From a development standpoint, the only thing worse than an expensive, publicly financed stadium is an empty, expensive, publicly financed stadium. Brazil is now left with half of the planned general infrastructure benefits but all of the planned costs.Īt the very least, the country is left with 12 new state-of-the-art soccer stadiums. Before the Cup, Reuters reported that Brazil only delivered half of the projects it pledged, and many of them didn’t finish in time for the Cup. Because of these increases and project delays, Brazil was forced to divert its resources away from general infrastructure projects that may have had greater long-run growth potential in order to focus on a mad scramble to finish the stadiums in time for the first whistle.Īfter all, it was crucial to have the stadiums ready for the start of the tournament, but improved subway systems could wait. Unfortunately, cost overruns at the sports venues increased stadium costs by at least 75 percent over the original estimates. It’s for this reason that Brazil originally emphasized that the great majority of the infrastructure spending for the World Cup would come in the areas of general transportation, security and communications, with less than 25 percent of total spending going towards stadiums. The overwhelming conclusion of scholarly research on the subject of stadiums and arenas is that they provide little to no long-term economic benefits. In terms of long-run development potential, of most concern to economists is the $3.6 billion in total spending on the 12 new and refurbished stadiums that are being used for the event. Of course, with a price tag estimated at $11.3 billion in public works spending alone, it will take more than just a trouble-free four-week tournament to justify Brazil’s heavy investment in hosting the World Cup.
The home team won its group and advanced to the Round of 16, and the widespread concerns about social unrest, street crime and stadium completion have faded as the games have largely gone off without a hitch. The next host country selected was France.Aside from some brilliant play by Mexican goalkeeper Guillermo Ochoa that turned an expected victory for the Brazilian national team into a draw, so far the 2014 World Cup has gone well for host Brazil. The first host country in 1930 was Uruguay. This system was put into place to avoid boycotts and controversies – problems that had plagued the tournament in its early years. A balloting system is used to determine which bidding nations will become the host country.
Only 32 teams make it to the finals to determine one winner.įIFA’s Council chooses the host countries. The first championship was held in 1930 and has been held every four years except for 19 due to World War II.Īs of 2019, there are 211 teams eligible to qualify for the championship. Members of the Federation Internationale de Football Association – FIFA – compete every four years for the World Cup. The FIFA World Cup is one of the biggest sporting events in the world.