Sociology of Sport VII Critique

Sports tourism does not have to be accompanied by crime: a case for the NFL Super Bowl Hassan Tajalli and Alejandra Iraide Peña

Department of Political Science, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, USA

ABSTRACT The Routine Activities Theory suggests that when there is the presence of a motivated offender, a suitable target, and the absence of a capable guardian, crime has the opportunity to occur. Large sporting events accompanied by massive tourists bring these ingredients of crime together. The purpose of this study is to find out whether the crime rates spike in the host cities during the high tourist month of the Super Bowl. Twenty- four months of crime rates on eight types of crimes were obtained for every American city that has hosted the Super Bowl. Panel Data Analysis is used to test the Hypotheses of this study. The findings do not show a spike in crime rates during the month of Super Bowl for any of the crimes examined in this study. It is in the economic interests of all stakeholders to provide a safe and secure venue free of crimes for sports tourists.

ARTICLE HISTORY Received 26 October 2015 Revised 29 September 2016 Accepted 13 December 2016

KEYWORDS Super Bowl; sports tourism; crime; Panel Data Analysis

The culture of countries can be defined by their sports and the traditions that revolve around them. In fact, sport is a form of cultural practice. As an integral part of culture, sporting events not only bring together thousands of individuals for a lone purpose, they solidify human relations through the events, interactions, and the development of spirit de corps that precedes and follows the game. Participation in sports and other cul- tural events are directly related to the health, life satisfaction and general quality of life of individuals. Unfortunately, major sports events are also often marred by various violent and non-violent crimes. From the time of Roman gladiatorial games to the games of modern times, we have often witnessed crimes ranging from petty crimes of pickpocket- ing to mass violent hooliganism; and, most recently, terrorism. The purpose of this study is to find out whether the most celebrated American sports event, the Super Bowl, is also marked with the rise of various crimes in the host city, during the month the game is played.

The National Football League’s (NFL’s) Super Bowl event is one of the most popular events in the United States. The Super Bowl is more than a game; it is a cultural event in the rank of Thanksgiving and Christmas. The game is the culmination of half a year of intense national football competition when fans and friends get together to eat, to drink and to watch their favorite teams rise or fall from grace. The day the Super Bowl is played is an unofficial national holiday when friends and families come together to

© 2017 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group

CONTACT Hassan Tajalli [email protected]

JOURNAL OF SPORT & TOURISM, 2017 VOL. 21, NO. 1, 15–32 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14775085.2016.1273127

celebrate the game. There is a week of live concerts performed by celebrities, fireworks, street music and dancing preceding the game. The game is the talk of the nation where half of the country is glued to their screen monitors to watch the game. The 2016 game, for example, attracted some 167 million TV viewers, more than half the popu- lation of the United States (Harden, 2016). More than 71,000 fans filled Levi’s Stadium during the 2016 Super Bowl, spending $6.2 million on food and beverages and another $4.6 million on merchandise (Florio, 2016).

National fascination with this mega game has made the Super Bowl a lucrative business. It was estimated that Super Bowl related consumer spending in the United States totaled 15.53 billion dollars in 2016 (Statista, 2016). Super Bowl Sunday is the second most lucrative day (after Thanksgiving Day) for the food industry in the United States. National broadcasters also have a field day by taking a large slice of the pie. A 30-second television ad-spot during the 2016 Super Bowl cost as much as $5 million, or about $167,000 a second (USA Today, 2014). In 2014, Forbes magazine reported that the 10 most valuable Super Bowls generated $1.7 billion only in advertising revenue for the television networks. The biggest winners, however, are the multi-billionaire owners of sports teams who have monopoly over the number and location of professional sports teams. Protected against anti-trust laws, the 32 teams making up the NFL have been able to reap the lion share of the economic benefits of their games. The NFL’s annual revenue, for example, is estimated to be $10 billion and is planned to reach $25 billion by 2027 (USA Today, 2014). This is on par with some of the biggest American multi- national corporations and more than the GDP of many countries.

Cities and states compete with each other to obtain a slice of the Super Bowl pie. Weed (2014) reviewed a decade of scholarly research and concluded that hosting a major sport event has macroeconomic benefits although the exact nature and extent of benefits remain under-researched. Arizona, for example, spent $30 million to host the 2015 game while cashing in an estimated $500 million in revenue. For the 2013 Super Bowl, which took place in New Orleans, Louisiana, ticket sales alone were estimated to have brought in $73 million. Hotels, restaurants and nightclubs were estimated to have gener- ated around $423 million (Schein, 2013).

But to be awarded with the honor, the competing cities must accept the unfavorable and costly conditions that are demanded by the NFL owners. The forcefulness of the demands stems from the anti-trust laws that allow sports leagues to control the number and location of the professional sports teams. Among the many contractual impo- sitions, cities and states are burdened with the use of public funds for the interest of private team owners. The state of Minnesota, for instance, is pitching $500 million in public funds to help build a $1 billion stadium for the city of Minneapolis’ Vikings in prep- aration for its 2018 Super Bowl. The exorbitant cost of building Minneapolis’ sports arena is not an exception. The AT&T stadium in Arlington Texas, and the Jets/Giants and Yankee stadiums in New York have each cost the local tax payers several hundred million dollars. Gordon (2013) reported that in the past 2 decades over 100 new sports facilities were opened in the United States and nearly all of them were subsidized by the taxpayers in the hope of cashing in for their investment. The burden of the subsidies is not limited to the local taxpayers; the federal government is on the losing side as well. Based on the data compiled by Bloomberg on 2700 securities, the tax-exempt muni bonds issued since 1986

16 H. TAJALLI AND A. I. PEÑA

by municipalities to build sports structures, will cost the US Treasury at least $4 billion (Kuriloff & Preston, 2012).

Large spending on sports arenas, such as the one underway in Minnesota, is predicated on the assumption that these expensive investments will have a number of tangible and intangible benefits for the host city and its state. The proponents argue that the direct and indirect benefits that the event brings to the host city and its state pales the investment.

