BEIJING: With its $40 billion landscape of twisted steel stadium, luminous Water Cube and imposing arenas arching high into the Beijing sky, the 2008 Olympic Games were as much a statement as a sporting spectacle.
China’s lavish staging of the Games underlined the nation’s economic superpower status and served as a breath-taking statement of intent. Never before have the Games been staged on such a grandiose scale. And it is likely they never will again.
Spanking new structures were central to the success of China’s extravaganza, but “reuse,” “recycle” and “revive” are the buzz words for future Games, even though Beijing has ambitious sporting, residential and entertainment post-Games plans for its venues. Beijing’s Olympics were far and away the most expensive ever. The bill for the Games and infrastructure directly and indirectly related to the Games — which analysts put at around $40 billion — dwarfs the previous record of $15 billion footed by Athens in 2004. While that $15 billion all but paralyzed the Greek economy, Beijing’s bill is mere pocket change for the roaring Chinese economy. Indeed, the International Olympic Committee is determined to ensure Beijing is the last of the huge Games. IOC president Jacques Rogge has repeatedly cautioned against “Games gigantism” and by 2012 a size-reduction plan first gradually introduced at the Athens Games will be fully in place for London. The plan covers issues such as the use of temporary grandstands, changing rooms, and training facilities instead of permanent structures.
London has chosen to carefully plan its post-Games legacy to ensure no white elephants are left standing after the athletes have left. Repeatedly praised by the IOC for its post-Games thinking, London Games chief Sebastian Coe and his team have opted for a compact event that will also revive a run-down part of the capital in the East End. “I think we accept that it is unlikely you will see a Games on this size and scale and stature again,” Coe told reporters in Beijing. “The IOC in 2001 reached the conclusions that the focus must be much more on sustainability, that big is not necessarily better.” London Mayor Boris Johnson said he had been “blown away” by Beijing’s achievements, but both he and Coe said London would deliver an Olympics to rival the Chinese event. “We have been dazzled, we have been impressed, we have been blown away by these Beijing Games, but we have not been intimidated and in our own sweet way, without wasting tax payers’ money, I am convinced that we can do just as well in 2012,” he said. London’s Games will lay the foundations of “a new small city” in the East End and pump money into sports education in state schools, something that could also help Britain’s rampant youth crime problem, Olympics Minister Tessa Jowell told reporters in Beijing earlier this month. London’s plans include temporary stands for the 80,000-seater Olympic stadium, to enable it to be trimmed down to a mere 25,000-seater after the Games. There will be no media village for reporters who will be put up in hotels — a significant saving in construction considering Beijing hosted more than 28,000 journalists. “9.75 out of 10” Denis Oswald told reporters in May in response to a question on how he would rate London’s preparations. Their parsimonious approach is being praised all the way. Rogge’s campaign against Games gigantism is aimed at encouraging more cities to bid for the extravaganza, given the Olympics have yet to be staged in South America or Africa. With spiraling costs, especially for Athens and Beijing, the IOC had feared candidates would be scared off. Vancouver plan an “intimate” Games in 2010, to be enjoyed by Canadians.
London is working hard to keep costs down and provide a lasting legacy. For 2016, Tokyo’s main selling point is the revival of its old harbor, Chicago’s downtown plan makes use of the lakefront and open park space while Rio de Janeiro will utilize PanAm Games facilities.
Rogge’s message seems to have sunk in.
