Flashcards
Barcelona Questions
Cards in this deck (15)
- 1What happened in prior 1970s in Barcelona?was a major industrial city ran by dictator Francisco Franco (Bladen)
experienced triple process of industrial, urban and demographic expansion - more factories, increasing population, housing expansion - due to migration from rural areas (Blanco, 09)
Lack of democracy and Franco's urban development model in interest of major real estate companies = anarchic conflict and socio-spatical segregation (Blanco, 2009) - 2What happened in the 1970s in Barcelona?Franco died = significant urban movements 'Plans Popular', extreme alternative to Franco's original model (Blanco, 2009)
Demanded better housing, improvements in health and education, transport and road improvements, political freedom (Blanco, 2009)
But plans coincided with global economic and industrial crisis (Brunet, 1995)
Left city in post industrial state with rundown spaces and decreased political activity (Bladen) - 3What happened in Barcelona in the 1980s?Country left with triple regeneration challenge - political, urban redevelopment and socio-economic (Blanco, 2009)
Shortage of resources, Olympic Bid = Key driver to reinvent themselves as globally competitive city through a mega-event-led regeneration strategy (Bladen)
Between bid and games - went from depression to economic boom (Brunet, 95) - 4What is the Barcelona model?A concept many cities have tried to emulate due to Barcelona's use of major events as catalysts for urban regeneration and socio-economic benefits over the last 30 years (Balibrea, 2007; Casellas, 2006)
But simply imitating their actions and formulas may not be a proven strategy for cities with dissimilar social and political circumstances (Garcia-Ramon and Albet, 2000) - 5What is Barcelona 2000?Plan set up after the Games to continue economic and social growth and improvement of quality of life.
Fits glocalization thesis as focused on global trade, investment and migration process plus the local region (Marshall, 1996) - 6What was Barcelona's Olympic Strategies/goals?They improved and exploited their assets to initiate development strategies (Hildreth, 2008)
1. promote urban regeneration to develop cities quality of life
2. improve global status, road/transportation improvements
3. development of hotel/sports facilities
4. enhancement of housing infrastructures (Brunet, 1995) - 7What was Barcelona's Olympic policies?Culture:
Olympic Committee committed to city-wide cultural programme, promoting Olympics as first 'Cultural Games' to gain local support (Rodriguez, 2008)
Aim to build infrastructure and develop Catalan identity and resident's pride for city (Subiros, 1999)
Regeneration:
to conserve historical buildings, develop leading architecture and open up the city to the sea (Degan and Garcia, 2012)
Make public art/architecture a symbolic feature and develop disadvantaged areas (Balibrea, 2001)
Construct Olympic venues/public spaces in disadvantaged areas, developing waterfront by extending beaches for public access and improve piers (Garcia-Ramon and Albet, 2000)
Develop infrastructure - extension of subway, new ring road, demolish abandoned buildings (Bladen)
Tourism:
Opportunity to promote city as leisure and tourist destination in hand with cultural and regeneration strategies to promote heritage (Bladen) - 8What is the argument for and against ongoing events?New and regular events bring the community together and make use of the spaces. Such as the inner city Ravel district where festivals are aimed at locals (R+P)
UFC upheld mega-event-led strategy - developed areas of land and new convention centre. Gained investment for waterfront and tourism (Bladen; D+G)
BUT. UFC cost $2.3b to produce and attracted 1.5 less visitors than expected (Bladen) - 9What is the for and against economic benefit?Outstanding investments compared to other cities. Proves success (but maybe not model's success) as Tokyo only city to generate more (Blanco 09). Athens left in £7b debt (Baim, 09)
Games cost $1.3b to produce but physical investment worth $8b (Brunet, 1995)
Success of games down to strength of goals and organisation that attracted investment and improve economy (Brunet)
Seen in Liverpool ECOC who used clarified goals and vision (Hildreth 08; Impacts 08)
BUT end of Olympics saw economic crisis with strict budget tensions till mid 90s (Blanco, 09)
Only wealthy saw benefits
Rapid inflation prices - housing, lowered residents purchase power (Barcelona City Council 94)
Investment 400% over budget (Taylor, 13)
Not uncommon, London 107% over (Taylor, 13) - 10What is for and against employment benefits?Pre-event created just over 60,000 jobs. halved unemployment in Barcelona (Brunet)
25% decrease in unemployment in Spain, evidence of thriving economy (Marshall, 96)
BUT dramatic changes after - 21,000 jobs lost, were temporary, low paid in service sector (Brunet).
Shows unemployment benefits of mega event not straightforward and can't be measured straight away (Bladen)
But Olympic infrastructure created 20000 permanent jobs in the city (Taylor, 2013).