Providing subsidies to private entities for building entertainment facilities is not necess- arily a bad business practice. If the contracts are ‘smartly’ negotiated, public subsidies can generate net benefit for the taxpayers and the funding governments. What matters is not the subsidy but the distribution of the revenue stream that is generated by the facility. Problem arises when team owners, in the case of sports facilities, receive all or significant portion of the revenue leaving the subsidizing taxpayers at a net loss. Hudson (2001), for example, lists a number of studies showing positive economic impact of subsidized sports facilities. A large body of research, on the other hand, have not found the economic benefits of using public funds to subsidize professional sports facilities. Coates and Humphreys (2008, p. 296) report that only a meager 5% of randomly surveyed members of the American Economic Association supported subsidies for professional sports franchises. A cursory review of the literature negates the claims that the use of public money to build sports facilities creates new jobs (Baade, 1996; Baade & Dye, 1988; Hudson, 1999; Miller, 2002), increases tax revenues (Baade, Baumann, & Matheson, 2008; Lavoie & Rodriguez, 2005; Porter, 1999), increases local income (Baade, 1996; Baade & Dye, 1990; Coates & Humphreys, 1999; Gius & Johnson, 2001) or improves local economy (Lertwachara & Cochran, 2007). As early as 2000, Siegfried and Zimbalist (2000) declared the case in support of tangible benefits of sports subsidies to be closed. In a very informative article, Rosentraub and Swindell (2009, pp. 220–221), however, caution about the authenticity of many of these findings. Promoters of sports facilities often hire the nation’s leading consulting firms to produce supportive findings. While, opponents of the facilities launch their own studies by recruiting sympathetic academi- cians to question the economic benefits of the subsidies. The issue for Rosentraub and Swindell is not to provide the ultimate answer to the question of economic benefits of sports facilities, but to bring to attention the bias that is inherent in the methodology of many of these. In fact, by examining sports and cultural facilities in six major American cities, Rosentraub (2010) makes the argument that if subsidies and land use are smartly used, cities can renovate their dilapidated inner-city, remedy crime problems and halt decline in property values. The author encourages cities to forge public–private partner- ships for the economic development and revitalization of their cities. But the key to success lies in forming smart partnerships that spur economic development and reinvi- goration of inner-cities. Rosentraub provides a long list of suggestions for achieving a suc- cessful and beneficial partnership.

Despite the argument of the critics against subsidizing professional sports facilities, cities and states try to outbid each other to win the favor of sports team owners. Realizing the challenging objections to the appropriateness of using public funds to build sports facilities, the emphasis of proponents of these expensive facilities has shifted toward urban revitalization and tourist appeal (Newsome & Comer, 2000), as well as intangible benefits of raising the status of the city and bringing national and international recog- nition that provide pride to the community (Eckstein & Delaney, 2002; Swindell,

JOURNAL OF SPORT & TOURISM 17

Rosentraub, & Tsvetkova, 2008). Hence the proponents see the public expenditure for pro- fessional facilities as a solution for urban development and generating civic pride, commu- nal binding and most importantly, building a positive image of the city for outsiders. Weed’s (2014) review of the literature, for example, indicates that sports tourism plays an important role in developing images of the destination host. The connection between tourism and sport events has been established before medieval times and it has continued to grow with increasing linkages between the two, in the industrial age (Huggins, 2013, p. 110). With the advancement in technology and the democracy of broad- cast television, sports now attract more individuals in general and also a more diverse array of social classes (Quinn, 2009). As Huggins mentioned, ‘today sport is a global, multibillion dollar industry, a dominant and defining force in millions of lives, and a major contributor to the overall tourism industry … ’ (2013, p. 107).

Whether there are some tangible economic benefits or intangible benefits of using public funds for building sports arenas to attract mega games, the expectation of benefits cannot be realized if the host cities cannot ensure the safety of the games’ participants. An event marred by criminal mischief will not only jeopardize the future possibility of being crowned the host of another Super Bowl, it will also damage the city’s image, tourism and its attractiveness for business investment. Crime is the repellant of tourism, urban revita- lization and economic development.

By bringing a large number of motivated offenders and suitable targets to the same location, large sporting events, such as the Super Bowl, provide an ideal opportunity for criminal activities. However, there is a dearth of research on crime patterns during major social events (Barker & Page, 2002; Decker, Varano, & Greene, 2007). Do sport tour- ists experience different types of crimes, as questioned by Wood Harper (2001)? Do the promised benefits of hosting a Super Bowl encourage host cities to be extra vigilant in pre- venting criminal activities? To date, limited research has been conducted using longitudi- nal studies of the possible surge of criminal activities in the cities hosting the Super Bowl. Baumann, Ciavarra, Englehardt, and Matheson (2012), estimated the impact of sporting events and franchises on annual rates of crime and found that the Olympic Games were associated with a 10% increase in property crimes and the Super Bowl was associated with a 2.5% decrease in violent crime. Exceptional events, such as international sporting competitions or Super Bowl, affect the lifestyles and routines of a large number of individ- uals that may affect their vulnerability to crimes. Yet there is little research on such events (Andresen & Tong, 2012). As Weed (2014) acknowledged, our understanding of the social, cultural and environmental impacts of these social events remain elusive. The purpose of this longitudinal study is to shed some light on some of the questions that are raised in the literature. Given the short-lived nature of the Super Bowl event, about a week, our longi- tudinal monthly assessment of crimes provides a more accurate evaluation of the impact of the event on various crimes. In the next section, we will provide an explanation for expecting high crimes during mega-sports games and review the extant literature on crimes that are inflicted on sports tourists.

Literature review

There should be no question about the importance of public safety when a large event, such as Super Bowl, takes place in a city. The concentration of a large group of spectators

18 H. TAJALLI AND A. I. PEÑA

in a locality is a fertile ground for crime and violence. In fact, violence and crimes histori- cally went hand-in-hand with sporting events. Gladiatorial events were notorious for crim- inal activities outside the gates and on the steps of the forums of the Roman Empire. Emperor Justinian I (AD 482–565), perhaps the greatest emperor since Constantine the Great (AD 272–337), nearly lost his diadem when the Blues and the Greens sport fans erupted into the Nika riot (AD 532) at the Hippodrome. Nearly 30,000 human lives were lost by the time the imperial forces were able to put down the riot. Hosting cities and other stakeholders in modern times, however, have enormous tangible and intangible interests to prevent the occurrence of these types of violent events. It, therefore, stands to reason for researchers to examine the impact of major sporting events on society and focus more on the victimization of sport’s attendants rather than concentrating on crimes within teams or acts committed by the players.

Research shows that a well-publicized image can significantly influence the visit and revisit of tourist to a city (Weed, 2014; Wicker, Hallmann, & Zhang, 2012). In the hope of economic gains, city leaders engage in well-orchestrated marketing strategies to promote their cities in order to bring mega events to their corner of the world (George & Swart, 2012; Kaplanidou, 2007). Although the direct economic gains of the mega events such as the Super Bowl is in dispute, it is well accepted that a city possessing a favorable image can monetize its image by attracting tourists, industries, businesses and investors (Avraham, 2004; Beerli & Martin, 2004; Lee, 2009). The enormity of the Super Bowl mega game can leave an indelible impression in the mind of millions of viewers and participants. Mega events, however, are double-edged swords in shaping the image of a city. None of the benefits resulting from favorable image can be realized in the face of negative media publicity (Beerli & Martin, 2004) and unpleasant personal experiences (Phelps, 1986). Publicized crime stories and personal victimization during a tourist visit not only discourage revisits but it will also discourage other would-be tourists, businesses and investors.

