Mapping the Distribution of Tobacco Litter During the Haridwar Kumbh Mela 2021: A Compliance Assessment of Tobacco-Free Kumbh Mela

Abstract

Introduction:

Tobacco litter is one of the most common forms of litter, comprising between 26 and 33% of all visible litter, leading to severe environmental damage. The current study attempts to assess the compliance with the Tobacco-Free Kumbh Mela (TFKM) mandate by analyzing the spatial distribution of tobacco product wastes (TPWs) in Haridwar, Uttarakhand, during mid-March and April 2021.

Methods:

We collected information about TPWs (smoking and smokeless tobacco) in the Kumbh Mela area during the busiest week. The litter count (mean ± S.D.) was calculated for total TPWs along with litter density (per sqm) in various public places. We also used Quantum Geographic Information System (QGIS) software to develop a graduated map of the density of TPWs across the Kumbh Mela area.

Results:

Bathing areas at the TFKM, which had the largest population density, had the least litter count (4.33 ± 1.26) and density (0.9 per sqm). While in the remotest location, parking areas were found to have maximum litter count (30.0 ± 18.0) and density (6.5 per sqm). Overall, the surveyed sites were non-compliant with the Tobacco-free Kumbh Mela as notified by the state government.

Conclusion:

Mass awareness campaigns should be undertaken at large scale to educate tobacco users regarding the harmful effects of tobacco use and the TPWs while inculcating a pro-envirnoment attitude to ensure compliance with directives like TFKM.

INTRODUCTION

The Kumbh Mela is the world’s largest and most anticipated Hindu pilgrimage festival, held every 12 years in four Indian cities along the banks of the sacred rivers Ganges (Haridwar and Prayagraj), Godavari (Nasik), and Kshipra (Ujjain). During 2021, Kumbh Mela was held in Haridwar in the months of January to April, fanning out over 150 km² covering four districts, namely, Haridwar, Dehradun, Tehri Garhwal and Pauri Garhwal.[1] Keeping with the previous Haridwar Kumbh Mela, 150 million pilgrims were expected in the Mela, but due to the sudden surge in COVID-19 cases during mid-March and April 2021, only 9.1 million visitors attended the Mela.[2]

Smoking and the use of smokeless, particularly practices involving spitting, increases the risk of COVID-19 transmission and related complications.[3,4] Evidence of this risk was observed during the surge in respiratory illnesses and COVID-19 cases among Hajj pilgrims.[5] Large mass gatherings such as the Kumbh Mela and Hajj can therefore act as potential hotspots for the spread of communicable diseases, including COVID-19, at a global level.[6,7,8] To prevent the Kumbh Mela from evolving into a cluster of COVID-19 cases, the Government of Uttarakhand issued advisories prohibiting the use, sale, and advertising of tobacco products, with the aim of observing and promoting a Tobacco-Free Kumbh Mela (TFKM) in Haridwar.[9]

This measure was not only to protect the locals and pilgrims from the harms of tobacco use or to prevent transmission of COVID-19 during the pandemic but also to minimize the tobacco product waste (TPW) that harms the environment, entire ecosystem, bioaccumulating at every level of the food chain. Every year in India, roughly 39,885 tons of cigarette or Beedi butts and tobacco product sachets end up as toxic trash, summing up to the weight of 7977 African elephants.[10] In United States, 38% of all roadways’ litter comprises of tobacco products.[11] High ratios of urban litter comprises of TPWs, especially cigarette butts, over 7000 toxic chemicals,[12] which end up on streets, in drains, rivers, and soil and pollute the aquatic ecosystem.[13,14,15,16]

Data from the “Center for Marine Conservation’s International Coastal Clean-up Project” suggested that a minimum of 4.5 trillion filter cigarettes globally are stashed either in disposal facilities or end up on beaches and in the aquatic ecosystem.[17] “Keep Britain Tidy” campaign estimated that a rise in the sale of cigarettes (from 6 trillion to 9 trillion) per year will be seen by 2025, out of which two-thirds will be littered.[18] “Litter in America” in their nationwide study, concluded a 65% of the overall littering rate is for cigarette butts.[11]

Section 4 of The Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 (COTPA)[19] prohibits smoking in public places it also bans all forms of direct and indirect advertising, promotion, and sponsorship of tobacco products. Furthermore, the solid waste management regulations under the Environment Protection Act prohibit the use of plastic to pack tobacco products.[20,21] In addition, to contain the COVID-19 pandemic both national and state governments issued several advisories and regulations preventing tobacco sale, use, or spitting in public places.[22,23,24] Given the commitment of the state of Uttarakhand for a TFKM in the midst of COVID-19 pandemic and in view of the high burden of tobacco use in state (26.5%),[25] this study aims to look at the density of litters to assess the compliance with the TFKM mandate. This study also attempts to formulate a “Tobacco Litter Index,” (taking up the observed TPW density in Haridwar, as the basis) that may be utilized by the national, state, or city administration to monitor TPW.

METHODOLOGY

TPWs were observed at various public places during the Kumbh mela; quantification of the litter as well as its proximity to the nearest litter bins or trash cans within the selected spots was noted. Considering the maximum footfall of 3.5 million pilgrims visiting the Mela on April 12^th, 2021 (Somvati Amavasya holy dip, or the first shahi snan),[2] the survey team chose the busiest week, i.e., 17–24 April 2021 for the observation excluding the Sunday. The observations were carried out at two times in the day, i.e., morning 7.00–11.00 am (IST = Indian standard time) and evening: 4.00–7.00 pm (IST) (the estimated maximum footfall coinciding with the Ganga Aarti timings; morning: 05.35 and evening: 18.30).

To develop a variable list of potential high TPW locations, we created a list of venues where tobacco products were either sold or consumed. We gathered data about the administrative boundaries of the Mela. The administrative jurisdiction of the 2021 Kumbh Mela extended over a vast area of nearly 150 km² (approximately 1454 ha), encompassing parts of four districts of Uttarakhand—Haridwar, Dehradun, Pauri Garhwal and Tehri Garhwal. For effective planning and management, the entire area was demarcated into 41 administrative sectors. While maintaining homogeneity among the sampled sites or venues within the Mela premises, four categories of public places were identified: (i) commute and transportation areas, such as bus stand, taxi stand, railway station; (ii) ghats/bathing areas; (iii) commercial market area, and (iv) parking area. Furthermore, due to COVID-19–related movement restrictions and curfews in the form of night curfew dated 20^th April from 7 pm to 5 am as per Government of Uttarakhand, Dehradun Order No. 68/USDMA/792 (2020) and complete curfew dated 28^th May onwards as per Government of Uttarakhand, Dehradun Order No. 70/USDMA-792 (20240), data were collected using a nonprobability convenience sampling approach. Only venues that were accessible during the permitted hours prior to the complete curfew could be surveyed, resulting in a total of 18 venues. The data collected were then used to estimate the density and distribution of TPW in the Kumbh Mela area applying Geographic Information System (GIS) tools.

A structured checklist was developed following an extensive review of the literature and underwent face validation by a panel of four public health experts. A 17-item survey instrument was finalized and converted into an English-language Google Form (https://forms.gle/HBK56fyr6nVRVpdn6), and pilot tested prior to final data collection to assess feasibility and operational clarity. Volunteers subsequently received structured training on the study objectives, survey tool, and standardized operational definitions of all observational variables, including procedures for demarcating the fixed 5 × 10-foot sampling area. Two survey teams, each comprising four trained volunteers, were constituted, with each team assigned nine venues. Field observations were conducted in pairs, with observations cross-verified immediately after data collection to minimize recording errors. Interobserver variability was addressed through paired observations, on-site consensus resolution of discrepancies guided by predefined criteria, and periodic supervisory checks to ensure consistency and adherence to the study protocol. The survey captured information on the types and locations of tobacco product waste (TPW) within the mela area, and the civic status of venues was categorized as urban, semiurban, or rural based on population size (urban: 1–10 lakh; semiurban: 10,000–1 lakh; rural: <10,000).[26]

Within each selected venue, a fixed and predefined area (5 × 10 feet) was demarcated as the sampling unit, following the spatial sampling methodology described by Marah and Novotny. The data collectors were required to mark the area by measuring an approximate distance of 5 ft right in front of the entry, exit or common point of the public place and 10 ft on either side by walking method.[27] Generally, the bathing areas do not have any specific entry or exit points, but in view of the COVID-19 pandemic, special points were established for crowd management.

