Presentation on theme: "The Olympics and sustainable urban regeneration Bob Digby University College School London."— Presentation transcript:
The Olympics and sustainable urban regeneration Bob Digby University College School London
Introduction Several Olympic bids now have been used to regenerate urban areas. Barcelona began the process in the mid- 1980s, and now Londons vision for 2012 is the regeneration of one of the poorest parts of the UK. Developments like this are – Usually large-scale Developed centrally by governments with a mix of private capital and government investment. Presented as projects for environmental remediation (e.g. Sydney 2000) or socio-economic regeneration (e.g. London 2012).
But are such urban flagship developments sustainable? Properly analysed, they can us to understand how and why urban developments might be considered sustainable or not. This presentation asks whether these kinds of regeneration are – successful; i.e. do they achieve what they set out to achieve? truly representative of what we mean by sustainability?
The Olympics should provide … sustainable environmental legacies, such as rehabilitated and revitalized sites, increased environmental awareness, improved environmental policies and practices, further encouragement and facilitation of strong environmental actions, technology and product development in a city, country and beyond, through the educational value of good example. This is what the IOC say ….. their criteria for sustainable development Source IOC website (2005) Mission Statement
To be successful, the Olympics should have environmental protection and, more importantly, sustainability as prime elements of Games planning and operations. positive legacies that last well beyond the Olympics themselves Source IOC website (2005) Mission Statement According to the IOC:
The Olympics: a major commitment There are 7 years from the time a city is awarded the Olympics in which to prepare Schedules are tight and difficult to meet – e.g Athens Olympics The Olympics involve host cities in massive investment and expense; costs are substantial, and implications great, e.g. for mass tourism and accommodation
The Olympics - a major undertaking E.g. The 16 days of the London 2012 Games will involve athletes in 300 events, with coaches & officials, attended by other members of the Olympic community. Over 7000 sponsors. In the Paralympics alone, 4000 athletes and 2500 officials, equivalent to Manchesters Commonwealth Games in newspaper, radio, TV, & internet journalists. Over 9 million tickets in total, and 500,000 spectators a day at events in and around London operational personnel, of whom will be volunteers, e.g. as stewards, marshals, and drivers.
So – the economic agenda is strong and powerful Host cities have to be able to balance budgets; huge costs versus the revenue benefits. Costs e.g. Land purchase, Construction of stadia, and transport infrastructure, and of hosting the Games themselves (e.g. security) Benefits Direct – Revenue from ticket sales, TV rights, and company sponsorships e.g. to supply drinks or food. Indirect – Land values after re-development However, other indirect benefits may help make a profit: E.g. tourist spending – in hotels, restaurants, VAT etc
Newington in the site of a former armaments depot and toxic waste dump, described by a firm of US consultants in the early 1990s as containing the worst contamination ever seen. Homebush Bay; its industrial history
Sydneys bid was all about clean-up – or remediation – of a previously contaminated industrial site. One firm of US consultants described Homebush Bay in the early 1990s as the most contaminated site in the southern hemisphere Greenpeace emphasised a number of aspects of Green - or sustainable – development when they put together the winning bid for the 2000 Olympics. Their criteria that they used are shown in the next slide. These criteria – they believe – form the basis of any green development.
The Greenpeace view of sustainability for Sydneys 2000 Olympics Submitted as part of a competitive design bid by Greenpeace Australia for the worlds first Green Games.
So – how well did Sydney match up to its intentions? The next slides consider some of the environmental, economic and social issues. Then you can decide for yourself! Were Sydneys Green principles kept to?
Before that – you have to do some research into 3 groups! Environmental group Type in Homebush Bay clean up into Google and follow the links – especially the Greenpeace link and Economic group: Type in economic impacts Sydney Olympics into Google and follow the links Social group: Type in social impacts Sydney Olympics into Google and follow the links Research these web links and feed back
Environmental criteria How well did Sydney match up? Construction should be on brownfield, and not greenfield sites. Homebush Bay was an industrial area, and many past industries had closed. Much of the land was derelict in But? Existing facilities should be used or adapted, rather than build from scratch Building foundations were recycled concrete and masonry from the demolition of an old abattoir on the site. During the construction of Sydney showground, 95% of waste was recycled. But? Building and design should be environmentally friendly Mostly, non-toxic materials were used, e.g. natural fibre insulation, non-toxic paints, glues, varnishes, polishes, solvents and cleaning products. CFCs, HFC and HCFC-free coolants were banned, as well as chlorine-based products such as PVC and bleached paper. Building materials were selected for their insulation, ventilation, and recyclability; air-conditioning was avoided. But? There should be minimal impacts of sites and events on nearby residents All sports and the Village were located on one site. Barcelonas Olympics brought the city to a standstill, the result of coaches and athletes travelling to venues. In Sydney, most amenities and accommodation were on site. But? Waste should be minimised, and recycling should occur wherever possible Renewable sources of energy were used, with high-efficiency lighting systems, and control systems to minimise energy usage. Pool water was ozone-filtered to reduce chlorine. Half the water on parts of the site were storm- or recycled water, and used for flushing toilets or irrigating landscaped areas. But? Native ecosystems, fauna or flora should be protected or re-habilitated The edge of Homebush Bay is mangrove and salt-marsh. Mangrove and salt-marsh environments near Olympic Park were protected. Mangroves were re-planted in some of the contaminated land – and helped to filter pollutants naturally. But? Olympics should be reached by public transport; car usage should be minimised A new rail link was built to Olympic Park, and a new ferry terminal at Homebush Bay. Admission tickets included the price of public transport. Cars were banned except for Olympics officials and some workers. But?
It had important economic impacts - 1 Source: PriceWaterhouseCoopers (2001 Evaluation) How well did Sydney match up?
Source: PriceWaterhouseCoopers (2001 Evaluation) It had important economic impacts - 2 How well did Sydney match up?
Sydneys Olympics therefore did three things for sustainable development a)The Olympics showed that it was possible to remediate polluted brownfield sites as part of the regeneration process b)They showed that it was possible to stick to sustainable principles and to make money at the same time; Sydneys were among the very few Olympics to make a profit c) Urban Development could stick to – and develop further – sustainable principles such as the use of recyclable water, use of non-toxic building materials etc. without compromising anyones standard of living
Coca Cola and McDonalds were two of Sydneys biggest sponsors But it wasnt problem-free!
Throughout recent Olympics, social issues have tended to be ignored There is clear evidence that socially vulnerable and lower income groups tend to suffer in the run-up to the Olympics. The cost of the Homebush Bay clean up forced the sale of the Olympic Village housing at market rates, rather than creating a pool of affordable housing, as initially planned. Rent increases in the suburbs closest to the Olympic Park in Sydney were higher than elsewhere, and boarding house accommodation (used in Australia for those who need secure accommodation) was re-vamped to accommodate paying backpackers instead of people who are normally housed there. And what about social benefits? 1
And what about social benefits? 2
So in judging socially sustainable principles, decide whether the following principles are applied: 1Do the lowest paid have the same rights of access and opportunities as the rest of the population? 2 Have local communities been involved in deciding what happens in major flagship schemes? 3Will the least well off be able to benefit from, and not be sidelined by, benefits of flagship schemes? 4Have budgets for health and education been spent as they should have been and not been diverted into the Olympics?
To conclude! In 2000, Greenpeace gave Sydney just 5 out of 10 for the way that it adhered its sustainable principles What do you think? What would you give? Try the exercises and see how well Sydney scores