Discussing the Post-Hosting Evaluation of a Mega Sporting Event: The Perception of Warsaw Residents toward UEFA EURO 2012

Transcription

1 Discussing the Post-Hosting Evaluation of a Mega Sporting Event: The Perception of Warsaw Residents toward UEFA EURO 2012 Abstract 1 The aim of this paper is to identify Warsaw residents perceptions and attitudes toward the UEFA EURO 2012 tournament. The investigation focused on how residents of Warsaw perceived the impacts of the tournament. A questionnaire survey was applied using a stratified sampling method to 480 residents of Warsaw. The results of the survey and ordered logit regressions show that although the residents did not perceive that the economic benefits of the tournament were spread uniformly, a large majority valued the tournament s role in promoting Warsaw as a tourist destination and enhancing the international identity of the city. Whereas residents generally displayed positive attitudes toward EURO 2012 in terms of lifting their pride and bringing the community closer together, they also noted some negative impacts of the event. The opinions expressed about the tournament depended on the age, education and income of the responders. A majority of the residents agreed that the positive impacts of EURO 2012 outweighed the negative. Keywords: UEFA EURO 2012; impact of mega events; residents` perceptions; Warsaw Authors: Justyna Garbacz 1, J. Cadima Ribeiro 2, Paulo Reis Mourão 3 1 School of Economics and Management, University of Minho, Braga, justyna.garbacz1@gmail.com 2 School of Economics and Management and NIPE, University of Minho, Braga, jcadima@eeg.uminho.pt 3 School of Economics and Management and NIPE, University of Minho, Braga, paulom@eeg.uminho.pt 1 The authors are indebted to the participants of the 2014 meeting of the Portuguese Association for Regional Development (APDR) for valuable comments on a previous version of this text that was discussed at a Parallel Session. Remaining errors are authors exclusive ones. 1

2 1. Introduction Hosting a mega sporting event, such as the UEFA European Championship in 2012, is a major challenge for a developing economy such as Poland. Public investments including the construction of football stadiums, the modernization of the transportation infrastructure and the upgrading of host city facilities were necessary to pursue EURO 2012 successfully (Humphreys and Prokopowicz, 2007; Deloitte, 2012). An event such as EURO 2012 also triggers numerous non-monetary benefits that can help compensate for the costs incurred (Jeong and Faulkner, 1996; Deccio and Baloglu, 2002; Gursoy and Kendall, 2006; Kim, Gursoy and Lee, 2006; Ritchie, Shipway and Cleeve, 2009; Gursoy et al., 2011). The tournament was expected to deliver long-term positive impacts and change the image of Poland in the international arena (Partner in Business Strategies, 2012; Deloitte, 2012). Despite the many studies produced concerning mega events (see, for example, Ritchie and Hall, 1999; Kim and Petrick, 2005; Gursoy and Kendall, 2006; Getz, 2008; Ritchie, Shipway and Cleeve, 2009; Gursoy et al., 2011), few have focused on residents perceptions collected after the events, and even fewer have developed a longitudinal approach to better understand the perceptions about mega events (Ritchie, Shipway and Cleeve, 2009; Gursoy et al., 2011). Although mega sporting events are single, short-term occurrences, they are likely to have positive long-term effects on the regions and communities that host them (Hiller, 1990; Roche, 1994; Kim, Gursoy and Lee, 2006; Gursoy et al., 2011). EURO 2012 was a very complex experience and a major celebration for the Polish people, and it engendered a raft of positive emotions and a surge of national pride (Partner in Business Strategies, 2012; Deloitte, 2012). According to Hiller (1990), supported by several other authors, namely, Ritchie, Shipway and Cleeve (2009) and Gursoy et al. (2011), a friendly and hospitable hosting community is essential to transform a mega event into an urban festival and provide a significant experience for residents and guests. Thus, Polish inhabitants knew that they could change the image of Poland abroad (Deloitte, 2012; Law, 2014). This paper uses EURO 2012 as a case study to evaluate perceptions of the importance of mega sporting events to the host regions. The study explores the economic, social and psychological impacts of hosting a mega event. The questionnaire applied was directed at Warsaw residents and contained questions about their perceptions toward the tournament, namely personal feelings and perceived economic, social and tourism impacts, among others. 2

3 This paper is organized as follows. In the second section, a review of the literature is conducted on the concept of mega events, their expected impacts and the perceptions of the host communities toward those impacts. Section three presents a summary characterization of the city of Warsaw and addresses the methodological issues in the study. In the fourth section, we present the results of the empirical application, followed by a discussion of the results obtained. Finally (in the fifth section), we present the conclusion, which includes several policy recommendations and possible paths for future research. 3

