This year’s COP 26 summit featured an emphasis for sport to play a more prominent role in fighting climate change. Leaders spoke of how the potential for sport to make a difference is vast. It is a huge multi-billion dollar industry with unique access and engagement. Furthermore, recent events such as the cancellation of the Rugby World Cup matches due to extreme typhoons and the need for artificial snow at the Pyeongchang 2018 Olympics have shown that sport is not immune to the impacts of climate change. For these reasons, the UN has created the Sport for Climate Action Framework to encourage sporting institutions and organisations to take responsibility for their emissions. The primary aim is to reduce CO2 emissions and the achievement of net-zero by 2040.
One such organisation taking the lead in doing its part for our planet is the National Basketball Association (NBA). It encompasses 30 teams (29 in the USA plus Canada’s own Toronto Raptors) and is the world’s largest and most notorious basketball league. Alongside the support for the NBA is the increased prominence of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) for its members. CSR encompasses the concerted efforts for corporations to operate in ways that enhance, rather than degrade, society. Reducing the environmental impact of business operations is a crucial metric for measuring a company’s CSR. A 2010 study into the five most prominent professional American sports leagues showed that 39% of executives felt that addressing their organisation’s environmental impact was a societal norm, thus relevant for their business.
The NBA has for many years now embraced this idea of CSR and has been a leader in professional sport and environmental policy. In May 2019, the NBA became the first professional sports league to sign onto the UN Sports Climate Action and partnered with Green Sports Alliance to found NBA Green, an organisation which promotes environmental sustainability in the NBA and the Sport of basketball. Whilst signing onto this action is often criticised to have no oversight or accountability, it represents a symbolic step in the right direction for the league. Individual NBA teams have achieved significant and measurable on-premise successes to ensure that game-day is as environmentally friendly as possible. Many venues that host matches are accredited with LEED certification for sustainability achievement and leadership. For example, the new Sacramento Kings Golden 1 centre achieved the prestigious honour of being the world’s first indoor sports venue to achieve Platinum status, the highest accolade for environmentally conscious buildings. Other venues have also achieved LEED recognition, such as the Portland Trail Blazers Moda Centre and the NBA’s Flagship retail Store in New York City, both of which have achieved gold, and the NBA’s newest franchise, the Brooklyn Nets Barclays Centre, silver. According to the US Green Building Council, with 10 venues, the NBA has the most LEED-certified venues of any sport in the United States. Other initiatives include NBA Spain building a court made entirely out of recycled glass, 10 million pounds of CO2 being offset during the leagues’ 2019 Green Week’, and the commissioner pledging all NBA All-Star games will be powered by 100% renewable energy.
Individual matches are also becoming targets for more environmentally friendly action. The Hawks-Knicks Game Four on May 30th, 2021 was the first game to receive Total Resource Use and Efficiency (TRUE) certification from Green Business Certification Inc. It stipulates that the event has a zero waste and landfill policy for solid non-hazardous materials. It also must comply with all air, water, and land discharge permits. The Hawks cited their strong partnerships with community members, such as the City of Atlanta and local schools as reasons for their success. Volunteers aided guests in sorting waste to reduce contamination, and business partners supplied compostable materials.
However, as is the case with most organisations, there remains significant structural and policy issues surrounding the leagues’ operations, hindering its ability to operate in an environmentally conscious manner. One area where the NBA rescinds a lot of the excellent work it does preaching for environmental sustainability is the amount of travel teams do in a regular season. The environmental cost of travel is a massive problem for sport. Studies show that 85% of the greenhouse emissions created by major sporting events come from the travel and accommodation of the teams and their fans. The NBA is by no means immune to this issue. NBA teams travel 1.3 million air miles in a regular season. This equates to 31,842 metric tonnes of CO2 emitted into the atmosphere, equating to the environmental impact of 7000 passenger vehicles running for a year. The reason the league has such high air travel is a cocktail of different factors, such as heavy season scheduling and the vast geography of each team. However, the leagues’ organisers and its teams could make a few structural and operational changes to reduce the amount of air travel and mitigate the impact of existing, unavoidable flying.
The most obvious solution is to fly less. Shorter flights are more polluting per mile due to the intense energy consumption it takes to get off the ground. It is currently the norm for teams to charter private planes. They make for a relatively comfortable and quick way to transport players between games. However, where greener on-ground options are available, the league should incentivize teams to use them more often. Journeys such as New York to Philadelphia can be achieved in under two hours by taking the train, creating much less CO2 than flying. While the gruelling 82 games regular season leaves little time to sacrifice for more green means of transport, NBA teams could be encouraged to take the environmentally friendly options where possible.
Furthermore, various institutional changes to the league structure can reduce the amount of air travel. Reducing the amount of playoff games in the first round from 7 to 5 has been thrown around as a possible solution. It is extremely rare that the first round results in huge upsets or goes the seven-game distance. Having a seven-game series makes little to no sense and creates unnecessary travel. Reducing the first and possibly second-round playoffs to five games would facilitate a more extended regular season. This would allow more travel time between games and could encourage teams to choose more environmentally friendly travel options.
A final proposal could be to consider more bubbles or gather more teams to one location where teams can play multiple games against different opposition. During the COVID 19 pandemic, teams were centrally located in Orlando, Florida, to protect players from the pandemic and ensure the season took place without travel risks. By using the concept of the bubble, teams from the far corners of the US could gather in one central location for a week and play multiple teams, reducing the overall amount of travel for both players and fans. Unlike the Disney Bubble, the games would be open to fans and operate like mini round-robin tournaments. Events like this could also hugely benefit the economies of struggling towns and NBA franchises as the fixtures would serve as mini sporting mega-events.
The COP26 summit proved that Sport, like every other industry, has to play its part in improving its relationship with the environment. The NBA and its member teams have taken many initiatives to play their part. They serve as examples of how decisive action can be taken regarding facilities and match day to act more environmentally conscious. With that in mind, the league could look beyond just the individual games in isolation and start considering the structure of the entire season. The high volume of air travel cannot continue if they are going to reduce emissions. Administrations must make structural changes to adapt a league created in an environmental context vastly different from what we see today.
Edited by Sarah St-Pierre
