Discussion Paper Series, 13(14): 333-348
How Does a Mega Event Affect the Hosting
Country’s Tourism Development? The Case of
Greece and the 2004 Olympics
Georgios Zografos
Civil Engineer, MSc in Tourism Management, University of Surrey
PhD Candidate, Department of Planning and Regional Development
University of Thessaly, Pedion Areos, Volos 383 34, Greece
e-mail address: [email protected]
Alex Deffner
Assistant Professor of Urban and Leisure Planning
Department of Planning and Regional Development
University of Thessaly, Pedion Areos, Volos 383 34, Greece
e-mail address: [email protected]
Abstract
Following a very good performance during the nineties, Greece started suffering from a decrease in
the number of incoming tourists. It appears that, after Greece entered the Eurozone it lost one of its
main advantages as a destination. The country started becoming expensive and could not compete
directly with other growing Mediterranean destinations such as Turkey. The successful organisation
of the 2004 Olympic Games has led to a clear improvement in the number of tourist arrivals and the
level of expenditure in Greece. One of the main arguments used by the Greek Government in order
to justify its decision to compete for, and finally to host, the 2004 Olympics, was that of the need to
reinforce its status as a tourist destination. The extensive construction programme which preceded
the Games (projects that were either linked with the Games or just accelerated due to the
occasion) rapidly changed the Greek capital. But how did a centrally organised and executed mega
event affect tourist destinations located hundred of kilometres away? This paper examines the role
of mega events as potential repositioning factors for the destinations. It also reviews the
organisation of the Olympic Games held in Athens in August 2004. Finally, the paper analyses the
dimensions of the Greek tourist product, pointing out the possibilities for certain spatial entities in
Greece, such as the Greek cities, to develop special forms of tourism. Thus, it draws conclusions
on the ability of mega events to stimulate the interest of potential tourists in a certain destination.
Special mention is made of tourist policies formulated by the government in order to exploit the
positive, post-Olympic climate. The paper also suggests ways in which mega events can be used
effectively in order to increase of the “desirability” of a destination.
Key words: Olympic Games, Greece, tourist destinations, mega events, Athens
November 2007
Department of Planning and Regional Development, School of Engineering, University of Thessaly
Pedion Areos, 38334 Volos, Greece, Tel: +302421074462, e-mail: [email protected], http://www.prd.uth.gr
Available online at: http://www.prd.uth.gr/research/DP/2007/uth-prd-dp-2007-14_en.pdf
How Does a Mega Event Affect the Hosting Country’s Tourism Development?
335
Introduction
Tourist areas can be characterised as products that are in continuous competition. Their
competitiveness depends on their characteristics as well as on their quality, issues that
are interrelated. At the same time, rapid tourism development in several countries
throughout the world led various authorities to think about how they would manage a
phenomenon with so many consequences over environment and space.
In the international bibliography of tourism development, the most popular issue is that
of the new patterns of tourism, the ones which respect the resources. Such issues are
directly related to the general discussion regarding sustainability. Mega events are
about special forms of tourism and they undoubtedly have a permanent effect on the
area were they take place, no matter what their duration is. Events can be simply
concerts, or huge events such as the Olympics or the International Exposition. Over the
last years, the organisation of mega events has been expanding fast, due to
globalisation.
The planning of such events helps in the successful upgrading of urban space and
contributes to the attraction of cutting edge technology enterprises, in turn motivating
power for economic growth. Therefore, it is expected that various metropolitan areas
around the world will compete in order to achieve the organisation of a mega event. The
organisation of mega events helps in the upgrading of declining areas in urban centres
rich in tourist resources (museums, accommodation, and restaurants). At the same time,
many cities want to be regarded as centres of economic, social and cultural
development within a globalised framework. The organisation of such huge events helps
in the motivation of all available powers in order for those targets to be achieved.
The organisation of such an event requires the establishment and the construction of
several special facilities, which are necessary for the successful organisation of the
event. As it is mentioned by Coccossis and Tsartas (2001, p. 174), there is a clear
relationship between mega events and urban planning.
If we look back in recent history, the emergence of other Mediterranean destinations
such as Turkey, which could offer the same kind of product more cheaply, led to the
significant decrease in the number of tourists entering Greece. At the same time,
Greece entered the Eurozone and became increasingly expensive.
