A waterlogged pitch can cost a team its weekly training session. Extreme heat can change when a match is played and who can safely attend. Around the 2026 Men’s World Cup, Football For Future wanted to understand how fans experience these disruptions and what they expect football to do about them.
We ran two surveys in Canada, Mexico and the United States, gathering 8,120 responses from fans across the three host countries. We asked how extreme weather affects the way they play, train and watch, how they see climate change affecting the game, and which actions they would support. Together, the surveys give football a baseline it can use to plan investment, communicate with fans and track their expectations over time.
The clearest finding was strong support for protecting the grassroots game. More than eight in ten respondents in each country backed a dedicated fund to protect grassroots football from climate impacts in both surveys. Large majorities also supported players speaking out and said they would feel proud if their club took a visible, meaningful stand on climate change.
Fans back investment in the places they play
Support for a dedicated grassroots fund amongst surveyed fans was tremendous; reaching 82% in Canada, 90% in Mexico and 81% in the United States. Fans also backed a wider role for elite football. In the same survey, 84% in Canada, 95% in Mexico and 82% in the US supported stronger action from elite football, including financial help, to protect community and non-professional football from climate impacts.
For governing bodies and tournament organisers, that support makes a case for directing adaptation funding beyond major venues. A club that regularly loses training sessions to waterlogged pitches may need better drainage or access to another ground. A league facing dangerous heat may need shade, drinking water, and the flexibility to reschedule fixtures. Where smoke affects air quality, clubs may need a clear plan for when to pause play and how to tell families.
Community organisations can help design funding around the costs they face, including maintenance and the time it takes to run facilities. Governing bodies can work with them to identify where disruption is frequent, budgets are stretched and players have few alternatives. Tracking sessions lost to extreme weather and whether people can still access and afford to play would help show what the investment delivers.
Fans back standards and financial help for hosts
The polling also gives governing bodies a steer on tournament rules. 83% of respondents in Canada, 95% in Mexico and 78% in the US said governing bodies and tournament organisers should require competitions and hosts to meet minimum sustainability standards. A separate question drew similar backing for financial help to meet those standards, with 83% in Canada, 93% in Mexico and 81% in the US in favour.
That support gives organisers a basis for pairing requirements with funding. For adaptation, they could ask hosts to assess local risks and set out how they will protect players and spectators during extreme weather, then help finance the improvements that plan calls for.
Players and clubs have room to lead
An overwhelming majority of respondents backed players speaking publicly about climate change to protect football’s future: 87% in Canada, 98% in Mexico and 86% in the US getting behind the idea. Asked how they would feel if their club took a visible, meaningful stand on climate change, 88% in Canada, 98% in Mexico and 86% in the US said they would feel proud.
Players who want to speak can start with experiences they know first-hand, such as training in extreme heat or seeing a community pitch repeatedly close. Clubs and player associations can help them tell those stories and explain what would make conditions safer. Clubs can give their own communications substance by showing supporters what they are changing, where they are investing and how they will report progress.
Fans experience disruption and see the climate connection differently
Only 38% of respondents in Canada and 37% in the US said extreme weather had disrupted their playing, training or match attendance, but 62% in Mexico experienced climate disruption. The shares who had considered how climate change could affect football were 33%, 35%, and 55% respectively. When asked which climate issues could affect the game, at least eight in ten in every country selected extreme heat affecting player safety. It was the most selected risk in both survey waves.
These findings give football a starting point for talking about climate risk in terms fans recognise. When a club moves a kick-off because of heat, it can explain the immediate safety decision and show how changing heat risks inform plans for future seasons. Climate practitioners can help clubs put those decisions in local context, and community organisations can identify which disruptions matter most to the people who play and watch there.
Specific proposals draw broader support
Asked whether football should be involved in tackling climate change, 51% of respondents in Canada, 70% in Mexico and 49% in the US said it had a responsibility to take meaningful action. Support for the dedicated grassroots fund was higher in all three countries. In the US, 81% backed the fund.
The wording of our questions offers one possible explanation for this difference. A broad question leaves respondents to decide what counts as meaningful action, who should take it and who should pay. The fund names a beneficiary and a purpose. The player question also makes the purpose explicit by linking speaking out to protecting football’s future. For organisations making the case for action, that suggests an approach worth testing. Explain what the proposal would do, who would benefit, and how people would see the difference.
Keeping football safe, playable and accessible
Adaptation was a focus of our World Cup campaign. The polling points to an opportunity for governing bodies and tournament organisers to turn that priority into lasting support for the community game. They can work with grassroots organisations to identify which places face the greatest risks and fund improvements that clubs and leagues can maintain. Players can draw attention to the risks they see, while policymakers and climate practitioners can connect football’s plans to local public health, weather and infrastructure planning.
We want this research to be useful to governing bodies, tournament organisers, clubs, players and grassroots organisations, as well as policymakers, climate advocates and researchers. It can inform investment and communications now and give future research a starting point. The measure of a good adaptation plan is whether it helps people keep playing and watching safely in the places where disruption already affects them.
About the research
Dynata conducted both surveys online. Wave 1 ran from 16 to 21 May 2025 and reached 3,613 respondents (Canada 1,204, Mexico 1,206, US 1,203). Wave 2 ran from 20 to 27 July 2026 and reached 4,507 respondents (Canada 1,501, Mexico 1,502, US 1,504). Download the fan polling results and methodology for the country and subgroup charts, survey wording as reported, and additional findings from both waves.
Disclaimer: The two waves used different, unweighted samples, so establishing any tournament effect on climate change attitudes wasn’t possible. The disruption and climate-awareness figures come from separate questions. Differences in question wording and response options can also affect comparisons.