The spatial externality effects of football matches and rock concerts

Applied Geography 1995 15 (1) 18-34

The spatial externality effects of football matches and rock concerts

The case of Portman Road Stadium, Ipswich, Suffolk

James Chase Division of Geography, School of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Coventry University, Coventry CVl 5FB, UK

Mick Healey Department of Geography and Geology, Cheltenham and Gloucester College of Higher Education, Francis Close Hall, Swindon Road, Cheltenham GLSO 4AZ, UK

Like many other football clubs in recent years, Ipswich Town has attempted to supplement its takings from football matches by using its stadium for other commercial activities, namely rock concerts. Previous anecdotal evidence suggests that the staging of large-scale rock concerts at football grounds generates nuisances far greater in magnitude than those associated with football matches, although there is little research to support this view. This paper is the first to apply the established methodology of investigating football-induced externality effects to a community experiencing both football matches and occasional large- scale rock concerts at the same venue. The findings conflict with previous evidence and suggest that general nuisance increases with distance from the stadium up to a distance of 1 km. The effect of staging mck concerts at the stadium has increased the negative effects generated, particularly noise levels. However, football-induced nuisance is perceived as being a greater problem overall, possibly due to the higher frequency of matches. Whilst the spatial extent and severity of football-induced nuisance can be understood largely in terms of urban morphology, personal opinion and local authority policy, an important factor affecting concert-induced nuisance is the weather, with wind direction having a particular effect on the spatial pattern of the noise generated.

During the last decade a number of studies have been undertaken to investigate the largely negative externality effects that football stadiums generate on surrounding residents. Significant findings have been made concerning the spatial extent, severity and nature of the nuisance components generated by football matches at Football League grounds; namely, that nuisance fields, although individually shaped by the urban physical environment, generally follow a distance-decay pattern and that traffic-related nuisances are more of a problem than vandalism or hooliganism (Bale, 1980, 1990, 1993; Humphreys et al., 1983; Mason and Robins, 1991; Head, 1992; Mason and Moncrieff, 1993). In recent years, spurred on by financial difficulties, several football clubs have attempted to supplement their takings from football by using their grounds for other commercial activities when matches are not scheduled. This trend has been reinforced by the need for

0143-6228/95/01/0018-17 0 1994 Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd

The spatial externality effects of football matches and rock concerts: J Chase and M Healey

many clubs to pay back the cost of investing in new or upgraded stadiums, in part associated with the raising of safety standards at grounds and the introduction of all-seater stadiums. However, little research has been carried out to compare nuisance effects of football matches with the corresponding externalities of non-football uses of the same stadiums.

An exception is Mason and Robins (1991), who investigated the spatial externality fields of Kenilworth Road stadium, Luton, for both football and non-football uses. They concluded that ‘the negative externalities generated by the use of the ground for non- football activities are both less intense and smaller in extent than those generated by football matches’ (Mason and Robins, 1991: 251). However, whilst the nature of football matches is similar for most large football stadiums, the externality effects of non-football events depends largely on the type of event concerned. The non-football events at Luton Town, although occurring relatively frequently, were generally small scale, such as hockey and lacrosse tournaments, American football, conventions and various community uses such as amateur football. It seems likely that the hiring out of football stadiums for occasional large-scale events such as rock concerts could create considerably more nuisance to local residents. This viewpoint is influenced by the experiences of some local residents before, during and after a Bruce Springsteen concert at Villa Park stadium, Birmingham, in 1988. However, the evidence is largely anecdotal and is presented in the form of a description of events by a solicitor acting on behalf of a coalition of 21 community groups, which was formed to prevent further concerts taking place.

For the duration of the performances and extending in various ways through the preceding and following 24 hours, floodlights, noise, traffic and the mass of people coming into the area

brought ordinary activity to an end. Some businesses had to close through lack of parking space. Residents over a substantial area had great difficulty reaching home. Once there they could not sleep or hear ordinary speech. The presence of a mass of people, far exceeding football crowds at the ground, sometimes behaving badly under the influence of alcohol, was

intimidating. There was widespread urinating in doorways and a deluge of litter. Elderly people were frightened. (Quoted in Bale, 1990: 332)

There is clearly a need for more systematic and balanced research into the spatial effects of such large-scale events. This paper reports the findings of a survey comparing the nuisance components generated by large football matches with those of rock concerts. It is the first study to apply the established methodology of investigating football-induced externality effects to a community experiencing both football matches and occasional large-scale rock concerts at the same venue. Portman Road stadium, Ipswich, was chosen for the investigation because it hosts between 20 and 35 Football Association (FA) Premiership football matches per season and has held four large-scale rock concerts in the three summers of 1990, 1991 and 1992, with plans for more in the future. Furthermore, the stadium has not previously been subjected to a study of externality effects.

Nature of stadium externalities

The concept of externalities is fundamental to all work concerning the spatial effects of football stadiums. Externalities have been defined as ‘third party effects’ (Knox, 1987: 247) occurring ‘when the behaviour of one individual, group or institution affects the welfare, positively or negatively, of others’ (Bale, 1978: 334). Externalities include ‘unanticipated or unsuspected outcomes of behaviour which often have an element of unintentionality’ (Smith, 1977: 90). The intensity of externalities is usually a function of relative location (Knox, 1987: 247), with the externality field being defined as ‘the area over which externalities extend from their source’.

Applied Geography 1995 Volume I5 Number I Ic)

The spatial externality effects of football matches and rock concerts: J Chase and M Henley

The effects of football matches

For nine months of the year, football stadiums are the focus of the controversy, conflict, tradition and addiction of the UK’s most popular spectator sport. Up to half a million people congregate in the most concentrated manner imaginable on the doorsteps of the surrounding residents to practise the behaviour of being football supporters. To an armchair ‘media-digester’, football supporters are hooligans, intent on causing maximum disruption and public disorder, damaging both property and person, leaving in their wake trails of destruction. This is a general reaction based on the public’s ‘exaggerated’ perception of football-induced nuisance, termed ‘moral panic’ by Bale (1990: 326). He compared the general public’s perception of football-induced nuisance with that of residents who live close to stadiums. He found that 96 per cent of the general public imagined a football stadium to be a nuisance (55 per cent a serious nuisance), if forced to live close to one, whereas only 5.5 per cent of residents actually living near a stadium viewed it as being a nuisance (17 per cent a serious nuisance). Although isolated incidents of vandalism and hooliganism do occur, they are generally recognized as being less of a problem than traffic-related nuisances (Bale, 1980, 1989, 1990, 1993; Humphreys et al., 1983; Mason and Robins, 1991; Head, 1992; Mason and Moncrieff, 1993).

Football stadiums are generally located in the inner-urban areas of most cities and therefore it is the residents of these densely populated ‘stadium shadows’ (Bale, 1990: 325) who bear the brunt of these nuisances or negative externalities. Very broadly, nuisance fields exhibit a marked distance-decay pattern, but some nuisances may be displaced by local authority, police and football club controls (such as parking and traffic restrictions and a heavy police presence) or shaped by the physical environment of the city (for example, railway lines, canals, parks and industrial areas). For those subjected to such nuisances, there are resulting costs: lower house prices close to the football stadium; loss of sale by traders forced to close on match days because of the threat of vandalism, assault or shoplifting; and the policing costs incurred by local taxpayers (football clubs are responsible for policing costs inside the ground only). In addition to these tangible costs, there are intangible costs, such as the nervous stress suffered by the local community and the general inconvenience created by residents having to ‘consume more [negative effects] than they would freely choose’ (Smith, 1977: 91).

Alternative uses of football stadiums

Most football clubs are in a poor financial state. Surveys have shown that in 1988 only 24 of the 124 English and Scottish league clubs made a profit, while in 1987, 80 out of the 92 English clubs were technically insolvent (Financial Times, 1990, cited in Mason and Robins, 1991). Although the formation of the FA Premiership has resulted in large sums of money being received by its member clubs as part of sponsorship and television coverage deals, additional sources of revenue are sought wherever possible, and especially by clubs outside the Premiership. One way is to adopt a more intensive use of the highly under-utilized stadium, which generally plays host to just 35-40 hours of first-team football per year. In the mid-1980s a survey showed that 36 per cent of clubs used their stadium for non-football activities (Oliver, 1986, cited in Mason and Robins, 1991). These can be in the form of other sporting events, such as rugby or hockey (although these feature less with the banning of artificial pitches), religious events, rock concerts, or the leasing out of land for building developments. It has already been suggested above from anecdotal evidence that rock concerts may cause nuisance levels in excess of those originating from football matches, due to high noise levels. However, this may be compensated, to a certain extent, by the low frequency of such events. Alternatively, residents may perceive one or two large-scale rock concerts per year as more of a nuisance than 25 football matches of a possibly less severe nature. The tradition and heritage of

20 Applied Geography 199.5 Volume 15 Number I


football may result in higher tolerance levels of residents to its spillovers, whereas the relatively modem, and possibly alien, nature of stadium rock concerts may be reflected in high levels of perceived nuisance.

There are also certain benefits associated with a neighbouring football stadium. For example, shopkeepers can experience increased takings on match days. Also, there can be considerable community spirit associated with a football club, particularly a successful one, of which local residents can feel proud to be a part. In addition, it can be convenient for a supporter to have the football ground in her/his locality; a survey of residents around Coventry City’s football ground showed that 34 per cent of respondents attended matches either regularly or occasionally (Head, 1992). These positive impacts are enhanced by staging rock concerts at a stadium. In addition, the bond between the club and the community may be strengthened. Furthermore, the leisure requirements of a different sector of the local population are catered for. Finally, in the case of Ipswich, there is the prestige of attracting a big-name rock band to the town, helping to put it on the national map. Clubs hosting successful large-scale intensive events such as rock concerts stand to make large financial gains in a short space of time.

Aims

The broad aims of this paper are:

(1) to examine the nature, scale and spatial extent of nuisances generated by Portman Road stadium in Ipswich;

(2) to compare the separate nuisance characteristics generated by football matches and rock concerts, and to compare these in turn with the findings of previous studies;

(3) to analyse the spatial patterns of nuisance in terms of the intrinsic nature of each nuisance type, the physical environment of the city, local authority policy, and the personal perception and tolerance levels of the residents.

Methods

Questionnaires

The collection of primary data was undertaken by the distribution of self-completion questionnaires to households living in three zones up to 1 km from the stadium. Previous studies have identified five types of nuisance perceived by residents living near a football stadium: noise, traffic congestion, parked cars, pedestrians/crowds and vandalism/ hooliganism. Residents were asked to assess the severity of each type of nuisance as follows:

(1) nuisance is not present; (2) nuisance is present but no problem; (3) nuisance is a problem; (4) nuisance is a severe problem.

This information was requested for both football matches and rock concerts. The resulting scores were mapped according to the location of respondents and then interpolated to produce externality contours, or ‘isonuisances’. A separate isonuisance map was produced for each type of nuisance and for each type of event (football matches and rock concerts) to enable the spatial extent and severity of each to be examined and compared. It should be noted that, as with previous attempts to derive nuisance maps (see, for example, Bale, 1980, 1990; Mason and Robbins, 1991; Head, 1992; Mason and Moncrieff, 1993) an element of subjectivity is inevitable in interpolating the externality contours from point data (that is, responding households).

Applied Geography 1995 Volume 15 Number 1 21

The spatial externality effects of football matches and rock concerts: J Chase and M Henley

Sampling

A stratified random sampling technique was employed to identify the location of households contacted. An area around Portman Road stadium of 1 km radius was divided into concentric distance zones, A, B and C, each one-third of a kilometre in breadth, to enable results to be analysed over distance. Previous studies have employed a similar methodology, although generally zones of 500 m were used, covering areas of up to 2 km from the stadium, in the cases of Bale (1990) and Mason and Robins (1991). Given the resources available for this study and the number of expected responses (lOO-120), it was felt that smaller zones would be necessary in order to obtain sufficient responses in each zone (minimum 30) for meaningful analysis.

The survey was carried out during September 1992 when residents had been subjected to both football matches and rock concerts during the preceding three months. A total of 200 questionnaires were distributed by hand to the residents of the three zones; 60 in zone A and 70 in each of zones B and C. One hundred and two were completed (47 male and 55 female), of which 31 were in zone A, 32 in zone B and 39 in zone C. This represents a response rate of 51 per cent. Due to the nature of self-completion questionnaires, it is recognized that the sample may have an element of technical bias because of the process of ‘self-selection’ by the respondents.

Portman Road-the spatial context

The physical environment

Portman Road could not be more conveniently located; close to both the railway station and town centre, and yet not too confined by its surrounds. (Inglis, 1987: 129)

Portman Road football stadium is located approximately 500 m west of Ipswich town centre in an area dominated by commerce and public open space, with adjacent housing at one end only. The River Orwell forms a natural barrier from west to east 300 m south

Figure 1. Base map of the study area

22 Applied Geography 1995 Volume 15 Number I

The spatial externality effects of football matches and rock concerts: / Chase and M Healey

of the ground. The railway station is situated a further 100 m south of the river. The railway lines and the river both limit the flows of traffic and pedestrians to a few crossing points. To the north is the only residential area within 350 m of the stadium. It is, however, relatively small, comprising just six streets of predominantly local authority housing. Apart from these houses, most of the large residential zones within the study area are at a distance greater than 500 m from the stadium and are therefore located in zones B and c (Figure I).

Spectator trends

Ipswich Town’s attendance levels have tended to change in direct response to the success of the club rather than follow national trends. For example, relegation to Division Two in 1986 was reflected by a severe decrease in average crowds, whereas promotion to the Premier League in May 1992 accounted for a 1992-93 season increase from 14300 to 18 100 per home game over the previous season.

Another factor controlling crowd size is the government legislation introduced to implement recommendations from the Taylor Report (Home Office 1990), making all- seater stadiums compulsory by 1994. Portman Road was the first stadium in the country to become all-seater in response to this legislation, following the completion of the work in August 1992. This has reduced the capacity of the ground from 28 000 to around 22 500. Other factors influencing crowd size include the number of visiting supporters in attendance, the importance of the match itself, the status and prestige of the opposition, the day and kick-off time of the fixture and, to a lesser extent, the weather.

Crowd control

One of the major concerns of the club is the policing of events at the stadium. The football club pays for policing costs inside the ground (of which 35 per cent is subsidized by the Football Trust), whereas costs incurred outside the stadium are paid for by the taxpayer. Each football match is graded A, B or C (high risk to low risk) by the police, depending on the team Ipswich are playing and the estimated crowd size. The cost of policing an A-grade game is approximately f24000; thus the bill to the football club will be around f12000.

So far, Portman Road stadium has played host to four summer rock concerts; one in each of 1990 and 1991, and two in 1992. When these are staged, most of the crowd control is carried out by stewards with just 40 police officers on duty at each event. There were no arrests at the two most recent concerts, which attracted crowds of approximately 20 000 (Dire Straits, 16 June 1992) and 16000 (Bryan Adams, 14 July 1992).

Traflic control

Car parking is not so much of a problem at Portman Road as it is at more confined stadium locations. Two council car parks border the stadium, with several more nearby in all directions. Traffic can reach the area via four main routes. To avoid unnecessary competition for space between pedestrians and traffic, Portman Road and Portman’s Walk (both bordering the ground) are closed to vehicles a few hours before events at the stadium.

Results

This section describes the patterns of results obtained from the survey, while the findings are interpreted in the discussion section which follows.

Applied Geography 1995 Volume 15 Number I 23


Nuisance fields and inter-zone relationships

The general and component nuisance fields are mapped in Figures 2-7 and show the geographical extent and patterns of nuisance experienced by residents. Two maps are presented in each figure so that the nuisance experienced from football matches may be directly compared with that of rock concerts. Figure 8 shows the severity of general nuisance as perceived by residents in each of the three zones in the form of graphs.

The general football-match nuisance field (Figure 2a) is spatially extensive, featuring two large bands of perceived nuisance representing the main residential areas north and south of the stadium. Unlike previous studies, nuisance appears to be limited close to the stadium, although this is largely due to the lack of extensive residential areas in zone A. The only spot of severe nuisance is an ‘outlier’ in a middle-class area of zone C, resulting from an exaggerated perception by one respondent.

The general rock-concert nuisance field (Figure 2b) is similar to that for football matches. However, there are no areas of severe nuisance. The problem nuisance band extends further northwest than for football matches, but there is less of a problem to the southwest of the stadium, perhaps reflecting differences in the traffic patterns between the two events.

General nuisance (see Figure 8) is shown to increase with distance from the stadium for both football matches and rock concerts, thus exhibiting a pattern opposite to the expected distance-decay effect. Overall, football nuisance is perceived as being slightly more severe than concert nuisance. However, as previous studies have demonstrated (Humphreys et al., 1983; Mason and Robins, 1991; Head, 1992), the general nuisance fields provide little indication as to the nature of nuisances being experienced by residents and whether more than one occurs simultaneously. Examination of the individual fields of different nuisance types illustrates the wide differences in the extent and severity of such nuisances, thus justifying their individual analysis.

The noise nuisance fields differ significantly between football matches and rock concerts (Figure 3). When football matches take place, the pattern is one of small,

a) Football Matches

__----__

b) Rock Concerts



a) Football Matches b) Rock Concerts

Figure 3. Noise nuisance fields

fragmented areas of spatially confined nuisance, very little of which is a problem to residents. However, with rock concerts the nuisance field becomes extensive, with severe levels experienced close to the stadium and problem levels perceived in the residential areas to the north. It is interesting to note the less severe nature of the nuisance to the south of the railway station. Reasons for this irregularity will be discussed later. Noise nuisance


Figure 4. Traffic nuisance fields


The spatial externali effects of football matches and rock concerts: J Chase and M Healey


is the only nuisance type to follow a broad distance-decay model for both football matches and rock concerts.

The traffic nuisance fields (Figure 4) are spatially extensive. Both the football match and rock concert maps highlight the most severe problem as being along Norwich Road (A1156), the main route into Ipswich from the west and north. Problem areas also exist,


Figure 6. Pedestrian/crowd nuisance fields




Figure 7. Vandalism/hooliganism nuisance fields

as might be expected, close to the ground in zone A. The main difference between the two fields is that for rock concerts the traffic nuisance south of the stadium, and in particular on the Chantry estate (southwest, zone C), is less severe. A comparison of traffic nuisance between zones reveals a general marked negative distance-decay pattern for both football matches and rock concerts; however, the latter features the highest levels of problem/ severe problem nuisance in zone A, whereas the former displays the highest levels of problem/severe problem nuisance in zones B and C.

The parked-car nuisance fields (Figure 5) are very similar to those for traffic but are, if anything, more severe, with virtually the whole of the residential area to the north experiencing problem nuisance levels. The expected high levels of parked-car nuisance exist adjacent to the stadium. However, as with traffic, the Chantry estate (to the southwest) experiences less parked-car nuisance for rock concerts.

The pedestrian/crowds nuisance fields are virtually identical for both football matches and for rock concerts (Figure 6). The nuisance levels experienced are not severe and are rarely a problem; they tend to follow narrow corridors from the periphery to the stadium along the main routeways.

The vandalism/hooliganism field for football matches (Figure 7~2) has a similar pattern to the corresponding pedestrian field; however, the nuisance is more severe. The highest levels are experienced in a corridor about 500 m north of the stadium, and to the east, bordering the town centre. The corresponding field for rock concerts (Figure 7h) demonstrates a similar pattern but of a less extensive and more fragmented nature. A relatively large proportion of the nuisanc ,? when it is present is of a problem/severe problem nature. This is a logical result as any form of vandalism or hooliganism is likely to cause severe disruption. The problem/severe problem nuisance represents a negative distance-decay pattern for both football matches and rock concerts.

Although some components of nuisance display a positive distance-decay pattern, the results described so far have demonstrated that a negative distance-decay pattern generally



Fbl R;k Bib Fbl Rik Bib - - Fbl Rik Bib

0 Nuisance is not present

Nuisance is present but no problem

n Nuisance is a problem

n Nuisance is a severe problem

Fbl - FOOTBALL MATCHES

Rck . ROCK CONCERTS

Bth - BOTH

Fbl R;k B;h

A B c ALL

ZOlll?

Figure 8. Severity of general nuisance by zone and type of event

exists up to a distance of 1 km from the stadium. It has also been shown that football matches in general create more nuisance to residents than rock concerts.

Dominant nuisance types

Table 1 shows the average nuisance score for each type of nuisance in each zone, and for each event type. The nuisances are ranked in order of severity according to their score. For football-generated nuisance, parking and traffic score highest in each zone, with noise consistently last. However, for rock concerts, although parking and traffic are the biggest problems in zones B and C, noise emerges as the dominant nuisance in zone A. Nevertheless, traffic-related nuisance is more important overall. The findings for football- related nuisance are consistent with those of Bale (1980, 1990), Humphreys et al. (1983), Mason and Robins (1991) and Head (1992). This study shows that traffic-related nuisance is also the dominant nuisance type generated by rock concerts.

Table 1. Rank and average score for each nuisance type by zone and type of event

Event type Rank A B

Zone

C All

Football 1 matches 2

3 4 5

Rock 1 concerts 2

3 4 5

Parking 1.96 Traffic 1.77 Crowds 1.56 Vandalism 1.56 Noise 1.39

Noise 1.83 Parking 1.70 Traffic 1.68 Crowds 1.38 Vandalism 1.24

Traffic 2.07 Parking 1.97 Vandalism 1.43 Crowds 1.32 Noise 1.19

Parking 1.70 Traftic 1.70 Noise 1.66 Crowds 1.34 Vandalism 1.20

Parking 2.10 Traffic 2.05 Vandalism 1.53 Crowds 1.35 Noise 1.22

Parking 1.92 Traffic 1.77 Noise 1.54 Vandalism 1.31 Crowds 1.29

Parking 2.02 Traffic 1.98 Vandalism 1.5 1 Crowds 1.40 Noise 1.27

Parking 1.79 Traffic 1.72 Noise 1.61 Crowds 1.31 Vandalism 1.26



Discussion

This section offers explanations for the extent and severity of nuisance in terms of the physical urban environment and nuisance type and local government intervention. It also discusses the additional effects of rock concerts and examines the role of personal perception and tolerance.

The physicuE urban environment and nuisance type. The patterns of nuisance around Portman Road stadium can be understood largely by the physical environment of the city, the differences in levels of local knowledge between football crowds and concert-goers, and the intrinsic nature of particular nuisance components.

The various nuisance fields, as described previously, exhibit some common characteristics: the nuisance levels in zone A are not as high as would be expected, and the nuisance band to the north is invariably more extensive than the corresponding band to the south, although the two residential areas are of a similar size. These characteristics can be accounted for by the physical environment of the townscape.

Portman Road stadium borders two car parks, industrial premises, a practice pitch and just one residential street. The nuisance effects in the immediate vicinity of the stadium are therefore ‘cushioned’. The open spaces of the car parks and the recreational park serve to dissipate the energy of the assembling and dissembling crowds. The residential areas to the south of the study area are protected somewhat by a huge semi-permeable barrier formed by the railway and the River Orwell. The latter can be crossed only by three major roads within the study area, two of which link the stadium with the railway station and the Al2 Ipswich southwest bypass respectively, and the other which links the town centre with the docks and southeastern exit from the town. This lack of routes causes a channelling of a significant proportion of the after-match pedestrian flow from the stadium and over the river in the direction of the railway station. This flow is considerably more concentrated after a match because the whole crowd leaves the stadium together, whereas spectators may arrive at the stadium over a period of two or three hours. It has not been identified from the survey as being ‘nuisance-inducing’, since few residents live along the route.

One possible reason why the Chantry estate, to the southwest, experiences less traffic and parking nuisance from rock concerts than from football matches is because of this river/railway barrier and a lack of local knowledge by concert-goers. The estate is a considerable distance from the stadium by road due to the shape of the road system. However, by parking on the estate and taking a short cut across the park, the stadium is but ten minutes’ walk away. Experienced football-goers will know this, while those attending only rock concerts may not. Therefore the difference between the characteristics of football match and rock concert nuisance fields may be influenced by the difference in the composition of the respective crowds. A similar observation was made by Mason and Robins (1991). Crowd composition is also an important factor in explaining the more severe nature of football-induced vandalism/hooliganism compared with that of concerts.

Some patterns of nuisance are an inevitable consequence of the intrinsic nature of a particular nuisance type. For example, noise levels from football matches cannot physically travel far enough to result in a severe nuisance to residents living, say, 1 km away from the source. For rock concerts, however, the picture is somewhat different, as will be discussed below.

The pedestrian/crowd nuisance field is restricted to the main pedestrian routes and therefore exhibits narrow corridors of moderate nuisance between residential areas, the town centre and the stadium. Vandalism/hooliganism, however, is largely unpredictable,



tending to occur sporadically and in isolated spots. The vandalism/hooliganism nuisance fields for Portman Road illustrate this reasonably well. There is, however, some evidence that most of this type of nuisance is experienced in areas of high accessibility, not too far from the stadium.

Traffic nuisance, by definition, can only be a genuine problem in close proximity to roads, particularly main routes. This is apparent in Ipswich, where the most severe traffic nuisance is perceived around Norwich Road (A1156) to the north, one of the busiest residential roads in Ipswich on match days. Nuisance from parked cars is also shaped by the road system, although it is largely affected by parking restrictions and, thus, local authority intervention.

Local government intervention. The effect of parked-car nuisance around Portman Road stadium has been displaced outwards by local authority policy (Humphreys et al., 1983 note this effect at The Dell, Southampton). Although parking is plentiful around the stadium, it is not free, and the residential streets in the immediate vicinity of the football ground have ‘permit-only’ restrictions in operation. Furthermore, it is difficult to drive away during the after-match congestion period; thus many people park on residential side streets, ten minutes’ or so walk from the stadium. Of those respondents from zones B and C who made ‘additional comments’ in the survey, 50 per cent complained about the parked-car situation in front of their homes on match days. ‘I cannot go shopping in my car on Saturdays because I’ll lose my space to a football fan’, wrote one zone-B respondent, living northwest of the stadium. Another way in which local government intervention is significant is by the closure of Portman Road and Portman’s Walk to traffic on match afternoons.

It can be argued that the local authority encourages all the negative externality fields associated with rock concerts by allowing the town to stage them in the first place. However, further intervention by Ipswich Borough Council ensures that the immediate nuisance field for concerts is reduced: it supplies all residents living near the stadium with either free tickets for the concert or, alternatively, a free night out at a restaurant. The trouble the local authority takes to keep the peace indicates the importance it attaches to attracting rock concerts to the town.

The extra strains of rock music. Football grounds generate relatively low levels of noise at reasonably sociable hours, when engaged in their traditional use. The effects of such noise are usually spatially confined and close to the stadium. However, when a rock concert is staged at a football ground the noise impact is more spatially extensive. One of the most important influences on the spatial patterns of the noise nuisance field is the weather. This is well demonstrated by the two rock concerts staged at Portman Road stadium during the summer of 1992. Dire Straits played at the stadium on 18 June, during which just seven complaints were lodged, only five of which were concerned with noise levels. David Smith, the Borough Council’s concert coordinator, credited this to the high cloud cover, northerly wind and ‘clever speaker positioning’ (East Anglian Daily Times, 1992b). However, following the Bryan Adams concert on 14 July, the Borough Council received 60 complaints, virtually all of which concerned noise. Most came from residents living the ‘other side’ of the London Road (A1214). The wind this time was blowing from a southerly direction, thus demonstrating the dramatic effects of microclimatic changes on this type of nuisance (East Anglian Daily Times, 1992~).

The adverse effects of noise nuisance generated by rock concerts can result in further costs to the community. For example, daytime sound checks made by rock bands have, in previous years, resulted in the Crown, County and Magistrates’ courts having to adjourn early for lunch, and have also affected school exams. One tangible cost of noise nuisance


The spatial externality e-8ects of football matches and rock concerts: J Chase and M Heuley

from concerts is the enforced closure of the Wolsey Theatre during each concert date, resulting in a loss of &5000 per night in ticket receipts (Eusf AngZian Daily Times, 1992a).

Aside from noise nuisance, a rock concert may directly damage the football pitch at Portman Road stadium. Despite the laying down of chip-boarding as a preventative measure, the club has alleged that the marked deterioration of the playing surface over the last four seasons is a direct consequence of rock concert activity. This could be described as a negative internality effect.

Perception and tolerance

So far in this paper attention has been focused on the negative externality fields of Portman Road stadium. However, this analysis hides important variations in the perception and tolerance of nuisances between individuals. It is possible that the tolerance of the residents to nuisance is dependent on the age and gender of the respondents. To test for these possible relationships, respondents were asked: ‘Do events held at the football ground cause you any inconvenience’, and ‘if yes, what causes the most inconvenience: a) football matches b) rock concerts?‘. Overall, 52 per cent of all respondents found events to be an inconvenience (Figure 9). Football matches generally take the blame for most of the nuisance, increasingly so with distance from the stadium, as the major effects of rock

nnn n ‘Do events held at

the football ground

inconvenience ?’

P ABC-MF (i) (ti) (iii) ALL

tone Sex Age

(b)

0 ‘NO, NOT AT ALL

0 ‘YES, A LITTLE

n ‘YES, QUITE A LOT

AGE

(i) 16-24

(ii) 25-59

(111) 60+

‘If yes, what

causes the most

inconvenience ?’

PB ABC-MF - (I) (ii)(iii) - ALL

Zone Sex Age

Figure 9. General inconvenience experienced by zone, sex and age



concerts diminish. Of respondents aged 60 or over, 24 per cent said events at Portman Road caused them ‘quite a lot’ of inconvenience, whereas the corresponding statistic for 25-59-year-olds was just 4 per cent. The strongest relationship appears to be between ‘the event most responsible for nuisance’ and age group (chi-square statistic = 6.65, df=2, p < 0.05); 62 per cent of respondents in the ‘60 and over’ age group viewed rock concerts as the major cause of inconvenience, compared with just 16 per cent in the ‘18-24-years- old’ category. As the only major difference between the two events is the level of noise, it may be assumed that high levels of the latter are perceived as more of a nuisance by the elderly than by the younger residents. Although there was a suggestion of a higher tolerance to football by male respondents, this was not statistically significant.

Traffic and parked-car nuisance generally scored highest for both football matches and rock concerts, although the actual levels recorded for the latter were less severe than those for the matches. However, the numbers attending both types of event are similar and generate the same volume of traffic. The differences in nuisance levels may therefore be explained by differences in the residents’ perception of the two types of event rather than the actual nuisances experienced. Alternatively, it may be a reflection of the frequencies of each event type.

Respondents’ perception of particular components of nuisance may be influenced by isolated incidents that have occurred in the past. This is particularly the case with problems of vandalism and hooliganism, the perception of which is often prone to exaggeration. For example, a resident who has suffered an attack of vandalism in the past is more likely to perceive it as a continuously severe nuisance.

Variations in the perception of nuisance between individuals helps to account for some of the anomalies noted in the nuisance fields. For example, the isolated spot of severe general nuisance observed in Zone C (see Figure 2) is attributable to the response of one individual, who complained of frequent nuisance associated with football matches, whereas other residents in the same street experienced little nuisance.

Another problem with perception is the difficulty in making comparisons between different zones within the same study and between different studies. For example, an Ipswich resident living in zone C may have a limited conception of what it is like to live within zone A. In turn, a zone-A resident in Ipswich will not have experienced nuisance in the corresponding zone at, say, Arsenal. Areas of high nuisance emerging at Ipswich may only compare to areas of minor nuisance at Arsenal. It is impossible to standardize residents’ perception within and between studies.

Summary and conclusion

This study has compared the nature, scale and spatial extent of nuisances generated by football matches and rock concerts at Portman Road stadium in Ipswich. It is the first study to take the established methodology of plotting football-generated externality fields around a stadium and apply it to high-magnitude, low-frequency events, such as rock concerts, occurring at the same venue. The examination of the nuisance characteristics has added significant empirical evidence to the generally sparse and previously anecdotal assumptions about the effects of rock concerts on the local community. It has also enabled a direct comparison to be made between the effects of these concerts and those of football matches played at the same stadium. The main findings of this investigation are as follows.

(1) Unlike the results from previous studies, the nuisance fields around Portman Road stadium generally exhibit a negative distance-decay pattern, at least up to a distance of 1 km.

32 Applied Geography 1995 Volume 15 Number 1


(2) Football-generated nuisance is generally perceived as being worse than concert- generated nuisance.

(3) Traffic-related nuisance is generally more severe than crowd-related nuisance, although for rock concerts, noise nuisance dominates in zone A.

(4) Both the level of inconvenience experienced and the event perceived to cause the most nuisance are statistically related to the age group but not the gender of the respondent.

(5) The spatial extent and severity of each nuisance type can be understood in terms of urban morphology, the personal opinions and attitudes of residents, the intrinsic nature of each nuisance type and the effects of local authority policy. The extent of noise nuisance from rock concerts is highly dependent on local weather conditions.

One of the problems in comparing the effects of football matches and rock concerts on residents is addressing the issue of frequency and severity as an influence on perceived nuisance. In this study, football-induced nuisance was shown to be slightly more severe than concert-induced nuisance, although this may simply reflect the much higher frequency of the former. Another important factor that requires further investigation is the duration and timing of the disruption from each event. Additional research is needed to acquire such data and to apply it to the established concepts of stadium externalities and to the issue of the location and relocation of football stadiums.

A majority of Football League clubs are currently (or will shortly be) undertaking extensive rebuilding work to modernize their stadiums. For most, this work has been enforced by recent government legislation to improve safety. However, for a few (generally larger) clubs, this legislation is being used as a launching pad for stadium alterations in excess of the minimum standards required, in an attempt to improve the archaic conditions of football grounds in the UK and to bring stadiums up to the standards set by other countries, such as Italy. This renovation is made possible either from the earnings of club success, lucrative television contracts and sponsorship deals, as is the case with Manchester United and Arsenal, or from the generosity of a wealthy, devoted chairman, in the case of Wolverhampton Wanderers and Blackburn Rovers. Either way, this ‘new age’ of stadium construction has revolutionized the way in which the public watches football and the way that clubs operate. Such improvements need to be justified economically. Hence new ground developments and improvements are planned with more diversified uses of the stadium in mind. A good example is Millwall’s new ground, ‘Senegal Fields’, which hopes to stage up to 70 ‘events’ every year, of which just 25 or so will be football related. Many of the remaining events are likely to be rock concerts. It is instructive that Millwall’s new stadium is being managed by a US venue-operating company (Mason and Moncrieff, 1993).

Evidence from this paper suggests that the changes in the balance of activities at football grounds have important implications for the football clubs, the residents living in the vicinity of the grounds, and the local authorities and police forces in whose territory the stadiums are located. This study has found that 25 football matches per year generate higher nuisance levels than two rock concerts. However, if the number of concerts were to increase significantly then the balance of nuisance may swing towards rock concerts, causing a high magnitude of additional nuisance to local residents. This is likely to extend the role of the police and local authorities in managing and planning the impact of these events on the local community. The greater diversity in events and their timings will also bring football clubs into more potential conflict with local residents’ groups and may strengthen the pressures on other clubs to consider relocating their stadiums before going down this road. For those clubs who have already invested heavily in upgrading their present stadiums, the pressures to move are more likely to be resisted. What does seem

Applied Geography 1995 Volume I5 Number I 33


clear, however, is that with the number of stadium rock concerts set to increase around the country as facilities improve, the severity of the impact of football stadiums on their local communities will increase significantly.

Acknowledgements

The authors are very grateful to Ruth Gaskell for producing the figures and to two anonymous referees for their helpful comments

References Bale, J (1978) ‘Externality gradients’, Area 10, 334-336 Bale, J (1980) ‘Football clubs as neighbours’, Town ana’ Country Planning 49, 93-94 Bale, 3 (1989) Sport’s geography E & F N Spon, London Bale, J (1990) ‘In the shadow of the stadium: football grounds as urban nuisances’, Geography 75, 325-44 Bale, 3 (1993) Sport, space and the city Routledge, London East Anglian Daily Times (1992a) ‘A sound system for the art of noise control’, East Anglian Daily Times (18

June) East Anglian Daily Times (1992b) ‘Rock concert goes smoothly’, East Anglian Daily Times (20 June) East Anglian Daily 77mes (1992~) ‘Concert noise angers residents’, East Anglian Daily Times (16 July) Financial Times (1990) ‘Profits the goal’, Financial Times (6 September) Head, A (1992) The spatial externality fields of Highfield Road football stadium, Coventry Unpublished BSc

dissertation, Department of Geography, Coventry University Home Office (1990) The Hillsborough stadium disaster: final report (the Taylor report) CM 962 HMSO,

London Humphreys, D, Mason, C and Pinch, S (1983) ‘The spatial externality fields of football grounds: a case study

of the Dell, Southampton’, Geoforum 14, 401-411 Inglis, S (1987) The football grounds of Great Britain (2nd edn) Willow Books, London Knox, P (1987) Urban social geography (2nd edn) Longman, Harlow Mason, C and Moncrieff, A (1993) ‘The effect of relocation on the externality fields of football stadia: the case

of St. Johnstone Football Club’, Scottish Geographical Magazine 109, 97-105 Mason, C and Robins, R (1991) ‘The spatial externality fields of football stadiums: the effect of football and non-

football uses at Kenilworth Road, Luton’, Applied Geography 11, 251-66 Smith, D (1977) Human geography: a welfare approach Penguin, Harmondsworth

(Revised manuscript received 27 April 1994)

Applied Geography 1995 Volume 15 Number 1

The spatial externality effects of football matches and rock concerts

Documents

Transcript of The spatial externality effects of football matches and rock concerts