After two successive Olympic bidding contests in which the number of cities in the race fell to just two, the head of the Association of Summer Olympic International Federations (ASOIF) says hard work is needed to make it more appealing to host the Games.

The IOC’s 2022 and 2024 bid races were blighted with cities dropping out – some due to defeats in referendums – resulting in Beijing beating Almaty to win hosting rights for the Winter Olympics and the double awarding of the next two summer Games to Paris and Los Angeles.

Ricci Bitti acknowledged the growing problems in perceptions of Olympic Games costs and a that there is a “trend” for taxpayers’ to withdraw from the prospect of paying the millions and billions of dollars perceived to be necessary to bid for and stage the IOC’s showpiece.

“People don’t get it immediately with a big event. They prefer that public authorities invest in something else,” he said.

“So we have to do a big effort in communication. I joke that we have a very rich product in the Olympic Games – that no one wants. We have to work on that.

“There are three big factors to try to solve this problem. To change the bid procedures… and the IOC is working very hard on that, to work and interact in the invitation phase. Secondly, the vision to reduce the cost of the Games. The president of the IOC has given a target to reduce $1bn in the cost of the summer games, $500,000 for winter.

“The third one is not on the table at the moment but should be in the near future – to monitor the size of the Games. I was in Gold Coast at the Commonwealth Games and you see that the size is more manageable.

“I think the model of the Games has to be considered very soon because the Olympics is getting very big.”

But this will be some way off, following the increase in the number of sports from 28 to 33 for the Tokyo Olympics. While the IOC continues to revamp the Olympic bidding concept, Ricci Bitti and ASOIF are getting down to the business of helping 2020 Games organisers deliver successful sports competitions.

This article, based on an exclusive interview by Host City at SportAccord Convention in Bangkok, was first published in the Summer edition of Host City magazine. 

In the months since Rio hosted the 2016 Olympics and Paralympics, we have seen sport’s international governing bodies, such as the International Olympic Committee, FIFA or UEFA, take some important first steps. Indeed, all three of these governing bodies, as well as the Commonwealth Games Federation, have made progress on the path of integrating Human Rights as a due consideration when rolling out their processes, in particular in connection with mega sporting events.

For example, EURO 2024, the Paris 2024 Olympics and the 2026 World Cup are all events in which framing documents (such as bidding criteria or host city contracts) must now include an explicit reference to the responsibility of organisers to respect human rights, whilst setting up and delivering the event. Terre des Hommes and its Children Win campaign have worked in coalition with other key civil society organisations to get the sport governing bodies to engage in taking these first steps.

What do we mean by incorporating human rights into the planning and delivery of mega sporting events? Well, this should imply that when constructing sports infrastructure for the event, workers are duly paid, have decent working schedules and conditions. It should imply that supply chains are free from child labour. Or, when communities and families are evicted and moved to a new location to make way for sporting facilities, that the process should not violate child rights – for example, by ensuring proper access to schools and health centres in the new location.

It is important to understand that the prevention of human rights and child rights violations, as well as respect of anti-corruption standards, are both key elements when considering the social components of ‘sustainability’. Usually understood in the context of its economic and environmental aspects, social sustainability has begun to gather momentum and importance over the last two years when debating the ‘sustainability’ of sporting events.

Take a moment to reflect on this. If an event lasting three or four weeks has life-changing consequences for many thousands of people, surely it should be organised in a way that reduces the negative impact to the minimum.

Therefore these changes on paper, in the documents I have described previously, are vitally important – but, let us be clear, they only constitute the start of the journey. And, one could add, the easiest part of it.

To have the desired positive impact on the ground, for the affected groups such as workers, children or communities, the new provision in contracts and bidding documents needs to be translated into concrete decisions aiming at identifying the risks in terms of human and child rights, at taking the necessary measures to mitigate such risks, and finally ensuring that victims of potential violations get proper reparation. Stakeholders involved in the organisation of mega sporting events are certainly familiar with such processes of risk assessment and management. What many actors are now requesting from sport governing bodies is that these should be applied in the area of the stakeholders’ responsibility to respect human rights.

