Residents’ Perceived Social-Economic Impact of the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games
Full citation and abstract? Mark Zhang et al. “Residents Perceived Social-Economic Impact of the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games”, ICHPER-SD Journal of Research 8, no. 2 (2013): 19-25. Accessed Oct. 11, 2015
Abstract This article examine if Beijing Olympic Games accelerated the improving of local resident life quality and how the changes affected their support for the Games. The study have 412 residents who lived in Beijing 18 months or longer to participate in the survey which shows that the supports for the Games was still high after 2 years of hosting the Games. Major reasons for the support are improved entertainment opportunities and increase national pride. However, there is no direct relationship determined between their improved quality of life and the support for the Games.
Where do the authors work, and what are their areas of expertise? Note any other publications by the authors with relevance to the 6Cities project. Mark Zhang, Associate Professor at Delaware State University, Dover, DE, USA. Expertise: Management Consulting, Sports Management. Li Chen, Professor at Delaware State University, Dover, DE, USA. Expertise: Human resources management in sport, Coaching evaluation and incentives, Sport Marketing. Ouyang Lei, Graduate Student at Delaware State University, Dover, DE, USA. Expertise: Sport and Fitness Administration/Management Christopher Malone, Delaware State University, Dover, DE, USA
What are the main findings or arguments presented in the article or report? The study determines that the Olympic Games had positive impact on four dimensions: culture, environment, entertainment opportunities and basic living. The paper shows that the “Entertainment Opportunities” and “National Pride” significantly impacted on the residents’ continuous support for the Games.
Describe at least three ways that the argument is supported. The argument is supported majorly by the data they collected from the survey of 381 valid Beijing resident samples. One year after the 2008 Olympic Games, the survey indicates the biggest perceived changes is “opportunities for recreation and sport activities” with a mean score of 3.88 on scale of 5. The second and third significant changes are “public accepting green and environment conservation ideas” and “public courtesy and civility” with mean score of 3.84 and 3.83. (1 equals “worsened,” 2 equals “slightly worsened,” 3 equals “no change,” 4 equals “slightly improved” and 5 equals “improved.”)
The study also uses sophisticated factor analysis to determine the relationship between these factors and support for the Olympic Game and effects and relationship between the factors themselves. The result shows that “quality of life was positively impacted by the improvement in “environment”, national pride, entertainment and culture.
What three (or more) quotes capture the message of the article or report? “Meanwhile, the “quality of life” was significantly and negatively impacted by the cost of “basic living” (-.233, p < .001), in the same time positively impacted by the improvement in all other areas including “culture enrichment” (.242, p < .001), “entertainment opportunities” (.078, p < .05), “environment” (.09, p < .05), and “national pride” (.10, p < .05).”
“A factor analysis indicated four dimensions of changes: “Culture Enrichment”, “Basic Living”, “Entertainment Opportunities”, and “Environment”. Furthermore, “National Pride” received a positive boost (M = 4.10) due to the Games.”
“Beijing residents also recognized the government’s efforts in preserving Beijing’s culture and historical heritage, as well as reducing air pollution. These improvements were seen to lead to a better quality of life in general.”
What were the methods, tools and/or data used to produce the claims or arguments made in the article or report? In October 2009, eight trained college students from Beijing Sports University distributed survey questionnaires at different locations in Beijing. Participants were residents who had lived in the metropolitan areas of Beijing for 18 months or longer. With total 381 valid survey, the paper has concludes the survey result in following table.
The article uses initial exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to reveal four factors with 76.7% explained variance. The researchers established valid factors for modified Jurowski’s (1997) Social Impacts of Tourism Scale (SITS). A path analysis was conducted to determine the possible cause and effect relationship between variables with the path model shown in Figure 2 below. How (if at all) are health disparities or other equity issues addressed in the article or report? No, it is not addressed in the article.
Where has this article or report been referenced or discussed? (In some journals, you can see this in a sidebar.) The article is peer reviewed and has 40 reference counts in search on Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) of Institute of Education Sciences (IES) website.
