Walking through the centre of Cortina today, the enthusiasm is unmistakable. Not only supporters of the various national teams, but also many local residents stop in the streets, laugh and talk together. The atmosphere feels genuinely pleasant and lively.
Most people seem to have forgotten the difficult period experienced just a year ago, when construction sites worked constantly to prepare the town for the event: continuous noise, missing parking spaces, dust and mud everywhere, and daily commutes slowed by blocked mobility.
Everyone now appears relaxed and satisfied. From a Cortina 2026 local perspective, however, one question remains: what will be left once all this is over?
This article offers a Cortina 2026 local perspective, written as the Games unfold. In February 2025, I questioned whether the Olympics would prove to be an opportunity or a risk for Cortina. For a general overview of the Milan–Cortina 2026 Winter Olympics, including venues and structure of the event, you can read my previous article here.
In July, I wrote an open letter calling for dialogue and responsibility, which you can read here.
That original question remains central today. Now, as the Games are underway, I write no longer in anticipation, but from within the lived reality of the event. For this reason, a more analytical and less emotional assessment feels necessary. This Cortina 2026 local perspective is shaped not by ideology, but by direct experience of what the Games mean for the town.
The Olympics are more than a sporting event. They accelerate changes in the economy, infrastructure and daily life of the town. To understand their true impact, we must distinguish between what works in the short term and what will endure over the long term.
The atmosphere in town: sporting success and local ambivalence
From an organisational and sporting standpoint, Cortina is delivering. Competitions are running smoothly, the technical operations appear efficient, and the international atmosphere is tangible. The new Sliding Center, which was the subject of considerable debate in the years leading up to the Games, is functioning well. Athletes have publicly acknowledged its high technical standards.
This deserves recognition. Not everything built for these Olympics is flawed or improvised.
Yet the perception among residents is more nuanced. There is no widespread hostility toward the event, but rather a quiet ambivalence. Pride in hosting a world-class competition coexists with deeper questions about the long-term cost for the territory.
Tourism: necessary growth or growing pressure?
A central argument in favour of the Olympics has been the promise of increased tourism. However, Cortina has not suffered from a shortage of visitors in recent years — particularly in summer. On the contrary, tourism numbers have been steadily rising, with visible signs of overtourism during peak periods.
Traffic congestion, overcrowded trails, rising housing costs and mounting pressure on fragile natural spaces are not theoretical concerns. They are already part of daily reality.
In this context, the question is not whether Cortina needs “more tourism,” but rather what kind of tourism it should pursue. From a Cortina 2026 local perspective, the issue is not numerical growth, but long-term balance.
During the Games, the town is populated largely by athletes, technical staff, and individuals directly connected to the event. This represents a different demographic from Cortina’s traditional winter visitors. What we are witnessing is less a pure increase in tourism than a substitution effect: the usual clientele partially replaced by Olympic-related guests.
Several second homes that are normally occupied during winter have remained empty, partly due to traffic restrictions and event-related limitations. This suggests that the economic benefits are neither automatic nor evenly distributed.
Ticket pricing and accessibility
Ticket prices for the competitions have been high. As a result, access has been limited for a portion of the local and national public.
Transport logistics do not appear to be the main obstacle — dedicated shuttle services are operating. The issue appears to be economic accessibility.
This is not only a local perception: Italian athlete Sofia Goggia also noted that Olympic ticket prices can discourage attendance, pointing out that the annual World Cup races in Cortina typically draw a much stronger Italian crowd.
When a major sporting event becomes financially out of reach for a significant share of the local population, a gap opens between the event and the community that hosts it. This does not invalidate the event, but it does raise questions about inclusivity.
Traditional ski operations and a winter paradox
Less discussed is the impact on traditional ski lift operators. Event-related closures, combined with a season marked by limited natural snowfall, have led to significant financial losses for some companies.
This creates a striking paradox: a Winter Olympics that, in its symbolic year, places strain on segments of the traditional winter economy.
The Appollonio–Socrepes cableway
The Appollonio–Socrepes cableway has been among the most controversial infrastructure projects linked to the Games. It was conceived as part of an integrated mobility system, including a large multi-storey parking facility at its base. However, work on the planned parking structure has not even started.
The official timeline called for the cableway to open before the start of the Games. In reality, due to construction delays, the lift is not operating during the competitions themselves. After the Games, in the absence of the planned parking infrastructure, the cableway risks remaining closed or underused for an extended period.
The Mortisa area where the pylons are located is classified as medium to high geological risk (P2–P3), with documented landslide movements reaching depths of 20 to 40 metres, as outlined in this technical summary of critical issues.
This is not a recent or isolated instability but a long-standing geological phenomenon with origins higher up the mountain and dynamics that have persisted for centuries.
In such a context, the notion of “permanent stabilization” is technically unrealistic. A landslide of this scale cannot simply be halted; it can only be monitored and managed over time.
The original design reportedly included technical solutions intended to accommodate ground movement. In its current implementation, however, the structures appear to rest on fixed foundations within an inherently dynamic geological setting.
The issue is not immediate structural failure. The issue is long-term coexistence with an active natural process. In mountainous terrain, the true test of infrastructure is not its inauguration, but its resilience over decades.
More broadly, investing in new ski infrastructure in a context of climate change — with shorter seasons and snow increasingly confined to higher elevations — calls for serious long-term reflection. The alpine model of the future may not align with that of the past.
The Sliding Center: a governance challenge
The Sliding Center is arguably the most technically ambitious project delivered for the Games. During the Olympics, it has performed well, and its engineering quality is widely acknowledged.
However, the critical question lies beyond the event itself. From a Cortina 2026 local perspective, governance will matter far more than the short-term success of the competitions.
A bobsleigh, luge and skeleton track is a highly specialised facility, energy-intensive and costly to maintain. Its sustainability depends on consistent international use, structured partnerships with sports federations and a clear long-term positioning strategy within the global sliding sports community.
What will determine its future is not engineering, but governance. The facility will require strong, competent and autonomous leadership capable of long-term strategic planning. Without professional management and a clear operational vision, even a technically excellent structure can become economically fragile.
The Sliding Center will ultimately be judged not by its performance during the Games, but by its viability once global attention has shifted elsewhere.
Cortina 2026 local perspective on identity and development
Beyond infrastructure and financial balance sheets lies a deeper issue: identity.
Cortina is not simply a tourist brand. It is an alpine community with history, culture and a delicate ecological and social balance.
The greatest risk is not immediate financial loss, but a gradual transformation that is accelerated by event-based visibility rather than guided by long-term coherence. When a mountain territory becomes primarily a stage, it risks diminishing its authenticity as a lived place.
An open conclusion
It is too early for a definitive verdict. The Olympics last a matter of weeks; their consequences will unfold over decades.
If the infrastructures prove useful, well-managed and aligned with a sustainable alpine model, this period may be seen as a forward-looking investment.
If, however, the legacy consists of underused facilities, high maintenance costs and increasing pressure on the territory, the historical evaluation will be more critical.
Mountains operate on long timescales. The Olympics do not.
Ultimately, this Cortina 2026 local perspective remains open-ended. The true assessment will begin when the flags come down and Cortina returns to ordinary life.
