The Impact of 2008 Beijing Olympic Games on City’s Employment

Photos: Beijing Organising Committee for the Games of the XXIX Olympiad

University of Malmö, Sweden Sustainable Urban Management Course Assignment Author: Minyu Gao Tutor: Dr. Peter Parker Submitted on 8th Jan 2012(final)

Mega events always serve as significant catalysts for labor market prosperity in hosting cities. Recognizing the effects of Olympic Games on employment in hosting cities is essential to assess the comprehensive impact of the Games. Post-Olympic periods are particularly important while little study has been done with regard to employment condition after 2008 Beijing Olympic Games. This study fills the gap and emphasizing post-Game employment in comparison to four different cities. Key words: mega events, Olympic Games, employment

Introduction Sustainable development focuses on economic, social and environmental aspects. Employment has been chosen as an entry point of understanding the Olympic Effect socially and economically. UN Economic and Social Council agreed that employment creation contributes to poverty reduction and economic prosperity, which clearly strengthens the first two aspects (UN Economic and Social Council 2006). Apparently, employment exerts strong influence on both economic and social dimensions. Job creation stimulates consumption and become an important vane in economy. It helps reduce poverty and give impetus to domestic economy, thereby structure an equitable and socially harmonious society. Along with massive enthusiasm of winning the right to stage the world’s most prestigious sporting occasion after waiting for 8 years, Beijing started to experience its vigorous growth brought by Olympic effect since 2001. Xinhua News correspondent reported that during investments peak year from 2005 to 2007, annual GDP growth reached 12.3% (Ting Zhou 2007). Undoubtedly, Olympic boosts investments and spurs economy hence increases employment opportunities. It is often regarded as a once in a lifetime opportunity for creating millions of jobs. However, question still remains as whether “Olympic Effect” is only an immediate gain that will fade away once the infrastructure projects are finished. Unfortunately, few statistics have been released in this regard. There are few analyses conducted on thorough review of Beijing Olympic effect on employment, even less compare pre- and post-Olympic periods’ effects. Bid cities focus to such a large extent on winning the bid, planning for the Games and staging successful Games while the post-Games period has often been neglected. Thus, the aim of this paper is set to reveal the effect of 2008 Beijing Olympic Games on employment of hosting city by comparing statistics on unemployment and job creation with four different cities and assess its impact on pre- and post-Olympic periods. It will be concluded at the end of this paper how sustainable the Beijing Olympic is (two year after the Games) with reference to other studies target at 1984 to 2004Olympic Games. The post-Game effect on employment after the Games is not yet clear and there are no ready figures to the problem, which provides impetus and adds value on this research. Research question is “Can 2008 Beijing Olympic Games create sustainable economic and social development”?

Methods The information for this paper is collected from:

