Olympics-related urban interventions in Barcelona and in Rio de Janeiro: A look at territorial equality legacies

IF 6 1区 经济学 Q1 URBAN STUDIES Cities Pub Date : 2024-10-15 DOI:10.1016/j.cities.2024.105503
Farideh Baroghi , Paulo J.G. Ribeiro
{"title":"Olympics-related urban interventions in Barcelona and in Rio de Janeiro: A look at territorial equality legacies","authors":"Farideh Baroghi ,&nbsp;Paulo J.G. Ribeiro","doi":"10.1016/j.cities.2024.105503","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In a time of increasing global competition for sport mega events (SME), evaluating urban legacies becomes crucial, particularly as successes increasingly favor less developed countries. Barcelona stands as one of the best example among host cities, with its legacy remaining a contentious subject. This paper evaluates Olympic-related urban interventions and territorial equality legacies, drawing a comparison between the development models of Barcelona (1992) and Rio de Janeiro (2016). Utilizing five key criteria–Olympic site selection, city public transportation improvement, eviction problems, environmental commitments, and sport mega-event costs–the paper examines Rio's alignment with the successful Barcelona model. Despite procedural similarities, Rio's outcomes raise doubts, particularly regarding territorial equality. The evaluation shows Rio's shortcomings in all five criteria, highlighting the need for a detailed understanding of urban legacies in SMEs. While Rio may have followed Barcelona in form, the paper emphasizes content distinctions, prompting considerations for future urban planning in host cities.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48405,"journal":{"name":"Cities","volume":"155 ","pages":"Article 105503"},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cities","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264275124007170","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"URBAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In a time of increasing global competition for sport mega events (SME), evaluating urban legacies becomes crucial, particularly as successes increasingly favor less developed countries. Barcelona stands as one of the best example among host cities, with its legacy remaining a contentious subject. This paper evaluates Olympic-related urban interventions and territorial equality legacies, drawing a comparison between the development models of Barcelona (1992) and Rio de Janeiro (2016). Utilizing five key criteria–Olympic site selection, city public transportation improvement, eviction problems, environmental commitments, and sport mega-event costs–the paper examines Rio's alignment with the successful Barcelona model. Despite procedural similarities, Rio's outcomes raise doubts, particularly regarding territorial equality. The evaluation shows Rio's shortcomings in all five criteria, highlighting the need for a detailed understanding of urban legacies in SMEs. While Rio may have followed Barcelona in form, the paper emphasizes content distinctions, prompting considerations for future urban planning in host cities.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
巴塞罗那和里约热内卢与奥运会有关的城市干预措施:对领土平等遗产的审视
在全球体育盛事(SME)竞争日益激烈的时代,评估城市遗产变得至关重要,尤其是在成功越来越青睐欠发达国家的情况下。巴塞罗那是主办城市中的最佳范例之一,但其遗产仍是一个有争议的话题。本文通过比较巴塞罗那(1992 年)和里约热内卢(2016 年)的发展模式,评估了与奥运相关的城市干预措施和领土平等遗产。本文利用五项关键标准--奥运场馆选址、城市公共交通改善、拆迁问题、环境承诺和大型体育赛事成本--考察了里约与成功的巴塞罗那模式的一致性。尽管在程序上有相似之处,但里约的成果却令人怀疑,尤其是在地域平等方面。评估显示,里约在所有五项标准上都存在不足,这凸显了详细了解中小型企业城市遗产的必要性。虽然里约可能在形式上沿袭了巴塞罗那的模式,但本文强调了内容上的区别,从而为主办城市未来的城市规划提供了参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cities
Cities URBAN STUDIES-
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
9.00%
发文量
517
期刊介绍: Cities offers a comprehensive range of articles on all aspects of urban policy. It provides an international and interdisciplinary platform for the exchange of ideas and information between urban planners and policy makers from national and local government, non-government organizations, academia and consultancy. The primary aims of the journal are to analyse and assess past and present urban development and management as a reflection of effective, ineffective and non-existent planning policies; and the promotion of the implementation of appropriate urban policies in both the developed and the developing world.
期刊最新文献
Strategic emerging enterprises drive city-level carbon emission efficiency in China The spatial dynamics of financial expenditure on science and technology in Chinese cities: Financial capacity and government competition Development agendas governing the common good – Unfolding planning approaches: A case study of Vantaa, Finland Green infrastructure as a planning tool: A comprehensive systematization of urban redesign strategies to increase vegetation within public places Travel sustainability of new build housing in the London region: Can London's Green Belt be developed sustainably?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1