Next Article in Journal
High Sulfur Content of Mesoporous Activated Carbon Composite Derived from Water Hyacinth
Next Article in Special Issue
Effects of the Olympic Announcement and the Actual Event on Property Values: The Case of the 2018 PyeongChang Winter Olympic Games
Previous Article in Journal
The Role of Incumbent Actors in Sustainability Transitions: A Case of LITHUANIA
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Impact of Postponing 2020 Tokyo Olympics on the Happiness of O-MO-TE-NA-SHI Workers in Tourism: A Consequence of COVID-19
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 13
Issue 22
10.3390/su132212879
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Do You Want Sustainable Olympics? Environment, Disaster, Gender, and the 2020 Tokyo Olympics

by
Eiji Yamamura
Department of Economics, Seinan Gakuin University, Fukuoka 814-8511, Japan
Sustainability 2021, 13(22), 12879; https://doi.org/10.3390/su132212879
Submission received: 24 September 2021 / Revised: 18 November 2021 / Accepted: 20 November 2021 / Published: 21 November 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainability in the Sports Market and Sports Events)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The slogans of the 2020 Tokyo Olympics were “symbol of resilience from the Great East Japan Earthquake” and “Compact Olympics”. The Olympics were also expected to demonstrate “gender equality” and to enhance sustainability in modern society. However, in practice, the cost of the Tokyo Olympics 2020 was far greater than estimated. The slogan was changed to “symbol of overcoming COVID-19” although in reality, infection spread dramatically during the games. Overall, the 2020 Tokyo Olympics did not turn out as expected or meet the expectations of the populace. Using individual-level data, we tested how and to what extent Japanese proponents of a sustainable society supported the compact Olympics announced in 2016. The key findings are: (1) most people support policies for environmental protection, gender equality, and disaster prevention and (2) they would have wished to reduce public expenditure for the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. Further examination with a questionnaire yielded similar results for the male but not for the female sample.

1. Introduction

According to the sustainability plan advocated by the Tokyo Organizing Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games (TOC) in 2020, Japan and Tokyo, as an “advanced country/city in solving sustainability issues,” would demonstrate its approach to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and enhance further sustainable development. Through an analysis of the Tokyo 2020 Games, we showcase a model addressing three main themes: climate change, resource management, and the natural environment [1]. Consistent with this purpose, the 2020 Olympics was planned to be small-scale, with minimal related public expenditure.
To reduce expenses, “Tokyo’s bid promised a ‘compact Olympics’; the plans envisioned 85% of event venues being concentrated within an 8-km radius of the Olympic Village” [2]. However, Olympic Games are mega events that entail enormous cost and labor for the host city and country. The average cost of the five Olympics held during 2007–2016 was $12 billion, which did not include the provision of roads, rail, airports, hotels, and other infrastructure [3]. The same was true for the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. “The cost of hosting the Games has swelled ever since Tokyo was picked to host the event. At first, the organizing committee, the Tokyo government, and the Japanese government were expecting to shell out a total of 734 billion yen (about $6.65 billion) to hold the Olympics. However, by December 2020, it had ballooned to an announced budget of 1.644 trillion yen ($14.89 billion). Add in ‘Games-related expenses,’ such as road improvements, and the total will likely top 3 trillion yen” [2]. Arguably, the 2020 Tokyo Olympics is considered the most expensive mega event. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) requires host cities and governments to guarantee that they will cover possible Olympics budget cost overruns.
The Olympics are expected to boost the local economy and create jobs, especially in the host city, and the Tokyo Olympics influenced the lives of not only workers in the Olympic “OMOTENASHI” sectors but of all Japanese citizens [4]. However, various studies have found that the final costs exceed benefits for the host country [5,6,7,8], and the host country population bears a substantial portion of the cost, paying taxes over a long period [5]. Due to COVID-19, the economic returns from the 2020 Tokyo Olympics were far smaller than expected. COVID-19 exerted a significant negative economic impact on Japan because the Olympics are too commercialized, making economic loss inevitable if unexpected negative shocks occur. COVID-19 has a serious impact on the macro and micro economy [9,10,11,12,13], and we are now trying to adapt to the new normal era [14,15,16]. The 2020 Tokyo Olympics reveal that the sustainability of the Summer Olympics is vulnerable to adverse events.
As the host population, the Japanese bore enormous costs for the Olympics. To prevent the spread of COVID-19, most games were held without live spectators. The Japanese thus could not enjoy watching the games in stadiums; hence, as an entertainment event, the 2020 Tokyo Olympics ended in failure. However, commercial interests oriented the Olympics toward being a mega-event, which increased the environmental burden and accelerated global warming and climate change, leading to natural disasters. For example, many Japanese people die of heatstroke during heat waves. Almost every year, typhoons accompanied by heavy rains cause floods. In addition, several large earthquakes, such as the Great East Japan Earthquake, have had an enormous detrimental impact on the Japanese society.
This study considers the 2020 Tokyo Olympics in relation to the environment and natural disasters from the viewpoint of a sustainable society. The 2020 Tokyo Olympics slogans were “compact Olympics” and “symbol of resilience from the Great East Japan earthquake”. In addition, the Olympics were expected to showcase “gender equality” and “environmental protection”. Using individual-level data, this study investigates the extent to which Japanese support these slogans. The key findings are as follows: the general population supports policies that promote gender equality, disaster prevention, and environmental protection; they also wanted to reduce public expenditures for the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. After dividing the sample into male and female sub-samples and controlling for endogenous biases, these results were found to hold for the male sample only.
Various studies have assessed the economic impact of sports mega events, such as the Olympics and the FIFA World Cup [17,18,19,20,21]. The host city population pays costs exceeding the positive impact value of increased happiness [22]. Olympic games are broadcast on television worldwide, allowing viewers in non-host countries to enjoy the Olympics as sports entertainment without bearing the related cost, posing a free-ride problem in economic terms. Apart from the economic and entertainment perspectives, existing studies have not explored the expectations of the host country population. This study is the first to examine this issue.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: Section 2 describes the data and presents the methods. Section 3 presents the estimated results and interpretations. Section 4 discusses the findings, and the final section provides reflections and conclusions.

