The recent Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games of Milano Cortina 2026 reached a record-breaking audience through global broadcast and social media. Millions followed the games online, making the Olympics more unifying than ever through digital engagement and streaming platforms. The values of a mega sporting event such as the Winter Olympics are excellence, respect, and friendship. However, behind the celebrations, medals, and performances, the Games can also leave behind environmental and financial damage. Sustainability is being increasingly considered to be one of the main priorities of the International Olympics Committee (IOC). IOC has itself confirmed the importance of reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the coming years, especially because of the environmental challenges linked to hosting an event of such scale. Hosting an Olympic Game can lead to high carbon emissions because of construction, transport, energy use, and tourism. Preparing for the event often requires building new venues and infrastructure, which can damage mountain ecosystems and increase greenhouse gas emissions.
Behind the excitement of the Games, there is a huge amount of waste that often goes unnoticed. At the same time, climate change is creating new challenges for winter sports. As winters become warmer, the Olympics increasingly depend on artificial snow, which requires large amounts of water and energy. Moreover, travel emissions should also be considered since thousands of athletes, staff members and spectators travel from all over the world, creating a large carbon footprint.
To reduce these impacts, the IOC has increasingly encouraged circular economy methods, where materials are reused and recycled instead of thrown away. However, sustainability was not always a priority for the Olympic Games. The idea of the “green Olympics” started in Lillehammer, Norway, during the 1994 Winter Olympics. These Games are often called the first environmentally conscious Olympics because it was then that sustainability became part of the planning process. Venues were designed to respect the natural landscape and were built with future use in mind for training and competitions. Impressively, all ten venues built for Lillehammer 1994 are still in use today. The fact that all these venues are still used for training and competitions in winter sports also showcases Norway’s continuing success and dominance in winter sports.
Over the years, organisers have learnt from previous mistakes, especially from Olympic venues that were left abandoned after the event. One example is Turin, Italy, host of the 2006 Winter Olympics. The Games had both positive and negative effects on the city. On one hand, Torino gained international attention and became a more attractive tourist destination. The Olympics also encouraged innovation and development, including the construction of the city’s first metro line and the renovation of important urban areas. On the other hand, while many venues were removed after the Games, others remain abandoned because the costs of maintenance and demolition are too high. This raises serious ethical questions about the investments in venues that may only be used for a few weeks and later forgotten.
The Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia, in 2014 are often considered among the least sustainable Games ever organised because huge amounts of construction waste were produced and greenhouse gas emissions increased because of transportation, construction and waste systems. The city improved its railway system, airport, water supply and winter tourism infrastructure thanks to the Olympics, showing that the Games can bring benefits to host regions, but poor environmental planning can leave long-term consequences.
These examples pushed Olympic organisers to rethink how the Games should be planned more sustainably. The Paris 2024 Olympics became known as one of the most sustainable Olympic Games. Although Paris hosted the Summer Olympics, it introduced an important sustainability model that future Winter Olympics can follow. The sustainable motto of Paris 2024 was “less, better, for longer”. Instead of building everything from the beginning, organisers reused existing venues, rented equipment and powered parts of the Games with renewable energy.
The same sustainable effort can be seen in Milano Cortina 2026 in Italy. These Games followed a multi-centred model, meaning events were spread across different locations in northern Italy instead of being concentrated in one city. This helped reduce the need for expensive mega-venues and relied mostly on already existing infrastructure. In fact, around 85% of the venues were built for the Winter Olympics that took place in Cortina D’Ampezzo in 1956, showing a legacy that lives on to this day. Avoiding the construction of new venues significantly reduced construction and environmental impact. The Games were also partially powered by Italy’s national solar, hydro and wind power renewable energy. Unlike many previous Winter Olympics, snowmaking was kept to a minimum and no additional chemicals were added to the snow. Strategic environmental assessments were also carried out to protect mountain ecosystems and endangered species living in the Alps, which were also represented by the mascots of the event.
Beyond environmental protection, Milano Cortina 2026 also focused strongly on sustainable legacy. One important example is Milan’s Porta Romana Olympic Village, which will become student housing after the Games and accommodate around 1,700 students. This shows how Olympic infrastructure can continue to benefit local communities even after athletes leave.
The legacy of the Winter Olympics should not only be medals and memories, but also benefits for local people. Since the first Winter Olympics in Chamonix in 1924, host cities have had the opportunity to improve infrastructure, promote sport, encourage tourism and create lasting development. However, this should happen responsibly and sustainably. The Games should therefore continue to promote education, social inclusion, health, and sport but also sustainable lifestyle and infrastructure. Hosting the Olympic Games should not be a burden to the host country but rather a chance to boost the city’s image and pride, stimulate sustainable development and grow participation in winter sports.
The Winter Olympics can have both positive and negative environmental impacts. While some Games left behind abandoned venues and environmental damage, others have shown that sustainability is possible through better planning, reuse and long-term thinking. The most recent editions such as Paris and Milano Cortina show that the Olympics are moving in a more sustainable direction, and hopefully, future games will continue to protect the environment while still inspiring people around the world through sport.
Sara Seregni
- Sara Seregni
- Sara Seregni
- Sara Seregni
- Sara Seregni
- Sara Seregni
