The Olympics’ persistent problems: Paris 2024 in the spotlight

Reforming problem gaming

The Olympic Games are a mega-event: a global, mobile celebration of sport and culture that commands worldwide attention, generates and costs fortunes, and critically alters physical and social landscapes. The Games have a history of damaging the cities and societies that host them. The negative consequences of hosting them often include broken budgets that overburden the public purse, bloated infrastructure, the militarisation of public space through the introduction of new surveillance technologies and security practices, and the expulsion of residents through raids, gentrification and evictions. Despite touting their “green” credentials, recent Olympics continue this trend of damage: Beijing 2022’s profits came at the expense of residents, and Tokyo 2020–21’s sustainable procurement practices were little more than greenwashing. Overall, measuring social, economic and ecological sustainability since 1992 demonstrates that the Olympics are unsustainable.

These negative results have generated waves of bad press worldwide, with cities backing away from their desire to host. Protest movements against bids and hosting plans have proliferated, and in some cases have led to public referendums or even outright cancellation of bids. For its part, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has recently undertaken a wide-ranging set of organizational reforms. Under these new reforms, Olympic authorities have promised to adapt the Games to the city, rather than forcing the city to adapt to host them, as was the case in the past. An important result of these reforms is the emphasis on using existing venues and infrastructure rather than requiring host cities to build expensive new venues and other facilities for the organization. Other initiatives also helped to reduce costs and streamline operations, including a reform of the bidding process and changing the timelines of planning processes to reduce overspending. These reforms sought to mitigate damage related to the organisation, restore the popularity of the Games and put the Games on a sustainable path for the future. The Paris 2024 Summer Olympics were the first to be planned and held under these reforms.

Paris 2024 showed some successes in reforming the Games to achieve more sustainable outcomes. The most important success in Paris was the high use of existing venues, estimated at 80 to 95 percent. This bodes well for ecological and economic sustainability, as the construction and subsequent maintenance of oversized and underused sports venues has been a persistent problem at previous mega-events. From Brazil 2016 to Athens 2004 and Montreal 1976, Olympic cities are plagued by stadiums that are too large and costly to build and maintain – one of the reasons why the Games have consistently gone over budget. In Paris, most of the new venues were temporary constructions, such as the Grand Palais Éphémère, which will be dismantled after the Games. Mega-event experts have long called for such measures to be adopted. The Games should be held and continued in existing buildings and only temporary structures built when necessary.

Problems in Paris

Despite these advances, problems with Paris 2024 remain. Much of the construction took place in the communes that make up the northern department of Seine-Saint-Denis, an economically disadvantaged and minority-majority department. periphery colloquially known as the nine-three (the new three). Over the nine years, Olympic-related projects have come at a high cost to local inhabitants. For example, some 400 migrant workers were evicted to make way for the Olympic Village, which residents fear will lead to gentrification of the commune. Along with this eviction, at least sixty squatted houses were evicted in areas close to the Olympic sites as a result of a new law that toughens fines and simplifies legal procedures related to the occupation of public spaces. Some consider this a necessary step towards urban improvement, but others protest the inhumanity of the actions, as affordable housing remains out of reach for many. Squatters were evicted with no alternative housing plan in place for them. This is part of a city-wide process of “hiding the undesirables” – a long-standing tradition among host cities – as they prepare for global attention. Sadly, then, the Paris Olympics mirror the Vancouver 2010 and London 2012 Olympics, when marginalised youth were swept out of sight before the event.

During the Paris Games, both the resort and the 9-3 neighbourhood witnessed an overwhelming police and military presence with omnipresent security barricades, severe restrictions on personal travel, and the introduction of AI-powered facial recognition security cameras. While the mega-event is meant to be protected against terrorist threats, these security practices were implemented against residents. An activist and resident of the 9-3 neighbourhood was arrested, held for ten hours, and fined by authorities when he tried to guide a small group of French journalists around the Olympic intervention sites in Seine-Saint-Denis. When he tried again a few days later, authorities intercepted him at the metro exit and arrested him once again. Locals are expressing concern that these technologies and practices will remain after the Olympics and fundamentally change the nature of public space in Paris and France more broadly.

