Research Article

A Retrospective Analysis: 1996 Atlanta Summer Olympics and Lessons for Future Olympic Cities

Volume: 5 Number: 1 July 30, 2020
EN

A Retrospective Analysis: 1996 Atlanta Summer Olympics and Lessons for Future Olympic Cities

Abstract

This paper examines the rationale of the 1996 Summer Olympics bid of Atlanta and provides a retrospective analysis of the short- and long-term impacts of the Olympic Games. Olympics provided a means to facilitate the primacy of downtown Atlanta and this new strategy was partially successful mainly because of other external factors. The elites of downtown Atlanta seized the opportunity presented by a potential Olympic hosting in Atlanta to make promises and implement a vision that revitalizes certain downtown areas. Atlanta’s Olympic strategy gave positive results in the short-run, however did not help to increase the primacy of downtown Atlanta in the long term due to short-term focused strategies, prioritizing regional issues and shifting focus of business elites to regional growth. Atlanta’s Olympic planning practice mostly benefited the business interests while the desires and needs of the residents mostly disregarded, mainly because of the privately-lead planning initiatives. Atlanta Olympic planning practice showed that privatization of the Olympic planning results in limited effects in urban transformation. This paper concludes that the Olympics is not a “one-fits-all approach” for host cities, thus the outcomes differ from city to city mainly because of the different objectives, politics, and culture of each city.

Keywords

Mega-event planning , olympics , Atlanta , Planning Practice

References

  1. ACOG Member 1. (2014) Personal interview, April 17.
  2. Allen, I. with Hemphill, P. (1971) Mayor: Notes on the Sixties. New York: Simon and Schuster.
  3. Andranovich, G., Burbank, M. J., and Heying, C. H. (2001) Olympic Cities: Lessons Learned from Mega-event Politics. Journal of Urban Affairs 23 (2), p. 113-131.
  4. Atlanta Committee for the Olympic Games (ACOG). 1996. 1996 Olympic Press Guide. Retrieved from Atlanta History Center (Atlanta, USA).
  5. Atlanta Committee for the Olympic Games (ACOG). (1997) Official Report of the Centennial Olympic Games, Volume One: Planning and Organizing.
  6. Baade, R.A. and Matheson, V. (2002) Bidding for the Olympics: Fool’s Gold? In Barros C; Ibrahimo M.; Szymanski , S. (Eds.), Transatlantic Sport: the Comparative Economics of North America and European Sports, p. 127-151.
  7. Banfield, E. C. (1965) Big City Politics: A Comparative Guide to the Political Systems of Atlanta, Boston, Detroit, El Paso, Los Angeles, Miami, Philadelphia, St. Louis and Seattle. New York: Random House.
  8. Burbank, M. J., Andranovich, G. and Heying, C. (2001) Olympic Dreams: The Impact of Megaevents on Local Politics, Lynne Rienner Publishers, Boulder, Colorado.
  9. Burbank, M. J., Andranovich, G., and Heying, C. (2002) Mega-events, Urban Development, and Public Policy. The Review of Policy Research, Fall 2002 (19) 3: p. 179-202.
  10. Essex, S. and Chalkley B. (1998) The Olympics as a catalyst of urban renewal: a review. Leisure Studies, 17 (3), 187-206.
APA
Batuhan, T. (2020). A Retrospective Analysis: 1996 Atlanta Summer Olympics and Lessons for Future Olympic Cities. Journal of Multidisciplinary Academic Tourism, 5(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.31822/jomat.656291