2. Data and Methods

2.1. Data

Three years after Tokyo was selected as the host city for the 2020 Summer Olympics in July 2016, data were independently collected from individuals in Japan using an internet survey. We commissioned the Nikkei Research Company to survey a representative sample of the Japanese population aged 18 to 68; Nikkei was selected owing to its reputation among Japanese researchers and experience with academic surveys. The tailor-made survey was kept open to collect a minimum of 10,000 observations. Eventually, the sample size reached 12,176 observations. The sample’s demographic composition included people aged 18–67 from all parts of Japan. Next, a survey gathered a sample representative of the Japanese population. Basic characteristics, such as educational background, household income, and gender, were obtained. The questionnaire also included various specific questions about the 2020 Tokyo Olympics and the respondents’ primary school educational conditions. To address endogeneity, we added a question about the gender of the respondent’s homeroom teacher in the first grade of elementary school as an instrumental variable. We asked this also in the follow-up survey conducted in 2018, in which we recruited the same respondents as had participated in 2016. Many respondents did not participate in the 2018 survey, reducing the observations to 7856. Further, some respondents did not answer the question about the gender of the teacher. This reduced the sample size to 4254. Hence, there is a possibility of selection bias. This calls for careful attention during the interpretation of the results.
Table 1 describes the variables and their mean values for the male and female samples. COMPACT OLYMPIC, VIEW ENVIRONMENT, VIEW GENDER, and VIEW DISAST are the key variables. These are discrete variables ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree); their mean values are around 4 on a 5-point scale. This implies that respondents prefer a compact Olympics and agree that the government should contribute to environmental protection, gender equality, and enhanced disaster prevention. Moreover, the values for women were slightly greater than for men. Therefore, women are more willing to support sustainable society policies. FEMALE TEACHER is a dummy variable that indicates the gender of the respondent’s homeroom teacher in first grade. As explained later, FEMALE TEACHER is used as an instrumental variable (IV) for the two-stage IV model.
Figure 1 illustrates the distribution of COMPACT OLYMPIC. In line with Table 1, nearly 70% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that the government should reduce public expenditure for the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. This indicates that most people are cautious about lavish expenditures.
Figure 2 presents the geographical distribution of COMPACT OLYMPIC. With the exception of one prefecture (Shimane), more than half of the respondents in each prefecture preferred a compact Olympics. In addition to Tokyo, there were venues for the games in Kanagawa, Saitama, Shizuoka, Miyagi, Fukushima, and Hokkaido prefectures. In Tokyo and these areas, more than 65% of the people preferred a compact Olympics, reflecting their obligation to bear the related costs.
Figure 3(1)–(3) shows the distributions of VIEW ENVIRONMENT, VIEW GENDER, and VIEW DISAST. Similar to Figure 1, the majority support the argument that the government should contribute to environmental protection, gender equality, and enhanced disaster prevention. In particular, natural disasters occur frequently in Japan. In response, awareness of disaster risk management has grown [23,24]. The Japanese strongly support government engagement in disaster prevention.

