
STOP PLANNING JUST ONE-OFF EVENTS:
START BUILDING PORTFOLIOS
Why do we keep planning single events—when the real potential for sustainability, resilience, multifaceted impact, and long-term value lies in curating interconnected portfolios of multiple events that serve communities year-round?
Dr Vassilios Ziakas (University of Liverpool, UK).
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Events practice and research has been dominated by short-term, single-event thinking—limiting its ability to address long-term challenges like sustainability and resilience.
Event portfolios offer a transformative alternative: permanent, multi-event structures that create synergy, continuity, and greater strategic value for host communities.
Despite their growing adoption in practice, event portfolios remain under-researched and under-taught, with curriculum and academic publishing still focused on singular events.
A new portfolio-based framework calls for integrative planning, adaptive governance, diversified event design, and embedded evaluation to fully realise this paradigm shift.
For the event sector to thrive in a world of permanent crisis, we must reimagine events not as isolated spectacles—but as interconnected components of resilient, community-anchored systems.
Why do we keep treating events like fireworks — dazzling, expensive, and over in a flash? For decades, event researchers and practitioners have fixated on single spectacles: one festival, one sport event, one mega-show. This singular focus is not just limiting — it’s risky. As Vassilios Ziakas reminds us, the reality is far more complex: events do not stand alone. They interact, reinforce one another, compete for attention, and shape a collective rhythm within their host communities (Ziakas, 2024). Yet the field has been slow to adjust. In over 20 years, only a trickle of research has explored the portfolio paradigm — despite the fact that cities like Edinburgh, Auckland, and Shanghai already build and manage events as interconnected systems (Antchak, Ziakas, & Getz, 2019).
INTRODUCTION
So why is the idea of event portfolios still so underdeveloped in both scholarship and practice? And what would it mean to take them seriously — not as a side note to singular events, but as the primary unit of analysis and action?
“Why do we keep treating events like fireworks — dazzling, expensive, and over in a flash?”
THE PROBLEM AND/OR OPPORTUNITY
The problem is systemic. Despite their growing prevalence in the real world, event portfolios remain marginal in academic research and professional training. While cities increasingly curate multiple, diverse events to achieve strategic outcomes — from economic development to social cohesion — most research still clings to the single-event paradigm. The consequence? Our models, methods, and management practices are built for ad hoc isolated occasions, not lifelong interdependent ecosystems. This fragmentation is further reinforced by disciplinary silos: sport management focuses on sport events; tourism studies on festivals; critical scholars on mega-event legacies — rarely do these domains speak to each other, let alone collaborate.
But there’s a generative opportunity here. If we reposition event portfolios as the core unit of design, management, and evaluation, we unlock new ways to build sustainability and resilience, foster innovation, and create shared value across time and space. Portfolios can transform how communities leverage their assets, align stakeholder interests, and respond dynamically to crises (Ziakas, Antchak, & Getz, 2021). They are not just a collection of events — they are a comprehensive strategy.
WHY DOES THIS MATTER NOW?
The world is in a state of perma-crisis or polycrisis. Climate shocks, public health emergencies, geopolitical instability, and economic precarity are no longer isolated crises — they are the new normal. In this context, events are particularly vulnerable. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed how quickly singular events can collapse under pressure, taking local economies, community initiatives, and sectoral jobs down with them. Yet, it also revealed something else: the importance of building structures that endure. Event portfolios — as permanent, multi-event ecosystems — offer a model for adaptive resilience. They can support continuity even when individual events falter, diversify revenue streams, and deepen year-round community engagement. For example, it has been shown how the city of De Moines used portfolio management to facilitate its recovery in the post-COVID period (Singh & Olson, 2021).
At the same time, many cities are rethinking their approach to placemaking and economic development. The question is no longer just “what event should we host?” but “how do we assemble and align events to serve broader goals over time?” The opportunity to embed events within long-term civic strategies is here — but it requires a conceptual and professional pivot. We must shift from events-as-transactions to portfolios-as-systems. The longer we delay, the more we risk remaining stuck in a reactive, brittle, and outdated paradigm.
HOW DOES THIS ADD TO WHAT WE ALREADY KNOW?
Most of what we know about events is based on a fragmented, event-by-event perspective. Research has traditionally focused on single-event impacts, often treating events as isolated phenomena — whether mega sporting spectacles or community festivals. While legacy, leveraging, and evaluation frameworks have become more sophisticated, they continue to be applied to standalone cases. This article challenges that dominant “singularist” mindset.
