How is the Olympic host city chosen?

By the International Olympic Committee, through a process that was substantially rewritten in 2019 after decades of problems with the old one.

Under the former system, cities submitted formal bids, campaigned for years, and IOC members voted in a secret ballot at a set date, several rounds if necessary, with the lowest-scoring city eliminated each round. It was expensive — bids routinely cost tens of millions — and it produced many losers who had spent heavily for nothing.

It also produced repeated corruption scandals, most notoriously around the 1998 and 2002 Games, leading to expulsions and a first round of reforms.

By the 2010s, cities were withdrawing in large numbers, often after referendums rejected bidding on cost grounds. Several races ended with only one or two candidates remaining.

The current system replaces competitive bidding with continuous dialogue. Two Future Host Commissions, one for summer and one for winter, hold ongoing conversations with interested regions, countries or cities. When a proposal is judged ready, it is put to the IOC session as a single recommendation for approval rather than as a contest.

There is no longer a fixed seven-year lead time, and awards have been made much further ahead — Brisbane was confirmed for 2032 over a decade in advance.

The stated aims are to cut bid costs, use existing venues rather than build new ones, and avoid the white-elephant stadiums that followed several previous Games.

The criticism is reduced transparency: a negotiated recommendation is harder to scrutinise than a public contest.

Hosts must still sign the Olympic Host Contract, covering obligations and financial guarantees.