As the International Olympic Committee (IOC) prepares to elect its next president, the seven candidates vying for the role have laid out their visions for the future of the Olympic Movement. While their manifestos cover a range of topics – including governance, sustainability, and athlete welfare – each candidate presents a unique perspective on how future host cities will be selected, supported, and shaped by their policies.
Here’s how the key proposals could impact cities bidding for and hosting the Olympic Games.
Lord Sebastian Coe: greater accountability for host cities
Coe introduces a bold governance reform: an initial four-year presidential term with a confidence vote for renewal. If implemented, this could create a more dynamic leadership approach that holds the IOC accountable to its promises – something host cities have long demanded.
His emphasis on modernising the Olympic brand and broadcasting strategies also suggests a stronger focus on ensuring host cities benefit from global media engagement, helping them maximise commercial and tourism opportunities.
Kirsty Coventry: athlete-centric host cities
Coventry’s manifesto prioritises athlete welfare, which could influence how host cities plan their venues, accommodations, and support services.
She also calls for leveraging AI and digital platforms to enhance engagement with younger audiences. For host cities, this could mean greater emphasis on interactive fan zones, esports integrations, and digital-first engagement strategies to make the Games more appealing to the next generation.
Johan Eliasch: sustainability and flexibility in hosting
Eliasch is the most radical when it comes to rethinking the structure of the Games. He proposes a rotational hosting model for the Winter Olympics, where specific cities or regions would repeatedly host the event. This would significantly reduce costs and environmental impact, making the Winter Games more accessible to cities that struggle with long-term infrastructure investments.
Additionally, his manifesto calls for a complete review of all sports and event formats to enhance their appeal to fans – potentially leading to changes that affect venue requirements and the commercial viability of hosting.
HRH Prince Feisal Al Hussein: a more inclusive bidding process
Prince Feisal emphasises modernising and democratising the Olympic bidding process. His proposal to raise the IOC membership age limit from 70 to 75 could allow for greater continuity in the Games’ strategic direction.
For host cities, a notable idea is the creation of an "Olympic Agenda 2036," which includes integrating cultural festivals into the Youth Olympic Games. This would encourage cities to rethink their event planning beyond just sporting venues, potentially making the Games a broader cultural and tourism initiative.
David Lappartient: more transparent selection and host representation
Lappartient focuses on governance reforms that could reshape how cities are chosen to host the Games. He proposes:
His emphasis on broader participation in IOC decisions could make the host selection process more transparent and inclusive.
Juan Antonio Samaranch: restoring full member voting for hosts
Samaranch seeks to return Olympic host city selection to a full IOC membership vote, reversing recent changes that shifted the decision-making power to the Executive Board.
This would bring greater transparency and competition back to the bidding process. Cities bidding for future Games would need to engage more directly with the entire IOC membership rather than focusing on a smaller group of decision-makers.
Morinari Watanabe: a multi-host Olympic model
Watanabe presents the most dramatic change for host cities: a decentralised Olympic model, where the Games are hosted simultaneously across multiple continents. This approach aims to:
If implemented, this would completely reshape how cities approach Olympic bidding and planning, moving from a single-city model to a shared responsibility between regions or nations.
what’s at stake for future host cities?
While all candidates recognise the need for sustainability, financial viability, and inclusivity, their approaches differ significantly. Some, like Samaranch and Lappartient, advocate for greater transparency in the bidding process, while others, like Eliasch and Watanabe, propose fundamental changes to how and where the Games are hosted.
For cities considering a bid, these manifestos highlight key questions:
The next IOC president’s policies will shape not just the future of the Games, but also the cities that host them.
