Sunday, January 26, 2014

Another perspective on Arena Pantanal


This post is in response to the one about the controversy around Arena Pantanal. I just found an article that seems to take a more positive spin on the construction of this new event space. Specifically, the article claims that a "sustainable approach has been applied to every detail along the way," citing the wood used to contract the Arena as "coming from certified sources," and the waste being recycled. What's more, the stadium has been nicknamed the Portuguese equivalent of "The Big Green" since its air and soil quality are closely monitored. 

It's curious that different sources have such wildly contrasting views on the Arena; while the other emphasized the misappropriation of conservation funds to construct this structure, this one highlighted the efforts made to make the Arena ecologically friendly. Yet I am a bit skeptical about this article since it seems more promotional than informational. I wonder what view most Brazilian people have of this development- do they see it as a "Big Green" that both provides a spectator space and furthers sustainability of the Pantanal? Or do they see it as a harmful enterprise that promoters have tried to brand with the label of sustainability? Maybe when we go to the Pantanal, we can poll the locals to see what's really up with this new Arena.

Article can be found here: http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/destination/stadiums/stadium=5025112/

-Gwynn

2 comments:

  1. Thanks for presenting the other side of this controversy on our blog! As a fan of sports, I have spent much time watching the games but not thinking about the environmental impact. I think it would be really interesting to interview or just to casually talk to the people of Cuiaba after the World Cup and talk to them about their reflections on how the games have affected their lifestyles.

    ReplyDelete
  2. However, If Brazil decides to use "Big Green" in both the World Cup and the Olympics I can't help but wonder if it will be doing much more damage to the local environment than good.

    ReplyDelete