Sustainable Olympics: How the IOC Reduces the Games’ Carbon Footprint
The Olympic Games: A Global Celebration with a Sustainable Mission
The Olympic Games serve as a global gathering point, uniting athletes and audiences from across the world in a celebration of human excellence, endurance, and international solidarity. To ensure that the Games deliver meaningful, lasting benefits to their host cities and nations, while also limiting environmental damage, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has outlined a clear vision in its Olympic Agenda. Central to this vision is the commitment to significantly reduce the Games’ carbon emissions.
Measuring and Reducing Emissions: The IOC’s Carbon Footprint Methodology
To support host cities in assessing and lowering the environmental impact of the Games, the IOC introduced the Carbon Footprint Methodology for the Olympic Games. Originally released in December 2018 and updated in December 2024, this comprehensive guide offers a consistent and transparent framework for evaluating greenhouse gas emissions and identifying ways to reduce them.
A Tool for Organisers: How the Methodology Works
First unveiled at COP24 during the UN Climate Change Summit, the methodology equips Olympic Organising Committees with step-by-step guidance to calculate emissions from all key areas. This includes venue development, energy consumption, transport and travel for participants and spectators, materials usage, and operational activities like catering and waste disposal.
The approach adheres to globally accepted standards such as ISO 14064, the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, the European Commission’s Organisation Environmental Footprint (OEF), and the UN’s Sports for Climate Action Framework. This alignment ensures that emission tracking is accurate, standardised, and adaptable to local contexts.
Organisers use the methodology to define the scope of emissions to include, determine whether to use direct data or estimates, and pinpoint areas where emissions can be minimized. It also plays a vital role early in the planning process—during the “Continuous Dialogue” phase—by helping stakeholders incorporate sustainability goals from the start.
Defining What Counts: Inclusion and Exclusion of Emissions
The methodology carefully outlines which emissions should be factored in and which are considered outside the scope of the Games. For instance, if a new stadium is constructed solely for the Olympics, its emissions are included. However, infrastructure projects that were already in motion prior to the host city’s selection—such as existing metro expansions—are excluded, even if they benefit Olympic visitors.
This distinction ensures that only necessary and directly linked emissions are counted, promoting accuracy and discouraging greenwashing.
Safeguards Against Misreporting
To maintain integrity and consistency, hosts cannot arbitrarily omit emissions. Clear criteria and justification must be provided for any exclusions, and the entire process must follow internationally recognized standards. The methodology was developed with input from independent experts to ensure it reflects best practices in climate accounting.
Spectator Travel: A Significant Consideration
Spectator-related emissions—classified as indirect or scope 3 emissions—are included in the overall carbon footprint. While host cities cannot control how individuals travel, they are expected to promote low-carbon options, such as efficient public transportation or incentives for sustainable travel choices.
Travel emissions are calculated using data such as ticket sales, transport surveys, and predictive models. These calculations consider factors like travel distance, mode of transport (e.g., air, rail, or car), and ticket usage patterns. Notably, emissions from non-ticketed spectators are harder to track and are therefore excluded, though hosts are encouraged to support broader sustainable mobility.
Long-Term Infrastructure and Legacy Projects
Only construction or upgrades driven by the Olympic Games are included in the emissions count. Facilities that were already part of a city’s long-term development plans are not. For example, if a venue is permanently upgraded or built exclusively for the Games, its environmental impact is accounted for. However, legacy benefits—like improved housing or public transit—are acknowledged as positive outcomes of Olympic investments.
Rented vs. Purchased Equipment
The methodology also distinguishes between rented and owned equipment. Full emissions are counted for purchased assets, whereas emissions from rented items are prorated based on their expected lifetime use. This calculation encourages the use of rental options and reduces waste from one-time purchases.
Post-Games Venue Use and Reporting
Temporary venues dismantled after the Games are included in the carbon footprint. However, transformations of Olympic sites—like turning an athlete village into residential housing—are not, as these changes typically fall under future development initiatives, not the Olympic delivery plan.
After the Games, hosts are expected to report actual emissions, compare them to original estimates, and share insights to benefit future organisers. This ensures accountability and a learning loop that promotes continuous environmental improvement.
Aiming for Progress, Not Perfection
Although each Olympic edition aims to be more sustainable than the last, improvements depend on a host’s starting conditions. For example, a city with pre-existing green infrastructure has an advantage over one that must build from scratch. The key goal is that every edition learns from its predecessors, reduces its carbon footprint, and aligns its plans with local priorities and global climate goals—particularly those outlined in the Paris Agreement.
Staying Up to Date
As climate science and policy evolve, so does the IOC’s methodology. Revisions are made regularly to reflect new insights, technological advances, and feedback from past hosts—most recently drawing on lessons from Paris 2024 and Los Angeles 2028.
