Suchergebnisse

No comment ; International audience ; Research question: The literature investigating non-mega sport events' social impacts remains limited. Furthermore, these impacts have mainly been examined from the point of view of spectators or residents. This article explores how these impacts are perceived by local governments. Based on the theoretical framework of strategic sensemaking, we analyze how local sport officials collect and interpret information concerning these impacts, and how these interpretations lead them to develop impact management strategies.Research methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with local sports officials from 25 medium-sized French cities and subjected to content analysis.Results and findings: Results show that while they perceive more positive than negative impacts, they are nonetheless proportionally more involved in the management of negative impacts. Two main gaps are identified in their sensemaking process. One gap relates to the understandability of positive impacts, and the other relates to their controllability. Four ways of managing these impacts are presented with supporting evidence, namely organizer relationship management, direct management, community mobilization, and partnerships with local corporations.Implications: These results are summarized in a model of sensemaking process, which provides new theoretical insights into the literature on sport events' social impacts. Practical suggestions are also made in order to increase the social leveraging of sport events.

No comment ; International audience ; Research question: The literature investigating non-mega sport events' social impacts remains limited. Furthermore, these impacts have mainly been examined from the point of view of spectators or residents. This article explores how these impacts are perceived by local governments. Based on the theoretical framework of strategic sensemaking, we analyze how local sport officials collect and interpret information concerning these impacts, and how these interpretations lead them to develop impact management strategies.Research methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with local sports officials from 25 medium-sized French cities and subjected to content analysis.Results and findings: Results show that while they perceive more positive than negative impacts, they are nonetheless proportionally more involved in the management of negative impacts. Two main gaps are identified in their sensemaking process. One gap relates to the understandability of positive impacts, and the other relates to their controllability. Four ways of managing these impacts are presented with supporting evidence, namely organizer relationship management, direct management, community mobilization, and partnerships with local corporations.Implications: These results are summarized in a model of sensemaking process, which provides new theoretical insights into the literature on sport events' social impacts. Practical suggestions are also made in order to increase the social leveraging of sport events.

No comment ; International audience ; Research question: The literature investigating non-mega sport events' social impacts remains limited. Furthermore, these impacts have mainly been examined from the point of view of spectators or residents. This article explores how these impacts are perceived by local governments. Based on the theoretical framework of strategic sensemaking, we analyze how local sport officials collect and interpret information concerning these impacts, and how these interpretations lead them to develop impact management strategies.Research methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with local sports officials from 25 medium-sized French cities and subjected to content analysis.Results and findings: Results show that while they perceive more positive than negative impacts, they are nonetheless proportionally more involved in the management of negative impacts. Two main gaps are identified in their sensemaking process. One gap relates to the understandability of positive impacts, and the other relates to their controllability. Four ways of managing these impacts are presented with supporting evidence, namely organizer relationship management, direct management, community mobilization, and partnerships with local corporations.Implications: These results are summarized in a model of sensemaking process, which provides new theoretical insights into the literature on sport events' social impacts. Practical suggestions are also made in order to increase the social leveraging of sport events.

No comment ; International audience ; Research question: The literature investigating non-mega sport events' social impacts remains limited. Furthermore, these impacts have mainly been examined from the point of view of spectators or residents. This article explores how these impacts are perceived by local governments. Based on the theoretical framework of strategic sensemaking, we analyze how local sport officials collect and interpret information concerning these impacts, and how these interpretations lead them to develop impact management strategies.Research methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with local sports officials from 25 medium-sized French cities and subjected to content analysis.Results and findings: Results show that while they perceive more positive than negative impacts, they are nonetheless proportionally more involved in the management of negative impacts. Two main gaps are identified in their sensemaking process. One gap relates to the understandability of positive impacts, and the other relates to their controllability. Four ways of managing these impacts are presented with supporting evidence, namely organizer relationship management, direct management, community mobilization, and partnerships with local corporations.Implications: These results are summarized in a model of sensemaking process, which provides new theoretical insights into the literature on sport events' social impacts. Practical suggestions are also made in order to increase the social leveraging of sport events.