The Greek political system supported the idea that Athens should host the Olympic
Games of 1996. That attempt to win the Games was unsuccessful and the government
declared that Greece would never again seek to organise the Games. Several reasons
however, such as the success of post-Olympic Barcelona, led to the renewed interest on
the part of the Greeks in organising the Olympics. Athens was subsequently appointed
to organise the 2004 Games and that opportunity seemed to be the right occasion for
the implementation of an extensive construction programme. One of the main
Discussion Paper Series, 2007, 13(14)
336
Georgios Zografos, Alex Deffner
arguments used by the Greek Government in order to justify its decision to organise
expensive Olympic Games, was the need for the country to be promoted in the best
possible way in order to reinforce its declining tourism industry.
1. Mega Events and their Potential Role in a Destination’s
Effort to be Upgraded
Tourist destinations evolve. As has been pointed out in the international bibliography,
various reasons affect the performance of a destination. There are great similarities
between the lifecycles of products and that of destinations. As is emphasised by Cooper
et al. (1993/1998, p. 114), the life cycle of a destination has various stages. There is a
point in the lifecycle where continuous development is followed by stagnation due to the
fact that the destination has exploited all its market potential. That stage is followed
either by rejuvenation or continuing decline.
The evolution of a tourist destination in general terms is a matter of politics. Politicians
using legislative tools favour or prevent the development of tourism in a spatial entity. In
today’s global economy it is clear that most governments see tourism as a substantial
foreign currency income. The choice of organising an event is primarily a political
choice. Politicians set the frame for tourism to be developed, and politicians decide
whether or not to organise an event.
We can refer to an event as: any action which takes place in a certain place and at
certain time, following the initiation of a body. The event can have various characters,
but its most important aspects are the athletic one, the exposition one and the artistic
one. Events can have temporal character or they can be repetitive. According to
Coccosis and Tsartas (2001, p. 172), there is a tremendous global trend towards the
growth of such events, mainly due to the sharp increase in demand for specialised
tourist products.
Having in mind the 2004 Olympic Games, it can be said that the existing trend in that
field is the integration of the different nature of the various events. In this way, we can
attend simultaneously the hallmark event, a full programme of artistic shows and actions
of an entrepreneurial character. It is clear that the artistic dimension has started to
dictate all the events. At the same time, it is clear that the greater the significance of
television, the bigger will be the growth of the event, e.g. the Eurovision Song Contest or
the Oscar Ceremony.
Hosting and organising an event today is a composite action. It is clear that in modern
times Olympic Games can be hosted only by countries with a high Gross Domestic
Product. The organisation of such an event is actually a marketing tool. The main
potential benefits to be achieved are:
UNIVERSITY OF THESSALY, Department of Planning and Regional Development
How Does a Mega Event Affect the Hosting Country’s Tourism Development?
•
attraction of tourist expenditure,
•
attraction of foreign investment.
337
As a marketing tool, the organisation of an event puts the place "on the map”. At the
same time, special management is needed in order to avoid such dangers as a
significant increase in the level of public debt.
Social issues are another danger generated by the organisation of an event. All the
people living in a spatial entity hosting an event are affected by its organisation. The
elite, according to Hall (1994), benefit the most from such actions, which is why they are
strongly in support of them.
When a place is appointed to organise an event, it has time in order to make up its
physiognomy and promote itself internationally, with the aim of stimulating international
interest. As it is emphasised by many authors, Stefanou and Mitoula among them (2005,
p. 13) components of that physiognomy are:
•
culture,
•
lifestyle,
•
economic achievements etc.
Imaging is an issue of strategic planning. The marketing process is a multipurpose task
and should be done carefully in order that potential visitors are given the right image. In
any case, spatial entities which desire to establish themselves as tourist destinations
should treat their image carefully. Imaging and tourist development are notions that are
very close each other.
As can be seen in practice, established tourist destinations are generally keen on
organising an event, while other spatial entities which have no priorities like the
development of tourism are not so keen. In the context of the established destinations,
the organisation of an event adds value. Furthermore, the construction and revamping
of infrastructure helps to update the destination, incorporating all the latest
developments in the areas of engineering, architecture, the use of technology, etc. As
well as the above-mentioned, it is clear that the organisation of events contributes
greatly towards the time redistribution of tourism in a space, as well as to its enrichment.
As it is pointed out by Spilanis (2000, p.180), the particular use of technology and highly
skilled manpower is proven to be more attractive than natural beauties
The political decision to organise a mega event can help a destination to evolve and get
out of a phase of stagnation or decline. It definitely helps the destination to be
rejuvenated. The fact is, the organisation has to have those characteristics which better
suit the occasion, in order that all its targets can be achieved. In this way, there is a
clear relationship between the development of tourism and the organisation of an event
Discussion Paper Series, 2007, 13(14)
338
Georgios Zografos, Alex Deffner
and it is certain that, if a spatial entity has a priority to develop tourism, it will also be
keen on organising an event.
