The Impact of the 2032 Brisbane Olympic Games on Tourism Development and Policy Responses
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/m3bt8g95Keywords:
Brisbane 2032, Olympic Games, tourism impact, tourism policy.Abstract
This paper takes the 2032 Brisbane Summer Olympics as the research object. Through a systematic comparison of the tourism effects of previous Olympic Games from 1984 to 2024, it assesses the expected impact of the Games on Brisbane’s tourism industry and proposes a corresponding policy framework. For Brisbane, the expected impact manifests across four dimensions: at the economic effects level, considerable benefits are anticipated but face the hard constraint of accommodation supply (currently only 24% of 2032 demand has been achieved); at the urban renewal level, A$19 billion in infrastructure investment will enhance carrying capacity, but post-Games utilization efficiency determines long-term outcomes, requiring Brisbane to draw on both the positive experience of Sydney’s careful planning and the negative lesson of Athens’ heavy construction, light operation; at the global exposure level, the visibility leap represents the greatest opportunity, but vigilance is needed against destination disillusionment caused by the gap between the extraordinary urban image presented during the event and visitors’ actual post-Games experiences; at the social tensions level, the historical trauma of Expo 88 necessitates the establishment of institutionalized community participation mechanisms—without these, social tensions will erode the positive value of the other three dimensions. Based on the above expected impacts, this paper proposes an inclusive tourism growth policy framework, arguing that only by integrating in-event reception capacity, post-Games legacy planning, sustained brand operations, and community benefit protection into a unified full-cycle governance framework can Brisbane transform economic opportunities into reality and achieve the leap from Australia’s third city to a globally renowned destination.
Downloads
References
[1] Deloitte Access Economics. (2025). Going for Gold: The economic opportunity for the taking. Deloitte Australia.
[2] Fourie, J., & Santana-Gallego, M. (2022). Mega-sport events and inbound tourism: New data, methods and evidence. Tourism Management Perspectives, 43, 101002.
[3] Mhanna, R., Blake, A., & Jones, I. (2019). Spreading tourists around host countries of mega sport events. International Journal of Tourism Cities.
[4] Zhao, C. L. (2014). Research on the ways to enhance the tourism efficiency of large-scale sports events: A comparative practice based on three Olympic Games. Sports Culture Guide, (9), 116-119.
[5] Barbu, A., & Nicolescu, L. (2024). A bibliometric analysis on the relationship between mega events and regional development. Journal of Tourism Research, 25(5), 838-852.
[6] Singh, N., & Hu, C. (2008). Understanding strategic alignment for destination marketing and the 2004 Athens Olympic Games: Implications from extracted tacit knowledge. Tourism Management, 29(5), 929-939.
[7] Wolfe, S. D. (2025). Behind the golden glow: The soft power, Potemkinism, and protest of Australian mega-events. In S. D. Wolfe (Ed.), The Hard Edge of Soft Power. Palgrave Macmillan.
[8] Jiang, Y., & Chen, N. (2019). Event attendance motives, host city evaluation, and behavioral intentions: An empirical study of Rio 2016. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 31(8), 3270-3286.
[9] Jiang, Y. Y., Gao, J., & Fang, Y. (2024). Research on sustainable use and innovative development of Olympic legacy. Beijing: Science Press.
[10] Chen, G., Peachey, J. W., Stodolska, M., et al. (2021). Governing adaptation strategies of winter tourism destinations in the context of the 2022 Olympic Winter Games. Tourism Review International.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

