Milano-Cortina is live right now, and it feels like a tipping point.

Not because the athletes are any less impressive, but because the idea of “Winter Olympics” is getting harder to justify. Fewer places can reliably host snow-based events, and that list is shrinking. The real question is not where the Games should go next. It is what they should become.

Sustainability and relevance, at the same time

A great comment under my LinkedIn post framed it well: from the IOC1’s point of view, the priority is sustainability so the Games can keep happening. For the public, the priority is relevance so more people can identify with the athletes and the sports.

Summer Olympics feel universal. Winter Olympics still belong to a relatively small, geographically concentrated club. So if we want them to survive, “more snowmaking” and “more infrastructure” cannot be the long-term answer. At best it buys time. At worst it deepens the contradiction.

A possible future: an Olympics of outdoor sports

One direction feels obvious: an Olympics of outdoor sports.

Sports rooted in real landscapes, practiced across seasons, deeply connected to the outdoors. Mountain biking. Trail running. Rock climbing. White-water kayaking. Ski mountaineering. Disciplines that already exist, already thrive, and already attract a new generation.

These are not just sports. They are ways of inhabiting nature responsibly.

But the key constraint is this: expand relevance without expanding impact. Otherwise we just move the same problems somewhere else.

Lighter infrastructure, stronger meaning

Unlike the Summer Olympics, which are inseparable from megacities, stadiums, and carbon-heavy logistics, Winter Olympics have always been centred on mountains and natural sites.

An Outdoor Olympics could be decentralized, landscape-first, lighter in infrastructure, and stronger in meaning. Our mountains, valleys, rivers and forests are already the most spectacular stadiums on Earth.

Why this matters for mountains in every season

This is exactly the question we explore with Mr. Alps: how mountains can thrive in every season, without fighting reality.

The Games are on. The debate should be too.

Read the article on Mr. Alps:
https://mralps.com/en/alpinsight/milano-cortina-last-winter-olympics-as-we-know-them?utm_source=alpinsight&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=milano_cortina

Most of the year, the Alps are sold as a product: snow, pistes, postcard villages, “escape.” And then Davos week happens. Suddenly the Alps aren’t an escape from the world, they’re where the world shows up.

This week, the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2026 expects close to 3,000 participants from 130+ countries, with around 400 political leaders and 65 heads of state/government.

I’m not writing this as a journalist (I’m not one). I’m writing it as someone building Mr. Alps, obsessed with one question:

What can be a resilient future for the Alps?

And Davos is the most extreme, slightly bizarre, very swiss answer I can think of.

1/4 | Davos didn’t “become Davos” at once

What clicked for me (thanks to a great FT piece) is that Davos kept switching identities, before it became necessary.

1.⁠ ⁠Health: 19th century clean-air / tuberculosis destination.
2.⁠ ⁠Culture: Thomas Mann’s novel the Magic Mountain hardwired Davos into the elite European imagination.
3.⁠ ⁠Sport: serious ski destination.
4.⁠ ⁠Conference: in 1971 a modest management symposium arrives… and eventually becomes the WEF ritual.

WEF is just the latest layer in a town that’s been reinventing itself for more than a century.

2/4 | A model of reinvention for the Alps at large?

Davos has ~11,000 residents, but around ~28,000 guest beds; and WEF week basically fills them. You can question what the WEF “achieves” for the Davos residents as it comes with housing and transport pressure, emissions, who benefits vs who gets squeezed and the dependency on one event / one image.

But Davos is also a village-size place managing very successfully to generate an identity that has nothing to do with snowfall. Not even really to do with skiing. Most Alpine destinations try to extend the season by adding activities: trail running, wellness, festivals. Sometimes it works. Often it’s still fragile. Davos does something different: it anchors one week around something you can’t easily copy-paste elsewhere.

3/4 | What’s different about WEF 2026 (and why it matters for the Alps)

This edition feels unusually tense. Geopolitics is explicitly in the air: tariffs, friction, the future of multilateral cooperation. But alongside the main meeting, WEF’s Open Forum includes “the future of our mountain regions” as a topic.

That’s rare. Mountain regions usually appear in global conversations as:

•⁠ ⁠a metaphor (“resilience,” “peaks”)

•⁠ ⁠or a background image (literally)

The Alps aren’t just scenery. They’re territories with real climate and economic constraints, and real choices to make.

4/4 | The Davos case study for Alpine villages

A lot of places treat off-season as a marketing problem: “How do we fill beds in April / May / November?”. But Davos suggests a different frame: Not “what can we add?” But rather “what do we stand for, year-round?” Davos has answered that question multiple times: health → culture → sport → international summits.

So the practical thought I’m taking back to Mr. Alps (and the 1,300+ villages I’m mapping): The Alpine villages that find purpose won’t just diversify activities. They’ll build repeatable moments that make them matter.

Not necessarily mega-events. Not stadiums. Not copy-paste festivals.

Smaller, identity-shaped experiences that fit the place. Something concrete that helps mountain regions stay liveable, not just visitable.

Because if Davos has a true “superpower,” it’s not luxury, and it’s not beauty. It’s the willingness to reinvent before the old model breaks.