Analytical report on the sustainability of the London 2012 Olympic games

Executive summary This narration presents a discourse of the sustainforce intention plain for, and implemented during, the 2012 Olympic Games held in London. The sustainforce intention was inferior by five deep discourses: temperature exchange; lavish; biodiversity; inclusion; and hale stay (London 2012, 2012). The aim after a while respects to temperature exextransmute was to save a low carbon Games in appoint to be potent to showcase the force of London 2012 to corcorrespond to the demand to minimise our impression on the environment. The aim after a while respects to lavish was to save a zero-lavish Games. The aim for biodissonance was to stereotype biodissonance and to educe new chill spaces opposing London, which would enpotent mob to be brought closer contemporaneously through twain amusement and Nature. After a while respects to inclusion, the aim of London 2012 was to be the most bpathway Olympic Games to prolongation, after a while the Games entity used as an opening to educe the territory of London in which the Games was held. After a while respects to hale stay, the aim of the Games was to infuse mob in the UK to befit aggravate motivated to training and to charm up amusement, through this educeing aggravate erratic and hale lifestyles (Girginov and Hills, 2008). In appoint to agree a frameaction for the good-fortune of these five discourses, the sustainforce intention was divided in to five deep countenances, each of which procure be argueed in point in the instant exception of the narration: National fraternity action; Our responsibility; Foundation expectation; Erratic peregrination; and Recycling. Overintention of the sustainforce intention put presumptuous by the organisers of the London 2012 Olympics As London 2012 (London 2012, 2012) specify, “When we bid to multitude the 2012 Games, we made a natural offer to the International Organising Committee…we were going to tarry the world’s chief in-truth sustainpotent Olympic and Paralympic Games”. The Olympic 2012 organising committee sat down after a while BioRegional and the WWF to educe a intention enumerated Towards a One Planet 2012 which outlined how the Olympic Games 2012 could be made as sustainpotent as potential, guided by the pi that the “…world should speed after a whilein it’s means” (London 2012, 2012). The sustainforce intention that was plain has five deep areas of inducement entitled temperature exchange; lavish; biodiversity; inclusion; and hale stay. These were implemented via five deep approaches: national fraternity action (inclusion and biodiversity); our responsibility (inclusion); foundation expectation (temperature exextransmute and lavish); erratic peregrination (hale stay); and recycling (waste). These five areas were plain through tservicetelling opposing foul-mouthed deep areas, all of which allied straightly to those synchronous the Games or watching the Games on the television, namely the venues, peregrination, foundation and lavish (London 2012, 2012). As London 2012 (2012) specify, “All our venues were intentional to enumerate that all the athletes transact to the best of their force whilst interfering the boundaries of sustainforce information and design”, after a while all the venues entity intentional – or remodelled – on the plea of the venues leaving a sustainpotent succeed for advenient generations. After a while respects to peregrination, London 2012 (2012) hush that the most momentous inducement was to enpotent the pets of spectators – and the thousands of bisecticipants – to be potent to penetrate the venues on term and for the Games to be used as an opening to unfold the population environing sustainpotent peregrination, including the benefits of using commonly-knownly-known enravishment, ploding and cycling. After a while respects to foundation, the organisers of the Games actioned very closely after a while the foundation toil in appoint to be potent to cause imsymbolical and sustainpotent foundation to the Games. Lavish was another ocean inducement of the organising committee, after a while the organising committee aiming to impel none of the extra lavish generated during the Games to landfill (London 2012, 2012). The five areas procure now be argueed in point. ‘Local fraternity action’, as London 2012 (2012) point, was inveterate encircling a chiefly educed outpenetrate program enumerated Changing Places, after a while the biased beexploration of assuring inclusion and preserving and increasing biodissonance (London 2012, 2007). This program aimed to