The official statistics produced by the host organizing committees Newspaper, media coverage and authorities reports both at home and abroad. Related professional articles and journals There are limitations of the sources. Authorities and local medias tend to focus on favorable news resulted from the Games while neglect the negative ones. To enhance reliability of the sources, data will not only be drawn from Mainland China newspapers and official websites but also try to refer as much overseas media reports as possible. Be that as it may, a majority of the sources are still available from Mainland China as a hosting country. In order to isolate the increase in employment that would have if the Games had not taken place in Beijing, comparative approach is taken. This approach is to “factor out” general urban trends and developments. For example, if an unemployment rate of 5 percent is identified in Beijing, but cities in general recorded unemployment rate of 2 percent, then we would conclude that this city may deviates 3 percent from the Olympic or other special events. This paper will study the extra 3 percent rate and elaborate its most possible reasons. Four compared cities are carefully selected based on their economic performance, political position as well as geographical location. Cities as Tianjin and Qingdao as Olympic co-host city are not considered so as to isolate Olympic factor. Moreover, mega-events in other cities are also considered to be influential on employment. As a result, Shanghai holding Expo and Guangzhou holding Asian Games are not on the list of the selected cities. To assess employment condition in after-Game period, registered unemployment rate and number of new jobs created in urban areas will be used as two indicators. Unemployment rate is regarded as an index reflecting the overall economic situation. Even though it may be difficult to compare the unemployment rate across various countries since different measurements following different computation rules, it is still useful to review relevant studies conducted on lasting effect of employment in other Olympic cities. It is important to note that unemployment rate in China refers to its registered unemployment rate using administrative methods recording those who registered themselves in employment exchanges and received unemployment benefits, which results in registered unemployment rate being lower than the actual unemployment scenario. Unfortunately, there is no ready-to-use data in terms of unemployment rate and number of job creation. Therefore, figures are mostly to be compiled city by city, year by year. However, they will be all collected from the same source, which is Statistical Communiqué of respective years and governments. For the sake of keeping figures as reliable as possible, most figures in this paper are obtained from provincial statistic yearbook or from the influential newspaper. For example, China Daily is the widest print circulation English language newspaper in China. Business Today is an American, non-profit student organization that publish magazines and hold conference bringing up meaningful debate from current events. Credibility of the sources ensures the dates to be more persuasive and trustworthy. Theory A number of studies quantify the employment impacts of hosting the mega events such as Summer Olympics. Crompton believes that sales, income and employment are the

most commonly reported multipliers, and the sustainability of the employment effects is one of those (Crompton 1995). Brunt is among one of the few scholars to assess “Olympic Legacy” that includes economic, social, sportive, environmental, touristic, fiscal or infrastructure-related impacts (AHMAR 2008). A large number of the literatures illustrated that the ‘one-time’ events have no lasting post-event effects in new business activities or employment (Mount, Leroux 1994). Tucker examined all Summer Games from 1984 to 2004 and stated “significant employment increase lasting in general from 6 years before the Olympics to 1 year after the Games, with a marginally significant boost lasting up to 8 years afterwards” (Tucker, 2006, p.1). He also points out that richer countries tend to benefit more than poorer countries from hosting the Games. Baade and Matheson (2002), who “failed to reveal any net job gains in 1985 and beyond as a consequence of the Olympic Games” in the case of 1984 Los Angeles Games (Baade, Matheson 2002). Samy from University of Strathclyde found that Olympics impacts are entirely transitory. They are clearly observed prior to the event up to the Games’ quarter, and then slowly vanish to disappear completely three years after the event (AHMAR 2008). Reviewing literatures in the same field renders us possibility to compare Beijing with other Olympic cities on its magnitude and duration of the Games effect. In general, the literatures express negative attitude and uncover transitory effect on employment in the hosting cities after the Games.

Results For the purposes of clarifying impacts and showing different periods to a manageable level to avoid complication of comparison, the analysis has been divided into three timeframes, namely early preparation period, peak investment period and post-game period. Early Preparation Period (2001- 2004) After ten years of arduous work and innovative programs, Beijing won the staging of 2008 Olympic Games in 2001. Newspaper journalist reported that the Olympics created 600,000 jobs every year since the preparations started in 2001(Gaoyue Gao 2010). A massive undertaking has been made on employment. People believe that the long period of consistent investment in the preparation stage of the Games is bound to throw tremendous influence on employment, which concerns both economic and social dimensions of the city. The actual effect of the Games would be seen mostly in peak investment period from 2005 to 2008. Peak Investment Period (2005-2008) From 2005 to 2008, investment in Beijing for the Games preparation reached its peak. A large sum of money poured onto the projects and investments, which serve to