We must engage in dialogue with the governing bodies at a global level in order to bring about these changes. As already mentioned, this is producing results. However, this strategy must be complemented at a national and local level in order to be truly effective. Indeed, it is the host cities and/or the national sport organisations who make the decisions that really change the lives of people impacted by mega sporting events. Thus, having host cities sensitised to the importance of human rights and anti-corruption should be non-negotiable when seeking the effective implementation of such a framework.

Processes at ground level have already started. The involvement of stakeholders including communities or trade unions are, for example, foreseen in the frame of the Paris 2024 Olympic Games. The same applies in the preparation of the bid for Euro 2024, where cities hosting matches will be required to take into account the new human rights requirements – including labour and child rights – designed by UEFA in its bidding documents of May 2017.

It is important that the work at global level is reinforced by implementing strategies at national and local level. Initiatives at both levels should be mutually supporting each other.

The implementation of human rights due diligence by organisers of mega sporting events in particular – and the world of sports in general – is now at an important crossroads. Sport governing bodies have to show that all this is not only about having good intentions and nice words on paper but also thoughtful, concrete and accountable ways of implementation.

For this reason, there still needs to be a reality check. Local stakeholders such as host cities, national sports federations or impacted communities have an important role to play to make the commitment to human rights due diligence become a reality.

This article was written by Terre des Hommes for the Winter 2017 edition of Host City magazine

I have the pleasure of welcoming you all to my host city for the third time – and seeing how this event has developed and grown over the years.

The overall theme for this year is "High impact events in the current climate" and there are a number of very qualified people to speak about this today and tomorrow – not least my colleagues from the International Olympic Committee in the first two panels.

The recent change by the IOC to award two summer Olympic Games at the same time to Paris in 2024 and Los Angeles in 2028 certainly covers the phrase "High Impact Events" – and you will hear from two absolute experts in that decision – Patrick Baumann who chaired the IOC Evaluation Commission and Christophe Dubi, the Olympic Games Executive Director. You will also hear from David Grevemberg, who ran the 2014 Commonwealth Games.

I used to know what I thought was a lot about the IOC bidding process, having served on three Evaluation and two Coordination Commissions – and then bidding twice with Manchester and once with London as we tried to convince the IOC of the joys of our case – and thankfully, one of these efforts worked.

I have been increasingly concerned that the IOC bidding process seems to be directed at how the process can be made shorter, cheaper and more accommodating. Perhaps we should also be prepared to speak out rather more about the huge benefits of hosting the Games that can be delivered by a well organised combination of political, organisational and sporting skills.

I am not going to repeat the huge benefits from London 2012 – and echoed in many ways by the Glasgow 2014 Commonwealth Games – where the development of village, infrastructure and sports facilities provide legacy benefits for generations to come. But I was hugely encouraged by a recent report from the Mayor of London in October to the effect that East London – the home of the 2012 Games – is the fastest growing part of London as the "Olympic effect" continues to attract jobs and investment. This report reveals that an extra 110,000 jobs have been created in East London since the Games, more than three times the number forecast in 2012. This boom is expected to continue with an additional 125,000 jobs across the six Olympic Boroughs by 2030.

This can only be described as high impact and I can only hope that any city or National Olympic Committee thinking of entering the Olympic Bidding race might well look at the London experience, as well as making full use of the revised IOC candidature process to fit the Games into their own long-term planning. Glasgow also has a terrific record of bidding for and organising individual World and European Championships – perhaps most recently World Badminton and World Gymnastics, the best presentation of indoor sport I have ever seen.

You will all have the opportunity to study the context of this debate over the next day and a half with panels and discussions on practically every aspect – the size of the city, safety, technology, entertainment and many others. It should be interesting in the extreme and I am sure that Glasgow will be listening and paying full attention. And Glasgow should, because Host City is set to come back to Glasgow in 2018 – and expect even more interest and attendance than this year which is the best attended yet.

Welcome back and enjoy.

