Transcript Slide 1

A Top tip
• The information you are about
to receive is vital to your
success
• So make some notes
The Great Bristol GA 6th Form
Competition March 2012
A Decision Making Exercise
How effectively have the London Olympics sites met
the urban regeneration and sustainability agenda thus
far in the Lower Lea Valley
http://www.webcandy.co.uk/clocks/london2012.htm
What you will be enlightened by
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
The London Olympic Vision
Background to the bid
The location of the Games
Why the location was chosen
The major stakeholders
Parallel case studies
The S.E.E impacts of large
sporting events
The Vision
• ‘The 2012 Games will improve life for people in London’s most deprived
area. They will be a catalyst for the regeneration of London's east end and
will provide affordable housing and quality living space for the people of
Newham’, Barbara Cassani London Olympic Bid Vice Chair
• ‘The London Games in 2012 will be far more than just a four week festival of
sport. They will be quite simply the most sustainable ever – leaving a lasting
legacy of jobs, homes and environmental improvements for East London,
London and Britain’. Ken Livingstone, former Mayor of London.
• ‘The Games will lift our international profile, attract inward investment and
boost profits and jobs for everyone’. Sir Digby Jones, Director General of the
Confederation of British Industry.
•
IOC say that successful Olympic hosts must show they are providing a
sustainable legacy, lasting beyond the Olympics themselves.
Background to the bid
• Bid for 2012 submitted July
2003
• Of the 9 bids submitted. IOC
reduced choices to 5 by May
2004
• These were London, Madrid,
Moscow, New York, and Paris
• July 2005 Singapore the final
announcement
• London beat Paris in a close
contest
Location of the London Olympics: the main
site
•
•
•
The Lower Lea Valley
It is the boundary between the
boroughs of Newham, Hackney,
Waltham Forest and Tower
Hamlets
The valley stretches for about 5
km between Stratford and the
River Thames.
The main
site:
Before
The main
site:
During
Reasons for the choice of
location: Lower Lea Valley
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
The Lower Lea Valley is home to one of
the most deprived communities in the
country.
Considered the largest remaining
regeneration opportunity in inner London.
Unemployment is high
The public health record is poor.
It suffers from a lack of infrastructure.
Industry provided low-density
employment.
Poor environmental quality - Fly tipping
has been a major problem in the area for
years + high levels of contaminated land.
Urban regeneration in East London
Today East London is an area of regeneration with a rising
population. It is made up of the London boroughs of Barking &
Dagenham, Hackney, Havering, Newham, Redbridge, Tower
Hamlets and Waltham Forest. The total area of this group of
boroughs is 318.64 km² and the total population in 2004 was 1.5
million.
East London, like many inner cities, suffered as a result of
deindustrialisation, particularly between 1960-70 when the
Docklands area was unable to compete with new container
ports such as Tilbury and Felixstowe.
The London Docklands urban Development Corporation
(LDDC, 1981) and Enterprise Zone (1982) helped to regenerate
the Docklands area. When the LDDC finished in 1998, the whole
Docklands area had seen massive change and development. Its
achievements included the establishment of a secondary
financial district and the development of an improved transport
Social Indicators
Social Indicators
Economic Indicators
Multiple
Deprivation Index
Data
1.Income
2.Employment,
3.Health
4.deprivation and
Disability,
5.Education Skills
and Training,
6.Barriers to
Housing and
Services,
7.Crime the Living
Environment.
People have more time and less money
and opportunities.
