FIFA, football’s global governing body, has long promoted itself as an organization committed to environmental sustainability. From bold promises of carbon-neutral World Cups to ambitious net-zero goals, the message has been clear: FIFA claims to be tackling climate change head-on. But an in-depth review reveals that the gap between FIFA’s climate rhetoric and its actual environmental performance is wide — and growing. Critics argue that FIFA’s efforts amount to greenwashing, with limited transparency, questionable offset strategies, and minimal real-world impact.
The Environmental Toll of FIFA World Cups
Massive Emissions Overshadow Sustainability Claims
FIFA’s flagship event — the World Cup — generates enormous carbon emissions. The 2022 World Cup in Qatar was touted by FIFA as the first “fully carbon-neutral” tournament, but the math tells a different story. The event emitted an estimated 3.8 million tonnes of CO₂, largely from international travel, stadium construction, and match-day operations.
This staggering figure rivals the annual emissions of small countries such as Iceland. Similarly, the 2018 tournament in Russia produced over 2.1 million tonnes of CO₂, with 75% linked to travel — a category FIFA acknowledges but cannot directly control.
Stadium Construction’s Hidden Footprint
The construction of venues is another major, often underreported, emissions source. For Qatar 2022 alone. The temporary Stadium 974 accounted for 438 kilotons of CO₂.
Six permanent stadiums emitted an additional 206 kilotons. These numbers are typically downplayed in FIFA’s public reports, yet they contribute significantly to the environmental cost of hosting.
FIFA’s Climate Strategy: Promises Versus Performance
Lofty Goals and Limited Progress
In 2021, FIFA introduced its Climate Strategy, pledging to:
- Cut emissions by 50% by 2030.
- Achieve net-zero by 2040.
- Offset all 2022 World Cup travel emissions, including those of ticket holders.
However, of the 18 climate-related initiatives outlined in its strategy:
- Only 2 have been delivered.
- 2 show partial progress.
- A staggering 14 show no known progress.
There’s no dedicated budget for sustainability, and reporting on funded climate initiatives remains opaque. FIFA’s focus has been on appearances rather than impact.
Regulatory and Environmental Pushback
Swiss Regulator Calls Out Misleading Advertising
FIFA’s claim that the 2022 World Cup was carbon-neutral triggered official complaints across five European countries. The Swiss Fairness Commission concluded that FIFA’s marketing was misleading, unsubstantiated, and Lacking evidence for carbon neutrality claims.
As a result, the organization was ordered to cease using such terminology in its advertising.
NGOs Slam FIFA’s Offsetting Approach
Groups such as Carbon Market Watch have accused FIFA of “irresponsible and farcical greenwashing.” Their main criticisms: Offsetting cannot replace direct emissions cuts. Many offsets purchased were of low quality or lacked “additionality”—meaning they didn’t result in real or measurable reductions.There’s limited verification and transparency on how offsets are chosen or monitored. Environmental experts warn that such practices erode public trust and contribute little to actual climate mitigation.
Structural Challenges to Emissions Reduction
Travel Emissions Remain the Biggest Obstacle
International flights — accounting for the majority of FIFA event emissions — remain largely outside the organization’s control. Teams, fans, media, and officials travel globally, and any strategy that doesn’t address this is unlikely to meet emissions goals.
Multi-Host Tournaments Increase Carbon Footprint
FIFA’s future World Cups in 2026, 2030, and 2034 are planned across multiple nations:
- 2026: USA, Canada, Mexico
- 2030: Spain, Portugal, Morocco (with ceremonial matches in Uruguay, Argentina, and Paraguay)
- 2034: Expected in Saudi Arabia
This approach increases travel distances and logistical complexity — effectively undermining FIFA’s own 50% emissions reduction target for 2030.
Offsetting or Obfuscating? The Problem with FIFA’s Carbon Credits
Dubious Carbon Offset Projects
FIFA relies heavily on carbon offsetting — paying for external projects like tree planting or renewable energy to “neutralize” emissions. But watchdogs have flagged several concerns:
- Lack of independent verification of projects.
- Questionable claims of permanence and impact.
- Potential harm to local communities involved in offsetting schemes.
Without robust oversight, offsets risk becoming a convenient accounting trick rather than a legitimate climate solution.
Can FIFA Lead on Climate?
Transparency and Accountability Are Key
If FIFA is serious about climate leadership, it must:
- Publicly report progress on all 18 climate initiatives.
- Create a dedicated sustainability budget and office.
- Align its climate marketing with scientific and regulatory standards.
Direct Action Over Offsets
Instead of relying on offsets, FIFA should:
- Reduce travel emissions by optimizing match locations.
- Mandate green building standards for stadiums.
- Partner with transportation providers for low-emission options.
Educate and Engage
Finally, FIFA should use its global platform to:
- Promote climate education.
- Encourage sustainable behavior among fans.
- Support research and innovation in sports sustainability.
Symbolism Over Substance
Despite loud proclamations of climate neutrality, FIFA’s environmental legacy is one of contradiction. The organization promotes ambitious climate goals while:
- Overlooking its largest emissions sources.
- Relying on questionable carbon offsets.
- Selecting host countries that increase travel and infrastructure demands.
The result is an approach more focused on optics than outcomes, drawing credible accusations of greenwashing. For FIFA to regain public trust and contribute meaningfully to climate action, it must replace symbolism with substance, promises with proof, and offsets with actual reductions.
Until that happens, the world’s most-watched sporting event will remain one of its most damaging to the planet.
