Reference Article: Editorial – The Hindu

UPSC Relevance:
– GS Paper III: Disaster Preparedness, Infrastructure, and Safety Management
– Essay Paper: Public Policy and Systemic Governance Failures

The recent Srikakulam crowd collapse at an unregistered private temple once again exposed the persistent and systemic failures in India’s crowd management and safety governance. Despite decades of tragic precedents, including the Hathras stampede (2024) and the Sabarimala crush (2011), the underlying causes — inadequate planning, weak infrastructure, and lack of enforcement — remain largely unaddressed. The Srikakulam tragedy occurred under predictable conditions: high footfall on a festive day, single entry-exit routes, absence of stewarding, and use of an under-construction area by the public. These were not unforeseeable hazards but preventable lapses that reflect the chronic disconnect between safety guidelines and their enforcement.

Recurring Patterns and Systemic Weaknesses

• Common Causes: Each of the major crowd crushes — from Sabarimala to Hathras and now Srikakulam — reveal reciprocal pedestrian flows, shared gates, and severely overshot capacities. These are compounded by inadequate infrastructure, lack of trained stewards, and absence of real-time density monitoring.
• Ignored Protocols: India already possesses well-documented safety frameworks, including the 2014 National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) guidelines and the National Building Code (NBC). These prescribe methods for crowd flow planning, density limits, evacuation times, and load-rated barricades. Yet, they are rarely integrated into the actual management of religious gatherings.
• Gap Between Guidance and Practice: The problem is not a lack of knowledge but of implementation discipline. Examples such as the Integrated Command and Control Centre (ICCC) at Tirumala show that it is possible to operationalise these frameworks through real-time analytics, licensed plans, and certified structures. However, these best practices remain exceptions rather than norms.

Religious Gatherings and Regulatory Lapses

Nearly 80% of crowd disasters in India occur during religious events or pilgrimages. These gatherings often escape scrutiny because they are organised without mandatory licences or engineering audits. The key lapses include:

• Permissions granted without a verifiable crowd safety plan or risk assessment
• Ad hoc capacity estimation based on area size instead of evacuation feasibility
• Temporary and uncertified structures such as weak barricades and makeshift platforms
• Poor crowd segregation and circulation design, allowing dangerous bidirectional flow
• Inadequate coordination among local authorities, event organisers, and emergency services

These structural weaknesses create a fragile environment where a minor trigger — a surge, a fall, or misinformation — can escalate into mass casualties.

Policy and Institutional Failures

India’s recurring stampedes reveal a pattern of institutional complacency and reactive policymaking. The post-tragedy response typically involves inquiries and compensation rather than systemic correction. The absence of a unified licensing system that mandates compliance with NDMA and NBC standards enables organisers to operate outside the safety framework. Furthermore, religious events are treated as cultural or spiritual phenomena rather than as engineered systems requiring technical oversight.

The failure to integrate data-driven crowd monitoring, trained personnel deployment, and certified design audits underscores the gap between regulation and reality. Until crowd management is treated as a core aspect of urban and disaster governance, such incidents will continue to recur.

Analytical Insights

1. From Reactive to Preventive Governance:
   India’s crowd disasters illustrate the need for a proactive, process-driven model of safety enforcement rather than post-incident crisis management.
2. Engineering-Based Crowd Planning:
   Religious and public gatherings must be governed by quantifiable engineering parameters — capacity, evacuation time, flow direction, and load distribution — rather than estimations based on faith or tradition.
3. Enforced Licensing Regime:
   Every mass event must require a safety licence linked to compliance audits by certified engineers and disaster management authorities.
4. Technology-Driven Real-Time Control:
   Deployment of CCTV analytics, density sensors, and communication systems for on-ground stewards can enable dynamic crowd control and early warning mechanisms.
5. Accountability Mechanism:
   Clearly defined liability chains — from organisers to local administrators — are essential to ensure responsibility and deterrence against negligence.

Conclusion

The Srikakulam tragedy is not an isolated accident but part of a predictable and preventable pattern rooted in weak enforcement and institutional neglect. India already possesses the technical knowledge and regulatory frameworks to prevent such incidents; what is missing is consistent implementation and accountability. To make public gatherings safer, India must establish a mandatory, audited licensing system for all high-footfall events, grounded in NDMA and NBC compliance.

Ultimately, public safety must be treated as a continuous process, not a reaction to disaster. Religious and cultural events should be engineered, monitored, and managed with the same rigour as any large-scale industrial or infrastructural operation. Only through this shift in policy culture can India end the recurring cycle of preventable crowd disasters.

UPSC Mains Practice Question:

India has adequate disaster management guidelines for crowd control, yet stampedes continue to occur. Analyse the reasons for this implementation gap and suggest a framework for ensuring safety at mass gatherings.