How Sustainable Were The 2026 Olympics?

Winter Olympics organisers promise green Games but controversies persist

The Milano Cortina 2026 Winter Olympics ran from 6 February to 22 March 2026 across northern Italy. Organisers promoted the event as a model of environmental responsibility. The International Olympic Committee called it “the Olympics of sustainability.”

However, the reality proved more complicated. While the Games achieved genuine progress in some areas, significant environmental compromises emerged. WWF Italia withdrew from its IOC partnership before the Games began. The conservation group stated it found “no evidence to certify environmental sustainability.”

This gap between ambition and outcome offers important lessons for UK businesses navigating their own sustainability commitments. Consequently, understanding what happened in Milan and Cortina matters beyond sport.

Venues relied heavily on existing infrastructure

The Games took place across Milan, Cortina d’Ampezzo, and several other sites in northern Italy. This distributed model built on infrastructure from the 1956 Cortina Olympics. Around 85 to 90 percent of venues were existing facilities or temporary structures.

Milan’s Porta Romana Olympic Village was designed for conversion into 1,700 student beds after the Games. The curling stadium in Cortina received energy efficiency upgrades alongside improved accessibility features. These included 80 additional seats and new lifts.

Nearly all venues ran on certified renewable electricity. Temporary generators used HVO biofuel rather than conventional diesel. Smart energy systems reportedly cut consumption by up to 40 percent at some sites. Snowmaking equipment incorporated GPS technology to reduce water and energy use without chemical additives.

Furthermore, organisers reused more than 20,000 items from the Paris 2024 Olympics. Food waste was redirected to charities. Single-use items were limited across venues.

Prince Albert II, chair of the IOC Sustainability and Legacy Commission, praised the approach. He described the sustainability model as “genuinely innovative.”

Italian government waived environmental impact assessments

Despite these efforts, serious concerns emerged before and during the Games. The Italian government exempted 60 percent of Olympic projects from Environmental Impact Assessments. This decision removed a key regulatory safeguard.

Construction for a bobsled track cleared approximately two hectares of 200-year-old larch forest. The site sits within a UNESCO World Heritage area. Environmental groups condemned the decision as irreversible damage to a protected ecosystem.

A new hockey arena was built in Milan. This contradicted earlier commitments to avoid new permanent structures. The building expanded the Games’ physical footprint beyond initial plans.

Artificial snow production required roughly 84.8 million cubic feet of water from Alpine rivers. Meanwhile, climate data shows Cortina has experienced 19 percent fewer freezing days since 1956. The warming trend continues to accelerate across Alpine regions.

The geographic spread of venues increased transport demands between sites. This complicated efforts to create a circular materials economy for the Games.

Conservation groups withdrew support before opening ceremony

WWF Italia ended its IOC partnership before the Games opened. The organisation stated publicly that Milano Cortina 2026 “were presented as ‘the Olympics of sustainability’, but this is not the case.”

Media outlets including The Guardian described the sustainability claims as “the great lie of these Games.” Reports indicated that the IOC had stopped hosting roundtable discussions with environmental groups roughly a year before the opening ceremony.

The criticisms centred on specific failures rather than general concerns. The waived impact assessments, forest clearance, and new construction directly contradicted the promises organisers had made.

What Milano Cortina reveals about sustainability commitments

UK businesses face similar pressures when making environmental commitments. Stakeholders increasingly demand evidence rather than statements. Supply chain partners, public sector buyers, and investors all scrutinise sustainability claims more carefully than before.

The Milano Cortina experience highlights several risks. First, exempting projects from standard assessments creates immediate credibility problems. UK businesses operating under environmental regulations cannot expect shortcuts to go unnoticed. Moreover, regulatory bodies and certification schemes continue to tighten requirements.

Second, biodiversity loss carries reputational consequences that persist long after projects complete. The forest clearance in Cortina damaged the Games’ environmental reputation despite achievements elsewhere. Similarly, UK firms operating near protected sites or ancient woodlands face intense scrutiny from local communities and national media.

Third, new construction marketed as temporary or minimal raises questions when it becomes permanent. The Milan hockey arena exemplifies how scope creep undermines broader sustainability narratives. UK businesses expanding facilities while promoting carbon reduction face comparable credibility challenges.

Additionally, resource intensity matters even when using efficient technology. The massive water requirements for artificial snow drew criticism despite GPS-guided application systems. UK manufacturers using intensive processes must address absolute consumption levels alongside efficiency improvements.

Finally, stakeholder engagement requires consistency and transparency. The reported cessation of NGO roundtables signalled declining commitment to collaborative oversight. UK businesses benefit from maintaining open dialogue with environmental groups, community organisations, and industry bodies throughout project lifecycles.

Climate change threatens winter sports locations worldwide

The Milano Cortina controversies occurred within a broader climate context. Research indicates only 52 of 93 previous Winter Olympics host locations will remain reliable for winter sports by the 2050s under current warming trajectories.

Alpine regions face particular vulnerability. Temperature increases occur faster at altitude than in lowland areas. Consequently, snow reliability declines rapidly as average temperatures rise.

