Catalina Gomez, Rio de Janeiro Community Manager
As the host of next year’s World Cup, all eyes are on Brazil. The attention on the country’s planning of this event has risen due to the recent protests and concerns about the costs of infrastructure required to host the tournament.
Although the event is still almost a year away, there are already a number of lessons that other countries, cities, and decision-makers can learn from the Brazilian experience:
Understand the investment tradeoffs when hosting major events: Most of the worldwide debates regarding hosting major sports events focus on the economic revenues for host countries, but there is little debate on the tradeoffs of investing in sports infrastructure versus other investments. In Brazil, for example, the total costs of the 12 stadiums of the World Cup host cities totaled R$8.3 billion (US$4 billion). The reforms of Rio’s Maracanã Stadium amounted to R$1.2 billion. Many wonder which other worthwhile investments could have been funded with these resources.
Define realistic project costs and times: Brazil has struggled with both the costs and times associated with key projects. For example, the costs of construction and reform of the twelve stadiums has changed dramatically since they were first planned. Currently, these costs have been reported to be more than 285 percent higher than what the federal government estimated in October 2007, when Brazil was selected as host of the World Cup.
In addition, the lack of adequate planning has generated important delays in infrastructure construction. These delays correspond to the lack of proper project budgeting, procurement, and project management. For example, Brasilia’s stadium has had 19 amendments to the construction contract as emerging needs have come up during its building process. Rio’s Maracanã has also had several amendments, the most recent one being a “minor” price adjustment valued at R$59 million (almost US$30 million).
Determine who picks up the bill: Cities and countries need to better define adequate financial schemes of major infrastructure so that they can ensure funding for the key projects and also maintain other financial responsibilities. In Brazil, 82 percent of the investments for the World Cup have been assumed at the state and city levels. The remaining 18 percent is split equally between the private sector and the federal government. In the case of Rio, for example, the full cost of the Maracanã’s reforms was covered by the state government. The state government is responsible for funding several crucial health and education programs that have historically been underfunded, generating great doubts as to whether it should be funding stadiums and sports facilities instead of focusing on its main social sector priorities.
Plan the long term legacy: Brazil’s experience has taught us that the long-term legacies of major sports events need to be planned. In Brazil, beyond the focus on infrastructure, little has been planned regarding the ultimate legacy of the World Cup. In some cities, like Rio, there are several urban upgrading, transportation, and education initiatives that are linked to the World Cup (and subsequent 2016 Olympic Games), but in reality, these aren’t necessarily long term legacies focused on social transformation. They are merely city investments that needed to be carried out anyway.
Photo credit: Fernanda Almeida