) argues that cost-benefit analyses
or economic impact assessments on a macro-level relies too heavily on the assumptions to justify the
outcomes and urges greater emphasis on a ‘bottom-up’ approach. This usually involves contingent
evaluation through questionnaires and surveys, directly assessing the behaviour of individuals. While
also costly, this approach has other disadvantages, including the main pitfall of ‘top-down’ studies,
measuring the counterfactual. In that sense, our study attempts to bridge this problem by turning
to a methodology now standard in the trade literature, the gravity model.
While the present paper is the first attempt to use the gravity model to assess the impact of
mega-events on tourism, the approach of Rose and Spiegel (2009), who investigate the impact of
hosting the Olympic Games on international trade flows, is followed. These authors find strong
support that hosting a Summer Olympic Game increases trade flows significantly. Furthermore,
they posit a theory of signalling, whereby countries that bid for a mega-event send a “policy signal
that is followed by future liberalisation”. The benefits of the mega-event is therefore not through
the increase in event-related activities (tourists visiting to support their teams, for example) but
through the signal a country sends by hosting (or being willing to host) the event. More revealing,
they find a similar impact on trade for those countries that won the bid to host the Olympics and
those that lost.
Measuring the behaviour of tourists from a comparative perspective also allows for an examination
of tourism displacement or crowding-out (Matheson 2002; Solberg and Preuss 2006; Fourie,
Siebrits et al. 2010).
Whereas some tourists may be attracted to an event (event-specific tourists),
some ‘normal’ tourists visiting the region frequently, may opt to shift their visit when a mega-event
The Essay on Sustainability of Tourism in South Africa
Sustainable tourism development aims to manage the negative impacts of the industry while developing local communities both economically and socially (UNEP, 2005). Sustainable tourism originally referred to preventing environmental damage from tourism, however, it is now aimed at a variety of different developmental activities related to the tourism industry. Tourism, when left unmanaged, may have ...
occurs. This could be for a variety of demand- or supply-side reasons, including escalating prices,
supply constraints in terms of accommodation and transport, security concerns, or visitor preferences
(Fourie, Siebrits et al. 2010).
However, quantifying these crowding-out effects is troublesome
as tourist behaviour is determined by many different country- and time-specific factors. A comparative
analysis, therefore, which includes a number of mega-events over different years, may provid
1. INTRODUCTION mega events and its impacts on the host country
The growth of the tourism industry in South Africa over the last two decades signal the country’s ability to sustainably export travel services, improving the balance of payments, creating jobs and boosting economic growth (Fourie 2010).
The South African travel and tourism sector, of which sport tourism is a subsection, will contribute 8.7% to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2009 (WTTC 2009).
One determinant of the rise in tourism is event tourism; tourists attracted to a country or region with the specific aim of consuming event-specific goods. Mega-sport events, in particular, are considered to entail significant benefits for the host country in terms of tourism arrivals, both concurrently with the event and as a legacy (Baade and Matheson 2003; Baade and Matheson 2004; Matheson and Baade 2004; Preuss 2004; Solberg and Preuss 2006; Preuss 2007; Preuss 2007; Hagn and Maennig 2009).
South Africa has hosted major sporting events in the recent past, including the 1995 IRB Rugby World Cup, 1996 African Cup of Nations, 2003 ICC Cricket World Cup, 2007 World Twenty20
There are numerous direct pecuniary and non-pecuniary benefits in hosting these events (Maennig and Du Plessis 2007).
For this paper, we focus on the impact of the change in tourist flows to South Africa. We contribute to the international debate on mega-sport events, finding empirical evidence to support our hypothesis that mega-events increase tourism arrivals, ceteris paribus. While this seems an obvious conclusion, the recent literature suggest that mega-events do not necessarily increase tourist numbers, as event-specific tourists may crowd-out or displace non-event tourists (Solberg and Preuss 2006; Allmers and Maennig 2009; Preuss and Kurscheidt 2009).
The Term Paper on Three Obstacles for Africa to Realize Sustainabel Development
In the contemporary economic development theories prevailing all over the world and in the policy practices pursued by every country, sustainable development of social economy is becoming a focus. What is sustainable development ? The United Nations defines it as ” to satisfy the needs of this generation,without doing any detriment to the ability of the coming generations in satisfying their ...
