Every day on Trinity’s campus, students can be seen loitering outside the Arts Block, casually lighting their third cigarette of the day, or vaping with friends as they chat along the benches. The crisp January air is infused with the scent of cigarette smoke and Costa coffee, blending into the campus seamlessly. When your professor gives a 10-minute break, it’s likely that half your class will flock outside for a quick smoking session. This behavior is not unique to Trinity; it’s emblematic of the broader European college culture. However, in recent years, Trinity has entered a period of introspection regarding its smoking policies. The growing normalization of smoking and vaping culture has raised concerns about its impact on the Trinity community as a whole, leading to discussions about the possibility of making the campus completely smoke-free. Not only is the persistent nature of smoking on campus harmful to the health of smokers, but secondhand smoke also indirectly impacts everyone in the vicinity, making it challenging for those trying to quit smoking to stick to their goals.
Trinity serves as an academic space for research and learning, yet it currently operates as an institution that allows an activity known to have detrimental health effects. While the administration may vocalize that smoking is harmful, this message loses its impact when students and staff members engage in smoking themselves, undermining the seriousness of their concerns. Ultimately, the effort for smoke-free college campuses has been in progress for over a decade now, with various initiatives attempted by the Irish government with an emphasis on denormalizing smoking. This focus comes as no surprise, given it feels like a daily occurrence to see 13-year-olds in their private school uniforms pulling out their strawberry kiwi vape from their sweatshirts as they walk along Grafton Street. Or to observe the crowded vape shops on Parnell, consisting of teenagers excited and awaiting the restock of their favorite puff bar flavor. Ultimately, now more than ever, the increasing reliance on smoking from the younger generations, as there has become a significant spike in smoking for this generation, suggests that stricter regulations may be necessary to achieve the healthier campus environment that Trinity and the government so desire.
Trinity’s official website features a dedicated section for “Tobacco Free Trinity,” which aims to reduce the number of smokers on campus. This initiative provides courses and resources to assist individuals in quitting vaping and smoking and actively discourages tobacco use on campus grounds. ‘Healthy Trinity’ ambassadors play a key role in this effort, guiding smokers to designated areas, such as opposite the 24-Hour Reading Room in Kinsella Hall, behind the Catering Complex, and along the perimeter of College Park. Yet, without these ambassadors who have been nearly impossible to spot this year, there is no real enforcement of this policy, and maintaining this commitment relies significantly on the regulation from the ambassadors, as well as clear communication of its boundaries, which is lacking.
In 2016, Trinity established tobacco-free zones in three areas of the campus by the building entrances. The first location was Fellows Square, located outside the Arts Block, followed by the health center, and lastly, the sports center. Research conducted by Dr. David McGrath, Director of College Health Service and Chair of the Trinity Tobacco Policy Committee, revealed an impressive 81% decrease in smoking within these zones. When asked to comply with the policy, 94% of individuals adhered to the regulations, contributing to a cleaner and more environmentally conscious version of Trinity. Furthermore, the committee’s research also highlighted that the majority of postgraduate students, faculty, and staff supported measures to create a smoke-free campus. Yet, unsurprisingly it was the undergraduates who couldn’t neglect their prized Marlboro reds nor fathom the idea of being unable to light a cigarette on the 6th-floor balcony of the Arts Block. In 2013, a college-wide survey assessed undergraduate students’ attitudes regarding smoking on campus. The results showed that 88.8% of the respondents were not in favor of Trinity becoming a smoke-free campus. However, by 2018, it was reported that 71% of students supported Trinity’s tobacco-free initiative.
Maggie Whelan, a first-year student, expressed to the University Times her strong stance on the matter,
“I feel as though smoking has no place in an educational context. If Trinity has any ambiguous policies regarding smoking, it will create opportunities for students to push those boundaries, potentially leading to more indoor smoking as well. This is particularly true for vaping. If Trinity allows any form of smoking, it will likely remain popular on campus. There are students at Trinity who are immunocompromised, and second-hand smoke will seriously impact them. I feel that for all of Trinity’s talk about caring for the unique needs of their students, they purposefully ignore this critical fact.”
In 2015, University College Dublin established itself as a smoke-free workplace and campus. The National University of Ireland, the University of Limerick, and the Athlone Institute of Technology have all also adopted smoke-free campus policies. The University of Limerick recently implemented a no smoking or vaping policy across its entire campus, effective since December 2024. While achieving 100% compliance can be challenging, gradually expanding smoke-free zones may help balance student needs and demands while respecting personal freedoms. Colleges around the world pride themselves on their commitment to being accepting spaces where a diverse student body can thrive; however, to what extent does this inclusivity extend to the acceptance of one’s own personal choices? Even when health concerns are significant, the ultimate decision lies with the individual and their autonomy, creating a difficult balance that seems impossible to be met.
Conversations with students about this issue revealed a range of mixed emotions. One student, shared with University Times, “I feel indifferent about smoking on campus. I rarely notice it, and it doesn’t directly impact me.” When asked about the possibility of a smoking ban on campus, they stated, “It would not affect me personally if smoking is banned on school grounds. I think individuals should have the right to smoke or vape as long as it does not impact those around them or their environment. Honestly, I’m not convinced that banning it would have a significant effect; people will likely engage in it regardless. As adults, we are free to make our own choices, and everyone is aware of the health risks associated with smoking so let it be in their own hands.”
Another student interviewed expressed similar ambivalence about a potential smoking ban at Trinity. They said, “I feel conflicted about the topic because I recognize the health concerns, but on the other hand, people are entitled to make their own decisions.” They added, “I don’t believe that more smoking regulations would make a difference; it might even make people want to smoke more and encourage more vaping, especially indoors. If they want to get rid of smoking effectively, they would have to ban smoking as a whole” The student also noted, “I think Trinity might be more concerned about how it looks that their student body is actively smoking, especially regarding how tourists view it.”
These smoke-free areas are often placed in congested spots on campuses, resulting in students leaving the areas they once occupied and potentially disrupting social interactions. Additionally, creating designated smoking zones may seem like a reasonable compromise, but it could lead to overcrowding in these areas. The issue of smoking on campus presents various avenues for consideration. One possible solution is to implement more smoke-free zones, along with the enforcement of these areas. A more gradual strategy might prove to be more effective than an abrupt transition. But, if Trinity seeks to diminish the smoking culture entirely, strict enforcement with repercussions could be crucial; however, it is unlikely that the TCDSU would fully support such measures. While some colleges may have made strides toward creating smoke-free environments, the effectiveness of these initiatives ultimately hinges on their enforcement, which Trinity does not have. Additionally, stripping away a key element of campus culture could create a significant void, leading students to smoke or vape secretly indoors rather than outside, which would only intensify the effects of secondhand smoke.
Students enjoy smoking for its social attraction and often as a stress reliever to help them decompress and unwind. Nonetheless, perhaps this normalization of smoking has to be reevaluated, as it has become a behavior that students are accustomed to. As an institution, Trinity has a responsibility to embody the values and ideals it seeks to promote. The students are a reflection of Trinity’s identity. We must ask: is the loss of smoking on campus a part of Trinity’s identity that we are willing to say farewell to? Is it something we feel the need to preserve? Or instead, should Trinity distance itself from these past tendencies and foster a healthier and cleaner environment and culture?
Smoking is deeply embedded in the social norms and culture of not just Trinity’s campus, but all over Ireland, and while decreasing smoking is Trinity’s goal, it will not come without setbacks from the student body and an indefinite change in a student culture that finds itself most at ease when smoking and doesn’t view it as a problem, but instead a social prop.