2. Greece as a Spatial System of Destinations
Greece’s dedication towards the mass tourism model (a model that suits any country
that wants to develop tourism easily) soon showed its problematic character (Zografos,
1999, p. 8). The country entered the European Union and lost its substantial advantage
as a cheap destination. Furthermore, old-fashioned policies of marketing, together with
other problems, led, in 2002, to a reduction in both tourist arrivals and the income from
tourism.
Thirty years of intensive tourist development in Greece resulted in the legacy of a
specific situation which partially reflects the economic geography of the country. The
country’s destinations have various characteristics and have developed at various rates.
Accommodation in those areas was mainly developed due to the rapid tourist
development of 1970s and 1980s. The 2004 Olympic Games took place at a point in
time when the Greek tourist product was downgrading because of its composition. One
of the main arguments used by the government in order to persuade public opinion of
the necessity for the country to organise the Games, was about the potential increase in
the numbers of incoming tourists.
The cities
Up to 2004, tourist flows towards Athens were characterised by a negative trend. That
decrease was largely traditional for Greece markets and was due to various reasons.
Some of them can be summarised below:
1. the increase in charter flights to regional destinations,
2. environmental problems in Athens,
3. a bad city image.
The Olympic Games, a hallmark event where marketing plays a key role, seemed to be
a chance to attract tourists back to Athens. However, certain weaknesses which are
common in Greek cities cannot be easily overcome and the attractiveness of the city of
Athens as a tourist destination seems to be impaired by precisely those weaknesses.
The Greek urban landscape is generally inhospitable. Visitors do not envy the citizens of
the city their everyday lives because their problems are obvious. Particularly during
summer months, living conditions are very unpleasant, especially during daytime.
As well as Athens (which could not be compared in popularity with cities such as
Amsterdam, Paris, Berlin etc), the other Greek urban centres are not cities which are
UNIVERSITY OF THESSALY, Department of Planning and Regional Development
How Does a Mega Event Affect the Hosting Country’s Tourism Development?
339
established tourist destinations, unlike secondary cities in Spain and Italy. The demand
for urban tourism in Greece comes mainly from internal visitors, expatriate Greeks,
Greek Cypriots and people from the neighbouring Balkan countries.
Developed regional destinations
The network of regional destinations is seen throughout the country. On examining all
regions in which tourist activity is concentrated throughout the year, it can be easily
seen that those areas are:
•
coastal Crete,
•
specific islands of the Aegean,
•
The Ionian Islands,
•
specific areas of the Greek mainland, such as Halkidiki, Magnesia etc.
It is true that the Southern Aegean islands are more developed in terms of mass tourism
than other regions of the country. That general finding, however, does not mean there
are no differentiations. As we can see, in the islands of the Cyclades for example,
certain islands of the complex have been developed to excess, while others have
developed tourism only slightly. Similarly, the northern coastline of Crete has been more
developed than its southern part. That lack of homogeneity leads to great imbalances in
the context of both the prefectures and the regions. The causes of all these areas of
concentration can be attributed to the characteristics of the country: its morphology, the
abundance of infrastructure and the priorities set by local communities.
The developed destinations of a country constitute one of its main assets in its struggle
to be developed. In 2004, all Greek regional destinations had symptoms such as fatigue
and delay due to their previous intensive development. At the same time, all the policies
that had been applied by the central government did not offer development choices with
a strategic character. If those policies existed, then destinations could penetrate the
markets with their own actions, something that would limit the monopoly tour operators
exert.
As a result of the above-mentioned, well known tourist destinations such as Rhodes,
parts of Crete and Corfu, lost their appeal as lifestyle destinations for upper-income
tourists. At the same time, “all inclusive” packages started to appear. According to the
international bibliography, such a system is quite harmful to the economy of the hosting
society.
As far as actions of the state are concerned, significant attention is needed in the
direction of protecting the successful performance of established destinations. That is
because:
Discussion Paper Series, 2007, 13(14)
340
Georgios Zografos, Alex Deffner
1. the successful combination of resources and infrastructure lead those destinations
to play key roles in the context of the national economy,
2. those destinations act as “pilots”, indicating what will happen in case of developing
destinations.