Also Edinburgh Festival had direct impact on employability - grew by 70% 90-96 (R+P) - 11What is for and against regeneration?Benefited from various projects as direct result (Bladen)
Improved transport links by 15% and green/beaches by 78% (taylor, 2013)
However criticised for having too much emphasis on improving transport links - anti-ecological effects, lack of intended green spaces (Martinez Alier 92)
The Olympic stadium was abandoned and now empty (Bladen). Dramatic comparison to Manchester CW Games - sold to MCFC (Bladen)
Architecture was demolished, what is left doesn't represent city culture
Lack of legacy planning - 50% occupancy rates after. Also seen in Beijing who saw rates plummet (Tschang, 08)
But not always case, Sydney saw legacy of major state of the art sporting venues and transport facilities (Allen 05) - 12What is for and against social/cultural benefits?91% residents in favour of Games before, year later survey showed similar positive attitudes (Brunet, 95)
47% felt had made no impact (Brunet)
BUT was not supported by all residents - Campaigns tried to gain support but wasn't successful for later events - UFC (R+P)
However increased sport participation by 15% (those who take part 1 x week or more 3 years later), general attitude towards sport developed and 45,000 more members to new sport facilities (Truno, 95)
London did similar with £1b invested into youth sport over 5 years created 6000 new facilities (IOC, 13)
Was successful hegemonic project, brought together various people, personalised benefits (Hajer, 95)
Now competes on international level with wide variety of events after council heavily invested in cultural activities - attendance tripled (Rodriguez, 2008)
BUT dumbed down culture for tourists, shown in decrease in traditional music festival attendance whilst grows for world music festivals (R+P) - 13What are for and against arguments for Tourism impacts?400% increase in visitors 8 year after, 300% increase in hotel capacity (Bladen)
BUT most people watched on TV so number of visitors not predominant effect. Greater expectations of visitors but limited by hotel space (Brunet)
Reputation on international level improved - Europe's most attractive city (Bladen)
Similarly Atlanta saw 78% increase in overseas visitors and 35% increase in domestic over 3 years (Smith and Jenner, 1998)
Sydney saw increasing interest in business and holiday destination with 88% visitors saying intended to visit for holiday after (Allen 05)
BUT 3 years later, decrease in tourism due to 9/11, increase in AUS dollar (Bowdin 11)
Barcelona also increased the cost of keeping the city clean by tourism (D+G)
An increase in overnight stays created tension from residents in regards to the use of public spaces - Old Town, oppose new nightlife 'right to sleep' (Degan, 2004)
Tourism policies given more priority than pressing issues such as welfare and immigration (Delgado, 07) - 14What arguments support the Barcelona model?Praised for transformation of public spaces, preservation of historical buildings and architectural aesthetic quality (Balibrea, 07)
Strengthened new/old attractions (Brunet)
Transport infrastructures, renovated seafront and sports facilities build as direct impact (D+G)
Full benefits and high levels of infrastructure not possible with Olympic financial resources (D+G)
Excellent environment for athletes - host variety of sport events, continued to grow (Brunet)
Combined quality urban regeneration and social cohesion to develop sense of belonging to the city, reason to come together (G-R +A)
Reinvented selves in 2 decades through innovation and design, creative culture, recognised for cutting edge cultural industries and architecture. Created own unique urban brand (D+G)
Effects carried on - UFC €3b private investment in regeneration projects (R+P) - 15What arguments are against the Barcelona Model?Worked for 80s/early 90s but not now. Regeneration not needed, just sped up process could have been more economically incorporated into more progressive strategies without negative effects (Moreno and Mbntalban, 91)
Cultural regeneration meant unaffordable housing which pushed out the younger residents of the city, creating urban sprawl, a sustainable challenge of the model (D+G) This is also seen in Sydney and Athens who were critiqued for displacing residents to build venues (Foley et al, 12) It affects their perception of quality of life, provides community alienation (McDonnell et al 99) It put pressure on public transport, frustrated the residents who blamed Gov.
No attention paid to quality/density of housing.
Most benefits concentrated on Barcelona, outskirts under developed (Marshall 96). - not always case, London shared benefits to avoid critique - Kent gained new vibrancy and community development (Foley et al, 12)
Only benefits certain people. Richer residents afford accommodation on seafront, housing in city (Marshall, 96)
Residents argued originated from private developers greed and economic considerations (D+G)
Legacy not continued - UFC space €1.5m to maintain yearly, no clear programming policy in future (R+P)
International labour migration caused - irregular, low income = living in overcrowded rundown conditions. (D+G) BUT city council are continuing pursuit for social cohesion implemented in cultural strategies by offering immigrants social services, health, schooling (D+G)
Information
- Description
- Seen Question Flashcards on Barcelona Questions, created by eppiefs on 21/05/2014.
- Created by
- eppiefs
- Views
- 17
- Rating