Hosting the Olympic Games costs billions of taxpayer dollars. Following a quasi- experimental setting, this paper assesses the intangible impact of the London 2012 Olympics, using a novel panel of 26,000 residents in London, Paris, and Berlin during the summers of 2011, 2012, and 2013. We show that hosting the Olympics increases subjective well-being of the host city's residents during the event, particularly around the times of the opening and closing ceremonies. However, we do not _nd much evi- dence for legacy e_ects. Estimating residents' implicit willingness-to-pay for the event, we do not _nd that it was worth it for London alone, but a modest wellbeing impact on the rest of the country would make hosting worth the costs.

Hosting the Olympic Games costs billions of taxpayer dollars. Following a quasi- experimental setting, this paper assesses the intangible impact of the London 2012 Olympics, using a novel panel of 26,000 residents in London, Paris, and Berlin during the summers of 2011, 2012, and 2013. We show that hosting the Olympics increases subjective well-being of the host city's residents during the event, particularly around the times of the opening and closing ceremonies. However, we do not _nd much evi- dence for legacy e_ects. Estimating residents' implicit willingness-to-pay for the event, we do not _nd that it was worth it for London alone, but a modest wellbeing impact on the rest of the country would make hosting worth the costs.

Hosting the Olympic Games costs billions of taxpayer dollars. Following a quasi- experimental setting, this paper assesses the intangible impact of the London 2012 Olympics, using a novel panel of 26,000 residents in London, Paris, and Berlin during the summers of 2011, 2012, and 2013. We show that hosting the Olympics increases subjective well-being of the host city's residents during the event, particularly around the times of the opening and closing ceremonies. However, we do not _nd much evi- dence for legacy e_ects. Estimating residents' implicit willingness-to-pay for the event, we do not _nd that it was worth it for London alone, but a modest wellbeing impact on the rest of the country would make hosting worth the costs.

Hosting the Olympic Games costs billions of taxpayer dollars. Following a quasi- experimental setting, this paper assesses the intangible impact of the London 2012 Olympics, using a novel panel of 26,000 residents in London, Paris, and Berlin during the summers of 2011, 2012, and 2013. We show that hosting the Olympics increases subjective well-being of the host city's residents during the event, particularly around the times of the opening and closing ceremonies. However, we do not _nd much evi- dence for legacy e_ects. Estimating residents' implicit willingness-to-pay for the event, we do not _nd that it was worth it for London alone, but a modest wellbeing impact on the rest of the country would make hosting worth the costs.

Hosting the Olympic Games costs billions of taxpayer dollars. Following a quasi- experimental setting, this paper assesses the intangible impact of the London 2012 Olympics, using a novel panel of 26,000 residents in London, Paris, and Berlin during the summers of 2011, 2012, and 2013. We show that hosting the Olympics increases subjective well-being of the host city's residents during the event, particularly around the times of the opening and closing ceremonies. However, we do not _nd much evi- dence for legacy e_ects. Estimating residents' implicit willingness-to-pay for the event, we do not _nd that it was worth it for London alone, but a modest wellbeing impact on the rest of the country would make hosting worth the costs.

Hosting the Olympic Games costs billions of taxpayer dollars. Following a quasi- experimental setting, this paper assesses the intangible impact of the London 2012 Olympics, using a novel panel of 26,000 residents in London, Paris, and Berlin during the summers of 2011, 2012, and 2013. We show that hosting the Olympics increases subjective well-being of the host city's residents during the event, particularly around the times of the opening and closing ceremonies. However, we do not _nd much evi- dence for legacy e_ects. Estimating residents' implicit willingness-to-pay for the event, we do not _nd that it was worth it for London alone, but a modest wellbeing impact on the rest of the country would make hosting worth the costs.

