1. Introduction Organization of mega events is always associated with a lot of controversy and dispute about the jus- tification of the expenditure. In the literature and the press is a dispute how to demonstrate the actual economic effects of the mass events. Increasingly, it is difficult to demonstrate a direct effect of the finan- cial income of a mass event afterwards. Very often financial income during the event, in comparison to the expenses incurred, are not so impressive. How- ever, in this case, more important is long-term effect of investment than the direct economic efficiency of the project. The leading argument for the organization of the mega events is the expected economic effect, which involves the construction of transport infra- structure and new tourist facilities, which in turn translate to stimulate the local economy. Of course, such effect can be achieved only when the created Journal of Geography, Politics and Society 2017, 7(4), 25–31 DOI 10.4467/24512249JG.17.034.7634 The ImPacT of meGa evenTS on The local economIc develoPmenT ThrouGh The develoPmenT of SocIal caPITal Grażyna Chaberek-Karwacka (1), Julia Ziółkowska (2) (1) Department of Spatial Management, Institute of Geography, University of Gdansk, Bażyńskiego 8, 80–309 Gdańsk, Poland, e-mail: geogk@ug.edu.pl (corresponding author) (2) Department of Tourism and Recreation, Faculty of Tourism and Recreation, Gdansk University of Physical Education and Sport, Górskiego 1, 80–336 Gdańsk, Poland, e-mail: julia.ziolkowska@awfis.gda.pl citation Chaberek-Karwacka G., Ziółkowska J., 2017, The impact of mega events on the local economic development through the de- velopment of social capital, Journal of Geography, Politics and Society, 7(4), 25–31. abstract The aim of the paper is to prove the thesis that the organization of mass events actually affect the local economic development but this effect to a large extent is not straightforward. Mass events builds the social capital, which guarantees economic devel- opment in the future. The paper includes a review of the literature concerning the organization of mega events on the world and above all, a review of the available research about the effects of mass events expected and achieved afterwards. The study primarily includes the biggest sporting events in the World and in Europe which took place after 2000. The paper includes also authors’ research based on the organizational effects of European Football Cup Euro 2012 in Poland and 2014 Football World Cup in Brazil. Key words mega events, tourism infrastructure, social capital, local economic development. received: 12 March 2017 accepted: 22 May 2017 Published: 29 December 2017 26 Grażyna Chaberek-Karwacka, Julia Ziółkowska infrastructure will not only serve the traffic associ- ated with the event, but will be also functional for the daily needs of the residents and tourist services after the event. However, the construction of new infrastructure does not guarantee the direct effect of local eco- nomic growth. In fact, the infrastructure is only a tool for achieving this kind of goals. The most important is desire, awareness and ability to use this infrastruc- ture by the citizens, in a way that will contribute to local economic development. Important is the abil- ity to exploit the effect of territorial marketing asso- ciated with tourism, build social networks and entre- preneurial and citizenship attitudes. The aim of the paper is to prove the thesis that the organization of mass events actually affect the local economic development but this effect to a large ex- tent is not straightforward. Mass events builds the social capital, which guarantees economic develop- ment in the future. 2. controversy over the organization of mass sport events Years ago, mega sport events were reserved solely to be hosted by the First World nations that had the economic vitality to viably stage them. In recent times even developing countries have been given the chance of hosting the mega events. The justifica- tion is the statement that the hosting of mega sport event is “a chance for development”. However, ob- servers are asking if the organizing the mega event in fact, have a positive lasting impact for the devel- oping countries, whether this is truly benefit for the citizens and the economy of the host country (Con- chas, 2014). In fact, in most developing countries, it entrusted with the organization of major sporting events to prepare for the championships always take place in an atmosphere of controversy and social move- ments expressing opposition and discontent. Re- cently, in South Africa and Brazil, on the occasion of the organization of the FIFA World Cup. The reason is that in developing countries it is very difficult to accept the huge public expenditure on sports infra- structure when many residents lacking homes, jobs, health care at the appropriate level and adequate infrastructure in educational institutions (Chaberek- Karwacka, Dolinski, 2016). Those who are against the organization of mass sport events such as the Olym- pics and World Cup, prove that the event consumes astronomical spending which are not concern for the welfare of citizens at all. The mega events seem to be conceived and produced as privileged events for elite. Very often the unbridled investment in sport- ing infrastructure are opposed to the development of better social and educational programs (Conchas, 2014). Sport mega events very often result in the clearance of communities away from stadia either