The International Olympic Committee: Dr. Jekyll at Day, Mr. Hyde at Night
By: Tom
Tags: Olympics, Sustainability, Climate Change, Sports, Climate Action

The International Olympic Committee: Dr. Jekyll at Day, Mr. Hyde at Night

Greenwashing in sports

Photo by Zdeněk Macháček on Unsplash

I want to present to you two different headlines from the world of sports that I read on the same day. Both concerning soccer, the world’s biggest sport and also a part of the Olympic movement. However, I could have easily picked a headline from another sport. What you are about to read makes no sense but that’s how the world works at this point.

1) Arsenal defender Hector Bellerin invests in the first carbon-neutral soccer club Green Forrest Rover

2) News came out that the German national team was flying from Stuttgart to Basel

When I read those two statements I was completely confused. It is the responsibility of sports organizations, like any other organization, to act socially responsible and for decades sports have played a very conflicting role when it comes to ecological sustainability.

On the one side, sports has a huge carbon footprint. Flying an estimated 28,500 athletes and staff to Brazil for the 2016 Summer Olympics in Rio generated more than 2,000 kilotons (kt) of greenhouse gases (GHG) — not to mention the 2,500 kt of GHGs associated with bringing in about half a million spectators (Rio 2016 Carbon Footprint Report). More concerning, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) as the most prominent sports organization has been repeatedly accused of greenwashing.

On the other side, it has been acknowledged by the UN that sports is an important facilitator of sustainable development. From sustainable sport fashion labels such as Patagonia to the IOC’s sustainability initiatives and now the founder of an ‘all green soccer club,’ there are plenty of examples where sports and its context have pioneered the ecological sustainability movement. Going one step further, studies have shown that individuals who regularly engage in outdoor recreation, physical activity, and sports have an increased awareness of environmental problems.

Sports have shown promising approaches towards a more sustainable future.

This article will evaluate how the biggest sport organization (IOC) has implemented sustainable practices into their actions and how they plan to adapt to the increasing importance of sustainability in today’s world.

Furthermore, I want to present possible solutions for more sustainable sports events and, more importantly, ways to control the federation’s behavior.

Greenwashing

One issue that proves to be quite a problem for pro-environmental organizations such as Green Forrest Rovers is the increasing number of organizations that seldom use green communication for greenwashing purposes.

But what is greenwashing? Even though no generally accepted definition of the term exists, Seele and Gatti (2017) define it as: “a co‐creation of an external accusation toward an organization with regard to presenting a misleading green message.”

Greenwashing can serve as a valid communication strategy since even organizations that do not have a green image can enhance their attraction for applicants by communicating sustainable practices.

As discussed earlier, a prominent example of an organization that is currently under scrutiny for greenwashing is the IOC.

The IOC is heavily communicating its sustainable image ever since the 2000 Olympic Games (OG) in Sydney without embracing significant environmental principles. While the IOC has made great efforts to improve its sustainability in the late 1990’s following environmental protests of the host regions, this effort has not been sustained over the long-term. Two of the last three OGs (Beijing, 2008; RIO, 2016) have been highly criticized for their unsustainable legacy.

One example of the unsustainable legacy of the IOC was the OG in Rio 2016. Examples range from unsafe water conditions to failed promises. For instance, to offset carbon emissions, the city had vowed to plant 24 million trees by 2016, but only 5.5 million were planted (ESPN, 2017), showing a significant gap between sustainability communication and action. And there are more examples. The Organizing Committee for the OG in London 2012 dropped its pledge to offset their carbon footprint when it could not find any carbon offset projects in the United Kingdom. Way to go IOC.

The question of responsibility

Historically, the level of commitment towards sustainability was dependent on the host state of the OG. The Olympic Winter Games in Lillehammer in 1994 is a perfect example. There were many environmental concerns before the games, and under the leadership of the Norwegian politician Harlem Brundtland, the Games were a prime example with regards to sustainability.

However, this success can not be attributed to the IOC; it is solely the result of a national organizing committee that had sustainability as one of their priorities. That is why other environmentally aware countries such as Australia could host environmentally friendly games. On the contrary, nations like Brazil whose government is not prioritizing sustainability staged events that were not sustainable.

It remains to be seen if the IOC chooses to implement only minor adjustments to the existing strategy but leaves the responsibility to the host country, or if they begin to take that responsibility on themselves. A potential first step could be the commitment to a transparent sustainability report and the encouragement of innovative ideas on how to stage sustainable mega-events.