4 2. Concept of a mega event and residents perceptions of its impacts 2.1 Concept of a mega event After 1989, the Polish authorities strived to establish a role for Poland in the international arena (Deloitte). With the development of the economy, more opportunities came, allowing Poland to compete as a host country for a mega event: in this case, as one of the host countries for the UEFA EURO 2012 tournament, which also included Ukraine as a co-host. According to Roche (2000), we can define mega events as large-scale events (cultural, sporting or even commercial) that have mass popular appeal and international significance. Kim, Gursoy and Lee (2006) consider mega events as one-off and short-term events that usually generate long-term impacts on the hosting communities. These events are typically organized by a combination of national governments and international non-governmental organizations. Mills and Rosentraub (2012) identified this phenomenon as a significant national or global competition that produces extensive levels of participation and media coverage and often requires large public investments in both the event s infrastructure and the general infrastructure. Moreover, Dolles and Soderman (2008) suggested that mega sporting events bring immediate access to a global market of viewers, through which the host region can diffuse images and knowledge to people of all countries about its culture and society. The opportunity to gain extensive external visibility and promote the city or territory as a welcoming one was also emphasized by Deccio and Baloglu (2002), Kim, Gursoy and Lee (2006) and Strauf and Scherer (2010), among others. In addition, several authors have emphasized the opportunity for residents to gain access to new infrastructure (Gursoy and Kendall, 2006; Gursoy et al., 2011). Many countries often apply to host a mega event, envisaging the potential advertising, fame and benefits that could appear because of it (Ritchie, Shipway and Cleeve, 2009; Gursoy et al., 2011). As highlighted by Ritchie, Shipway and Cleeve (2009) and by Gursoy et al. (2011), for some countries, hosting a mega event means more than community pride or international recognition. Mega events are certainly an important tourist and, hence, economic asset because they both directly and indirectly attract participants and visitors to the destination (Kang and Perdue, 1994; Bramwell, 1997; Strauf and Scherer, 2010; Kaiser et al., 2013). 4

5 However, diverse studies have also concluded that mega events may generate negative socioeconomic and environmental impacts or induce a negative perception of the event s effects by the hosting population (namely related to an increase in criminality and violence, traffic congestion or overcrowding). This is the case in research conducted by Baade and Matheson (2004), Matheson (2006), Baumann et al. (2009), Marie (2010), and Campaniello (2013), among others. Referring to the specific case of hosting the EURO 2012 tournament by Poland, Humphreys and Prokopowicz (2007) gave particular attention to the potential registering of a crowding effect, while Law (2014) mainly addressed the issue of violence associated with rivalries amongst the supporters of the national teams participating in the tournament. In various studies, we also encounter the definition of a mega event first advanced by Ritchie and Hall (1999), to whom a mega event is a major one-time or recurring event of limited duration, developed primarily to enhance the awareness, appeal, and profitability of a tourism destination in the short and/or long term. In fact, sporting events that have existed for many years as well-known competitions may contribute to the promotion of a destination. In the case of urban development, Bramwell (1997, p.167) described mega events as large events of world importance and high profile, which have major impacts on the image of the host city. Hosting mega events may generate incentives for an increase in different types of crimes and violence (Marie, 2010; Campaniello, 2013; Law, 2014). Moreover, authors such as Strouhal (2007) and Wood et al. (2011) discussed the traffic problems associated with mega events, and Hiller (2000) and Matheson (2006) discussed the relationship between sporting events and the significant disruptions that can occur in the functioning of local and regional economies. 2.2 Residents perceptions of the positive and negative impacts of hosting mega events Hosting mega events brings positive and negative impacts. These impacts may appear pre-event, during or post-event (Ritchie, Shipway and Cleeve, 2009; Gursoy et al., 2011), and they may be felt by various stakeholders, including participants, local businesses and the host community. Therefore, there is a need to research the effects of mega events not only after the hosting of the event but also during and prior to its implementation. In this regard, one should keep in mind that empirical research suggests that local residents` perceptions about impacts 5

6 are likely to change over time before, during and after the hosting of the event (Kim, Gursoy and Lee, 2006; Ritchie, Shipway and Cleeve, 2009). Post-event surveys provide the most meaningful information. Receiving feedback after the event is crucial to discovering whether the event was successful. Another advantage of post-event studies is that, by reviewing the overall success or failure of the event, it is possible to determine the key issues and thus extract recommendations that can later be used to plan and manage future events (Ritchie, Shipway and Cleeve, 2009). Post-event studies provide an opportunity to establish the economic, social, and cultural benefits and the effects from the event s international exposure and to discover its true legacy and impacts. In most cases, the benefits attained tend to be lower than expected (Humphreys and Prokopowicz, 2007; Ritchie, Shipway and Cleeve, 2009; Gursoy et al., 2011). Post-event surveys provide researchers with the opportunity to evaluate the perception of the hosting community or the participants toward the event, to rate their general experience and to estimate the efficiency of the management of various aspects connected with it. The purpose of post-event studies is to identify whether the event and all of the happenings connected with it met the expectations of the participants, the hosting community and other stakeholders. Given this aim, it is common to obtain information on various features, such as whether community members perceived the event to be valuable, if they considered it worth investing time and resources on it or if they would choose to participate in a similar future event. An event can affect people in different ways, so there might be inequity in the distribution of its impacts and benefits. Hiller (1990) admitted that most studies focus on positive impacts, while negative impacts are largely hidden. Kim and Petrick (2005), in turn, referred to the reasons why those associated with mega events tend to emphasize the economic impacts and ignore the social, cultural and environmental effects, which are seen as external to the economic analysis and less tangible. Those who watch mega events often tend to be unable to shed light on the less positive factors associated with the hosting of the events. Typically, studies have focused on the following three impact areas: mass effects (primarily related to tourism impacts), long-term perspective effects (related to physical infrastructure and environmental impacts), and idiosyncratic effects (related to image enhancement and cultural impacts). Physical infrastructure is said to be a key benefit of major events (Deccio and Baloglu, 2002; Gursoy and Kendall, 2006; Getz, 2008; Gursoy et al., 2011). Physical infrastructure 6