2.2. Method

Regression was applied to investigate the correlation between COMPACT OLYMPIC and views of government roles (VIEW ENVIRONMENT, VIEW GENDER, VIEW DISAST). The estimated function takes the following form:
COMPACT OLYMPICi = α0 + α1 VIEW ENVIRONMENT (or VIEW GENDER, VIEW DISAST) i + α2UNIVI + α3AGE i + α4AGE SQ i + α5 MARRI i + α6 INCOM i + α7FEMALE i + u i,
where COMPACT OLYMPIC i represents the dependent variable for individual i. The regression parameters are denoted as α, and the error term as u. The key independent variables are the government’s role in a sustainable society. VIEW ENVIRONMENT, VIEW GENDER, and VIEW DISAST were entered separately in different estimates to examine the correlation between the view of the government’s role and preference for a compact Olympics. The expected signs of the coefficients for the key variables are positive because the Olympics should be smaller if respondents were unwilling to host an Olympics, suffering from the negative effects of commercialization, such as an increase in environmental burdens. Further, respondents are thought to favor government expenditures on environmental protection and disaster prevention. Under budget constraints, it is important to consider how the government expenditure is allocated. An increase in expenditure for the Olympics, such as constructing venues, leads to a decrease in other expenditures, such as those for environmental protection, prevention of disasters, and provision of education and child rearing. In Japan, children are put on waiting lists for nursery schools, which restricts women who intend to work after having a child for whom the mother needs to care. Childcare use increases the mother’s labor supply and earnings [25]. Additionally, it improves the parenting quality of disadvantaged mothers and reduces their stress [26]. Hence, people who support women’s empowerment are likely to support increases in government expenditure for child rearing by reducing expenditure for the Olympics. Similarly, people who place importance on protecting the environment and preventing disasters are more likely to support the reduction of government expenditure for the Olympics. As control variables, we included the following: UNIV, which is 1 if respondents graduated from university, otherwise it is 0; age (AGE) and its square (AGE SQ), the married dummy (MARRI) and female dummy (FEMALE), and household income (INCOM). In Japan, there are 47 prefectures. Hence, residential prefecture dummies were used to capture differences between residential prefectures.
There is possible endogeneity bias in the baseline model because the causality between COMPACT OLYMPIC and the government’s role is unclear. Furthermore, there seems to be a third group of factors that determine the dependent variable and key independent variables. Dependent and key independent variables can be determined simultaneously by unobserved circumstances. For example, an individual who is against commercialism might simultaneously prefer policies to reduce government expenditure and protect the environment. In the function, the error term, including the third factor, is then correlated with the key independent variables, which inevitably causes endogeneity bias. To control this, childhood experiences were used as exogenous IV to conduct a IV model estimation [27]. This study employed the same variable as IV. In the IV 2SLS (two-stage least square) model, the first-stage estimation exogenously determines the government’s role.
Generally, women are more benevolent and universally concerned than men [28,29]. In Japan, after entering primary school, pupils are randomly assigned to homeroom teachers. Therefore, the sex of homeroom teachers is exogenously determined, which influences pupils’ preferences. Children learn from the adults surrounding them, which shapes their worldview and social values. Preferences for trust and cooperation are transmitted through families in communities [30,31]. Men with working mothers tend to prefer working women [32], and the wives of men whose mothers worked are significantly more likely to work [33]. Hence, women influence men’s views and preferences, which is called female socialization. Based on this argument, we assume that a female teacher’s preference is transmitted to her pupils during the school experience. The homeroom teacher effect persists after pupils become adults [34,35]. Accordingly, as adults, respondents who had women teachers are expected to be more universally concerned and to view a sustainable society as more important than short-term economic benefits. As the IV variable, this study uses the female teacher dummy (FEMALE TEACHER), reflecting the first year of primary school. The estimated function takes the following form (2):
VIEW ENVIRONMENT (or VIEW GENDER, VIEW DISAST) i
= β0 + β1 FEMALE TEACHER + X′i B + e i.
Next, the key endogenous variables’ predicted values are obtained for the second stage, which is equivalent to function (1). Unbiased results can thus be obtained. From the argument above, the coefficients of IV and β1 are expected to have a positive sign in the first stage. The control variable vectors are represented by Xi, and B is the vector of their coefficients. The set of control variables is included in the first-and second-stage functions. The estimation error of regression estimations is correlated within clusters. In the case of this study, individuals are clustered on prefectures. Hence, default standard errors can greatly overstate the estimator precision. Thus, if the number of clusters is large, statistical inference should be based on cluster-robust standard errors instead [36]. In this study, the number of clusters is 47, which is sufficiently large. In order to deal with this error, in all estimation results, robust standard errors are reported clustered on the residential prefecture.