The number of smoking and smokeless TPWs, including packets were recorded. The data collectors also collected the geotagged photographs of the TPWs found to further carry out brand analysis.

The last section of the survey tool gathered information about the surrounding environment, viz., the number and presence of litter bins in the sampling area and proximity of litter bins (in feet measured by walking method) from the entry/exit/common point of the public place. Real-time Air Quality Index (AQI) data for each sampled area were recorded in situ using a publicly available mobile application (AQI [Air Quality Index], version 3.4; Google Play Store). The application reports AQI values based on data obtained from nearby government and regulatory air quality monitoring stations rather than direct sensor-based measurements at the study sites. As the measurements were derived from secondary data sources accessed via the application, no on-site calibration of air quality monitors was performed as part of the study. The same application and version were consistently used across all sampling locations to ensure uniformity of data collection.

Using Quantum GIS (QGIS Version 3.18 “Zürich,” https://qgis.org/en/site/), the location of all the 18 venues was geotagged, and a graduated map was derived. The density of TPW per square meter (per sqm) was the unit of measurement.

The mean (+/− S.D.) was calculated for AQI and total TPWs along with the density (per sqm) of TPWs in each category of public place. The Tobacco Litter Index (TLI) was developed as an ordinal, exploratory index derived from observed TPW density values. Continuous TPW densities (TPWs/m²) were categorized into five graded levels (I–V), representing increasing degrees of tobacco litter burden. The index was designed to standardize site-level density measurements into interpretable categories to facilitate comparison across venues and to support environmental and public health interpretation. For each of the categories of public places and types of litter, numbers and proportions were computed. Type of litter was categorized as tobacco (smoking in the form of cigarettes and beedi buts and smokeless in the form of spit/spittle/tobacco juice/spitting marks) and nontobacco litter (leftovers in the form of plastic coverings, foils, torn parts of packs and packets including cigarette packs, beedi packs, sachets/boxes of tobacco products). All the statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics Software, version 25 (Chicago, USA).[28]

RESULTS

Most of the surveyed venues were noncompliant with the TFKM mandates [Table 1]. The majority of them fall under the category of commute and transportation area (11 venues), followed by ghats/bathing area (3 venues), parking area (2 venues), and commercial market area (2 venues). The majority of the venues (16, 88.9%) were urban areas, with one venue each in semiurban and rural categories. We observed that the Parking areas recorded the maximum mean number (30.0 ± 18.0) and density (6.5 units/m²) of TPWs, along with maximum mean AQI (95.0 ± 1.0). Similarly, ghats/bathing areas recorded minimum values for all three variables [Table 1]. A graduated map depicting the densities of TPWs across the Mela premises was developed using QGIS [Figure 1]. Based on the same densities, a TLI was developed, where the lowest density (0.0–2.0 TPWs/m²) was represented as Grade I and the highest (8.1–10.0 TPWs/m²) as Grade V [Table 2].

Table 1.

Characteristics of tobacco product wastes observed at the surveyed venues within the Kumbh Mela area, based on direct field observations within demarcated sampling areas

Type of public places*	Number of public places observed (n=18) (n, %)	AQI (Mean±SD)	Number of TPWs (n=261) (Mean±SD)	Density of TPW (per sq m)
Commute and transportation area	11 (61.11)	87.73±10.81	11.72±6.70	2.5
Ghats/bathing area	3 (16.67)	83.0±8.74	4.33±1.26	0.9
Commercial market area	2 (11.11)	88.66±10.11	29.5±33.23	6.3
Parking area	2 (11.11)	95.0±1.0	30.0±18.0	6.5

*The surveyed venues did not fall into the remaining three categories of public places

Figure 1.

Graduated map illustrating the spatial distribution and density grades (Tobacco Litter Index, Grades I–V) across surveyed public venues in the Kumbh Mela area, Haridwar district

Table 2.

Tobacco litter index: grading of tobacco product waste density (TPWs per square meter) used to classify levels of tobacco litter burden

Grade	Grade density of TPWs (in per sqm)
I	0.0–2.0
II	2.1–4.0
III	4.1–6.0
IV	6.1–8.0
V	8.1–10.0

Smoking tobacco (171, 65.52%) and leftover wastes (160, 61.3%) outweighed SLT wastes (90, 34.48%) and packets (101, 38.7%) [Table 3].

Table 3.

Categorization of litter observed at the surveyed venues within the Kumbh Mela area

Type of public places*	Smoking tobacco litter (n=171) (n, %))	Smokeless tobacco litter (n=90) (n, %)	Leftovers (n=160) (n, %)	Packets (n=101) (n, %)
Bus stand/Taxi stand/railway station	93 (54.38)	36 (40.0)	83 (51.87)	46 (45.55)
Ghats/bathing area	9 (5.26)	4 (4.45)	9 (5.63)	4 (3.96)
Commercial market area	46 (26.9)	13 (14.44)	46 (28.75)	13 (12.87)
Parking areas	23 (13.46)	37 (41.11)	22 (13.75)	38 (37.62)

*The surveyed venues did not fall into the remaining three categories of public places

On performing the brand analysis from the photographs taken during the data collection, a total number of 15 brands (Nine SLT brands—Gagan pan masala, V1 Tobacco, DB Royal, Golden Spit tobacco, Black Label, Swagat Gold, Safal, Blue Chewing Tobacco, Double black; Three Cigarette brands—Malboro, Gold Flake and Capstan; and two beedi brands—Jaswant Chaap Bidi, Mohen Biri) were identified from the 101 packets observed from the photographs of the litters and TPWs taken during the survey [Figure 2].

Figure 2.

Photographic documentation of tobacco product wastes (TPWs) observed at selected surveyed venues within the Kumbh Mela area, Haridwar district

DISCUSSION

This study facilitates us to discern an impactful way of monitoring compliance with Section 4 of COTPA during a congregation of this magnitude (approximately 3.5 million pilgrims took the holy dip on the 12^th April, 2021),[2] amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, by the application of GIS tools and assessing the TPW density.

A similar study conducted at Thailand’s most popular public beaches examined the presence of tobacco product waste (TPW), particularly in areas with the highest visitor concentration.[29] In contrast to our findings, which showed relatively low TPW density in the most crowded spots, the Thailand study reported the greatest accumulation of TPWs precisely in areas where people congregated the most. We surveyed these venues, marking an area of 5 × 10 feet right in front of the entry, exit, or common points,[27] as reported by previous research-based evidence regarding compliance with 100% smoke-free college campus policies, fewer cigarette butts were observed near building entrances than those campuses with partial or no policies.[30] Also, entry or exit points are the key areas to study the littering patterns.[17]

This paper exhibits the first evidence of compliance with tobacco control policies during a mass gathering like the Kumbh Mela in India, by observing and mapping the distribution of TPWs in the Mela area. Previously conducted compliance assessments carried out across various districts/states of India, like Alwar, Mohali, and Himachal Pradesh, have exhibited 80–100% compliance to COTPA,[31,32,33] in contrast to those conducted in South Bengaluru, Delhi, and Chandigarh, where the compliance was less than 50%.[34,35,36] Our study also finds varying levels of violations of the TFKM mandate at all the surveyed sites, with varying TPW density from 0.9 to 6.5.

The Tobacco Litter Index proposed in this study represents an exploratory, data-derived classification of tobacco litter burden rather than a fully validated index. The grading thresholds were based on observed density distributions within the study setting and should be interpreted as context-specific. Further research is required to validate the index across different geographic settings, assess its sensitivity and reliability, and examine its utility in relation to environmental and public health outcomes.

Based on these findings, enhanced surveillance of public spaces, stricter enforcement of smoke-free and tobacco-free regulations, and strategic placement of additional litter bins are recommended to improve compliance with tobacco-free mandates. Complementing these measures with targeted education on the environmental hazards of tobacco product waste (TPW) and the health risks of tobacco use may foster proenvironmental behavior among users, further supporting adherence to tobacco control directives. Ghats/bathing areas recorded the minimum number of TPWs even though these spots are the attraction points of the Kumbh Mela, owing to a more compliant attitude or stricter regulations against tobacco use in these areas.[19] Similar patterns in terms of littered wastes (majority being cigarette butts) was concluded by Gholami et al., depicting lowest pollution in recreational areas whereas, maximum pollution was observed in low-density commercial areas.[16] Keeping with this and another study from Argentina,[37] we also found high densities of TPWs in commercial areas with a maximum density in parking places. This distribution of TPWs can be attributed to the consumer’s habit, lack of knowledge about harmful effects of tobacco litter, careless behavior, and limited regulation in such areas.[38,39,40]

