Sustainability Goals Under Pressure

The withdrawal creates a stark policy vacuum for events that have built their brands on green credentials. FIFA’s own requirements for 2026 host cities include a commitment to emissions reduction plans aligned with the Paris Agreement. However, with the US pulling out of the bedrock treaty of international climate cooperation, the tournament’s promise of setting “new standards for environmental sustainability” is now under intense scrutiny.

The 2026 FIFA World Cup, spanning a continent with long-distance travel baked into its format, already faces difficult questions about its environmental footprint. Recent research suggests the event is on track to be the “most climate-damaging” World Cup in history, with estimated emissions of more than nine million tonnes of CO₂ equivalent — nearly double the historical average. Critics argue that the federal government’s pivot away from climate leadership removes both regulatory pressure and institutional support needed to mitigate such a significant impact.

“A Colossal Own Goal”

The reaction from global climate leaders has been swift and unsparing. Simon Stiell, Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC, described the US decision as a “colossal own goal which will leave the US less secure and less prosperous”. He warned that while much of the world accelerates its clean energy transition, this “step back from global leadership” could undermine the very infrastructure, from transport systems to energy supply, that major sporting events depend upon.

For the LA28 Olympic Games, the stakes are equally high. Organisers have recently unveiled an Impact and Sustainability Plan centred on “radical reuse” and 100% renewable electricity for venues. While Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass continues to champion a “greener, more sustainable future”, the federal withdrawal from the UNFCCC and the IPCC risks leaving local organisers and businesses “flying in the dark”, without the scientific and policy guardrails previously supported through federal participation.

Local Leadership and Commercial Pressure

With the federal retreat, pressure is now firmly on cities, states and sponsors to carry the torch. Delivery will rely more heavily on host cities such as New York, Houston and Los Angeles to demonstrate climate leadership independently of federal direction. LA28’s “Resilient by Nature” initiative, for example, seeks to address wildfire resilience and urban cooling solutions regardless of national climate policy.

Commenting on the recent launch of LA28’s Impact and Sustainability Plan Reynold Hoover, Chief Executive Officer of LA28 stated: “LA28 represents more than a moment on the world stage. It’s a once-in-a-generation opportunity to uplift our communities and lead by example. This plan reflects our belief that the legacy of the Games should be measured not only in medals, but in the lasting impact we leave behind for future generations.”

However, a significant risk for US-hosted events is reputational. Sponsors, broadcasters and fans increasingly expect alignment with recognised global standards. Many major Olympic and World Cup partners have science-based targets explicitly linked to UN processes. Any perceived mismatch between event-level sustainability claims and national policy risks accusations of greenwashing.

As the US isolates itself from global climate governance, the “beautiful game” and the Olympic spirit face an unprecedented challenge: delivering a credible and lasting sustainable legacy in a nation that has officially turned its back on the global climate framework. While the US government may be facing a climate red card, the world of sport must now look to its sustainable ‘mega-subs’ to stay in the game.