7 comprises transportation infrastructure, the construction of stadiums and other buildings, landscape improvements and housing developments. Mega sporting events are often used as reasons to renovate the infrastructure surrounding the host location. These events can be seen as a way to spark urban regeneration if they are implemented in the poorer districts of host cities (Langen and Garcia, 2009; Ritchie, Shipway and Cleeve, 2009). Furthermore, mega events can provide many economic benefits, such as increased GDP, employment and retail opportunities (Langen, 2008; Langen and Garcia, 2009: Gursoy et al., 2011), although such benefits depend on many factors. Increased employment in the construction and retail sectors benefits the local economy as well as the quality of services provided to visitors and residents. Mega events stimulate the tourism sector and indirectly affect local businesses, services, and infrastructure (Shone and Parry, 2004; Gursoy and Kendall, 2006; Langen, 2008; Langen and Garcia, 2009; Gursoy et al., 2011; Kaiser et al., 2013). With this effect in mind, more and more European cities have focused on tourism as part of their local development strategies (Kang and Perdue, 1994; Russo and Van der Borg, 2002). Promoters should be aware that the economic impacts from mega events vary from location to location and across cities, regions and countries and, further, that the tourism impact tends to be in part inversely dependent on the current status of the tourism destination (Kaiser et al., 2013). Moreover, in addition to providing some economic benefits, mega events may create a new image or even change pre-existing negative opinions about a city or territory (Getz, 1992; Deccio and Baloglu, 2002; Kim, Gursoy and Lee, 2006; Strauf and Scherer, 2010; Gursoy et al., 2011). Even after a mega event, long-lasting financial growth is possible through good management of a destination s image, which may bring new businesses, investments and tourists (Chalip, 2004; Gursoy and Kendall, 2006; Strauf and Scherer, 2010). Although mega sporting events are usually single, short-term occurrences, they are likely to have long-term effects for the regions and communities that host them (Hiller 1990; Roche, 1994; Langen and Garcia, 2009; Ritchie, Shipway and Cleeve, 2009; Kaiser et al., 2013). The positive impacts may have a lasting effect on tourism in the local community (Kang and Perdue, 1994; Strauf and Scherer, 2010; Gursoy et al., 2011; Kaiser et al., 2013), provide opportunities for increased international publicity and recognition (Jeong and Faulkner, 1996; Deccio and Baloglu, 2002; Gursoy and Kendall, 2006; Langen and Garcia, 2009) or improve the local community`s quality of life (Goeldner and Long, 1987; Kim and Petrick, 2005; Ritchie, Shipway and Cleeve, 2009). 7

8 Less attention has been paid to cultural impacts, such as the development of social interactions and the preservation of traditions, community values and the interests of local residents (Hall, 1992; Ritchie and Hall, 1999; Deccio and Baloglu, 2002; Waitt, 2003; Kim, Gursoy and Lee, 2006; Ritchie, Shipway and Cleeve, 2009). Long-term social benefits may be delivered to the hosting community through the proper planning and promotion of events, such as the enhancement of community spirit and pride, the promotion of cooperation and leadership within the community, the strengthening of support for local cultural traditions or the development of greater cross-cultural understanding (Getz, 1992; Gursoy and Kendall, 2006; Kim, Gursoy and Lee, 2006; Ritchie, Shipway and Cleeve, 2009). However, as noted previously, the same way that mega events can generate positive impacts, they are also likely to cause negative impacts of a different nature, and, as highlighted by Humphreys and Prokopowicz (2007) regarding the application made by Poland and Ukraine to host the EURO 2012 tournament, the final global result may be that the total benefits (monetary and non-monetary) are unable to compensate for the total costs (monetary and non-monetary). While Humphreys and Prokopowicz (2007) emphasized the monetary cost to Poland for hosting the championship, the consultancy company Deloitte (2012), in a report commissioned by the host cities, highlighted the long-term benefits that could be provided by the event regarding the external promotion of the country and the investment made in terms of sports facilities and infrastructure. Law (2014) focused on the opportunity the event represented to develop a cathartic effect, allowing Polish and Ukrainian citizens to strengthen the image of their countries as embracing the ideals, tastes and values of those of the European culture and to show feelings of pride by successfully organizing the tournament and acting as enjoyable hosts for the visitors (supporters). Although many studies have been conducted on mega events (see, for example, Ritchie and Hall, 1999; Gursoy and Kendall, 2006; Kim, Gursoy and Lee, 2006; Getz, 2008; Ritchie, Shipway and Cleeve, 2009; Gursoy et al., 2011), few have focused on the residents perceptions, and even fewer have developed a longitudinal approach to better understand the phenomenon (Kim, Gursoy and Lee, 2006; Ritchie, Shipway and Cleeve, 2009). In this regard, one must admit that the residents` attitudes and support for the hosting of a certain mega event may vary over time for various reasons (Ritchie and Hall, 1999; Kim, Gursoy and Lee, 2006). 8

