The FIFA World Cup just concluded in New York City’s backyard. Every game up to that point tested the protocols and plans for extreme weather conditions, and the Columbia Climate School was on the pitch.
The New York/New Jersey MetLife Stadium hosted eight World Cup games in total, in an open-roof venue that saw torrential downpours, intense wet-bulb globe temperatures (WBGT) and poor air quality conditions. A team of students: Allison Nyanjogu Karabu, Fabricio Correa Lara, Alaty Adele Almejhed, Yanenowi Helene Logan, Louise Brilliant, Angela Anran He, Emily Su and Carolina Tavares Lopes, provided a match-by-match analysis of extreme heat-related risk for players, fans and staff. The information includes sections on meteorological conditions, transportation routes and logistics, social media and public sentiment, stadium and FIFA risk communication strategy and the well-being of stadium workers and fans.
Below, the research team shared reflections about the emergent issues during the World Cup and the future of summer sporting events in the face of climate change.
How did the poor air quality index (AQI) increase the already persistent extreme weather risk for fans, workers and players at the final match for the World Cup in NY/NJ?
Allison Nyanjogu Karabu: Toxic plumes of wildfire smoke from Canada came over much of the northeast states, and NJ/NYC days before the World Cup Final, going as high as 300’s “very unhealthy” in parts of Manhattan. Luckily, the AQI was expected to drop to 100 on the day of the Final to a “moderate” level considered safe, but this may be a point of concern for vulnerable populations already exposed to risk of extreme heat, like those with respiratory conditions, the elderly, infants and children during future summer events. Potential poor air quality should be considered in emergency management protocols moving forward for summer events held during wildfire season.
The World Cup had extreme heat protocols. How were those conveyed to the players, fans and staff? What are the best ways to streamline that communication?
Yanenowi Helene Logan: The best examples of extreme heat communication were the ones that trended; for example, the social media alert on the water bottle policy that allowed fans to bring in one unopened disposable water bottle and the newly mandated hydration breaks. Unfortunately, there wasn’t a standardized baseline of messaging regarding extreme heat or safety, and online messaging could only be found if sought out. The simple answer is to include heat-safety messaging on Jumbotrons, public address announcements and shuffled in with advertisements.
Hydration breaks were a trending topic this World Cup. Is this a practice we should expect for future sporting events?
Louise Brilliant: With increasing temperatures due to climate change, forced rest and water breaks instituted by FIFA should be a priority, and must also be executed correctly according to health professionals. The three-minute hydration breaks were too short to have a meaningful impact on rehydration and body cooling. In 1994, when the World Cup first came to the U.S., MetLife Stadium experienced downslope winds from the west that created warmer, drier conditions and reduced rainfall that made thunderstorms less common. As ocean temperatures increase today, cooler air from southeasterly winds are less effective at lowering temperatures and humidity in the area. Summer sporting events will need to implement safety protocols to adapt to the changing climate if they are to continue with public health and heat mitigation in mind.
Fans traveling from abroad joked about walking to MetLife Stadium for games. Did the transportation process protect fans from extreme weather conditions, and what recommendations do you have moving forward?
Fabricio Correa Lara: The system did provide real thermal relief where it was enclosed. Air-conditioned rail cars and shuttle buses functioned as recovery zones; the security screening tent and the American Dream pedestrian bridge offered covered passage. However, where jurisdictional responsibility became unclear, precisely in the outdoor corridors between transit hubs and gates, there was no severe-weather shelter protocol or designated refuge area for all fans. Transportation corridors should be planned as climate-risk zones rather than only as mobility routes, including: covered hydration stations where long wait times are expected, field-deployed WBGT monitoring in access corridors rather than reliance on regional airport stations, and pre-identified refuge areas for every uncovered zone.
What was the media response to extreme heat at the World Cup, and how might that have informed FIFA protocol (water bottle policy, rain gear, masks)?
Angela Anran He: Very little discourse was focused on heat preparedness or complaints about MetLife’s mitigation strategies, and concerns about the effects of heat and weather were more focused on players’ performances and match outcomes. However, medical reports indicate that heat stress was still an issue throughout the matches, so it would be irresponsible to say that the lack of negative reviews online indicates a perfectly successful mitigation plan. It is likely that most fans came to matches under-prepared due to a lack of prominent communication about extreme heat in the media. One useful tactic to keep in mind for future sporting events is to create a space for and encourage communication between fans to share their experiences and advice.
What do summer sporting events in the context of climate change mean for human health?
Alaty Adele Almejhed: Few platforms reach the audience like a World Cup does. This tournament drew enormous global viewership across all 104 matches, and that scale cuts both ways. It means any failure to protect players and fans from heat or smoke plays out in front of the largest possible audience, but it also means that visible, well-communicated safety measures (mandatory cooling breaks, published AQI/WBGT thresholds, hydration infrastructure, clear on-site signage) could normalize climate-health awareness for more people than almost any other single event could. Given that events at this scale will keep colliding with heat waves and wildfire seasons as the climate continues to shift, organizers should start treating ‘what happens when both hit at once’ as a planning scenario now, rather than a crisis to manage reactively; the way FIFA effectively did during Final week.
The final report “Extreme Heat Risk & Mitigation at New York New Jersey (MetLife) Stadium Review” will be released by the National Center for Disaster Preparedness in Fall 2026. Visit the project website to learn more about the team and their work.
