Games legacy: let's stop kidding ourselves

Abstract

It is 2 years since the 2012 Olympic Games took place in London, and the UK has just played host to the Commonwealth Games (Glasgow July 23–Aug 3, 2014). Both Games are a fantastic celebration of world-class athletics, and brought feel-good summers of sport to the UK. Furthermore, these events, as for many in the past, were promised to bring lasting health legacies for the general population. In the run-up to the 2012 Games, the £8·92 billion of taxpayer funding spent to host the event was partly justified by the promise of a so-called Olympic legacy, including a lasting improvement in sport and healthy living across the whole of the UK. The cost of the Commonwealth Games is not yet known, although the bidding process alone cost £6·21 million, and a similar legacy to that of the 2012 Olympics was promised for Scotland. But is there any evidence that previous Games, or other large sporting events, have delivered on these promises in host cities or countries? Investment in sporting events undoubtedly improves access to safe outdoor spaces and modern sports facilities. The Queen Elizabeth II Olympic Park—the main venue for the 2012 Olympic Games—opened to the public in April, 2014. As a result, 560 acres of parkland are now available for walking, cycling, and other outdoor pursuits. Additionally, the park is home to various sports facilities, including several gyms, an aquatic centre, velodrome, and a hockey and tennis centre. The availability of these venues will provide advantages to the elite athletes of today and tomorrow; even those living elsewhere in the UK will benefit because these venues offer the opportunity of hosting other international events. However, for most of the UK population, this resource is unlikely to affect their health. Even for people living near the park, those who are not already physically active might see few benefits because availability does not guarantee use. On a country-wide level, as part of the 2012 London Olympic legacy, £1 billion was invested in youth sports across the UK, creating new sports clubs; £150 million a year is being invested in sport for primary school pupils; and £135 million was used to support and improve local sports facilities across England. Similarly, a £10 million fund has been set aside for Glasgow 2014 Commonwealth Games legacy projects, with grants of between £10 000 and £100 000 available to create or improve places where local people can go to be active throughout Scotland. Glasgow has one of the poorest health records in Europe; the so-called Glasgow Effect shows that people living in Glasgow have mortality rates unerringly higher than the UK average—even higher than those in other previously industrial cities with similar levels of poverty, such as Liverpool and Birmingham. In Scotland, measures to combat obesity and physical inactivity are urgently needed. Studies have aimed to assess whether events such as the Olympic Games really leave a health legacy. However, the monitoring of subsequent effects on health has been criticised for focussing solely on population-level outcomes, and for only taking into account participation in organised sports—both approaches only capture a fraction of the potential impact on health. Prospective analyses of physical activity rates in host cities and countries could provide valuable information about what aspects of these events, if any, affect health behaviours in the general population. Without such analyses, all we have are empty promises with little evidence to prop them up. The Scottish Government was honest in publishing a systematic review on its website, which concludes that little evidence exists to show a legacy effect for the general population on physical activity and participation in sports. Perhaps other countries hosting such events should take a leaf out of Scotland's book, and proceed with similar candour. Events such as the Olympic, Paralympic, and Commonwealth Games offer unparalleled opportunities for people in many nations to join together to celebrate sport. But it is naïve to believe that the poor health habits of a nation can be reversed by hosting a single sporting event. Indeed, it seems unlikely that the Games could directly inspire people to take up sport, given that most spectators experience the event through their television screens. Encouraging people to use existing facilities, investing in sports centre provision nationwide, and instilling a culture of physical activity in young people are what is needed to reverse the tide of obesity and physical inactivity. For the sake of people's intellect and physical health we need to face the facts, and focus on creating a lasting health legacy that is independent of the Games.