Football, business, and sustainability are words that should go hand in hand. The current landscape of the football world encompasses billions of people, hundreds of countries, and therefore: money, lots of money. Money in infrastructure, money in match commercialization, money in transportation, money in workers' salaries, money, money, and more money, reaching astronomical figures.
Nevertheless, it’s not just about business; some football affairs such as hosting major tournaments or managing league regulations are often deeply political decisions, impacting nations’ global standing, cultural influence, and even diplomatic relations.
Is Millionaire Football Compatible with the Sustainable Development Goals?
In recent years, the United Nations has tried to do its part with initiatives like the creation of the ‘Football for the Goals’ platform. This aims to involve its members in actively pursuing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), encouraging international confederations, leagues, football clubs, and even foundations to support just causes in areas like poverty, gender equality, and climate action.
On paper, it sounds great, right? A global sport mobilizing the masses for a greater cause. However, reality seems a bit more complicated. While these initiatives give the impression that the entire football world is becoming greener and more responsible, in practice, the picture remains much the same.
Just take a look at the next headlines: ‘Atlético de Madrid’s second most expensive transfer in history’ arrives for 75 million euros plus 20 in variables'; or ‘The five sheikhs who own football clubs’.
It seems that, at least in big clubs, money still reigns supreme. How sustainable is it for a player to cost what would amount to hundreds of years of minimum wage in many countries? And sheikhs buying teams like toys, with fortunes built on industries that are anything but sustainable, like oil. Where is SDG 7 (Affordable and clean energy), or SDG 13 (Climate action) in all this?
Sustainability and human rights: The Paradox of the 2022 FIFA World Cup
This clash between the ideals of sustainability and the harsh economic reality of modern football leads us to one of the most controversial cases: the selection of Qatar as the host of the 2022 FIFA World Cup.
It’s a decision that surprised many and left others questioning how a small, oil-rich country with extreme temperatures could be the best option for an event that, at least in theory, should promote values like social justice and environmental protection.
Qatar promised that this would be a 'carbon-neutral' World Cup. The stadiums were built with cutting-edge cooling technologies and focused on the use of renewable energy. Isn’t that a win-win? But criticisms were quick to follow.
How do you achieve a carbon-neutral event when you have to transport hundreds of thousands of people from all over the world to a country whose infrastructure isn't equipped for such a massive influx? The energy consumption needed to keep stadiums at tolerable temperatures in a desert is enormous, concretely, the equivalent of driving a car around the world 80,000 times. And all of this merely to facilitate the hosting of an international football tournament in a location that is ill-equipped for such an event.
And then there was the question of what will happen to those stadiums after the event. Will they actually be used, or will they turn into white elephants, grandiose structures left abandoned and underused?
Now, nearly two years on, we can confirm our suspicions. Although most of the stadiums are not entirely abandoned, their usage remains minimal. Six of the nine World Cup stadiums are now hosting matches for Qatar’s national league, which attracts an average crowd of only 5,000 people—just 15 per cent of the stadiums’ capacities. Lusail Stadium, the largest venue, is among those abandoned, and as a result, Lusail Boulevard—a modern development built around the stadium—is almost a ghost town.
But it’s not just the environmental impact that’s been debated concerning the Qatar World Cup. The labour conditions in the construction of these stadiums have been another dark point in this story. Qatar has been criticised for years for its labour system known as ‘kafala’, which essentially ties migrant workers to their employers, often in conditions bordering on exploitation.
Despite promises of reforms and improvements, reports of labour abuse persisted throughout the event's preparation. Extreme working hours under the scorching sun, low wages, and limited labour rights are part of the reality for many of the workers who built the imposing stadiums in the middle of the desert.
Qatar 2022: Success or mistake?
And so, with all of this in mind, can we really call this a sustainable World Cup? Is it enough for Qatar to say it will offset its carbon emissions, or for FIFA to join initiatives like ‘Football for the Goals’? There seems to be a huge gap between what is preached and what actually happens.
Despite this, some argue that these kinds of events are an opportunity for countries like Qatar to get on the global map, and by being in the world's spotlight, they are pressured to improve their standards. This is exactly what FIFA intended.
Qatar is an absolute monarchy, with little room for free speech. Criticise the government, and you risk punishment. Women face strict limitations under male guardianship laws, requiring a man’s approval for key decisions. Labour rights are another problem, as we’ve seen previously and there is a really poor football culture.
Meanwhile, Qatar’s wealth from oil and gas gives the country an important paper in the international framework. Thus, hosting the World Cup in 2022 was perceived by the politicians as an opportunity to implement different types of measures to mitigate the social injustices and fight against unsustainable practices. Whether this event was going to leave a positive legacy in terms of sustainability and human rights was at the time unreliable.
Reflecting with a broader perspective two years later
Two years after the World Cup began, little is said about the evolution (or lack thereof) of a country that was the centre of attention for the entire planet for a month and a half and has since disappeared from the public eye.
From what we know, some stadiums are still operational, as previously mentioned. However, they are being used in a completely inefficient manner, wasting unsustainable resources since their construction. We also know that the famous stadium that was promised to be dismantled after the event remains just as it was two years ago.
Not all news is bad; there are some signs of progress in labour conditions. A minimum wage has been established, and employers are required to allocate money for the housing and food of their workers. Additionally, outdoor labour has been regulated to limit work during scorching temperatures. However, the economic recession that preceded the tournament has created new vulnerabilities for migrant workers, with many not receiving their salaries for months or being paid below the established rates.
Therefore, while it is true that some progress has been made, Qatar 2022 falls far short of the ideals of sustainability and justice. Following what has happened, we must take a different path; we cannot allow the same story to repeat itself in Saudi Arabia or anywhere else in the world. Let us leverage the media influence of the beautiful and elevate it, not in terms of sports performance, but in terms of sustainability. It is time to learn from past mistakes to avoid repeating them, to take criticism and act decisively. The world is watching, and the time for change is now.