It is therefore important for the mega-event organizers as well as academicians to understand the nature and conditions under which individuals could be victimized. Crimes inflicted on tourists are opportunity-based incidences. A theory around this type of crimes is called ‘The Routine Activity Theory’. The theory maintains that crimes occur when there is a convergence of a motivated offender, a suitable target and the absence of a capable guardian (Breetzke & Cohn, 2013). This is a probabilistic theory: ‘each of these convergences has a given probability of a criminal event taking place; if there is an increase or decrease in the number of convergences, there is a corresponding increase or decrease in the number of criminal events’ (Andresen & Tong, 2012, p. 333). The theory maintains that any change in the routine activities of individuals is expected to affect the number of criminal events. A number of studies (Breetzke & Cohn, 2013; Hemmatinezhad, Nia, & Kalar, 2010; Kaplanidou et al., 2013; Mcpheters & Stronge, 1974; Wood Harper, 2001) have examined victimization of tourists in highly concentrated adult entertainment venues. The tourists’ appearance (clothing, cameras, etc.) and unfamiliarity with their new environment make them vulnerable to criminal victimization (Ryan, 1993; Lepp & Gibson, 2003; George, 2010). Mega-sport events, such as the Olympic Games or the Super Bowl, therefore, necessitate mobilization of extraordinary security forces for pre- venting or reducing the number of criminal events. Even a successfully obtained and orga- nized mega game can end up with an unsuccessful outcome. Therefore, planning and

JOURNAL OF SPORT & TOURISM 19

implementing crime prevention could be even more important than organizing the events.

The emergence of the plague of terrorism since the Munich Olympic attack in 1972 has added another layer of security concern among game planners and national governments. The recent Paris and 911 terrorist attacks, in particular, have encouraged governments and event organizers to plan and implement security to an unprecedented level. Anti-terrorism strategies and security planning have since become an integral part of the bidding port- folio for applying to be awarded as the host of the next game. Part of what awarded London the opportunity to host the 2012 Olympic Games was the ability of London’s bidding team to convince the International Olympic Committee that the additional $1.7 billion spending in security and the city’s security infrastructure were sufficient to protect both tourists and athletes (Giulianotti & Klauser, 2012). It took nearly two years of planning and drills by local, state and national military and security forces to prepare for 2016 Super Bowl. The entire San Francisco Bay area became a security fortress during the week of the game.

Anti-terrorist vigilance that recent mega games require may have been responsible for curbing some ordinary crimes. The few studies on Olympic Games show insignificant increase in ordinary criminal activities. In a study on the 2010 Winter Olympics Games in Vancouver, Andresen and Tong (2012) found that in some parts of the city certain classi- fications of crimes increased moderately while other types of crimes decreased in a few cases. Decker et al. (2007) also did not find a significant difference between the reported crimes for the period of the Olympic Games in Sydney, Australia and for the same period in the previous year. Examining major football games in Uruguay, Munyo (2014) found that total crime decreased by 13% during the time of the games and that there was no immedi- ate change on property crime shortly before or shortly after the games. However, the study found a significant increase in assaults including domestic violence. Some scholars have reported significant increases in other crimes such as sex trafficking and prostitution (Finley, 2013; Morrow, 2008; ‘Sexual slavery’, 2013) during major sporting events.

One of the unfortunate crimes of recent decades has been football hooliganism in Euro- pean and non-European countries. Although the issue is dubbed the ‘British disease’, there is ‘some degree of academic consensus regarding the transnational nature of the phenom- enon’ (Spaaij, 2006). Surprisingly, major national games in the United States have been relatively immune from the spread of this ‘disease’. Perhaps, the presence of extra ordinary security forces surrounding these games have discouraged the spread of this phenom- enon into the United States. The social and psychological causes of hooliganism have been the subject of numerous research by social scientists. Spaaij’s review of the academic literature (2006) found four theoretical explanations of the phenomenon. These are (a) presence of societal ‘fault lines’, (b) presence of the ‘hooligan subculture’, (c) the social organization of football hooliganism and (d) ‘the subtle yet vital interactions and nego- tiations between hooligans and significant others, and the (intended and unintended) effects of policies targeting football hooliganism’.

A significant increase in alcohol consumption during major sport games (Glassman, Miller, Miller, Wohlwend, & Reindl, 2012; Lloyd, Matthews, Livingston, Jayasekara, & Smith, 2013; Miller, McDonald, McKenzie, O’Brien, & Staiger, 2013) is one of the reasons for increase in assaults during sport games (Andresen & Tong, 2012; Baumann et al., 2012; Lloyd et al., 2013; Miller et al., 2013). The editorial note of Addiction journal (2012),

20 H. TAJALLI AND A. I. PEÑA

for example, reported 42 deaths associated with soccer games in Brazil between 1999 and 2008. As a response to violent fights and deaths during and after the soccer games, the Brazilian government in 2003 banned the sale of alcohol in soccer stadiums and other sporting events. Ironically, the Federation of International Football Association (FIFA) required Brazil to suspend the national ban on the sales of alcoholic beverages in soccer stadiums during the 2014 World Soccer Cup. Some studies have even found signifi- cant increases in murder rates as a result of major sport games. White (1989), for example, found that professional football playoff games increased the incidences of homicides during the six-day period after the playoffs. The increase in homicides was mainly for the losing teams.

Sports games are also marred by a number of non-violent crimes such as the sale of fraudulent tickets. This type of crime is often more difficult to document due to the private consensual nature of the transaction. World Cup ticket scalping gained notoriety especially in 2014 when a ticketing company that had won the FIFA’s contracts since 1994 was implicated in years of ticket scalping. Off course, there is a high incentive for criminals to engage in such a lucrative business. The resale ticket price for the 2016 Super Bowl, for example, averaged between $5000 and $6000. Criminals are also enticed to sell fraudulent tickets. The victims who end up buying these fake tickets could not only loose a significant amount of money but additionally become victims of identity theft as well (Skowronski, 2016).

Our goal in this study is to find out if any of the various types of crimes collected by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) surge during the month of the biggest sport event in the United States. The next section will layout the methodology for testing our question.

Method

The purpose of this research is to investigate whether various crimes surge during the month of the NFL’s Super Bowl in host cities. Since not all crimes have equal likelihood of rise during a tourist event (Wood Harper, 2001), this study examines possible surge of seven different types of crimes in host cities during the month the Super Bowl is played. These crimes are: murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny and motor vehicle theft. Table 1 provides the FBI’s description of these crimes, as well as the type of crime cases that are or not included in them. Our preliminary analysis of data shows that ‘simple Assault’ data reported by FBI is marred by inconsistencies and missing values. As a result, examination of this crime is dropped from our analysis. Follow- ing the precepts of the Routine Activity Theory, we test hypotheses regarding the surge of various crimes during the month the Super Bowl game is held. The focus of this study is to test whether the Super Bowl event has an impact on the occurrence of various crimes. A caveat needs to be mentioned regarding the hypotheses of this study. Our hypotheses are limited only to the cities hosting the event. Neither our hypotheses nor our analyses take into consideration crimes that take place in the host city’s surrounding communities. Therefore, our findings can only be generalized to the hosting cities exclusive of their sur- rounding towns.

Data for this study is based on the available monthly crime rates for each of the 15 cities that hosted the Super Bowl from 1990 to 2012 and reported their crime statistics to the FBI. Regrettably, the FBI did not have data for several of the host cities for the time period of

JOURNAL OF SPORT & TOURISM 21

interest to this study. Therefore, crime data for these cities were not included in our analy- sis. The list of host cities used in this study can be found in Table 2. Data beyond 2012 were not available at the time of this investigation.

The FBI collects and disseminates crime statistics on various classifications of crimes in its Uniform Crime Reports. We requested the FBI to provide us 24 months of reported crime rates for each of the 8 types of crimes for each of the 15 cities. The 24 months of crime rates consist of the crime rates for the month of the game, its preceding 11 months, and the crime rates for the 12 months after the game. For example, the Super Bowl XLIV was played during the month of February 2012 in Indianapolis, Indiana. In this case, we requested, and obtained from the FBI, 11 months of crime data prior to Feb- ruary 2012 and 12 months of crime data for the dates after the month of the game. In other words, crime data for the city of Indianapolis was collected from March 2011 through Feb- ruary 2013 for each of the 8 types of crime (i.e. 24 × 8 pieces of data for the city of India- napolis). The same data collection procedure was performed for the other 14 cities that hosted the Super Bowl and which the FBI has the data.

Table 1. Uniform crime reports description of various crimes. Crime classification Description

Murder The willful (non-negligent) killing of one human being by another. The following are not classified as Criminal Homicide: deaths caused by negligence, suicides, justifiable homicides, traffic fatalities, accidental deaths, assaults to murder and attempts to murder.

Force rape The carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will. Sexual attacks against men are not included in this class of crimes.

Robbery The taking or attempting to take anything of value from the care, custody or control of a person or persons by force or threat of force or violence and/or by putting the victim in fear

Aggravated assault

An unlawful attack by one person for the purpose of inflicting severe or aggravated bodily injury. This type of assault usually is accompanied by the use of a weapon or by means likely to produce death or great bodily harm.

Simple assault All assaults which do not involve the use of firearm, knife, cutting instrument or other dangerous weapon and in which the victim did not sustain serious or aggravated injuries.

Burglary The unlawful entry of a structure to commit a felony or a theft. Larceny The unlawful taking, carrying, leading or riding away of property from the possession or constructive

possession of another. Motor vehicle theft

The theft or attempted theft of a motor vehicle. This includes autos, trucks, buses and other vehicles.

Table 2. List of the Super Bowl host cities used in this study. Super Bowl Year Host city

XXIV 1990 New Orleans, LA XXV 1991 Tampa, FL XXVII 1993 Pasadena, CA XXVIII 1994 Atlanta, GA XXX 1996 Tempe, AZ XXXI 1997 New Orleans, LA XXXII 1998 San Diego, CA XXXIV 2000 Atlanta, GA XXXVI 2002 New Orleans, LA XXXVII 2003 San Diego, CA XXXVIII 2004 Houston, TX XL 2006 Detroit, MI XLII 2008 Glendale, AZ XLV 2011 Arlington, TX XLVI 2012 Indianapolis, IN

22 H. TAJALLI AND A. I. PEÑA

In order to linearized the data, natural logs of the seven crimes were computed. These seven logged crimes (excluding ‘simple assault’ due to inconsistency in the collected data) will form the Dependent Variables of this study. The crime rates are measured in terms of the monthly number of crime occurrences per 100,000 residents, for each of the cities. The crime rates take into consideration the estimated population of the city in the host city. A caveat should be made regarding the FBI reported statistics on rape. Historically, rape is a crime that is under reported (Palermo & Peterman, 2011; Yung, 2014). Yung’s (2014) study shows that as much as 84% of rape incidents have not been reported to police. As a result, our analysis of this variable will only represent changes in rates of reported rapes rather than the changes in the actual rates. It is the assumption of this study that if there is a surge in the actual number of rapes during the month of the Super Bowl, we should also observe a spike in the number of reported rapes in that month. Table 3 provides summary statistics of our collected data.

Three manually constructed Independent Variables and a variable representing the natural log of the unemployment rates are included in each of the seven statistical models of this study. The variable ‘Sept. 11’ is a dichotomous variable where time periods before 11 September 2001 are coded 0 and the following time periods are coded 1. As a covariate, this variable will account for the possible effect that post 911 security measures may have had on the surge or decline of crimes during the Super Bowl event. The variable ‘Time Trend’ is a counter; coded from 1 to 24 for each month. It represents the trend of crime over time. The independent variable ‘Super Bowl’ is a dummy variable where the month of the Super Bowl for each city is coded 1 and the remaining months are coded 0. This variable shows whether the hypotheses of this study can be supported. A positive significant coefficient for this variable will support our hypothesis that a particular crime surges during the month of the Super Bowl. The fourth and the last independent variable of our study is the natural log of the monthly unemployment rate of the host city. The relationship between unemployment rate and crime has been thoroughly researched for many decades. The large body of research has examined the relationship between unemployment and crimes. Comprehensive reviews of the literature by Allen (1996) and Vieraitis (2000) clearly bring out the contro- versy over this relationship. Nevertheless, we have included unemployment rate into our analyses to control for its possible impact on the criminal behavior of individuals. The unemployment rate for this study was collected from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics.

This study uses a panel of data collected on two dimensions of ‘Cities’ and ‘Time Trend’. Figure 1 depicts the structure of the data on these two dimensions where each row

Table 3. Summary statistics for the sample. Variable Mean Std. dev. Min Max N

Cities 7.961 4.307 1 15 358 Time 12.439 6.902 1 24 358 Murder rate 2.125 1.915 0 8.653 358 Rape rate 4.640 2.836 0 14.400 358 Robber rate 51.879 35.024 6.970 162.080 358 Aggravated assault rate 75.726 55.649 14.510 251.190 358 Burglary rate 144.714 78.433 40.460 392.840 358 Larceny rate 349.586 153.030 97.790 876.210 358 Motor vehicle rate 121.251 57.993 16.080 265.630 358

JOURNAL OF SPORT & TOURISM 23

represents monthly crime rates data for a city that hosted the Super Bowl. Observed monthly crime rates are denoted as Os in the Figure. Each of the seven crime types in this study have a data structure similar to Figure 1.

Our analysis pools this time-series/cross-sectional data into a unified whole in order to draw a general conclusion about the impact of the Super Bowl on various crimes. It should be noted that the focus of this study is not to examine crime rates in separate individual cities but to make a general conclusion on whether Super Bowl has an impact on various crimes during the month that the event takes place. We have used the Panel Data Analysis procedure of STATA to analyze our Panel data. The equation for our Panel Data model can be expressed as follow where the dependent variable of y represents a type of crime (logged), a and b are the coefficients, x1 through x4 are the independent variables of ‘Time Trend’, ‘Super Bowl’, ‘Log Unemployment Rate’ and ‘September 11’ respectively. Letters i and t denote the two dimensions of ‘city’ and ‘month’. Error term is shown as e.

yit = a + b1x1it + b2x2it + b3x3it + b4x4it + eit.

It should be noted that inclusion of the ‘Super Bowl’ dummy variable will allow us to detect possible surge of crimes during the month of the Super Bowl while controlling for the impact of the 911 terrorist attack, ordinary trend of crime over time, and the status of the economy during the time frame of the study.

Three types of analysis are performed in order to triangulate our assessment of crime surge during the month of the Super Bowl. In our first panel data analysis we have used the 15 host cities and the time trend Fixed Effects and cluster the data at city level. This is a powerful tool of removing omitted variable bias by taking into consideration the within-cities variation over time. The second leg of our triangulation aggregates the host cities and the time periods in a long format and uses pooled OLS. Pooled OLS is a linear regression without fixed and/or random effects. By clustering the standard errors at city levels, our analysis assumes for the intercept and the slopes to be constant regard- less of the host cities and the time periods. In other words, it assumes no difference in intercept and slopes across the host cities and the time periods. Our third approach of assessing the impact of the Super Bowl on crime attempts to compute the regression coef- ficients while the interaction between cities fixed effects and the linear time trend is absorbed. We have used ‘reghdfe’ package of STATA to perform the analysis of this part.

Figure 1. Research design of the study.

24 H. TAJALLI AND A. I. PEÑA

Results and comments

Table 4 shows two models of Fixed Effects and Pooled OLS for each of our dependent vari- ables. Table 5 depicts the regression coefficients while interaction between the cities fixed effects and the linear time trend is absorbed. In this case, the data is clustered by cities. The main body of our results tables present coefficients and standard errors of independent variables. The coefficient of interest that sheds light on our hypotheses is ‘Super Bowl’. The coefficient indicates whether there has been a surge of crime during the month the Super Bowl was played. With an exception of motor vehicle theft under the Pooled OLS model, our three models have produced consistent results. These results reject the hypotheses that crimes surge during the month of the Super Bowl in the host cities. In other words, the host cities did not experience an increase in any of the crime types during the month that the Super Bowl was played. In the case of ‘motor vehicle theft’, our findings suggest a possibility of a significant decline in this crime. One may speculate the cause of this decline to be the ever presence of security forces searching for car bombs. In short, our findings point to the direction of hypothesis that Super Bowl event does not lead to significant increase in crimes. Although our findings relate to a surge of crime in the host cities, readers should be reminded that many Super Bowl tourists stay and party in the surrounding towns rather than the host city. It would be highly informative if the future researchers use the entire host city’s metropolitan area as their unit of investigation.

The good news for the traveling sports fan is that Super Bowl events are safe for tourists. Several plausible explanations can be given for the absence of a surge in crimes during Super Bowl events in the host cities. The most significant contributor to the safety of the Super Bowl location is the large deployment of security forces. Although, statistics on the number of federal, state, county, municipal and private security agents are publicly unavailable, government declarations attest to the extraordinary presence of various security forces during the Super Bowl event. In fact, the Federal government has classified the Super Bowl as one of the two national events with the highest level of security alert.

Cities invest large sums of money in preparation for hosting this major sport event with the expectation of more return on their investment. It is only in the presence of actual and perceived safety that cities can realize their short- and long-term returns on their invest- ment. Negative safety perception of a locality dissuades potential tourists (Fakeye, 1992; Roehl & Fesenmaier, 1992; Lepp & Gibson, 2003) and business investment (Frye & Shleifer, 1997; Goglio, 2004; Krkoska & Robeck, 2009). Neither sports fans nor the governing body of the NFL will reward those cities that are lax about the safety of their tourists. Similarly, other stakeholders, such as the players and owners, realize that their revenue is directly tied to the safety of the place the Super Bowl is played. The Super Bowl is a money-spin- ning business; insecurity can break the spinning-wheel for all the involved profiteers.

Ironically, the ghost of terrorism has prevented surge in the occurrence of the types of crimes examined in this study. The memories of September 11 and the 2015 Paris terrorist attack have made the mega games’ attendance safer in certain respects. The extraordinary security planning and presence before and during the 2016 Super Bowl is a prime example of how opportunity for committing ordinary criminal acts is strikingly limited. In light of various terrorist threats, The Department of Homeland Security has classified the Super Bowl as a SEAR 1 (Special Event Assignment Rating) event; this is a type of assignment that is reserved for only the Presidential Inauguration. Super Bowls are riddled with

JOURNAL OF SPORT & TOURISM 25

Table 4. Fixed and pooled OLS estimates of Super Bowl impact on various crimes.

Variable

Log murder rate Log rape rate Log robbery Log aggravated assault Log burglary Log larceny Log MVT

Fixed effects

Pooled OLS†

Fixed effects

Pooled OLS†

Fixed effects

Pooled OLS†

Fixed effects

Pooled OLS†

Fixed effects

Pooled OLS†

Fixed effects

Pooled OLS†

Fixed effects

Pooled OLS†

Time trend 0.004 −0.012 −0.002 −0.004 −0.004 −0.083* −0.008** −0.091** −0.002 −0.049 −0.002 −0.019 −0.006* −0.042 (0.003) (0.028) (0.003) (0.011) (0.003) (0.039) (0.003) (0.033) (0.002) (0.029) (0.002) (0.012) (0.002) (0.025)

Super Bowl −0.170 −0.044 −0.071 0.003 −0.026 −0.048 −0.101 0.002 −0.065 −0.053 −0.003 −0.001 −0.053 −0.056* (0.122) (0.128) (0.124) (0.102) (0.076) (0.037) (0.049) (0.036) (0.054) (0.028) (0.048) (0.028) (0.041) (0.028)

Log unemp. rate

−0.028 −0.995 0.204 −0.072 −0.023 0.010 −0.189 −0.208 0.033 −0.157 0.119 −0.158 −0.334** 0.114 (0.136) (0.758) (0.289) (0.292) (0.140) (0.477) (0.131) (0.445) (0.092) (0.353) (0.109) (0.250) (0.076) (0.346)

September 11 −0.641 −0.408** −0.953 −0.764 −0.492 −0.570** −0.758* (0.386) (0.149) (0.531) (0.462) (0.392) (.160) (0.349)

Constant 0.425 2.863* 1.009 1.731** 3.753** 6.953** 4.537** 7.739** 4.807** 7.027** 5.576** 6.697** 5.341** 6.056** (0.237) (1.426) (0.534) (0.551) (0.246) (1.583) (0.249) (1.346) (0.161) (1.165) (0.205) (0.504) (0.151) (1.010)

F-test 1.12 1.81 0.493 2.09 0.65 2.37 4.24* 2.78* 1.11 2.20 0.99 4.5** 7.12** 2.80* Df 3, 14 4, 285 3, 14 4, 335 3, 14 4, 338 3, 14 4, 338 3, 14 4, 338 3, 14 4, 338 3, 14 4, 338 R-squared 0.838 0.025 0.675 0.024 0.950 0.027 0.928 0.032 0.941 0.025 0.912 0.051 0.947 0.032 SEE or ŝv 0.446 0.380 0.186 0.190 0.132 0.131 0.138 ŝU 0.981 0.558 0.812 0.676 0.531 0.437 0.560 DW 2.541 2.398 2.684 2.390 2.539 2.750 2.677 Rho 0.807 0.649 0.958 0.954 0.957 0.898 0.952 N of obs. 320 290 356 340 358 343 358 343 358 343 358 343 358 343 N of groups 15 15 15 15 15 15 15

Notes: Standard errors in parenthesis; statistical significance: * < .05, ** < .01. †Corrected for autocorrelation.

2 6

H .T A JA

LLIA N D A .I.P

EÑ A

various local, state, federal and privately employed security forces. The FBI reported that for the 2016 Super Bowl event, 60 federal, state and local agencies were working together to coordinate surveillance and security. Reuters reported that some 4,000 private security staff had been brought in to support police in securing the surrounding area (Reuters, 2016). The Drug Enforcement Agency, Transportation Security Agency, local law enforce- ment and other agencies spent over two years preparing and planning for this event (Glazer, 2016). Additionally, in preparation for this Super Bowl, the FBI and Santa Clara police department spent several months running drills within Levi’s Stadium (where the game took place) and the surrounding areas. Tactics were mimicked and improved based on what other cities have used when hosting this event. The Department of Home- land Security even turned to French officials for advice while preparing for the event. The officers of the Department were in constant contact with their French counterparts since the 2015 Paris attacks.

On the day of the game on Sunday 7 February, Levi’s Stadium was turned into a for- tress-like zone with concentric rings of security all around the premises. Sophisticated high-tech sensors, sniffing dogs, metal-detectors, security forces in uniform and plain clothes, sharpshooters on rooftops and the omnipresence of surveillance cameras moni- toring every movement of the attendees. The stadium and its surrounding area were designated as no-fly zones. F-15 fighter jets and military attack and rescue helicopters were on stand-by near the event area. The extraordinary security operations extended even to all surrounding cities, train and bus stations, airports, shopping malls, restaurants, hotels and other possible places that fans may gather. Under these tight security con- ditions, street criminals found it hard to go about their business. It is with the combined effort and strong collaboration of many local, state and national security agencies that America’s favorite national sport event of the year is successfully executed. Many public resources and agencies need to be utilized in the planning of this event. It would be inter- esting to see the total security cost that goes into the Super Bowl events.

The relative safety of the Super Bowl event may also be related to the socio-economic demographics of Super Bowl attendees. Attending the Super Bowl is a costly entertain- ment. Attending the game is not cheap; in fact average Americans are priced out of the game. Those who can afford this expensive luxury are of a socio-economic class that have a particular set of behaviors. They are less likely to engage in the type of criminal

Table 5. Regression results after absorbing the interaction between cities fixed effects and linear time trends.

Log murder rate

Log rape rate

Log robbery

Log aggravated assault

Log burglary

Log larceny Log MVT

Super Bowl −0.161 −0.053 0.043 −0.021 0.020 0.102 0.049 (0.130) (0.125) (0.086) (0.065) (0.064) (0.080) (0.060)

Log unemp. rate

0.383 0.865** 2.081** 2.283** 2.620** 3.108** 2.508** (0.189) (0.134) (0.167) (0.173) (0.174) (0.198) (0.170)

September 11 −0.734 −0.504 −0.466 −0.262 −0.158 −0.187 −0.096 (0.553) (0.292) (0.514) (0.480) (0.521) (0.638) (0.652)

F-value 2.39 26.36** 78.61** 114.50** 172.19** 177.30** 114.26** df 3, 14 3, 14 3, 14 3, 14 3, 14 3, 14 3, 14 R-square 0.710 0.908 0.982 0.987 0.991 0.991 0.986 # of Clusters 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 N 320 356 358 358 358 358 358

Notes: Standard errors in parenthesis; statistical significance: * < .05, ** < .01.

JOURNAL OF SPORT & TOURISM 27

activities that are examined in this study. The average ticket price for the 2015 Super Bowl was $9722, while some luxury suites for the 2016 game in the San Francisco Bay Area were selling for more than $500,000. Added to the exorbitant ticket cost of the game, one should add inflated hotel costs and raised airfares. The price of a hotel room six miles away from Levi’s Stadium, where the 2016 game was played, was averaged at $580 per night (Barrabi, 2016). One study (Kaylor, 2015), for example, estimated that the average cost of attending the 2015 game in Arizona (including ticket, airfare, hotel, rental car, game-day parking) was $8113 if flying from Boston and $6913 if flying from Seattle. At this price tag, the event is too costly for common street criminals to travel to the event. Economists (Becker, 1968; Goglio, 2004) consider crime as an economic activity perpe- trated by individuals who weigh in the cost and benefits of their transactions. Offenders refrain from their criminal activities when the cost of their mischief is significantly higher than the prospect of benefitting from their crimes. The exorbitant cost of traveling to, and perhaps attending, the game can significantly discourage many potential oppor- tunists. Added to the high cost of traveling to the game site, one should also take into con- sideration the omnipresence of security forces and the increased likelihood of being caught.

Delightedly, the Super Bowl event has become a family event and a time for the reunion of friends and relatives. For the most part, people attend the event to enjoy the company of friends and family in a safe environment. The festive mood of friends and families uniting from various parts of the country is conducive to a healthy environment. The economic interest of the host city and all other stakeholders are to promote such an environment. Without a safe and secure environment free of crime, the economic objec- tives of these stakeholders cannot be achieved.

This event is the largest sporting event in the country and the one that annually brings most Americans together; it is comforting to conclude that the findings of this study support the idea that the Super Bowl is a safe, family friendly event. The preparation for this event could serve as an example or guide for other cities planning major events such as the Formula 1 events that have taken place in Austin, Texas for the past four years. It could also assist in preparation for large multi-day music festivals. Perhaps the influx of individuals is not as significant as the Super Bowl, but the safety priority should remain the same.

Perhaps the distinguishing difference between the relatively safe modern mega- sports games and the crime infested games of older times resides in the operating models of the games. Contrary to the ancient games, such as the one culminated in the Nika riot, modern mega games are deeply rooted in business models. Modern mega games are mega businesses of extraordinary investment and returns by and for thousands of stakeholders. Legitimate businesses demand security, law and order. Inse- curity is destructive of legitimate business activities. It is in the business interest of the host cities, sports owners, team members, broadcasters, food and alcohol industries, air- lines, hotels and entertainment industries to demand a safe environment for the game to take place. At least with regard to the security of the modern mega games, we may exult the economic model supported by Adam Smith. One may rephrase Adam Smith’s famous words that ‘It is not from the benevolence of the sports owners, city planners, or other profiteers that we enjoy the safety of our mega games, but from their regard to their own interest’.

28 H. TAJALLI AND A. I. PEÑA

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

References

Allen, R. C. (1996). Socioeconomic conditions and property crime: A comprehensive review and test of the professional literature. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 55, 293–308.

Andresen, M. A., & Tong, W. (2012). The impact of the 2010 winter Olympic games on crime in Vancouver. Canadian Journal of Criminology & Criminal Justice, 54(3), 333–361.

Avraham, E. (2004). Media strategies for improving an unfavorable city image. Cities, 21(6), 471–479. Baade, R. (1996). Professional sports as catalysts for metropolitan economic development. Journal of

Urban Affairs, 18(1), 1–17. Baade, R. A., & Dye, R. E. (1988). An analysis of the economic rationale for public subsidization of

sports stadiums. Annals of Regional Science, 22(2), 37–47. Baade, R. A., & Dye, R. E. (1990). The impact of stadium and professional sports on metropolitan area

development. Growth and Change, 21(2), 1–14. Baade, R., Baumann, A. R., & Matheson, V. A. (2008). Selling the game: Estimating the impact of pro-

fessional sports through taxable sales. Southern Economic Journal, 74(3), 794–810. Barker, M., & Page, S. J. (2002). Visitor safety in urban tourism environments: The case of Auckland,

New Zealand. Cities, 19(4), 273–282. Barrabi, T. (2016). Super Bowl 50 ticket prices plummet after patriots’ loss. Fox Business. Retrieved

from http://www.foxbusiness.com/features/2016/01/25/super-bowl-50-ticket-prices-plummet- after-patriots-loss.html

Baumann, R., Ciavarra, T., Englehardt, B., & Matheson, V. A. (2012). Sports franchises, events, and city livability: An examination of spectator sports and crime rates. Economic and Labour Relations Review, 23(2), 83–97.

Becker, G. S. (1968). Crime and punishment: An economic approach. Journal of Political Economy, March/April, 169–217.

Beerli, A., & Martin, J. D. (2004). Factors influencing destination image. Annals of Tourism Research, 31 (3), 657–681.

Breetzke, G., & Cohn, E. G. (2013). Sporting events and the spatial patterning of crime in South Africa: Local interpretations and international implications. Canadian Journal of Criminology & Criminal Justice, 55(3), 387–420.

Caetano, R., Pinsky, I., & Laranjeira, R. (2012). Should soccer and alcohol mix? Alcohol sales during the 2014 world soccer Cup games in Brazil. Addiction, 107, 1722–1723.

Coates, D., & Humphreys, B. R. (1999). The growth effects of sport franchises, stadia, and arenas. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 18(4), 601–624.

Coates, D., & Humphreys, B. R. (2008). Do economists reach a conclusion on subsidies for sports fran- chises, stadiums, and mega-events? Econ Journal Watch, 5(3), 294–315.

Decker, S. H., Varano, S. P., & Greene, J. R. (2007). Routine crime in exceptional times: The impact of the 2002 winter Olympics on citizen demand for police services. Journal of Criminal Justice, 35(1), 89–101.

Eckstein, R., & Delaney, K. (2002). New sports stadiums, community self-esteem, and community col- lective conscience. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 26(3), 235–247.

Fakeye, P. (1992). Importance of socialization to repeat visitation. Annals of Tourism Research, 19(2), 364–367.

Finley, L. (2013). Examining state and state-corporate crime surrounding major sporting events. Contemporary Justice Review, 16(2), 228–250.

Florio, M. (2016). Super Bowl fans spent $151.92 each on food, drink, stuff. Retrieved from http:// profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/02/11/super-bowl-fans-spent-151-92-each-on-food-drink- stuff/

Forbes. (2014). The most valuable Super Bowls. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/pictures/ egee45ijlj/the-most-valuable-super-bowls/

JOURNAL OF SPORT & TOURISM 29

Frye, T., & Shleifer, A. (1997). The invisible and the grabbing hand. American Economic Review, 87(2), 354–358.

George, R. (2010). Visitor perceptions of crime-safety and attitudes towards risk: The case of Table Mountain National Park, Cape Town. Tourism Management, 31(6), 806–815.

George, R., & Swart, K. (2012). International tourists’ perceptions of crime–risk and their future travel intentions during the 2010 FIFA world cup™ in South Africa. Journal of Sport & Tourism, 17(3), 201– 223.

Giulianotti, R., & Klauser, F. (2012). Sport mega-events and ‘terrorism’: A critical analysis. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 47(3), 307–323.

Gius, M., & Johnson, D. (2001). An empirical estimation of the economic impact of major league sports teams on cities. Journal of Business and Economic Studies, 7(1), 32–38.

Glassman, T., Miller, J., Miller, E. M., Wohlwend, J., & Reindl, D. (2012). Game day alcohol expectancies among college students from a university in the southeast. American Journal of Health Education, 43(4), 202–208.

Glazer, A. (2016). If you go near the Super Bowl, you will be surveilled hard. Retrieved from http://www. wired.com/2016/01/govs-plan-keep-super-bowl-safe-massive-surveillance/

Goglio, S. (2004). Crime, collective action and development. European Planning Studies, 12(6), 853– 869.

Gordon, A. (2013, July 17). America has a stadium problem: Despite every number suggesting they shouldn’t, why do American cities keep building sports stadiums funded with public money? Pacific Standard.

Harden, M. (2016). Big Super Bowl 50 numbers: How many watched it? Streamed it? Went to fan events? Retrieved from http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/news/2016/02/11/167-million-watched- super-bowl-50-1-1m-attended.html

Hemmatinezhad, M., Nia, F., & Kalar, A. (2010). The study of effective factors on the motivation of tourists participating in sport events. Ovidius University Annals, Series Physical Education & Sport/ Science, Movement & Health, 10(2), 356–361.

Hudson, I. (1999). Bright lights, big city: Do professional sports teams increase employment? Journal of Urban Affairs, 21(4), 397–408.

Hudson, I. (2001). The use and misuse of economic impact analysis: The case of professional sports. Journal of Sports and Social Issues, 25(1), 20–39. doi:10.1177/0193723501251003

Huggins, M. (2013). Sport, tourism and history: Current historiography and future prospects. Journal of Tourism History, 5(2), 107–130.

Kaplanidou, K. (2007). Affective event and destination image: Their influence on Kaplanidou, K. (2007). Affective event and destination image: Their influence on Olympic travelers’ behavioral intentions. Event Management, 10(2/3), 159–173.

Kaplanidou, K., Karadakis, K., Gibson, H., Thapa, B., Walker, M., Geldenhuys, S., & Coetzee, W. (2013). Quality of life, event impacts, and mega-event support among South African residents before and after the 2010 FIFA world cup. Journal of Travel Research, 52(5), 631–645.

Kaylor, J. (2015). NFL: What does it actually cost to go to a Super Bowl? Retrieved from http://www. cheatsheet.com/sports/nfl-what-does-it-actually-cost-to-go-to-a-super-bowl.html/?a=viewall

Krkoska, L., & Robeck, K. (2009). Crime, business conduct and investment decisions: Enterprise survey evidence from 34 countries in Europe and Asia. Review of Law and Economics, 5(1), 493–516.

Kuriloff, A., & Preston, D. (2012, September 4). In stadium building spree, U.S. taxpayers lose $4 billion. Bloomberg. Retrieved from http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-09-05/in-stadium- building-spree-u-s-taxpayers-lose-4-billion

Lavoie, M., & Rodriguez, G. (2005). The economic impact of professional teams on monthly hotel occupancy rates of Canadian cities: A Box-Jenkins approach. Journal of Sports Economics, 6(3), 314–324.

Lee, T. H. (2009). A structural model to examine how destination image, attitude, and motivation affect the future behavior of tourists. Leisure Sciences, 31(3), 215–236.

Lepp, A., & Gibson, H. (2003). Tourist roles, perceived risk and international tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 30(3), 606–624.

30 H. TAJALLI AND A. I. PEÑA

Lertwachara, K., & Cochran, J. (2007). An event study of the economic impact of professional sport franchises on local U.S. Economies. Journal of Sports Economics, 8(3), 244–254.

Lloyd, B., Matthews, S., Livingston, M., Jayasekara, H., & Smith, K. (2013). Alcohol intoxication in the context of major public holidays, sporting and social events: A time-series analysis in Melbourne, Australia, 2000–2009. Addiction, 108(4), 701–709.

Mcpheters, L. R., & Stronge, W. B. (1974). Crime as an environmental externality of tourism: Miami, Florida. Land Economics, 50(3), 288–292.

Miller, P. A. (2002). The economic impact of sports stadium construction: The case of the construction industry in St. Louis, MO. Journal of Urban Affairs, 24(2), 159–173.

Miller, P., McDonald, L., McKenzie, S., O’Brien, K., & Staiger, P. (2013). When the cats are away: The impact of sporting events on assault- and alcohol-related emergency department attendances. Drug & Alcohol Review, 32(1), 31–38.

Morrow, K. L. (2008). Soccer, sex, and slavery: Human trafficking in the world cup. Tulane Journal of International & Comparative Law, 17(1), 243–266.

Munyo, I. (2014). Entertainment and crime. KYKLOS, 67(3), 391–397. Newsome, T. H., & Comer, J. (2000). Changing intra-urban location patterns of major league sports

facilities. Professional Geographer, 52(1), 105–120. Palermo, T., & Peterman, A. (2011). Undercounting, overcounting and the longevity of flawed esti-

mates: Statistics on sexual violence in conflict. Bulletin Of The World Health Organization, 89(12), 924–925.

Phelps, A. (1986). Holiday destination image — the problem of assessment. Tourism Management, 7 (3), 168–180.

Porter, P. K. (1999). Mega-sports events as municipal investments: A critique of impact analysis. In J. Fizel, E. Gustafson, & L. Hadley (Eds.), Sports economics: Current research (pp. 61–74). Westport, CT: Prager.

Quinn, K. (2009). Sports and their fans. Jefferson, NC: McFarland. Reuters. (2016, February 3). Super Bowl security plan informed by Paris attacks: U.S. official. Roehl, W., & Fesenmaier, D. (1992). Risk perceptions and pleasure travel: An exploratory analysis.

Journal of Travel Research, 30(4), 17–26. Rosentraub, M. (2010). Major league winners: Using sports and cultural centers as tools for economic

development. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. ISBN: 978-1-4398-0159-8. Rosentraub, M., & Swindell, D. (2009). Doing better: Sports, economic impact analysis, and schools of

public policy and administration. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 15(2), 219–242. Ryan, C. (1993). Crime, violence, terrorism and tourism: An accidental or intrinsic relationship?

Tourism Management, 14(3), 173–183. Schein, A. (2013). Super Bowl XLVII: A look at the numbers. Retrieved from http://bizmology.hoovers.

com/2013/02/04/superbowl-wrap-up-a-look-at-the-numbers/ Sexual slavery: A not-so-super side of the Super Bowl. (2013, February 11). America, 208(4), 6–7. Siegfried, J., & Zimbalist, A. (2000). The economics of sports facilities and their communities. Journal

of Economic Perspectives, 14(3), 95–114. Skowronski. (2016, January 31). USA Today. Retrieved from http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/

personalfinance/2016/01/31/dont-get-blitzed-super-bowl-scams/79410278/ Spaaij, R. (2006). Understanding football hooliganism: A comparison of six western European football

clubs. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. ISBNs: 9789056294458, 9781429472616. Statista. (2016). Retrieved from http://www.statista.com/statistics/217141/super-bowl-weekend-

related-consumer-spending-in-the-us/ Swindell, D., Rosentraub, M. S., & Tsvetkova, S. (2008). Public dollars, sports facilities, and intangible

benefits: The value of a team to a region’s residents and tourists. Journal of Tourism, 9(2), 133–159. USA Today. (2014). NFL takes aim at $25 billion, but at what price? Retrieved from http://www.

usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/super/2014/01/30/super-bowl-nfl-revenue-denver-broncos- seattle-seahawks/5061197/

Vieraitis, L. M. (2000). Income inequality, poverty, and violent crime: A review of the empirical evi- dence. Social Pathology, 6, 24–45.

JOURNAL OF SPORT & TOURISM 31

Weed, M. (2014). After 20 years, what are the big questions for sports tourism research? Journal of Sport & Tourism, 19(1), 1–4.

White, G. F. (1989). Media and violence: The case of professional football championship games. Aggressive Behavior, 15(6), 423–433.

Wicker, P., Hallmann, K., & Zhang, J. J. (2012). What is influencing consumer expenditure and intention to revisit? An investigation of marathon events. Journal of Sport & Tourism, 17(3), 165– 182.

Wood Harper, J., Jr. (2001). Comparing tourists’ crime victimization. Annals of Tourism Research, 28(4), 1053–1056.

Yung, C. R. (2014). How to lie with rape statistics: America’s hidden rape crisis. Iowa Law Review, 99(3), 1197–1256.

32 H. TAJALLI AND A. I. PEÑA

Copyright of Journal of Sport & Tourism is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.