Elsewhere in the area, a motorway interchange and off-ramp were recently built in the Pleyel neighbourhood, not far from the Stade de France, the official Paris 2024 Olympic stadium. Part of the city’s long-standing plan to revitalise Pleyel by transforming it into a business and entertainment hub, this transport intervention was executed alongside an expansion and upgrade of metro and train services. These investments were justified through the Olympic Games – another example of mega-events being used to overcome political obstacles in the host city. These plans, however, are controversial among local residents. The new motorway interchange runs alongside a local school, with locals alleging that the increased road traffic exposes children to dangerous and illegal levels of pollution. However, authorities have ignored (and suppressed) protests from residents and continued construction. In Paris, as in other cities hosting mega-events, it is typically the poorest and most marginalized who suffer the consequences of construction.

While these stories highlight some of the failings and oversights of the Paris Olympics, the problem is not as simple as it seems. The IOC has reformed the Olympics to better accommodate the development of the host city, which in principle means that cities no longer have to accommodate the short-term needs of the event at the expense of the long-term needs of the city. This is a step in the right direction, but it reveals pernicious problems with local politics and the complicity of local authorities in harming their own people. The unwillingness of local officials to respond to residents’ concerns, as exemplified by the problems that arose in ’93, only exacerbates the detrimental effects of hosting the Olympics. External forces are therefore not the only parties to blame for the detrimental outcomes, as local governments should also be held accountable.

In line with the IOC reforms, plans for the Paris Olympics were combined with development plans for Greater Paris, which seek to interconnect and transform the regions surrounding the French capital. This master plan for the entire Paris metropolitan region sought to harmonise urban and economic development, modernise the area and reinscribe it as a world power. From a distance, these Olympic reform processes appear successful, as construction projects related to Paris 2024 were incorporated into the capital’s overall development plan. But, as the struggles within the nine-three show, a look from the ground focused on the most marginalised areas of Paris reveals a different story.

Suggestions for an authentic reform

The Paris Olympics were less disruptive to local populations than many previous Games, but that does not mean they were without flaws. These Games have made important advances in using existing structures for sporting events. However, organisers and authorities of mega-events who claim a smooth run and a promised legacy of social, economic and ecological sustainability should always be questioned. All mega-events should be transparently investigated by an independent body that has both access and enforcement powers.

Neither the host city authorities nor the IOC are the right people for this task, as both have vested interests in presenting developments as more sustainable and less damaging. Instead, this independent body should be appointed and staffed with no ties to any organisational aspect of the Games. It should be empowered to investigate all aspects of planning and organisation, shedding light on these notoriously opaque processes, and should operate with transparency. In addition, law enforcement should follow up on breaches by organisers. However, there is currently nothing of the sort in place.

The damage that persists at Paris 2024 is largely a consequence of the paternalistic policies observed at the IOC and in France (and in many other countries with democratic deficits). In Paris, as elsewhere, authorities often fail to take sufficient account of the voices of affected residents and adopt a superior attitude towards marginalised and minority residents. These tendencies are accentuated by the power and pressures that come with hosting major events, and Paris 2024 is sadly no exception.

True sustainability must start by considering the risks, costs and benefits of hosting the Olympics and pursuing a system where affected residents have veto power. Mega-events have the potential to unite hearts around the world. However, instead of shiny “Potemkin promises,” residents should be informed of the potential costs of hosting the Olympics. Too often, marginalized populations lose their voice when multi-billion-dollar projects are launched. Giving vulnerable communities veto power over mega-events would completely transform the Olympic juggernaut.

…

Author bio: Dr. Sven Daniel Wolfe is an Ambizione Fellow of the Swiss National Science Foundation in the Spatial Development and Urban Policy (SPUR) group at ETH Zurich, Switzerland. He researches the (geo)politics and (un)sustainability of mega-events.

Image credit: Flickr