05 October 2023 , 10:11
1053
0
Climate campaigners believe FIFA are “totally detached from reality” after deciding to hold the 2030 World Cup across three different continents.
FIFA announced on Wednesday that the 2030 World Cup will be hosted by Spain, Portugal and Morocco, with the opening three matches taking place in Uruguay, Argentina and Paraguay. The South American leg of the tournament is a nod to the inaugural 1930 World Cup on what will be its 100-year anniversary.
The World Cup has never been played on more than one continent before and FIFA president Gianni Infantino has tried to paint the tournament as a celebration of the centenary edition. But it is his assertion that “in 2030, we will have a unique global footprint” which has observers concerned.
The 2026 World Cup has already sparked worried comments due to Mexico, the USA and Canada hosting following a summer of wildfires. But the surprise idea behind the next tournament has turbo-charged those concerns into allegations of recklessness and of contradiction.
FIFA has committed to reducing its carbon emissions by 50 percent by 2030 and to reaching net zero by 2040, in accordance with the Paris Agreement. Yet pressure is mounting on FIFA after its claims that the Qatar World Cup was “fully carbon-neutral” were found to be unsubstantiated and its sustainability criteria was criticised after over 70,000 air miles were flown by sides competing at the Women’s World Cup.
Chelsea winners and losers from record transfer window as more changes to come
Freddie Daley is a facilitator at the Cool Down Network and was the UK complainant against the Qatar World Cup carbon-neutral claim, which climate experts dismissed as "dangerous and misleading". He believes this announcement is the most extreme example yet of FIFA prioritising money and growth over sustainability.
"FIFA's announcement is totally detached from reality,” he told Mirror Football . “Not only does it contradict their own pledge to cut emissions, but it sends the wrong message to football fans around the world that such a tournament is compatible with a sustainable future and a healthy environment. FIFA is saying one thing and doing another.”
Wildfires were commonplace across the summer due to global warming (DARREN HULL/AFP via Getty Images)Elliot Arthur-Worsop, founder of Football for Future, agrees. He said: "This is yet another example of the footballing industry’s inability to take the threat of climate change seriously. Every day we are seeing how extreme weather events, flash floods, and heatwaves are intensifying, putting football matches at risk. The decision from FIFA forces players and fans to generate tonnes of carbon emissions through unsustainable travel. This sets a dangerous precedent for future tournaments at a time when the impacts of climate change are only going to get worse.”
Michael Hardy, a director at Game Changer, accused FIFA of “greenwashing”, adding: “FIFA must learn from their mistakes or be destined to repeat them. This shows they haven’t learned a thing. They called their last World Cup carbon-neutral – in fact it was the most polluting World Cup in history. Football can’t cost the earth, for the planet or for fans. This plan will.”
FIFA failed to respond to Mirror Football’s request for comment. But in response to previous questions about the 2026 World Cup, a spokesperson said the organisation is “fully aware” of the threat posed by climate change and was “making substantial efforts to tackle those impacts”. They added that FIFA has offset emissions since 2014 and promised to release “a robust sustainability strategy” in early 2024.
Looking beyond the question of emissions caused by a huge amount of air travel, there are concerns about holding a World Cup in the summer, given the ever-increasing temperatures caused by global warming. Madeleine Orr, an assistant professor at the University of Toronto, believes hosting in Spain, Portugal and Morocco is worrying and the South American leg simply adds even more unnecessary carbon emissions.
"Splitting up the event between three continents and six countries is potentially catastrophic from an emissions standpoint,” Orr said. “There will be untold international and intercontinental flights attached to this event model, which is problematic when the world is on fire.”
Gianni Infantino's stint as FIFA president has been defined by expansion on all fronts (FIFA via Getty Images) HAVE YOUR SAY! What do you make of FIFA's plans for the 2030 World Cup? Comment below.
Under Infantino’s leadership, FIFA has continually tried to expand the World Cup. The 2026 World Cup will see an increase from 32 to 48 teams and from 64 to 104 matches and the newly-unveiled plans for 2030 are another step in the same direction.
Frank Huisingh, founder of Fossil Free Football, described the plans as “outrageous” and pointed out an alternative. “It’s possible to organise a relatively sustainable World Cup,” he said. “You need to limit the number of participating teams, use existing stadiums, choose an area with good public transport or plans to build it and focus your ticket sales on local fans.”
Earps reacts to FIFA Best nomination and on season so far with Man Utd
Infantino said the 2030 World Cup would provide “unique social and cultural cohesion” and send “a great message of peace, tolerance and inclusion”. It will also send a less than great message in the midst of a climate crisis.