coordinate and facilitate the Games on finance and insurance, the IT industry, communications, city branding and tourism. Beijing statistical bureau published a cumulative 1.5 million jobs have been created during 2005-2008, which is surprising high compare to nearly 300,000 new jobs to Seoul Olympics and 150,000 new jobs for Sydney Olympics in preparation stage ( 2008). A large sum of funds has been titled to the infrastructure investments which represent an enormous untapped potential for the creation of productive employment. China Daily correspondent reported 79 per cent of the funds would be channeled into post and telecommunications, infrastructure facilities and improvement of the living environment (Huanxin Zhao 2006). According to Business Today online journal for a more specific analysis, Beijing launched 20 projects to improve the quality of environment, with an overall investment of $12.2 billion. In sports facilities, it built the Olympic Park and 19 new stadiums and venues that hosted the Olympic events. In transportation, Beijing spent $1.1 billion on building Beijing's subway system; constructing and refurbishing more than 318 km of city streets, light rail system and colossal airport terminal. In urban renewal, $200 million was used in demolishing dilapidated housing and urban buildings with 25 historic areas refurbished. In telecommunications, it spent $3.6 billion transforming Beijing into a "digital" city. The heavy investment was assigned to equip Beijing with wireless transmission and networking technologies (Business Today 2009). Job opportunities generated from diverse sectors and various fields as a result of heavy investments. Olympics venues construction and operation, venues and facilities constructions brought up down stream business such as building materials armored concrete. New construction requires a large number of physical labors while projects in communications and technology industries make a sustainable growing labor market possible. Olympics Studies Center in 2004 estimated it would create 225000 jobs in construction. 147000 jobs created in public service, 373000 in manufacturing, 321000 in Hi-tech industry, 80000 in sports and 110000 in tourism (Humanistic Olympics Studies Center 2004). Beijing Organizing Committee deducted that altogether, 14,000 renovation projects were completed, and this number equaled the total of projects launched in the 20 years before 2001 (The Beijing Organizing Committee for the Games of the XXIX Olympiad 2008a). Business Today estimated that spending on the Olympics added 2.5 percent annually to Beijing's overall economic growth since 2002 (Business Today 2009). The above large figures fully demonstrate how different projects and investments conducted mainly by government largely contribute to the economic development before the Games. It is in agreement with the excellent GDP performance right before the Games. To assess the sustainability of employment after the Games, post- Games period should be elaborated in details. The Post-Olympic Period (2009-2010) It is rash to diagnose the post Games effect on employment simply by repeating its employment figures from 2009-2011. Practically, a higher percentage of unemployment rate does not necessarily suggest that the Games’ effect has been disappeared. On the other hand, a lower percentage of unemployment rate is not persuasive enough to reveal the Games’ long-lasting influence as a result of failure to take into account inflation, local and global economic situation, etc. Thus, it is crucial

to introduce the most comparable cities in facilitating the analysis of employment situation in Beijing. As one of the key cities in the Yangtze River Delta, Suzhou is a historic and tourist city located in the south of Jiangsu province, bordering Shanghai on the east, ranking the fourth in GDP volume in 2009 in China (Suzhou People's Government 2011). Nanjing located in downstream of Yangtze River, is an important industry city, economic and education center as well as a transportation hub for Eastern China. Hangzhou is the capital and largest city of Zhejiang Province in Eastern China. Forbes survey named Hangzhou the best place to do business in China for a fifth consecutive year (Freechinavisa 2006). Chongqing is the only direct controlled municipality in inland China. It is a major city and transportation hub in Southwest China and one of the five national economic central cities of China. Figure 1 to figure 3 shows figures in graphs combining peak investment period and post-game period so that direct changes can be easily observed from 2005 till 2010.

GDP Growth Rate
18.0% 17.0% 16.0% 15.0% 14.0% 13.0% 12.0% 11.0% 10.0% 9.0% 8.0% 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Sources from: Statistical Communiqué on National Economic and Social Development (detailed websites for respective cities and years in Appendix)

Beijing Suzhou Nanjing Hangzhou Chongqing

Figure 1. Figure 1 line graph on GDP growth rate is shown for a general idea of each city’s economic performance. Generally, consistent tendency is shown on most cities. 2007 saw peak performances followed by plunges in 2008 or 2009 owing to adverse factors from home and abroad. At home, industrial production experienced sharp downturn. Abroad, actual growth in export and investment went down under the background that the West countries suffered from financial turmoil. The only exception is Chongqing city that showed recovery in 2009 and rose dramatically in 2010 thanks for its deregulation in financial market. Beijing is more or less on the same path with other cities while a striking comparison is noticed between 2008-2009 periods, where it boomed from 9.0% to 10.1% when three out of four cities generally fell 1%. This exceptional growth may respond to the fuel of 2008 Olympic Games. In 2010, Beijing eased the GDP growth rate while other cities started accelerating because Beijing put strict restrictions on automobile and real estate market for a healthier economy.

