Mega-events and mega-profits: Unravelling the Vancouver 2010 security–development nexus

Molnar,A and Snider,L 2011, Mega-events and mega-profits: Unravelling the Vancouver 2010 security–development nexus. In Bennett,CJ and Haggarty,KD (ed), Security games, Taylor & Francis, London, Eng., pp.150-168, doi: 10.4324/9780203827475.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Title Mega-events and mega-profits: Unravelling the Vancouver 2010 security–development nexus
Author(s) Molnar,AORCID iD for Molnar,A
Title of book Security games
Editor(s) Bennett,CJ
Publication date 2011
Chapter number 9
Total chapters 10
Start page 150
End page 168
Total pages 19
Publisher Taylor & Francis
Place of Publication London, Eng.
Keyword(s) Law
Summary Academic and political commentators have commonly sought to understand the Olympics as a cultural dynamic, a "spectacle" that motivates certain actors to project their relative interests in localized spaces and as well on a global scale (Hiller 2006; Boyle and Haggerty 2009b ). Mega-events, as this argument goes, are monumental cultural events (Roche 2000) that rely on the audacity of spectacle to dramatize and condition the cultural, political, legal and economic landscape. Extending these insights into surveillance studies, Boyle and Haggerty (2009b: 259-260) position spectacle and the disciplinary mechanisms of anxieties associated with mega-events to explain the risk management practices of security planners. The dynamic social implications of the spectacle condition dramatic regimes of securitization and surveillance such that sovereign power emanates from the production and consumption of spectacle. In similar fashion Vida Bajc (2007: 1648) writes that security meta-rituals "demonstrate[s] that the process of transformation of [the] public space [of mega-events] from one of routine of daily life into a sterile area [that] has a ritual form [that] .... separates insiders from outsiders and brings about a new socio-political reality." Put another way, the "security-meta ritual" legitimates security and surveillance practices by normalizing the social hierarchies it imposes. Bajc focuses on the over-determination of dividing practices in mega-event security, but the signifying practices associated with capital are absent (perhaps due to her empirical focus on presidential addresses). Klauser (2008: 181) links commercialization and mechanisms of surveillance, but only by foregrounding the significance of "neutralized space" created by granting absolute commercial rights to event sponsors. Neoliberalprivatization and its articulation with security and surveillance, however, cannot be reduced to control over sponsorship rights and consumptive practices in particular urban "zones," nor can it be limited by the methodological temporality of the event itself.
ISBN 0415602629
Language eng
DOI 10.4324/9780203827475
Field of Research 160204 Criminological Theories
160205 Police Administration, Procedures and Practice
Socio Economic Objective 810107 National Security
HERDC Research category B1.1 Book chapter
Copyright notice ©2011, Taylor & Francis
Persistent URL

Connect to link resolver
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 0 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 8 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 487 Abstract Views, 13 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Wed, 04 Mar 2015, 13:45:20 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact