Hosting the Olympic Games Amid the Pandemic - How does Beijing compare to Tokyo?
Camille Bourgeois-Fortin - 11 February 2022
Amid a global surge in Covid cases, China hosts the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics, which opened on February 4th. As Japan showed last summer, facilitating a sporting event of this magnitude during a pandemic carries significant yet novel challenges. In fact, if Tokyo 2020 was initially regarded as a success, especially from a sports perspective, it arguably became a failure with regards to Covid containment. The local population suffered its worst outbreak during and following the event and retrospective investigations revealed serious shortcomings in Tokyo’s prevention strategy. Has China learned from its predecessor’s mistakes? No matter the outcome of the Beijing Olympics, one thing we can be sure of is that China has doubled down on screening and security measures. As we witness this second attempt at holding the Games amid the pandemic, comparing Japan’s experience to China’s approach will hopefully shed light on the evolution of best practices, the lessons learnt from Tokyo, and more generally on how the pandemic is progressing and forcing countries like China to adapt and innovate.
The Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games: A first attempt with costly flaws
Originally scheduled to take place in the summer of 2020, the event was postponed to 2021 because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Unfortunately, the pandemic was still in full swing when the rescheduled games were set to begin at the end of July 2021. However, with the International Olympic Committee (IOC) pushing for the Games to go on regardless of the fourth wave, money on the line, and the country’s international reputation at stake, Japan opened the Games despite rising infection rates and little support from its population. While effectively preventing infections among volunteers, athletes, and media personnel during their stay, it appeared that the local staff and population were not properly accounted for in Tokyo’s Olympics planning.
Sanitary rules and lengthy lists of protocols were all outlined in the Tokyo Olympic playbook. Olympic athletes were not subjected to vaccine requirement or long quarantines. Instead, they were frequently and systematically tested prior to and throughout their time in Japan. Officials also enforced strict sanitary measures and limited movement and gathering allowances. Their core strategy revolved around making the Olympic Village a tight bubble for the athletes to keep them and other stakeholders isolated from the rest of the country to insulate them from community transmission. For athletes and their entourages, quarantine was reduced to a three-day isolation period at their accommodation after arrival in Tokyo. Journalists and other stakeholders underwent a two-week quarantine in a designated facility. Everyone also had to report their temperature and conditions daily, as well as adhere to the contact tracing and health-tracking app protocols. The most important and relied upon measure to mitigate the risk of virus importation was the aggressive testing regime. Concretely, all incoming athletes and their close contacts, had to be tested twice before reaching Tokyo, tested again on arrival, and then tested daily for the whole duration of their stay, while other attendees were tested daily only during their first three days, and every three days after that. For example, if an athlete arrived in Tokyo on 18 July and left on 10 August, that person was tested at least 26 times. Hence, excluding the pre-arrival tests performed in visitors’ countries, as of August 10th, 2021, approximately 290,000 COVID-19 screening tests had administered to athletes and team officials at the Olympics sites in Japan, on top of 387,000 additional tests for stakeholders, including various employees and volunteers involved in the event (WHO, 2021). The cumulative positivity rate among Games participants from 1 July to the end of the Games was 0.02 per cent, a level considered extremely low by health experts. At the airport, the COVID-19 early detection system worked as planned, with a positivity rate of just 0.09 per cent. Those who tested positive were put in isolation in a hotel outside the Olympic Village.
Notwithstanding Japan’s efforts to hold a safe Olympics, the public health situation deteriorated in Japan. During the first week of August, Japan saw a record-breaking number of new COVID-19 cases. During the closing ceremonies ambulances rushed across Tokyo, taking patients from hospital to hospital due to a beds scarcity.
Kazuhiro Tateda, the president of the Japan Association for Infectious Diseases and a Covid-19 adviser to the Japanese government argued that the country “had been experiencing a gradual increase in the weeks preceding the Games and that the upward trend had simply continued after the closing ceremony and into September”. The IOC also claimed, in Japan’s defense, that there was no clear evidence to indicate that the increase in cases across the general public was linked to cases from among athletes and other attendees of the Games. Although the wave of cases that hit Japan might not be directly linked to the Olympics, Tokyo’s system was certainly not infallible and there were certain lapses in its vigilance that could have contributed to spreading Covid across Tokyo.
Firstly, initial containment measures may have been inadequate. While the 70,000 athletes participating in the Games were supposed to be in the “bubble” as soon as they landed at the airport, reporters showed Olympic athletes using the same arrival gates, elevators, and cafes as the public at Haneda Airport. Furthermore, infection control at hotels could have been stronger given that these facilities were simultaneously housing athletes, Olympic-related personnel, and the public. Therefore, many athletes and delegates ended up testing positive after arriving with negative results. Secondly, the “bubble” was very porous. Residents of Japan were allowed to commute from their homes to the Olympic site, which turned out to generate about two-thirds of the infections reported at the Games. Thirdly, despite spectators not being allowed into the Olympic venues, people still gathered to watch the Games, whether from parks, restaurants, houses, or bars across the country. Overall, public compliance with socializing restrictions deteriorated in face of the mixed messages sent by staging a mega-event in the middle of a pandemic. In addition, the government decision to host the Olympics without popular support led to a loss of public trust, which may also have undermined adherence to contact limiting ordinance.
The Beijing 2022 Olympic Games: stricter measures and Zero-Covid policy
While the Covid situation surrounding the commencement of the 2022 Games is reminiscent of the Delta outbreak preceding Tokyo’s event, the current Omicron wave is considerably more contagious thus harder to contain. However, no matter the variant, China remains committed to a ‘Zero COVID’ Winter Olympics in Beijing, in line with its countrywide “Zero Covid” policy. Consequently, very strict protocols have been implemented to improve upon those of the Summer Olympics six months ago.
Pre-Olympics precautions
China’s strategy to prevent a covid outbreak during and around the Olympics derives from its nationwide “Zero Covid” policy that was implemented long before the Games. The government’s uncompromising approach has become even stricter in the last few weeks to prevent any potential Games-related cases to spread into Beijing. To achieve this goal, some trains and flights to Beijing have been suspended to limit movements of people and all provinces have doubled down on monitoring. The zero-tolerance strategy has led some cities to resort to some of their harshest containment measures yet seen. Notably, Xi'an, a city of over 13 million people, underwent one of the longest lockdowns in China since the start of the pandemic after a covid outbreak was declared on December 22nd. Meanwhile, about 20 million people across China found themselves in some form of lockdown and were prevented from leaving their homes at some point in January. Tianjin, only about an hour from Beijing, is another city on high alert. It has sealed off many communities and cancelled most transportation options to prevent commutes to and from Beijing. As for Beijing itself, there has been no major outbreak reported thus far as surveillance and transmission reduction protocols are rigorously enforced. For instance, following the appearance of a relatively small cluster of Covid cases in Beijing at the beginning of January, Chinese authorities tested over 2 million residents in the affected districts. The authorities also imposed new measures, such as extending mandatory testing to anyone buying cold medicine from drug stores. Finally, unlike in most countries where infected people are permitted to self-isolate in their home, those who test positive, anywhere in China, are systematically sent to an isolation center, or to a hospital if their condition requires it.
The severity of these measures and their rigid application despite very low number of cases in comparison to other countries illustrate the Chinese government’s acute concern in the run-up to the Olympics. This unprecedented level of caution, equally applied throughout the entire country over several months leading up to the Games, represents greatly heightened vigilance compared to Tokyo’s pre-Olympics approach. Indeed, despite rapidly rising Covid cases in Japan during the weeks leading up to the event, there was no nationwide Games-related policy. Caution was increased in Tokyo, but not so much through the rest of the country where testing was carried out at a normal pace without stricter public health measures.
Covid protocols during the Games: enhanced screening and sanitary measures
Beijing’s Olympics Covid protocols, which established the measures surrounding participants’ arrival and the specific rules for the duration of the Games, is much more stringent than that of Tokyo’s. Whereas Japan essentially bet on testing, China is invested on all fronts, from stricter vaccine requirements, more sensitive and more frequent testing, to a tighter bubble with an impenetrable loop system. The plan theoretically leaves little chance for the virus to penetrate the site.
Once in the Olympic Village, following on two negative pre-departure tests within 96 and 72 hours prior to their departure and another test at the airport upon arrival in Beijing, participants will be tested every 12 hours for their first seven days, and six hours before their competition. Unlike the Tokyo Games, where tests were largely self-administered salvia antigen tests, China relies on PCR, the gold standard of testing for Covid-19, and swabs are administered by staff only. These staff members are also subjected to thorough screening measures, including all-day temperature monitoring with transmitters to sound an alarm should their temperatures exceed 37.3 degrees. Overall, China’s testing and screening regime imposes significantly higher standards and frequency.
Besides screening, on-site sanitary standards are much more robust in Beijing than they were during the Tokyo Games. For instance, facemasks must be of the highest-level filtration, N95 or equivalent, which provide much more protection than the cloth face masks that were worn in Tokyo. The efficacy of sanitizer and disinfectants have also been enhanced and meal services (including automated systems), bedding arrangements and other amenities were designed with stringent Covid protocols in mind to minimize contact and prevent cross-contamination.