It shifts the focus from one-off events to strategic, multi-event program design. By doing so, it builds on — but also disrupts — existing literature by arguing that the true potential of events lies not in their individuality, but in their collective synergy. It moves the conversation from “how do we optimise this event?” to “how do we configure and sustain a system of events for long-term value?”
WHAT IDEAS DRIVE THIS ARTICLE?
This article is grounded in a strategic, systems-thinking approach. It draws on the concept of event portfolios — defined as purposively curated, multievent program organisations — as a practical and conceptual shift away from ad hoc, standalone event planning. The article is informed by over two decades of interdisciplinary literature across event studies, tourism, cultural policy, and sport management, particularly the seminal work of Vassilios Ziakas and Donald Getz (see Andersson, Getz, & Jutbring, 2020; Andersson, Getz, Gration, & Raciti, 2017; Getz, 2017; Gration, Raciti, Getz, & Andersson, 2016; Ziakas, 2014, 2019, 2022; Ziakas & Getz, 2020, 2021).
It also incorporates empirical examples from cities such as Edinburgh, Auckland, and the Gold Coast, where event portfolios have been used to promote resilience, enhance destination branding, and embed long-term social value. Methodologically, the article synthesises existing theory with applied practice to develop a framework for thinking about the design, management, and impact of event portfolios. It positions portfolios not just as a policy innovation, but as a necessary evolution in the professionalisation of event management.
KEY ARGUMENTS
-
Too often, major events are treated as singular showcases, with attention focused on short-term gains like economic spikes, media visibility, or one-time legacy projects. However, this approach can leave host communities vulnerable to the inherent volatility of large-scale events. Event portfolios offer an alternative, embedding a series of smaller and larger events into the calendar year and local infrastructure. This sustained approach ensures that communities are not reliant on one-off successes. For example, cities like Edinburgh and Auckland have diversified their event offerings to include recurring festivals, cultural programs, and sporting events that together maintain a consistent economic and social rhythm throughout the year. By doing so, they build sustainability and resilience into their destination strategies—offering more dependable visitor flows, long-term employment opportunities, and community participation. The cumulative nature of portfolios helps to maintain continuity when one event fails or underperforms, thereby increasing the adaptive capacity of host cities in times of crisis, such as the COVID-19 pandemic or economic downturns.
-
Event portfolios can catalyse more strategic governance and overcome the fragmented, siloed approaches that often characterise event planning. Rather than managing events in isolation—sport here, culture there, tourism somewhere else—portfolios require coordination across sectors, departments, and stakeholders. This necessity forces destination managers to think holistically, aligning events with broader urban, cultural, and economic development goals. For instance, in the Sunshine Coast and Manchester, the creation of formalised event portfolios has led to improved collaboration between tourism boards, cultural agencies, city councils, and private sector partners. Portfolios offer a shared framework and common language for integrated planning, helping to coordinate objectives, timelines, and resource allocation. In this way, event portfolios can act as governance tools that foster inter-organisational trust, build long-term relationships, and encourage innovation through shared goals and mutual accountability.
-
While mega-events often focus on scale and spectacle, event portfolios present opportunities for deeper community involvement over time. A diverse set of recurring events allows more residents to engage with programming that reflects their values, interests, and identities. This includes everything from food festivals and cultural parades to neighbourhood sports days and environmental workshops. In the small rural community of Fort Stockton, Texas, the integration of sport and cultural events created a symbolic and practical infrastructure that enabled different parts of the community to interact, celebrate, and co-create shared meaning (Ziakas, 2010). Over time, this built a stronger sense of local identity and social cohesion (Ziakas, 2013). Because events are interlinked and repeated across time, they create a fabric of social interaction that is more participatory than a single event could provide. Event portfolios therefore foster local pride and belonging, strengthen volunteerism, and mobilise civic action—ultimately making the event ecosystem more embedded and inclusive.
-
A single large event often stretches a city’s operational resources—logistics, staffing, infrastructure, and risk management systems. In contrast, portfolios allow for better planning, smarter scheduling, and more efficient use of limited resources by spreading operational demands across multiple events throughout the year. This results in economies of scale and the reuse of systems, venues, and personnel. For example, common branding strategies, safety protocols, marketing platforms, and volunteer networks can be deployed across a series of events, reducing duplication and improving consistency. This not only saves money but also builds institutional knowledge and capabilities over time. Additionally, hosting recurring or complementary events can encourage knowledge transfer and skill development within teams, making it easier to deliver high-quality experiences. A well-managed portfolio creates an operational rhythm that supports long-term staff retention and improves the city’s ability to respond flexibly to future challenges.