Petty crime
often
increases
High
unemployment
Young people
leave school with
fewer
qualifications
People have less money to
spend on goods and services
Vicious Circle of
decline
The local council invests
less in housing, roads
and education
Less taxes and business
rates are paid to the local
council
The London Olympics: Major
sporting Infrastructure
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Stadium
Aquatics
Velodrome
Hockey Centre
Basketball Arena
Athletes Village
Press Centre
Aquatics Centre
Canary Wharf
Athlete’s Village
Stratford International Rail link
Basketball centre
The main Athletics
Stadium
Hockey Centre
River Lea
The Velodrome
Location of the London Olympics: the main site
The Main Stadium
The Aquatics Centre
The Velodrome + BMX track
The Hockey Centre
The Basketball Centre
The Athletes Village and Stratford Rail link
Location of the London
Olympics: the other sites
London
•
The ExCel centre – boxing, Judo etc
•
The Millennium Dome - Gymnastics
•
Wembley - Football
•
Greenwich Park - Equestrian
•
Royal Artillery Barracks - shooting
•
Wimbledon - Tennis
•
Lords - Archery
•
Regents Park – Road race cycling
Outside London
•
Weymouth – sailing
•
Dorney Lake - Rowing
Who are/were the major stakeholders / players?
Organisers
• Seb Coe – Chair London Organising Committee
• Ken Livingstone
Finance bodies
• Private investors – fund staging of games (approx £2 billion)
– Coke, McDonalds, Panasonic
– BA, British Telecom, John Lewis, BP, Lloyds TSB
• Central Government and other bodies fund infrastructure + venues (£……)
– National Government (tax payers) – 64%
– National lottery – 23%
– Mayor of London + LDA (London Development Agency – 13%
Who are/were the major stakeholders / players?
International Olympic
Committee
They are interested in how the Olympics are viewed around the work and claim
that if the games are to be a success they MUST leave a sustainable legacy
London Development
Agency
They are interested in the development of London as a whole and will definitely
want a strong legacy for Newham.
London Organising
Committee of the
Olympic Games
The group that are organising the big ideas. They make the decisions about where
to spend the money
Olympic Delivery
Authority
They put into place what the committee decide is best they want the games to run
smoothly
Boris Johnston
(Mayor of London)
Wants the economic, social and environmental well being of the city to be high and
needs local people to feel that the games were a success so that they will vote for
him again
Transport for London
They have to organise how the many millions of visitors are going to be transported
around the city
Four London Borough
Councils
They are more interested in the long term benefits that the games can bring
rather than if the games are seen as a success
Parallel Case Studies: The 2000 Sydney Olympics
Socio Economic Impacts
•
Costs of games tripled to AU$6 billion
•
Costs rose partially due to high cost
of site decontamination
•
AU$6 billion investment in
infrastructure
•
Net loss AU$2.1 billion
•
Tourism numbers increased 2001. 1.6
million visitors spent AU$6 billion
•
Tourism numbers decreased in 4
years after the event
•
$2 billion received in TV rights,
sponsorship + ticket sales
•
Gentrification occurred + No
affordable housing generated in
Athletes village
•
Athletes village fully sold off after
games. Now home to 5000
Environmental impacts
•
Venues largely unused – white
elephant although some reuse in
2003 Rugby World Cup
•
430 Hectares of ecologically
significant wetland + remediated
brownfield sites produced
•
40kms of cycle path and
pedestrian footpaths created
•
Water recycling system built.
Now saves Sydney 850 m litres
of drinking water / year
•
Athletes village solar powered
•
95% of waste recycled in
building phase
Parallel Case Studies: The 2004 Athens Olympics
Socio Economic Impacts
•
Costs skyrocketed to over $9.3 billion
•
Costs of maintaining the environment
= $500 million annually
•
Games Debt likely to take 2 decades
to repay
•
21 of 22 venues now abandoned
including hockey and kayaking
•
Major stadium home to football team
FC Panathinaikos so well used
•
Athletes village not fully sold off after
games as isolated + lacked service
provision
Environmental impacts
•
Many venues abandoned +
graffitied
•
Olympics acted as catalyst
for pedestrian walkways and
metro system (now carries
600,000 a day)
•
Solar panels were not
installed on Athletes village
due to spiralling costs
Classic Olympic issues:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Social Impacts
Land rights
Gentrification + speculative developers
Social exclusion
Community displacement – Clay’s Lane
A genuine social Legacy of housing + services?
The feel good factor?
Not everyone is for the games
Classic Olympic issues:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Economic Impacts
Overall spiralling costs? – Security?
