Scholarlink

<p>This paper presents a comparative legal analysis of the host city agreements for the 2026 FIFA World Cup and the 2028 Summer Olympic Games in Los Angeles. These two mega-events provide a rare opportunity to evaluate the differing contractual frameworks imposed by the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) and the International Olympic Committee contemporaneously on the same host city. Drawing on content analysis, this study explores how each agreement structures obligations, financial responsibilities, commercial rights, jurisdictional issues, and legal risk. With some key differences, the findings reveal imbalance in favor of the awarding bodies, with both contracts shifting extensive liabilities onto the host city while reserving expansive powers for modification. The analysis also highlights the democratic and jurisdictional tensions embedded within these agreements. Despite Los Angeles’ bargaining leverage as a host for both events, the contracts are illustrative of the entrenched power asymmetries that underlie global sport governance.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Host contract, host risk: comparing the 2026 FIFA World Cup and LA 2028 Olympics

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年9月29日

查看全文
  • Robert Sroka

摘要

This paper presents a comparative legal analysis of the host city agreements for the 2026 FIFA World Cup and the 2028 Summer Olympic Games in Los Angeles. These two mega-events provide a rare opportunity to evaluate the differing contractual frameworks imposed by the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) and the International Olympic Committee contemporaneously on the same host city. Drawing on content analysis, this study explores how each agreement structures obligations, financial responsibilities, commercial rights, jurisdictional issues, and legal risk. With some key differences, the findings reveal imbalance in favor of the awarding bodies, with both contracts shifting extensive liabilities onto the host city while reserving expansive powers for modification. The analysis also highlights the democratic and jurisdictional tensions embedded within these agreements. Despite Los Angeles’ bargaining leverage as a host for both events, the contracts are illustrative of the entrenched power asymmetries that underlie global sport governance.