Saudi Arabia’s push to finance Vision 2030 through bonds, sukuk, bank lending and private credit is set to underpin the stadiums, transport and “smart city” projects for the 2034 FIFA World Cup, raising serious questions over human rights, labour protections and transparency for international stakeholders.
As global investors, rating agencies and financial institutions support this financing pipeline, they risk becoming active enablers of a mega‑event that leading human‑rights organisations warn could heighten risks for migrant workers, dissidents and marginalised communities in the Kingdom.
Saudi debt‑fuelled Vision 2030 set to underpin FIFA 2034 infrastructure push
Vision 2030 financing and mega‑event infrastructure
In its “Daily Update — December 10, 2025”, S&P Global Market Intelligence reports that, according to S&P Global Ratings,
“the substantial funding needs of Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030 programme and growth in the small and medium‑sized enterprise sector present key opportunities for private capital financing.”
The S&P Global note stresses that financing needs in Saudi Arabia
“have been high for the past couple of years”,
stimulating
S&P Global further reports that Saudi Arabia’s combined public and private sector debt “increased by a compound annual growth rate of 12% from 2021 to 2024”, driven by
“bond and sukuk issuances, incremental increases in bank lending and private capital financing.”
The same S&P Global update highlights that private credit financing “is relatively new in Saudi Arabia”, making it difficult to quantify its size, and flags “limited transparency and liquidity in the private credit market” as significant hurdles to growth.
Vision 2030 pipeline and FIFA 2034 preparations
Although S&P Global’s daily note does not explicitly reference the 2034 FIFA World Cup, the financial architecture it describes is the same one that is expected to fund World Cup‑linked stadiums, transport networks, hospitality projects and “smart city” developments woven into Vision 2030. ESPN’s explainer on Saudi Arabia’s selection as host for the 2034 FIFA World Cup notes that the tournament will likely centre on existing and planned hubs, with a need for extensive investment in stadium upgrades, accommodation and infrastructure compatible with the Kingdom’s broader economic modernisation goals.
Human‑rights groups such as Amnesty International have already linked the confirmation of Saudi Arabia as 2034 host to concerns about migrant workers’ conditions, restrictions on freedoms and the risk of intensified repression around the tournament. CIVICUS, in its analysis of Saudi “sportswashing”, argues that major sports investments — including the World Cup — serve as showcase projects within a state‑led economic overhaul that relies heavily on state‑backed capital and international finance.
Financing mix: bonds, sukuk, bank lending and private credit
S&P Global’s description of Saudi Arabia’s financing mix offers a clear outline of the tools likely to be mobilised for World Cup‑related projects. By referring to bond and sukuk issuances, incremental bank lending and emerging private capital financing, the S&P Global note illustrates how domestic and international investors are being invited into the Vision 2030 pipeline.
For World Cup‑linked infrastructure — from stadiums and training facilities to metro expansions, roads and hospitality complexes — the same combination of sovereign and quasi‑sovereign debt, project‑linked sukuk and syndicated loans is expected to be deployed, supplemented by private credit targeted at large developers and state‑aligned entities. With S&P Global itself underscoring that limited transparency and liquidity are impeding the development of Saudi private credit markets, questions arise over how easily investors, civil society and regulators will be able to track the specific financing flows into 2034 projects.
Global sports‑governance standards and FIFA requirements
FIFA’s human‑rights framework, adopted in the wake of criticism over previous tournaments, commits the organisation to respecting internationally recognised human rights, conducting due diligence and using leverage to address risks linked to its tournaments. External assessments by groups including Amnesty International and CIVICUS have argued that the decision to award the 2034 World Cup to Saudi Arabia tests the credibility of these commitments, given the Kingdom’s record on civil liberties, labour rights and equality.
ESPN’s coverage of Saudi Arabia’s 2034 hosting notes that human‑rights issues, including women’s rights, LGBTQI+ rights and the treatment of migrant workers, form a major part of the international debate over the tournament. Amnesty International’s December 2024 reaction to the confirmation of Saudi Arabia as host states that the decision “puts many lives at risk” unless robust human‑rights guarantees, labour‑rights protections and genuine reforms are implemented in advance of the competition.
