The essence of this essay is to see whether holding of Olympics in different cities is economically viable basing from past studies done on the matter.

Olympics are held in different cities every two years. The reason this is done to avoid monotony in host cities and to encourage the presence of all cities in the world to take part in it. It is however not clear whether this trend should be followed after post event studies contradicting  pre-event studies and expectations in terms of projected income and economical benefits of holding the games in different cities The rotation involves choosing the venue and preparing for the events. The Cities that host the Olympic Games do commit to significant investments in sports venues and other infrastructure. The hosting cities expect to create large and lasting economic benefits from the scale the event which is not always the case. Economic impact studies confirm the expectations through predicting economical benefits in terms of billions of dollars. The misapplications in these studies are that they project the incomes to be very high. Post – studies have consistently shown that the positive economic impacts of hosting such big sporting events hardly get near the expected results. This is because once the Olympics have been held; the host cities lack functions to utilize the infrastructure built thus most of them remain idle. It takes some considerable amount before the cities get another chance to host an international event that will use the infrastructure (Guttmann, 1992).

Olympic sports are known foster unity among international entities and give a chance to athletes to show their prowess in their fields and thus are celebrated worldwide. From the massive size of the events, most cities compete to host the event with the assumption of massive reaps from the event. The rotation also enhances globalization and interaction among nations thus propelling international relations and world peace in general. It is also a once in a lifetime chance for tourism since people who come to witness the games can extend it to be a tourism chance. The games also have a face lift the cities that host them in the name of infrastructure that constructed for the hosting. Hosting the games in different cities also ensures that there is no advantage or favor to a specific to group of athletes from the region of hosting which might cause their dominance of the games.

From the reports on analysis held in the past it would be economical for the games to be held in one city. In the same manner they were held in Olympia, being hosted in one city would mean no construction of new infrastructure or sporting facilities for the event but proper maintenance of the same that have been utilized previously. This would remove the burden of Cities constructing new facilities as well as save the organizing committee lots of funds. The facilities will be guaranteed of being used in future thus not be demolished or lie idle for long. It is however worth noting that the decision of picking one city to be the venue will not be easily acceptable to most as this would be like letting the games favor one nation as was during the ancient times where they were held in the wooded valley of Olympia in Elis. It is therefore purely on economical grounds would hosting in one city be advisable.

References

Durant, J. ( 1973). Highlights of the Olympics: From Ancient Times to the Present. New York:

                        Hastings House Publishers.

Guttmann, A. (1992). The Olympics: A History of the Modern Games. Chicago: University of

Illinois Press.