The Olympic Games serve as a global gathering point, uniting athletes and audiences from across the world in a celebration of human excellence, endurance, and international solidarity. To ensure that the Games deliver meaningful, lasting benefits to their host cities and nations, while also limiting environmental damage, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has outlined a clear vision in its Olympic Agenda. Central to this vision is the commitment to significantly reduce the Games’ carbon emissions.
Measuring and Reducing Emissions: The IOC’s Carbon Footprint Methodology
To support host cities in assessing and lowering the environmental impact of the Games, the IOC introduced the Carbon Footprint Methodology for the Olympic Games. Originally released in December 2018 and updated in December 2024, this comprehensive guide offers a consistent and transparent framework for evaluating greenhouse gas emissions and identifying ways to reduce them.
A Tool for Organisers: How the Methodology Works
First unveiled at COP24 during the UN Climate Change Summit, the methodology equips Olympic Organising Committees with step-by-step guidance to calculate emissions from all key areas. This includes venue development, energy consumption, transport and travel for participants and spectators, materials usage, and operational activities like catering and waste disposal.
The approach adheres to globally accepted standards such as ISO 14064, the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, the European Commission’s Organisation Environmental Footprint (OEF), and the UN’s Sports for Climate Action Framework. This alignment ensures that emission tracking is accurate, standardised, and adaptable to local contexts.
Organisers use the methodology to define the scope of emissions to include, determine whether to use direct data or estimates, and pinpoint areas where emissions can be minimized. It also plays a vital role early in the planning process—during the “Continuous Dialogue” phase—by helping stakeholders incorporate sustainability goals from the start.
Defining What Counts: Inclusion and Exclusion of Emissions
The methodology carefully outlines which emissions should be factored in and which are considered outside the scope of the Games. For instance, if a new stadium is constructed solely for the Olympics, its emissions are included. However, infrastructure projects that were already in motion prior to the host city’s selection—such as existing metro expansions—are excluded, even if they benefit Olympic visitors.
This distinction ensures that only necessary and directly linked emissions are counted, promoting accuracy and discouraging greenwashing.
Safeguards Against Misreporting
To maintain integrity and consistency, hosts cannot arbitrarily omit emissions. Clear criteria and justification must be provided for any exclusions, and the entire process must follow internationally recognized standards. The methodology was developed with input from independent experts to ensure it reflects best practices in climate accounting.
Spectator Travel: A Significant Consideration
Spectator-related emissions—classified as indirect or scope 3 emissions—are included in the overall carbon footprint. While host cities cannot control how individuals travel, they are expected to promote low-carbon options, such as efficient public transportation or incentives for sustainable travel choices.
Travel emissions are calculated using data such as ticket sales, transport surveys, and predictive models. These calculations consider factors like travel distance, mode of transport (e.g., air, rail, or car), and ticket usage patterns. Notably, emissions from non-ticketed spectators are harder to track and are therefore excluded, though hosts are encouraged to support broader sustainable mobility.
Long-Term Infrastructure and Legacy Projects
Only construction or upgrades driven by the Olympic Games are included in the emissions count. Facilities that were already part of a city’s long-term development plans are not. For example, if a venue is permanently upgraded or built exclusively for the Games, its environmental impact is accounted for. However, legacy benefits—like improved housing or public transit—are acknowledged as positive outcomes of Olympic investments.
Rented vs. Purchased Equipment
The methodology also distinguishes between rented and owned equipment. Full emissions are counted for purchased assets, whereas emissions from rented items are prorated based on their expected lifetime use. This calculation encourages the use of rental options and reduces waste from one-time purchases.
Post-Games Venue Use and Reporting
Temporary venues dismantled after the Games are included in the carbon footprint. However, transformations of Olympic sites—like turning an athlete village into residential housing—are not, as these changes typically fall under future development initiatives, not the Olympic delivery plan.
After the Games, hosts are expected to report actual emissions, compare them to original estimates, and share insights to benefit future organisers. This ensures accountability and a learning loop that promotes continuous environmental improvement.
Aiming for Progress, Not Perfection
Although each Olympic edition aims to be more sustainable than the last, improvements depend on a host’s starting conditions. For example, a city with pre-existing green infrastructure has an advantage over one that must build from scratch. The key goal is that every edition learns from its predecessors, reduces its carbon footprint, and aligns its plans with local priorities and global climate goals—particularly those outlined in the Paris Agreement.
Staying Up to Date
As climate science and policy evolve, so does the IOC’s methodology. Revisions are made regularly to reflect new insights, technological advances, and feedback from past hosts—most recently drawing on lessons from Paris 2024 and Los Angeles 2028.
Companies