Politics and the London 2012 Olympics
The (in)security Games
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4035771 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Barrie Houlihan (0000-0003-0701-6681, Norwegian School of Sport Sciences), R Giulianotti (0000-0002-7561-3755, Loughborough University) |
| Year | 2012 |
| Volume | 88 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 701-717 |
| Publication date | 2012-07-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International Affairs (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0020-5850 • E-ISSN: 1468-2346 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1468-2346.2012.01097.x |
| OpenAlex | W2054791278 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 20 |
This article traces the emergence of security at the Olympic Games as a key concern of host governments and of the Olympic movement and analyses the implications of this heightened concern for the delivery of the Games, the local host community and for national security policy. It is argued that the Olympic Games, as a high profile media event, provide an increasingly attractive political opportunity structure for a range of political actors—an attraction that is intensified when the Games are held in a world city such as London. Since the 9/11 attacks in New York there has been a sharp increase in security expenditure for the Olympic Games, arguably significantly out of proportion to the likely risk. The cost of security has risen from approximately $108 million in 1996 (Atlanta) to an estimated $1.99 billion in 2012 (London). It is argued that the period since 2001 has been characterized by hyper-insecurity and a culture of intense risk aversion based not on probability but on the possibility of attack. Among the consequences of this development is a desensitization of host nations to the increased securitization of their cities. It is also argued that the impact on the local UK host community of Newham will be significant not only as a result of the intense level of policing, but also owing to the redevelopment associated with the Games and the use of the surveillance infrastructure to create a virtual gated community in the post-Games athletes' village. The article concludes by discussing some of the longer-term implications of the increased securitization of the Olympic Games, including the normalization of intense surveillance, the further encroachment on civil liberties and the growing tension between the values espoused by the Olympic movement and the reality of a successful delivery of the Games
Atlanta · Business · Geography · Metropolitan area · National security · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Securitization · Sociology · Terrorism · Finance · Law · Public Administration · Sport and Mega-Event Impacts · Sports, Gender, and Society · Travel-related health issues
Safe-City-Ai
Liquid London
Sport mega-events and security
Of Mechanisms and Myths
Not that wide open
Introduction
Scoring big
Euro 2012, the ‘civilizational leap’ and the ‘supporters United’ programme
Sport and UK soft power
The Beijing 2008 Olympics
The Olympics and Elite Sport Policy
Sports Fandom in the Risk Society
In Conclusion, What Next for the Olympic Cities
Enhancing the Contribution of Sport to the Sustainable Development Goals
Sport, soft disempowerment and the 1966 Fifa World Cup
Spatial scale, time and process in mega-events
Sport Mega-Events and Public Opposition
For me, the most important issue is the games themselves’
Soldiering By Consent” and Military–Civil Relations
Nothing Will Be the Same Again After the Stade de France Attack
| Unique citing works | 20 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,54 |
| Citation span | 2013 - 2026 (14) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 16 |