9 Gursoy and Kendall (2006) proposed a model that suggests that the support for the hosting of mega events is influenced by the residents` perception of the potential costs and benefits. This approach to the issue is retained and underscored by Gursoy et al. (2011) in research undertaken to examine the impacts of the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing. Their model indicated that the perceived costs and benefits are in turn influenced by the residents concern about their community, their emotional attachment to the community, the degree to which they retain an egocentric attitude about their community and their amount of environmental sensitivity (Gursoy and Kendall, 2006). According to Gursoy and Kendall (2006) and Gursoy et al. (2011), there is a direct, positive relationship between the perceived benefits and support for mega events. Those authors results confirmed the previous study of Deccio and Baloglu (2002), which suggested that residents who were highly attached to their community were more likely to view mega events as creating benefits for the local community. In fact, residents who are seriously concerned with community matters are likely to see mega events as generating profound longterm impacts on their communities, both positive and negative. The results also indicated that egocentric values are connected with high perceptions of costs and benefits, that is, for residents endowed with higher egocentric values, the perceptions of costs tended to be more significant than the perception of benefits (Gursoy and Kendall, 2006). Residents perceptions of mega events are quite complex (Kim, Gursoy and Lee, 2006). One can expect that attitudes may differ according to gender or age (Mason and Cheyne, 2000; Kim and Petrick, 2005), social status (Ritchie, Shipway and Cleeve, 2009), and education, occupation or income (Waitt, 2003). Even so, some of the cited studies suggested that the differences in attitudes can best be attributed to the heterogeneity of urban communities rather than demographic variables (Konstantaki and Wickens, 2010). We can summarize the main dimensions affecting residents perceptions of hosting a mega event into three primary areas: - Dimensions primarily affected by crowd movements, which are related to assistance and tourism flows (Strauf and Scherer, 2010; Kaiser et al., 2013); - Dimensions particularly connected with a medium and long-term perspective, which are related to economic and social changes (increase in the local GDP or local 9

10 employment, following Deccio and Baloglu, 2002; Getz, 2008; Ritchie, Shipway and Cleeve, 2009; Gursoy et al., 2011); and - Dimensions identified with egocentric values, such as an increase in pride for hosting such a significant event or the globalization of local brands (Getz, 1992; Kim, Gursoy and Lee, 2006). Considering both the positive and negative impacts (monetary and non-monetary) of hosting a mega event and the way a mega event was perceived by the hosting community, we decided to ask the residents of Warsaw about the impacts of hosting the EURO 2012 tournament. The results obtained are presented in the next section. There, we present the methodological and empirical efforts to evaluate how these dimensions were valued by Warsaw residents when they were asked about their overall satisfaction with the UEFA EURO 2012 tournament. 10

11 3. Preliminary notes on the research methodology how the Euro 2012 tournament transformed the Polish economy Warsaw is the capital of Poland, and it is also the most populous Polish city, with an estimated population of 1,715,517 in Warsaw is the 9 th most populous city in the European Union. However, a large portion of the actual population is comprised of residents who are not formally registered as Warsaw inhabitants. The estimated total number of people spending the night in the city is approximately million. In addition, approximately 500,000 people commute to Warsaw for work; therefore, we can estimate that during the day, there are million people within the city limits. Warsaw s emerging economy has been noticed globally, regionally, and nationally, and it was recently ranked as the 7th best emerging market. Moreover, in 2011, Warsaw produced 13% of Poland's national income, and the GDP per capita in Warsaw was 26,335. In addition, according to official figures, the unemployment rate is one of the lowest in Poland at 3.5% as calculated by the GUS, the Central Statistical Office. The population of Warsaw is very diverse in terms of age, educational achievement and social class, indicating that we needed to be careful and precise when formulating a questionnaire and choosing a sample to examine the perceptions of residents toward the EURO 2012 tournament. Warsaw was chosen as one of the four Polish hosting cities for the EURO 2012 tournament. The others were Poznan, Gdansk and Wroclaw. The remaining cities that hosted the tournament were located in Ukraine, the co-host country. The four Polish cities spent approximately PLN 195 million (Polish currency) to organize the EURO 2012 tournament. Of the amount spent, based on figures calculated by Deloitte (2012), PLN 48 million were received from UEFA and sponsors. The same consultancy company estimated that approximately PLN 1.5 billion should have been spent by tourists in the host cities. Warsaw s stadium was the largest stadium built for the tournament (it was one of the newly created football arenas) and can hold 58,000 people. The others are smaller and can accommodate approximately 40,000 spectators. In addition to building the stadium, following UEFA`s requirements for host countries and cities, Warsaw had to build or upgrade its transportation infrastructure, including the 11