Reflecting on five events held in South Africa since 1995, we find evidence to support both sides of the debate; while some events do increase tourism, a few have no significant impact on tourism arrivals.
The critical issue with the increase in foreign arrivals (due to sporting events) is therefore the problem of crowding-out or the displacement effect of normal tourists. In the 2010 FIFA World Cup context, many authors are anxious about this (Preuss and Kurscheidt 2009), but the South African sporting organisers have taken these fears into consideration and plan to limit the displacement of normal tourists. They have done this by scheduling most of the large sporting events in the off season, winter months when there are lower volumes of arrivals to host cities (Maennig and Du Plessis 2007).
As Higham (2005) points out with reference to the 2005 Lions tour in New Zealand, this will curb displacement effects and may offer additional benefits to hosting large sports events because there is now a demand in off-peak seasons.
This can be seen in practice with the IRB Rugby World Cup, British & Irish tour and the 2010 FIFA Soccer World Cup which are held in the lowest arrival months of May and June (Figure 1), both winter months in South Africa. On the other hand, the ICC Cricket World Cup and the World Twenty20 Champions are summer sports. South Africa is typically seen as a summer destination by tourists and the highest arrival months are therefore summers months. However both events were scheduled for the lower tourist summer months of February and September. The IPL, another variation of the game of cricket, was not scheduled for these low season summer months. This scheduling problem was not due to bad planning from the South African organizers, but due to the fact that the event’s location was shifted 3 weeks before the event was to commence, because of security concerns in India
3. The Theoretical Linkage between Tourism and Poverty Reduction
The Review on Thai Tourism and Economic Development
The tourism industry is currently the worldûs largest and most diverse business sector since it serves as a primary source for generating revenue, employment, private sector growth, and infrastructure development for many countries. Researchers have argued that tourism development not only stimulates the growth of the industry, but also triggers overall economic growth (Lee and Chang, 2008). ...
With annual tourist arrivals in developing countries growing rapidly and sanguine growth
prospects for the future, the potential contribution of this sector to economic growth, poverty
reduction, and improved livelihoods has gained renewed attention among governments and
international development agencies. The Canary Island Declaration on Tourism in March 2001
concluded that for a large majority of Least Developed Countries, of which 30 are African,
tourism development could be an avenue to increase participation in the global economy, to
alleviate poverty, and to achieve socio-economic progress. This was confirmed by the Summit to
review the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in September 2005, at which the UNWTO
— together with UNICEF, UNDP, UNCTAD, and a broad range of private sector and NGO
organisations — highlighted tourism as one of the most effective tools for sustainable growth in
the world’s poorest countries, and as a key
Tourism as an Engine for Pro-Poor Growth in Africa
Significantly, Africa is the world’s regional leader in terms of tourism growth, with Sub-Saharan
Africa — pulled by South Africa, Kenya, Mozambique, Swaziland and Seychelles — leading the
performance. At the same time, in North Africa, the two main destinations, Morocco and Tunisia,
have experienced somewhat different growth paces. Tourism is also one of the fastest growing
industries in the SADC region, with immense untapped potential for further development. The
Overseas Development Institute (ODI) identifies four reasons why tourism is a potential engine
for pro-poor growth in Africa.
First, whilst Africa contributes little to global tourism figures, tourism is significant for the
continent’s economies. By 2003, tourism accounted for over 11% of total African exports
(Ashley & Mitchell 2005).
As table 1 below indicates, for countries such as Mauritius, Tanzania,
Morocco and Egypt, tourism is a major source of exports. This compares favourably with the
importance of tourism to countries on the periphery of Europe, such as Spain (19.4%), Bulgaria
(19.9%) and Greece (29.4%).
Notwithstanding the continent’s marginal position in the global
economy (producing less than 2% of world exports and contributing only 1.6% of world GNP)
Africa still attracts 4% of global international arrivals. This indicates that the tourism sector and
its potential pro-poor benefits are disproportionately important for Africa, compared to other
continents.
