While the Olympic Games are more than just a sporting event, they are an opportunity for the best athletes in the world to compete on an internationa

Baron Pierre de Coubertin envisioned the modern Olympic Games as the focus of the world spotlight, and he purposely kept the four-year time span between Games so the spotlight would continue to burn bright long into the future. Given the continued interest and prestige of the Games today, de Coubertin and his collaborators would be well pleased. Every so often during the interlude between Olympic Games, the media focuses on an issue related to international sport and ultimately the Olympic Games. These areas of intense interest and speculation are a good starting point for discussing current Olympic policy issues.

Choosing a Host City or Region

Imagine this: the President of the IOC moves toward the microphone, paper in hand, to announce the successful bid for hosting the next Summer Olympic Games. You and other members of the Organizing Committee sit in the audience of the capacity-crowd press conference, thinking back over the long years of work spent on the bid: hundreds of meetings; millions of dollars or euros raised and a good sum spent; countless hours of attempting to convince citizens, city workers, and government officials of the value of bringing the Olympic Games home; visits by Olympic and IOC members; a massive enterprise coordinated. Yet, you still wait to hear if you won the bid to host the Olympic Games. The President of the IOC announces, “And the winner is….”

WWW

IOC Future Host Election

https://olympics.com/ioc/future-host-election

At the press conference to award the bid to host the Olympic Games, the stakes are immense because of the time and money invested as well as the potential for gain in achieving the bid. It is a nation’s chance to gain the world spotlight. Given this situation, it is easy to understand why the IOC procedures for awarding the bid to host are considered an important area for policy development. Policies must stipulate exactly how the decision will be made, what criteria will be used, and what the timeline will be. In this case, policies provide a framework for the bidding committee. What is important to the IOC in terms of staging the Olympic Games? Who will make the decision, and when will the decision be made? How can we position our bid to be held in the best possible regard by members of the IOC?

In recent years, the answer to these questions – and the overall process of selecting hosts for the Olympic Games – has not come without controversy. Rumors of IOC members accepting bribes of money, trips, gifts, and promises had been debated for years, but the December 1998 scandal that erupted as a result of alleged bribes associated with the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympic bid resulted in a thorough scrutiny and revision of the policies mandating the conduct of IOC members. In the past, the IOC did not condone IOC Bid Selection Committee members accepting gifts, but it also did little to monitor the policy. In effect, it produced a scenario where it appeared that the votes of IOC members had to be secured through bribes in order to win the bid. Organizing committees spent considerable time, money, and thought on planning how to best influence members of the IOC. However, the public outcry resulting from the Salt Lake City corruption allegations resulted in the IOC sanctioning those involved. Investigators discovered that the Salt Lake City Bid Committee paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash, gifts, travel, and medical aid to IOC members. In the end, four IOC violators resigned, six were expelled, and ten received official warnings by the IOC President.

The corruption scandal related to the Games host selection was one of the developments that added pressure to an IOC already facing increased criticism for its host selection process. The process was perceived as too costly, too complex, and left too many losing bidders who would then be discouraged to bid again. In response to this criticism, the IOC mapped out a comprehensive reform of the host selection policy in its Olympic Agenda 2020. The goal of the new approach to host selection was to invite interested parties to develop projects that best fit their own needs. Rather than adapting the host city/region to the Games, the new approach would require the Games to adapt to the city/region. The host-centric approach, so the IOC argued, would make it more appealing for interested parties to apply to host the Games given they can “create Olympic projects that are less expensive and that maximise operational efficiencies, while also unlocking greater value for future hosts, with a strong emphasis on legacy and sustainability” (IOC, 2022d, para. 5).

With a new approach, titled “The New Norm,” the IOC outlined a set of 118 reforms that re-envision the delivery of the Games. These reforms aim to reduce cost for bidding, provide more flexibility for planning (e.g., getting rid of rigid bidding deadlines, considering multiple cities as potential host cities within a country), and guarantee opportunities for ongoing dialogue between the organization and parties interested in hosting the Games, such as cities, regions, countries, or NOCs. Among the most significant changes were the creations of two Future Host Commissions, one for the Summer Games and one for the Winter Games, each tasked with overseeing interest in the Games and advising the IOC Executive Board. The Commissions also guide interested parties in developing host proposals that aligned with their long-term development goals. The Commissions also plays a crucial role in the new streamlined approach for the bidding process:

WWW

IOC’s “The New Norm” Reforms for Host Selection

https://olympics.com/ioc/news/the-new-norm-it-s-a-games-changer

the Informal Exchange phase, during which interested cities/regions can learn more about the selection process. The IOC will provide contextual advice on how to develop a strong bid (the Future Host Commission is not involved at this stage).

the Continuous Dialogue phase, a non-committal phase where Future Host Commissions work with interested cities/regions to explore how feasible hosting the Games would be in the specific cities/regions, aligning ideas for the bid with local long-term goals for development of the cities/regions (e.g., highlighting opportunities and challenges). This phase includes developing an initial strategy for venues, funding, games delivery, and alignment with Olympic Agenda 2020+5 recommendations, but no submission of formal documents to the IOC is required. However, at the end of this phase, the IOC Executive Board can invite interested hosts to open a targeted dialogue (see next phase) based on recommendations made by the respective Future Host Commission. Up until this point, interested hosts do not have to specify the specific edition they intend to apply for (e.g., 2034 Games).

the Targeted Dialogue phase, where interested parties go through a defined process to explore hosting a specific edition of the Games. This is where the Future Host Commission works with the potential hosts to conduct detailed assessments of their plans for hosting the Games (this may include a visit to the bidding city/region) and submits a report to the IOC Executive Board that addresses all essential elements for hosting the mega event. Based on this report, the IOC Executive Board then decides what potential host(s) to put up for election by the IOC Session. If an election is called by the IOC Session, the preferred host(s) participate in a consultation meeting to discuss their plans and make a final presentation to the Session (immediately following a separate final presentation of the Future Host Commission).

You may be wondering what criteria interested hosts will be judged on. During the Targeted Dialogue phase, all preferred