The London 2012 Olympic Games

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Sustainability analysis using set indicators
Socio-cultural indicators
Economic Indicators
Conclusion

Introduction

Background

The London 2012 games were based on a dream of hosting inspirational, secure and all-encompassing games that would leave a mark in the UK. When the representatives from the UK were bidding for the games, they promised it would be the first ever sustainable tournament. The meaning of the term ‘sustainability’ is very complex and therefore not easy to define.

Brundtland commission defined sustainability as the ability to meet the current needs without compromising future needs. However, environmentalists and sustainability experts have been advocating for a more detailed definition. As a result, the organizers of the London Olympics came up with a sustainability plan that incorporated a range of sustainability definitions.

The plan focused on the major sustainability premises namely: climatic change, management of toxic wastes, environmental conservation, health and nutrition, and inclusiveness. Climate change focused on management of water, energy, and alleviation/alteration of carbon impact. Waste management centred on the state of the art waste management infrastructure and exemplary management of resources.

The management of biodiversity was aimed at encouraging the sport division to play a part in the conservation of nature and bring individuals closer to the environment. The London sustainability theme of inclusiveness focused on promoting access and celebrating diversity. Lastly, healthy living was meant to inspire everybody to engage in sports and to inculcate healthy lifestyles.

The reassessment of various ways in which sustainability has been defined highlights the complexity of coming up with a single definition. Sustainability experts argue that the essence of sustainable development has become open to numerous applications and interpretations.

Generally, there is a tendency by organizations and individuals to depend on a triple bottom line approach especially to evaluate performance alongside the meaning. The triple bottom line approach views sustainability in terms of the benefits achieved from the following viewpoints: environment, economy and socio-cultural.

Purpose of the Report

The general aim of this report is to assess the sustainability of the London games 2012.The report will adopt a triple bottom line approach (three sustainability indicators) to assess the sustainability of the London Games 2012.

The use of the three sustainability indicators is in line with the legacy of the London 2012 games. There are other sustainability models that have added an extra dimension associated with governance. The socio-cultural and economic indicators used will consider this extra dimension by exploring the management of the games and other governance issues.

Sustainability analysis using set indicators

The use of a set of indicators, especially a far-reaching set, brings forth the question of how to evaluate the overall performance in relation to sustainability. Particularly, it brings forth the question of how to reach equilibrium on all the fronts (economic, socio-cultural and environment front). The set indicators are grouped into three categories namely: environmental indicators, socio-cultural indicators and economic indicators.

Environmental Indicators

Environmental indicators include water quality, greenhouse gas emission, air quality, land use changes, protected areas, public open-air leisure centres and solid waste management. The new water framework directive assesses the well being of the surrounding water i.e. the concentration of nitrates, phosphates and E-Coli for bathing water.

UK is generally ranked poorly in terms of Orthophosphate concentration with an average concentration of 0.3 P mg/I. The E-Coli level is also higher than the required standard. The highest concentrations have been recorded around river Lee. However, the nitrate levels within the Olympic park surroundings are below the maximum limit of 50mg N/I with the highest concentration measured being 17.4 mg N/I.

The nitrate levels have contaminated London river waters. There is not even a single river that has low nitrate levels. In addition, the phosphate levels are extremely high in more than three quarters of the rivers within London. The construction works and other developments for London games provided a great opportunity to enhance the areas around Lee River and its backwoods.

The emission of the Kyoto basket of greenhouse gases in the UK has fallen by more than 5 percent since 2003. The highest reductions in percentage are Sulphur hexafluoride SF₆(47%), Perfluorocarbons PFC (30%), Methane CH₄ (10%) and Nitrous oxide N₂O (10%).

Approximately 50% of these emissions originate from the industry and commerce with moderate emission from homes and road transport. The greenhouse gas emission from industry and commerce in the city of London is almost similar to the entire nation. The road transport contribution is relatively low. This is credited to the dense public transport system and partly to congestion charge zone within the city centre.

In the year 2008, the city was voted as the low emission zone. However, the total emission has slightly gone up by 5% since then. The increase in emission is mainly attributed to the construction works around the Olympic park as well as growth of businesses in Docklands (especially in Tower Hamlets).

Analysis of the data sourced from the London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games and Paralympics Games Limited (LOCOG) and Olympic Delivery authority (ODA) only shows the long-term benefits of the project. However, it is clear that the construction works around the Olympic Park emitted the highest amount of the greenhouse gases (24%).