Well-developed destinations lend heavy support to the national economy. That is why it
should be a state priority to sustain their feasibility. The establishment of certain “tried
and tested" destinations, such as “Rhodes”, is a long-term process, and should be seen
as an intangible national asset.
New and developing regional destinations
Looking at the map of Greek destinations, however, someone could easily see that
there are lots of differences when compared to the situation thirty years ago. A new
generation of destinations has emerged, destinations which can be referred to as the
emerging ones. There are various reasons which led to that development:
1. big infrastructure projects, largely funded by the European Union, made places
which in previous decades were considered as inaccessible suddenly more
accessible,
2. living standards in Greece have improved due to the significant increase in Gross
Domestic Product,
3. the successful development of alternative tourism forms, which favor the
geographical and temporal redistribution of tourist activity,
4. as is clear, people living in urban centres are keen to visit new destinations.
“Hidden” destinations in the islands or in the Greek hinterland are now being
discovered and are starting to attract significant number of visitors. At the same
time, there is a full acceptance by local societies that tourism is their main activity,
5. the fact that all areas which had tourism potential used tourism as a tool of
economic development,
6. the significant increase of travel-related TV programmes as well as the significant
increase of travel-related publications.
Undoubtedly, the elevation of new destinations has been favoured by internal demand.
The demand from abroad still has a predominantly mass characteristic and tour
operators speculate on established destinations, where significant capitals have been
invested by them.
Certain policies for the successful creation of new destinations have led to the
development of new hyper resorts (Areas of Integrated Tourist Development – A.I.T.D:
P. O. T. A in Greek). One show case of these policies is the case of the Western
UNIVERSITY OF THESSALY, Department of Planning and Regional Development
How Does a Mega Event Affect the Hosting Country’s Tourism Development?
341
Peloponnesus programme. On the other hand, certain policies of the Greek National
Tourist Organisation to exploit its properties have had some results, helping destinations
such as Nafplion to reverse the trend towards stagnation.
It is clear that tourist destinations, as all destinations globally, are subject to the
phenomenon of cyclicality. There are periods when they are in a position of high
popularity and there are periods in which they are low in popularity. It's easy to see that
destinations like Evrytania or Zagori, which were developed during the nineties, are
subject to that phenomenon as well. However, which factor is the determinant one, the
one which will change the demand (in qualitative and/or quantitative terms), is not
known. The fact is, however, that the one key role is that of local authorities. Local
authorities, through their actions, will maintain the position of the destination in the
upward side of the cycle of popularity as a tourist destination for as long as possible.
In conclusion, it can be said that Greece as spatial system of destinations is quite
interesting because it consists of various parts. Each of them has its own characteristics
and seems to work independently. Interrelationships exist, but they are limited in
number. Interconnections between those various parts seem to be necessary in order
for each part to benefit from another as the parts seem to work in a way that is
complementary.
The role of the European Cohesion Funds.
European Cohesion Funds have significantly helped the improvement of the Greek
tourist product during the last twenty years. The implementation of large scale
transportation projects has eliminated many of the burdens caused by the shape of the
country’s morphology (Psycharis, 2004, p. 63). In this way, local economies can move
towards other kinds of activities beyond the traditional ones. At the same time, through
initiatives such as Leader and Leader+ programmes, a significant number of tourism
enterprises located in rural and mountainous areas were funded.
The elevation of destinations which were characterised as “the developing ones”
happened mainly due to the European Cohesion funding. Furthermore, funding was not
the only type of European Community aid offered to those areas. Through local
development agencies, the appropriate “know how” was transferred to all people
involved. Without the help of the European funds, the development of tourism in most of
the mountainous areas where it exists today would not have taken place.
On the other hand, European Cohesion Funds contributed significantly to the revamping
of the Greek tourist product. The plethora of actions concerning the refurbishment and
upgrading of hotels helped destinations to restructure their capacity. Undoubtedly the
role of European Cohesion Funding is paramount for the national economy of Greece.
Even if funds are not completely absorbed, all those resources contribute greatly to the
country’s competitiveness and the extroversion of its economy.
Discussion Paper Series, 2007, 13(14)
342
Georgios Zografos, Alex Deffner
3. Aspects of the 2004 Olympic Games
Greece was nominated to organise the 2004 Olympic Games in 1997. A seven-year
period was considered to be long enough for the execution of the ambitious preparation
programme. Several delays during the first period of the preparation programme
resulted in continuous interventions by the International Olympic Committee.
