impact of professional sports in surrounding metropolitan areas
Post on 17-Jan-2016
39 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Impact of Professional Sports in Impact of Professional Sports in Surrounding Metropolitan AreasSurrounding Metropolitan Areas
Terri Ekin
Lucy Morales
Mark Morales
PAF 502: Public Service Research II
IntroductionIntroduction
Research Question– Hypothesis
Does a professional sports team’s presence improve the economic well being or quality of life of people in a surrounding metropolitan area?
Significance of Research Question– Studies have been made to suggest that a sports stadium
facility does not improve the economic well being of people in a surrounding area.
Theories to Formulate Basis Theories to Formulate Basis of Hypothesisof Hypothesis
A large corporation will greatly benefit its community by the economic multiplier effect.
A professional sports team is a large corporation. A sports team will benefit its community
economically.
Public Policy IssuesPublic Policy Issues Government-subsidized industry
– Historian W. G. Hardy. Intangible benefits
– Quality of life issues Hefty price tag
Economic benefit studies – Heartland Institute Study
Opportunity costs Shifting current spending Subsidies leave the
community
Our HypothesisOur Hypothesis
Professional sports teams are not, by themselves, a significant influence on certain measurable economic and quality of life issues.
Our HypothesisOur Hypothesis
Professional sports teams are not, by themselves, a significant influence on certain measurable economic and quality of life issues.
Discussion of Data Discussion of Data MeasurementMeasurement
Data Collection MethodsMajor League BaseballNational Football LeagueFed Stats
– US Census Bureau– Bureau of Labor Statistics– Bureau of Justice Statistics
http://www.census.gov
Census BureauCensus Bureau
http://www.fedstats.gov
Bureau of Labor StatisticsBureau of Labor Statistics
Data ElementsData Elements
Population from 2000 US Census for Metropolitan Statistical Areas (n= 280)
MLB or NFL? How many stadiums? Per-Capita income? Percent of
– Women over 25 with post HS degree– Population with inc. below nat’l poverty rate– Households paying > 30% income in rent
More Data ElementsMore Data Elements
Per-Capita income?Percent of
– Women over 25 with post HS degree– Population with inc. below nat’l poverty rate– Households paying > 30% income in rent
More Data ElementsMore Data Elements
• Percent of working people >16 yrs working at home.--whose commute is < 30 minutes-- whose commute is >90 minutes
• Percent unemployment for 2000• For 51 MSA’s, the homicide rate for CY
1999
Research FindingsResearch Findings
Statistical TablesDiscussion
Descriptive StatisticsDescriptive Statistics
N Minimum Maximum MeanStd. Deviation
HaveSprt 280 0 1 0.09 0.291Popn2K 280 57813 21199865 818545.8 1957795.95PercFem25olABMPD 280 0.15 0.56 0.2858 0.07074PercapIncome 280 6378 31195 19663.57 3355.856PercentPov 280 0.05 0.57 0.1346 0.06361PercWkHome 280 0.01 0.07 0.0293 0.00894PercCommUpTo30min 280 0.49 0.91 0.7532 0.08378PercCommOvr90min 280 0.01 0.07 0.0212 0.00899PercGr30ofInc 280 0.23 0.56 0.3629 0.05148AnnRateUnEmp2000 280 1.2 27.4 4.2675 2.67085Valid N (listwise) 280
Correlation Table – Factor AnalysisCorrelation Table – Factor Analysis
Population Have Sport
Perc Fem with
DegreePer Capita
Income
Percent below
Poverty Rate
Population 1 0.665 0.178 0.358 -0.075Have Sport 0.665 1 0.183 0.383 -0.144
Perc Fem with Degree 0.178 0.183 1 0.566 -0.238
Per Capita Income 0.358 0.383 0.566 1 -0.756
Percent below Poverty Rate -0.075 -0.144 -0.238 -0.756 1
Percent Work at Home 0.062 0.071 0.518 0.398 -0.297
Percent with Commute Less
than 30 min -0.579 -0.537 -0.026 -0.259 -0.093
Percent with Commute Greater
than 90 min 0.303 0.132 -0.264 -0.192 0.307
Percent who Pay more than 30% of income for Rent 0.088 0.05 0.449 0.116 0.133
Annual Rate of Unemployment -0.038 -0.093 -0.471 -0.569 0.602
Correlation Table – Factor AnalysisCorrelation Table – Factor Analysis
Percent Work at Home
Percent with Commute
Less than 30 min
Percent with Commute
Greater than 90 min
Percent who Pay
more than 30% of income for Rent
Annual Rate of Unemployment
Population 0.062 -0.579 0.303 0.088 -0.038Have Sport 0.071 -0.537 0.132 0.05 -0.093Perc Fem
with Degree 0.518 -0.026 -0.264 0.449 -0.471Per Capita
Income 0.398 -0.259 -0.192 0.116 -0.569Percent below
Poverty Rate -0.297 -0.093 0.307 0.133 0.602
Percent Work at Home 1 0.076 -0.1 0.374 -0.189
Percent with Commute
Less than 30 min 0.076 1 -0.447 -0.033 -0.083
Percent with Commute
Greater than 90 min -0.1 -0.447 1 0.045 0.379
Percent who Pay more
than 30% of income for
Rent 0.374 -0.033 0.045 1 -0.026Annual Rate
of Unemployme
nt -0.189 -0.083 0.379 -0.026 1
ComponentsComponents
1 2 3
Popn2K-0.08 0.857 0.093
HaveSprt-0.196 0.8 0.053
PercFem25olABMPD
-0.418 0.086 0.754PercapIncome
-0.792 0.377 0.298PercentPov
0.887 -0.039 0.015PercWkHome
-0.252 -0.017 0.73PercCommUpTo30min
-0.108 -0.849 0.029PercCommOvr90min
0.543 0.51 -0.063PercGr30ofInc
0.208 0.038 0.846AnnRateUnEmp2000
0.804 0.042 -0.15
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
Component
Scree Plot
Component Number
10987654321
Eig
en
valu
e3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
.5
0.0
Top Fifty Cities with the Top Fifty Cities with the number of their teamsnumber of their teams
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
rank
area_name
Popn2000-10k
Population in 10,000's
Total Of Team
MLB Baseball
NBA Basketball
NFL Football
AmenitiesAmenities
Important Issues for communities and the public– “Being on the map…”– Having an identity
Stadium as one part of a community amenity package– others: public services,
infrastructure, culture/arts, diversity, climate, etc.
Economic Questions to AskEconomic Questions to Ask Does a stadium promote the general
economic development of a metropolitan area?
Can it assist in maintaining the vitality of the central city?
Can it stimulate development? Studies researched say NO
– I.e. - Bank One Ballpark - $230 million projected to create 400 jobs It would cost only $700,000 per job
ConclusionConclusion In spite of many studies failing to show positive
economic benefits of stadia, communities still strive to keep and attract professional sports teams.– Major sports leagues act as monopolies– Cities enter into bidding wars to attract teams– Cities will continue to attract and retain major
league sports based on perceived benefits
•Price of a New Stadium: $400 millionPrice of a New Stadium: $400 million
•Price of a New Quarterback: $50 millionPrice of a New Quarterback: $50 million
•Price of a Hot Dog and Beer: $20Price of a Hot Dog and Beer: $20
•Having the Cardinals in your Hometown: PRICELESS!!!Having the Cardinals in your Hometown: PRICELESS!!!
Discussion of Research Limitations and Discussion of Research Limitations and Possible Future EffortsPossible Future Efforts
– Large metropolitan areas are very complex, making quantifying particular influences difficult.
– Small scale – Design a questionnaire focused on perceived benefits of sports team, covering a random sample of people (public) from all parts of the economic spectrum (possibly based on income)
This questionnaire could give more insight into quality of life indicators
ReferencesReferences
Edward I. Sidlow and Beth M. Henschen, “Building Balparks: The Public-Policy Dimensions of Keeping the Game in Town”, in The Economics and Politics of Sports Facilities, Edited by Wilbur C. Rich (Quorum Books, Westport, CT) 2000
“Sports Stadium Madness – Why it started – How to stop it” by Joseph L. Bast, The Heartland Institute 1, http://www.lpwi.org/newsletter/00news/00janfeb/six.html
W.G. Hardy, http://www.mackinac.org/images.asp?id=4131
David Swindell and Mark S. Rosentraub, “Who Benefits from the Presence of Professional Sports Teams? The Implications for Public Funding of Stadiums and Arenas,” Public Administration Review, Jan/Feb, Vol. 58, No. 1, pp. 11-20, 1998
top related