3. Results

Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4 report the estimates obtained from the ordinary least squares (OLS) estimations. Table 5, Table 6 and Table 7 show the results of the IV 2SLS model. Table 2 and Table 5 show the results using the whole sample. After dividing the sample into male and female sub-samples to examine gender differences, the male sample results are presented in Table 3 and Table 6 and those for the female sample in Table 4 and Table 7.
Further, Table 2 indicates a positive sign for the government’s role and statistical significance at the 1% level in all columns. This is consistent with the inference presented in the previous section. For the control variables, a significant positive sign for FEMALE was observed in all results. Its absolute coefficient value was around 0.10, suggesting that women are more likely to support reducing Olympics expenditures by 0.10 points on the 5-point scale. This implies that women place more importance on a compact Olympics to reduce government expenditures.
Table 3 and Table 4 indicate that the positive signs for the government’s role are statistically significant at the 1% level for all results. The absolute values for the female sample are larger than those for the male. Support for the government’s role in environmental protection, gender equality, and disaster prevention is correlated with the view of the compact Olympics. However, causality should be examined using the results in Table 5, Table 6 and Table 7.
For the IV 2SLS results, we consider the first stage of Table 5. The F-stat in the first stage shows the validity of FEMALE TEACHER as an IV variable in all columns. However, according to work of econometrics published in 2005, an F-value of 10 or higher is a strong instrument [37]. More recent study points out that the F-value must be 104.7 to clear the weak instrument problem although this view has not been established [38]. A careful attention should be called for when results are interpreted because F-stat is below 100 in all results. We only observed correlation between dependent and independent variables rather than causality in the second-stage if F-stat is blow 10 in the first stage.
As expected, FEMALE TEACHER produces a positive sign and is statistically significant at the 1% level in all columns. Therefore, respondents with a female teacher in the first grade of primary school are more likely to support government policies of environmental protection, gender equality, and disaster prevention as adults. Therefore, the IV strategy was valid. In the second stage, the signs of VIEW ENVIRONMENT, VIEW GENDER, and VIEW DISAST are positive and statistically significant at the 10% level in column and 5% level in columns (2) and (3), which is similar to the results of Table 2’s OLS model. The statistical significance is lower than that in Table 2. However, its absolute value is approximately 1.50, which is significantly larger than those in Table 2 because the underestimation biases were corrected.
As for the results using the sub-sample of males in Table 6, similar to Table 5, the F-stat in the first stage shows the validity of FEMALE TEACHER as an IV variable in all columns. However, we only observed correlation between COMPACT OLYMPIC and VIEW ENVIRORNMENT rather than causality in the second-stage in column (1) because F-stat is blow 10 in the first stage.
FEMALE TEACHER shows a positive sign and is significant at the 1% level in all columns. Therefore, the IV model was validated. In the second stage, VIEW ENVIRORNMENT, VIEW GENDER, and VIEW DISAST show a positive sign and statistical significance in the male sample at the 1% level, and the coefficient value of each is far larger than in the results of the OLS model in Table 3. As for the results using the sub-sample of females in Table 7, the F-stat in the first stage does not show the validity of FEMALE TEACHER as an IV variable, with the exception of column (3). Further, statistical significance was only observed for VIEW DISAST but not for ENVIRONMENT or VIEW GENDER. Hence, among women, the view of the government’s role is not associated with willingness to reduce government expenditures on the Tokyo Olympics. This is consistent with the finding of a previous study that female teachers affect male but not female pupils’ preferences for corporate responsibility later in life [35]. Female teacher–male pupil matching reduces the gender difference in preferences regarding issues of the environment and gender because females tend to have a stronger interest in these issues than males do [35]. As is evident in existing studies [32,33,39,40,41], this study also observed cross-gender effects.
Considering Table 2, Table 3, Table 4, Table 5 and Table 6 together, it can be concluded that people’s views about the government’s role in developing a sustainable society are correlated with their viewpoint on government expenditure for the Olympics. However, IV results did not show the statistical significance only for men.
One possible explanation for the difference between the OLS and IV results using the female sample is that the third factor is correlated with dependent and key independent variables, causing estimation biases for women. For instance, women are more universally concerned than men [28,29]. This is the third factor influencing both viewpoints on government expenditures and government role. Using the randomly-assigned female teacher variable as IV, the third factor effects are controlled and a causal impact related to viewpoint on government role is not observed. As shown in Table 1, women are more likely to prefer a compact Olympics. However, the findings of this study imply that different-gender interactions through education reduce gender preference for a compact Olympics.

4. Discussion

This study shows that Japanese people generally desire a sustainable society, preferring a compact 2020 Tokyo Olympics with reduced public expenditure. In opposition to Japanese public opinion, the slogan of “symbol of resilience from the Great East Japan Earthquake” was changed to represent overcoming the COVID-19 pandemic. Directly before the commencement of the Olympics, Yoshiro Mori, head of the Tokyo Olympics, said that women talk too much and that meetings with many female board directors would “take a lot of time,” for which he was criticized and over which he eventually resigned [42]. During the Olympics games, contestants experienced heat waves, including high humidity. Russian tennis player Daniil Medvedev, for example, struggled with the heat during his match and told the chair umpire, “I can finish the match, but I can also die.” He asked the umpire, “If I die, are you going to be responsible?” [43]. The average temperature in Tokyo has risen annually, and the climate during mid-summer does not offer a comfortable environment. The Japanese Olympic Committee could not arrange optimal conditions for the games to protect the contestants’ health. A total of 130,000 meals were discarded uneaten at the Tokyo Olympics in one month [44].
Since the 1990s, the IOC has made sustainability a pillar of the so-called Olympic legacy, referring to the long-term impact the games have on both the host city and the world. This means ensuring not only that the games themselves do not harm the environment but also that they lead to permanent, positive changes for the environment [45]. This view is in line with the Japanese population’s perspective. However, public expenditures for the Tokyo Olympic 2020 were far greater than in the 2016 plan. On the one hand, market mechanisms did not work because of the government’s critical role in managing the Olympics. On the other hand, the IOC is essentially a sports and entertainment business, and almost 75% of its income comes from selling broadcast rights, with another 18% coming from sponsors [46]. The Olympics are thus too commercialized to truly reduce their scale, creating a gap between concept and reality for the Olympics. The scale of the Olympics has become too large to be efficiently managed due to the complexity of market-government failures, and this was especially true for the Tokyo Olympics, which did not achieve sustainable objectives because of both government failure and market failure. This stems from a type of coordination problem between players. The framework provided by the Penta helix project is useful for dealing with this issue. In this model, key stakeholders, such as NGOs, academia, and civil society, jointly participate in enhancing cost efficiency in the entire planning and implementation process, based on economies of scale and closer cooperation and exchange. The government should coordinate with these stakeholders. In comparison with these stakeholders, a broadcasting company has dominant bargaining power. Hence, the Olympics should return to an amateur model to promote sustainability.

