When the Games Come to Town: Neoliberalism, Mega‐Events and Social Inclusion in the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympic Games
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Vancouver's successful bid for the 2010 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games took place at a transformational moment for the International Olympic Committee (IOC). In the first decade of this century, the IOC began to require host cities to address a much wider range of local impacts of the ‘global Games’, and to undertake planning initiatives to ensure maximum local social inclusion. In this article, we present a case study of the policies and principles of social inclusion used by the Vancouver Organizing Committee (VANOC) in preparing for the 2010 Games. We use key informant interviews, document analysis and participant observation to study a specific programme — Building Opportunities with Business (BOB) — that was showcased as one of VANOC's prominent demonstrations of social inclusion. Our evidence suggests that Games planning processes have become even more powerful instruments for the promotion of liberal philosophies through neoliberal local governance regimes; social inclusion is promised through the proliferation of ever more institutionally diffused public–private partnerships. With the neoliberal shift from public service provision to private sector entrepreneurialism, individual employability becomes the primary goal of, and normative justification for, social inclusion policies. Heavily circumscribed VANOC efforts at specific types of social inclusion have met with limited success, but it appears clear that the fusion of transnationally mobile mega‐events and prevailing doctrines of neoliberal entrepreneurialism has become a significant new framework for local urban social policy. Résumé La candidature de Vancouver pour les Jeux olympiques et paralympiques d'hiver de 2010 a été acceptée alors que le Comité international olympique (CIO) était en mutation. Depuis la première décennie de ce siècle, le CIO incite les villes d'accueil à se préoccuper d'un éventail beaucoup plus large d'impacts locaux liés aux ‘Jeux planétaires’ et à mener des initiatives d'aménagement afin d'optimiser l'inclusion sociale locale. Cet article présente une étude de cas des politiques publiques et des principes d'inclusion sociale appliqués par le Comité d'organisation de Vancouver (COVAN) pour préparer les Jeux de 2010. Des entretiens avec des informateurs clés, une analyse documentaire et l'observation de participants permettent d'étudier un programme communautaire particulier, BOB (Building Opportunities with Business), présenté comme l'une des expériences les plus probantes d'inclusion sociale du COVAN. Les données suggèrent que les processus de planification des jeux sont devenus des instruments encore plus efficaces de promotion des philosophies libérales à travers des régimes de gouvernance locale néo‐libéraux, les promesses d'inclusion sociale passant par une prolifération de partenariats privé‐public toujours plus diffuse sur le plan institutionnel. Compte tenu de l'évolution néolibérale (de la fourniture de services publics aux initiatives entrepreneuriales privées), l'employabilité individuelle devient l'objectif premier, et la justification normative, des politiques d'inclusion sociale. Les efforts du COVAN, strictement circonscrits à certains types d'inclusion sociale, n'ont connu qu'un succès limité. Toutefois, il paraît évident que la fusion de méga‐événements mobiles à l'échelon transnational et des doctrines actuelles de l'entrepreneurialisme néolibéral a généré un nouveau cadre important pour la politique sociale urbaine locale.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it