Rio de Janeiro. As the summer of 2016 approached, the world’s attention centered on this Brazilian state as the Olympic Games made their way to a South American country for the very first time. Eyes were on athletes such as Michael Phelps and Usain Bolt, and the anticipated camaraderie and goodwill of the Olympics brought a glimmer of hope to a world often otherwise overshadowed by turmoil and animosity.
Yet, as the games drew near, even more attention was given to the host city and its readiness – or lack thereof – to welcome the world and its athletes. Less than two months before the opening ceremonies, construction equipment and supplies were piled everywhere; grandstands were only partially built; and construction delays caused by the failure to obtain necessary permits resulted in damage to partially-built facilities (Barbara, 2016). Reports of high crime, pollution and the Zika virus added fuel to the widespread concern from the outside that Brazil was ill-equipped for the Olympic-sized undertaking (Barbara, 2016).
From a distance, through our television and computer screens, Rio seemed to have succeeded in pulling everything together. With the exception of the green water in the diving pool, and the sparse attendance at some of the events, the setting seemed complete as the world celebrated the strength, perseverance and teamwork through rose-colored glasses. Yet those issues, coupled with broken toilets in the Athletes’ Village, uncharacteristic booing of athletes by spectators, and shootings and robberies, raised concerns by Olympic officials (Rossingh, 2016). According to one International Olympic Committee official, the Rio Olympics were “the most difficult games we have ever encountered” (Rossingh, 2016).
Even more striking, however, is the state of the Olympic venues subsequent to the Summer Games. Hosting the Olympic games is a coveted opportunity that is expected to yield long-range financial benefits. Yet a year after their use, Rio’s facilities are in states of disrepair as a result of vandalism, unpaid electric and water bills, and damage from lack of proper maintenance; in addition, venues such as arenas and golf courses have been unsuccessful in attracting business and tourism that was promised, resulting in an even further implosion of the recreational infrastructure (Farand, 2017).
As the Olympics approached, Brazil was embroiled in a political crisis that resulted in the removal of its president, Dilma Rouseseff, and was experiencing an economic recession. It could be argued that those factors contributed to the lack of preparedness for the Olympics (Barbara, 2016). However, the same culture that contributed to those national crises could have provided the backdrop for the disarray surrounding the Olympics. Moran, et al. (2014) enumerates Hofstede’s four dimensions of national culture, one of which is power distance, or the inequity that exists between the powerful and nonpowerful. That power distance can be seen in the economic disparity that exists in Brazil, where upper-class neighborhoods exist alongside favelas, or shantytowns, where millions live without even the most basic services (Moran, et al., 2014).
Disregard for the homeless and disadvantaged as the Olympic infrastructure took form was apparent. Rather than the promised boost to the communities in Rio, the Olympics created an even greater chasm. Thousands of people were displaced to accommodate Olympic buildings. Basic sanitation and water in one favela were disregarded and tourist attractions were established instead. Subway stations were built in wealthy neighborhoods rather than in areas that would have benefited working class individuals (Barbara, 2016). One year later, dilapidated buildings and debris are eyesores and breeding grounds for disease and vandalism; and housing in the Athletes’ Village is too expensive for those it was intended to assist (Farand, 2017). “Rio 2016 leaves a shady legacy of a city entrenched with marginalization and discrimination, with a deeply militarized public security approach and a record of human rights violations, where violence remains part of the game” (Farand, 2017).
Were political and economic factors responsible for what is seen as an unsuccessful Olympic result? Were organizers ill-equipped and unprepared for the expansive project? The answer to these questions is, most likely, yes. Yet underlying it all is the power distance that enabled influential and affluent business and property owners to reap the benefits of what was promised to be a new world for the people of Rio, with disregard for and at the expense of the non-powerful.
References:
Barbara, V. (July 1, 2016). Brazil’s Olympic catastrophe. Retrieved October 15, 2017 from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/03/opinion/sunday/brazils-olympic-catastrophe.html?_r=0
Farand, C. (February 10, 2017) Rio 2016 Olympic venues left in disrepair as Brazil struck by its worst recession in modern history. Retrieved October 15, 2017 from http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/olympics/rio-olympic-venues-disrepair-2016-brazil-worst-recession-economy-ruin-a7572786.html
Moran, R., Abramson, N., Moran, S. (2014) Managing Cultural Differences. New York, NY: Routledge
Rossingh, D. (August 22, 2016) Rio Olympics 2016: Did Brazil pass or fail its big test? Retrieved October 15, 2017 from http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/22/sport/rio-olympics-2016-report-card-pass-fail/index.html
hmf7 says
I really appreciated your post regarding the Olympics, and in a time where it seems fewer and fewer cultures are being preserved, the information in your post doesn’t surprise me. I think you’re right, the Olympic officials and leaders in Rio should have done more.to build up the city rather than tear down the homes of it’s poorest inhabitants.
But I think this is just the tip of a much bigger iceberg. Developers are building up housing for those who can afford it, and for the quarter of the population who live in favelas (Jenkins, 2016), they will simply be pushed aside. While I think that the Rio Olympics most likely exasperated the problems, I think they have been entrenched in the country for quite a while. Without a leader to put all Brazilians first, the problem will simply get worse and worse.
Jenkins, S. (2016) For the displaced of Rio, ‘The Olympics has nothing to do with our story’. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/olympics/for-the-displaced-of-rio-the-olympics-has-nothing-to-do-with-our-story/2016/08/07/da16b0e8-5c9a-11e6-8e45-477372e89d78_story.html?utm_term=.d19e9fc290cd
Michael Mccormick says
My personal opinion is that the world and the Olympic committee wanted it succeed no matter the problems that were arising. The committee did not want to pull out when the problems starting piling up. It would look like a failure on them and not the Brazilian government. Well developed countries have problems planning for the Olympics so what did they expect a half impoverished and half middle class city and country to do. The committee needs to understand where these events are being put together, they need to realize that they will attract bad publicity if their million dollar buildings are not being used or the governments are holding them back from the lower class and society. The committee will need to learn how to balance out the differences and similarities of countries going forward.