The closed-loop bubble
The core of Beijing’s plan, and what really sets this Olympics apart, is its tightly sealed bubble, also referred to as the "closed loop". It is an exclusive and highly controlled environment that is home to the estimated 60,000 athletes, team officials, media, staff, and volunteers involved in the Games. The closed loop covers a 160km area between three gated Olympic zones located in central Beijing, the capital’s Yanqing District and neighboring Zhangjiakou City. It encompasses its own housing facilities, staff’s living quarters, hospitals, official locations, as well as transport links, including designated high-speed rail systems, all reserved to serve the Olympics. The bubbles and the entire loop are completely isolated from the public. Overseas Olympics participants enter the bubble upon arrival in China and remain in it until they leave the country. Local staff in the loop were all quarantined for three weeks prior to the Games and will complete another 21 day quarantine after the event. Guards in biohazard suits are posted at every corner to make sure no one enters or leaves the bubble. Even trash from within the zones is handled separately and held at temporary storage sites, to prevent cross-infection and potential risks of spread. Beijing’s population have been clearly instructed to avoid all contact with vehicles transporting Olympic personnel, even in the instance of a road accident. In such case a special Olympic team and designated vehicles are prepared to handle any matters at risk of triggering interaction between the loop and the outside world. Overall, the Winter Games’ closed loop is a much tighter model than the bubble arrangement in Tokyo last summer.
Vaccination
On top of everything China has put in place, the prevalence of vaccination is likely to play a major role in containing Covid. Global vaccination rates are much higher now than during the Tokyo Games, making it feasible for China to implement vaccine mandates for all participants with less compromise or opposition. According to the IOC, the vaccination rate for personnel involved in the Beijing Winter Olympic Athletes' Villages is close to 100 percent, and several delegations, including Canada’s, have also reported perfect vaccination rates. Yet, athletes who have not received at least two doses will still be allowed to take part in the Games, but only after a strict 21-days quarantine in a designated facility. Unvaccinated athletes will also be required to present an immunoglobulin antibody (IgM) test pre-arrival. Altogether, this is a big difference from the vaccine situation during the Tokyo Games, where full vaccination was strongly recommended, but neither compulsory nor enforced. In fact, at the time of the Summer Games, many countries only had a fraction of their population fully vaccinated which made it unrealistic to introduce a vaccine mandate. In the end, about 80% of all athletes and foreign delegates in Tokyo were vaccinated, which left a relatively high number of unvaccinated participants in the Olympic Village. Furthermore, only 20% of Japan’s population had received two jabs when the Tokyo Olympics started. In contrast, 87% of China’s population was fully vaccinated when the Games began and virtually all Chinese Olympic supporting personnel are fully vaccinated with their booster dose.
In conclusion, the 2022 Beijing Games will presumably be the most controlled international sporting event held thus far. While the Tokyo Games last year showed it was possible, yet risky, to host the Olympics in a circumscribed and monitored space during the Covid pandemic, China has gone even further. Adamant on its Zero-Covid Policy, China aims to achieve zero Covid transmission within its carefully controlled Olympic bubble and avoid any spread to its population during or after the event. Chinese officials have emphasized that their aim is not to detect zero cases, but rather to have zero spread. In that sense the system has held up so far. Nonetheless, Beijing’s Olympics have already been heavily criticized, notably shrouded by accusations pertaining to human rights abuses, which have led to diplomatic boycotts by multiple countries, including Canada, as well as ongoing controversies surrounding China’s censorship and overall lack of transparency. Adding to those concerns are the common issues related to the Olympic Games, namely their environmental impact, their enormous cost and grounds for sportwashing. Notwithstanding the potential veracity of those concerns and serious allegations, Beijing’s Olympics planning, especially its Covid management measures, appear highly effective. China’s ability to host such major international event safely, especially after having been the first epicenter of the pandemic, is an incredible demonstration of resilience and organizational capacity, just as it is one of wealth and power.
SOURCES
https://time.com/6141429/beijing-winter-olympics-opening-ceremony-2022/
https://theconversation.com/how-japans-olympic-success-has-been-followed-by-covid-failure-166204
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/01/01/china/five-things-to-watch-2022-mic-intl-hnk/index.html
https://www.bbc.com/news/59882774
https://www.si.com/olympics/2021/07/22/tokyo-olympics-experience-empty-city-covid-spit-testing
https://thediplomat.com/2021/07/is-japans-olympic-bubble-about-to-burst/
https://abcnews.go.com/Sports/covid-rules-2022-beijing-winter-olympics/story?id=82310521
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/winterolympics/article-10479851/Beijing-2022-organisers-accused-sportwashing-Winter-Olympics-opening-ceremony.html
Author
Camille Bourgeois-Fortin
Policy Research Assistant
Camille Bourgeois-Fortin is a Policy Research Assistant at the China Institute at the University of Alberta and a BA graduate of the University of Ottawa in International Development and Globalization, with a minor in China studies. She is currently finishing her MA in political Sciences, with her thesis focused on social policies and inner migration in China.