Content uploaded by Greg Richards
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Greg Richards on Jun 16, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
Exploring the Social Impacts of Events
Abstract
Social impacts are increasingly used as one of the main justifications for staging and funding events, and yet there is very little empirical evidence on the extent to which these impacts are realised by different kinds of events or in different settings.
This timely volume fills this gap by being the first to explore the different social aspects of events, looking in particular at the role of events in developing social capital, social cohesion and participation in local communities. Based on cutting edge empirical research, it evaluatesthe contribution of both cultural and sports events to social capital, social cohesion, community spirit and local pride in range of different types of events and settings, with case studies drawn from Europe, Australia and South Africa. It therefore furthers knowledge about the social benefits and impacts of events and significantly contributes to the development of Events as a discipline.
... Events, as a form of planned performances and activities, have historical origins dating back to ancient times, even before the fall of the Western Roman Empire in AD 476 [1]. Historically, attending events has been a significant leisure activity [2]. A scientific event is a planned occurrence with a specific time frame that involves multiple participants and serves as a unique opportunity for exchanging knowledge, discussing research findings, and collaborating among scholars and practitioners [3]. ...
Introduction
Despite numerous efforts to define and categorize scientific events, a consensus remains elusive, complicating the understanding and classification of such events. The current study aims to establish clear, consensus-based definitions for various types of scientific events by examining their definitions and purposes from the perspectives of scholars across different countries.
Methods
The current study used a descriptive survey design to gather responses from scholars across 32 countries about their perceptions of scientific events. The sample size was determined using G*power, requiring 80 participants; 118 were recruited. Data was collected via a Google Forms survey with a 9-point Likert scale. Invitations were emailed. The Content Validity Index (CVI) was used to assess item relevance, with all items achieving a CVI above 0.78. Data analysis involved descriptive statistics, and ethical considerations regarding voluntary participation and confidentiality were observed.
Results
This study validated the definitions of ten event types, each achieving a CVI above 0.78. The scientific events were categorized into conferences, symposiums, workshops, courses, summits, panels, meetings, fast-track reviews, annual reviews, and seminars. Course and panel garnered the highest level of consensus with a CVI of 0.983. Fast-track review also demonstrated a strong agreement among participants, with 82.2% expressing their concurrence with the provided definition.
Conclusion
The study establishes consensus-based definitions for scientific events, enhancing standardization in the academic community and underscoring the importance of precise categorization.
... The ECoC title is perceived as a potential source of social capital generation for the cultural sector (Liu, 2017). Richards et al. (2013) mention mechanisms used to increase social capital, either by increasing interaction, fostering higher levels of identification, or supporting social structures and networks. Palmer (2004) considers that the added value of the degree of collaboration within the cultural sector can have important implications for event planning, such as an increase in the number of visitors, an increase in the attention generated by the event and the opportunity to benefit economically. ...
... This raises an important area of discussion with respect to the potential for sport events to produce longer-term SEIs among those who consume the events. Since organizations often rely on SEIs to justify hosting and funding events (Bakhsh et al., 2023b;Doyle et al., 2021;Richards, 2013), a lack of overall +SEIs and +SMEIs is of particular concern. However, in addition to asking the extent to which SEIs and SMEIs were realized among the general population, this research also sought to understand if these impacts were realized among subsets of the population. ...
This study measured if residents, or subsets of residents, experienced social event impacts (SEIs) and social media event impacts (SMEIs) from a major sport event. Panel data were collected from 1,027 individuals using an online survey nine-months post-event. Descriptive statistics indicated that although the event did not jeopardize residents’ safety or cause them conflict, it failed to produce positive SEIs and SMEIs, other than feel good factor, amongst the population. A cluster analysis revealed that while there was a subset of residents who experienced positive SEIs and SMEIs, over half were limitedly impacted, experiencing either no positive SEIs nor SMEIs or only SEIs. This research advances SEI-related theory by investigating impacts among all community members, not just attendees; measuring impacts further out from the event, not just shortly post-event; and introducing SMEIs. It challenges the notion that events elicit positive SEIs while identifying boundaries with respect to who experiences them.
