How Olympic cities are selected | Explained

India joins five other countries in race for 2036 Olympics. New process focuses on flexibility, sustainability and cost-effectiveness. India yet to decide city/cities for hosting. Mexico only one to have hosted before. Other potential bidders include Egypt, Seoul, China, Qatar, Hungary, Italy, Denmark, Canada and Germany. India has hosted several single-sport competitions, regional South Asian Games in 2016 and Asian Games in 1951 and 1982.

The story so far: Prime Minister Narendra Modi publicly declared India’s intention to host the Olympic Games, preferably in 2036, during the opening ceremony of the 141st International Olympic Committee (IOC) session in Mumbai on October 14. He also mentioned India’s ambition to host the Youth Olympics in 2029 although the quadrennial event is currently scheduled for 2030. Only three Asian countries have ever hosted the Olympics — China, South Korea and Japan, with Japan hosting the games twice in 1964 and 2020. With India throwing its hat into the ring, there are at least five confirmed countries interested in hosting the 2036 Games and nine others reportedly in various stages of preparations and discussions internally and with the IOC. If India does manage to outbid the competition, it will be the first big-ticket multi-discipline sporting event in the country since the controversy-marred Commonwealth Games (CWG) in 2010.

In the older system of electing an Olympic host, cities, through their respective national Olympic committees, would submit a letter of interest to the IOC to start a multi-year, multi-step evaluation process. The bidding cities would complete a series of questionnaires, evaluated by the IOC. The second step of the process involved scrutiny from the IOC Evaluation Commission and a series of inspections of all venues before the final bids are put to vote at an IOC session, ending in a host being decided seven years in advance as per the Olympic Charter. It often led to excessive spending among the bidders, to secure rights, often ending in huge debts, corruptions and scandals.

However, after Thomas Bach took over as the IOC president in 2013, he put in place the Olympic Agenda 2020, as a roadmap for the future of the Olympic Movement, approved by the 2014 IOC session. One part of the agenda dealt with a new process for host city selection, called the ‘new norm’, that was officially adopted during the 2019 IOC session in Lausanne.

The new process placed emphasis on three main aspects — flexibility, sustainability and cost-effectiveness — with the motto being ‘The Games adapt to the region, the region does not adapt to the Games’.

With respect to flexibility, the seven-year rule was done away with and there has been greater flexibility in deciding the hosts — the IOC has said that the 2036 edition could be decided even as late as after 2030. In contrast, Paris and Los Angeles were selected through a tripartite agreement in 2017 that assured both countries hosting rights in 2024 and 2028 respectively, giving Los Angeles 11 years to prepare. Brisbane too was named host for the 2032 edition in 2021, 11 years ahead. There is now a two-stage process — a continuous dialogue and a targeted dialogue — without any fixed deadlines, to assess, discuss and guide potential hosts.

The continuous dialogue is a non-committal stage not specific to any particular edition. It is basically a discussion between the IOC’s Future Hosts Commission (FHC) and interested parties about the hosts’ vision for the Games, its purpose and long-term legacy. This is followed by putting together a master plan and working out logistical details, with every potential host free to work out their own template. Also, unlike the past, the Games can be planned to be held across cities or even in conjunction with another country. The FHC includes athletes, international federations, national Olympic committees and the international paralympic committee. Once there is seriousness in a bid to progress to the next level, it will enter the ‘targeted dialogue’ phase with the interested parties termed ‘preferred host’. However, unlike in the past when a party, once rejected, would be discouraged from bidding again, now the other interested parties can continue continuous dialogue for future events.

In a targeted dialogue, the bids become more determined. While there is again no time-frame for a targeted dialogue, it is anticipated to not exceed 12 months. It explores the proposals to host a specific edition of the Olympic Games and brings the IOC’s executive board into the picture for detailed discussions. This is where each of the ‘preferred hosts’ answer the FHC’s questions and provides guarantees on infrastructure, accommodation, security and public services among others and makes the final submission. The FHC then prepares an advisory report for the executive board which has the power to either recommend a single host or shortlist more than one for elections by the IOC members.