FIFA score CSR own goal in 2010 World Cup – part 1

It’s the biggest sporting event on earth but when it comes to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) the 2010 FIFA World Cup is failing to score goals. While FIFA are very proud (draconian?) about their management and organization of this summer’s World Cup it seems they have spent far more on corporate negotiations, licensing wars and sponsorship meetings than creating an event that could be deemed a CSR success.

Holding FIFA accountable for every aspect of the event would seem somewhat harsh if they were not so insistent on that being the case. The balance between appeal, profit and planning leaves FIFA looking as if profit determined most of their decisions. World Cup 2010 is creating the largest ‘event based’ carbon footprint on record which was anticipated, however over 2/3 of the carbons emissions is due to fans flying in from around the globe. Simply put South Africa is nowhere near the largest traveling fan bases in the Americas and Europe. The total emissions of 2.7m tonnes of carbon dioxide represent more than twice the amount of the Beijing Olympics and far more than the 2006 Word Cup. The emissions due to travel from overseas I can digest, it really is what it is. However, what about the 900,000 tonnes that are far more avoidable caused by local stadium construction, domestic travel within South Africa and energy for matches and hoteld. South Africa is reliant almost exclusively on coal for electricity which inflates the number significantly, and a lack of internal transport infrastructure has meant fans fly from match to match rather than rail.

Its hard to believe FIFA paid much heed to any of these considerations when selecting South Africa to host the event. I’m extremely excited that an African nation was finally chosen for the first time to host the prestigious tournament, though it would have been much better if the nation itself was ready to host it in a manner that was environmentally friendly and gave more back to the community at large. FIFA certainly have the political power and sway to work with the government of a hosting nation to create a plan that makes wider considerations in preparation for the cup. In 2010 I would have expected far more from FIFA when tabling the hosting proposal, there is certainly more than enough profit that could be used to bolster South Africa’s hosting capacity, especially when I think culturally it was the right thing to do.

The host cities each signed legislation to ensure environmental, social and economic considerations were taken into stadium construction. The standards for new or rehabbed stadia were successfully used at the 2006 World Cup in Germany. During construction the South African stadiums were studied by engineers, shockingly many agreed measures were not enacted at the beginning of the projects and it was by then too late to make a significant impact. Impacting the local economy and further impacting emissions were the facts that lower than proposed rations of local raw materials and even workers were used during the construction phase. Now, to stem some of the negative press, cities are involved in projects to offset or reduce carbon emissions by urgently planting trees anywhere possible.

If Holland or Spain win the Cup it will lessen some of my frustration with FIFA but not to the point where I can overlook the CSR own goal they have scored. Much more in part two….as I look at the preparation for and some of the more positive aspects of the FIFA 2010 World Cup