There’s bucket-loads going on. You may want to treat this a bit like a magazine - pick a section or two you are interested in to start with, and come back for others after. Sections in this newsletter:
As ever, comments, corrections, and feedback are all welcome!
Fran
Future generations
“our decisions, actions, and inactions today, have an intergenerational multiplier effect … present generations, carry a responsibility towards future generations to act with their interests in mind.”
From the new draft UN Declaration on Future Generations
Looking back, it now seems absurd that cigarette companies were sponsors of the World Cups in 1982 and 1986. Future generations will no doubt look back in the same way on oil companies partnering with FIFA for World Cups. In 2018 it was Gazprom and now Aramco have been announced as a partner for World Cups.
We know we must transition away from fossil fuel use, and it’s clear fossil fuel companies will not change. Future generations will look to understand our decisions, actions, and inactions in response to this announcement.
Expect to hear more on this story in future newsletter posts. In the meantime read also: Amnesty International, Fossil Free Football, Greenpeace and Sports Politika. Further coverage by Forbes, SportsPro, The BBC, The Mirror, AP News, Trouw. And comments by Dan Roan BBC Sports Editor, and also Ricardo Fort.
Clubs Round-Up
Earth Day events, messages, comms and activities have come from clubs including: Arsenal, Juventus, Spurs, Rotherham United, Vorwärts Spoho (who are also taking part in one of the events listed below), and also the Mexican Football Federation.
Also for Earth Day, Nicola Pearson of BBC Sport has looked at what the 20 Premier League club’s are doing to become more sustainable.
Elsewhere:
Arsenal. In Kenya, teams supported by the club took part in an annual tournament, alongside promoting tree planting.
Brentford have published the results of a fan survey on sustainability while Brentford fans organised a cycle ride to watch Brentford Women FC in action.
Bristol Sport clubs and Ashton Gate Stadium have hosted green matches as part of ‘Project Whitebeam’.
Club Brugge has an average of more than 2,000 cycling fans at every home game and the club are looking to improve their offer to them. (p.s. It would be great to see a table with data on the scale of cycling to different grounds).
Colchester United Community Foundation on installing solar panels.
Forest Green Rovers. ‘Football’s greenest club had dreams that weren’t sustainable. The hope is they are recyclable’. A well put together piece in The Athletic.
Liverpool have won an industry environmental sustainability award.
Manchester City. A new video promoting Etihad Airways has had over 10 million views. Imagine the power a video of the players cycling or taking a coach could have?
Notts County Community Trust on encouraging young people to think about Smart Energy Usage.
Swansea City are introducing reusable cups and have announced a new recycling partner.
Watford now have a sustainability range section on their website and also have a prize for fans to win for logging their journey details on their sustainability platform
Wolves are moving to reusable cups, with their hospitality partners Levy also making a donation from the sale of reusable cups on a matchday.
Women’s World Cup 2027 decision
On 17th May, a FIFA Congress of national member associations will meet in Bangkok. The agenda will include a vote on who will host the Women’s World Cup 2027. There are two bids remaining. A joint Belgium-Netherlands-Germany (BNG) bid and a Brazil bid. The joint USA-Mexico (USM) bid has just been withdrawn.
Before the vote, a Bid Evaluation Report will be published. In the meantime here are some of my own notes, focusing solely on environmental sustainability …
Both the Brazil and BNG bids include environmental sustainability within their vision. The Brazil bid says “ We want to return to the forefront as a leading nation in Environmental Sustainability … The aim of Brazil 2027 is to provide the world and Brazilians with an environmentally, financially and socially sustainable World Cup”. The BNG bid aims to deliver a compact and “sustainable tournament: Our experience in sustainability, innovation and technology will come together to deliver solutions that can be replicated around the world”.
Brazil’s venues are geographically spread out, with flights required between match locations. For BNG, no in-tournament flights will be needed. Neither of the bids involve building new stadiums and no bids provide any estimates of the emissions that will be caused by the tournament (it’s not a requirement to do so, which is a flaw in the process). A tournament in Brazil would take place during a cooler period in the year, and the BNG bid says that the countries have “a temperate climate that is characterised by moderate temperatures and low humidity in summer”. Neither address potential extreme weather risks (the USM bid did have a section on this).
