The Brazil World Cup: A Cautionary Tale

Entering the third week of World Cup 2014, predictions are still strong that Brazil, the host country, will be taking the cup this year. Indeed, Brazilians pride their country as the ‘soccer nation’. That, however, is also what makes the mass protests surrounding the Brazilian World Cup such an ironic and sad revelation of the true nature of international sports events.

“I think basically we thought that the benefits were evident and that the World Cup addresses our main sport, so that support and understand of the benefits would be almost automatic”, says Luis Fernandes, Brazil’s Deputy Minister of Sports, in an interview with LA Times.

But the track record of World Cup and Olympic games held around the world, especially in the developing world, increasingly suggests that the ‘benefits’ that appeared ‘evident’ almost never materialize after the games is over. Instead, what takes it place is often a trail of debts and under-utilized, white-elephant stadiums and infrastructure, and in some cases, dead bodies and displaced people.

History provides a wealth of examples: the 30-year debt that followed Montreal’s 1976 Olympic games, Greece’s abandoned softball stadium built in 2006, Beijing’s vacant Water Cube constructed for the 2008 Olympic, and South Africa’s Giraffe Stadium built for the 2010 World Cup.

In Brazil, the government has spent between US$11-14 billion in preparing the nation for the World Cup, a plan that included the construction or re-construction of 12 stadiums, each with a minimum capacity of 40,000 seats. The amount spent is grossly over the original budget, and Brazilians are angry as the expensive stadiums divert resources initially devoted to social programs, and increase taxpayers’ burdens.

On top of that, eight workers have died in the construction of the stadiums, and over 250,000 have been forcefully evicted from their homes to make room for the stadiums. Many are also protesting against the rampant corruption in the country, which was partly accountable for the ballooning costs.

But at the bottom of the problem of international sports events is the fact that the bodies that organize these events, namely FIFA and IOC, are for-profit monopolies, and nothing breeds corruption the way monopoly does. FIFA’s process for selecting host countries came under attack and scrutiny after news leaked out that FIFA accepted bribes from Qatar to select it as the host for the 2022 World Cup.

The scandal calls FIFA’s integrity into question. Most importantly, it reveals FIFA as a multinational that operates for its own interests, rather than for the interests of the soccer sport, the players, or the host countries.

It is becoming an increasingly well-known fact that FIFA imposes unreasonable demands on World Cup hosts, without providing any substantial support, and often serving FIFA officials’ self interests. For example, one has to question the necessity and sustainability behind FIFA and IOC’s demands for state-of-the-art sports facilities to be constructed for the games. Bear in mind that FIFA and IOC are not the ones responsible to pay the bills. Instead, it is the people of the host countries who most often end up shouldering the financial costs. And what does FIFA do in return for the hospitality of the host countries?

Five mini soccer pitches were built by FIFA around South Africa following the 2010 World Cup, a gesture corresponding to FIFA’s promise to promote soccer in the nation. Mr. Dale McKinley, a researcher based in Johannesburg, puts it best in an interview with BBC:

"A handful of projects were given World Cup money. They could have built a pitch in every school with the money they made. Why is Fifa so greedy?"

The same story is heard over and over again. FIFA, IOC, and the elites, such as real estate or construction contractors, in host countries benefit from international sports events, while the people suffer from the disruption, financial burdens, and soaring prices brought by the games.

It is important to recognize the true nature of the organizers of international sports events before countries jump in and bid for the right to host the game. It is especially crucial for developing countries, who have much greater costs to bear in order to ready their infrastructure and facilities for such games, and who are at a weaker position to negotiate with FIFA or IOC.

The Brazil World Cup, with all its problems, is a cautionary tale both for developing countries and international sports events organizing bodies: it is time for FIFA and IOC to reform and make the world’s most-loved sports events corruption-free, affordable, and sustainable.