Although two-thirds of international tourism receipts in Africa are concentrated in several key
countries — namely South Africa, Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia and Mauritius — the tourism sector
is important to a broader spectrum of African countries too. Tourism constitutes over 10% of total
exports in more than half of African countries for which there is available data. In some countries,
such as Mali and The Gambia, small annual international arrival figures of 70,000 visitors — that
is less than 200 tourists a day — are still significant, with tourism respectively contributing
10.1% and 30.5% of total exports for these two countries (Ashley & Mitchell 2005).instrument to achieve the MDGs. The Tourism Sector in South Africa
Prior to South Africa’s first democratic elections in 1994, the country’s tourism sector was
plagued by a host of constraints that limited its potential to play a more meaningful role in the
development of the economy. These constraints included the following:
lack of inclusive and effective national, provincial and local structures for the
development, management and promotion of the tourism sector;
inadequate or non-existent ground transportation, especially in the rural areas;
lack of infrastructure in rural areas that compounded perceptions that the safety of
tourists could not be guaranteed;
poor consumer-oriented service;
poor involvement of local communities and previously neglected groups in the tourism
industry, mainly as a result of government policies;
lack of market access – local communities did not have access to the lucrative tourism
industry; and
12
the potential of domestic tourism was largely suppressed due to the segregated access to
tourism products that prevailed then (DEAT 2004).
Since 1994, the government has recognised the role of the tourism sector as a key catalyst for
economic growth and development. For this reason, it has embarked upon various initiatives to
develop this industry in a sustainable and responsible manner, and to maximise its real potential
in light of the country’s rich, diverse and attractive tourism attributes. In addition, there is now
considerable local activity and emphasis upon tourism-led local economic development planning
across large cities, smaller localities and rural areas (Rogerson 2006).
Accordingly, the government now explicitly targets, and seeks to promote, tourism as a high
potential growth and export sector. This has been welcomed by all constituencies. The
Accelerated and Shared Growth Initiative for South Africa (ASGISA) — a new policy instrument
adopted in 2006 to grow the economy to 6% by 2014 — points to the positive role of tourism in
poverty reduction and social upliftment, and support for this targeted sector is now being fasttracked.
Tourism is thus viewed as a key conduit to improve the livelihoods of many poor
communities that reside in the underdeveloped ‘second economy’, as well as supporting the
further global integration of the industrialised, modern and wealthy ‘first economy’. With the
necessary policy interventions and the looming 2010 Soccer World Cup in mind, the government
seeks to raise the contribution of tourism to GDP from 8% to 12%, and create 400,000 new jobs
by 2014.
Figure 5
Potential developmental impacts of the South African tourism industry
increased foreign exchange reserves;
domestic and foreign investment;
employment creation – in one estimate, for every 8 tourists that visit South Africa, 1 new
permanent job is created;
skills, human resource and entrepreneurship/SMME development;
responsible and sustainable use of local natural resources;
capital expenditure on basic service-enhancing infrastructure (urban and rural);
socioeconomic transformation and broad-based black economic empowerment;
local economic development (LED) in urban and rural nodes;
equitable geographical spread of tourism benefits across the nine provinces;
showcasing the Southern African region and ‘niche’ tourism opportunities to a broader
global audience; and
enhanced global integration of the South African economy.
5.1 Principles governing tourism development
The 1996 White Paper on the Development and Promotion of Tourism in South Africa set out the
government’s initial vision and objectives for the tourism industry, in line with the social equity
imperatives of the progressive Reconstruction and Development Programme (adopted in 1994,
but succeeded in 1996 by the more conservative Growth, Employment and Redistribution
strategy).
It recognised that tourism had largely been a missed opportunity for South Africa in the
past, but could provide an ‘…engine of growth, capable of dynamising and rejuvenating other
sectors of the economy’. Its approach to the development of responsible and sustainable tourism
turned on several key principles, including the following:
tourism should be private sector-driven, although the government should facilitate
tourism development
5.4 Developmental impact of tourism in South Africa
Unlike other tradable industrial products, tourism is a services-oriented activity, with various
components and linkages into the economy. Its impact on trade, development and poverty is thus
complex, and difficult to precisely measure. The following are some preliminary observations —
by no means comprehensive — on these impacts.
