Hosting a global mega-event like the World Cup offers an opportunity to supercharge development in Seattle. But history shows that such events can also leave a legacy of unanticipated harm and unfulfilled benefits. 

Can Seattle channel hosting into community-centered progress our city sorely needs? By learning from the past, we believe Seattle can avert the risks, realize the benefits, and turn three weeks of hosting into years of benefits. 

Considerations for the Cup

Amid goals and gold medals, mega-event preparation can magnify a local population’s daily challenges, shift priorities away from people in need, and exacerbate deeper struggles. But many communities have translated hosting into community investments that yielded amazing events AND long-term advancements for all:

Past fouls:

• Paris’ 2024 Olympics opened in chaos when “coordinated malicious” sabotage disrupted travel nationally. Before that, Paris almost doubled transit prices for the duration of the Olympics and Paralympics (July 20-September 8.) The rise may have annoyed some, but it could have severely strained many riders.
• The U.S.’ 2024 Copa America–essentially a World Cup hosting dress rehearsal ended in chaos when Miami crowds waiting to enter the championship erupted into a stampede. Almost 8,000 unticketed people forced their way into the stadium, leading to a stampede, arrests, and injuries. 
• Qatar’s 2022 World Cup was marred by labor and human rights abuses.
• Russia’s 2018 World Cup and Sochi’s 2014 Olympics saw deforestation and pollution.
• Rio de Janeiro’s 2016 Olympics and Brazil’s 2014 World Cup displaced residents and overspent on venues still under-used.
• South Africa evicted thousands in preparation for the 2010 World Cup.
• Atlanta’s 1996 Olympics displaced many residents and businesses who never recovered.

Past scores:

• Germany’s 2024 Euro Cup relied on existing infrastructure to host, avoiding the costs and environmental impact of building new stadiums. 
• Tokyo’s 2020 Olympics “greening” initiatives used rainwater and renewable energy to power venues.
• South Africa’s 2010 World Cup and Sydney’s 2000 Olympics celebrated Indigenous populations prominently and in a non-exploitative way. 
• Barcelona’s 1992 Olympics “holistically” revitalized still thriving neighborhoods, especially along the waterfront.

Insights for Impact

These examples offer a critical lesson for anticipating risks and translating event preparation into community gain: Hosting usually promises huge benefits through rapid preparation and development. But, preparations meant to help communities can actually harm them for decades to come, leaving people worse off than before the event.

For Seattle, the case studies illuminate particular risks:

• Housing: Preparation often prioritizes visitors, but sudden influxes may translate into short- and long-term housing shortages and local displacement.
• Costs: Locals already struggle with the region’s cost of living, but prices tend to rise during event preparation, further straining the economic environment.
• Infrastructure: Building the new should balance bolstering the existing environment and ensuring new developments are accessible, sustainable, and useful, especially for neighborhoods in need.
• Culture: Preparations can sterilize and homogenize richly diverse neighborhoods. In an already rapidly gentrifying Seattle, preparations must preserve and uplift our unique neighborhoods.
• Public safety: World Cup plans call for higher police presence to ensure safety for visitors and locals alike. But more police–especially in minority communities–may not feel like safety to all, especially in a city already struggling with its police relationship.

Seattle World Cup preparations are well underway, and the local Organizing Committee has announced partnerships and initiatives for inclusivity and sustainability that recognize the first and future people calling this region home. Additionally, Seattle avoided a common preparation pitfall in not redirecting billions to a new stadium. 

But many social impact questions remain, and their answers could lead to either help or harm. Like how will we welcome ~750,000 fans when we only have ~43,000 hotel rooms in King County; meanwhile, around 16,000 people experience homelessness on any given night?

For such big questions ahead of a big event, Seattle needs big goals and a lot of teamwork. A clear social impact plan and vision could help answer those questions, especially if it centers Seattle’s context alongside past case studies. For example, instead of mass displacement, maybe preparations could offer long-term housing to many locals experiencing homelessness.

Mega event preparations have left many well-intentioned hosts with shiny stadiums and inconvenient transit lines sitting unused after the whistles blew and fans left. Those hosts prioritized short-term events over long-term community needs, leaving a lasting legacy of decades of debt, local displacement, and even horrific human rights abuses, particularly hurting already underserved communities. 

Some of those risks remain for Seattle, evidenced by transit preparations facing delays and public safety discussions anchored in increasing police presence. Meanwhile, the World Cup spotlight will shine brightest on some of Seattle’s oldest, culturally richest, and most underserved neighborhoods, like Pioneer Square and the International District. 

Preparation is off to a great start and is in great hands, but it’s hard for any city to withstand the pressure of an event like the World Cup. However, it can be a winning experience for all with a clear social impact strategy that learns from past examples of translating short-term tournaments into long-term gain without compromising community equity. Of course, Seattle cannot actually win a World Cup on the field; but all of us can win for decades to come by planning today.