In 2030, Morocco, Portugal and Spain – with Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay hosting the three opening matches – will host the world’s biggest football tournament. It will be the first time that a World Cup will be held across three continents. Despite calls from Amnesty International to make the awarding of the tournament conditional upon the development of a more credible human rights strategy, FIFA has pressed on.
Complacency from bidding nations
Each of the nations was required to commission an independent human rights risk assessment and deliver a human rights strategy. Amnesty International confirmed to DW that Morocco took the assessment seriously and delivered a rigorous piece of work. Spain and Portugal, however, were complacent, delivering reports that were broad rather than specifically focused on risks around the World Cup.
It said that while Morocco’s human rights strategy was detailed, it lacked governmental commitment to change, which is particularly relevant given that same-sex acts in Morocco are a crime, something an independent FIFA evaluation of Morocco’s previous bid (2026) noted was “particularly problematic.” Portugal’s strategy was focused on work groups assessing problems rather than specifics, and Spain just didn’t submit one.
“The fact FIFA didn’t remark on that was a strong indication that this was a predetermined outcome and so human rights criteria can fall by the wayside,” Stephen Cockburn, head of Labour Rights and Sport at Amnesty International, told DW.
“There are significant risks, and they could be addressed if they were taken seriously, and then you could leave a positive legacy. You need governments and FIFA to be proactive about it and that’s not the impression you get from reading the human rights strategies.”
Qatar scrutiny has helped
There are concerns from labor and trade unions in all three main host countries. In Portugal and Spain, there is an affordable housing crisis as well as racial discrimination issues and cases of alleged excessive use of police force that have been the subject of numerous complaints by domestic and foreign football fans.
“A lot of people look at a World Cup in Spain and Portugal and say there is no issue, why would there be? Sometimes people are shocked by what we do highlight,” Cockburn said. “The World Cup can bring these issues to light. Ideally, there should be a police force more into dialogue than baton charges – that would be a great legacy.”
A 2023 investigation by Spanish newspaper El Periódico found unsafe working conditions at the site of Barcelona’s Nou Camp Stadium, a report that helped changed views in Spain.
“It made people realize it’s not just Qatar and that we can’t be complacent about labour rights,” Cockburn said.
The Amnesty official believes the scrutiny on Qatar did a make difference. Even if the legacy of that tournament is mixed because reforms came too late and many suffered and are still suffering, changes in law helped change lives. Now, that impact is being seen in the consideration of human rights in the bid reports. The key now is to get a binding commitment.
“We did that work because we didn’t believe the official approach would go that deep – and we were right,” Cockburn said of the comprehensive Amnesty report evaluating the human rights issues of the 2030 and 2034 bids.
“There’s no reason FIFA or football associations couldn’t have commissioned someone to do this work.
“We are driven by the fact these tournaments can make a difference if they are done right. If we can use this process to make some change then it’s always worth trying but it would be very nice if FIFA would help,” he said. “Because people will die if they don’t take responsibility and make these decisions.”
An emissions nightmare
Perhaps a more obvious concern regarding the 2030 tournament is the distances that will have to be traveled, In FIFA’s evaluation report, the world governing body estimated the “carbon footprint of the 2030 tournament would be 3.5 million tons CO2-equivalent.”
For Stefan Gössling, a professor of Tourism Research at Sweden’s Linnaeus University, three and a half million is really significant.
“That’s many small countries together,” Gössling told DW. “In 2030, we want to halve global emissions. This type of event is a danger to that.”
Gössling believes a complete reframing is required.
“Maybe have a World Cup every year, but on a different continent and just for the people on that continent. Then everyone is involved but we bring emissions down significantly,” Gössling said.
“They [private jets] have 20-30 times the emissions than commercial flights. We need someone to start with the wealthiest to give people a sense of social justice.”
Furthermore, Gössling would like to see the real cost of flying be implemented.
“The problem with air travel in particular is that we don’t have internalized negativity. Emissions are climate change, climate change is damage, damage is cost, but we don’t see that. If we had a true cost of flying, including the damage and the social cost, a lot of people would stop flying. The rich cause that cost and the poor pay for it. We need to internalize that cost.”
Change is coming
“Governments are struggling to bring down emissions in line with the Paris Agreement, so how can it be so easy for FIFA to find ways achieve this? We need to be a bit more critical. There is no excuse for emissions anymore,” Gössling said.
Cockburn believes the landscape is changing though, and there is a growing movement of people wanting to watch football but not at any cost. Beyond that, questions will be asked of FIFA’s ability to regulate itself and the actions or inactions of football associations. In any case, the legacy of the 2030 World Cup should not be forgotten in light of the focus on the tournament in Saudi Arabia four years later.
Edited by: Chuck Penfold
