MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064621975 · doi:10.1111/1468-2427.00256

Mega‐events, Urban Boosterism and Growth Strategies: An Analysis of the Objectives and Legitimations of the Cape Town 2004 Olympic Bid

2000· article· en· W2064621975 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Urban and Regional Research · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSport and Mega-Event Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)CapeContradictionLegitimationUrban planningGentrificationRestructuringGrassrootsPoliticsPolitical scienceEconomic growthEconomySociologyHistoryEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mega‐events are short‐term high‐profile events like Olympics and World Fairs that always have a significant urban impact. They re‐prioritize urban agendas, create post‐event usage debates, often stimulate urban redevelopment, and are instruments of boosterist ideologies promoting economic growth. While mega‐events have normally been the preserve of industrial/postindustrial cities, the bid for the 2004 Olympics by Cape Town, South Africa represented the first bid from Africa, and the most successful bid to date from a developing country. The unique theme of the Cape Town bid was human/urban development — a contradiction given the elitist and commercial nature of mega‐events — and yet a direct response to problems created by the apartheid city. The developmental aspects of the Cape Town bid are assessed in their South African context in order to ascertain whether development was only a legitimation for business interests (or growth machines) or whether and how the mega‐event would contribute to urban restructuring. It is concluded that the bid represented a form of urban/national boosterism that repositioned Cape Town and South African interests in the global economy — particularly relevant given its previous apartheid pariah status. As a pro‐growth strategy advocated by political and economic elites, the Olympic bid was less important as a sporting event at the grassroots than as a symbol of expectations of economic betterment. Whether mega‐events like the Olympics can carry such far‐reaching objectives within their more specific mandates is a matter for further reflection. Les méga‐événements sont des événements à court terme très en vue comme les jeux Olympiques et les foires mondiales qui ont toujours un impact urbain considérable. Ils changent les priorités des programmes urbains, ils créent des débats d'usage après l'événement, encouragent souvent le redéveloppement urbain, et sont les instruments des idéologies de relance qui supportent la croissance économique. Les méga‐événements prennent place habituellement dans les villes industrialisées/post‐industrialisées, mais la tentative du Cap en Afrique du Sud pour obtenir les jeux Olympiques de 2004 représente la première offre de l'Afrique. C'est la tentative venant d'un pays en voie de développement qui à ce jour a été la plus couronnée de succès. Le thème unique de la tentative du Cap était le développement humain/urbain — une contradiction, en vue de la nature commerciale et élitiste des méga‐événements — et cependant une réponse directe aux problèmes créés par la ville apartheid. Les aspects du développement de l'enchère du Cap sont évalués dans leur contexte sud‐africain afin d'établir si le développement était simplement une justification des intérÁts commerciaux (ou machines de croissance) ou si le méga‐événement pouvait contribuer à la restructuration urbaine, et comment. Je conclus que l'enchère représentait une forme de relance urbaine/nationale qui a replacé le Cap et l'Afrique du Sud dans l'économie globale — particulièrement pertinente en vue de son statut précédent d'apartheid paria. En tant que stratégie préconisée par les élites politiques et économiques pour stimuler la croissance, la tentative des jeux Olympiques était moins importante comme événement sportif populaire que comme le symbole d'une attente d'amélioration économique. Il reste à savoir si les méga‐événements comme les jeux Olympiques peuvent atteindre de tels objectifs de grande envergure dans leurs mandats spécifiques.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.347
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.328 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it