Rio 2016 sought to connect Olympic-tourists with the city’s local-Cariocan community and culture. Yet the way mega-events are spatially and regulatorily organized, alongside the behavioural tendencies of Olympic-tourists, constrain such ambitions. Using Rio 2016 as a case-study, we offer in-depth, qualitative insights through the lens of 35 individual Olympic-tourists to examine how and why these factors determine behaviour, and thus experiences across host-environments. We detail how concerns over tourists’ safety result in managers designing risk averse experiences, produced by overlaying hyper-securitized and regulatory enforcements inside existing tourist bubbles, creating what we refer to as a ‘double bubble’ – reducing the likelihood of visitors venturing ‘off-the-beaten-track’. Whilst Olympic-bubbles protect tourists from outside threats, they restrict cultural engagement with the wider city, neighbourhoods and locals – side-lining other sides to Rio. We suggest managers adopt a dual-strategy of ‘local infusion’ in and ‘tourist diffusion’ beyond official zones to achieve intended goals.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Duignan et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: