The Olympic Games and Economic Efficiency: An Analysis of the Mega-Event's Costs and Benefits Introduction to the Issue The Olympic Games are the largest sports mega-event, whose economic impact extends far beyond sports. From a scientific point of view, evaluating their economic efficiency is a complex multifactorial task requiring the analysis of both direct and indirect costs and benefits. Traditionally, the justification of bidding countries is based on the concept of positive multiplier effect: large-scale investments in infrastructure, tourism growth, job creation, and the formation of a positive country image. However, an increasing number of studies by economists and political scientists question the unconditional benefits of the Games, pointing to the risk of creating "white elephants" (unneeded post-Games objects), a burden of debt for cities and regions, and the lack of evidence of long-term tourism dividends. Structure of Costs and Sources of Financing The economy of the Olympics is divided into operational costs (organization of competitions, security, ceremonies) and capital investments in infrastructure. The latter constitute the lion's share of the budget. Sources of financing are also diversified: private investments (from the IOC, sponsors, ticket sales) and public funds (budgets of different levels). The key problem is the tendency to catastrophic exceedance of budgets. Oxford University's research (2020) showed that since 1960, all Olympic Games without exception have exceeded the initial budget, on average by 172%. The record holder is the Montreal-1976 Games, for which the city paid off the debt for 30 years, while the London 2012 Olympics exceeded the budget by three times. Stated Benefits and Their Critical Analysis Infrastructure leap. The Games often serve as a catalyst for large-scale construction. A classic example of "successful" transformation is Barcelona-1992, where the Games were part of a strategic plan to develop the waterfront, mo ... Read more