As the Milano-Cortina 2026 Winter Olympics approach, sustainability professionals should prepare for one of the most ambitious sustainability experiments in Olympic history, framed around climate mitigation, circular economy principles, and legacy-driven urban regeneration. The organizing committee has placed sustainability at the core of planning, aiming to leverage ISO 20121 event management standards and Olympic Agenda recommendations to reduce environmental impacts across energy, materials, and infrastructure (Milan Cortina 2026 sustainability report, Althete’s Village Report, 2026).
A centerpiece of Milan’s sustainability strategy is the Porta Romana Olympic Village — designed to exceed Nearly Zero Energy Building (NZEB) requirements, target LEED certification, and generate a significant share of its energy on-site with solar thermal and photovoltaic systems (Porta Romana project overview, 2023; ArchDaily, 2026). After the Games, this village will be converted into affordable student housing and mixed-use community space, integrating public plazas, green spaces, and commercial areas as part of a broader urban regeneration strategy (Parametric Architecture, 2026).
Energy and emissions are also high on the agenda: planners aim for 100% certified renewable electricity to power venues, while corporate partners like Eni are supplying renewable-feedstock fuels and bio-LPG for torches, significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions compared with fossil-derived alternatives (Eni Press Release, 2025). Embedded carbon reduction strategies include rainwater reuse, mass timber elements, and low-carbon façade materials across new construction, underscoring how sustainability is integrated at the systems level.
Yet the ambition faces scrutiny. Civil society groups have raised concerns about environmental impacts such as construction in sensitive Alpine zones and biodiversity loss, reminding professionals that sustainability outcomes must be independently evaluated post-Games (Mountain Wilderness, 2024). The polycentric model of hosting, spread across multiple venues in Milan and the Dolomites, also presents transport and logistics challenges that will test emission reduction commitments (Traveler analysis, 2025).
For sustainability experts, Milano-Cortina 2026 will be both a test case for sustainable mega-events and a living laboratory for legacy planning, stakeholder coordination, and community-centred design. Tracking outcomes from energy use to transport behavior and post-Games community integration will be crucial for assessing whether these Games set a new standard or reveal persistent systemic challenges.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently announced it will stop monetizing the value of lives saved and health benefits avoided when setting air pollution standards, and instead focus solely on compliance costs to industry (Associated Press, 2026; SEJ, 2026). Historically, EPA regulatory impact analyses have included estimates of avoided premature deaths, illnesses, and lost productivity, often showing that benefits far exceed compliance costs (EPA, 2024). This recalibration effectively assigns a zero dollar value to lives saved in cost-benefit analysis.
For legal practitioners, this shift raises significant administrative law and constitutional concerns. Under the Clean Air Act, agencies must demonstrate that rules are reasonable and supported by evidence, with cost-benefit analysis central to defending economically significant regulations in court (Michigan v. EPA, 2015). Removing quantification of health benefits may invite arbitrary and capricious challenges under the Administrative Procedure Act if the agency cannot justify ignoring well-documented health science.
Internationally, air quality governance and human rights frameworks increasingly emphasize the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment. The United Nations Human Rights Council and General Assembly have recognized this right, framing environmental protection as part of human rights obligations (United Nations Human Rights Council, 2021; United Nations General Assembly, 2022). Moreover, treaties such as the Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution outline cooperative commitments to reduce pollutant emissions across borders (United Nations Treaty Collection, 1979).
From a sustainability law perspective, excluding lives saved from regulatory accounting undermines the integration of environmental protection with human health outcomes and long-term economic welfare. It conflicts with international norms that regard clean air as foundational to human rights and sustainable development. Removing these valuations may weaken regulatory defenses, reduce the ambition of environmental protections, and erode public trust in governance.
India’s Supreme Court has issued a landmark judgment affirming that CSR is not optional philanthropy but a constitutional obligation that must inherently include environmental and ecological protection, including biodiversity and wildlife conservation (Supreme Court of India, 2025). The court held that corporations cannot claim to be socially responsible while ignoring environmental claims equal to social claims, tying CSR duties to Article 51A(g) of the Constitution, which mandates protection and improvement of the natural environment (New Indian Express, 2025; Times of India, 2025). This decision arose from litigation focused on protecting the critically endangered Great Indian Bustard, an emblematic species whose survival is now directly linked to corporate liability where business activities threaten its habitat (Supreme Court of India, 2025).
For sustainability professionals, this ruling reframes CSR from reputational branding to legal compliance with ecological standards. Companies subject to Section 135 of the Companies Act, 2013 must allocate funds toward genuine in-situ and ex-situ conservation, reflecting broader ecosystem stewardship rather than traditional charity (New Indian Express, 2025). This holds substantial implications for sustainable finance: investors and financial institutions will need to integrate ecological risk into ESG assessments, reorient capital flows toward companies that demonstrate measurable biodiversity outcomes and penalise those whose operations undermine ecological resilience.
Legally, the judgment reinforces polluter-pays principles and broadens fiduciary duties under Section 166(2) to include environmental interests, challenging conventional shareholder primacy (The Supreme Court of India, 2025). Sustainable finance frameworks in India must now evolve to align with judicial expectations that corporate profitability is intertwined with ecosystem health and biodiversity protection, a precedent likely to influence ESG integration across Asia’s emerging markets.
Recent developments from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) illustrate the intersection of healthcare, pharmaceuticals, sustainability, and corporate legal obligations. Alongside guidance for conditions such as multiple sclerosis and leukaemia, NHS England is scaling its “online hospital” model, leveraging digital consultations to enhance access while reducing patient travel and associated emissions (Pharmaceutical Journal, 2026). This model underscores a growing expectation that healthcare providers and pharmaceutical firms integrate environmental considerations into service delivery, particularly in reducing the carbon footprint of patient care (NICE, 2025).
From a corporate law perspective, the environmental and sustainability dimensions of healthcare now implicate fiduciary duties, compliance, and reputational risk. Pharmaceutical companies may face legal obligations to demonstrate that their manufacturing, prescribing practices, and waste management align with both regulatory standards and broader ESG commitments ( BSI, 2025). Failure to account for the environmental burden of medicines, including carbon-intensive anaesthetic gases or overprescribed pharmaceuticals, could expose companies to litigation, regulatory penalties, or shareholder scrutiny (Sustainable Healthcare, 2025).
Moreover, digital healthcare expansion increases data and privacy responsibilities, while also creating legal obligations to ensure equitable access and prevent digital exclusion. For sustainability and legal professionals, NICE’s guidance signals that corporate responsibility in healthcare now explicitly includes environmental stewardship, patient outcomes, and compliance with evolving ESG norms, aligning profitability with ethical, legal, and sustainable practice (Pharmaceutical Journal, 2026; NICE, 2025).
CGSL is a nonprofit initiative working at the intersection of law & sustainability. We advance legal research, policy formulation, and collaboration to support a just, resilient, and sustainable world.
© CGSL | DevForge CC