This article is edited from Sir Craig Reedie OBE’s opening address to Host City 2017 in Glasgow on 28^th November 2017

Public scepticism about the value of major events such as the Olympic Games is at an all-time high. A continued era of austerity, economic and political uncertainty means that the parties driving such events have to work even harder to justify their value.

While this may sound daunting for some, when cities step back and look at the bigger picture they will realise that major events like this are more relevant than they have ever been. They represent the very confidence in our urban futures that we need to pull us through challenging times. They’re expressions of multi-cultural unity, open-mindedness, acceptance and cooperation. Their successful delivery has the power to re-invent the image of a country, accelerate and transform cities at a record-breaking pace.

To deliver this potential it is imperative that these events are seen as being primarily for the hosts’ and their citizens’ benefit, and align perfectly with their longer-term ambitions. In this context they can be presented to host citizens as accelerants to pre-existing ambitions and expressions of their hosts’ confidence and clarity of purpose.

Recent Arup-led research conducted for the Cities Alive: Rethinking legacy for host cities report, highlighted three tactics that are likely to have greatest impact in achieving this:

1. ‘Urban overlay’: mapping the city’s ambitions and accelerating change through its neighbourhoods and streets. At its heart the approach takes the event as an accelerant in realising a city’s longer-term ambitions. In the same way that overlay design is used to create the ‘look and feel’ of an event, the event itself is used to create the ‘look, feel and function’ of the future city.
2. Operational excellence: transforming city management and embedding highly efficient Games time organisational models to increase future resilience
3. Cleaner and greener infrastructure: inspiring and accelerating action to tackle climate change by developing hard and soft ‘climate ready’ infrastructure

With eyes turning to Paris and LA as the hosts of the 2024 and 2028 Olympic Games, its time to consider how cities may evolve their approach to hosting, to ensure Games are delivered cost effectively, while leaving a lasting, positive legacy for their communities. 

Closer to the action through virtual reality and live sites

The London 2012 Live Sites generated real excitement and enabled more people to get into the spirit of the Games. Advances in hand-held technology, virtual reality and streaming media will enable spectators to tune into any number of live sports, get guided tours of venues or experience being at the virtual trackside with their favourite athletes.  Formula-e Motor Racing is a great example, with the use of 360-degree cameras, live streaming of races, almost instant highlights and even the opportunity for fans to ‘vote’ to give their favourite drivers an additional boost of power.  

Flexible, temporary venues

Most major event venues will be temporary in the future, allowing land to be swiftly released for redevelopment after the Games. More affordable – off-the-shelf or pre-engineered sporting venues will significantly reduce cost. Reduced venue capacities can also bring significant savings, with smaller facilities resulting in fuller capacities and a better atmosphere for fans.

New financial models

Cities are cautious about bidding for major sporting events, with Boston, Hamburg, Rome and Budapest pulling out of the running for the Olympics and Los Angeles seeking an advance from the International Olympic Committee.  New ‘value’ focussed financial models are emerging, which should be encouraged. Investment in regeneration can drive huge increases in surrounding land values. This model would see a percentage of this increased land value returned and put towards the cost of infrastructure.  Another approach is tax increment financing (TIFs), which diverts future property tax revenues towards upfront infrastructure investment. 

Streamlined transport

The greatest single risk to the successful legacy of a major event is the potential disruption it can bring to the daily life of a host city.  A combination of new technologies, greater use of data and more effective management will reduce cost, improve experiences for residents and visitors and strengthen the long-term resilience of host cities.  Examples include the idea of ‘logistics hubs’ outside city centres, where deliveries can be consolidated so that they minimise the number of trips required, reduce emissions and congestion and load packages onto smaller, electric vehicles.  London 2012 also saw the adoption of a highly efficient multimodal ‘transport coordination centre’, as well as greater use of travel planning apps. Arup expects most host cities to explore ways of using predictive modelling tools, data analysis, mobile apps and live updates to deliver smooth running transport and logistics. 

Creating a resilient legacy

Cities should see the Games as a catalyst to help them tackle the major challenges they are facing – such as rising air pollution; energy shortages; housing shortages and an increasing number of extreme weather events.  Rather than focusing on event related sustainability outcomes, such as reducing energy use during sporting events – the report recommends it is used as an opportunity to scale up and accelerate ambitions having a long-term impact. For example, this could involve helping cities establish their own localised energy, cooling and water systems.     