12 airport and high speed motorways connecting the other Polish hosting cities and Ukraine, constructing or renovating several four- and five-star hotels, and establishing an appropriate safety structure for the participants in the tournament and spectators (Humpreys and Prokopowicz, 2007; Deloitte, 2012). By the time of the championship, not all of the planned infrastructure improvements, primarily roads, were totally finished. In this regard, especially regarding the transportation network, one should keep in mind that hosting the EURO 2012 tournament was not the only reason to build or upgrade the transportation network, as Poland s road infrastructure had long been recognized as clearly insufficient for the common needs of the country, as noted by Humpreys and Prokopowicz (2007). Due to conditions resulting from the chosen research methodology, the survey was conducted on paper and presented to responders personally in public places, such as schools, universities, bus and train stations and shopping centers. The survey was applied between April and July 2013, that is, approximately one year after the hosting of the tournament. The full questionnaire can be found in the Appendix. The initial section of the questionnaire contains three basic closed questions about awareness and level of involvement in the EURO 2012 tournament. The core of the survey concerns the residents perception of and relationship with the EURO 2012 tournament in terms of its economic, social and cultural impacts. To examine this issue, closed answers were provided using a 5-point Likert scale. We opted not to use a don t know/ no answer alternative to the 5-point Likert scale for the reasons noted by Riphahn and Serfling (2002) and Kroh (2004), namely the bias produced when a survey is conducted on the street and when it is focused on idiosyncratic issues. All of the questions were designed in such a way to enable answers according to a 5-point scale that contained replies including strongly disagree/disagree/neutral/agree/strongly agree. An extensive list of the mega-event impacts noted in the literature review, such as economic and environmental impacts, increases in tourism and image enhancement or cultural issues, provided a rich basis on which to design the questionnaire for use with residents (Deccio and Baloglu, 2002; Kim, Gursoy and Lee, 2006; Gursoy and Kendall, 2006; Gursoy et al., 2011; Langen and Garcia, 2009, Strauf and Scherer, 2010). To ensure the clearest view of the perception of EURO 2012 and to facilitate comprehension of the survey, the questionnaire initially focuses on economic and tourism impacts (namely, questions 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.5 and 1.10), which are generally recognized effects 12

13 of mega sporting events (Langen, 2008; Kaiser et al., 2013). The questions raised concerns about economic benefits, such as employment opportunities or tourism promotion and image enhancement issues. The second section (for instance, questions 1.12 and 1.13) concerns matters connected with culture, such as an increase in cultural capital resulting in civic and national pride for hosting such a prestigious event, as suggested by Swann (2001). This component of the survey was designed using several closed questions and, as in the previous section, the respondents were asked to indicate their degree of agreement on a 5-point Likert scale. This section concerned the personal feelings and judgments of Warsaw residents regarding EURO Personal judgments were measured by asking questions about the residents personal feelings regarding EURO 2012, such as, for example, whether they feel more proud of being Warsaw residents after hosting the tournament or whether the tournament brought the community closer together. However, mega sporting events may also cause negative impacts. The residents of Warsaw could have perceived the EURO 2012 tournament more dimly, and it was important to show this side of the event as well. The possibility of decreased street safety, overcrowding, congestion, higher prices and a lack of ticket availability could drive some inhabitants to prefer avoiding the host region. Therefore, to identify whether this effect had taken place and the related perceptions of the residents, it was necessary to include questions concerning these factors. The third section of the questionnaire (questions ) contained socio-demographic questions, such as gender, age, education, and employment status. Keeping in mind the main goal of the study, that is, to obtain an overall qualitative evaluation of the impacts perceived by residents of hosting the UEFA EURO 2012 tournament and the nature of the sample used in the survey, we avoided including questions that addressed technical and financial (budget) issues. Concerns about the time it took to complete the questionnaire also recommended shortening it as much as possible (Kim et al., 2006; Gursoy et al., 2011). The research methodology required selecting the sample size prior to choosing the method of sampling. Decisions about sample size must be taken in light of the number of 13

14 elements in the population, its variety and limitations such as cost and the time required to conduct the survey (Gembremedin and Tweeten, 1994). Due to restraints such as cost and time limitations and the chosen research methodology, the sample size that it was possible to obtain was 480, which is 0.02% of the population of interest, with a sample error of 4.5%. To fulfill the objectives of the study, it was important to choose an appropriate sampling method. The data were collected from responders chosen by a (proportionate) stratified random sampling design questionnaire, which was based on the geographic areas of Warsaw (see Table A1, at Appendix). A similar approach to sampling was presented in several other studies. In Chain (2009), Residents perceptions of the 2010 FIFA World Cup: a case study of a suburb in Cape Town, South Africa, the sample was selected using the stratified random sampling method and was also based on geographic area. The exact sampling method, proportionate stratified random sampling, was chosen by Yong (2006) to examine residents perceptions in his paper on Government and residents perception towards the impacts of a mega event: the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games. Statistical methods of random sampling allow an appropriate number of responders to be selected from the population. According to Zikmund (2003), the method of stratified sampling is more effective than simple random sampling because there is a better probability of minimizing sample error. Other authors, such as Cooper and Schindler (1998), note that stratified random sampling increases statistical efficiency and enables different research methods to be used in different strata. A sample taken according to this method is more precise and reflects the population on the basis of the criteria used for stratification, in this case, geographic area. Thus, the chosen method used in this study is proportionate stratified sampling, which means that the responders were chosen from strata in exact proportion to their representation in the population. The merit of utilizing this type of sampling is that the results are selfweighted (Gembremedin and Tweeten, 1994). Furthermore, if the sample, as a subset of the population, is selected properly according to the rules of statistics, then we are able to deduce conclusions that are applicable to the population being studied. 14

