IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/natsus/v4y2021i4d10.1038_s41893-021-00696-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An evaluation of the sustainability of the Olympic Games

Author

Listed:
  • Martin Müller

    (University of Lausanne)

  • Sven Daniel Wolfe

    (University of Lausanne)

  • Christopher Gaffney

    (New York University)

  • David Gogishvili

    (University of Lausanne)

  • Miriam Hug

    (University of Bern)

  • Annick Leick

    (University of Lausanne)

Abstract

The Olympic Games claim to be exemplars of sustainability, aiming to inspire sustainable futures around the world. Yet no systematic evaluation of their sustainability exists. We develop and apply a model with nine indicators to evaluate the sustainability of the 16 editions of the Summer and Winter Olympic Games between 1992 and 2020, representing a total cost of more than US$70 billion. Our model shows that the overall sustainability of the Olympic Games is medium and that it has declined over time. Salt Lake City 2002 was the most sustainable Olympic Games in this period, whereas Sochi 2014 and Rio de Janeiro 2016 were the least sustainable. No Olympics, however, score in the top category of our model. Three actions should make Olympic hosting more sustainable: first, greatly reducing the size of the event; second, rotating the Olympics among the same cities; third, enforcing independent sustainability standards.

Suggested Citation

  • Martin Müller & Sven Daniel Wolfe & Christopher Gaffney & David Gogishvili & Miriam Hug & Annick Leick, 2021. "An evaluation of the sustainability of the Olympic Games," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 4(4), pages 340-348, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:nat:natsus:v:4:y:2021:i:4:d:10.1038_s41893-021-00696-5
    DOI: 10.1038/s41893-021-00696-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-021-00696-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41893-021-00696-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sven Daniel Wolfe, 2023. "Building a better host city? Reforming and contesting the Olympics in Paris 2024," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 41(2), pages 257-273, March.
    2. Julia Lohmann & Jennifer Breithecker & Ulrike Ohl & Petra Gieß-Stüber & Hans Peter Brandl-Bredenbeck, 2021. "Teachers’ Professional Action Competence in Education for Sustainable Development: A Systematic Review from the Perspective of Physical Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-26, December.
    3. J. James Reade, 2023. "Large Sporting Events and Public Health and Safety," Economics Discussion Papers em-dp2023-04, Department of Economics, University of Reading.
    4. Ji Wu & Madeleine Orr & Kurumi Aizawa & Yuhei Inoue, 2021. "Language Relativity in Legacy Literature: A Systematic Review in Multiple Languages," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-18, October.
    5. Vargas Vanesa Mădălina & Niţă Sorin & Marin Aurel & Joga Florentina Ecaterina & Stoica Mihaela-Ionica, 2022. "Greening: politics and economics for social auditing. Sport management as common denominator," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 16(1), pages 575-583, August.
    6. Pedro Janela Pinto & Gustavo Lopes dos Santos, 2022. "Olympic Waterfronts: An Evaluation of Wasted Opportunities and Lasting Legacies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-32, February.
    7. Alexander Budzier & Bent Flyvbjerg, 2024. "The Oxford Olympics Study 2024: Are Cost and Cost Overrun at the Games Coming Down?," Papers 2406.01714, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2024.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:natsus:v:4:y:2021:i:4:d:10.1038_s41893-021-00696-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.