By: Tomos Land, Staff Writer
It has barely been a week since the 2026 FIFA World Cup final, yet the focus has already shifted to future iterations of the tournament. After enjoying a bountiful event, which is forecast to bring in record levels of revenue, FIFA — the sport’s world governing body — is reported to be considering plans to expand the number of nations taking part. More teams at future world cups means more matches, fans, and host cities. Each of these factors come with a higher cost to the environment. Governments need to step up and require FIFA to host the competition in a country that has better green infrastructure. By reverting to a single host nation, the governing body can meaningfully reduce the amount of travel required between matches.
During his tenure, the organization’s president, Gianni Infantino, has overseen a major pivot away from fans and fairplay to the total commercialization of soccer. His pursuit of money has already alienated his counterparts in the Union of European Football Association (UEFA) and La Liga, Spain’s top soccer association, with the union stating that “the soul and governance of football are not assets to trade.” This comes at a time when the tournament’s environmental footprint is being felt more acutely than ever before. Just days before the final, concerns were raised about the projected air quality at the Metlife Stadium in New Jersey on game day, triggered by the smoke from wildfires in northern Turtle Island (Canada). Fortunately for everyone, a storm front the day before the final helped clear up the air.
During the latest edition, Infantino made headlines for his own carbon footprint during the event, having “attended 24 matches in just over two weeks” during the group stage. Leading by example, the FIFA president is overseeing a tournament which is estimated to end up producing “almost double the average for the last four World Cup finals,” topping 9 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent (CO2e). Having previously pledged to reduce its emissions 50% by 2030, FIFA now appears to have abandoned its climate goals in the pursuit of commercial revenue.
However, as the recent deadly wildfires in Spain and devastating storms in Morocco have shown, the degradation of the environment will continue to exact a much, much higher cost.
To celebrate a century since the first edition of the tournament in 1930, the 2030 FIFA World Cup will take place across three continents. Three initial centennial games will be played in Argentina, Uruguay, and Paraguay, followed by the remaining fixtures in Spain, Portugal, and Morocco. Undoubtedly, the event, even without the proposed expansion, will rake in enormous sums of money, as evidenced by this year’s World Cup. However, as the recent deadly wildfires in Spain and devastating storms in Morocco in February have shown, the degradation of the environment will continue to exact a much higher cost.
FIFA should be serious about sustainability, and must mitigate its tournament’s impact on the climate. The tournament’s economic impact, which FIFA uses as a key selling point to potential hosts, should revolve around producing generational upgrades in infrastructure, such as investing in modes of mass transit and green energy.