Spectator/ media and sponsors travel (air, road and rail) contributed 13% of the emission and other related transport infrastructure contributed further 12%. In overall, the construction and infrastructure projects contributed more than 70% of the greenhouse gas emission (GGE).

In a nutshell, staging of the 2012 Olympic Games had a negative GGE impact, but this only represented 0.5 % of the country’s annual emission. In addition, the long-term benefits of the game should be emphasized.

The quality of the outdoor air in London as a whole is within the standards. However, the areas around Lambeth and the city centres have exceeded the annual permitted level. Nonetheless, the construction works at the Olympic Park has had no apparent impact on the air quality in the city of London. All the screening data from the London Air Quality Monitoring Network confirms this.

Land use data shows a number of changes in London as a whole, particularly in Host Boroughs. The area under domestic gardens has considerably decreased reflecting the increase in population and density of housing. This is locally referred to as garden grabbing.

However, the amount of land being converted to residential areas has gone down since sub-prime crisis in 2008.The games considerably transformed the Brownfield area into residential, parks and amenity space. Nonetheless, the Olympic park and other venues that were intended for the games had small impact on the overall land use changes in London.

Although the venues tend to overlap large number of protected areas within London they were not within these protected areas. This exhibits the extent to which natural habitats and landscapes are guarded and at the same time allowing access to wildlife and scenic areas by the athletes and other visitors. In addition, the open –air leisure spaces (woodland/forest and public open space) have increased except for the park/garden.

In Host Boroughs, Woodlands and forests have remained the same. The construction works around the Olympic Park regenerated most of the derelict lands and industrial Brownfield which created more space for amusement and open-air leisure activities. Furthermore, when the games ended most of the hard surfaces were converted to grass.

The solid waste analysis focuses on the solid waste production, treatment and disposal. The production of toxic waste doubled in the three year period before the Olympic Games. This is attributed to the clean up process in the Olympic venues. Most of these waste consisted of contaminated debris that were as a consequence of on-site treatment aimed to improve the land.

For that reason, the London Games had a direct positive impact on toxic waste management. The waste transfer stations have increased substantially since 2005 and only dropped a little in 2006 due to increase in treatment plants.

Waste transfer has remained stable in London even with the increase in population. The city of London and the larger UK benefited greatly from the groundbreaking processes for treating and recycling wastes.

Socio-cultural indicators

There are over 20 social-cultural indicators, but the report will only focus on the most important indicators. They include poverty and social inclusion, health and nutrition, crime rates, participation of minorities in the games, and access to public services. Poverty and social inclusion appraise the poverty level and social segregation of the UK society.

Poverty level and social segregation in the UK are measured using the Index of Deprivation. This is based on seven realms namely: earnings, the level of employment, health and disability, education and expertise, obstacles to basic needs, crime rate and the living standard.

According to the data sourced from the Department of Communities and Local Government, income deprivation is based on the percentage of the population relying on the social benefits whilst obstacles to basic needs reflect the complexity in accessing fundamental needs such as housing. The data show high rates of deprivation in the five Host Boroughs compared to the entire London.

The highest disparity is in the housing and social services. In both cases, deprivation index had fallen significantly from 2007 to 2009. This is mainly attributed to the subprime crisis that led to the increase in the cost of housing. The impact of the London 2012 Games in the transformation of the East London is yet to be discerned. Most of the available data on poverty and social segregation were collected in 2009.

Educational level as an indicator evaluates the impact of the London games on the educational achievement of the populace. Educational achievement for the people of London has been on a rise for the last ten years. The ratio of the unqualified personnel has gone down whilst the ratio of those with high education has risen by nearly 42 percent.

Gender disparity in term of education achievement is still high with more women having low qualifications. Qualification profile in Host Boroughs is by and large lower than London. In addition, the gender inequality is emphasized. The increase in educational level is less attributed to London Games 2012. The educational standards of the labour force have been an elemental tune since late 90s.

Spending on elementary education has always been adjusted above inflation and therefore protected by the government. Government emphasis has always been on the underprivileged areas, for instance, East London. The UK government created Equality and Inclusion Board to enhance the participation of the minorities in London Games 2012. The board set up a mechanism for recruiting the minority groups.

The targeted percentage of the minority groups were as follows: minority ethnic 15%, disabled 3% and 11% women. Therefore, the game promoted equality and inclusiveness in sports and other fronts.