Each bidder will have the opportunity to present their case at the FIFA Congress. It will be interesting to hear how they incorporate environmental sustainability into this, and how this informs the voting. That said, we should expect the unexpected in how FIFA takes the process forward - there may be plot twists in decision-making before or at Congress, as we have already seen with the US and Mexico dropping out of bidding at a late stage.
Finally, it’s important to note that I’ve only looked at one of the many aspects of the bids, and with less of an expert eye than others will have. So I realise these notes have limitations, and if anyone has further or different insights please do share.
Football Governance Bill
The UK Government's plans to create a new Independent Football Regulator were discussed in Parliament last week. As previously noted, the plans currently contain no reference to environmental sustainability. Speaking during the debate, Labour MP, Jeff Smith said:
“I would have liked to see some reference to environmental sustainability. We all need to play our part for the future of the planet”.
The plans now move on to the “committee stage”, where there are further opportunities for interventions on the proposals. Parliament has issued a call for evidence to support its work. Let’s see if there are any further developments from here! And for a more general update on the progress of the Bill, see this report from the Football Supporters’ Association.
Other news round-up
The Climate Captains project aims to empower 100 football clubs across Europe to launch climate justice initiatives. 12 EFL Trusts are already on board. Community Sports Trusts at Carlisle United, Northampton Town, and Rotherham United are among those who have already launched fan surveys.
Players
Tom Davies of Sheffield United, talking environment to BBC Match of the Day, as part of the ‘Nature-Based Blades’ project.
Protect Where We Play. Features players including Alexei Rojas of Arsenal FC and Daphné Corboz of Paris FC. You can too contribute too.
Sampdoria’s Morten Thorsby was interviewed on changing football’s relationship with the environment.
How climate change, a ‘threat multiplier,’ is affecting the future of sport. The article has an interview with, and a short video from, Madeleine Orr who has a book out next week on Warming Up: How Climate Change is Changing Sport.
Writer, David Goldblatt is interviewed by ESPN on Football's climate change threat: Flooded stadiums, too hot to train.
Action FC on the need for more transparency and reporting around the actions clubs are taking.
Two new Football For Future blogs to check out. One on engaging communities, the other on engaging journalists.
Rome's Frecciarossa Italian Cup Final will be centred around sustainability initiatives including encouraging public transport and carpooling.
The Premier League Chief Executive has said “The feedback we have from players is that there is too much football being played and there is constant expansion”, while also noting that the door is ajar to the Premier League playing competitive games overseas. The Premier League also plans for its own Summer Series in the US to return next year. Less games and less travel would be better for players and the environment.
The Times notes that the FA is exploring rule change to ban clubs from globetrotting post-season friendlies. It appears that this is only in relation to the immediate period at the end of a season (before major tournaments take place). There is a need to also look at the extensive and growing programme of global pre-season friendlies throughout the Summer.
'What do football fans think and say about climate change?'A University of Bath survey (with a chance to win a prize for those who complete it!)
The ISO standard for event sustainability management has been updated. I’m not clear what this means in practice. It would great to see something written on this in plain English. Any takers?
Events
Big impact with limited resources - sustainability in grassroots sports clubs. An online seminar on 15th May. Participants include Leicester Nirvana FC.
Green Pitch: New Frontiers for Sustainable Football Conference organised by UCL Institute of Finance & Technology in London on the 31st May.
Big clubs emissions data
In the UK, all clubs defined as ‘large companies’ are required to report certain data on their emissions and energy use. This does not cover all the emissions that are a result of their activities. ‘Scope 3’ emissions, which cover the lion’s share of emissions, are not required to be reported, and most do not.
Hopefully, in future years, we have better data to work with. That said, we now have up to four years’ worth of data for 27 clubs, and some clubs have provided some extra Scope 3 data. What does this tell us?
I’ve put it all into a single spreadsheet for others to access and analyse. If anyone with an expert eye wants to write a guest post on it here, and/or correct it, that would be fantastic. Drop me a line. In the meantime, here are my first observations:
Comparisons between clubs are not possible as each is using a different methodology. The data is gathered and presented by different clubs in many different ways, and sometimes changes in approach within a club in different years. This makes it difficult to identify any overall trends, but below are a first attempt at some.
