The modernisation of Italian football stadiums is no longer just a sporting necessity. It has become an economic, regulatory and social issue. The ability to build new venues and upgrade existing facilities is now a key factor in the competitiveness of the entire football industry. Yet complex administrative procedures, urban planning restrictions and regulatory uncertainty continue to leave Italy lagging behind other European countries.
Against this backdrop, UEFA EURO 2032 could provide a decisive opportunity to accelerate change. This was the focus of a panel dedicated to the legal framework and the tools needed to build and modernise sports facilities. The discussion was moderated by Sacha D’Ecclesiis, a lawyer at Cintioli & Associati, and featured Roberto Chieppa, President of a Section of the Council of State, and Massimo Sessa, Extraordinary Commissioner for UEFA EURO 2032 Stadiums.
In the 1990s, when Italy hosted the 1990 FIFA World Cup, the country could boast some of the finest stadiums in Europe. This infrastructure legacy went hand in hand with the sporting achievements of Italian teams and the growth of the national football scene.
From 2006 onwards, particularly following the World Cup held in Germany, a new model began to emerge: stadiums owned or directly managed by football clubs. The United Kingdom embraced this transformation, whereas Italy failed to make comparable progress.
The difference becomes particularly clear when looking at football clubs’ revenue streams. In Italy, stadium-generated income generally accounts for less than 10% of clubs’ total revenue, while broadcasting rights contribute approximately 60%. The British model, by contrast, is more balanced: roughly one-third of revenue comes from stadium operations, one-third from media rights and one-third from commercial activities and merchandising.
A stadium is therefore much more than a venue where matches are played. It is an infrastructure asset capable of generating revenue, strengthening clubs’ competitiveness and contributing to the local economy. According to Roberto Chieppa, the construction of new sports facilities should be regarded as a matter of national interest.
Football is an industry that contributes to GDP and employment, while infrastructure investment can generate economic benefits that extend well beyond individual clubs’ balance sheets. Italy’s main challenge, however, lies in the complexity of the authorisation process.
The key piece of legislation is Legislative Decree No. 38/2021, which governs the procedures for building and upgrading sports facilities. The process involves several stages, from the submission of a feasibility document by the project promoter to preliminary and final decision-making conferences, with the aim of securing a declaration of public interest and obtaining project approval.
These provisions are complemented by regulations governing safety and operational certification, which are still partly based on legislation dating back to 1996, as well as rules concerning the protection of cultural heritage. In the latter area, an accelerated procedure gives the competent Ministry 90 days to identify the elements that must be preserved. According to Chieppa, these different sets of regulations do not always work together effectively.
The result is a fragmented framework that makes it difficult for investors to assess in advance not only the financial costs, but also the timescales and uncertainties involved in delivering a stadium project. One of the main issues is the gap between statutory deadlines and the time required to complete the process.
The proposed stadium in Pietralata, Rome, is a clear example: approximately four years passed between the feasibility study and the single authorisation decision. Furthermore, the deadlines established by law are often merely indicative, while the available substitute powers are not always sufficiently effective.
To address these difficulties, Chieppa identified several possible solutions: introducing more effective mechanisms to ensure compliance with deadlines, appointing special commissioners to take over individual administrative decisions when authorities fail to meet their deadlines, and simplifying procedures for stadium renovation projects.
Another key step is to make permanent use of extraordinary measures that have already proved effective, as happened with Italy’s National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRRP).
The aim is to ensure that streamlined procedures are not limited to major sporting events or individual projects. Massimo Sessa’s perspective starts from a fundamental consideration: building new sports facilities in Italy is particularly challenging because of the country’s dense urban development and the extensive environmental, landscape and architectural restrictions, among the most complex in Europe.
According to the Commissioner, the debate surrounding San Siro Stadium highlights the need to rethink infrastructure that no longer meets the standards required by modern football. The 1990 World Cup had largely involved renovating existing stadiums, while Italy subsequently failed to achieve infrastructure development on a scale comparable to that of other countries.
In this respect, EURO 2032 could become a catalyst for change. Sessa also referred to the experience of the Milan-Cortina Winter Olympics and the Jubilee, events that created the political and administrative conditions needed to deliver projects that would have faced greater obstacles under normal circumstances.
The challenge, therefore, goes beyond simply building stadiums to host international competitions. Stadium regeneration can also become a means of revitalising suburban areas, creating new meeting places for young people and local communities. However, turning these projects into reality requires ensuring that private investors can achieve a reasonable return on their investments.
This means providing the right tools to support the substantial costs involved while allowing the commercial activities associated with stadiums to generate additional value. Chieppa also stressed the importance of supporting investment through incentives aimed at encouraging the development of sustainable and digitally advanced stadiums.
Finally, the relationship between project financing and competition remains a crucial issue. A distinction must be made between publicly owned facilities, for which competitive tendering is a fundamental requirement, and projects promoted by private investors who intend to manage a stadium directly over an extended period. This distinction requires a clear legal framework capable of safeguarding competition without undermining investment certainty.
The panel’s closing message was clear: Italy needs extraordinary procedures to become standard practice. Sessa highlighted the paradox of a country where the Colosseum, built in approximately six to seven years according to his remarks, stands as a reminder that Italy could never deliver major construction projects. The challenge posed by EURO 2032 is therefore to turn an international sporting event into a lasting opportunity for change.
The goal is not simply to build new stadiums, but to develop modern, sustainable and digitally advanced facilities capable of generating economic and social value for local communities. A stadium should be more than just a place where football is played: it should also serve as a social hub and a focal point for the community around it.