Large scale sporting events have huge potential to act as change catalysts for cities, helping them to tackle the major challenges facing them – from rising air pollution and carbon reduction, to housing shortages. For too long legacy has been viewed narrowly, with the emphasis on the physical structures left behind. We need to think about how we build institutional muscle power – able to deliver benefits before, during and after the events. The real prize of the games should be the opportunity for cities to scale up and accelerate ambitions that have a long-term impact.

The above presents a distillation of Arup’s Cities Alive: Rethinking legacy for host cities report.  

Yoshiro Mori, president of the Tokyo Organising Committee for the Olympic and Paralympic Games 2020, believes the Sapporo 2017 Asian Winter Games will provide “valuable experience” in the build-up to Tokyo 2020.

The Olympic Council of Asia’s 8th Asian Winter Games opened at the Sapporo Dome in February featuring five sports, 11 disciplines and 64 events at 12 competition venues.

Mori said: “It is a great honour for Japan to be able to host such a prestigious event as the Asian Winter Games for the fourth time. The Tokyo 2020 Organising Committee would like to welcome and wish the best of luck to the athletes from 32 countries and regions who are competing at this birthplace of the Asian Winter Games.

“We would also like to send our best wishes to the organisers who will be able to showcase the best of what Sapporo and Japan have to offer: world-class facilities, a centuries-old culture imbued with a modern and cosmopolitan spirit, as well as a unique Japanese kind of hospitality we call ‘omotenashi’.”

A record 1,200 athletes and 32 National Olympic Committees competed in Sapporo 2017 and Mori added that the logistics behind the Asian Winter Games are important for Tokyo 2020 preparations.

Mori said: “For Tokyo 2020, the Sapporo 2017 Asian Winter Games offers the experts we are engaging in various fields, from transportation to medical services, media operations and venue management, an opportunity to gain valuable experience in advance of the Tokyo 2020 Games.

“For international delegations and sports fans, they also offer a foretaste of the experience that awaits them at the Tokyo 2020 Olympic and Paralympic Games.”

Gou Zhongwen, director of China's General Administration of Sport, has been named president of the Chinese Olympic Committee (COC).

He succeeds Liu Peng, who has served as president of the COC since 2005 and is now honorary chairman.

The appointments were made at the COC session in Beijing at the end of 2016 and announced by state media agency Xinhua.

In November 2016, the 59-year-old Guo was appointed director of China's General Administration of Sport following Liu’s retirement from this position at the age of 65. In April 2016 he was appointed deputy secretary of the Communist Party of China's Beijing municipal committee.

In 2008, Guo was appointed vice-mayor of Beijing in 2008 responsible for education and technology. He also ran the leading group for Beijing's campus soccer development.

He was deputy head of the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology from 2002.

Under Liu Peng’s leadership, China rose to prominence in several Olympic sports, including table tennis, badminton and diving, at three summer and three winter Olympic Games, topping the medal table at Beijing 2008.

Liu also played a lead role in Beijing’s successful bid to host the 2022 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games.

The light the Olympic Games casts on the host city can be harsh. Anyone who wasn’t already familiar with Rio’s issues with security, economics and the environment now has a much clearer picture. But such global attention is a good thing for the city in the long run, according to the International Olympic Committee.

“These Games did not take place in a bubble. We chose a city that has its problems, which has a reality with many challenges,” IOC President Thomas Bach told a press conference on 20 August, the penultimate day of the Games.

“The Rio 2016 Games took place within this context, which was positive as it allowed us to show that sport can help to address problems and bring people together. There are no regrets whatsoever,” he said.

Bach cited advances in sports, education and urban mobility as great benefits for the future of the city. Rio has a rejuvenated Port Area, a new Olympic Training Centre, a new leisure area in Deodoro, new BRT lines, a subway, a VLT, new roads, more hotels, and a City Operations Centre.