5. Conclusions

The development strength of the 2020 Tokyo Olympics must be supported by all elements. The synergy between one element and the others is crucial. Therefore, the Penta helix concept or multi-stakeholder model should have been applied, where the government, academia, business entities or actors, communities, and the media [47,48] are united in coordination and committed to developing the potential of the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. Sustainability was the core idea of the Tokyo Olympics [1]. Environmental protection, empowering women, and recovery from the East Japan earthquake were key issues for the Olympics. Using individual-level data, we tested how and the extent to which Japanese people (who prefer a sustainable society) supported the compact Olympics concept advocated before the games, finding that the majority of Japanese people support the idea of government measures to promote a sustainable society. They would like to have reduced public expenditures for the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. However, in reality, the 2020 Tokyo Olympics defied expectations and the population’s demands. The IOC should organize the Olympics to reflect public opinion and contribute to realizing a sustainable society.
COVID-19 has inflicted unexpected damages on our society. When the 2020 Tokyo Olympics were held, the situation was remarkably different from that in 2016, when the survey for this study was conducted. There is a possibility that the COVID-19 pandemic caused the Japanese people to oppose hosting the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. During the era of the pandemic, it is likely that greater funding for infection control, among other measures, needs to be allocated. Such allocations do not support reducing public expenditure. We should consider this when analyzing the formation of the public view as, unfortunately, this survey was not conducted in 2021. However, these issues need to be explored in future studies.

Funding

This research was funded by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (grant number [16H03628]).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Ethical review and approval were waived for this study. The survey used in this study falls outside the scope of the Japanese government’s Ethical Guidelines for Medical and Health Research Involving Human Subjects, and there are no national guidelines in Japan for social and behavioural research. Therefore, our study was carried out in accordance with the Ethical Principles for Sociological Research of the Japan Sociological Society, which do not require ethical reviews.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study. All survey participants gave their consent to participate in the anonymous online survey by Nikkei Research Company. The authors did not obtain any personal information about the participants. After being informed about the purposes of the study and their right to quit the survey, participants agreed to participate. They were provided with the option “I don’t want to respond” for questions. Completion of the entire questionnaire was considered to indicate participant consent.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Editage [http://www.editage.com (accessed on 5 November 2021)] for editing and reviewing this manuscript for English language.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