-
From a tourism and destination marketing perspective, event portfolios allow destinations to segment audiences more effectively and offer diversified products across different seasons. Instead of betting everything on one blockbuster event, cities can design a balanced programme that targets multiple demographics—families, sports fans, foodies, cultural tourists, and locals. This enables more precise brand positioning and the potential to extend tourist stays and spending. For instance, the city of Macao has developed a portfolio combining sporting events and culinary festivals, allowing it to attract both short-stay international visitors and repeat domestic travellers. By programming events throughout the calendar year, destinations can counteract seasonality and create reasons to visit during traditionally quieter periods. This strategy not only boosts tourism revenue but also makes the destination brand more authentic, locally grounded, and reflective of its diverse cultural assets.
CONCLUSIONS
The time has come for the events sector to confront a hard truth: the continued fixation on standalone events—whether mega or minor—is limiting our capacity to build a sustainable, resilient, and truly impactful industry. A singular event, no matter how well executed, cannot on its own drive the kinds of systemic, long-term benefits our communities, economies, and cultures need. The event portfolio perspective, by contrast, offers a radically different paradigm—one that invites us to think relationally, holistically, and strategically. It shifts our attention from isolated spectacles to a curated ecosystem of interdependent events that can deliver compound value.
As this article has argued, portfolios are not just collections—they are strategic frameworks for comprehensive coordination, cross-leveraging, and continuity. They help cities build diverse audiences, reduce risk, amplify local assets, and create permanent organizational structures to support the events economy. Critically, they also offer a more honest response to the growing demands for community benefit, climate action, and fiscal accountability. This is not simply a shift in strategy—it is a shift in worldview.
The academic field must now rise to meet this moment. A focus on portfolios opens up new conceptual horizons, interdisciplinary conversations, and urgent research agendas. Practitioners, meanwhile, need clear tools, policies, and training to make portfolios a reality. This article sets out the why and the how. The next step is collective action: educators rethinking curricula, policymakers backing coordinated models, and scholars expanding our lens. The future of events is already here—it’s just unevenly distributed.
PRACTICAL ACTIONS
To harness the full potential of event portfolios, stakeholders must go beyond conceptual endorsement and actively retool their strategies, structures, and skillsets. The following actions outline where to start.
1. Rethink Event Strategy as Portfolio Design
Cities, regions, and organizations must stop treating events as one-off campaigns and begin designing multievent calendars as interconnected, strategic systems. This means curating events of diverse scale, frequency, and type—balancing “pulsar” (transformative, one-off) events with “iterative” (recurring, identity-building) ones. Managers should develop typologies of local events, map their interdependencies, and assess where new or reconfigured events could fill gaps or reinforce existing strengths. Portfolio design should be embedded into place branding, tourism, economic development, and community wellbeing strategies.
2. Establish Permanent Portfolio Governance Structures
Event portfolios demand ongoing oversight. Municipalities and destination management organizations (DMOs) should create or empower dedicated portfolio units, boards, or coordinators responsible for assembling, managing, and evaluating events as a system. These bodies must include diverse stakeholders—from cultural producers and sports promoters to local communities and sponsors—to avoid silos and ensure buy-in. Governance frameworks should allow for adaptive planning, resource sharing, and transparent evaluation mechanisms.
3. Invest in Cross-Sector Collaboration and Capacity Building
Portfolios thrive when events are not only co-located but co-leveraged. Leaders must foster partnerships across tourism, sport, culture, heritage, education, and business sectors to align events with shared goals. This requires convening regular cross-sector forums, developing shared toolkits (e.g., for measuring collective impact), and training event professionals in systems thinking, networked leadership, and adaptive planning. Skill development should be prioritized for both new entrants and senior leaders transitioning from single-event roles.
4. Align Policy and Funding with Portfolio Principles
Public funding should reward portfolio thinking. Grant schemes and investment criteria must evolve to prioritize collaborative projects, shared infrastructure, and long-term planning over one-off events. Cities should offer incentives for events that contribute to a balanced portfolio (e.g., filling seasonal gaps, reaching under-served groups, aligning with sustainability goals). Procurement and tendering processes should recognize and reward applications that demonstrate how events will reinforce broader calendar strategies.