In many settings of political bargaining over policy, agents care not only about getting their will but also about having others approve the chosen policy thus giving it more weight. What is the effect on the bargaining outcome when agents care about such legitimacy of the policy? We study this question theoretically and empirically. We show that the median-voter theorem holds in groups that are ideologically very cohesive and in groups with extreme ideological disagreement. However, in groups with intermediate ideological disagreement, the median-voter theorem does not hold. This is since, on the individual level, ideological disagreement with the median has a non-monotonic effect on the policy. We test our model in a natural experimental setting—U.S. appeals courts—where causal identification is based on random assignment of judges into judicial panels, each consisting of three judges who rule on a case. Here judges care about legitimacy of the policy they write because a norm of consensus prevails and because increased legitimacy reduces the likelihood of the judicial case to be heard by the Supreme Court. The predicted pattern of how policies depend on the participants' ideologies are corroborated by our empirical tests.

In many settings of political bargaining over policy, agents care not only about getting their will but also about having others approve the chosen policy thus giving it more weight. What is the effect on the bargaining outcome when agents care about such legitimacy of the policy? We study this question theoretically and empirically. We show that the median-voter theorem holds in groups that are ideologically very cohesive and in groups with extreme ideological disagreement. However, in groups with intermediate ideological disagreement, the median-voter theorem does not hold. This is since, on the individual level, ideological disagreement with the median has a non-monotonic effect on the policy. We test our model in a natural experimental setting—U.S. appeals courts—where causal identification is based on random assignment of judges into judicial panels, each consisting of three judges who rule on a case. Here judges care about legitimacy of the policy they write because a norm of consensus prevails and because increased legitimacy reduces the likelihood of the judicial case to be heard by the Supreme Court. The predicted pattern of how policies depend on the participants' ideologies are corroborated by our empirical tests.

Public consultations, especially online, are more and more commonplace in contemporary democracies. This work aims to study how interpersonal trust determines participation in public consultations, and the forms there of. I use the Grand Débat National, that occurred in France in 2019, as a natural experiment to study the geographic cross sectional relation ship between a novel synthetic measure of local interpersonal trust and various aspects of participation in this public consultation. Then I study evidence from a small-scale experiment on interpersonal trust and participation in an online public consultation. I conclude that high-trust individuals participate more to public consultations compared to low-trust individuals, both at the extensive and intensive margins, and that there exists a discrepancy in their forms of participation, in terms of content, but also when it comes to textual or lexical aspects of participation. This result calls for questioning the common presumption that public consultations will give a better representation to and help design be.er policies for everyone, particularly low-trust individuals. In fact, it appears that public consultations can be instead captured by the demands of high-trust individuals.

Public consultations, especially online, are more and more commonplace in contemporary democracies. This work aims to study how interpersonal trust determines participation in public consultations, and the forms there of. I use the Grand Débat National, that occurred in France in 2019, as a natural experiment to study the geographic cross sectional relation ship between a novel synthetic measure of local interpersonal trust and various aspects of participation in this public consultation. Then I study evidence from a small-scale experiment on interpersonal trust and participation in an online public consultation. I conclude that high-trust individuals participate more to public consultations compared to low-trust individuals, both at the extensive and intensive margins, and that there exists a discrepancy in their forms of participation, in terms of content, but also when it comes to textual or lexical aspects of participation. This result calls for questioning the common presumption that public consultations will give a better representation to and help design be.er policies for everyone, particularly low-trust individuals. In fact, it appears that public consultations can be instead captured by the demands of high-trust individuals.

Public consultations, especially online, are more and more commonplace in contemporary democracies. This work aims to study how interpersonal trust determines participation in public consultations, and the forms there of. I use the Grand Débat National, that occurred in France in 2019, as a natural experiment to study the geographic cross sectional relation ship between a novel synthetic measure of local interpersonal trust and various aspects of participation in this public consultation. Then I study evidence from a small-scale experiment on interpersonal trust and participation in an online public consultation. I conclude that high-trust individuals participate more to public consultations compared to low-trust individuals, both at the extensive and intensive margins, and that there exists a discrepancy in their forms of participation, in terms of content, but also when it comes to textual or lexical aspects of participation. This result calls for questioning the common presumption that public consultations will give a better representation to and help design be.er policies for everyone, particularly low-trust individuals. In fact, it appears that public consultations can be instead captured by the demands of high-trust individuals.