References

  1. The Tokyo Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games Tokyo 2020 Tokyo 2020. Olympic and Paralympic Games Sustainability Plan Version 2 [Internet]. 2018. Available online: https://www.olympic.org/olympic-agenda-2020 (accessed on 1 August 2021).
  2. Editorial: Cost of hosting the Tokyo Olympics exploded, and the people deserve to know why. Mainichi Newspaper, 21 August 2021.
  3. Flyvbjerg, B.; Budzier, A.; Lunn, D. Regression to the tail: Why the Olympics blow up. Environ. Plan. A 2021, 53, 233–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Yamamura, E.; Tsutsui, Y. The impact of postponing 2020 tokyo olympics on the happiness of O-MO-TE-NA-SHIWorkers in tourism: A consequence of COVID-19. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Miyoshi, K.; Sasaki, M. The Long-Term Impact of the 1998 Nagano Winter Olympic Games on Economic and Labor Market Outcomes. Asian Econ. Policy Rev. 2016, 11, 43–65. Available online: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aepr.12115/abstractanddoi:10.1111/aepr.12115 (accessed on 1 August 2021).
  6. Baumann, R.; Engelhardt, B.; Matheson, V.A. The labor market effects of the Salt Lake City Winter Olympics. J. Econ. Stat. 2012, 232, 308–317. [Google Scholar]
  7. Spilling, O.R. Mega event as strategy for regional development. The case of the 1994 Lillehanmmer Winter Olympics. Entrep. Reg. Dev. 1996, 8, 321–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Teigland, J. Mega-events and impacts on tourism: The predictions and realities of the Lillehammer Olympics. Impact Assess. Proj. Apprais. 1999, 17, 305–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Mckibbin, W.; Fernando, R. The Global Macroeconomic Impacts of COVID-19: Seven Scenarios. SSRN Eletron J. 2020. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3547729 (accessed on 1 August 2021).
  10. Djalante, R.; Lassa, J.; Nurhidayah, L.; Minh, H.; Mahendradhata, Y.; Ngoc, N.T. The ASEAN’s responses to COVID-19: A policy sciences analysis. PsyArXiv 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Fagbemi, F. COVID-19 and sustainable development goals (SDGs): An appraisal of the emanating effects in Nigeria. Res. Glob. 2021, 3, 100047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Fernandes, N.; Economic effects of coronavirus outbreak (COVID-19) on the world economy. SSRN Electron J. 2020. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3557504 (accessed on 1 August 2021).
  13. Deyshappriya, N.P.R. Economic Impacts of COVID-19 Macro and Microeconomics Evidences from Sri Lanka. SSRN Electron. J. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Caraka, R.E.; Lee, Y.; Chen, R.C.; Toharudin, T.; Gio, P.U.; Kurniawan, R.; Pardamean, B. Cluster around Latent Variable for Vulnerability towards Natural Hazards, Non-Natural Hazards, Social Hazards in West Papua. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 1972–1986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Brouder, P.; Teoh, S.; Salazar, N.B.; Mostafanezhad, M.; Pung, J.M.; Lapointe, D.; Higgins-Desbiolles, F.; Haywood, M.; Hall, C.M.; Clausen, H.B. Reflections and Discussions: Tourism Matters in the New Normal Post COVID-19; Tourism Geographies; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2020; Volume 22, pp. 735–746. [Google Scholar]
  16. Bonacini, L.; Gallo, G.; Scicchitano, S. Working from home and income inequality: Risks of a ‘new normal’ with COVID-19. J. Popul. Econ. 2021, 34, 303–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Rose, A.; Spiegel, M. The Olympic effect. Econ. J. 2011, 121, 652–677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Hagan, F.; Maennig, W. Large sports events and employment: The case of the 2006 Soccer World Cup in Germany. Appl. Econ. 2009, 41, 3295–3302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Hagan, F.; Maennig, W. Employment effects of the Football World Cup 1974 in Germany. Labour Econ. 2008, 15, 1062–1075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Jasmand, S.; Maennig, W. Regional income and employment effects of the 1972 Munich Olympic Summer Games. Reg. Stud. 2008, 42, 991–1002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Baade, R.; Matheson, V. The quest for the Cup: Assessing the economic impact of the World Cup. Reg. Stud. 2004, 38, 343–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Dolan, P.; Kavetsos, G.; Krekel, C.; Mavridis, D.; Metcalfe, R.; Senik, C.; Szymanski, S.; Ziebarth, N.R. Quantifying the intangible impact of the Olympics using subjective well-being data. J. Public Econ. 2019, 177, 104043. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Yamamura, E. Effects of Interactions among Social Capital, Income and Learning from Experiences of Natural Disasters: A case study from Japan. Reg. Stud. 2010, 44, 1019–1032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Yamamura, E. Natural disasters and social capital formation: The impact of the Great Hanshin-Awaji earthquake. Pap. Reg. Sci. 2016, 95, S143–S164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Yamaguchi, S.; Asai, Y.; Kambayashi, R. Effects of subsidized childcare on mothers’ labor supply under a rationing mechanism. Labour Econ. 2018, 55, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Yamaguchi, S.; Asai, Y.; Kambayashi, R. How Does Early Childcare Enrollment Affect Children, Parents, and Their Interactions? Labour Econ. 2018, 55, 56–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Yamamura, E.; Tsutsui, Y. Trade policy preference, childhood sporting experience, and informal school curriculum: An examination of views of the TPP from the viewpoint of behavioral economics. Rev. Int. Econ. 2019, 27, 61–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Adams, R.; Funk, P. Beyond the