Costs of developing a brownfield site
Impact on the local economy multiplier…
Job creation
Tourism footfall + spending
Rebranding / reimaging / regeneration
Investment in transport infrastructure
Investment in transport infrastructure
The costs and income of running
the games
Classic Olympic issues:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Environmental impacts
Brownfield site decontamination
Environmental sustainability of the site
Environmental Impact of the build
Energy supply + consumption
The impacts of Transport
to / from and inside the venue(s)
6. Consumption during the games
How successful has regeneration been?
Reimaging
Regeneration
Social
Yet to be seen
Until recently, plans for housing have been substantial, with estimates of
up to 9000 new homes around the Olympic Park after 2012. However, the
new Mayor has promised to make the Games ‘less about regeneration and
more about sport’ and is known to be keen to make efficiency savings
where possible. In Sydney after 2000, cost pressures and a change of
political will forced a change of policy from social housing to free market
private housing, which promised far higher rewards.
Economic
The people who value
land post-2012 will have
to factor in
increased land values as
the ‘desirability' of the
area increases. Even if a
prolonged
credit crunch ensues,
land values around the
Olympic Park will have
more than
doubled since 2005.
It is fair to ask whether London’s costs can balance. The UK Government
estimated
in mid-2008 that costs would reach £10-£11 billion, over four times the
original estimate, but that these would be exceeded by the scale of
benefits. These costs will have to be balanced by ticket sales and
sponsors – but the payback will occur largely through indirect impacts.
Tourist spending and the increase in construction employment each
generate ripple effects in east London, but the big payback will come in
terms of land values.
Environmental
Yet to be seen
The plans for London’s 2012 have extended Sydney’s concept of the
‘Green Olympics'. Using some of the same design personnel responsible
for Sydney, London’s central hub is Olympic Park, the first major park in
London for over a century. As well as providing a traffic-free concourse
during the Olympics and
Paralympics, the Olympic Park will promote the regeneration of the Lea
Valley and create a new Lea Valley Regional Park.
Green rules. How sustainable
will the games be?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Use ‘brownfield’, not ‘greenfield’ sites.
Use or adapt existing materials, rather than build from
scratch
Design and use environmentally friendly buildings and
materials
Minimise adverse impacts of Olympic events on
residents
Minimise waste, and recycle wherever possible
Protect native ecosystems, fauna or flora
Make Olympic sites fully accessible by public
transport.
Manage water sustainably
Use energy efficiently
Create a local amenity and access for people
‘Assess’, An exam tastic term
1. Assess = consider both sides of the argument and
come to a considered conclusion
2. To do this…
3. Consider Costs Vs Benefits
4. Of various S.E.E.P impacts
5. Be balanced
6. But show complexity in your arguments ‘However’
Your
BIG task
Assess the success of the London
Olympic Games in meeting
regeneration and sustainability
agendas thus far
Assess the success of the London Olympic Games in meeting
regeneration and sustainability agendas thus far:
The activity and the task
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
You have decide how far the Olympic games site have
been successful with the regeneration and
sustainability agenda. So consider both sides of the
argument and come to a considered conclusion.
Consider Costs Vs Benefits. Use data.
But show complexity in your arguments ‘However’
Include the views of the various stakeholders
Set the decision within the framework of
sustainability. Remember to cover social,
economic and environmental impacts
Getting started
1. Send a representative to collect an information pack
2. Read through the information in the packs
3. Then distribute the 5 tasks from the previous slide
between the different members of the team
4. Send a representative to collect paper, pens etc
5. You have one hour before you presentation must be
delivered to the judges
6. Good luck and remember unimaginable prizes, fame
and glory for the winning team.
Spare stuff / templates for additional slides
Making decisions are never easy in Geography
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
A key element of geography and the working world is decision making
The key is..
Be informed. Read up to give you breadth of understanding of the SEEP
points (Social, Economic, Environmental and Political)
Then you can make an informed decision which will allow you to PEE (a
great relief)
Identify your social, economic and environmental Points and consider
the sustainability factor
Expand and explain your points
Support them with Evidence
Finally see the complexity ‘However’, Recognise your weaknesses and
prepare your counter arguments