5.4.1 Economic impact
Tourism is now often referred to as the ‘new gold’ of the South African economy as the total
foreign direct spend of tourists has overtaken gold foreign exchange earnings, for long the
mainstay of the country’s ‘minerals-energy’ economy. The contribution of the tourism sector to
GDP is about 7.1%, or around R100bn. This reflects the broader structural shift in the South
African economy towards services industries – although Rodrik (2006) argues that the skillsintensity
of this sector explains the country’s high levels of unskilled unemployment.
Nonetheless, the tourism sector has outperformed all other sectors in terms of both GDP and job
creation (SAT 2004).
The 1996 White Paper argued that by more effectively and responsibly harnessing the tourism
sector as an engine of growth and development, certain targets could be met:
16
raise tourism’s contribution to GDP by 8% by 2000 and 10% by 2005;
maintain a 15% increase in visitor arrivals between the years 1996 and 2006;
create 1 million new jobs in tourism by 2005;
increase foreign exchange earnings from approximately R10bn in 1996 to R40bn by
2005; and
increase the number of overseas arrivals to 2 million by 2000 and African arrivals to 4
million (DEAT 1996).
However, the successful realisation of the above targets has been mixed:
The numerical target for African arrivals has been met, even exceeded. In 1996, these
arrivals totalled 3.8 million; by 2000, this had increased to 4.3 million. However, the
number of overseas arrivals in 2000 was 1.6 million, well short of its target.
The rate of tourism growth has been highly variable. Rather than the projected 15%,
tourist arrivals had grown at an average of roughly 9% between 1993 and 2002 (which is
still above the international average of 3%).
From a macroeconomic perspective, it is clear from table 1 that the contribution of tourism to the
economy has grown, with an expansion in both the size of the tourism industry and the tourism
economy.
Mega-events and their impact on tourism
The appeal of hosting a mega-event, or more specifically a mega-sporting event, has grown significantly
over the last two decades. Not only have the advent of professionalism in sport, combined with
higher per capita income worldwide and improvements in broadcast technology, made mega-events a
truly global experience (Horne and Manzenreiter 2006), but also countries and regions increasingly
consider these events as possible lucrative opportunities encapsulating large potential tangible and
intangible benefits for the host.
What has been less apparent is the size of these benefits. Although scholars have attempted
to measure the economic gains that result from hosting a mega-event since the 1980s, it is in the
most recent decade that the debate about the potential gains, both in terms of economic returns
and intangible benefits (including various non-quantifiable advantages as broad as national pride,
patriotism and country image), has intensified. Comparisons are fraught with difficulties; ex ante
studies differ from ex post analyses while methodologies depend on data availability and the skills of
the researcher (Kesenne 2005).
However, the central problem remains similar across the spectrum:
isolating the impact of one mega-event and determining its counterfactual. Put more plainly: Are
the costs for infrastructure, stadia, security and marketing worth the gains from tourism, trade
and tickets? And, if not directly, does the event spark — maybe indirectly — long-run economic
development?
Empirical results vary considerably across papers. Measuring only the economic returns to host
the Summer Olympic Games, Preuss (2004; 2007) and Baade and Matheson (2003) show that the
gains are ambiguous [see also Kasimati (2003)]. The benefits from hosting the FIFA World Cup are
similarly doubtful (Szymanski 2002; Baade and Matheson 2004; Lee and Taylor 2005; Allmers and
Maennig 2009).
As the two largest mega-sport events on the planet and with a seemingly endless
interest from countries in hosting these events, such results come as a surprise. ‘Smaller’ megaevents
have received less attention. There are only a few recent articles, for example, reviewing
the economic impact of the Winter Olympic Games (Rose and Spiegel 2009), Rugby World Cups
(Jones 2001), Cricket World Cups and British/Irish Lions tours (Higham 2005) which are some of
the mega-events analysed in this study.
Yet, hosting these events is not only about the direct monetary gains. If the interest in hosting
2
these events does not wane even in the face of negative financial returns, then surely some other
positive, intangible gains must be at play. This view is purported by more recent work, mostly
related to the two major global events, the Summer Olympics and FIFA World Cup (Maennig and
Du Plessis 2007; Maennig and Porsche 2008).