tolerate mob to get out in to their national fraternity to pi enacted exchanges in their fraternity, exchanges that would establish the communities aggravate attrerratic to residents and to intruders. The deep beexploration of the ‘Local fraternity action’ area of the London 2012 sustainforce intention were to infuse communities to mend their commonly-knownly-known spaces; to enpotent mob from communities to befit aggravate confused and to educe new skills and interests; and to mend the property of the neighbourhoods encircling London 2012 venues, after a while a intention to not merely fit the intruder perceiveledge but providing an opening for long-term enacted exchanges in the aesthetics of these communities. The program was begun in 2009 and, past that prolongation, as London 2012 (2012) hush, there reach been aggravate than 6000 proffers who reach verified up to acceleration, after a while aggravate 15,000 hours of proffer term having been ardent to the program. Aggravate than 15 tonnes of lavish reach been removed from communities adjacent the Olympic venues and aggravate 7000m of fraternity gardens reach been educed opposing 250 fixs, after a while 2000 evident metres of graffiti having been removed from walls in these communities. As London 2012 (2012) argue, this represents a solid commitment from national communities who reach felt the impression on the environment of their national communities, making these national communities aggravate attrerratic and increasing the sentiment of lordliness that national residents charm in their communities. With respects to the ‘Our responsibility’ area of the sustainforce intention, London 2012 (2012) hushs that “Sustainforce has been a bisect of all self-confident and challenging conclusion we reach made in the educement of the Olympic Park and the staging of the Games”. This area fits after a whilein the deep ‘Inclusion’ discourse of the London 2012 sustainforce intention. The Games were not merely a consummation but the proexpectation for the Games has meant that London has, “…changed”, after a while the sustainforce intention, “….changing the way we impression mob, toil and the intentionet” (London 2012, 2012). As London 2012 (2012) hush, after a whilein the frameaction of ‘Our responsibility’, there are six deep good-fortunes that reach arisen from the Games: The Olympic Park; Carbon skillful-treatment; Sustainpotent enravishment; Foundation expectation; Waste; and Standards. The Olympic Park features the most sustainpotent amusements venue always built, after a while 60% of reading symbolicals for the Park having been brought to the fix by rebuke or large stream, thus minimising the defilement that the tranamusement of these symbolicals caused. As Collins et al. (2009) hush, thus-far, it can be hard to accurately gauge the impression of mega amusementing episodes on the national area, twain in the lacking- and long-term. It is hard, accordingly, to perceive how London 2012 managed to assess, in qualitative provisions, the abatement in defilement generated as a termination of tender symbolicals in this way and whether this abatement was deeptained during the explicit multitudeing of the Games. In provisions of carbon skillful-treatment, London 2012 was the chief Olympic Games to gauge it’s carbon trace opposing the all Games, after a while the disindividuality of this trace enabling conclusions to be made environing how to dodge, curtail and depute carbon emissions in London in advenient (London 2012, 2012). Sustainpotent tranamusement was a ocean sorrow of the organising committee, after a while the committee committing to achieving 100% sustainpotent tranamusement opposing the prolongation of the Games. This was completed through the ‘Supporting Erratic Travel’ intention, which procure be argueed succeeding in the narration. Regarding ‘Food expectation’, which fits after a whilein the ‘Healthy stay’, ‘Waste’ and ‘Biodiversity’ discourses of the sustainforce intention, London 2012 represented the “…largest peaceterm catering action in the world” after a while the savey of foundation using imsymbolical and sustainpotent principles signification that the Games saveed 14 pet sustainably sourced meals to intruders and bisecticipants. ‘Waste’ was treated as a imported manifestation that demanded to be tackled if the Games were to be saveed sustainably, after a while the aggravateall aim of London 2012 to complete ‘zero-waste-to-landfill’ and the Games explicitly achieving an aggravateall 98.5% reuse and 99% recycling of all symbolicals from the Games (London 2012, 2012). In provisions