It is certain that several consequences were the result of all those delays:
•
firstly, there was the escalation in costs due to the direct commission of the various
projects to construction companies. The whole procedure led to the provision of no
discount by the contractors,
•
the delay caused negative publicity for the upcoming Olympics.
The 2004 Olympic Games were the first Olympics to be organised in the post 9/11 era.
The organising committee had to take into account several issues, such as the security
of the American, British, Israeli and Australian athletes. Special parameters for security
plans were considered by the international press to be very difficult to achieve on the
part of the Greek authorities. In this respect, the 2004 Olympic Games were badly
marketed. The preparations for the Games were moving ahead at a pace. The
successful preparation of the Olympic Stadium was the issue that attracted most
negative publicity, with grave doubts surrounding the likelihood of its being completed
on time.
Amidst all that negativity and nervousness, the implementation of the "city image"
programme heralded a change of mood. That change, however, was not able to attract
potential visitors to the Games. The Athenians moved away from their city (partly as a
result of governmental initiation), while only a few visitors came during the first days of
the Games. That is why the city appeared to be abandoned. Due to major security
issues, cutting edge technology equipment was bought from abroad, ensnaring the
country’s political system in various post-Olympic discussions. It seemed that the
organisation of the 2004 Olympic Games was not as easy as the "Barcelona model" had
made it appear
As was pointed out by several involved bodies and sources (International Olympic
Committee, international press, etc), the Games were ultimately successfully organised.
All games were satisfactorily staged and all arrivals and departures of journalists,
visitors etc. took place in the best possible way. The Olympic Village and the rest of the
lodging facilities and all the sports venues were completely satisfactory.
According to the international press, one of the few negative points to be mentioned was
the images of empty rows of seats. Those images showed that Greek people could not
participate adequately in various types of the games. At the same time, the high level of
Olympic facilities showed that there was a kind of mismatching between the needs of
the Greek people and the kind of investments produced. It should be mentioned that
UNIVERSITY OF THESSALY, Department of Planning and Regional Development
How Does a Mega Event Affect the Hosting Country’s Tourism Development?
343
various other negative points might have occurred, but they may have been successfully
concealed by the 2004 organising committee.
Two of the key issues which contributed significantly to the creation of a positive image
surrounding the 2004 Olympics are the huge number of volunteers, which is remarkable
considering the relatively small population of Greece, and the high quality images of the
opening ceremony of the Games.
As far as the tourist dimension of the Games is concerned, it can be said that there was
no sufficient matching between the Games and the Greek tourist product (Deffner and
Zografos, 2005, p. 3). Greece is the only country to have a decrease in the numbers of
incoming tourists during the year prior to the Olympics. Even in 2004, there was only a
slight increase in the tourism figures. With regard to the period of the Games, there was
the paradoxical existence of empty rooms in the organising city’s hotels, which was the
result of negative publicity and of high pricing. Even a reduction in prices during the
Games was not enough to attract a significant number of tourists. It seems clear that the
sole management of the Olympic city’s room capacity by one tour operator did not
produce the desired results.
Olympic facilities and planning issues
Urban planning in its modern form should take into account cultural activities as a main
component of the urban space. The significant relevance of leisure time, combined with
the increasing relevance of the media in modern society, constitute important issues
which should be taken into account by the modern urban planner. Having a central
function, cultural activities participate in various levels of the urban networks (see also
Deffner, 2005). Furthermore, they are key figures in the metropolitan aspect of a city
It is clear that Athens arranged its organisational model around the development of new,
permanent Olympic facilities. That choice was based on the programme prescribed in
the folder committed to the International Olympic Committee during the period when
Athens was contending for the Games. That resulted in the fact that the Olympic 2004
legacy in terms of facilities is very good. The planning of the Olympic facilities largely
took into account their functions as a network of leisure facilities in the metropolitan
context of Athens.
The Olympic Village was constructed at the foot of Mount Parnes. That choice could be
characterised as original because it supported an idea of how a new form of urban living
could be incorporated within the Athens metropolitan system (Economou et al, 2001, p.
118). On the other hand, many urban planners believe that choice could harm one of
the last non-built up areas of the Athens basin. The view of some scientists is that the
Olympic Village should have been constructed inside the urban area of Athens, filling
existing gaps therein, such as the Elaionas area where many misused industrial cells
exist. Such an action could have offered more towards settling the problems of the
Discussion Paper Series, 2007, 13(14)
344
Georgios Zografos, Alex Deffner
Athenian urban plot than building on one of the few areas of countryside left in the
vicinity.