Moreover, its economic structure changed to focuses on tertiary instead of industrial industry development thanks for preparing and staging the Gams. It is recognized that tertiary industry counts on effectiveness to realize GDP growth rather than government investments. The economic restructure takes time.

Registered Unemployment Rate
7.00% 6.00% 5.00% 4.00% 3.00% 2.00% 1.00% 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Sources from: Statistical Communiqué on National Economic and Social Development (detailed websites for respective cities and years in Appendix)

Beijing Suzhou Nanjing Hangzhou Chongqing

Figure 2. Surprisingly, with GDP growth rate lower than the compared cities, Beijing’s registered unemployment rate is at the bottom among six cities as shown in figure 2. Generally, registered unemployment rate of all cities have been slightly declining since 2005. While in 2008-2009 period, a remarkable difference is shown when Beijing enjoyed a prominent fall whereas other cities flattened out. It may have connection to the impact of the Games and respond to the exceptional GDP growth over the same period. From 2009 to 2010, Beijing continued to keep its fruit and remained the lowest unemployment rate ever since 2005. Notably, Nanjing almost halved its unemployment rate from 6.12% in 2005 to 3.33% in 2006 when it made tremendous effort on new and re-employment. It followed up the registered unemployment and provided a whole range of service including skill training program and public employment service. Hangzhou plummeted most significantly from 2009 to 2010 with a series of nichetargeting policies enacted by Hangzhou government emphasizing laid off workers, low-income workers and migrant workers, thus contributed to the lower unemployment rate.


Number of New Jobs Created in Urban Areas (Thousand)
500.00 450.00 400.00 350.00 300.00 250.00 200.00 150.00 100.00 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Sources from: Statistical Communiqué on National Economic and Social Development (detailed websites for respective cities and years in Appendix)

Beijing Suzhou Nanjing Hangzhou Chongqing

Figure 3. Another important figure directly reflects the employment besides registered unemployment rate is the number of new jobs created in urban areas. As demonstrated in figure 3, compared with the moderate growth from 2005-2007 in most cities, the number of new jobs in Beijing in 2008 rocketed from 200 to 420 thousand, with more than one fold colossal increase. While three out of four cities saw a decline in the same period mainly because of the 2008 economic crisis. Significantly, the boom in Beijing continued to flourish in 2009 and 2010, when Nanjing leveled off in the same period whereas Suzhou crashed due to its transition of economic development model from labor intensive industry such as textile to technology intensive industry such as Information Technology. In order to figure out reasons for the phenomenon discovered from the line graphs, effects from various sectors should be analyzed. Questions are raised from the most critical points. To start with, why did Beijing’s GDP growth rate run the opposite way in when most other cities dropped in response to the economic crisis in 2009? The games helps to optimize industrial structure in a way that tertiary sector has been growing strongly. According to statistics from the Organizing Committee, Beijing's tertiary sector has lagged behind other cities in developed countries, which are typically around 80 per cent. The growth in service sector will help offset postOlympic slowdown in economy, something every host city and nation goes through in the immediate aftermath (The Beijing Organizing Committee for the Games of the XXIX Olympiad 2008). Of course, other factors contribute to the favorable result. Beijing is neither an export-oriented cities nor living on foreign-funded enterprises like Suzhou which suffered a serious blow from the global recession and saw a notable decrease both in GDP growth rate and new jobs created in urban areas. Most importantly, why is the number of new jobs created in urban areas remarkably high in 2008 in the face of global financial crisis which stroke most of the compared cities? How could it still generate about the same amount of jobs in 2009 and 2010, which double to the pre Games period instead of rebounding to a lower stage? Why is

