What remains of a major sporting event after the last race has been run or the last match played? How can one justify the huge amount of money spent for the organisation of such events if the host city is left with debts, a negative social and landscape legacy and expensive and underused facilities?

Often what is expected immediately after an Olympics or World Cup is not only a sporting success, but the renewal of infrastructure and a strong boost to the economy, revitalising a nation. However, there is frequently a legacy, i.e., the material and immaterial legacy that remains on the ground following a major event [1], which is negative. This does not only consist in the failure to exploit the infrastructure after the event is over but in losing the full potential of the event itself [2]. The legacy that is left behind can indeed justify the expense for both the promoting body and the host nation or city [2]. The International Olympic Committee has formally included legacy in its statute since 2003, and FIFA (Fédération Internationale de Football Association) has also become increasingly concerned with using sport events for the economic and social development of a territory.

Conventionally, a legacy has been divided into tangible and intangible [3]. The former is the most obvious and easily understood, almost always connected to short-term economic impacts, although its various manifestations are varied, complex and interconnected. The second includes social, political, sporting, and human capital impacts, ranging from basic training provided to volunteers to highly specialised managerial skills. These are all forms of impact that can be achieved in an area solely through the organisation of a major sporting event, and which the mere investment of money does not achieve [3].

Italy will host the Winter Olympics in Milan-Cortina next year, and an important objective defined in the presentation dossier for the five-ring event was to leave a positive legacy for our country. Each work had to somehow bring a favourable social spin-off to the territories involved, not only in terms of supporting sport. To date, however, one can only imagine future benefits in the Olympic village in Milan, which will be transformed into a student residence, in the biathlon track in Anterselva, and the new stretch of railway in the Riga valley in South Tyrol [4]. All other infrastructures, however, risk becoming white elephants after the event. Here are those that, according to the experience of past editions, are most at risk of long-term non-use, mainly due to lack of public demand:

• Bobsleigh, skeleton and luge tracks: very expensive facilities to build and maintain, requiring continuous refrigeration and technical maintenance. Moreover, very few people practise these sports outside of Olympic or professional contexts.
• Nordic ski slopes and biathlon: although more ‘popular’ than bobsleigh, they require large areas, artificial snow, and equipment that is not easily accessible to the general public.
• Ski jumping trampolines: only professional athletes can really use them, as this sport requires advanced technique, support facilities and qualified trainers. Ski jumping competitions are also infrequent; there are few annual events on the FIS (International Ski and Snowboard Federation) calendar compared to what would be needed to justify the existence of the facility.

Figure 1: Bobsleigh track abandoned after the 1984 Sarajevo Olympics. Photo by Peter Donko on Unsplash.