TY - UNPB
T1 - The Oxford Olympics Study 2024
T2 - Are Cost and Cost Overrun at the Games Coming Down?
AU - Flyvbjerg, Bent
AU - Budzier, Alexander
N1 - This working paper is authored by Said Business School faculty and is circulated for discussion purposes only. All comments and feedback are most welcome. Contents should be considered as ‘preliminary findings’ and are not to be quoted or reproduced without the authors’ permission.
PY - 2024/5/31
Y1 - 2024/5/31
N2 - The present paper is an update and extension of the "The Oxford Olympics Study 2016" (Flyvbjerg et al. 2016). We document that the Games remain costly and continue to have large cost overruns, to a degree that threatens their viability. The IOC is aware of the problem and has initiated reform. We assess the reforms and find: (a) Olympic costs are statistically significantly increasing; prior analyses did not show this trend; it is a step in the wrong direction. (b) Cost overruns were decreasing until 2008, but have increased since then; again a step in the wrong direction. (c) At present, the cost of Paris 2024 is USD 8.7 billion (2022 level) and cost overrun is 115% in real terms; this is not the cheaper Games that were promised. (d) Cost overruns are the norm for the Games, past, present, and future; they are the only project type that never delivered on budget, ever. We assess a new IOC policy of reducing cost by reusing existing venues instead of building new ones. We find that reuse did not have the desired effect for Tokyo 2020 and also looks ineffective for Paris 2024. Finally, we recommend that the Games look to other types of megaprojects for better data, better forecasting, and how to generate the positive learning curves that are necessary for bringing costs and overrun down. Only if this happens are Los Angeles 2028 and Brisbane 2032 likely to live up to the IOC’s intentions of a more affordable Games that more cities will want to host.
AB - The present paper is an update and extension of the "The Oxford Olympics Study 2016" (Flyvbjerg et al. 2016). We document that the Games remain costly and continue to have large cost overruns, to a degree that threatens their viability. The IOC is aware of the problem and has initiated reform. We assess the reforms and find: (a) Olympic costs are statistically significantly increasing; prior analyses did not show this trend; it is a step in the wrong direction. (b) Cost overruns were decreasing until 2008, but have increased since then; again a step in the wrong direction. (c) At present, the cost of Paris 2024 is USD 8.7 billion (2022 level) and cost overrun is 115% in real terms; this is not the cheaper Games that were promised. (d) Cost overruns are the norm for the Games, past, present, and future; they are the only project type that never delivered on budget, ever. We assess a new IOC policy of reducing cost by reusing existing venues instead of building new ones. We find that reuse did not have the desired effect for Tokyo 2020 and also looks ineffective for Paris 2024. Finally, we recommend that the Games look to other types of megaprojects for better data, better forecasting, and how to generate the positive learning curves that are necessary for bringing costs and overrun down. Only if this happens are Los Angeles 2028 and Brisbane 2032 likely to live up to the IOC’s intentions of a more affordable Games that more cities will want to host.
KW - Olympic Games
KW - Olympics
KW - Sports
KW - Cost Overruns
KW - Paris 2024
U2 - 10.2139/ssrn.4850085
DO - 10.2139/ssrn.4850085
M3 - Working paper
BT - The Oxford Olympics Study 2024
ER -