Originally published on the CGS blog on August 14, 2014.
The Gauntlet of Doha
This summer, Jennifer and I had the chance to conduct independent research on a topic that deeply interested both of us: soccer. With palpable excitement in the US regarding the World Cup, Jennifer and I looked toward the 2022 iteration of the tournament as the legitimacy of FIFA’s decision to award the tournament to Qatar was called into question. Myriad issues sprung forward after Qatar was awarded the tournament, including climate, lack of infrastructure, and the treatment of laborers in Qatar. All of these, only complicated by seemingly dishonest behavior from FIFA in a string of match-fixing scandals, has many observers calling for change.
Jennifer and I were lucky that CGS encouraged us to pursue this lead and try to address the question, “What, if anything, should be done to change the 2022 World Cup?” Each of us had the chance to read through primary documents from FIFA and the Qatari bid committee, as well as dig into the effects previous World Cups have had on their host countries. The findings might counter some commonly-held assumptions about the benefits of stadiums and major tournaments. If you are skeptical of many of these events, you will likely have many of your initial thoughts confirmed.
After researching, Jennifer and I came to the conclusion that moving the World Cup would be advisable. Looking toward the future, Doha needs to construct nine new stadiums and do major renovations to three others. Accomplishing this in eight years is no small feat — and this is without considering the massive infrastructure overhaul that Qatar outlined in its bid. NGOs project that at its current pace, thousands of laborers would die from the hostile working conditions as Doha frantically tries to finish the projects.
Our best suggestion for a new host would be to share the World Cup between the United States in Canada. For the Canadians, this would be their first time hosting. For the US Soccer Federation, this would help them cultivate interest among America’s youth. Interestingly enough, the three most-populous countries on Earth are only casual fans of the world’s most popular sport; therefore, FIFA has much to gain from tapping the American market.
The US and Canada have plenty of stadiums that are prepared to host. Others would only require small renovations and, perhaps, some investment in infrastructure to accommodate a tournament of that scale. We outline in the paper numerous cities that could host the World Cup, but we confess that there are many other options.
All in all, Jennifer and I hoped to provide a paper that was illuminating, that lifted the veil often shrouding bureaucracy. Qatar is by no means the worst choice for a host country. In fact, both of us found their bid proposal rather compelling. We just think that 2026 might be more feasible for the small Gulf state.
We certainly have more questions that we would like to pursue regarding the economics of the World Cup, as well as the political impact, and football’s ability to change social norms. We’re curious fans more than formal scholars, but hope that to have nudged the scholarship forward in some way.
Of course, we thank Citizens for Global Solutions for the opportunity to research this and hope you find it insightful.
READ THE REPORT HERE.