Introduction Despite numerous efforts to define and categorize scientific events, a consensus remains elusive, complicating the understanding and classification of such events. The current study aims to establish clear, consensus-based definitions for various types of scientific events by examining their definitions and purposes from the perspectives of scholars across different countries. Methods The current study used a descriptive survey design to gather responses from scholars across 32 countries about their perceptions of scientific events. The sample size was determined using G*power, requiring 80 participants; 118 were recruited. Data was collected via a Google Forms survey with a 9-point Likert scale. Invitations were emailed. The Content Validity Index (CVI) was used to assess item relevance, with all items achieving a CVI above 0.78. Data analysis involved descriptive statistics, and ethical considerations regarding voluntary participation and confidentiality were observed. Results This study validated the definitions of ten event types, each achieving a CVI above 0.78. The scientific events were categorized into conferences, symposiums, workshops, courses, summits, panels, meetings, fast-track reviews, annual reviews, and seminars. Course and panel garnered the highest level of consensus with a CVI of 0.983. Fast-track review also demonstrated a strong agreement among participants, with 82.2% expressing their concurrence with the provided definition. Conclusion The study establishes consensus-based definitions for scientific events, enhancing standardization in the academic community and underscoring the importance of precise categorization.
This book critically analyzes the hidden political dimensions associated with the planning of Indonesia's new capital. Planning Indonesia’s New Capital City reveals the underlying agendas behind the Indonesian government’s decisive and rapid action, under the leadership of President Jokowi, to relocate the national capital amid precarious global political and economic conditions. Addressing a significant gap in the literature and a timely contribution, this book will be of interest to researchers in the fields of human geography, Asian urban studies, Southeast Asian Studies and megaproject management. TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1. Introduction: Capital relocation (1.1 Behind Nusantara; 1.2 Toward the hidden agenda; 1.3 On critical discourse analysis; 1.4 The book overview); Chapter 2. Megaprojects as political legacies (2.1 Megaproject politics; 2.2. Institutionalizing legacies; 2.3 A constructivist framework; 2.4 Conclusion); Chapter 3. The history of Indonesia’s capital relocation: The rise and fall of a great idea (3.1 The dilemmas of leaving Jakarta; 3.2 A winding road to Nusantara; 3.3 Too big to fail; 3.4 Conclusion); Chapter 4. The origins of a new capital: From zero to hero (4.1 From a furniture maker to “Bapak Infrastructure”; 4.2 From street vendor resettlement to capital relocation; 4.3 From Jawasentris to Indonesiasentris; 4.4 Conclusion); Chapter 5. The vision of the Capital City of Nusantara: To be the first (5.1 An economic hub for a just nation; 5.2 A sustainable city exemplar for the world; 5.3 A lasting monument for a great leader; 5.4 Conclusion); Chapter 6. The mechanism of capital city building: Race against the dwindling time (6.1 Fast‑track planning; 6.2 Authoritarian neoliberalism; 6.3 Oligarchic coalition; 6.4 Symbols, myths, and rituals; 6.5 Conclusion); Chapter 7. Conclusion: The future’s capital in the making (7.1. Planning for political legacies; 7.2 Beyond Nusantara)
Limited research has been conducted on the benefits of utilizing festival spaces for methodologies involving storytelling and narrative inquiry for use in other (related) areas of investigation (e.g., tourism). This article introduces a method, “story-mapping,” for the collection of locals’ stories during a combined arts festival. The intention was to capture place-focused data from community stakeholders from the case study destination, Bridgend County Borough, South Wales. Locals were encouraged to tell stories about the area, including specific grassroots elements using a map as a visual prompt. The process was designed to empower and involve the local community in defining and sharing a “sense of place” as part of a paradigm shift towards regenerative tourism. Utilizing “story-mapping” in the festival space proved effective but also presented some challenges. The article evaluates the method through the lens of narrative inquiry and makes recommendations for future researchers wishing to utilize this approach.
Purpose
The study aims to understand the meaning of event-based and place-based community practices, as well as the resulting social impacts.
Design/methodology/approach
An ethnomethodological approach was followed (participant observation and interviews were supplemented by secondary data), with the analysis being exploratory and interpretative.
Findings
The festival and the place reinforce the community’s social practices, which have impacts beyond the festival, benefiting individuals, the community and the place, becoming a means for valorisation and diffusion of the rural way of life, and placemaking.
Research limitations/implications
In this study the authors focus on social practices in the context of an event and of a place (the village where the event occurs). The authors connect to theories of practice, which they apply in the analysis. The value of the study lies on the underlying mechanisms (how communities exercise social practices in the context of festivals, and what social impacts may lead to) rather than its context-dependent specific results.
Practical implications
National and regional authorities can play a role in providing local communities with adequate tools to overcome the challenges they encounter. This can be done by issuing appropriate (events) plans and policies while giving room for the locals to voice their opinions.
Social implications
Community-based festivals are key social practices that can strategically impact placemaking, strengthening community bonding, forging connections with outsiders and promoting well-being practices that discourage rural depopulation.
Originality/value
There is a scarcity of research that deepens the understanding of the role of festivals in placemaking and their social impacts, particularly in the rural context. This study contributes to closing this gap by focussing on the social practices of a community-based festival in a village in the interior of Portugal.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.