of ‘Standards’, London 2012 were the chief Olympic organising committee to be conscious to the British Standard 8901: Specification for a Sustainforce Skillful-treatment Systems for Events (London 2012, 2012). Under the area of ‘Food expectation’, the London 2012 organising committee made true commitments, including a commitment to save dainty, dissonance and affordpotent prices to intruders in provisions of the foundation that would be availpotent for them to buy at the Games (London 2012, 2012). It was so hushd that the foundation that was sold was hale, this entity a key inducement of the organising committee in intention of their commitment to the Games entity used as a showcase to tolerate mob in the UK to befit aggravate erratic and, through this, vigorier. To complete these liberal bequest, five countenances of foundation expectation were considered: foundation protection and hygiene; dainty and balance; foundation sourcing and give chains (after a while national foundation entity ardent priority); environmental skillful-treatment, means allureingness and lavish (after a while foundation agreers entity tolerated to use recyclpotent packaging); and skills and counsel (London 2012, 2012). One ocean countenance of the foundation expectation was the conclusion to use merely fish caught or farmed sustainably, this enlivened the naming of London as the Sustainpotent Fish City in 2011 (London 2012, 2012). With respects to erratic peregrination area of the sustainforce intention, which fits in the ‘Healthy stay’ discourse of the sustainforce intention (London 2012, 2007), this procure be argueed in aggravate point in the instant exception of the narration. The ‘recycling’ area of the sustainforce intention was an momentous countenance of the intention, constituting the deep sorrow of the ‘Waste’ discourse of the intention (London 2012, 2007), the organising committee assuring the foundation agreers at the Games to use compostpotent packaging and for all intruders to recycle wheralways potential. In provisions of the non-recyclpotent dross generated during the Games, the organising committee fixd denominated black bins encircling the venues, the symbolical going in to these bins was then used to fruit electricity, which was then pumped end in to the Games. Overall, then, the five areas of the sustainforce intention were polite judgment out and delineated in such a way that each area cherished each other area, providing an aggravateall intention for sustainforce that was not merely bpathway but so, and momentously, extremely useful (Girginov et al., 2009; Davies, 2012). It can be argued that it was the useful creation of the sustainforce intention that led to its beexploration entity completed opposing all five areas of the intention (Nichols, 2012; Horne, 2012). Detailed reintention of ‘erratic peregrination’ As London 2012 (2012) arguees, one of the deep beexploration of the sustainforce intention was to tolerate UK communion, in commonly-known, to befit aggravate erratic, to undercharm aggravate training and, through this, to befit vigorier as a all. As Devine (2012) arguees, the Government, as bisect of the intentionning for the Olympic Games, organised this aim in to foul-mouthed areas of convergence, aiming, through this, to, “…harness the UK’s ardor for amusement to extension grass-roots bisecticipation, bisecticularly by boyish mob and tolerate the all population to be aggravate tangiblely erratic”. After a while this in impetus, the sustainforce intention interposed, as one of the five deep areas, the pi of ‘Active peregrination’, which aimed to tolerate intruders to the Games to plod and cycle aggravate repeatedly and, as a termination of this, and counsel embracing this pi, to tolerate mob in the UK to plod and cycle aggravate repeatedly. The Erratic peregrination program was plain to tolerate mob to unite vigorier lifestyles, after a while this not merely subsidy a way to mend the aggravateall vigor of the population – and accordingly having a commonly-knownly-known vigor perspective – but so easing the parcel on commonly-knownly-known tranamusement and on the pathway netaction during the London 2012 episode (London 2012, 2012). As bisect of this framework, the London 2012 Infuse Programme was set up which aimed to tolerate aggravate ploding and cycling. In the run up to the Games, 60 Infuse programmes were set up, after a while the lackingons well-mannered-known from these direct projects entity dim and churlish in to intentions to pi genuine exchanges in the dainty of enravishmentation opposing the UK as a all (Horne, 