IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/tou/journl/v31y2010p93-118.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

L’ACCUEIL DES GRANDS eVeNEMENTS SPORTIFS : QUEL IMPACT eCONOMIQUE OU QUELLE UTILITe SOCIALE POUR LES ReGIONS ? L’EXEMPLE DE LA COUPE DU MONDE DE RUGBY 2007 EN FRANCE

Author

Listed:
  • Eric BARGET

    (Universite de Limoges, CDES-OMIJ)

  • Jean-Jacques GOUGUET

    (Universite de Limoges, CDES-OMIJ)

Abstract

Une aide publique des grands evenements sportifs ne peut etre justifiee par une seule etude d’impact economique. Il est necessaire de mesurer aussi l’utilite sociale dans le cadre d’une analyse coûts/benefices. Cela permet de comparer les coûts engendres pour la communaute d’accueil avec les benefices pour la population en termes de bien-etre social. Pourtant, il y a toujours une forte demande d’etudes d’impact economique de la part des pouvoirs publics avant l’organisation de grands evenements sportifs, alors que les etudes coûts/benefices sont quasiment inexistantes, d’où des decisions peu rationnelles en la matiere. On peut meme supposer que les resultats des etudes d’impact economique aient servi à justifier des decisions prises sur la base de considerations essentiellement politiques. Dans cet article, pour rendre compte à la fois de l’impact economique et de l’utilite sociale de l’organisation d’un grand evenement sportif, nous proposons un test de legitimite que nous illustrons avec l’exemple de la Coupe du Monde de Rugby de 2007 en France. Abstract - The legitimacy of allocating public funds and common resources to the organization of mega sporting events cannot be solely based on an economic impact study. The analysis should also measure the social utility that is generated, and, within the framework of a cost-benefit analysis, compare the costs of the project for the community and the benefits people derive from it in terms of social well-being. Nevertheless, there is a paradox with a strong demand for economic impact studies by public decision makers, while hardly any costs-benefit analyses exist. It is very likely that the lack of such studies has driven to inappropriate public decisions over the past years. Sometimes, economic impact studies have been used, ex post, to justify decisions made on a political level. Here we propose a legitimacy test of such an important event, illustrated through the 2007 Rugby World Cup in France.

Suggested Citation

  • Eric BARGET & Jean-Jacques GOUGUET, 2010. "L’ACCUEIL DES GRANDS eVeNEMENTS SPORTIFS : QUEL IMPACT eCONOMIQUE OU QUELLE UTILITe SOCIALE POUR LES ReGIONS ? L’EXEMPLE DE LA COUPE DU MONDE DE RUGBY 2007 EN FRANCE," Region et Developpement, Region et Developpement, LEAD, Universite du Sud - Toulon Var, vol. 31, pages 93-118.
  • Handle: RePEc:tou:journl:v:31:y:2010:p:93-118
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://regionetdeveloppement.univ-tln.fr/wp-content/uploads/10-Barget-Gouguet.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    DeVELOPPEMENT eCONOMIQUE ReGIONAL; THeORIE DE LA BASE; IMPACT eCONOMIQUE; GRANDS eVeNEMENTS SPORTIFS; COUPE DU MONDE DE RUGBY; eCONOMIE DU BIEN-eTRE; ANALYSE COÛT-BeNeFICE; MeTHODE D’eVALUATION CONTINGENTE;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R11 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Regional Economic Activity: Growth, Development, Environmental Issues, and Changes
    • R34 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Real Estate Markets, Spatial Production Analysis, and Firm Location - - - Input Demand Analysis
    • R58 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Regional Government Analysis - - - Regional Development Planning and Policy
    • L83 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Sports; Gambling; Restaurants; Recreation; Tourism
    • D70 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - General
    • I31 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - General Welfare, Well-Being

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tou:journl:v:31:y:2010:p:93-118. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christophe Van Huffel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/letlnfr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.