The final chapter will discuss three potential solutions for greater sustainability in the Olympic movement.

Solutions for more sustainability in the Olympic Movement

1) Certifications and sustainability report

A potential solution for the IOC could be the extended use of independent certifications such as ISO or BCorporation. Third-party certifications could help in the assessment of the organization’s green practices. Besides, it could be made mandatory for the IOC to publish a sustainability report conducted by an independent third-party. The IOC could use this third-party to hold itself accountable. It needs to be clarified what happens if a target is not met like in the prior tree-planting example. In this case, penalties should be handed out to the organizing committee.

It should not be possible for the IOC to break promises like the planting of 24 million trees without consequences. Whenever the IOC commits to certain ecological goals, there must be penalties if the objective is not reached. While this is easier for short-term goals, the controlling of long-term goals is just as important. The best-case scenario would be the implementation of an independent working group that controls the IOC.

2) Switch OG to one place/allow regions to bid

Another prominent proposition is the installment of permanent hosting sites for the OG. There has been extensive coverage of structural and social problems, such as the case of unused facilities. By having a permanent hosting site, many of those structural problems could be solved. While this solution comes with its disadvantages, there is another promising approach to be explored: allowing regions to bid.

One region that is already preparing its official application for 2032 is the Rhein-Ruhr area in Germany. Many cities have already agreed to the ambitious plan. The vision of the privately financed initiative “Rhein-Ruhr City 2032” is to host a:

“supra-regional, community-based, economically and ecologically sustainable concept for the Olympic and Paralympic Games in the metropolitan region Rhein-Ruhr.”

The fifth biggest metropolitan region in Europe comes with many advantages. 90% of the needed sports facilities are already available, and within the small radius of 60km, the region can provide space for 641,000 visitors without the construction of new buildings.

3) Simply cut sports

It may sound a little drastic at first, but once you consider certain sports’ ecological footprint, it gets more reasonable. The winter disciplines are under special scrutiny. When researchers at the University of Waterloo calculated the impact climate change has on the Winter Games they estimated that nearly 50 percent of the last host countries will be unable to host the games in the future due to the increasing temperatures. Additionally, all water sports need a certain amount of water quality. It is estimated that 1.15 to 2.41 million tonnes of plastic are entering the ocean each year from rivers. While the bad water quality in Rio has been an outlier so far, the problem of bad water quality could be a more frequent and concerning issue going forward.

Conclusion

Much like the two headlines I presented in the intro, sports has two faces when it comes to sustainability. The biggest issue I see at this moment is that the IOC as sports biggest organization can not act as a leader. Due to the (rightful) greenwashing accusations the IOC is not seen as a trustful organization even though they have made continuous effort to focus more on sustainability.

In their new Sustainability Strategy, the IOC has targeted to change many structures within their organization. It will take time to evaluate the success of the IOC’s strategy. They have identified five focus areas that they want to improve in the near future: infrastructure and natural sites, sourcing and resource management, mobility workforce, and climate. So far, they have only achieved 40 percent of their goals from their 2020 agenda.

IOC Strategy Agenda: http://extrassets.olympic.org/sustainability-strategy/executivesummary/8-1

However, the IOC has also identified three spheres of responsibility. And many of the aforementioned achievements lie in the first sphere. While it is much harder to improve their actions in the second and third sphere this will determine whether we will read headlines like the investment in Green Forest Rangers in the future or if we will continue to see sports teams and organizations not care about the future of our planet. The IOC has acknowledged their responsibility and it is their task to make the necessary adjustments to the bidding process and hosting of the OG. However, it is our responsibility to monitor their success and hold them accountable for their failings and successes.

Sources:

Babiak, K. (2010). The role and relevance of corporate social responsibility in sport: A view from the top. Journal of Management and Organization, 16(4), 528.

Bowen, H. R. (2013). Social responsibilities of the businessman. University of Iowa Press.

Boykoff, J., & Mascarenhas, G. (2016). The Olympics, sustainability, and greenwashing: The Rio 2016 summer games. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 27(2), 1–11.

Cunningham, G., McCullough, B. P., & Hohensee, S. (2020). Physical activity and climate change attitudes. Climatic Change, 159(1), 61–74.

Seele, P., & Gatti, L. (2017). Greenwashing revisited: In search of a typology and accusation‐based definition incorporating legitimacy strategies. Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(2), 239–252.

United Nations General Assembly (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Division for Sustainable Development Goals: New York, NY, USA.