New International Olympic Committee President Kirsty Coventry has announced a pause of the current Olympic host city selection process. The decision comes after closed-door sessions involving more than 70 IOC members in Lausanne during Coventry’s first week as president, following her June 24th inauguration.
“There was overwhelming support from the IOC members for a pause and review of the Future Host Election process,” Coventry said. “Members want to be engaged more in the process, and there was significant discussion about when the next host should be awarded.”
Coventry added that “the members were in agreement that the way we used to do things is not where we want to go. There have been good reforms to get future hosts and improve the selection process, but members felt they should be included more in the process and better understand how it works.”
The review represents a significant shift from her predecessor Thomas Bach‘s strategy, which was designed to avoid costly bid campaigns by prioritizing early, behind-the-scenes agreements with preferred bidders. This 2019 system replaced the previous dramatic head-to-head voting process that was both expensive and susceptible to corruption.
Bach’s approach led to Brisbane being fast-tracked as the 2032 Games host in a surprise selection made 11 years in advance, bypassing traditional bids and contested votes while drawing criticism from IOC members who felt excluded from the decision-making process.
Coventry emphasized that the IOC would examine lessons learned from recent host selections and their varying timelines: Los Angeles and Brisbane were both selected with 11-year lead times, while Paris 2024 was chosen seven years in advance, and the French Alps received only a six-year timeframe.
“So there was a lot of discussion on when is the appropriate time to elect a future host. And also how we should be selecting a future host,” she said.
“We need to ensure that we have more membership engagement and also look at the timing. When is the most appropriate time, when is the best time, when is the most effective time (to decide an Olympic host). What is the most effective way we are not going to overburden any of the stakeholders,” she added.
The next host to be selected would be for the 2036 Summer Games. Officially confirmed bids include Nusantara (Indonesia), Istanbul (Turkey), Ahmedabad (India), and Santiago (Chile).
A working group, to be established within the coming weeks, will examine both the timing and methodology of future host selections.
summer olympics in India? welp
All countries who have hosted infuse Greece with $100 million dollars to build the most amazing Olympic venues with all accoutrements for athletes and families.
They honestly should go to some sort of permanent rotation among already-established sites that have the infrastructure already more-or-less in place. Something along the lines of: 1) USA, 2) England, 3) Australia, 4) Germany, 5) Japan. That gives you 20 years of rotation that still covers almost all parts of the globe and then maybe re-evaluate after that. FIFA really should do something similar. This would far and away be the most financially-responsible way of doing this.
World Cup has to be played in a nation or group of nations with 7-10 stadiums that can seat at least 45,000, and the final has to seat at least 75,000. It’s not an undertaking for just a city. IRL there are only a few countries that have the stadiums already built AND the infrastructure to host (extensive transportation networks, which includes highways and air/seaports and railways). Anything short of that costs billion$, which Brazil and RZA figured out.
A 20-32 year rotation (6-9 hosts) could realistically ONLY be combined-nation hosting by USA/MEX/CAN (2026), ENG/SCO/WAL, ESP/POR/MOR, GER, FRA/NED/BEL, JPN/KOR, CHL/ARG/PER, AUS/NZ, and maybe UAE, since they recently hosted and have the stadiums. BRA has let some of their stadiums… Read more »
Qatar hosted in 2022, not UAE.
Brazil’s stadiums are still far more developed than anywhere else in South America. China would also be very capable. GER/FRA would be enough.
I think anyone planning for an event in the decade starting 2030 and not using climate change as the sole KPI is playing with fate. I give LA a 50% chance of holding it and Brisbane a mere 20%. I have asked Grok to select host cities that must satisfy the following 3 conditions:
1) No coastal city since we have no idea how much sea level will rise just that it is going to rise.
2) No continental cities since Harbin which has the highest record of 28C recently hit 37C. Who knows how much it will rise by 2036.
3) No area which would be subject to flash flooding the like of which is seen… Read more »
This might be the most unhinged list I’ve ever seen lol.
Agree. You should also inquire into temperature of Worlds OW venue in Singapore! It might be boiling!
I think you might want to check your own temperature.
😀😃😄😁😆😅😂🤣
Brisbane 20% chance of hosting in 2032?
It is actually being held in winter (in the southern hemisphere) so no real chance of flooding or cyclones.
Would Nusantara really have the infrastructure and transportation network to be a host?
I would have to assume that a mega city being built effectively from scratch in the 21st century will have modern infrastructure and transportation to host large scale events as part of its core design principles. It’s going to have autonomous minibuses, and the goal is to have “80% of mobility” use public transport, cycling, and walking.
It’s all about timelines to me. Can they get done what needs to get done by 2036? I think so. And if they do, I can’t think of a more logical bid aside from returning to another recent host city.
Indonesian target is to be done by 2045…
The Olympics should ALWAYS be hosted in Greece.
I like this
Of course more members want to be involved so they can get paid under the table
Exactly
I hope that IOC will continue the process of requiring fewer permanent venues, so that host cities can create more cost-effective options. Among the welcome changes would be a way to convert facilities to more efficient use after the games, and to use that as the legacy of a hosted Olympics. That should be part of the venue planning for hosting: how the facilities will be scaled down and used for the greater good in the years after. It has been the tradition that a host builds or renovates a grand central stadium as a landmark of the Games, but recent hosts have downscaled or repurposed their stadiums for more equitable use. This can be applied to all hosts. For… Read more »
There is more to the world than the Eastern US.
I don’t understand why there is a requirement at all? If a games can be held to a certain standard with temporary venues then who cares? Be done with the fake economic angel the games pretends to be, just put on a great athletic games and the events and development will follow if it is apparent that it can be sustainable.