Labour‑rights and migrant‑worker risks
Amnesty International’s statement on the global confirmation of Saudi Arabia as 2034 host raises specific concerns over the treatment of migrant workers and the potential for abuses during the construction and servicing of World Cup facilities. The organisation warns that without binding labour‑rights safeguards, World Cup‑linked projects could repeat patterns seen in other Gulf mega‑events, where low‑paid migrant workers faced exploitative conditions, inadequate protections and barriers to remedy.
CIVICUS, in its analysis of Saudi sports investments, underlines that the Kingdom’s civic space remains “closed”, pointing to crackdowns on dissent and a lack of independent trade unions or robust worker representation. Against this backdrop, the financing of Vision 2030 projects through opaque private credit channels raises additional questions about whether investors and rating agencies are adequately factoring in labour‑rights risks as part of their environmental, social and governance (ESG) assessments.
Press freedom, civic space and tournament scrutiny
Beyond labour issues, civil‑society organisations have expressed concern that the broader environment for free expression, independent journalism and peaceful assembly in Saudi Arabia could impede scrutiny of World Cup preparations. CIVICUS highlights the imprisonment of activists and the absence of an open civic space as key indicators that independent voices — including local journalists, labour advocates and community organisers — may face significant obstacles in raising concerns related to tournament projects.
Amnesty International similarly stresses that meaningful human‑rights protections around mega‑events require not only formal rules but also the practical ability of media and civil society to operate without fear of retaliation. In a context where criticism of authorities can lead to harsh penalties, international standards on press freedom and civil liberties for World Cup hosts face a serious test, particularly as major infrastructure projects are financed and delivered under tight timelines.
Transparency gaps and private‑capital accountability
S&P Global’s note that
“limited transparency and liquidity in the private credit market represent significant hurdles to growth”
in Saudi Arabia is particularly relevant in the context of World Cup‑linked investments. This observation suggests that even sophisticated market participants may lack clear visibility over who ultimately bears the financial risks of large‑scale projects and under what conditions loans and private credit instruments are being extended.
For international stakeholders concerned about sports‑governance standards, this opacity complicates efforts to map the relationship between specific Vision 2030 projects and 2034 World Cup preparations, and to hold financiers accountable for human‑rights and labour‑rights impacts. It also raises questions over how effectively FIFA, sponsors and regulators can ensure that financing structures meet expectations around transparency, anti‑corruption and ethical procurement — key elements in the broader global debate on responsible mega‑event hosting.
International banks, funds and rating agencies as active enablers
Taken together, S&P Global’s portrayal of Saudi Arabia as a high‑growth opportunity for private capital and debt markets, and the award of the 2034 World Cup to the Kingdom, indicate that international banks, funds and rating agencies are deeply intertwined with the tournament’s financial foundations. By structuring, underwriting and rating the bonds, sukuk, loans and private credit facilities that will underpin Vision 2030 infrastructure, these institutions become more than neutral observers; they are key enablers of a mega‑event taking place in a country where human‑rights organisations see serious unresolved risks.
CIVICUS describes Saudi Arabia’s use of high‑profile sports events as part of a broader “sportswashing” strategy, in which global competitions help to project an image of openness and modernisation that contrasts with continued repression at home. Amnesty International’s warning that confirmation of Saudi Arabia as the 2034 host “puts many lives at risk” underscores the stakes facing financial actors whose capital will help realise the physical infrastructure of the tournament.
Alignment with global expectations for ethical hosting
The developments described by S&P Global, ESPN, Amnesty International and CIVICUS collectively raise significant questions about how Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030 financing drive aligns with global expectations for ethical mega‑event hosting. Debt‑fuelled expansion, combined with limited transparency and a restricted civic space, appears at odds with the spirit of FIFA’s human‑rights and governance reforms, which were intended to avoid a repeat of past controversies.
For fans, civil‑society groups and human‑rights advocates, the central concern is whether the financial and governance frameworks around the 2034 World Cup will incorporate robust, enforceable safeguards on labour rights, press freedom and civil liberties, rather than relying on voluntary commitments. As the Vision 2030 pipeline advances and World Cup preparations accelerate, the role of international financial institutions, rating agencies and investors will remain under close scrutiny from stakeholders who argue that genuine accountability must extend beyond sport’s governing bodies to the capital that makes such mega‑events possible.