Abstract
This thesis examines the legitimation of, and social responses to, the Guangzhou 2010 Asian Games (Games) with particular attention to the social controversies surrounding the Games. Over the past two decades Chinese cities have submitted numerous bids to host mega-events. Recently, for instance, Beijing won its bid for the 2022 Winter Olympics and Hangzhou, the capital of Zhejiang province, will host the 18th Asian Games. These mega-events can generate positive legacies for the local and national economy, but the social and economic consequences for specific groups could be negative. Little research has been done on the social and political consequences of these events. Using the Guangzhou 2010 Asian Games as a case study, this study examines the consequences of a mega-event in China.Urban studies literature has given considerable attention to mega-events over the past few decades. As explained in Chapter 2, the political economy approach is a very useful way of examining the social impacts of mega-events. This approach focuses on economic inequality related to the displacement of weaker groups and the marginalization of the poor. However, the extant political economy literature on mega-events pays little attention to the related but alternative sources of injustice: cultural subordination and political misrepresentation. Following Fraser, this study develops a multidimensional conception of social justice. Redistribution remains part of the analysis but recognition and representation are also used as the basis of the framework that will assess justice claims in urban contention over mega-events.
I will argue in Chapter 3 that claim making regarding mega-events is a discursive practice. After all, both governments and social actors discursively communicate their opinions on mega-events. Such a discourse-based approach also implies that the opinions of residents regarding mega-events - both positive and negative - need to be taken seriously. Critical discourse analysis, specifically the discourse-historical approach, allows for an examination of both government discourses and social claims regarding the necessity and the effects of mega-events. Critical discourse analysis combines critical social analysis with textual analysis. The discourse-historical approach helps to contextualize the Guangzhou 2010 Asian Games. The Games were part of a mega-project that was meant to advance modernization. The social responses to this larger mega-project were part of an on-going series of social contestations about how the city was changing rather than discrete criticisms of the Games alone.
On the basis of these theoretical foundations, I then present three empirical chapters on the Guangzhou 2010 Asian Games and its social impacts. The research methods I used in this study are presented in Chapter 4. In Chapter 5, I analyze the government rhetoric in the run-up to the Games and its social reception. The Guangzhou municipality presented the Asian Games as a precious opportunity to present Guangzhou on the global stage. This branding was incorporated in an extensive urban development strategy, which facilitated the further modernization of Guangzhou. For the most part, Guangzhou residents demonstrated positive reactions to the Games on the motivational bases of nationalism, economic growth and civic pride.
In Chapter 6, I discuss the physical transformation of the city in the run-up to the Games from 2004 to 2010. The landscapes of Guangzhou were dramatically changed. These changes materialized government discourse and won general social support but they also triggered various forms of urban contention.
In Chapter 7, I examine three social controversies that arose in response to the Games. They were the Xian village redevelopment, the Pro-Cantonese movement, and the city beautification. My analysis shows that the justice claims expressed in these controversies not only relate to maldistribution, but also misrecognition and misrepresentation. Moreover, the effects of the Asian Games created diverse forms of injustice. For instance, the Games caused maldistribution in Xian controversy but also triggered misrecognition in the language controversy. This underscores the importance of a multidimensional perspective of social justice in critical research to arrive at an adequate interpretation of the social effects of mega-events.
I conclude that this study provides two important contributions. Empirically, the analysis presented here adds richness and diversity to the mega-event database. First, contrary to any presumptions based on previous political economy research, the public reception to the Games was more positive than expected. Apart from economic considerations, residents felt proud of Guangzhou’s status as an Asian Games host city. Second, the criticisms and oppositions surrounding the Games focused on diverse of forms of injustice, not only maldistribution but misrepresentation and misrecognition as well. And there is not a clear cut. Third, though the Games helped the local governments promote the city’s image, and defined development priorities for Guangzhou’s urban landscape, it was also used by Guangzhou residents to recover their regional identity and helped them to address diverse forms of social injustice.
Theoretically, this study further develops the political economy approach in the study of mega-events. As shown here, a generic political economy perspective, which mainly formulates the negative social impacts as redistributive injustice-dispossession by capital accumulation, would not adequately address all the sources of social injustice that are in play in arguments over mega-events. Justice claims vary and should be understood and approached from a host city’s specific setting. In this sense, Fraser’s conceptualization of justice offers useful insights for an inclusive and equitably normative framework to analyze and assess justice claims in diverse local dynamics.
| Date of Award | 15 Jun 2016 |
|---|---|
| Original language | English |
| Awarding Institution |
|
| Supervisor | Bart WISSINK (Supervisor) |