15 All of the variables determined from the answers to our survey were first examined using detailed descriptive statistics, such as mean, mode, standard deviation and minimum and maximum values. We discuss these statistics in section 4. To fully evaluate the perceptions of Warsaw residents toward EURO 2012 and its impacts on society, simply conducting a descriptive statistical analysis is not sufficient. Thus, we opted to estimate Ordered Logistic Regressions (OLR), also called the ordered logit model. This estimate is a regression based on a logistic regression model that applies to ordinal dependent variables. The model is usually estimated using maximum likelihood. Our basic ordered logistic probability function has the following shape: Ln(θi) = Xi β +ε (1) where: θi = prob (score i)/prob (score > i) or θi = prob (score i)/(1 prob(score i); β = the vector of regression coefficients that we wish to estimate; and X = the vector of explanatory variables observed/responded to by the i-th respondent; ε = the error term. The OLR model applies to data that consider the proportional odds assumption. This assumption means that the coefficients that describe the relationship between, for instance, the lowest of all of the higher categories of the response variable are the same as those that describe the relationship between the next lowest categories of all of the higher categories. Examples of multiple ordered response categories embrace, for example, bond ratings, levels of state spending on government programs (high, medium, or low), or, in this case, opinion surveys with responses ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree (Greene, 2003). The next section provides our OLR results. 15

16 4. Empirical results 4.1 Some descriptive comments on the results As previously noted, all of the variables/answers were first examined considering their categorical nature and using the proper detailed descriptive statistics such as mean, mode, first quartile, mean, third quartile, standard deviation and minimum and maximum values. Table 1 shows the descriptive statistics for these variables, including the primary dependent variable, Overall Satisfaction with EURO [Insert here Table 1] For each variable, the minimum and maximum values overlap with extreme answers. Because of different response distributions for the variables Awareness, Involvement, Attendance, Age, Gender, Education, Employment and Income, these variables were analyzed separately. In the case of the three first variables, Awareness, with a mode of 1, and Involvement and Attendance, with means of 2.53 and 0.14, respectively, the results indicate that all of the respondents were aware that Warsaw was hosting EURO 2012, they mainly saw the games through the TV broadcasts and the vast majority did not attend any game in a stadium. The largest standard deviation was observed for the variable Involvement (2.112) and the lowest, as expected, was for the variable Awareness (0.000). Analyzing the demographic variables, we can conclude that the sample shows a slight dominance of females, and most of the sample was years old, attained secondary or higher education, earned in the range of per month and worked in retail and services. The variable Employment had the highest standard deviation (1.951), followed by the variables Age (0.911), Income (0.906), Education (0.651) and Gender (0.500). Taking into account other variables that had the same response distribution -- from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5) -- the highest means, 4.34 and 4.13, appeared for Tourism and InterIdentity, respectively. This result means that in this sample, the respondents were more positive and more often agreed or strongly agreed that EURO 2012 promoted 16

17 Warsaw as a tourism destination and enhanced Warsaw s international identity. The variable IncomeIncrease had the lowest mean, at 2.12; thus, Warsaw residents disagreed that EURO 2012 increased or would increase their family/personal income. Most of the variables had a mode of 4. The exceptions were Community, with a mode of 3, and Crime, Overcrowding, Tranquility, Industry and IncomeIncrease, with modes of 2. The highest standard deviations were observed for the variables Industry (1.118), Traffic (1.069), Roads (1.045) and Tranquility (1.016), and the lowest was for Tourism, The remaining variables ranged from to Empirical results on the dimensions influencing Warsaw residents perceptions of EURO 2012 Because conducting a descriptive statistic and qualitative analysis to fully evaluate the perception of Warsaw residents toward EURO 2012 and its impacts on society was not sufficient, a more robust approach was undertaken. Therefore, we estimated Ordered Logistic Regressions (OLR). As noted previously, the model is usually estimated using maximum likelihood. To evaluate the overall satisfaction of the respondents, we considered the responses provided to the question, Do the overall positive impacts of EURO 2012 outweigh its negative impacts? The relevance of analyzing the net overall impacts of mega-events is well discussed at Hiller and Wanner (2011) or Prayag et al. (2013). In sum, this question directs respondents to a clear answer related to the overall perception, avoiding the particular bias of discussing sector impacts. We previously used the full set of explanatory variables. However, after the convenience tests (Pearson chi-square and Intraclass Correlation Coefficients ), we were not able to reject the null hypothesis of no statistical association between seventeen omitted explanatory variables and our dependent variable ( Overall ). Testing the reliability of our survey data, we got a Cronbach s Alpha (Scale reliability coefficient) of Full details are available upon request. Hence, considering equation (1) from the Methodology section, the established statistical model is given by equation (2): 17

18 Overall = X i β + ε i, (2) The final vector X comprises the following variables: - Recognition of more capacity so that Warsaw residents can attend mega events; - Recognition of Warsaw s promotion as a tourism destination; - Recognition of higher levels of crime in Warsaw due to EURO 2012; - Recognition of an increase in employment opportunities; - Recognition of improvements in road conditions; - Recognition of Warsaw s promotion in the international media; - Recognition of an increase in Warsaw residents pride; and - Educational level. Table 2 shows the results we obtained after estimating equation (2). 18