forcibly or because of rising house prices. In Brazil, for example, the low of housing rights was being ig- nored at all (Levermore, 2011). Additionally, the lack of transparency in spending and decision-making showed that the Brazilian government was more concerned with having an image as a big emerging country than with the welfare of its citizens. Many surveys conducted after an announcement about Mundial in Brasil in 2014, show that the vast majority of respondents was opposed the organiza- tion that event (Chaberek-Karwacka, Dolinski, 2016). The probe, conducted by Grazyna Chaberek-Kar- wacka and Karel Dolinski in April 2014 which col- lected 225 responses, also showed the almost 80% of respondents against the organizing of the event. Replies came from 25 different states of the country. The states with the largest number of answers are found in South-East Region (São Paulo, Minas Gerais and Rio de Janeiro) and the Southern Region (San- ta Catarina, Paraná and Rio Grande do Sul). Those were states which were chosen to host the World Cup games. The question: “Why are you in favor or against the organization of World Cup in Brazil?” was answered differently. The argument the most often repeated was: “government should first be ad- dressed and solved the basic problems of the coun- try’s health, education, security and a high rate of corruption”. The second argument, which often ap- peard in the responses, refered to the level amount of expenditure for organizing events. The third argu- ment concerned the corruption in the country. On the other hand, among respondents who were in favor of organizing the World Cup in the country ap- peard the arguments: “an increase in the number of tourists visiting the country, creating new jobs and prestige for the Brazilians”1. In the government statements, the infrastructure development is the argument the most frequently given as one of the most important reason why countries and cities bid to host mega events (Malha- do et al., 2013). There were many expectations about the transport infrastructure development in brazil- ian host cities, too. Actually, one of the major ex- pected influences of 2014 FIFA World Cup was the in- frastructure available for transportation to and from the stadiums. Practically speaking, the preparedness of Brazil or any host country is an undertaking that 1 The result of the probe is publishing only partly in Chaberek-Karwacka, Dolinski, 2016. The impact of mega events on the local economic development… 27 presents complex challenges. The most important investment in the host cities is always the logistics system, which cover: revitalisation or new roads con- structions and constructions of strategic crossroads and the extention of the public transport system (Chaberek-Karwacka, Dolinski, 2016). However, in fact, is crucial whether the transport investments occurred during the preparation for mass sport events are aimed only to improving communication and mutual availability between stadiums, airports and city centers (including tourist accommodation). Whether they are really useful in satisfying everyday communication needs. It is important to take into consideration the long-term effect of those spend- ing. That is a question about the usability of new constructed infrastructure in everyday life of citizens (Chaberek-Karwacka, Dolinski, 2016). Carron has cited the words of Rafael Lima the Bairfo da Paz resi- dent and community activist after announcing Brazil the host of FIFA World Cup 2014: “We need jobs. We need education. We need land titles. We need health care. And we need to know where this road they are planning to build is going, and who will be affected” (Carrion, 2013, p. 26). Certainly there are many arguments for the mega events contribute to the growth of the economic po- tential and the economic development of the host, however, should look at what really has the biggest impact on this positive economic effect. 3. The real effects of mass sport events 3.1. Infrastructural and economic effects Organization of mega sport events requires the con- struction of transport and sport infrastructure. This involves huge financial expenditure, which can not be covered by private capital. The financial benefits should outweigh the involved capital, that is the idea of investing. In the face of such assumptions, huge government spending involved in the organi- zation of mega sport events should be reflected in specific budget income, higher than expenditure. In the public finance case, the result should be a high- er GDP and higher tax revenues, both from the VAT and income taxes. The expected economic growth is the government’s main justification of the public expenditure for the organization of entertainment events. The economic growth should occured by development of infrastructure, higher employment and overall growth of the welfare of society. Usually after the event, public opinion remains in the eu- phoria and no longer calculates the effects of the ex- penses. However, it is worth to take a look at how the assumptions of growth and economic development are realized in the economy of the host countries in long term after the event. In this paper were analyzed some examples, comparing the expectation and real effects of hosting the mega sport events. The main prepara- tion was focused on the investments on sport and transport infrastructure (Woźniak, Napierała 2012). In Poland, alike in other countries, main spendings concerned the building stadiums, sustainable