The Politics of Hosting the Olympic Games
The IOC is doing a feasibility assessment to enable the IOC Executive Board decide which stakeholders should be moved to a certain year of the Games after broad discussions about how to organize the Games (also known as ongoing dialogue). The IOC pays for opinion polls at the national, regional, and municipal levels. The feasibility study talks to groups like the IUCN for environmental issues and BSR for human rights, also considering “The Politics of Hosting the Olympic Games.”
This is in response to Olympic Agenda 2020 recommendation 2.6, which says that the IOC should get "... independent opinions of third parties (especially about sustainability and legacy) in relation to social, economic, and political circumstances; and Olympic Agenda 2020+5: Promoting Sustainable Olympic Games. The Host Contract (in English only) and its practical Conditions, which you may find on this website, explain in further detail the legal and practical requirements for hosting the Olympic Games.
No politician can be convinced to do anything, especially at medal ceremonies

The International Olympic Committee (IOC), National Olympic Committees (NOCs), and International Federations (IFs) are the three primary parts that make up the framework of the Games. The host country's government is not one of them. Even though the host nation's government has a stake in the home city's bid to host the Games, it doesn't sign the Host City Contract or invite the NOCs to take part. The IOC is the only group sending out the invitations.
The president of the IOC greets the head of state of the host country as they enter the stadium for the commencement of the sports event. After then, the president of the IOC and the head of state go to the official tribune. The head of state says the following to start the Games: About the Olympic Games: I start the Games of ... (host name), and in honor of the number of current Olympic games. It goes like this for the Winter Olympics: "I declare open the … (number of winter games) Winter Olympics of … (name of the host)."
Too much reliance on compensation, a strategy that causes problems

But Paris 2024 in the Shadow of Environmental Concerns says that the model of big international events might not always be right for the planet because of the event's environmental impact (like the use of resources, waste generation, and mass air transportation to get there) or the kinds of goods and services offered during the event (especially the use of single-use plastic products).
So, the people in charge decided to fix this compatibility issue. The organizers proudly announced in March 2021 that "the board of directors of the Paris 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games organizing committee has ratified the so-called climate strategy," which says that Paris 2024 will be the first Olympic and Paralympic Games to have a positive effect on the climate. [2]. In early June 2024, Georgina Grenon, the French head of environmental excellence for Paris 2024, informed the press that "it was in the DNA of Paris 2024 to organize more responsible Games." [3].
The people in charge have the tools they need to reach these goals

The three main goals of the environmental plan for the David Hockney Olympic Games in Munich in 1972 and Paris in 2024 are to cut down on greenhouse gas emissions, give significant support to projects that are good for the climate, and get stakeholders involved to make the activities have a bigger long-term effect. The first pillar says, "In total, Paris 2024 hopes to cut the emissions related to the event in half compared to previous editions." How?
Conclusion

Other levers are using low-carbon solutions in all site operations, renewable electricity at all sites, a plan for sustainable restoration, a responsible digital plan, using low-carbon materials in temporarily used equipment, and following the principles of the circular economy. Enedis's network of competition and non-competition sites that don't utilize diesel fuel to generate electricity would cut energy-related emissions by more than 80% and save 10,000 liters of diesel every order day, which is the same as 150 to 170 full tanks of gasoline.
The second pillar is even less persuasive because it is based on compensation, which is what the losers use to win. One such instance was Paris 2024, which made the mistake of mainly depending on the already controversial tactic of using compensation as the means of implementing the majority of the relevant environmental programs. To do this, it would "help with the CO2 avoidance or capture projects that are located on all five continents." These include things like giving improved stoves to people who still use basic cooking tools to keep the climate from getting worse and restoring and protecting forests and oceans, which are strong sinks of CO2.
Comments
Post a Comment