19 Table 2 Ordered Logit results (year: 2012) Overall Overall Overall Overall Overall Overall Overall satisfaction satisfaction satisfaction satisfaction satisfaction satisfaction satisfaction (age<=45 (age>45 (income<=1000 (income>1000 (gender=fema (gender=male years) years) euros monthly euros monthly earned) earned) Attendance 0.837*** 0.963*** ** 1.039** *** (0.292) (0.358) (0.514) (0.366) (0.530) (0.440) (0.417) Tourism 0.728*** 0.808*** *** 1.273*** *** (0.167) (0.197) (0.337) (0.189) (0.286) (0.256) (0.236) Crime ** * ** (0.121) (0.149) (0.214) (0.139) (0.255) (0.181) (0.171) Employment 0.199* 0.230* ** (0.119) (0.136) (0.514) (0.135) (0.290) (0.167) (0.179) Roads 0.281*** 0.342*** * 0.465** *** (0.099) (0.113) (0.215) (0.115) (0.212) (0.142) (0.146) Diffusion of 0.622*** 0.730*** *** *** 0.339* Warsaw identity (0.146) (0.173) (0.294) (0.175) (0.286) (0.223) (0.197) Pride 0.695*** 0.513*** 1.145*** 0.813*** *** 0.792*** (0.134) (0.157) (0.266) (0.159) (0.275) (0.181) (0.213) Education 0.244* 0.431** * level (0.145) (0.186) (0.290) (0.163) (0.396) (0.202) (0.216) Number of observations

20 LR Chi (Prob>Chi2) (0.000) (0.000) (0.000) (0.000) (0.000) (0.000) (0.000) Pseudo R Log likelihood Notes: *: significant at 10% level; **: significant at 5% level; ***: significant at 1% level. Standard errors between brackets. Examining Table 2, we observe (in the first column) that the level of overall satisfaction of the respondents was positively associated with higher levels of satisfaction and was especially related to the mass effects. These effects were particularly due to the impacts of attendance and higher levels of satisfaction with the dimension of tourism impacts. As expected, the decrease in feelings of safety reduced the overall satisfaction level (which agrees with Humphreys and Prokopowicz, 2007). Additionally, we observe that the respondents recognized the importance of the investments associated with EURO 2012: we observe (Table 2, first column) that a higher perception of an increase in employment opportunities and a higher awareness of investments in roads are statistically significantly associated with higher levels of overall satisfaction. For instance, if a respondent increased his score on national roads transformation by one point (Question 1.8), his ordered log-odds of being in a higher category of overall satisfaction would increase by when the other explicative variables were held constant. In Table 2, we also find that the impact of higher levels of pride and the impact of Warsaw s diffusion on the respondents are statistically associated with higher categories of overall satisfaction. Finally, the respondents characterized by a higher degree of education tended to be more aware of a positive overall impact of EURO 2012 on Warsaw s economy. Comparing the estimated coefficients for all of the respondents, we observe that the dimensions related to the crowds impact had more positive and statistically significant values. If a respondent increased his score on the impact of attendance (/tourism) by one point (Questions 1.3 and 1.5), his ordered log-odds of being in a higher category of overall satisfaction would increase by (/0.728) when the other explicative variables were held 20

21 constant. Conversely, the estimated coefficient for the perception of the impact on Polish employment had the least statistically significant positive value. As noted previously, the perception of a decrease in safety ( crime ) led to a reduction in overall satisfaction - if a respondent increased his score on crime s impact by one point (Question 1.12, variable crime), his ordered log-odds of being in a higher category of overall satisfaction were reduced by when the other explicative variables were held constant. To more deeply explore the perceptions of Warsaw residents, some sub-samples were created based on the relevance placed in the literature on the dimensions of age, income and gender. Columns 2-7 in Table 2 present Ordered Logit results depending on the age, income and gender of the responders. We observe (Table 2, second column) that, for residents with ages equal to or less than 45 years, a higher perception of an increase in employment opportunities and a higher awareness of investment in roads are statistically and significantly associated with higher levels of overall satisfaction. If a respondent from this group increased his score on national road transformation by one point, his ordered log-odds of being in a higher category of overall satisfaction would increase by when the other explicative variables were held constant. This sub-sample also shows that the impact of higher levels of pride and the impact of Warsaw s diffusion on the respondents were statistically associated with higher levels of overall satisfaction (following the study of Gursoy et al., 2011). Moreover, if a respondent increased his score for the impact of attendance (/tourism) by one point, his ordered log-odds of being in a higher category of overall satisfaction would increase by (/0.808) when the other explicative variables were held constant. Similar to the general sample, in the group of residents aged equal to or less than 45 years, a decrease in feelings of safety (variable Crime ) reduced the overall satisfaction (converging with the findings of Baade and Matheson, 2004, Campaniello, 2013, and Law, 2014). If a respondent increased his score for the impact of crime by one point, his ordered log-odds of being in a higher category of overall satisfaction would be reduced by when the other explicative variables were held constant. Respondents characterized by a higher degree of education (and age equal to or less than 45 years) tended to be more aware of a positive overall impact of Euro 2012 on Warsaw s economy (following Ritchie et al., 2009). 21

