Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Sports championships are major events capable of changing the image of cities and countries. Countries use these mega-events mostly to enhance economic development opportunities, to attract foreign investment, to generate tourism revenues, to regenerate parts of cities, and to increase the population’s self-esteem. However, the major boost seems to come from the marketing strategies. Host countries promote their images as modern, cosmopolitan, and attractive places, ideal to attract footloose capital. The EURO 2004 European Soccer Championship in Portugal was one such mega-event. Portugal constructed new and renovated old stadiums to host the championship. I argue that EURO 2004 was above all a country marketing strategy conducted by the political elite, supposedly with benefits for the country as a whole; nonetheless, the benefits had distinct geographical and societal impacts within a limited timeframe. The key finding is that the EURO 2004 belonged to the same category of events as the EXPO’98 and the Porto 2001, which helped change the image of Portugal, nationally and internationally; however, a constant reliance on mega-events to modernize and make a country more competitive is not sustainable in the long run.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Carlos J. L. Balsas (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: