As the iconic sounds of the vuvuzela have left our living rooms, the 2010

World Cup in South Africa is well and truly over. When Spain lifted the trophy on July 11th, many of us returned to our daily rituals without football dominating our local television schedules. However, for many in South Africa, the end of the World Cup was hopefully the start of change, as the benefits of hosting one of the world’s biggest sporting competitions would start to surface and the legacy of South Africa 2010 would begin. This was particularly true for the South Africans living in the townships, who hoped that having the eyes of the world on their lives for a few weeks or so would bring social and economic change to their lives. And with so many South Africans living in such conditions, and just under 25% of the population living in poverty in the year 2008, the World Cup provided a great opportunity to help those who needed it the most.

 

In an earlier blog we discussed the thoughts of the Sibesonke community during the World Cup, and highlighted the optimism people held regarding the economic benefits the tournament could bring. We combined this with another survey, this time focusing on the realities of life after the tournament and looking at the actual economic results. Again, using our BOPinion tool, we found that the initial early optimism was not matched by reality, and there is at least some disappointment within the community about the impact brought by being World Cup hosts.

Mid-way through the tournament, 10.2% of survey participants said they had lost money during the World Cup. When we asked again at the end of the tournament, that figure had risen to just under 20%; 18.9% of participants had lost money on investments made due to the tournament. This is highlighted in the first chart.

Furthermore, when we initially asked about possibilities for making money there was great optimism regarding the economic opportunities that would be created during the World Cup. However, only just over 50% actually invested in the World Cup, and of those that did, as discussed above, about one-fifth lost money on the investment. This is shown in the second chart.

However, that does mean that about four-fifths enjoyed positive returns. In fact, it was a little over at 81.1%. Of those who did invest; the majority of money was made on hotels and guest houses, selling flags, taxi services, bars and restaurants, as well as other services. The results are shown in the third chart.

Although the World Cup did bring economic benefits to the Sibesonke community, it appears that the reality failed to match the initial expectations and hope. Can this be explained by a poor economic performance during the tournament? Or were initial expectations simply too high? The World Cup brought positive change to some, but for others, it failed to deliver the hope it promised and life continued as it always had. The BBC highlighted this with a report focusing on the legacy of South Africa 2010 and showed both the positive and negative impact the tournament had. And the legacy debate may long continue, but what is important is that our thoughts about South Africa do not fade now the football is over, like the sounds in our living rooms of the last blows of the vuvuzela.