While the costs and benefits (tangible and intangible) remain a source of debate, the focus
has shifted recently towards those aspects of mega-events that are quantifiable, such as tourist
behaviour (Solberg and Preuss 2006; Preuss 2007).
Preuss (2007) argues that cost-benefit analyses
or economic impact assessments on a macro-level relies too heavily on the assumptions to justify the
outcomes and urges greater emphasis on a ‘bottom-up’ approach. This usually involves contingent
evaluation through questionnaires and surveys, directly assessing the behaviour of individuals. While
also costly, this approach has other disadvantages, including the main pitfall of ‘top-down’ studies,
measuring the counterfactual. In that sense, our study attempts to bridge this problem by turning
to a methodology now standard in the trade literature, the gravity model.
While the present paper is the first attempt to use the gravity model to assess the impact of
mega-events on tourism, the approach of Rose and Spiegel (2009), who investigate the impact of
hosting the Olympic Games on international trade flows, is followed. These authors find strong
support that hosting a Summer Olympic Game increases trade flows significantly. Furthermore,
they posit a theory of signalling, whereby countries that bid for a mega-event send a “policy signal
that is followed by future liberalisation”. The benefits of the mega-event is therefore not through
the increase in event-related activities (tourists visiting to support their teams, for example) but
through the signal a country sends by hosting (or being willing to host) the event. More revealing,
they find a similar impact on trade for those countries that won the bid to host the Olympics and
those that lost.
Measuring the behaviour of tourists from a comparative perspective also allows for an examination
of tourism displacement or crowding-out (Matheson 2002; Solberg and Preuss 2006; Fourie,
Siebrits et al. 2010).
Whereas some tourists may be attracted to an event (event-specific tourists),
some ‘normal’ tourists visiting the region frequently, may opt to shift their visit when a mega-event
occurs. This could be for a variety of demand- or supply-side reasons, including escalating prices,
supply constraints in terms of accommodation and transport, security concerns, or visitor preferences
(Fourie, Siebrits et al. 2010).
However, quantifying these crowding-out effects is troublesome
as tourist behaviour is determined by many different country- and time-specific factors. A comparative
analysis, therefore, which includes a number of mega-events over different years, may provide
a more consistent evaluation of its size.
4 Results
We firstly investigate whether mega-sporting events, on average, increase tourism flows in the same
year of hosting the event. While this may seem obvious, the recent literature on mega-events and
their impact on tourism have become more critical (and possibly pessimistic) in their assessment of
the role in mega-events to generate new arrivals (Maennig 2008, Preuss 2009).
To that end, Event
variable is defined in equation (E1) as a binary variable which takes the value 1 if the destination
country i hosted a mega-sporting event. This variable is then grouped according to the mega-event
type and hence six dummy variables are defined to test whether the type of event matters. SOG,
WOG, FIFA, CWC, RWC and Lions are binary variables which take the value 1 if the destination
country hosts a Summer Olympic Game, a Winter Olympic Game, a FIFA World Cup, a Cricket
World Cup, Rugby World Cup or a Lions Tour respectively.
<TABLE 1 HERE>
The results of the test for the first hypothesis are presented in column (1) of Table 1. Estimates
show that, after controlling for the impact on trade which is economically and statistically significant
and other factors standard to the gravity framework, the Event coefficient is 0.079 which suppose a
predicted tourism increase of 8% in the same year of hosting a mega-event.