One of the arguments used in the speeches of politicians when persuading Greek
citizens of the necessity to organise the Games was that the event could act as a
catalyst for the reunification of the city with its sea front. Athens has 52 km of seafront,
which belongs to various municipalities. The existence of the large expanse of the old
airport located near the seafront gave the chance for those speeches to be
implemented. In that way, the Sea Sports Centre of Agios Cosmas and the Olympic
Zone of Ellinikon were constructed.
On the other side of the coastline, the Olympic Zone of Faliron set the limits of the
proposed unification of the urban plot with the seafront. All those ambitious projects,
however, do not seem to have helped in achieving the target. Athenian coastal areas in
many cases are not accessible to the citizens even three years after the Olympics.
However, coastal zones, seem to be primary leisure places, especially for young people
who tend to develop their own leisure patterns (Haywood et al., 1990, p. 102).
The heart of the Games was undoubtedly the Olympic Complex of Amaroussion.
Consequently, it was verified that the northern suburbs of Athens are considered to be
the heart of the Greek economy. The International Broadcasting Centre was constructed
only a few metres away from the headquarters of the biggest Greek firms and from the
headquarters of the multinationals' affiliated companies in Greece.
Without doubt, the biggest issue concerned the planning permission needed for the
construction of the Olympic Rowing Field. As it is pointed out by Coccossis and Tsartas
(2001, p. 178), the choice of Shinias raised many protests. On the other hand, issues
such as the construction of the Olympic Racecourse in Markopoulo were fully accepted.
It should also be mentioned that, concerning the construction of the rest of the facilities,
there was a fair spread throughout the urban plot of Athens, the main purpose being to
secure the best supply of services for the athletes and the members of the Olympic
family. Unfortunately, there has been no actual planning concerning the specific postOlympic use of most of these facilities. Nevertheless, the construction of high quality
sports centres in depressed areas of Athens such as Liosia was a positive action.
However, many scientists are sceptical on what degree that spreading of the Olympic
legacy would benefit the city in terms of its competitiveness with the other European
cities (Gospodini and Beriatos, 2003, p. 86).
Major construction programmes in the Athens area related to the
organisation of the Olympics, or accelerated due to them
It is certain that Olympic Games have changed the function of Athens as a metropolitan
system. The addition of a transportation system such as the "tram", a project which was
UNIVERSITY OF THESSALY, Department of Planning and Regional Development
How Does a Mega Event Affect the Hosting Country’s Tourism Development?
345
characterised as Olympic, reshaped the urban morphology of the Athens metropolitan
area. Various other projects were accelerated due to the impending organisation of the
Olympics. There was a general priority in Greek policies towards the radical upgrade of
the Athens’ transportation system (Economou et al, 2001, p. 119).
"Eleftherios Venizelos", the International Airport of Athens. The creation of the new
international airport helped the whole country to reposition itself in the context of tourist
destinations. Eleftherios Venizelos Airport plays a significant role in the reformation of
the urban development in the Athens greater area, and acts as a pole for the spreading
of development in the area of Mesogeia. The airport is one of the major facilities at the
disposal of Athens and Attica in its struggle to establish itself as one of the top multiple
supply destinations in the Mediterranean. The airport serves as the hub in the context of
the distribution of incoming tourists throughout the regional airports of Greece, although
the number of charter flights, from outbound markets to those regional destinations is
significant. The whole project was constructed using the B.O.T method - "Build-Operate
and Transfer".
“Attiki Odos”, the ring road of Athens. The construction of that project was almost
completed a few months before the Olympics. Its completion, reassured the efficient
transportation of the athletes and the rest of the Olympic family, from the Olympic village
to a significant number of Olympic facilities, such as the pole of the Olympic Centre in
Maroussi. “Attiki Odos” can be characterised as a major project which actualizes the
spreading of urban development in the area of Mesogeia and the rest of the west Attica.
“Attiki Odos” is a major means of the transformation between the plethora of second
home coastal settlements on the western side of Attica into new Athenian suburbs. It
seems that “Attiki Odos” is the key factor for the spatial organisation of the extended
metropolitan area. The whole project was constructed using the method B.O.T - "BuildOperate and Transfer".
