As presented by Cantelon & Letters (2000) in their article “The Making of IOC Environmental Policy as the Third Dimension of the Olympic Movement,” environmentalism has become an increasingly important part of international culture, and something that international organizations such as the IOC must be able to adapt to. Cantelon & Letters (2000) use the example of the 1992 Albertville Winter Olympics in France as a turning point of environmental policy. As the construction of the Olympic facilities had an increasingly negative impact upon the natural environment of Albertville, international criticism was turned towards the IOC, forcing them to adapt to become more environmentally conscious. Luckily, the organizing committee of the Lillehammer games was able to adapt very quickly to a more “green” mentality, and as a result, in many ways, the IOC also adopted those same values.
While there is certainly much to be said about the local influence on a global organization in this case, that is not what caught my attention in regards to this article. Instead, it is the failure of the Albertville games and the subsequent need to adopt a “green” mentality. It seems to me that, without the negative backlash against the Albertville games, the IOC would have continued to act environmentally irresponsibly. This is evidenced by the fact that, although the Albertville games stressed that they were striving to maintain the area’s beauty, however, it is unclear that anything was actually being done to preserve the local ecosystems. One could certainly assume from that press release that the IOC was simply trying to save face. Therefore, my question becomes, if the Albertville games did not receive such negative coverage, would environmentalism have become the third dimension of the Olympic movement? I have say no, however, the silver lining of this scenario remains that out of disaster came a learning experience and a chance to make things better for the future, and it certainly appears that the IOC has embraced this opportunity.
Another question that was raised by this article is whether the IOC would have been able to implement a policy of environmentalism if not for Lillehammer hosting the next winter Games. It seems to me that Lillehammer was the ideal host city to implement 'green' technologies, but the IOC really lucked out that Lillehammer had won the bid. What would have happened if they had not? I wonder if another bid city would have paved the way for a stricter environmental policy.
ReplyDeleteThe environmental issues in the Olympics reminded me what was happened in the 2008 Beijing Olympics. Before the Beijing Olympic Game start, many athletes refused to take part in the games, because they considered the severe pollution in China. I can understand, even though I think they were over-reaction. Honestly, the pollution in Beijing is really serious comparing to Bowling Green. The sky always looks gray in Beijing. But the Chinese government shut down most of the factories around Beijing before one year of the Olympics. When I traveled to Beijing in Dec. 2007, the sky was so blue and the air was so fresh. Also, for the Olympic venues, the recycling materials and the “green products” have been used. One of the slogans for the Beijing Olympic was the “Green Olympics”.
ReplyDelete