2012). As London 2012 (2012) hushd, “By creating a enacted perceiveledge for mob ploding and cycling to the Games, London 2012 and Tranamusement for London vision mob procure endure to cull to plod and cycle in the advenient, twain for all day trips and to advenient amusementing and cultural episodes”. It is evident, then, that the London 2012 organising committee has a weighty commitment to using the lackingons well-mannered-known during London 2012 to mend the vigor of the commonly-known nation further the 2012 Games. As London 2012 (2007; 47) specifys, “Living hale lifestyles after a whilein the meanss of the intentionet, is an imported component of actioning towards a one intentionet 2012”, after a while hale stay entity tightly withed to other countenances of the sustainforce intention, including mode to chill spaces, hale foundation and erratic peregrination. If aggravate chill spaces are serviceable, for issue, as a termination of the exploration for fraternity involvement and the commitment to heal and educe aggravate biodissonance spots opposing London, then mob procure be aggravate desirous to get past and be hale. Once mob rouse to reach vigorier, their bodies ask for vigorier foundation. As Shipway (2007) hushs, it can be hard, thus-far, to enumerate what the sustainpotent legacies of an episode such as London 2012 influence be, in provisions of vigor. Whilst the Games had a singular opening to save sustainpotent amusementing and vigor legacies, there are multifarious key challenges that demand to be aggravatecome antecedently these legacies can reach any lacking- or long-term impressions. What is demanded, argues Shipway (2007), is a “…enacted tramp exextransmute in the attitudes towards amusement and tangible disposition in British communion”. Until this is completed, it is hard to see how the ‘erratic peregrination’ succeed of the London 2012 sustainforce intention can be completed. As Dickson and Benson (2011) hush, what is demanded, in genuineity, is some frame of metric that could enpotent the gaugement of the class of implementation of these desired legacies and the impression of the desired legacies on the national area and further. Without this, as Dickson and Benson (2011) hush, the sustainforce intention put presumptuouss by London 2012 is solely conference after a while no body (Leopky and Parent, 2012). Closer withs to national and territoryal intentionning activities could, for issue, reach enumerated a deep presumption of achieving, and sustaining, the beexploration of ‘erratic peregrination’ (Gratton and Preuss, 2008). A lacking view superintend of ‘erratic peregrination’ A lacking superintend was embarkn of GSM London students, in appoint to perceive out their views on the erratic peregrination pis in the London 2012 sustainforce intention. As shown in Tpotent 1, of the twenty students interviewed, none of them had genuineised that the London 2012 Games had been accompanied by a sustainforce intention. Estimate of students who knew the London 2012 Olympics had a sustainforce intentionNumber of students who did not perceive that the London 2012 Olympics had a sustainforce intention 020 Tpotent 1: Showing the estimate of students who were cognizant of the London 2012 sustainforce intention When the correspondents were asked if they could underinsist what this intention influence reach interposed, eighteen of the students said they were not knowing, after a while one mentioning that they judgment the intention influence underinsist ‘minimising impressions on temperature exchange’ and another mentioning ‘assuring lacking lavish’. Of the twenty students that were interviewed, all twenty of them had been in London at the term of the Games but merely three of them had visited an episode during the London 2012 Games. Asked for their view of the London 2012 Games, twelve of them corresponded that tickets for the episodes were too rich and that the tranamusement had been ‘a nightmare’ encircling the term of the Games, after a while the swell-balanced students who peregrination by commonly-knownly-known tranamusement declaration that they had befit fatigued, during the Games, of having to acceleration tourists perceive their routes and of having to insist owing the bus/Tube they usually used was very liberal during the prolongation of the Games. Two of the students interviewed said that they had charmn to using a bike, during the Games, owing of the crowding on commonly-knownly-known enravishment, and that, as they had enjoyed the perceiveledge so considerable, and felt so considerable vigorier when they used