"Proastiakos" (the suburban railway) and the extension of the Athens underground
system towards the Airport. A major transportation system was partly developed in the
pre-Olympic period. Athens’ expansion in the surrounding rural areas is expected to be
explosive when the whole system is completed. In terms of spatial transformation and
the expansion of the metropolitan boundaries, the suburban railways system is going to
play the key role, the role “Attiki Odos" has played in the past. The part of the suburban
railway which was completed due to the organisation of the Olympics connects the
central Athens station to the “Eleftherios Venizelos” airport. Its route is almost parallel to
the extension of one of the routes of the Athens metro system. The expansion of the
suburban railway system, however, generates a series of problems, such as limited
accessibility to certain areas, thus producing divisions in the context of the urban plot.
"Tram". the light railway of Athens, was actually the only project which was clearly
defined as Olympic. Its completion was finalised only a few days before the opening
ceremony of the Games. The project’s development was very fast, as it was the only
Discussion Paper Series, 2007, 13(14)
346
Georgios Zografos, Alex Deffner
project that was so delayed. Its route changed several times for various reasons, mainly
technical ones. In the meanwhile, the objection and the protests of residents from areas
along the route of the light railway were causing further delays to the completion of the
project. The routes of the tram served all those Olympic visitors who wanted to visit the
coastal Olympic facilities, such as the Faliron and the Ellinikon Olympic complexes and
the Agios Kosmas marina. The popularity of the tram as a means of transportation is
slowly but steadily increasing. Further improvement in its itineraries seems to be
helping.
The motivation programme for the renovation of the facades of the buildings to be
achieved. Massive use of non-catalyst vehicles during the eighties together with the lack
of an adequate legal framework which would enable the frequent renovation of the
facades, have led to the creation of a "dark shadow over the city’s face". The unusual
thing is that, before the programme was introduced in order for the facades to be freshly
painted, there was general reluctance to order the buildings’ owners to carry out the
work. The programme was delayed due to various reasons and finally, a few days
before the opening ceremony, only a percentage of the buildings' facades were painted.
The programme for the upgrading the city’s hotels. The Athenian accommodation was
completely refurbished and the post-2004 provision for hotel accommodation is far more
qualitative than before. The existence of a qualitative hotel product helped Athens to
attract several conferences, etc. Post-Olympic tourism figures are much better than the
previous ones. As has been pointed out in the press, Athens has the best value for
money hotel product among the European capitals.
The programme for the unification of the city’s archaeological sites. This was another
project accelerated due to the Olympics, and it was the one which created the biggest
pedestrian zone in Europe. The majority of the area at the foot of the Acropolis rock is
now totally pedestrianised, assuring a decent setting for the city’s heritage. The whole
project was completed in time for the Olympics in an effort to revitalise the city’s centre,
which was largely abandoned by its residents, who had moved to the suburbs. The
effort did not limit itself to the archaeological areas, but it was extended to central areas
such as Omonoia Square. The renovation of the surrounding facades showed the way
for other buildings to be revamped (joining the aforementioned programme).
4. Conclusions
Undoubtedly, the successful promotion of places creates surplus value for the subject
location. However, the essential lack of place marketing strategies in combination with
the lack of planning as well as of adequate infrastructure lead to stagnation as far as the
evolution of a destination is concerned. Mega events involve the media. The media
transfer images and comments and they can easily create “desirability” concerning
destinations. Viewers receive images and they can be transformed into potential
UNIVERSITY OF THESSALY, Department of Planning and Regional Development
How Does a Mega Event Affect the Hosting Country’s Tourism Development?
347
tourists. That transformation is the greatest benefit derived from the organisation of an
event.
Concerning Greece, the post-Olympic increase in arrivals shows that something
changed, even in the mid-term. However, that change could not be seen in isolation
without taking into account changes in policies concerning the context of tourist policy
which took place in the post-2004 era. Those changes are also significant as they
concern various parts of the state’s involvement in tourist activity. Even a new “Tourist
Development” Ministry was introduced, incorporating all relevant bodies which belonged
to the Ministry of National Economy.
As research concerning the Greek tourist industry’s attitude towards the organisation of
the Games and their potential contribution to the increase of the business profits
evolves, it can be said that there is a gap. Athenian-based businesses believe that the
Games strongly benefited them, while people in regional areas do not share the same
strength of belief. It is certain that the organisation of a mega event such as the
Olympics, which focuses on a sole metropolitan area, generates all those variations.
Industry players in emerging destinations think that the Olympic did not “touch” them.
One of the reasons for that is the fact that the demand for emerging destinations’ comes
from the interior; there are no foreign tourist investments, as is the case in Crete for
example. Big tour operators, having invested largely in established destinations, took
the chance to promote their products due to the hosting of the Olympics. According to
Snell (1997, p. 38), such types of actions as the organisation of a mega event, are
subject to cost benefit analyses were all potential incomes and outcomes from the
spatial system that organises the event, are taken into account.