Few studies have noted that littering may occur when no bins are available.[41,42,43] Absence of a bin in the vicinity can also be linked to the likelihood of littering, as revealed in the previous studies.[44,45] In contrast, some studies reported that despite the presence of a litter bin, most of the littering occurred within 5–8 m of the bin.[45,46]

Earlier studies reveal that proximity and the number of litter bins tend to reduce the littering rates,[41,47,48] while a study conducted in the United States did not find any association between the presence/availability of litter and the number of litter bins.[45]

Many studies supported the fact that presence of butt bins or cigarette butt receptacles lead to reduction of cigarette litter,[11,48,49] whereas our results does not show any relationship between the presence of receptacles and the quantity of TPWs. This finding is similar to the study by Patel et al., which found that butt littering had been a norm among the smokers regardless of the availability of bins.[50]

While conducting the brand analysis, many of the SLT brands could not be identified, and therefore, the proportional estimation could not be done. Although we deciphered 15 brands, only one cigarette brand (Gold Flake) was found in common with another study from Central Delhi.[51]

Elevated AQI levels observed in outdoor settings with minimal or no vehicular traffic may indicate the presence of additional pollution sources, including potential noncompliance with smoke-free public place regulations, although other environmental contributors cannot be excluded. Prior studies conducted under controlled or near-source conditions have shown that cigarette smoke can substantially impair air quality, in some cases exceeding the impact of vehicular emissions.[52,53] In contrast, this study used ambient AQI estimates in open, outdoor settings during a mass gathering, and although higher TPW density coincided with elevated AQI in parking areas, this association cannot be attributed to active smoking in the absence of evidence of recent smoking activity and given the likely contribution of vehicular emissions.

Mistry et al. has applied GIS tools to assess community factors that influence tobacco use in adolescents across two metropolitans (Mumbai and Kolkata) in India.[54] Marah and Novotny also made use of GIS tools, creating a weighted overlay model associating the distribution of cigarette butts with point of sale and consumption pattern.[27] Therefore, we propose a method of estimating the littering pattern based on density of TPWs using GIS tools to prepare a graduated map of densities of TPWs. Furthermore, the application of GIS tools in mapping litter, not only encompasses the limitations of single observational methods with few sampled sites, but the results can also be extrapolated across larger areas.[14] Geospatial models and data can also be used to redirect cleaning programs, to map the tobacco vendors, location of public places according to COTPA, to understand the littering behavior of the consumers, to facilitate policy makers in making informed decisions about new interventions and policy reforms related to TPW removal and vendor licensing.[54,55]

This study has several important limitations that should be considered when interpreting the findings. The early conclusion of the Mela due to a surge in COVID-19 cases restricted the number of venues that could be surveyed, resulting in a limited sample size and constraining the generalizability of the results beyond the studied setting. Inclusion of a larger number of sites would have enabled greater external validity and facilitated replication across different contexts. In addition, the absence of a qualitative component limited insights into users’ perspectives and contextual drivers of tobacco product waste (TPW) littering behavior. Future studies incorporating qualitative methods and assessing knowledge and perceptions related to TPW toxicity could support the development of targeted behavioral and policy interventions.

CONCLUSION

The findings underscore the need for stronger implementation of existing tobacco control and waste management policies at large mass-gathering events. The widespread presence of tobacco product waste (TPW) at the mela highlights gaps in the enforcement of smoke-free regulations and in on-site waste disposal infrastructure. Event organizers and local authorities should prioritize stricter enforcement of public smoking bans, ensure adequate placement and maintenance of waste bins in high-footfall areas, and integrate targeted educational campaigns on TPW disposal into event planning. Policymakers may also consider strengthening product-level and point-of-sale communication on the environmental and health impacts of TPW, alongside stricter enforcement of bans on plastic packaging used for tobacco products. Collectively, these measures can help reduce TPW generation and environmental contamination at mass gatherings and support more effective tobacco control in similar settings across India.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

Funding Statement

Nil.