glass ceiling: Does gender matter? Manag. Sci. 2012, 58, 219–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Beutel, A.; Marini, M. Gender and values. Am. Sociol. Rev. 1995, 60, 436–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Bisin, A.; Verdier, T. The Economics of cultural transmission and the dynamics of preferences. J. Econ. Theory 2001, 97, 298–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Bisin, A.; Topa, G.; Verdier, T. Religious intermarriage and socialization in the United States. J. Political Econ. 2004, 112, 615–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Kawaguchi, D.; Miyazaki, J. Working mothers and sons’ preferences regarding female labor supply: Direct evidence from stated preferences. J. Popul. Econ. 2009, 22, 115–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Fernández, R.; Fogli, A.; Olivetti, C. Mothers and sons: Preference formation and female labor force dynamics. Q. J. Econ. 2004, 119, 1249–1299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Yamamura, E. Long-term effects of female teachers on pupils’ smoking behaviour in adult life. Appl. Econ. Lett. 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Yamamura, E.; Managi, S.; Tsutsui, Y. Male pupils taught by female homeroom teachers show a higher preference for Corporate Social Responsibility in adulthood. J. Jpn. Int. Econ. 2019, 54, 101048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Cameron, C.; Miller, D. A Practitioner’s Guide to Cluster-Robust Inference. J. Hum. Resour. 2015, 50, 317–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Stock, J.H.; Yogo, M. Testing for Weak Instruments in Linear IV Regression. In Identification and Inference in Econometrics: A Festschrift in Honor of Thomas Rothenberg; Stock, J., Andrews, D., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2005; pp. 80–108. [Google Scholar]
  38. Lee, D.S.; McCrary, J.; Moreira, M.J.; Porter, J.R. Valid t-ratio Inference for IV 2021. In National Bureau of Economic Research; Report No. w29124; 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Cronqvist, H.; Yu, F. Shaped by their daughters: Executives, female socialization, and corporate social responsibility. J. Financ. Econ. 2017, 126, 543–562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Oswald, A.; Powdthavee, N. Daughters and left-wing voting. Rev. Econ. Stat. 2010, 92, 213–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Washington, E. Female socialization: How daughters affect their legislator fathers’ voting on women’s issues. Am. Econ. Rev. 2008, 98, 311–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. BBC News. Yoshiro Mori. Tokyo Olympics chief steps down over sexism row. BBC News, 12 February 2021. [Google Scholar]
  43. Durkee, A. Tokyo Olympics: Tennis Shifts Later Due to Extreme Heat after Player Medvedev Says He “Can Die” during Match; Forbs: New York, NY, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  44. Kyodo News. 130,000 meals for Olympic staffers thrown away in 1 month. Kyodo News, 27 August 2021. [Google Scholar]
  45. Brasor, P. Were the Olympics sustainable? Reports of waste suggest it’s not easy being green. Japan Times, 14 August 2021. [Google Scholar]
  46. Mainichi Newspaper. Tokyo Olympics cost $15.4 billion. What else could that buy? Mainichi Newspaper, 7 August; 2021.
  47. Caraka, R.E.; Noh, M.; Chen, R.C.; Lee, Y.; Gio, P.U.; Pardamean, B. Connecting climate and communicable disease to penta helix using hierarchical likelihood structural equation modelling. Symmetry 2021, 13, 657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Sjögren Forss, K.; Kottorp, A.; Rämgård, M. Collaborating in a penta-helix structure within a community based participatory research programme: ‘Wrestling with hierarchies and getting caught in isolated downpipes’. Arch. Public Health 2021, 79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 13 12879 g001 550
Figure 1. Distribution of Preference for Compact Olympics.
Figure 1. Distribution of Preference for Compact Olympics.
Sustainability 13 12879 g001
Sustainability 13 12879 g002 550
Figure 2. Geographical distribution of preference for compact Olympics. Note: Black shaded areas indicate prefectures where the percentage of residents who preferred small-scale Olympics is over 65%. Gray shaded areas show prefectures where the percentage is between 50% and 64%. The white area is a prefecture (Shimane) where the percentage is below 49%.
Figure 2. Geographical distribution of preference for compact Olympics. Note: Black shaded areas indicate prefectures where the percentage of residents who preferred small-scale Olympics is over 65%. Gray shaded areas show prefectures where the percentage is between 50% and 64%. The white area is a prefecture (Shimane) where the percentage is below 49%.
Sustainability 13 12879 g002
Sustainability 13 12879 g003 550
Figure 3. Distribution of various preferences.
Figure 3. Distribution of various preferences.
Sustainability 13 12879 g003
Table
Table 1. Description of variables and the mean for male and female samples.
Table 1. Description of variables and the mean for male and female samples.
DescriptionMaleFemale
COMPACT OLYMPICDo you agree that government should reduce public expenditure for the 2020 Tokyo Olympics?
1 (strongly disagree)–5 (strongly agree)		3.884.02
VIEW ENVIRONMENTDo you agree that government should protect the environment?
1 (strongly disagree)–5 (strongly agree)		3.593.84
VIEW GENDERDo you agree that government should create economic and social conditions in which women are able to fully exhibit their ability and actively participate in the workplace?
1 (strongly disagree)–5 (strongly agree)		3.714.01
VIEW DISASTDo you agree that government should enhance disaster-prevention?
1 (strongly disagree)–5 (strongly agree)		4.014.27