We don’t know the true scale of emissions from these clubs, and we are still far away from finding out. Only 5 of 27 clubs have so far gone beyond the minimum reporting requirements and tried to establish a fuller picture. Elsewhere, lots of businesses do voluntarily report scope 3 emissions. The recent Premier League commitment to develop a dataset by 2025/26 could help, but there is a lack of detail, pace, and teeth to this so far.
From the limited data we do have, the decarbonising of football appears to be very off-track and concerns should be rising. 14 out of 26 clubs have seen their emissions go up in the last year. 9 out of 20 clubs have seen their emissions go up over the four years. Of the 20 clubs for which we have 4 years’ worth of data, emissions have been reduced by only 3.4%. Or just over 1% per year. This is way too slow. At the same time, the UK economy has reduced emissions by 9% between 2019 and 2022, and (provisionally) 5.4% in the past year.
The biggest clubs could do more to lead the way. Arsenal, Chelsea, and Manchester United only report the most basic emissions data and have no targets. Liverpool and Manchester City produce bespoke emissions reports not in line with GHG Protocol, which leads to the potential for very different interpretations of the data they present. Spurs, who report in line with this protocol, have seen their emissions go up 11% in the last year. Liverpool, Manchester City and Spurs, who do have emissions targets, do not appear to be on track to meet them.
The focus on inputs, initiatives and activities needs to urgently shift to a focus on impacts and outcomes. Nearly all clubs have an environmental policy, statement or strategy. But only 7 out of 28 clubs have stated any published targets for emissions reduction (all are net zero targets). Targets are needed from all clubs as well as the plans to deliver on them, which are also lacking.
Clubs are becoming more energy-hungry. Over the four years, 15 of 19 clubs have increased their energy use, and in the last year, 18 of 25 clubs have seen their energy use increase. This is against a backdrop of the UK Government's ambition to reduce energy demand by 15% by 2030. A more granular understanding of why this is happening is important too.
European Club Association (ECA)
The ECA is an industry association for football clubs. It is the sole independent body for clubs that is recognised by UEFA and FIFA. Its ‘Ordinary members’ - those competing regularly in Europe - can vote on all its matters, and thus have the most say in its direction. It is separate from the Union of European Clubs, a recently formed body for non-elite professional football clubs.
There is no independent expert assessment of the ECA’s sustainability work, though it would be great if an organisation such as InfluenceMap could add it into its work on industry associations. In the meantime, a few observations …
The new ECA sustainability strategy has a dual focus. Firstly, sustainability within the ECA itself as an organisation. And secondly, supporting the sustainability efforts of its members.
In assisting member clubs, the ECA strategy is focused on helping clubs meet existing rules and requirements. This should help improve consistency across clubs and opportunities to share and follow best practices. What is less clear is what the ECA is advocating and lobbying for on behalf of its members regarding future policy.
The ECA focuses on “safeguarding, strengthening and developing European clubs’ interests … in all international football affairs and decision-making” So, for instance, what is the ECA’s position on UEFA’s planned “codes of conduct for business relationships aligned with environment commitment”? And what is ECA’s position on the upcoming review of UEFA’s sustainability strategy planned for 2025? Will ECA be arguing for a much more ambitious strategy with new policies, or something more incremental? Beyond football, the ECA is also engaging with the EU. Will the ECA, for instance, add its voice to concerns about the future of the European Green Deal? What other EU policies might it seek to influence on behalf of its members?
The ECA has unique access and powerful resources to put its voice across on environmental issues compared to both smaller clubs and fans’. How should these other groups best go about ensuring their voices are taken into account too?
A final aside. The strategy says “ECA identifies approximately 150 members within the scope of the EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD)”. This could provide an opportunity to develop a “European Football CSRD tracker” of top clubs. Is anyone up for starting some thinking on what that might do, and look like? Give me a shout if you are.
See you again in about a fortnight, unless anything pops up in the meantime!
Fran James (he/him)
Football and Climate Change Newsletter
footballandclimatechange@gmail.com
LinkedIn | Twitter