trans- portation, extension of air infrastructure, roads, rail- ways as well as the communication within the host cities and among those cities (Karwacka 2010). The cost of building the 1 km of highway amounted to 17.19 million euros, which is more than twice the average cost of 1 km of motorway in Europe. Mod- ernized airports were to be one of the main pillars of the success of the operation of UEFA Euro 2012. But, as statistics show, increased air traffic (for ex- ample, Gdansk and Wroclaw) was observed only in the months of games (June, July), when it increased by 14.45%. In 2013, the number of flight operations returned to the state before the championship, and even down to the level of 17 151 to 24 960 Gdansk and Wroclaw. A railway played a key role in the trans- port of passengers during the UEFA Euro 2012. How- ever, in this case, also cannot observe an increased number of passengers carried in the period after the tournament. Only in June 2012 the passengers num- ber was increased. In Poland, were built 4 new stadi- ums. The most expensive was the National Stadium in Warsaw, constructed by more than 1,900 million PLN. It is hard to believe in achieving a positive re- turn on investment. The annual cost of maintaining the stadium is 39.4 mln PLN and far exceeds the cur- rent income of 18.17 mln PLN. When Athens successfully held the Olympic Games in 2004, many of the venues are vacant four years later, promised parks have never materialized, and new transportation infrastructure has caused problems like flooding and increased traffic. The whole legacy of the Olympic Games in Athens was summarized as caused more problems for the local economics than the benefits generated in the event time (Gong 2012). The investment of improving the communica- tion system is always one of the main expenses due to satisfy the big transportation demand during the event, but if the city already has advanced transition system, there is no need to extend it just because of one temporary boom of visitors. Prior to start a new project, the decision-makers should recognize if the communities need a magnificent venue or if there is sufficient market to maintain or make a full utili- zation (Gong, 2012). The G. Chaberek-Karwacka and 28 Grażyna Chaberek-Karwacka, Julia Ziółkowska K.  Dolinski (2016) research concerning the usability of the Brazilian Mundial’s investments in everyday life of the citizens in host cities showed that all of these are parts of a basic logistic system in mobility of the surveyed cities. It seems that those investments were the most urgent and the most needed. Most of them were like a missing link. Moreover, most of pre- sented investments were placed in the very center of the city where the transportation needs are the most frequently. The logistics systems in most of these 12 host cities, became more multimodal and coherent after the 2014. Similar infrastructure benefits were observed in Polish host cities of UEFA EURO 2012. Especially Gdansk gained the speeding up infra- structure investments in and around the city. These include a number of projects related to the moderni- zation of transport infrastructure in the city, such as the expansion of the airport in Rębiechowo and the road investment which allowed not only to provide communication facilities at the time of the Champi- onship, but also contributed to the improvement of the quality of the citizens’ life (Raport:…, 2012). Macroeconomic indicators such as GDP showed the highest rate in two years and the year before UEFA Euro 2012. GDP grew faster by 3.6 and 3.1% than the average for the euro area. A year later af- ter the event, the economy slowed down and grew more slowly than the average for the euro area, which denies the calculations made when Poland and Ukraine were chosen to the hosting the UEFA championships, which assumed long-term dynamic growth of GDP by 2020 (Żuryński, 2014). When it comes to economic efficiency of mega sport events, it can be said that public funds involved directly resulted primarily on increased revenues of individual entrepreneurs including mainly large for- eign corporations. Sh. Tayob (2012, p. 736) proved that during the preparation of World Cup 2010: „the autonomy of the South African government, its manpower and its resources were subordinated to the demands of FIFA and its corporate partners, for whom huge profits were ensured. Even where profits accrued inside the South Africa, the main beneficiar- ies were large companies able to capitalize on the huge construction project undertaken and others with privileged access to capital”. Even an unemploy- ment in every of host countries fell only seasonally. The objective benefits, both in Poland and in Brazil was the acceleration the development of many road projects enrolling in daily communication system of host cities (Chaberek-Karwacka, Dolinski, 2016). 3.2. Tourism and marketing effects Another important argument in favor of the or- ganization of mega sport events underlined by the supporters, is an increase in tourism and associated with it the financial benefits to the local economy. The observed effect of the championship in this aspect is very diversified, however S. Du Plessis and W. Maennig (2011) proved that major sporting events have only a limited impact on tourism during the time of the event. One important reason is the crowding-out of “normal” tourist due to the noise, traffic jams and other disturbances. But from another side there are many expecta- tions in the improving of city or state image. This expectation is supported by so called “Barcelona ef- fect”. The Olympics represented a significant effort to restructure the city of Barcelona before the Olym- pic Games in 1992. Crucially the games seemed to change the way people thought of Barcelona. Nowa- days this Spanish city is perceived as a land of sun, sand and sangria, but it is easy to forget that before the games in 1992, it was a somewhat different place. For one thing, it didn’t really have a beach before. The city created 2 miles of beachfront and a modern ma- rina by demolishing industrial buildings on the wa- terfront before the games. Between 1990 and 2001 the country went from being the 11th “best city” in Europe to the 6th, according to one ranking. The IOC says that 20 years after the games Barcelona is now the 12th most popular city destination for tourists in the world, and the 5th in Europe (Taylor, 2012). That is why tourism and marketing effects should be analyzed in two aspects: the tourism just before and during the championships and also in long term af- ter the mega event. The example of positive touristic effect of the or- ganization the mega sport event is Germany which has increased its share among the countries receiv- ing the largest number of foreign tourists after the Mundial 2006. This development, was similar to the level of global, as in the case of a European country is a very good result, due to the fact that Europe as a tourist region steadily losing its share in incoming tourism to other regions of the world (especially for the region of Eastern Asia Pacific). Another positive effect on touristic attractiveness has been observed in Poland after the UEFA EURO 2012 although there weren’t so many tourists as Polish authorities had expected. Importantly, the vast majority of foreign visitors left the country positively surprised by what they saw. They were pleased not only with the level of sports events, but also of organization, infrastruc- ture, hotel and catering offer and entertainment. Good assessment issued to Poland by foreign visi- tors have a chance to bring profit in the future. Ac- cording to the PBS2 survey, as many as 92 percent 2 PBS – the largest Polish research company. The impact of mega events on the local economic development… 29 of respondents PBS declared to recommend their friends Poland as a country worth visiting and attrac- tive to tourists. 79 percent of respondents stated that they will come to Poland again (Woźniak, Napierała, 2012, p. 453). Organizers and economists share the view that after the championship significantly im- proved the image of Poland in the international arena. This was the result of both a large number of information about Poland in foreign media as well as the positive feedback about the country’s foreign supporters. This is confirmed by Brand Finance Insti- tute survey conducted in 2013, in which the Polish national brand remained in the top twenty of the world’s most valuable brands (Woźniak, Napierała, 2012). However, in 2008, The UEFA European Football Championship organized two countries, Austria and Switzerland. In both countries, in the year following the organization of the European Championship (2009), was recorded a decrease of the total num- ber of foreign tourists (respectively: Austria – 2.6%, Switzerland – 3.7%). It is very strange, considering that the two countries are characterized by a rec- ognized and strong brand among potential tour- ists (especially practicing winter forms of tourism), and regardless of whether they are organizing a big event or not, should expect usually increased arrival of tourists from other countries (Marczak, 2014). 3.3. Social effects As shown above, the financial results of the organi- zation of sports events and macroeconomic indica- tors provide a lot of controversy, and thus on this basis is not possible to evidently determine the real impact of the event on the socio-economic devel- opment of the host country. In contrast, those who advocate positively with regard to the FIFA World Cup point to intercultural awareness as one of the benefits. That is mean that these mega-events allow nations and individual contestants to make a social network, by recognizing and cooperating with each other in spite of their differences but also opens up unique dialogical opportunities (Conchas, 2014). In fact, even the main initiators and organizers some- how admit that the biggest benefits of the champi- onships are social one. For example, after World Cup in 2010 in South Africa politicians, organizers and FIFA alike proudly proclaimed that the event was resounding success because large number of South Africans from all race and class backgrounds united under the national flag (Tayob, 2012). Cornelissen claim that even protests and demonstrations against the mega sport events built the social networking and social capital. At the example of South Africa, “while many of the demonstrations and civic actions were framed an in opposition to the World Cup, they were more significant for how they were embedded within a particular power configuration in the post- apartheid era, and their linkage to systemic process. The demonstrations placed in sharp focus the politi- cal divergences of the country. Such divergences are often accompanied by varied and opposing recol- lections of history that shape societal engagement and counteract national process of unification” (Cor- nelissen, 2012, p. 345). Social capital is an essential element of civil