UNIVEquals 1 if respondents graduated from university, 0 otherwise0.230.26
AGEAge43.544.1
AGE SQSquared age20622204
MARRIEquals 1 if respondents are married, 0 otherwise0.480.58
INCOMHousehold income667634
FEMALEEquals 1 if respondents are women, 0 otherwise01
FEMALE TEACHEREquals 1 if homeroom teacher is female in the first grade in elementary school, 0 otherwise0.650.76
Observations 24141684
Note: The unit of INCOM is 10,000 yen.
Table
Table 2. Estimation results of the OLS model (dependent variable is COMPACT OLYMPIC): Sample: Male and female samples.
Table 2. Estimation results of the OLS model (dependent variable is COMPACT OLYMPIC): Sample: Male and female samples.
COMPACT OLYMPIC
(1)(2)(2)
VIEW0.18 ***
ENVIRONMENT(0.02)
VIEW 0.15 ***
GENDER (0.02)
VIEW 0.25 ***
DISAST (0.02)
UNIV0.060.060.06
(0.07)(0.07)(0.07)
AGE0.06 0.07 0.08
(0.10)(0.10)(0.11)
AGE SQ0.050.050.02
(0.10)(0.10)(0.10)
MARRI−0.08 **−0.08 **−0.08 **
(0.03)(0.04)(0.03)
INCOM−0.06−0.06−0.06
(0.04)(0.04)(0.04)
FEMALE0.10 ***0.10 ***0.09 ***
(0.03)(0.02)(0.03)
R20.060.060.08
Observations425442544254
Note: Numbers within parentheses are robust standard errors clustered on the residential prefecture. Further, residential prefecture dummies are included. For convenience of interpretation, the coefficients of AGE and AGE SQ were multiplied by 10 and 1000, respectively. The coefficients of INCOM were multiplied by 10 and 1000. *** p < 0.01, and ** p < 0.05.
Table
Table 3. Estimation results of the OLS model (dependent variable is COMPACT OLYMPIC): Male sample.
Table 3. Estimation results of the OLS model (dependent variable is COMPACT OLYMPIC): Male sample.
COMPACT OLYMPIC
(1)(2)(2)
VIEW0.17 ***
ENVIRONMENT(0.03)
VIEW 0.14 ***
GENDER (0.02)
VIEW 0.24 ***
DISAST (0.02)
R20.060.060.08
Observations251725172517
Note: Numbers within parentheses are robust standard errors clustered on the residential prefecture. The set of control variables is equivalent to that in Table 2 although the results are not reported. *** p < 0.01.
Table
Table 4. Estimation results of the OLS model (dependent variable is COMPACT OLYMPIC): Female sample.
Table 4. Estimation results of the OLS model (dependent variable is COMPACT OLYMPIC): Female sample.
COMPACT OLYMPIC
(1)(2)(2)
VIEW0.20 ***
ENVIRONMENT(0.03)
VIEW 0.16 ***
GENDER (0.03)
VIEW 0.26 ***
DISAST (0.03)
R20.070.060.09
Observations173717371737
Note: Numbers within parentheses are robust standard errors clustered on the residential prefecture. The set of control variables is equivalent to that in Table 2 although the results are not reported. *** p < 0.01.
Table
Table 5. Estimation results of the IV 2SLS model (dependent variable is COMPACT OLYMPIC): Sample: Male and female sample.
Table 5. Estimation results of the IV 2SLS model (dependent variable is COMPACT OLYMPIC): Sample: Male and female sample.
COMPACT OLYMPIC
Second-Stage
(1)(2)(2)
VIEW1.53 **
ENVIRONMENT(0.76)
VIEW 1.66 **
GENDER (0.72)
VIEW 1.31 ***
DISAST (0.48)
First-stage
FEMALE0.10 **0.09 ***0.12 ***
TEACHER(0.04)(0.03)(0.03)
F-stat.
Prob > F		5.14
0.03		7.63
0.00		13.7
0.00
Root MSE1.491.641.27
Observations409840984098
Note: Numbers within parentheses are robust standard errors clustered on the residential prefecture. The set of control variables, which are included in the first and second stages, is equivalent to that of Table 2 although the results are not reported. ** p < 0.05 and *** p < 0.01.
Table
Table 6. Estimation results of the IV 2SLS model (dependent variable is COMPACT OLYMPIC): Male sample.
Table 6. Estimation results of the IV 2SLS model (dependent variable is COMPACT OLYMPIC): Male sample.
COMPACT OLYMPIC
Second-Stage
(1)(2)(2)
VIEW1.48 **
ENVIRONMENT(0.67)
VIEW 1.10 ***
GENDER (0.41)
VIEW 1.09 ***
DISAST (0.41)
First-stage
FEMALE0.10 **0.14 ***0.14 ***
TEACHER(0.04)(0.04)(0.03)
F-stat.
Prob > F		5.83
0.02		10.2
0.00		13.5
0.00
Root MSE1.531.311.21
Observations241424142414
Note: Numbers within parentheses are robust standard errors clustered on the residential prefecture. The set of control variables, which are included in the first and second stages, is equivalent to that of Table 2 although the results are not reported. ** p < 0.05 and *** p < 0.01.
Table
Table 7. Estimation results of the IV 2SLS model (dependent variable is COMPACT OLYMPIC): Female sample.
Table 7. Estimation results of the IV 2SLS model (dependent variable is COMPACT OLYMPIC): Female sample.
COMPACT OLYMPIC
Second-Stage
(1)(2)(2)
VIEW2.32
ENVIRONMENT(1.81)
VIEW 8.54
GENDER (13.6)
VIEW 2.12 *
DISAST (1.06)
First-stage
FEMALE0.08 0.02 0.09 **
TEACHER(0.06)(0.04)(0.04)
F-stat.
Prob > F		1.96
0.16		0.37
0.54		5.23
0.03
Root MSE1.847.091.59
Observations168416841684
Note: Numbers within parentheses are robust standard errors clustered on the residential prefecture. The set of control variables, which are included in the first and second stages, is equivalent to that of Table 2 although the results are not reported. ** p < 0.05 and * p < 0.1.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Yamamura, E. Do You Want Sustainable Olympics? Environment, Disaster, Gender, and the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12879. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132212879

AMA Style

Yamamura E. Do You Want Sustainable Olympics? Environment, Disaster, Gender, and the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. Sustainability. 2021; 13(22):12879. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132212879

Chicago/Turabian Style

Yamamura, Eiji. 2021. "Do You Want Sustainable Olympics? Environment, Disaster, Gender, and the 2020 Tokyo Olympics" Sustainability 13, no. 22: 12879. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132212879

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop