Fragile growth coalitions or powerful contestations? Cancelled Olympic bids in Boston and Hamburg

Environment and Planning A Pub Date : 2017-06-05 DOI:10.1177/0308518X17711447

John Lauermann, Anne Vogelpohl

{"title":"Fragile growth coalitions or powerful contestations? Cancelled Olympic bids in Boston and Hamburg","authors":"John Lauermann, Anne Vogelpohl","doi":"10.1177/0308518X17711447","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Hosting sports “mega-events” like the Olympics is a common scenario among urban growth coalitions worldwide. They are promoted as temporary “catalysts” for local economic growth linked to exceptional decisions in land provision and public spending. But this model of growth politics is increasingly contested: recent Olympic bids have failed in a number of cities as urban social movements organize against them while growth coalitions are unable or unwilling to defend their projects. Two cities exemplify this changing political economic landscape: Boston (USA) and Hamburg (Germany). Both cities launched bids for the 2024 Summer Olympics, and both cities subsequently cancelled their bids. Drawing on a comparative study of bidding politics in Boston and Hamburg, the paper asks why growth policy failed, analyzing the conflict between opposition movements and long-established growth coalitions. These episodes are symptoms of a growth coalition fragility that weakens their effectiveness in urban politics. Urban growth coalitions must contend with changing growth priorities and leadership; by triggering fragility, protest movements are able to gain new influence on the urban policy agenda.","PeriodicalId":11906,"journal":{"name":"Environment and Planning A","volume":"39 1","pages":"1887 - 1904"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"34","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environment and Planning A","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X17711447","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 34

Abstract

Hosting sports “mega-events” like the Olympics is a common scenario among urban growth coalitions worldwide. They are promoted as temporary “catalysts” for local economic growth linked to exceptional decisions in land provision and public spending. But this model of growth politics is increasingly contested: recent Olympic bids have failed in a number of cities as urban social movements organize against them while growth coalitions are unable or unwilling to defend their projects. Two cities exemplify this changing political economic landscape: Boston (USA) and Hamburg (Germany). Both cities launched bids for the 2024 Summer Olympics, and both cities subsequently cancelled their bids. Drawing on a comparative study of bidding politics in Boston and Hamburg, the paper asks why growth policy failed, analyzing the conflict between opposition movements and long-established growth coalitions. These episodes are symptoms of a growth coalition fragility that weakens their effectiveness in urban politics. Urban growth coalitions must contend with changing growth priorities and leadership; by triggering fragility, protest movements are able to gain new influence on the urban policy agenda.

查看原文本刊更多论文

脆弱的增长联盟还是强大的竞争?取消了波士顿和汉堡的奥运会申办

举办像奥运会这样的体育“大型赛事”是世界各地城市发展联盟的常见场景。它们被宣传为与土地供应和公共支出方面的特殊决策有关的地方经济增长的临时“催化剂”。但这种增长政治模式正日益受到质疑:最近在许多城市申办奥运会都失败了，因为城市社会运动组织起来反对它们，而增长联盟无法或不愿捍卫自己的项目。有两个城市体现了这种不断变化的政治经济格局:美国的波士顿和德国的汉堡。这两个城市都曾申办2024年夏季奥运会，但后来都取消了申办。通过对波士顿和汉堡的竞标政治进行比较研究，本文分析了反对派运动与长期建立的增长联盟之间的冲突，提出了增长政策失败的原因。这些事件都是增长联盟脆弱的症状，削弱了它们在城市政治中的有效性。城市增长联盟必须应对不断变化的增长重点和领导层;通过引发脆弱性，抗议运动能够对城市政策议程产生新的影响。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Environment and Planning A

自引率

0.00%

发文量