In recognition of these advances, he awarded the Olympic Order, the highest honour of the Olympic Movement, to Rio Mayor Eduardo Paes on 22 August.

The tourism industry could also continue to benefit from the Games. An estimated 500,000 overseas visitors came to Rio during the Olympic Games, 88 per cent of whom intend to come back to Brazil, according to a survey carried out by the ministry of tourism. To accommodate this influx, the number of hotel rooms has increased from 20,000 to 50,000, according to the Brazilian Hotel Industry Association.

Speaking at the closing ceremony on 21 August, Bach said: “These Olympic Games are leaving a unique legacy for generations to come. History will talk about a Rio de Janeiro before and a much better Rio de Janeiro after the Olympic Games.”

However, preparations for the Games took place amid a backdrop of economic and political crisis and the city during Games-time presented a tough environment. The impact of Rio 2016's budgetary issues is now being felt by the International Paralympic Committee, which is facing the scenario of several national teams not being able participate as a result.

“Clearly Brazil is in a far different position now to the one that it was in October 2009 when it won the right to stage the Games,” IPC President Sir Philip Craven said on 19 August.

“The current economic and political climate has made preparations extremely challenging, especially for the Rio 2016 Organising Committee who we have partnered with for the last seven years.

“This situation is difficult for everyone involved and, on top of bringing in extra revenues and making cuts, we need to sell more tickets.”

But at the press conference, Bach was optimistic about attendance at the Paralympic Games. “At London 2012, ticket sales began slowly, but later picked up a lot. I hope the same will happen here.”

HOST CITY: The IOC must be very pleased with the pool of cities bidding for the 2024 Olympic Games?

Sir Craig Reedie: Yes I think we are. It’s quite interesting that the change in the candidature rules, which came out of the whole reform process called Agenda 2020, seems to have attracted a very considerable field of really good cities. 

We are now waiting for further information from Paris, from Hamburg, from Rome, from Budapest and from a North American city – eventually, Los Angeles.

HOST CITY: It must have been a relief when Los Angeles stepped forward – was that anticipated?

Sir Craig Reedie: Yes, I think the USOC have all but admitted that their process might not have worked in the selection of Boston. But, with Boston’s withdrawal, they were fortunate in many ways that the Los Angeles people were so able to come to the party very quickly and in a relatively tight timeframe, because they had a number of things to agree with Los Angeles city before the necessity of putting in a formal bid on the 15th of September. 

Los Angeles has an Olympic record – if they win they will be like London, hosting the third time. The city has changed dramatically over the last few years and I am sure they will come forward with a very good bid. 

HOST CITY: And the other cities represent a different spread to what we’ve seen in recent bidding procedures. 

Sir Craig Reedie: Yes, it’s an interesting mix. Paris is looking to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the 1924 Games in Paris and has clear bidding experience. 

Rome hosted outstanding Games in 1960 and there seems to be considerable enthusiasm in Italy and in Rome behind the Rome bid, so they are impressive.

Budapest has come quite late to the party but again a splendid city and Hungary has a terrific Olympic record. 

It’s interesting that when the German Olympic Committee decided to choose Hamburg as opposed to Berlin, who I suppose before that decision would have been seen to be favourite, immediately there was strong support from Berlin for the Hamburg choice. So again there seems to be a great deal of unity there. 

So it’s a really good field. 

HOST CITY: The Olympic bidding process has changed, hasn’t it – after the new invitation phase, we are now straight into the candidature phase.

Sir Craig Reedie: You have to go back a few years to when the system changed from one bidding system into a two phase system – applicant and then candidate. That has now been refined and the big addition has been the invitation phase before a National Olympic Committee decides finally to put a city into the candidature role. 

The closing date was 15 September. So for several months before that, cities that were thinking of bidding for the Games, and the National Olympic Committees, came to meet the relevant people in the Olympic Games department and the candidate cities department of the IOC to sit down and work out exactly how the Games would fit into their city; how it would provide legacy; how it would be sustainable; how it would fit into city plans. And the cities were given a great deal of information from the IOC, as it does have a great deal of information from previous bidding processes. 