the improvement of unemployment rate in 2009 performed better than all other compared cities? Firstly, new enterprises and industry both before and after the Games are attracted by greatly improved facilities and environment, which will generate extra job opportunities. More small and medium enterprises (SMEs) emerging during and after the Games are essential to the well-functioning of labor market and increase employment opportunities. SMEs have played an important role not only in economy but also in society at large. China Daily reported that more than 80 percent of the workers laid off from state-owned enterprises found employment in SMEs. They constitute an even more important source of jobs when they allowed equal access to the business from the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games (China Daily 2007). In the preparation of Olympic, venues construction and operation brought up down stream business such as building materials armored concrete. The Hong Kong Trade Development Council estimates that China's sports industry has a market potential of $250 billion driven by major international sporting events held in China, such as the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games and other mega sports events. SMEs will seize the opportunity from the sports industry which will soon grow by 20 percent a year (Business Today 2009). Secondly, Tourism in Beijing, especially Olympic themes tourism, flourishes to the utmost after the Games. Surprisingly, tourists in 2008 sharply dropped 13% compared to 2007 due to global economic crises and catastrophic year of China, when snow calamity affected 19 provinces and most devastating earthquake happened (Sohu News 2009). However, it saw dramatic increase in 2009 for 14.5% (Province Data Net 2010) and 13.3% in 2010 (Beijing Municipal Peoples Government 2011). United Nations World Tourism Organization estimated that "China, as we predict, is going to become world's No 1 tourist destination by the year 2015,"(The Economic Times 2010). Statistics shows that tourist industry takes up about 9.6% of the total employment positions, which impressively explains the gravity of tourism on employment (NET.163 2010). The related hotel industry also sees a boom since China won its Olympic bid. Business Today reported that the government has reduced hotel ownership restrictions. Starting in 2002, foreign investors could own a majority stake in hotels. In 2006, wholly foreign-owned hotels were permitted. These moves cleared the way for an extensive expansion of foreign-owned hotels and other tourism facilities (Business Today 2009). Prosperity in Tourism and its related industry will spur the development of catering, transportation, communication and many other tertiary industries. It facilitates the transformation of economic mode and help economic restructuring. Attracting mix people from around the world contributes to a more diverse society to some extent. Thirdly, post-games requires operation and maintenance of built infrastructure such as Olympic Park and the 37 stadiums and venues, extended Beijing's subway system, new city streets and ring roads city's light rail system, etc., All 11 newly-built Olympic Venues are put into use. For example, National Stadium (Bird Nest) is now used as public welfare, concert and sports venue; Water Cube is used as public swimming, 3D theater, public welfare and sports venue; Wukesong indoor stadium served as basketball gymnasium is renewed to be a comprehensive venue combining with business office of MasterCard center. Undoubtedly, a considerable amount of permanent new jobs generated in daily operation and maintenance of the venues.

