Document Football's growing carbon footprint deals with significant and growing problem of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions generated by professional football. The authors emphasize that if they are not adopted serious climate action, the future of football looks bleakThe report provides a clear view of the current state of global professional football and where it needs to go.

The main sources of pollution in football are clearly identified as:

• Travel for (international) matches.
• Stadium construction.
• Sponsorship contracts with polluting companies that use football to advertise and normalize their products to billions of people.

Together, these activities lead to emissions of approximately 64-66 million tons of CO2e per yearThis means that one single sport has about the same amount of emissions as a rich country like Austria and approximately 60 % more than Uruguay, the first country to host the World Cup.

Nevertheless, the football community has its with a huge global reach and an example it sets, the potential to play a leading and key role in taking climate action, reducing emissions, changing consumption patterns and securing a future in which the game can continue to be played. It can do this in three key ways:

1. By reducing, not increasing, our own pollution.
2. By not promoting highly polluting products and lifestyleswhich worsen the problem.
3. Being a positive voice for climate action by informing about its activities and encouraging fans and corporations to make a difference. Football is uniquely connected to a huge public, gigantic corporations, political leaders and influential role models.

The document points out that decisions must come from the highest football authorities, which set the policy regarding permitted advertising and organize the football calendar. Although FIFA, UEFA and some major national football associations have signed up to the UN's targets to reduce emissions by 50 % by 2030 and reach net zero by 2040, reality shows that things are going downhill in the wrong direction.

The report criticizes two main negative trends:

• Sponsorship: Points to FIFA's controversial sponsorship deal with Saudi Aramco, the world's largest oil company, which the players protested against. UEFA has a long-term sponsorship deal with Qatar Airways, and airlines are ubiquitous in top-flight European football. The document highlights that the potential emissions associated with these high-carbon sponsorship deals are ignored.
• Football calendar: Indicates that expanding the international calendar, leading to more pollution, the need for more stadium construction and air travel. The emissions from a single men's World Cup match are equivalent to the annual emissions of 31,500 to 51,500 average British cars. The expanding calendar not only leads to more pollution, but also to player overcrowding and an increased risk of injury.

Suggestions for solutions include:

• Breaking ties with polluters, similar to the case of tobacco. Sport should not serve as a platform for selling products that endanger health and safety.
• Re-evaluating and developing a new football calendar, which will be smaller and more regional, protecting players, the quality of the game and the planet. It is proposed that FIFA, UEFA and other football bodies sit at the same table with players, fans and climate experts.

The report discusses in detail domestic football broadcasts, focusing on leading European clubs. It points out wide variability in reported emissions data. Emissions are divided into four categories: scope 1 and 2 (direct and indirect energy emissions), spectator travel, stadium renovation/construction and other scope 3 emissions. Spectator travel is proving to be the largest share of clubs' emissionsThe document emphasizes the need standardized emissions reporting methodology and gives examples of clubs like Forest Green Rovers, who are leaders in reducing GHG emissions.

In the section about international competitions the report focuses on emissions FIFA World Cup, emphasizing that transport is by far the largest contributor to emissions, while aviation accounts for approximately 90% of transport emissionsMethodology for accounting for emissions from stadium construction is also questioned because it often fails to take into account all potential long-term environmental impacts. The document criticizes use of carbon offsets organizers of major tournaments such as the 2022 World Cup in Qatar, which was designated as misleadingThe report provides initial estimates of emissions from World Cup qualifying rounds and regional tournaments, while highlighting the lack of official data. The document points out with concern increasing number of matches in international tournaments, which directly contradicts the objectives of the UN Framework Convention on Sport for Climate Action (S4CA).

The report addresses football sponsorship by sectors with a high carbon footprint, such as fossil fuels and airlines. It points out the significant presence of these sectors among the sponsors of the world's leading clubs and international tournamentsThe authors estimate GHG emissions associated with significant sponsorship contracts, some of which are many times larger than the total carbon footprint of a typical leading club. They found that Airline sponsorship is more extensive in football than in any other sportThey estimate that total GHG emissions from sponsorship deals with a high carbon footprint are significantly higher than emissions from regular football activities.

The document presents two estimation methods the global carbon footprint of the football sector: bottom-up and top-down. The bottom-up estimate amounts to around 15 million tonnes of CO2e per year, while the top-down estimate is slightly lower, around 13 million tonnes of CO2e per year. However neither method fully takes into account sponsorship-related emissionsAfter taking these emissions into account, the report estimates the total carbon footprint of the global football sector at 64-66 million tonnes of CO2e per year, which is comparable to the annual emissions of a country like Austria. More than 75 % of this amount is caused by sponsorship contracts with companies with a high carbon footprint.

Finally, the report highlights urgency of the situation and the need rapid and extensive measures. It suggests that Ending sponsorship deals with a high carbon footprint would yield the largest reduction in emissionsThe authors call on international and national football associations to take the lead in this area for the benefit of current and future generations of players and fans. The paper points out that the potential for football to succeed in achieving emissions reduction targets is significantly greater than for other sectors. Spring