5. Redesign Education and Research to Reflect Portfolio Reality
Universities and vocational providers should overhaul event management curricula to reflect the real-world shift from singular to systemic event models. Event portfolio planning, evaluation, and policy-making should become core modules, integrated across risk, marketing, and design subjects. Case studies should cover not only mega-events but multievent ecosystems. Meanwhile, researchers should prioritise comparative studies, portfolio evaluation methods, and the governance of multievent program organizations. All this requires transdisciplinary collaboration—bridging sport, tourism, culture, and management— in order to build a robust body of knowledge.
IMPLEMENTATION CHALLENGES
While the event portfolio paradigm offers compelling advantages, several practical and structural challenges may limit its widespread adoption. First, the shift from single-event to portfolio thinking requires significant organisational change, which many local authorities and event agencies are not currently equipped for. Resistance may stem from entrenched practices, short-term funding cycles, and a lack of systems-thinking capability.
Second, portfolios inherently involve complexity—balancing multiple events, partners, goals, and timelines. This can strain coordination capacity, especially in under-resourced contexts. Smaller municipalities or community organisations may lack the staff, data, or infrastructure to manage portfolios effectively.
Third, evaluation remains a persistent weakness. Without integrated measurement systems, it is difficult to assess cumulative impact or justify sustained investment. There is also a risk that portfolio development becomes a rhetorical exercise rather than a structural shift, especially where governance and funding mechanisms remain rooted in singular-event logic.
Finally, academic silos and discipline-specific journals can continue to inhibit integrative research and curriculum reform. Overcoming these barriers requires collective effort from scholars, policymakers, educators, and funders to normalise portfolio thinking and embed it across practice, policy, and education.
REFERENCES
Andersson, T., Getz, D., Gration, D., & Raciti, M.M. (2017). Event portfolios: Asset value, risk and returns. International Journal of Event and Festival Management, 8(3), 226–243.
Andersson, T., Getz, D., & Jutbring, H. (2020). Balancing value and risk within a city’s event portfolio: An explorative study of DMO professionals’ assessments. International Journal of Event and Festival Management, 11(4), 413–432.
Antchak, V., Ziakas, V., & Getz, D. (2019). Event Portfolio Management: Theory and Practice for Event Management and Tourism. Oxford: Goodfellow.
Getz, D. (2017). Developing a framework for sustainable event cities. Event Management, 21(5), 575–591.
Gration, D., Raciti, M., Getz, D. and Andersson, T. (2016). Resident valuation of planned events: An event portfolio pilot study. Event Management, 20(4), 607–622.
Singh, S., & Olson, E.D. (2021). Response and Recovery through Event Portfolio Management: A Case Study from Des Moines, Iowa (pp. 167-192). In V. Ziakas, V. Antchak, & D. Getz (Eds). Oxford: Goodfellow.
Ziakas, V. (2010). Understanding an event portfolio: The uncovering of interrelationships, synergies, and leveraging opportunities. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events, 2(2), 144-164.
Ziakas, V. (2013). A multidimensional investigation of a regional event portfolio: Advancing theory and praxis. Event Management, 17(1), 27-48.
Ziakas, V. (2014). Event Portfolio Planning and Management: A Holistic Approach. Abingdon: Routledge.
Ziakas, V. (2019). Issues, patterns and strategies in the development of event portfolios: Configuring models, design and policy. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events, 11(1), 121-158.
Ziakas, V. (2022). Strategic Event Leveraging: Models, Practices and Prospects. Wallingford: CABI.
Ziakas, V. (2024). Rethinking Events: A Critique and Reconfiguration. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Ziakas, V., Antchak, V., & Getz, D. (Eds.) (2021). Crisis Management and Recovery for Events: Impacts and Strategies. Oxford: Goodfellow.
Ziakas, V., & Getz, D. (2020). Shaping the event portfolio management field: Premises and integration. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 32(11), 3523-3544.
Ziakas, V., & Getz, D. (2021). Event portfolio management: An emerging transdisciplinary field of theory and praxis. Tourism Management, 83, 104233.
AUTHOR(S)
Principal Consultant, and Honorary Faculty, University of Liverpool (UK).
Vassilios is Principal Consultant in Leisure Services and Honorary Faculty at University of Liverpool. His research cuts across events, leisure and service management with emphasis on strategic planning, community development and sustainability. Along these lines, his research explores linkages among the leisure, cultural and creative industries. He has published extensively, and his work is widely cited. His most well-known books are Event Portfolio Planning & Management (Routledge), Strategic Event Leveraging (CABI), and Rethinking Events (Edward Elgar).
Disclaimer
The views and insights expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and reflect their research and professional expertise. They do not represent the views of the Centre for Events & Festivals CIC or its partners.