I suppose this will last until a city will make an ambitious proposal. But this proposal is not only related to the fact that sports could be hosted only in different kind of venues: a different use of indoor venues should be done. Let's say, a Judo Grand Prix requests 3 days for 14 categories, while in OG only 2 categories are held every day. It's a waste of time, other sport could join and the programme gets compressed. With the current technologies of live streaming, like eurosport for the Pyeongchang games, there's no need for television, each can decide which sports see.
In Olympics, I suppose the most expensive things are venues, together with Olympic Villages and civil infrastructures, (roads, airport, public transport); athlete number is not the most important problem and, on the other hand, increasing programme in some sports (like canoe or track cycling) will increase quotas but not necessarily number of athletes, (and media will be able to "build" more outstanding athletes like Phelps or Bolt). Using venues better, by including more sports (and hence, more tickets) is the way to get a near-term economic advantage. For longer terms, it comes from the ability of the governments, and from the perception people has. Probably, in the future, the IOC should recommend to divide team sports over the whole country, so that local improvements can be done, reducing the perception of centering resources in only one place. Things definitely will change, but it takes courage from IOC and ambition from potential hosts.
If I get a Ph.D. position in Lausanne, I'll go tell them