1. Mega-sport events have a smaller impact on inbound tourism than previously thought, with an average increase of only 4%.
2. The Summer Olympic Games see the largest increase in inbound tourism at 18%, while most other events have no positive impact.
3. Developing countries may benefit more from hosting mega-sport events, as the selection panel's preference for developed countries reduces the impact on inbound tourism.
The article "Mega-sport events and inbound tourism: New data, methods and evidence" provides an updated analysis of the impact of mega-sport events on international tourism. The authors use a gravity model for tourism demand to estimate the effects of eleven mega-sport events on inbound tourism from 1995 to 2019. The results show that adding more events, years, and improved techniques reduce the effects of mega-sport events on inbound tourism. Mega-sports events now only increase inbound tourism by 4%, on average, with the Summer Olympic Games seeing an increase of 18% on inbound tourism.
The article's strengths lie in its use of a rigorous econometric method to estimate the impact of mega-sport events on international tourism. The authors also provide insights into the selection panel's preference for developed countries to host these events, which may lead to smaller impacts on inbound tourism in developing countries.
However, there are some potential biases and limitations in this article that need consideration. Firstly, the authors do not explore counterarguments or alternative explanations for their findings. For example, they do not consider whether other factors such as security concerns or political instability may affect tourists' decisions to visit a country during a mega-sport event.
Secondly, the article does not provide evidence for some claims made. For instance, it is unclear how the authors arrived at their conclusion that most mega-sport events have no positive impact on inbound tourism.
Thirdly, there is a lack of discussion about possible risks associated with hosting mega-sport events. For example, there is no mention of potential negative impacts such as displacement of local communities or environmental damage caused by large-scale infrastructure projects.
Finally, while the authors acknowledge that developing countries may have larger effects from hosting mega-sport events due to their lower baseline levels of international tourist arrivals, they do not explore how these countries can maximize these benefits while minimizing potential risks.
In conclusion, while the article provides valuable insights into the impact of mega-sport events on inbound tourism, it is important to consider its potential biases and limitations. Future research should explore alternative explanations for the findings, provide evidence for claims made, consider potential risks associated with hosting these events, and explore how developing countries can maximize benefits while minimizing risks.