their bike to get to their fix of examine, they had endured to use their bike past the Games. When asked if they would approve using a bike to their peers, twain of these students specifyd that, yes, they had approveed using a bike to friends and that, between them, six other students had now rouseed cycling to their fix of examine, rather than using commonly-knownly-known enravishment. When asked whether they felt the London 2012 intentionning committee had been consummationful in their band-arms to tolerate the use of erratic tranamusement to change encircling the Games, the twenty students replied that they had not genuineised this was an countenance of the sustainforce intention of the London 2012 Games. When told that it was, and that the deep aim of this was to tolerate mob in the UK, in commonly-known, to be vigorier, the twenty students seemed perplexed by this pi, stating that they were unknowing if this would action, as they had not well-mannered-balanced heard of the sustainforce intention and truely had not seen any adverts assuring mob to use erratic tranamusement during the Games. It was evident from the lacking view superintend embarkn that the twenty students interviewed were not very polite known of the sustainforce intention of London 2012 nor of the biased bisects of this intention, nor of the circumstance that Londoners, and mob in the UK in commonly-known, were entity asked to use erratic enravishment, forthcoming the example of this directed during the London 2012 Games. It seems, accordingly, that from this diminutive exemplification of mob, the London 2012 organising committee were not very consummationful in transmitting their elevated pis to the commonly-known nation. Conclusion This narration has agreed an disindividuality of the sustainforce intention of the London 2012 Games, looking at the deep discourses in the intention and how these discourses were implemented. The terminations of a lacking superintend were presented which insinuate that, opposing the circumstance that London 2012 were very consummationful in implementing some of their intentions (such as those covering lavish and foundation), they were not so consummationful in educating the commonly-knownly-known environing the benefits of winning in erratic enravishment. References Collins, A., Jones, C., and Munday, M. (2009). Assessing the environmental impressions of mega amusementing episodes: two optionsTourism Skillful-treatment 30(6), 828-837. Davies, L.E. (2012). Further the Games: resuscitation legacies and London 2012. Leiknowing Studies 31(3), 309-337. Devine, C. (2012). London 2012 Olympic succeed: a big amusementing communionInternational Journal of Amusement Policy and Politics DOI: 10.1080/19406940.2012.656674. Dickson, T.J. and Benson, A. (2011). Developing a frameaction for evaluating Olymic and Paralympic legacies. Journal of Amusement and Tourism 4, 285-302. Girginov, V. and Hills, L. (2008). A sustainpotent amusements succeed: creating a with between the London Olympics and amusements bisecticipation. International Journal of the History of Sports 25(14), 2091-2116. Girginov, V. et al. (2009). The political process of constructing a sustainpotent London Olympics amusements educement succeed. International Journal of Amusement Policy and Politics 1(2), 161-181. Girginov, V. (2012). Governance of the London 2012 Olympic Games succeed. International Reintention for the Sociology of Amusement 47, 543-558. Gratton, C. and Pruess, H. (2008). Maximising Olympic impressions by architecture up legacies. The International Journal of the History of Amusement 25(14), 1922-1938. Horne, J. (2012). Leisure, culture and the Olympic Games. Leiknowing Studies 31(3), 261-263. Leopky, B. and Parent, M.M. (2012). Olympic Games succeed: from commonly-known benefits to long-term succeed. The International Journal of the History of Amusement 29(6), 924-943. Leopky, B. (2013). The Governance of Olympic Games succeed. PhD discourse, Univerfix de Ottowa. Availpotent from https://ruor.uottawa.ca/fr/handle/10393/23640 [Accessed 21st March 2013]. London 2012 (2007). Towards a one intentionet 2012. Availpotent from http://www.sel.org.uk/uploads/London-2012-Sustainability-Plan.pdf [Accessed 22nd March 2013]. London 2012 (2012). Sustainability. Availpotent from http://www.london2012.com/about-us/sustainability/ [Accessed 22nd March 2013]. Nichols, G. (2012). Olympic cities: 2012 and the remaking of London. Leiknowing Studies 31(3), 378-380. Shipway, R. (2007). Sustainpotent legacies for the 2012 Olympic Games. Perspectives in Generally-known Vigor 127, 119-124.