Can you learn anything from the article or report’s bibliography that tells us something about how the article or report was produced? The reference lists couple of articles that provides the research methods such as Social Impacts of Tourism Scale (SITS) used in research on similar subject in previous Olympic Game. It also uses paper on impact of previous Olympic Game to guide the research objectives. It uses data from Beijing Government and conclusion from other paper to justify their finding. For example, “basic living” worsened after the Olympic Game can be partly contributed to 30% increase of Beijing housing prices in the first half of 2009 according to reference.
What three points, details or references from the text did you follow up on to advance your understanding of how air pollution science has been produced and used in governance and education in different settings? I followed up on the “Air Quality Guarantee Plan for the 29th Olympics in Beijing”(北京市2008奥运空气质量保障方案) mentioned in the article. According to the article, the overall air quality during the Beijing Olympics Games was improved dramatically when compared to the June of 2008 data. Recently, before China military parade, Beijing Environmental Protection Bureau announced the plan that is similar to the ones in Beijing Olympic Game and APEC. And those three events all have similar impact that is the air quality in Beijing improved dramatically during the events but changed back to heavy polluted shortly afterwards.
How the literature supports/opposes what you knew about 2008 Beijing Olympics? I thought quality of life would increase during or after the Game since mega events usually generate lots of job opportunities and attracting tourists. But according the paper, participants reported a mean score of 3.66 that is between slightly improved and no change. The significant negative impact on life quality by increased cost of “basic living” mentioned in the article may be accounted for this result.
How the literature could be useful in assessing air quality management during the 2008 Beijing Olympics? According to the paper, “public accepting green and environment conservation ideas” ranked second among the resident perceived improved factors. “The air quality and natural environment” perceived by resident has a high score of 3.73. The results indicates the Olympic game in Beijing had a positive impact on promotion of environmental conservation ideas and the public had impression that air quality had improved 1 year after the Game.
Full citation and abstract?
Mark Zhang et al. “Residents Perceived Social-Economic Impact of the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games”, ICHPER-SD Journal of Research 8, no. 2 (2013): 19-25. Accessed Oct. 11, 2015
Abstract
This article examine if Beijing Olympic Games accelerated the improving of local resident life quality and how the changes affected their support for the Games. The study have 412 residents who lived in Beijing 18 months or longer to participate in the survey which shows that the supports for the Games was still high after 2 years of hosting the Games. Major reasons for the support are improved entertainment opportunities and increase national pride. However, there is no direct relationship determined between their improved quality of life and the support for the Games.
Where do the authors work, and what are their areas of expertise? Note any other publications by the authors with relevance to the 6Cities project.
Mark Zhang, Associate Professor at Delaware State University, Dover, DE, USA. Expertise: Management Consulting, Sports Management.
Li Chen, Professor at Delaware State University, Dover, DE, USA. Expertise: Human resources management in sport, Coaching evaluation and incentives, Sport Marketing.
Ouyang Lei, Graduate Student at Delaware State University, Dover, DE, USA. Expertise: Sport and Fitness Administration/Management
Christopher Malone, Delaware State University, Dover, DE, USA
What are the main findings or arguments presented in the article or report?
The study determines that the Olympic Games had positive impact on four dimensions: culture, environment, entertainment opportunities and basic living.
The paper shows that the “Entertainment Opportunities” and “National Pride” significantly impacted on the residents’ continuous support for the Games.
Describe at least three ways that the argument is supported.
The argument is supported majorly by the data they collected from the survey of 381 valid Beijing resident samples. One year after the 2008 Olympic Games, the survey indicates the biggest perceived changes is “opportunities for recreation and sport activities” with a mean score of 3.88 on scale of 5. The second and third significant changes are “public accepting green and environment conservation ideas” and “public courtesy and civility” with mean score of 3.84 and 3.83. (1 equals “worsened,” 2 equals “slightly worsened,” 3 equals “no change,” 4 equals “slightly improved” and 5 equals “improved.”)