22 Considering the sub-sample with ages higher than 46 years (third column), only the impact of pride was statistically significant. In this case, if a respondent increased his score by one point, his ordered log-odds of being in a higher category of overall satisfaction would increase by when the other explicative variables were held constant. There were some differences in overall satisfaction between residents with incomes equal to or less than 1000 euros and those earning more than 1000 euros (columns 4 and 5). The variables Attendance and Tourism were both statistically significant; however, an increase in employment opportunities was only statistically significantly associated with higher levels of overall satisfaction in the case of residents who earned more than 1000 euros (column 5), which seems to follow Murphy (1981). If a respondent from this sub-sample increased his score for employment impact by one point, his ordered log-odds of being in a higher category of overall satisfaction would increase by when the other explicative variables were held constant. However, higher levels of impact for pride and Warsaw s diffusion were only statistically significant with higher categories of overall satisfaction in the case of respondents with incomes equal to or less than 1000 euros (column 4). If a respondent increased his score on pride impact (/Warsaw diffusion s impact) by one point, his ordered log-odds of being in a higher category of overall satisfaction would increase by (/0.678) when the other explicative variables were held constant. The last two columns of Table 2 present Ordered Logit results depending on gender. These two sub-samples also differed in the case of overall satisfaction (Kim and Petrick, 2005; Jeong and Faulkner, 1996). We observe that the dimensions related to the crowds impact had the most positive and statistically significant values for males (column 7), while for females, there were not as many statistically significant dimensions (column 6). If a male respondent increased his score on attendance impact (/tourism s impact) by one point, his ordered log-odds of being in a higher category of overall satisfaction would increase by (/1.120) when the other explicative variables were held constant. Moreover, the male respondents recognized the importance of the investments associated with Euro if a respondent increased his score on national road transformation by one point, his ordered logodds of being in a higher category of overall satisfaction would increase by when the other explicative variables were held constant. 22

23 However, for females, the variables Crime, Diffusion of Warsaw identity and Educational level were significant (column 6). If a female respondent increased her score for the impact of crime by one point, her ordered log-odds of being in a higher category of overall satisfaction were reduced by when the other explicative variables were held constant. For females, the impact of Warsaw s diffusion had the most positive and statistically significant value (also significant for males, but not with as positive a value). Additionally, female respondents with higher education levels tended to be more aware of a positive impact of EURO 2012 on Warsaw s economy. Analyzing the Ordered Logit results, we can conclude that the perception of Warsaw s residents toward EURO 2012 depended on their age, income and gender. Residents with an income equal to or less than 1000 euros appreciated that the tournament increased their pride in being a Warsaw inhabitant and in Warsaw s international identity, while respondents who earned more drew more attention to employment opportunities. Moreover, for females, concerns about safety were more important than investments in roads, which were more relevant for males. 4.3 Discussion Following the daily life of Poland, we know that the idea of hosting an international mega event was an issue that had been discussed publicly for a long time. Poland wanted to enter the international arena, and the government tried extremely hard to assure UEFA that the country was capable of hosting the tournament. Poland s government and people knew that organizing the tournament could increase the status and prestige of Poland abroad, as noted in the report produced by Deloitte (2012) that was commissioned by Poland s host cities. In other words, hosting an international event such as the EURO championship would give Poland the opportunity to present a modern, hospitable country to the world (Deloitte, 2012; Law, 2014), and, according to the evidence, the country was successful in doing so (Deloitte, 2012; Partner in Business Strategies, 2012). Thus, the results obtained from our empirical research are consistent with the empirical literature regarding residents` perceptions about the impact of mega events (Deccio and Baloglu, 2002; Kim, Gursoy and Lee, 2006; Strauf and Scherer, 2010) and with Poland s goal of presenting itself as a modern society that can successfully host such events. The results obtained are also in line with those of PBS (Partner in Business Strategies, 2012) from 23

24 Warsaw in June 2012 that showed that 93% of the residents believed the tournament would help to enhance Poland s image, and 72% believed that the preparations for hosting the tournament would contribute to the country s economic development. This last result is of particular interest because not all of the planned infrastructure improvements had been finished by the time of the tournament. Data regarding tourist visits cited by Deloitte (2012) also tell us that the four Polish cities that hosted the tournament were visited by 685,000 foreign tourists and approximately 750,000 national supporters. Further, once again following the results from PBS, the organization of the tournament in Poland received a positive evaluation of 85%, which was better than that received for EURO 2008 hosted by Austria and Switzerland. These results do not tell us that the costs of the event were fully covered in financial terms, which was the major concern of Humphreys and Prokopowicz (2007). Nonetheless, the results do question the claim of those authors that there was no room to inquire whether Poland and Ukraine should go ahead with their applications to host the EURO 2012 tournament. On the contrary, based on the report produced by Deloitte (2012), large long-term benefits were expected because of the worldwide promotion of the countries and the returns the countries would eventually receive from their investments in sporting facilities and especially in their general infrastructure. Of course, one should not forget that Deloitte was hired as a consultant for the study. Our results are also in line with those of Law (2014) regarding the opportunity the event represented to allow Poland and Ukraine to strengthen their images as countries that embrace the ideals, tastes and values of European culture and to demonstrate feelings of pride by successfully hosting the tournament for visitors. In this regard, the data from our survey, which were tested using an ordered logit model, confirmed the evaluation obtained a few months earlier from a survey conducted by Partner in Business Strategies (2012) during the tournament. This result is particularly notable because perceptions about the impacts of mega events tend to change over time (Kim, Gursoy and Lee, 2006; Ritchie, Shipway and Cleeve, 2009) and, as time goes by, the evaluations tend to be less passionate and more able to establish the real impacts of the events, whether material or immaterial. The willingness to host a similar future mega event expressed in our data is perhaps the most valuable indication we can obtain from Warsaw residents regarding their perceived the costs and benefits of hosting the UEFA EURO 2012 tournament. 24