Негативное влияние Олимпиады Сочи 2014 на экономику региона

• Номер работы:
  279996
• Раздел:
  Все работы   →   Магистерские работы   →   Управление персоналом (Менеджмент)
• Год добавления:
  15.04.2014 г.
• Объем работы:
  50 стр.
• Содержание:
  1. Introduction 4
  1.1 Background 4
  1.2 Problem Discussion 4
  1.3 Purpose 5
  1.4 Disposition 6
  1.5 Literature Review 6
  2. Case study of negative impact of the Olympics in Sochi on the regional economy 13
  2.1 Characteristic of Winter Olympics 2014 in Sochi 13
  2.2 Economic impact of the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics to local economy 15
  2.3 Changes in the labor market of Sochi and the Krasnodar region 20
  2.4 Changes in gross regional product and the ?nancial system of the Krasnodar region 26
  2.5 An unrecoverable blow to Sochi’s potential as a resort 28
  2.6 A Blow to Sochi’s Economy and Threat to Interethnic Peace 30
  2.7 The cost of hosting winter Olympics. Corruption and kickbacks 31
  3. Conclusions 35
  List of references 38
  Appendices 48
  
  
• Выдержка из работы:
  Некоторые тезисы из работы по теме Негативное влияние Олимпиады Сочи 2014 на экономику региона
  1. Introduction
  
  1.1 Background
  
  The city of Sochi in Krasnodar Krai region in the Russian Federation was se-lected on 04 July 2007 to host the XXII Olympic Winter Games and XI Paralympic Winter Games in 2014. Russia will be hosting the Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games (WOPG) for the first time in its history, including the history of the former Soviet Union3. The selection of Sochi took place after eight years of a steady eco-nomic growth in the Russian economy that rebounded from the 1998 economic crisis at the average rate of 6.8% during 1999-2006, and after an unsuccessful bid for hosting the 2002 Winter Olympics when the Sochi’s candidacy had not been even shortlisted [Regnum, 2007].
  
  1.2 Problem Discussion
  
  Global mega-events such as the Olympic Games, the FIFA World Cup or the Expo World"s Fair potentially have a profound and long-lasting effect on the econo-my of the host cities [Clark 2008]. Within a relatively short period of time, urban economies experience the influx of a disproportionate share of capital investment and consumption. By some estimates, the investment compression caused by the Olympic Games accelerates the urban development of the host city by up to 10 years [Preuss 2004b]. For the Chicago Olympic Games in 2016, studies forecast an economic impact in excess of USD 22 billion for the state of Illinois over 11 years, of which USD 13.7 billion are expected to be realised by the City of Chicago alone [Tootelian and Varshney 2008]. It is this economic boost which entices cities to bid for hosting the Olympic Games, along with the prospect of getting numerous infrastructural upgrades and a sparkling international image virtually en passant [Toohey and Veal 2007].
  ...........................
  2.2 Economic impact of the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics to local economy
  
  The Games organizers have been focused on developing the city of Sochi and the regional economy from the very beginning of the Olympic project. At the bid-ding stage, Sochi 2014’s plans for the Games were developed in synergy with the long–term development plans for the city. Thanks to the Games, the regional summer resort of Sochi will become a world-class multi-purpose sports center and a year–round business and tourist center with a contemporary social, transport, telecommunications and energy infrastructure. Games are a catalyst for the development of the Krasnodar region as a whole, leading to:
  ? increase in investment attractiveness;
  ? growth in business activity;
  ? creation of a modern sports cluster of federal signi?cance;
  ? creation of new jobs;
  ? development of transport infrastructure.
  To estimate costs and benefits of hosting the 2014 WOPG in Sochi we em-ployed the five-account approach elaborated by Shaffer, Greer, and Mauboules (2003) that takes account of different impacts on the economy, society and na-ture. This approach includes the following accounts (areas of impact) [Shaffer et al., 2003]:
  .................