Observations on sustainability in sport, steeped in winter

Image credit: Joris Meier on Unsplash

It’s winter here in the northern hemisphere and, if you’re like me (working in sustainability, and lacking in vitamin D), you might be feeling a bit of gloom, and a bit of fatigue. But here’s the thing. Something has shifted in the sport and sustainability space recently, and I actually think it’s a healthy shift.

In short, the sector is moving away from broad narratives, and towards clearer proof. Less “look what we did”, more “here’s what changed”. Less activity, more outcomes. This piece shares three observations from my own work, and what I think they might mean for organisations around sport.

When I started out in the early 2000s, I found it hard to explain what I did. “Saving the world through sport” was my naive, oversimplified line. Back then, Sport and Development and Corporate Social Responsibility were gaining traction with a handful of sports organisations. The logic was simple: sport could play a role in addressing wider challenges in society. Done properly, it made business sense too, but it wasn’t only about business.

Interestingly, I remember having to convince clients to communicate this work at all. Since it grew out of philanthropy and charitable giving, modesty was often seen as a virtue. Reporting and communication didn’t fully settle in until the 2010s, when transparency, accountability, and shared learning started to matter more. At that point, “whitewashing” was already a term people used, and it certainly happened in sport. But “greenwashing”, and “sportwashing”, weren’t yet part of everyday language.

Fast-forward to today. These days, I work under the banner of sustainability, sometimes ESG, occasionally impact, but very rarely CSR or philanthropy. And while it’s easier to explain ethical business now, I also find myself having to justify the value of this work in a way I didn’t expect.

So how did we get here, and what does it mean for the sector? I think greenwashing has been one of the main culprits. That’s no great revelation. But I do find it fascinating how quickly sentiment has shifted, from organisations once being hesitant to share their “good” work, to many audiences now feeling sustainability fatigue. At the same time, I’m seeing several signs that the sector is starting to correct course.

Observation 1: We’re seeing a shift from activity narratives to outcome evidence

What I’m noticing most is a rebalancing. There is less reliance on narratives about actions alone, which can sometimes be mistaken for greenwashing, and more emphasis on evidence that shows outcomes and impact.

In recent months, a number of sports organisations have started describing a move towards an impact-focused approach, where outcomes (not just actions) sit at the centre of the work. In practical terms, this often means tightening targets, and rearticulating KPIs so they reflect results. It looks like moving away from quantitative measures such as “number of workshops delivered” or “guidance published”, and towards impact-oriented measures like “emissions per attendee” or “waste diversion rate”.

The goal is simple: make results more comparable across seasons and venues, and to reduce the risk of counting activity as success.

Observation 2: Sustainability has moved from a deal-breaker to a standard expectation

I was asked recently by a sports marketing agency to map the ESG ambition level of a set of clients, rights holders, peers, and owned events. The criteria covered things like the tools or frameworks being applied, partnerships, publication of targets, integration within the organisation, public evidence (reports, articles, and other information), and, where relevant, validation. The ambition levels were categorised as Minimum, Competitive, and Leading.

The signals were clear. A small set of credible, repeatable metrics across a few key levers – energy, transport, and materials/equipment – increasingly wins the day. We combined the desk research with internal interviews and found something important. Sustainability was no longer seen as a deal-breaker. However, it is now sought out in almost every RFP and due diligence process. That naturally loops back to the value of a strong, repeatable, outcome-focused KPI backbone.

For agencies in particular, sustainability is now part of compliance and risk management. But what’s interesting is that it still isn’t widespread best practice across the market. That creates a competitive opportunity. There is a real gap here to use sustainability as a credible USP, not as a slogan, but as something that helps attract investors, strengthen proposals, and recruit and retain talented employees.

Observation 3: Sustainability behaviours are becoming habitual, but advocacy is fading

I recently reviewed an athlete sustainability survey that had been conducted for the second time (the first being a few years earlier). What stood out was that almost all respondents believed climate change had already impacted their outdoor, winter sports. Education also seemed more embedded, with a higher proportion saying they learned about climate change or sustainability in school or university. Around four in five reported having made lifestyle changes to reduce their environmental impact.

So far, so good. But several indicators also pointed to something more mixed. A lower motivation to act publicly, or advocate actively. While most athletes still reported that they are willing to change their lifestyle, fewer described that willingness at the highest levels. Fewer also said they encourage others to make changes, and fewer were willing to participate in sustainability-focused social media campaigns run by their sports organisation.

Without anyone really noticing, sustainability behaviour has become more normal and more habitual, but, in parallel, people have become less inclined to speak up about it.

What this might mean for the sector: “headline” has become “hygiene”

In my eyes, these observations lead to one main conclusion: Too much emphasis on narrative alone has contributed to decreased trust, and a kind of sustainability fatigue. I think this has been intensified by wider societal trends too, polarisation, information overload, and a general hardening of public debate. It has made many of us a bit more thick-skinned than we were, with fewer of us willing to push these topics in the public domain.

Despite all of that, sustainability has also become more mainstream. In many settings, it has shifted from headline to hygiene. We may be less inclined to advocate for it, but that doesn’t mean we don’t feel the impact of environmental and societal issues, or the desire to address them. We still like positive news stories that demonstrate progress and contribution to wider goals; we crave them, but increasingly, we prefer to see them backed up with cold, hard facts.

And perhaps that’s the encouragement we need in winter, not that the mission has changed, but that the sector is slowly getting better at doing the work in a way that people can trust.