Analysis This paper illustrates a strong economic growth in Beijing in 2009 despite the financial crisis, with employment condition performing better and better year by year showing no unfavorable tendency 2 years after the Games. However, many other studies are in line with Samy’s theory that Olympics impacts are entirely transitory. BAADE and MATHESON (2002) concluded that the Olympic Games in Los Angeles in 1984 and Atlanta in 1996 had no significant effect on employment after the Games (Baade, Matheson, 2002). Tucker explored employment impacts of Game and included all summer Olympics between 1984 and 2004. He calculated the deviation between the expected employment levels of each concerning host city, using a straightforward method. He found a significantly positive impact on employment from six years before the Games until about one year after (AHMAR 2008). A study carried out by Jasmand and Meannig identified that “wages in the Olympic regions grew significantly faster than other German regions but, in contrast, no employment effect after 1972 Munich Olympic Games” (Jasmand, Maennig 2008). Brunet reckons unemployment dropped by more than half in Barcelona from 1986 to the Games years in 1992 (from high of 128,000 to just over 60,000). The city’s unemployment rate was also halved over the same period, from 18.4% to 9.6%. Unfortunately, in the following years, he notices a rise in unemployment (Brunet 2005). From the above cases, scholars agreed that Olympic Games are generating a large number of jobs before the Games, while the positive phenomenon vanishes quickly after the Games. Some argue that no lasting effect could be seen in the after- Games period; some said there is only marginally effect one year after the Games; some defended that post-Games effect are entirely transitory and would be completely vanish three years after the event. Despite all the differences, there is one thing in common — Olympics are defined to be unsustainable in creating jobs. Surprisingly, the result of my study is significantly different from their studies on employment in terms of its duration of effect. Even though this study can only be able to assess the effect two years after the game up till 2010 at the time of writing, it points out that Beijing Olympics have potential for long term employment effect. Since the number of new jobs increased from 200 thousand to 420 thousand in 2008, it kept the momentum and created even more jobs year by year without rebounding to the pre-game stage, with 424.4 thousand in 2009 and 446 thousand in 2010. Moreover, registered unemployment rate rolled down all the way from 2005, with 2010 making a record low rate. It is also useful to note that Beijing created much more jobs than Soul, Sydney, Barcelona, Atlanta, and Los Angeles in Olympics. Moreover, it still shows strong growth tendency on number of new jobs and unprecedented low unemployment rate. Therefore, findings of this paper are not in agreement with Trucker’s point that richer countries tend to benefit more than poorer countries from hosting the Games. It is believed that Beijing Olympic benefits more than a number of the hosting cities in developed counties (Tucker 2006).

Conclusion Impacts study of Beijing Olympic leads to expectation of medium to long term employment effect. By the time of writing, 2011 figures are mostly unavailable therefore difficult to be collected and analyzed. Based on the results and analysis parts of this research, it is safe to draw the conclusion that there is remarkable positive effect on employment because of the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games. Even though medium to long term effect is too early to be affirmed, it is highly possible that Beijing will keep up its favorable momentum judged from its trend from 2008 to 2010. The assumption is made through comparison with 4 cities at home other Olympic cities aboard. A number of research targeted at all summer Olympics between 1984 and 2004 shows no or marginally positive impact after the games. In the contrary, this paper demonstrates the performance of the second year after the games outweighed the previous year, even better than the peak investment years. It is safe to conclude that 2008 Olympic Games creates short-to-medium term economic and social development in Beijing. Economic growth and restructuring, a large number of additional employments and increased tourism are the major findings of this paper. It is believed that they will lead to sustainable effect on both society and economy. Socially, Beijing citizens have seen considerable improvement in every aspect of their daily life, especially in transportation, environment, cultural relics protection and volunteerism. High unemployment leads to social polarization. On the other hand, lower unemployment results in a more social cohesion scenario. Economically, three pillars pull Chinese economic growth based on its actual condition, namely investment, consumption and exportation. Beijing Olympic has significant impact on the first two pillars. It stimulates the market and expands consumption. In the long term, some of those pre-game investments will continue to run the business. Some of them help Beijing’s economic restructuring. It should also be realized that the Games not only brings tremendous job opportunities, but also optimize the structure of industries in a positive way. The service industry has been growing rapidly and takes up more than 70% in Beijing’s economy. In addition, it attracts business opportunities thanks to intangible impact of the Games. Its openness, image and reputation have implication to the investors around the world. The intangible impact has sustainable influence on the economy in hosting city.