The study also uses sophisticated factor analysis to determine the relationship between these factors and support for the Olympic Game and effects and relationship between the factors themselves. The result shows that “quality of life was positively impacted by the improvement in “environment”, national pride, entertainment and culture.
What three (or more) quotes capture the message of the article or report?
“Meanwhile, the “quality of life” was significantly and negatively impacted by the cost of “basic living” (-.233, p < .001), in the same time positively impacted by the improvement in all other areas including “culture enrichment” (.242, p < .001), “entertainment opportunities” (.078, p < .05), “environment” (.09, p < .05), and “national pride” (.10, p < .05).”
“A factor analysis indicated four dimensions of changes: “Culture Enrichment”, “Basic Living”, “Entertainment Opportunities”, and “Environment”. Furthermore, “National Pride” received a positive boost (M = 4.10) due to the Games.”
“Beijing residents also recognized the government’s efforts in preserving Beijing’s culture and historical heritage, as well as reducing air pollution. These improvements were seen to lead to a better quality of life in general.”
What were the methods, tools and/or data used to produce the claims or arguments made in the article or report?
In October 2009, eight trained college students from Beijing Sports University distributed survey questionnaires at different locations in Beijing. Participants were residents who had lived in the metropolitan areas of Beijing for 18 months or longer. With total 381 valid survey, the paper has concludes the survey result in following table.
The article uses initial exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to reveal four factors with 76.7% explained variance. The researchers established valid factors for modified Jurowski’s (1997) Social Impacts of Tourism Scale (SITS). A path analysis was conducted to determine the possible cause and effect relationship between variables with the path model shown in Figure 2 below.
How (if at all) are health disparities or other equity issues addressed in the article or report?
No, it is not addressed in the article.
Where has this article or report been referenced or discussed? (In some journals, you can see this in a sidebar.)
The article is peer reviewed and has 40 reference counts in search on Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) of Institute of Education Sciences (IES) website.
Can you learn anything from the article or report’s bibliography that tells us something about how the article or report was produced?
The reference lists couple of articles that provides the research methods such as Social Impacts of Tourism Scale (SITS) used in research on similar subject in previous Olympic Game. It also uses paper on impact of previous Olympic Game to guide the research objectives. It uses data from Beijing Government and conclusion from other paper to justify their finding. For example, “basic living” worsened after the Olympic Game can be partly contributed to 30% increase of Beijing housing prices in the first half of 2009 according to reference.
What three points, details or references from the text did you follow up on to advance your understanding of how air pollution science has been produced and used in governance and education in different settings?
I followed up on the “Air Quality Guarantee Plan for the 29th Olympics in Beijing”(北京市2008奥运空气质量保障方案) mentioned in the article. According to the article, the overall air quality during the Beijing Olympics Games was improved dramatically when compared to the June of 2008 data. Recently, before China military parade, Beijing Environmental Protection Bureau announced the plan that is similar to the ones in Beijing Olympic Game and APEC. And those three events all have similar impact that is the air quality in Beijing improved dramatically during the events but changed back to heavy polluted shortly afterwards.
How the literature supports/opposes what you knew about 2008 Beijing Olympics?
I thought quality of life would increase during or after the Game since mega events usually generate lots of job opportunities and attracting tourists. But according the paper, participants reported a mean score of 3.66 that is between slightly improved and no change. The significant negative impact on life quality by increased cost of “basic living” mentioned in the article may be accounted for this result.
How the literature could be useful in assessing air quality management during the 2008 Beijing Olympics?
According to the paper, “public accepting green and environment conservation ideas” ranked second among the resident perceived improved factors. “The air quality and natural environment” perceived by resident has a high score of 3.73. The results indicates the Olympic game in Beijing had a positive impact on promotion of environmental conservation ideas and the public had impression that air quality had improved 1 year after the Game.