This creates a feedback loop for major events. Organisers require more artificial snow to compensate for natural shortfalls. However, increased artificial snow production consumes more water and energy. These requirements grow each year as natural snow becomes less reliable.

The pattern extends beyond sport. UK businesses operating in climate-sensitive sectors face analogous challenges. Tourism, agriculture, energy, and water-dependent industries must adapt to changing conditions while maintaining environmental commitments.

Five key facts UK businesses should understand

• The Milano Cortina 2026 Winter Olympics achieved 85 percent venue reuse and powered most sites with renewable electricity, yet faced sharp criticism for environmental shortcuts including forest destruction and waived impact assessments.
• WWF Italia withdrew from its IOC partnership before the Games began, stating it found no evidence to certify environmental sustainability despite organisers’ claims.
• The Italian government exempted 60 percent of Olympic projects from Environmental Impact Assessments, removing standard regulatory protections for a UNESCO World Heritage area.
• Artificial snow production required approximately 84.8 million cubic feet of water from Alpine rivers, even as climate data shows Cortina experiencing 19 percent fewer freezing days since 1956.
• Only 52 of 93 previous Winter Olympics host locations will remain climatically reliable for winter sports by the 2050s, illustrating the accelerating impact of warming on seasonal industries.

Implications for UK firms making environmental claims

The Milano Cortina case offers practical lessons for UK businesses developing sustainability strategies. Environmental commitments increasingly influence tender outcomes, supply chain relationships, and stakeholder confidence. Therefore, claims must withstand scrutiny from multiple directions.

Regulatory compliance forms the foundation. Seeking exemptions from impact assessments or environmental reviews creates immediate questions about genuine commitment. UK businesses benefit from exceeding minimum requirements rather than seeking ways around them. Planning authorities, environmental regulators, and certification bodies communicate across jurisdictions.

Measuring absolute impacts matters as much as relative efficiency. Using renewable energy or efficient technology represents progress. However, stakeholders also examine total resource consumption, habitat effects, and cumulative impacts. UK firms should track both efficiency metrics and absolute footprints.

Third-party verification strengthens credibility. The IOC’s sustainability claims lacked independent oversight that might have identified problems earlier. UK businesses using external compliance support for carbon reporting and environmental management create accountability mechanisms that internal assessments cannot provide.

Stakeholder dialogue must continue throughout project lifecycles. The reported end of NGO engagement damaged the Games’ credibility before they began. UK businesses maintaining regular communication with community groups, environmental organisations, and industry bodies identify concerns early when solutions remain feasible.

Transparency about trade-offs builds trust more effectively than presenting every decision as environmentally positive. Milano Cortina’s problems intensified because organisers emphasised achievements while downplaying compromises. UK firms acknowledging difficult choices while explaining mitigation efforts often find stakeholders more receptive than when claims appear one-sided.

How this affects procurement and supply chains

Public sector buyers increasingly require evidence of environmental performance. Procurement Policy Note 06/21 mandates carbon reduction plans for central government contracts above £5 million annually. Suppliers must demonstrate measurement, reporting, and reduction commitments.

The Milano Cortina experience shows why buyers scrutinise sustainability claims carefully. Suppliers making ambitious statements without supporting evidence face challenges in competitive tenders. Conversely, those providing verified data and transparent reporting strengthen their positions.

Supply chain expectations have also intensified. Large organisations now require Scope 3 emissions data from suppliers. This means UK SMEs must understand their own carbon footprints and demonstrate credible reduction pathways. Our net-zero program supports carbon reporting for PPN 06/21 compliance and supply chain requirements.

Moreover, reputational risks flow through supply chains. A supplier’s environmental controversy can affect buyers’ reputations even when the buyer’s direct operations remain sound. UK businesses therefore assess suppliers’ sustainability practices as part of risk management.

Future Games face higher scrutiny after Milano Cortina

Los Angeles will host the Summer Olympics in 2028. Brisbane follows in 2032. Both cities face expectations shaped partly by Milano Cortina’s controversies. Organisers must demonstrate credible environmental management from the earliest planning stages.

The IOC committed to reducing its carbon footprint by 50 percent by 2030. Achieving this target requires addressing the issues that emerged in Milan and Cortina. Independent audits and transparent reporting will likely become standard expectations for future Games.

Winter sports events face particular pressure as suitable host locations decline. Organisers must balance the desire to host events with the environmental costs of creating appropriate conditions in warming climates. This tension will only increase over coming decades.

Further reading

UK businesses seeking reliable information on environmental management and sustainability reporting can access several authoritative sources. The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero provides policy guidance and regulatory updates relevant to business carbon reduction obligations.

The Procurement Policy Note 006 outlines specific requirements for suppliers to central government, including carbon reduction plan templates and submission guidance.

Additionally, the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment provides professional standards and guidance for environmental practitioners, including resources on impact assessment and sustainability reporting frameworks.

Businesses can also benefit from structured training on environmental compliance and carbon management to build internal capability for meeting evolving requirements.