Predictably, not all mega-events would have the same impact on tourism. Column (2) of Table 1
presents the estimates of the impact of mega-sporting event disaggregated by the type of event. Four
of the six mega-events have an economically and statistically positive impact on tourist arrivals, while
the Rugby World Cup and the Winter Olympic Games have a negative impact on tourism, ceteris
paribus. The latter finding is consistent with the results from Rose and Spiegel (2009) who also find
no evidence of an increase in trade with hosting the Winter Olympic Games. The large negative
coefficient for the Rugby World Cup
iThe Rugby World Cup is the premier international rugby union competition. The event is organised by the sport’s governing body, the International Rugby Board (IRB), and is contested by the men’s national teams. The inaugural tournament was held in 1987, hosted by both Australia and New Zealand, and is now contested every four years. The tournament is one of the largest international sporting competitions in the world.[1][2]
The winners are awarded the William Webb Ellis Cup. William Webb Ellis was the Rugby School pupil who – according to popular myth – invented the game after picking up the ball during a game of football. South Africa are the current World Champions, having won the 2007 Rugby World Cup final in France on 20 October 2007 with victory over England, the 2003 World Champions and current runners-up. The next Rugby World Cup will take place in 2011 in New Zealand. The hosts for 2015 and 2019 have been announced as England and Japan respectively.[
s more difficult to explain, and rTournament
The opening game of the 2003 Rugby World Cup between Argentina and Australia at Telstra Stadium in Sydney
The current model features twenty nations competing over a month in the host nation(s).[6] There are two stages, a group and a knock-out. Nations are divided into four pools, A through to D, of five nations each.[7] The pool allocation system seeds teams ranked one to four from the previous tournament into A to D pools respectively. The other four automatic entrants—the losing quarter-finalists from the previous tournament—are drawn into pools at random.[8]
The remaining positions in each pool are filled by the qualifiers. Nations play four pool games, playing their respective pool members once.[7] A bonus points system is used during pool play. If two or more teams are level on points, a system of criteria is used to determine the higher rank;[7] the sixth and final criterion decides the higher rank through the Official IRB World Rankings.[7]
The winner (first position) and runner-up (second position) of each pool enters the knock-out stage.[7] The knock-out stage consists of quarter- and semi-finals, and then the final. The winner of each pool is placed against a runner-up of a different pool in a quarter-final.[7] The winner of each quarter-final goes on to the semi-finals, where the respective winners proceed to the final. Losers of the semi-finals contest for third place (called the ‘Bronze Final’).[7] Should a tie result during an event in the knock-out stages, the winner is determined through extra time. Should that fail, sudden death begins when the next team to score any points is declared with winner; as a last resort, a kicking competition is used.[7
equires a more disaggregatedSelection of hosts
Main article: Rugby World Cup hosts
Tournaments are voted on by the IRB member nations and are organised by Rugby World Cup Ltd (RWCL).[16] This decides what nation(s) will host the tournament, with the voting procedure managed by a team of independent auditors, and the voting kept secret. All the tournaments thus far have been held in nations in which rugby union is a popular sport, this trend continued when New Zealand was awarded the 2011 event ahead of Japan, a traditionally weaker rugby nation in comparison to New Zealand. The allocation of a tournament to a host nation is now made five or six years prior to the commencement of the particular event, as New Zealand were awarded the 2011 event in late 2005.[17]
The tournament has in the past been hosted by either a single or multiple nation(s).
For example the 1987 tournament was co-hosted by Australia and New Zealand. The IRB requires that a host nation must have a 60,000 (minimum) capacity venue for the final.[18] Host nations sometimes construct or upgrade stadia in preparation for the World Cup; such as Millennium Stadium – purpose built for the 1999 tournament or the upgrade of Eden Park for 2011.[19]
The 1995 Rugby World Cup was the third Rugby World Cup. It was hosted and won by South Africa, and was the first Rugby World Cup in which every match was held in one country.
The World Cup was the first major sporting event to take place in South Africa following the end of apartheid. It was also the first in which the South African national team was allowed to compete; the International Rugby Football Board (IRFB, now the International Rugby Board) had only allowed the readmittance of South Africa to international rugby in 1992, following negotiations to end apartheid. The World Cup would also be the last major event of rugby union’s amateur era; two months after the tournament, the IRFB opened the sport to professionalism.
The World Cup would be marred by an accident that took place during the pool stage of the tournament. Three minutes into a match between Côte d’Ivoire and Tonga, the Ivorian winger Max Brito was crushed beneath several other players. Despite intensive care, Brito was left paralyzed below the neck.[1]
At the World Cup Final, held at Ellis Park in Johannesburg on 24 June, South Africa defeated New Zealand 15 – 12, with Joel Stransky scoring a drop goal in extra time to win the match. Following South Africa’s victory, Nelson Mandela, the President of South Africa, wearing a Springbok rugby shirt and cap, presented the Webb Ellis Cup to the South African captain François Pienaar. Mandela and Pienaar’s involvement in the World Cup is the subject of the 2009 film Invictus, and the ESPN 30 for 30 documentary The 16th Man in 2010.
