2014 FIFA World Cup In Brazil Case Solution

1. Identify the key stakeholders of the 2014 FIFA World Cup and briefly outline their motivations and roles.

For the FIFA 2014 world cup, the key stakeholders included:

1. The event organizers, which included:

• FIFA

• LOC

• Federal government

• Host cities

• Stadium authorities

• Regional committees who were authorised to facilitate the organization of the competition

2. Workforce 

Which includes all employees and organizations as well as volunteers

3. Participants 

Including all national teams that participate in the competition and staging the event. This also includes other groups and individuals who participate towards staging the event

4. Commercial affiliates, which included:

• FIFA’s commercial affiliates

• FIFA world cup sponsors

• National supporters

5. Supply chain 

Which includes organizations, and groups that supplied services, or products for the organization of the FIFA world cup

6. Attendees, that include:

• Individuals who come to see the event i.e. fan groups

• Tourism organizations

• Ticket holders

• Individual groups or organizations who represent fan groups (FIFA, 2012)

Each stakeholder group had an important part to play in the 2014 world cup, held in Brazil. These roles were fuelled by individual motivations as well. These are briefly mapped in the following section:

2. Critically evaluate the positive and negative impacts the 2014 FIFA World Cup have had on Brazil and how these impacts have been measured.

The FIFA world cup 2014 was expected to create jobs for the local economy, along with an injection of foreign revenue. However, post-world cup situation has highlighted that the stimulus of $11.1 billion looks pales in front of the $2.2 trillion Brazilian economy. The economic statistics of debt highlight the pressure on the Brazilian economy after the world cup (Staab, 2018). There was a 51% increase in public debt in the twelve host cities. Compared to this, other cities had experienced a rise of 20% in their public debt during the same period. The economic impact is also seen through the GDP of the country. The FIFA event injected BRL 30b into the economy, against the total cost of BRL 25.6b, resulting in 0.7% of Brazil's GDP for 2013 (Staab, 2018). The economic burden on Brazil was also felt through the case of the white elephants i.e. the large stadiums built in twelve cities to support the world cup. The economic measurement, in this case, was done through the CBA, where the costs of building and maintaining the stadiums exceeded its benefits. Shortly after the world cup, eight of the twelve stadiums were running at a loss and were used for parking lots amongst other functions. In 2014 alone, the losses sustained by the Brazilian stadiums amounted to EUR42 million (Staab, 2018).

This also leads to the impact of infrastructural development in Brazil. The rough approximation of $11 billion injected in the country for investment in infrastructural development of stadiums, airports, and other services had been a temporary gain for infrastructure providers. Additionally, the figure amounts to only 0.7% of the total planned investment in Brazil during 2010-2914. As such, the positive impact of these facilities and developments was short-lived and has been realized. The long term impact, which is measured through a cost analysis and economic statistics, identifies a burdening for the Brazilian economy (Szalai, 2014).

FIFA world cup saw Brazil undergoing a partnership between power and wealth. This was complimented with corruption and bureaucracy present throughout the government. This coalition led to a hitch in poverty, as well as eviction and dispossession for the population of Brazil instead of the expected prosperity, security, income increases and job creation that was promised by FIFA. Though the Brazilian construction companies had benefitted from the building of the stadiums, and the related infrastructure, the human rights record of the country worsened during this period. Eight workers had died during the stadium building processes that were undertaken by companies like Andrade Gutierrez (Chaudhary, 2015).