The economic impact of hosting the 2012 Olympics could hit £41bn (US$53.8bn, €48.5bn) for London, although the debate about its overall legacy rumbles on.

According to the latest government report – Inspired by 2012: The legacy from the Olympic and Paralympic Games – the Gross Value Added (GVA) is likely to reach between £28bn (US$36.8bn, €33bn) and $41bn.

To date, the Games have been directly responsible for £14.2bn (US$18.7bn, €16.7bn) in trade and investment revenue – surpassing the £11bn (US$14.4bn, €13bn) target set prior to the event.

Tourism has contributed to that figure, with 3.5m additional visitors enticed by “Games-related promotion activity” since 2012, which resulted in £2.1bn (US$2.8bn, €2.5bn) in additional spending.

However, with the spotlight now on Rio ahead of the 2016 Olympic Games, questions are being asked about the overall benefit the Games had on Britain, as well as the attractiveness of hosting the Games.

While the reported economic impacts appear to vindicate the £9.3bn (US$12.2bn, €11bn) spent by the government on building and upgrading the necessary infrastructure to host the Games, the benefits to the country as a whole have been questioned.

On BBC2 current affair programme Newsnight last night (3 August), Dame Kelly Holmes said that while the positive impact on a regenerated East London was undeniable, she was “not so sure” that the rest of the country was basking in the glow of the Games.

Indeed, while there had been an initial upsurge in participation, Sport England figures show that the number of people participating in sport since 2012 has stagnated. However, investment had made its way to other parts of the country, with a National Centre for Sport and Exercise Medicine built in both the East Midland and Sheffield, as well as the capital.

Tessa Jowell – who was Olympic minister between 2005 and 2010 – explained that the project helped to regenerate East London “at a rate that would otherwise have taken 60 years” and conceded that we have to take a long view to extract the true benefits of the Games.

The “enormous expense” of hosting the Games would have to make the International Olympic Committee (IOC) change tact, added Sport England vice-chair Debbie Jevans, with the number of cities bidding to host the flagship event decreasing over each process.

Jevans said it was conceivable that in 20 years countries, not cities, would be vying to host the Olympics to spread the cost and generate a more inclusive legacy.

The government document – which included a foreword by new prime minister Theresa May and recently-elected Mayor of London Sadiq Khan – also revealed that Sport England had invested £193m (US$253.5m, €227.4m) in more than 2,800 community sports facilities since 2011.

May was keen to emphasise that the “story hasn’t ended” with the closing ceremony.

“We’ve taken advantage of trade and investment opportunities, seen our tourism sector continue to break new ground and published Sporting Future – a new strategy for an active nation, launched to help even more people become active and enjoy the many benefits of sport,” she added.