Further Research While actual money input during the Olympics are relatively easy to identify, the "legacy" of the Olympics in terms of long-term benefits is more difficult to measure. Other major events which take place during over the same research period should be carefully examined in order to get unbiased results. For example, the credit crunch started as early as in 2007 and guided to the origins of the global financial crisis should be taken into consideration in the analysis of the Olympic impact. It has different impact in different years and cities in the light of the cities’ economic mode. However, due to the time and length limits of this paper, in-depth study of the global financial crisis is insufficient. There could be more analysis on the major event over the same period in future research. Secondly, analyzing in depth all potential dimensions of the Games is well beyond the

scope of this paper. Even though employment is certainly the variable that captures social and economic welfare, wage income is also one of the most important variables that within socio-economic aspect. Further studies could combine the wage income and employment variables together for a more complete picture when studying the Olympic influence on social and economic in hosting cities. For an even more deepgoing detection, further research could consider the net benefits from the Games, which means if the investment is reallocated to something else, would it generate more jobs or lower unemployment rate than the Olympic Games? This paper somehow confirms some of key findings which have positive contribution to the society and economy at large, while they contradict with major findings of other studies implying that the Games effect is entirely transitory. It is difficult to conclude at this stage the long term effects of the Olympics due to the restricted time scope, and it needs more researches to be done in this field. Studying the legacy of Beijing Olympic Games keeps track of its performance and provides grounds for the coming Olympic cities. It will be inspiring, interesting and worth-studying.


AHMAR, S., 2008. HOSTING THE OLYMPICS: SPRINT OR MARATHON? . BAADE, R.A. and MATHESON, V., 2002. 6. Bidding for the Olympics: fool's gold?. Transatlantic sport: The comparative economics of North American and European sports, , pp. 127. BEIJING MUNICIPAL PEOPLES GOVERNMENT, February,12, 2011-last update, 2010 Beijing Tourism. Available: [December,5, 2011]. BRUNET, F., 2005. The economic impact of the Barcelona Olympic Games, 1986-2004 Barcelona: the legacy of the Games 1992-2002. Barcelona Centre d’Estudis Olímpics UAB, (2002), pp. 1-27. BUSINESS TODAY, July, 30, 2009-last update, Post-Olympics Beijing. Available:|MainLayout::init [December, 11, 2011]. CHINA DAILY, September, 15, 2007-last update, SMEs focus of gov't attention. Available: [December, 5, 2011]. CHINA.COM.CN, August, 17, 2008-last update, Four year during Beijing Olympic created 1.5 Million Jobs. Available: [January, 7, 2012]. CROMPTON, J.L., 1995. Economic impact analysis of sports facilities and events: Eleven sources of misapplication. Journal of Sport Management, 9(1), pp. 14-35. FREECHINAVISA, 2006-last update, Hangzhou named top business city. Available: [December, 11, 2011]. GAOYUE GAO, July,6, 2010-last update, The Lasting Benefits from the Beijing Olympics. Available: [December,5, 2011]. HUANXIN ZHAO, January, 17, 2006-last update, Olympics to add oomph to Beijing economy. Available: [December,5, 2011]. HUMANISTIC OLYMPICS STUDIES CENTER, May, 25, 2004-last update, Five Major Impacts on Beijing Olympic. Available: [December, 5, 2011]. JASMAND, S. and MAENNIG, W., 2008. Regional Income and Employment Effects of the 1972 Munich Summer Olympic Games. Regional Studies, 42(7), pp. 991-1002. MOUNT, J. and LEROUX, C., 1994. Assessing the effects of a mega-event: a retrospective study of the impact of the Olympic Games on the Calgary business sector. Festival Management and Event Tourism, 2(1), pp. 15-23. NET.163, May, 26, 2010-last update, Tourist industry takes up about 9.6% of the total employment positions. Available: [December, 11, 2011].