so- ciety. Most social benefits brought the preparation of the FIFA World Cup 2010 in South Africa, UEFA EURO 2012 in Poland and the FIFA World Cup 2014 in Brazil. The organization of such a big event has become a positive impulse and mobilize society to work together. In Poland, it seems that additionally managed to break down the barriers between the central authorities, local authorities and residents of host cities, even through extensive public consulta- tion that took place on the occasion of the organi- zation of fan zones and stadiums during the con- struction. Extremely important was the promotion of volunteerism, creating a base of volunteers and the construction of a bank of experience that can be used in the organization of future projects of similar scale and level (Woźniak, Napierała, 2012; Raport:..., 2012). The biggest challenge in the process of prepa- ration for the tournament, in addition to the mod- ernization of infrastructure, was just possibility for the community to face something important. With something that will trigger the need to coordinate efforts around a common purpose. From the begin- ning it was clear that the championship cannot be organized without the broad collaboration of vari- ous public institutions, to which the intended target was reached, had to go beyond the rigid framework of its bureaucratic world (Woźniak, Napierała, 2012). 4. The importance of human capital in the socio-economic development The main argument justifying massive public spend- ing to prepare for the mega sport events is the socio- economic development. According to United Nation (Transforming…, 2015), the sustainable develop- ment has been defined as development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. For sustainable development to be achieved, it is crucial to harmonize three core elements: eco- nomic growth, social inclusion and environmental 30 Grażyna Chaberek-Karwacka, Julia Ziółkowska protection. These elements are interconnected and all are crucial for the well-being of individuals and societies. That means, the sustainability contains the collaboration of economic, social and environmental goals. In the economic aspect, sustainable develop- ment is the need to promote economic develop- ment, which gives a real increase in prosperity while maintaining this growth in the future (Chaberek- Karwacka, 2012). The economic growth is based on the rational public finance management, entrepre- neurship and the economic effectiveness of individ- ual companies. According to annual reports of Con- sumer Goods Forum and CapGemini (The Future…, 2012) to be prepare for the future, business have to be more sustainable and increase the collaboration across the industries. Networks and collaboration can lead to more innovative solution in the industry and social engineering. According to the research, the base of competitive advantage and efficiency is transparency, sharing the information and network- ing (Chaberek-Karwacka, 2012). This kind of manage- ment is not possible without the trust. Trust is based on the universal norms which should lie on the foun- dations of the entrepreneurship and business. These economic demands are directly related to the social aspects of sustainable development. The social aspect of development is based on providing equal opportunities for development, thus ensuring all people to have access to education, productive and fairly paid job and to participate actively in the public decisions (Chaberek-Karwacka, 2012). An environmental aspect of sustainable devel- opment is associated with persistent behavior of natural capital and the integrity of the environment necessary for the preservation of life on earth. This means the requirement that the natural goods and services were used so as not to undermine the net- works of interdependence ensure the continuation of ecosystems, and on the other hand, not to reduce the contribution of these goods and services in the creation of human well-being. Environmental goods and therefore cannot be used in excess (Chaberek- Karwacka, 2012). Those postulates need the aware- ness of the entrepreneurs and consumers. At the same time, consumers should uphold ecological business through their market choices. Taking into account all aspect of sustain develop- ment, the key to achieve it is creation of the social capital. The social capital can be consider as a nexus of both direct and indirect relationship between the firms, the environment and the social unity. The in- tellectual capital refers to the network of relation- ships between firms, the citizens, the employees and the social agents. In the nowadays economy, social intangibles become essential resources in order to achieve distinctive competencies. They are a set of critical resources that enable the creation of essen- tial competences. Moreover, social activities increase the capacities for the creation, sharing and manage- ment of knowledge generating sustainable compet- itive advantage (Bueno et al., 2004). The social capital is generally found in the social structures of society, allowing individuals to act ef- fectively within these structures. It is best concep- tualized as a cumulative and transferable public good, freely accessible by the community (Arcodia, Whitford, 2006). To possess social capital, a person must be related to others, and it is other, not himself, who are the actual source of his or her advantage. It involves civic engagement social norms, networks development (Willis et al., 2004), responsibility for the public goods and environment. This way build- ing social capital secures networking and trust in the business as well as the protection of the environ- ment. All of them are necessary for the future eco- nomic and social development. 