As London quiets down, British bask in a post-Olympic glow
London 2012 gave Britain a patriotic boost – not to mention spectacular results at the medal table. Not everything, though, was as rosy as hoped.
In Pictures The Olympics: A Family Photo Album
In Pictures Week Two of the Olympics
Subscribe Today to the Monitor
That is partly because it is August, and many of the pub’s regulars are on holiday. But it is also in contrast to the flood of customers the Empress fed and refreshed during the London 2012 Games, which centered on the Olympic Park, a 30-minute stroll away.
As the London Olympics fade into memory, the Empress, like other businesses in the area – and the country – is tallying what impact the Games might have on trade in the longer term.
There is no doubt that the 2012 London Olympics were a spectacular success. Team GB enjoyed its best performance in more than a century, coming third in the medals tables. Despite a last-minute security debacle, the event was well run and peaceful, the crowds charmed by the troops who stepped up to fill the gap. There were even moments of non-sporting brilliance, foremost among them a dazzling opening ceremony.
But questions are inevitably being asked about what, if anything, all this might add up to in the longer term.
“I think the Olympics will have made a difference,” says Georgia Larcombe, the Empress’s manager. The area has been spruced up, transport links have been improved. And many visitors, both Londoners and foreign tourists, who might never have considered making the trek to this part of the capital, will now consider coming back, she reckons.
“If the area doesn’t stay as pleasant as it has been made for the Olympics we will have been let down,” she adds.
A real gold rush?
The economic legacy of the Games is the most pressing question being asked, largely because the government solicited it. In the run-up to the Games, anxious to defend the £9 billion-plus ($14 billion) bill, Prime Minister David Cameron said the Olympics would boost the economy by £13 billion over the next four years, with an uptick in international tourism, direct foreign investment, and business.
Some financial analysts have attempted to put a more precise figure on the Olympian effect on the economy. But most have limited their sums to small gains made to GDP in the current quarter.
That is because making a cost-benefit analysis of an event like this is almost impossible. It is easy enough to work out how much the Olympics cost the taxpayer, but the benefits are much harder to measure.
“It’s very difficult to measure the economic impact; there have been several sporting events studies but the results tend to be mixed,” says Bruce Morley, an economist with a special interest in sports at Bath University.
“And the Games are likely to help the economy in less tangible ways,” he adds, “like encouraging people to be more healthy and fit - things that are not included in GDP.”
The question of how the Games might stimulate the economy in East London, many parts of which have long been run-down and impoverished, is similarly vexed.
The regeneration of the area around the Olympic Park is happening independent of the Games, though they have doubtless given it a huge boost. In 2018, for example, the Cross Rail –a £14.8 billion (about $23 billion) railway link providing a faster link between East and central London – will be completed, with huge benefits for local residents and businesses.