PROVINCE DATA NET, 2010-last update, 2009 Beijing Tourism. Available: [December, 5, 2011]. SOHU NEWS, January, 21, 2009-last update, Beijing 2008 Tourism. Available: [December, 5, 2011]. SUZHOU PEOPLE'S GOVERNMENT, January, 6, 2011-last update, Government Work Report. Available: [December, 5, 2011]. THE BEIJING ORGANIZING COMMITTEE FOR THE GAMES OF THE XXIX OLYMPIAD, 2008a-last update, Bid Report-Theme 6 Marketing. Available: [December,5, 2011]. THE BEIJING ORGANIZING COMMITTEE FOR THE GAMES OF THE XXIX OLYMPIAD, August 13, 2008b-last update, Olympic Games a boost for jobs. Available: [January, 7, 2012]. THE ECONOMIC TIMES, March, 22, 2010-last update, China to become the largest tourist destination by 2015: UNWTO. Available: [December, 11, 2011]. TING ZHOU, August,8, 2007-last update, Investment Effect on Olympic Games [Homepage of Xinhua News], [Online]. Available: [December,5, 2011]. TUCKER, L., 2006. How does hosting the Olympic Games impact employment in the host city. Undergraduate student paper contest Carleton College & the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, . UN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL, 2006. Employment and sustainable development, , July 3-5 2006, DESA/ILO e-Forum, pp. 1.


Statistical Communiqué of Beijing on the 2010 National Economic and Social Development,,2011-02-21 Statistical Communiqué of Nanjing on the 2010 National Economic and Social Development,,2011-03-23 Statistical Communiqué of Hangzhou on the 2010 National Economic and Social Development,,2011-02-25 Statistical Communiqué of Chongqing on the 2010 National Economic and Social Development,,2011-04-04 Statistical Communiqué of Suzhou on the 2010 National Economic and Social Development,,2011-01-19 Statistical Communiqué of Beijing on the 2009 National Economic and Social Development,,2010-02-02 Statistical Communiqué of Chongqing on the 2009 National Economic and Social Development,,2010-04-06 Statistical Communiqué of Hangzhou on the 2009 National Economic and Social Development,,2010-02-01 Statistical Communiqué of Suzhou on the 2009 National Economic and Social Development,,2010-01-20 Statistical Communiqué of Nanjing on the 2009 National Economic and Social Development,,2010-03-08 Statistical Communiqué of Beijing on the 2008 National Economic and Social Development 2009-12-22 Statistical Communiqué of Hangzhou on the 2008 National Economic and Social Development, 2010-01-06 Statistical Communiqué of Suzhou on the 2008 National Economic and Social Development, 2010-01-16 Statistical Communiqué of Chongqing on the 2008 National Economic and Social Development 2010-01-17 Statistical Communiqué of Nanjing on the 2008 National Economic and Social Development, 2010-01-06 Statistical Communiqué of Beijing on the 2007 National Economic and Social Development 2009-12-22 Statistical Communiqué of Hangzhou on the 2007 National Economic and Social Development
15 2010-01-07 Statistical Communiqué of Chongqing on the 2007 National Economic and Social Development, 2010-01-17 Statistical Communiqué Suzhou on the 2007 National Economic and Social Development 2010-01-06 Statistical Communiqué of Nanjing on the 2007 National Economic and Social Development, 2010-01-06 Statistical Communiqué of Hangzhou on the 2006 National Economic and Social Development,2010-01-07 Statistical Communiqué of Chongqing on the 2006 National Economic and Social Development, 2010-01-17 Statistical Communiqué of Suzhou on the 2006 National Economic and Social Development 2010-01-06 Statistical Communiqué of Beijing on the 2006 National Economic and Social Development,2009-12-22 Statistical Communiqué of Nanjing on the 2006 National Economic and Social Development, 2010-01-06 Statistical Communiqué of Beijing on the 2005 National Economic and Social Development 2009-12-22 Statistical Communiqué of Hangzhou on the 2005 National Economic and Social Development 2010-01-07 Statistical Communiqué of Nanjing on the 2005 National Economic and Social Development 2010-01-06 Statistical Communiqué of Suzhou on the 2005 National Economic and Social Development, 2010-01-06 Statistical Communiqué of Hangzhou on the 2005 National Economic and Social Development, 2010-01-07


Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful