The 2020 Tokyo Olympics, originally intended as a catalyst for economic recovery and urban development following the 2011 earthquake and Fukushima disaster, faced unprecedented challenges due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic's onset necessitated a postponement to 2021, coinciding with a delayed vaccination campaign and a fourth state of emergency in Tokyo. Public opinion polls revealed significant opposition to the games in Japan, contrasting with the generally positive views before the pandemic. This study addresses a gap in the literature by investigating the factors affecting public attitudes towards mega-events during a global crisis. The research aims to identify the key determinants of public opinion to provide insights for future large-scale event planning during crises. The study hypothesizes that perceptions of high costs, the burden on the medical system, and a high risk of infection spread negatively influence attitudes, while perceptions of effective pandemic countermeasures, economic benefits, and positive views towards athletes positively affect attitudes.

Existing literature highlights the multifaceted benefits of hosting the Olympics, including urban development, economic gains, and city branding. However, there is limited research on public attitudes towards mega-events during periods of crisis. Studies have shown various economic and societal benefits associated with hosting the Olympics, including improvements to urban infrastructure, increased tourism and business opportunities, and enhanced national image. The literature also acknowledges the considerable costs associated with hosting the games and the potential for negative impacts if public support is not secured. This study aims to extend current knowledge by examining citizen perspectives during a unique period of global crisis, specifically focusing on the 2020 Tokyo Olympics.

The study employed an online survey of 800 Japanese citizens conducted before the 2021 Olympics. Data was collected on demographic variables and attitudes towards the Olympics. Participants were asked to identify factors influencing their opinions. The study used text analysis (MeCab and CaboCha) to extract factors related to cost, infection, movement, medical facilities, the economy, countermeasures, and athletes. Logistic regression models were used to analyze the relationship between these factors and the respondents’ attitudes toward hosting the Olympics. Three models were created: Model 1 included all variables, Model 2 used stepwise variable selection, and Model 3 used balanced data to address the imbalance in the response variable (opposition vs. non-opposition). Model selection was based on McFadden's pseudo-R² and adjusted McFadden's pseudo-R². The study used a dummy variable to represent opposition to hosting the Olympics, with additional dummy variables and continuous variables representing respondent attributes (gender, age, marital status, number of children, income, residence in Tokyo, perception of media over-information, and anticipated end of the pandemic) and the extracted factors. The results were compared across models to determine the robustness of the identified factors.

The survey revealed that 80.3% of respondents opposed hosting the Olympics, a figure consistent with other polls. Opposition was consistent across age groups and regions. The strongest predictor of opposition was the fear of a healthcare system collapse due to the Olympics acting as a super-spreader event (Odds Ratio = 20.728, p<0.017). Concerns about infection spread (F2_Infection and F3_Movement) also significantly contributed to negative attitudes. The perception of high costs did not significantly influence attitudes. Conversely, positive perceptions of pandemic countermeasures and the anticipated economic benefits significantly correlated with support for the Olympics. Women were more likely to oppose, while respondents with more children were more likely to support the games. Those feeling that media coverage of the pandemic was excessive tended to support the games, suggesting potential media effects on public sentiment. Those who anticipated the pandemic ending soon were more likely to support the event.

The findings underscore the critical role of public health concerns in shaping attitudes towards large-scale events during a pandemic. The overwhelmingly negative response to the potential strain on the healthcare system highlights the need for transparent communication and reassurance regarding medical capacity. Contrary to expectations, cost was not a major driver of opposition, suggesting that concerns about public health outweighed financial considerations. The significant positive relationship between perceptions of economic benefits and support for the Olympics suggests the importance of effectively communicating the positive economic impacts of such events. The findings highlight the need to engage citizens actively in the decision-making process, especially concerning mega-events with potential large-scale health implications.

This study demonstrates that citizen perceptions of health risks, particularly the potential collapse of the healthcare system, are paramount when hosting large-scale events during a pandemic. The study emphasizes the importance of transparent communication, collaboration with citizens, and the need to design simple, effective indicators to address public concerns. Future research could examine attitudes towards mega-events in different cultural contexts and explore the long-term impacts of the pandemic on public perception of such events.

The study's limitations include its focus on a single pandemic event, limited age range (20-50 years), and the Japanese context. The cross-sectional nature of the survey does not allow for causal inferences. Future research should consider these aspects to enhance the generalizability of the findings.