London is among the top cities in the UK with the highest crime rate. On a national scale, the crime rate has reduced significantly over the last two decades. The total number of recorded crimes in the period 2003 to 2012 fell by over 20 percent, with the sharpest decline (45%) recorded in 2011/2012. As usual, Host Boroughs recorded high figures compared to the entire London.

The falling trend was a result of the policies put in place by the government to fight crime. These policies included the setting up of the Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships in local areas. The political will to make London 2012 Olympic Games the safe ever was there.

The Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships in the Host Boroughs and London as a whole was tied to the local government structures. Therefore, there was a marked impact of the game on crime avoidance and reduction.

Generally, the mortality rate (especially infant mortality) due to ill health has decreased in the entire UK. The rate in London is much lower. Over 70% of the mortality rates are due to cancers, circulatory and respiratory diseases. However, death caused by cancer and circulatory diseases have relatively decreased whilst death caused by respiratory diseases have remained constant.

Morbidity rate has also gone down all over the UK with London and the 5 Host Boroughs recording slightly higher figures than the rest of the country. The decline is attributed to the increased number of health facilities all over the country and universal health insurance. Life expectancy has also increased countrywide.

However, life expectancy in the 5 Host Boroughs is slightly lower than the whole country due to socioeconomic deprivations and segregations. The blacks and other minority groups have the lowest life expectancy. Nonetheless, there are considerable and sustainable steps being taken by the government to address these inequalities. Nutrition as an indicator explores the quality of food intake.

The energy and nutrient intake in London is lower compared to the rest of the UK. This also applies to the general food quality, particularly vegetables. Unhealthy eating habits are common in the city and this is reflected in the increasing number of obese and overweight individuals.

The impact of the London Games on the physical activities and regeneration of East London reinforced the emphasis on healthy eating habits and change of lifestyle. The London Games also led to the introduction of the annual school Olympics to enhance sports in the country and improve students’ health. More sporting facilities have been set up to improve access.

Economic Indicators

Economic indicators just like socio-cultural indicators are many. The report will only focus on a number of them namely: employment by economic activity, accommodation infrastructure, tourist/visitors, and the public expenditure. Since 2005, UK has experienced an annual growth rate of approximately1% of employed individuals.

The growth has been witnessed both in the public and private sectors. At the same time, the population of London has been growing at the rate of 2.41% per annum. This has contributed to a significant number of unemployed.

Although the London 2012 games had little impact on the overall level of employment, the distribution of the contracts related to the Olympic created a considerable amount of jobs. Though employment in the construction industry increased by 1.5 % annually during that period, it rose by almost 4% in London. This is attributed to key infrastructure construction projects in the city.

According to the data sourced from the London Development Authority, the city witnessed a nearly 40% decline in the number of establishments in 2004/05 and almost a double figure in 2006. Regardless of the decline in the number of hotels and accommodation in London, total bed space has continued to increase with the sharp increase in 2009/10.

The increase in bed space and establishment in East London was attributed to the Olympic effect. The number of establishments as a result of the Olympic effect is not easy to desegregate. In 2007/08, UK had seen a decline in the number of tourists due to the global economic crisis.

However, the London games saw a sharp increase in the number of visitors to the UK and domestic tourists to London. The number of visitors outside the EU was slightly lower. Economic experts attribute it to the strength of the sterling pound and the aftershocks of the global economic crisis.

According to the Public Expenditure Statistic Analyses, priority of government spending has changed considerably since 2005. More emphasis was put in housing, education, environmental conservation and management, and housing. Recreation and sporting expenditure increased by almost the same level in the whole country. London received more funding than any other city.

The funds were used to improve public service, public order, recreational and sporting services and transport. Public expenditure was consistent with the government commitment to create a legacy in the London Games 2012. The UK government spent nearly £ 1 billion on Olympic village.

Conclusion

The London 2012 Olympic Games provided an opportunity for the city of London to enhance its infrastructure and other operations in a sustainable style. The use of the three indicators offered a holistic approach in assessing sustainability. According to these indicators, the London 2012 Games had more positive than negative contributions to the environment, society and the economy as a whole.

The public investment in the games significantly complemented the city’s regeneration and development programmes. Economic and social-cultural indicators show that it is still early to tell the impact of the London Games 2012. However, the impact of the games on the environment is discernible.

Click Here To Order Now!