About the Authors
Major international events – particularly the Olympic and Paralympic Games – are often assumed to be automatic accelerators of development. As the Milano Cortina Winter Olympics 2026 approach, this narrative is once again gaining momentum. Experience, however, suggest otherwise: the impact is of such events is neither guaranteed nor evenly distributed. Time and again, successful events from an operational standpoint have failed to deliver lasting benefits for the territories that hosted them.
The difference between a short-lived celebration and a long-term legacy lies not in scale or investment alone, but in governance, relationships, and strategic intent. Legacy does not happen by default: it is designed, negotiated, and defended over time.
Why legacy strategies so often fail
One of the most common reasons legacy ambitions fall short is fragmentation. Olympic projects typically involve multiple levels of governance – international bodies, national governments, regions, municipalities – each operating with different mandates, incentives, and political timelines. Without early alignment, legacy risks becoming an abstract aspiration rather than an accountable objective.
In our experience working on major international events, legacy is most vulnerable in the years before construction begins, when responsibility is diffuse and the pressure of delivery still feels distant. Once timelines tighten and scrutiny intensifies, it is often too late to retrofit long-term value into short-term decisions.
Achieving the “best public interest” as the legacy of a major event is therefore a very complex goal to achieve, linked to the best timing and coordination, while also having to cope with economic and global conditions that change over such a long preparation period and which can inevitably undermine the starting point.
The invisible infrastructure: relationships and trust
The success of an Olympic project depends on a dense, fast-moving ecosystem of actors: institutions, organisers, technical partners, sponsors, service providers, associations, and local communities.
As the event approaches, this ecosystem becomes more complex – and more fragile. Only by being able to amalgamate different interests and foster the construction of a ‘common language’ through which the objectives of each player in the field (whether public, private, third sector, or simply an active citizen stakeholder) can be perceived on the same level, lasting public value can be generated. This must be paired with a clear identification of the key stakeholders to external communication.
In other words, much of the work that determines whether an event leaves a positive legacy is invisible: stakeholder mapping, interest alignment, trust-building, and continuous dialogue. These relationships are not a “soft” add-on to delivery; they are the infrastructure that allows investments, narratives, and commitments to hold over time.
The Olympics as a reputational stress test
Unlike other major events, the Olympics operate under sustained global scrutiny. Reputational narratives form years before the Opening Ceremony and are shaped as much by governance choices, community engagement, and perceived fairness as by sporting success.
This creates both opportunity and risk. When expectations around sustainability, inclusion, and social impact are met – or exceeded – host territories and partners can redefine their international positioning. When they are not, criticism tends to crystallise early and persist long after the flame is extinguished.
A recent SWG study conducted for Coca-Cola – an Olympic partner for nearly a century – shows that Italians see the Games not only as a source of national pride, but as a platform to address sustainability, inclusion, and socio-economic development. The implication is clear: public expectations extend far beyond sport, and the gap between promise and delivery is where reputational value is either created or lost.
Public affairs and advocacy as legacy accelerators
Legacy strategies rarely fail because of a lack of vision. More often, they fail because that vision is not translated into shared priorities across institutions, businesses, and communities. This is where promotion, public affairs, and community relations activities play a decisive role.
The support that companies, organizers, and public actors need is a systemic strategy of multi-level engagement and communication that enables them to converge around a shared plan of collective objectives. Within this framework, the local economic and social community – both at the macro level (the country) and the micro level (the territories involved) – becomes the main stakeholder for dialogue and for communicating the positive value generated by hosting a major event.
The well-being of a community means greater business opportunities for companies, as well as greater consensus for public institutions. In the context of major events, public affairs are therefore not a reactive lobbying activity, but a strategic lever for institutional alignment, narrative coherence and community legitimacy.
This long-term orchestration often starts at the bid phase and continues well beyond the closing ceremony. Effective advocacy helps ensure that infrastructure investments, social programmes, and sustainability commitments are understood, supported, and defended by those who will ultimately inherit them.
Milan as a case of transformation through dialogue
Milan offers a compelling illustration of how major events can become catalysts for long-term change. Expo 2015 was not transformative simply because it attracted visitors or investment, but because it was accompanied by years of coordination between institutions, businesses, and civil society. The result was not only physical regeneration, but a lasting repositioning of the city on the global stage.
The Milano Cortina 2026 Olympic and Paralympic Games are following a similarly complex path. Here too, the most critical infrastructure is intangible: the alignment of territories with very different identities, the management of expectations across local communities, and the integration of Olympic values into long-term development strategies.
Why businesses matter in the Olympic legacy equation
Companies involved in major events—whether as sponsors, suppliers, or partners—are not external actors. They are embedded in the territories where events take place and increasingly expected to act as agents of positive change.
Participation in the Olympics is no longer just an exercise in visibility or corporate responsibility. When approached strategically, it becomes a platform for building durable relationships, strengthening local credibility, and contributing to shared development goals. The reputational returns are real – but only when engagement is authentic, locally grounded, and sustained over time.
From celebration to accountability
An Olympic Games lasts a few weeks. Its consequences can shape territories for decades. The critical question for institutions, organisers, and partners is no longer whether legacy matters—but who is accountable for delivering it, and how early they are willing to invest in the relationships that make it possible.
When shared vision, strategic public affairs, and genuine community engagement come together, major events stop being isolated spectacles. They become long-term investments in social cohesion, economic resilience, and collective future value.