5. conclusion The expectations from the hosting of mega-sporting events are not only limited in the economic impacts such as touristic base development, increasing em- ployment opportunities, infrastructure develop- ment and urban growth, but also include the positive social impacts such as international awareness and community pride, which are perceived as or even more important than positive economic benefits. It is worth noting that political purpose very of- ten plays the main role in the decision of hosting a mega-sporting event. It is an opportunity offering host communities an internationally-focused plat- form to present and promote their national identi- ties and cultures, as well as industry and markets which play the key role in the economic growth and are the most political sensitive. Successfully host- ing a sport mega event would be viewed as a great achievement in political career, which come with foreign currency. That is why some policymakers choose to be blind about the negative impacts and keep eager to win the hosting rights (Gong, 2012). During the preparation for the tournament, not everything goes as the host would like to. There is no the assumed amount of highways and not the entire rail network become modernized. Beautiful stadiums, which are built after the tournament not only don’t bring profits, but don’t even earn their keep. However, there are grounds for believing that the organization of the mega sport events creates The impact of mega events on the local economic development… 31 the social foundations, that means social capital, consists of social skills and tools necessary for the achieving the economic growth and development in the future. references Arcodia Ch., Whitford M., 2006, Festival Attendance and the Development of Social Capital, Journal of Convention & Event Tourism, 8(2), 1–18. Bueno E., Paz Salmador M., Rodriguez O., 2004, The role of social capital in today’s economy. Empirical evidence and proposal of a new model of intellectual capital, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 5(4), 12–17. Carrion M., 2013, Brazil’s Poor Pay World Cup Penalty, Progres- sive, 77(7), 26–29. Chaberek-Karwacka G., 2012, Logistyka w regionalnej polityce lokalizacyjnej. Wydawnictwo Universytetu Gdańskiego, Gdańsk. Chaberek-Karwacka G., Dolinski K. 2016, Usability of the Transport Investments Constructed During the Prepa- ration for Mass Sports Events, After the Event, [in:] M. Chaberek, L. Reszka (eds.), Modelowanie procesów i sys- temów logistycznych, Zeszyty Naukowe UG Ekonomika Transportu i Logistyka, 58, 309–324. Conchas M., 2014, Research possibilities for the 2014 FIFA World Cup in Brazil, Soccer & Society, 15(1), 167–174. Cornelissen S., 2012, “Our struggles are bigger than the World Cup”: civic activism, state-society relations and the socio- political legacies of the 2010 FIFA World Cup, The British Journal of Sociology, 63(2), 328–348. Du Plessis S., Maennig W., 2011, The 2010 FIFA World Cup high-frequency data economics: Effects on international tourism and awareness for South Africa, Development Southern Africa, 28(3), 349–365. Gong Q., 2012, The Positive and Negative Economic Contribu- tions of Mega-sporting Events to Local Communities, [in:] UNLV Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Cap- stones, Paper 1362, http://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/ thesesdissertations/1362 [10.10.2015] Karwacka G., 2010, The influence of international sport events on development of infrastructure: Euro 2012 in Poland – case study, Romanian Review on Political Geography, 12(2), 375–385. Levermore R., 2011, Sport-for-Development and the 2010 Football World, Geography Compass, 5(12), 886–897. Malhado A.C.M., Araujo L.M., Ladle R.J., 2013, Missed oppor- tunities: sustainable mobility and the 2014 FIFA World Cup in Brazil, Journal of Transport Geography, 31, 207–208. Marczak M., 2014, Wpływ organizacji wielkich eventów pił- karskich na rozwój turystyki na przykładzie wybranych destylacji, Turystyka Kulturowa, 12, 54-67. Raport: Podsumowanie kosztów i oszacowanie korzyści z orga- nizacji turnieju UEFA EURO 2012, 2012, Deloitte, Warszawa, https://www.um.warszawa.pl/sites/default/files/raport_ euro_pl.pdf [01.03.2016] Taylor A., 2012, How The Olympic Games Changed Barcelona Forever, Business Insider. (26, Jul 2012.), http://www.busi- nessinsider.com/ [15.03.2016] Tayob Sh., 2012, The 2010 World Cup in South Africa: A Millen- nial Capitalist Moment, Journal of Southern African Stud- ies, 38(3), 717–736. The Future Value Chain: Building Strategies for the New Decade, 2012, Consumer Goods Forum, CapGemini, http://www. gs1.at/fileadmin/user_upload/Broschuere_TCGF_Fu- ture_Value_Chain_2020.pdf [30.03.2016] Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Devel- opment, 2015, United Nations, A/RES/70/1. Willis J., Killerby P., Dollery B., 2004, Social economics and social capital, International Journal of Social Economics, 31(3), 239–258. Woźniak J., Napierała M., 2013, Ekonomiczne i społeczne korzyści wynikające z organizacji przez Polskę turnieju UEFA EURO w roku 2012, Journal of Health Sciences, 3(13), 428–465. Żuryński R. 2014, Ekonomiczno-organizacyjne efekty UEFA EURO 2012, Economics of the 21st century, 3(3), 127–148.