Greece has quite a centralised administrative system. Furthermore, and in relation with
this, Greece is quite an urbanised state. Athens is by far the biggest city in Greece and
its population is almost half the population of the country. It is clear that the Olympics
were seen by the political system as an exquisite opportunity for Athens to be upgraded
and become attractive as an international metropolis. Having that in mind, it can be
postulated that benefits for the rest of the country’s destinations were not key priorities
in the context of the organisation of the Games.
Due to the major construction programme that took place, Athens changed a lot. In
many cases, the work was done quite fast and resulted in various infrastructure
problems. After the Games contradictions and delays, concerning the uses the
infrastructure produced, led to some misuses of the newly-built facilities. The
relationship between the urban plot and the coastline still remains problematic. Athens
has many difficulties to become a new “Barcelona”, because there are main structural
issues which cannot be easily solved.
If the actual aim of the Games was the reinforcement of the Greek tourist product and
not the promotion of Athens as an international metropolis, then the whole structure of
the Olympics (i.e. resources addressed to tourism marketing expenditure) should be
Discussion Paper Series, 2007, 13(14)
348
Georgios Zografos, Alex Deffner
different. Nevertheless, the successful staging of the event seems to have stimulated
international interest in Greece. If aims and targets were better clarified prior to, but also
during and after, the Games, potential benefits from several hundreds of hours of
international broadcasting worth billions of euros would have been greater.
Acknowledgments
This paper was presented in Joint Congress of the European Regional Science
Association (47th Congress) and ASRDLF (Association de Science Régionale de
Langue Française, 44th Congress) PARIS - August 29th - September 2nd, 2007
Bibliography
COCCOSIS, H., TSARTAS, P. (2001), Tourism Development and the Environment, Athens:
Kritiki. [in Greek]
COOPER, C., FLETCHER, J., GILBERT, D., WANHILL, S., ed. R. SHEPHERD (1993/1998),
Tourism Principles and Practice. New York: Addison Wesley Longman.
DEFFNER, A. (2005), The Combination οf Cultural and Time Planning: A New Direction for the
Future of European Cities, City, vol. 9, issue 1, pp. 125-141.
DEFFNER, A., ZOGRAFOS, G. (2005), A place marketing approach for the promotion of the
Greek tourist product in relation to the 2006 Eurovision Song Contest. International Conference:
Tourism Beyond the coastline. Thessaloniki: September 2005.
ECONOMOU, D., GETIMIS, P., DEMATHAS Z., PETRAKOS G., PYRGIOTIS G. (2001), The
International Role of Athens, Volos: University of Thessaly Press. [in Greek]
GOSPODINI, A., BERIATOS, E. (2003), The predominance of Built heritage and Innovative
design in the emerging new Urban landscapes, Aeihoros: Texts of Urban and Regional Planning
and Development, Vol. 2 Issue 2, Volos: University of Thessaly Press, pp. 72-97. [in Greek]
HALL, C. (1994), Tourism and Politics, Chichester: Wiley
HAYWOOD, L., KEW, F., BRAMHAM, P., SPINK, J, CAPENERHURST, J., HENRY, I. (1990),
Understanding Leisure. Cheltenham: Stanley Thornes.
PSYCHARIS, Y. (2004), Regional programs and regional policy in Greece: evaluation and
prospects, Aeihoros: Texts of Urban and Regional Planning and Development, Vol. 3, Issue 1,
Volos: University of Thessaly Press, pp. 56-79. [in Greek]
SNELL, M. (1997), Cost - Benefit Analysis for Engineers and Planners. London: Thomas Telford.
SPILANIS, I. (2000), Tourism and regional development: the case of the Aegean islands, in
TSARTAS P. (ed.) (2000), Tourism Development: A Multidiscipline Approach, Athens: Exantas,
pp. 149-187. [in Greek]
STEFANOU, Y, MITOULA R. (2005), The effects of the globalization on Greek urban landscape,
Aeihoros: Texts of Urban and Regional Planning and Development, Vol. 4, Issue 1, Volos:
University of Thessaly Press, pp. 56-79. [in Greek]
ZOGRAFOS, G. (1999), Developing a Mountain Area through Tourism, Xanthi: Undergraduate
Diploma Thesis, Democritus University of Thrace.
UNIVERSITY OF THESSALY, Department of Planning and Regional Development