juaf_626 juaf2007.cls (2012/05/18 v1.1 Standard LaTeX document class) 6-18-2012 :726 JUAF juaf_626 Dispatch: 6-18-2012 CE: AFL Journal MSP No. No. of pages: 24 PE: Elna Lim 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 TRANSPORT LEGACY OF THE OLYMPIC GAMES, 1992–2012 EVA KASSENS-NOOR Michigan State University ABSTRACT: Legacy planning in preparation for the Olympic Games has significantly grown in importance for host cities and the IOC because of the wasteful investments for some previous Games. Since the late 1990s, the IOC has actively sought to prevent such over-spending through a transfer of knowledge program, in which valuable lessons are passed from one host city to the next. This paper analyzes the transport legacies of the Olympic Games, using original archive material and interviews with key decision-makers in five cities. While previous research into the effects of the Olympic Games on host cities suggests that infrastructural legacies are place specific, the main argument of this paper is that the transport legacies of the Olympic Games are much more uniform across the host cities. Even though the host cities’ transport systems were intrinsi- cally different pre-Olympics, the author finds that similar features the Olympic transport systems, developed through the Transfer of Knowledge program, produced similar legacies. In explaining the creation of transport legacies through Olympically motivated drivers, the author suggests the Olympics might trigger similar transport developments in future host cities. Therefore, city planners can use Olympic transport features as powerful catalysts to accelerate their urban and transport plans. Legacy planning has become a key aspect in preparing for the Olympic Games and other mega-events. Over the past decades, various typologies of mega-event legacies were developed (see also Cashman & Hughes, 1999; Gratton & Preuss, 2008; Malfas, Theodoraki, & Houlihan, 2004; Ritchie, 1984). In particular, one key legacy ambition of host cities dominates many urban agendas in the run-up to a mega event: to transform into a postindustrial city through place marketing, global recognition, and inward investment. In particular urban legacies, which mega events can create in host cities, have spurred massive investments, promised long-lasting benefits for residents, and have become one of the main reasons why citizens back the bid (Cashman, 2006; Chalkley & Essex, 1999; Malfas et al., 2004; Pillay, Tomlinson, & Bass, 2010). Since the advent of the modern Olympic Games, legacy motivations in potential host cities have tended to create extravagant expenditures in order to secure the bid and ultimately the accolade of “best games ever.” Pierre de Coubertin, the founder of the modern Olympic Games, warned as early as 1911, that the legacy of permanent buildings should not be to host more events there if temporary buildings would suffice Olympic demands (De Coubertin, 1911). Following Direct correspondence to: Eva Kassens-Noor, School of Planning Design and Construction and Global Urban Studies Program, Michigan State University, 201E Human Ecology, 552 W Circle Drive, East Lansing, MI 48823. E-mail: ekn@msu.edu. JOURNAL OF URBAN AFFAIRS, Volume 00,Number 0, pages 1–24. Copyright C  2012 Urban Affairs Association All rights of reproduction in any form reserved. ISSN: 0735-2166. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9906.2012.00626.x