That’s a complete change from the previous process, where the IOC had a very detailed list of requirements and cities bid against that list. 

So there is a major change there and I understand that it has been welcomed by the cities, all of whom have been to see the IOC in the invitation phase, and by other cities who went and subsequently decided not to bid but learned a great deal from the exercise and may do so in the future. 

And then we come to the candidature phase, which is divided into three parts.

The first part, which runs until June 2016, is the Vision, Games Concept and Strategy and the candidate city’s “bid book” will be submitted electronically. There will be consultation with the IOC throughout and at the end of that first phase the Executive Board will decide whether the cities will move to the second phase, which runs from June to December 2016 and deals with governments, legal matters and venue funding. 

Again, the presentations will be made through the IOC with a great deal of assistance and the Executive Board will again make a decision on moving people forward to the third phase, which is Games Delivery, Experience and Venue Legacy and runs from December 2016 through to the selection in September 2017. 

So rather than one huge bid book being required at a set date, it’s divided into three sections. There are workshops planned; there are assistances planned to the cities throughout. 

HOST CITY: is there any possibility that any of the cities might not proceed beyond each of these particular stages?

Sir Craig Reedie: The whole point of the exercise with the IOC is to help them to get presentations and plans submitted that actually fit not only what the IOC wants for good Games but also what the cities want themselves. There’s an element of skill and discretion needed in doing that; the IOC have to deal with information from one city on a confidential basis and they have to be fair with all five cities. And if they do that, the system will work. 

It is not beyond the bounds of possibility that a city could come back and say we’re not taking it any further – I think that’s unlikely in the sense that a lot of work will have gone into this, a lot of discussions have gone on through the invitation phase. And since it’s going on through a stage by stage basis I think it’s highly unlikely that people will withdraw. 

The end result of that is that we will have five cities presenting to the Session on the ultimate decision to be taken in Lima in Peru in 2017. 

HOST CITY: Five is a very good number of cities. 

Sir Craig Reedie: It’s a very good number. I have very warm memories of five cities presenting in 2005 in Singapore. 

HOST CITY: And this is all the result of a process of change initiated by IOC President Thomas Bach, which is reflected by the broad theme of the HOST CITY 2015 conference, “Creative Innovation”. Why the need for change in the IOC?

Sir Craig Reedie: I think the principle that Thomas Bach enunciated, to change or change will be forced upon you, is a good one. 

People forget that the previous bidding process was certainly the gold standard in sport the world over. If you find that there is a reluctance to bid – and clearly there was an element of that in the 2022 Winter Games situation – then perhaps you should be prepared to do a little bit of out of the box thinking. 

And the whole Agenda 2020 process started with two long four or five day meetings of the Executive Board which were effectively a think tank. We ranged all over the place and at the end of the day came up with a coordinated and sensible view of how we wanted to run the Games but also to promote the Olympic movement for the future. 

There were some fairly dramatic discussions on the bidding process of the Games. We wanted to make it more inclusive, we wanted to make it more cooperative, we wanted to make it cheaper, we wanted to make it encouraging to more cities to become involved. 

In the process of bidding for sporting events, it’s a competitive field. The Olympic Games are the greatest show on earth; it’s important that they maintain this status. It’s important that the athletes regard them as the greatest show on earth and something they really want to take part in. 

So therefore a process of change is a perfectly reasonable thing to undertake.

HOST CITY: What are your expectations of HOST CITY 2015 in Glasgow?

Sir Craig Reedie: From my point of view of being involved in HOST CITY 2015, I am delighted that the event is coming to Glasgow, because Glasgow has shown that it is a sporting city with the way it has developed its facilities, the way it ran a major multi-sport event, the Commonwealth Games in 2014, and what it’s been doing since then – not least a couple of hugely successful Davis Cup tennis ties. 

So if you look at the excitement that generates locally, and the promotion that it gives the city on a worldwide basis, then I think this indicates that the market out there is a buoyant one.

Cities should be very well prepared to become involved and therefore they should be thinking ahead; they should be innovative – and with a bit of luck they will reap the benefits that Glasgow has.