organic farming in sri lanka research paper

• Corpus ID: 8690309

Organic Farming in Sri Lanka

• U. R. Sangakkara
• Published 2004
• Agricultural and Food Sciences

7 Citations

Farmers’ attitude towards organic agriculture: a case of rural sri lanka, challenges and way-forward of non-organic agriculture to organic agriculture: a comparative study between china and sri lanka, agricultural research for sustainable food systems in sri lanka: volume 1: a historical perspective, consumer purchase intention towards organic food ; with special reference to undergraduates in sri lanka, the impact of chemical fertilizer ban on the paddy sector: propensity score matching and value chain analysis, effect of partially-burnt paddy husk as a supplementary source of potassium on growth and yield of turmeric (curcuma longa l.) and soil properties, underutilized crops in the agricultural farms of southeastern sri lanka: farmers’ knowledge, preference, and contribution to household economy, 4 references, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 12 October 2021

Climate change and food security in Sri Lanka: towards food sovereignty

• Mahinda Senevi Gunaratne   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2296-900X 1 ,
• R. B. Radin Firdaus   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7022-0576 1 &
• Shamila Indika Rathnasooriya 2  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  8 , Article number:  229 ( 2021 ) Cite this article

32k Accesses

25 Citations

34 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Development studies
• Environmental studies
• Social policy

This study explored food security and climate change issues and assessed how food sovereignty contributes to addressing the climate change impacts on entire food systems. The study aimed to contextualise food security, climate change, and food sovereignty within Sri Lanka’s current development discourse by bringing global learning, experience, and scholarship together. While this paper focused on many of the most pressing issues in this regard, it also highlighted potential paths towards food sovereignty in the context of policy reforms. This study used a narrative review that relied on the extant literature to understand the underlying concepts and issues relating to climate change, food security and food sovereignty. Additionally, eight in-depth interviews were conducted to obtain experts’ views on Sri Lanka’s issues relating to the thematic areas of this study and to find ways forward. The key findings from the literature review suggest that climate change has adverse impacts on global food security, escalating poverty, hunger, and malnutrition, which adversely affect developing nations and the poor and marginalised communities disproportionately. This study argues that promoting food sovereignty could be the key to alleviating such impacts. Food sovereignty has received much attention as an alternative development path in international forums and policy dialogues while it already applies in development practice. Since the island nation has been facing many challenges in food security, poverty, climate change, and persistence of development disparities, scaling up to food sovereignty in Sri Lanka requires significant policy reforms and structural changes in governance, administrative systems, and wider society.

Similar content being viewed by others

Global impacts of heat and water stress on food production and severe food insecurity

The economic commitment of climate change

The role of artificial intelligence in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction.

Agriculture predominantly depends on the climate and natural resources; thus, climate change decisively impacts agriculture. The FAO ( 2016 ) has noted that climate change has prolonged impacts on agriculture and food security. A 60% increase in global food demand will occur by 2050 against 2006 levels due to population increases and changes to food patterns, while climate change will continually impact global food systems. Although agriculture has an immense capacity to absorb carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), agriculture, forestry, and other land-use practices contributed to 24% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in 2010 (Tubiello et al., 2014 ). In 2015, entire food systems—including agriculture, changing land-use patterns in agriculture, food processing, supply chains and consumption—contributed to 34% of global GHG emissions (Crippa et al., 2021 ). In his special report to the UNHRC in 2014, the Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food highlighted the drawbacks of current food security processes, their significant risks and GHG emissions. Thus, he proposed agroecological techniques and small-scale farming to promote food system sustainability, improve climate change resilience and enhance food sovereignty (Sage, 2014 ; De Schutter, 2014 ). These techniques include intercropping, agroforestry, crop and livestock diversification to promote natural nutrient recycling, natural farming practices and the minimisation of external inputs (De Schutter, 2014 ). Moreover, the ten elements of agroecology (i.e., diversity, co-creation and sharing of knowledge, synergies, efficiency, recycling, resilience, human and social values, culture and food traditions, responsible governance, and a circular and solidarity economy) put agroecology into practice (FAO, 2018 ).

Climate shocks and changes in weather patterns affect agriculture to a greater extent in Sri Lanka than in other countries. The country experienced its worst drought conditions in late 2016, while a 40% decline in paddy production occurred in early 2017. Afterwards, heavy rains in May 2017 further deteriorated food crop production. Moreover, 229,560 households were food insecure, with rain-fed farmers and agricultural labourers being the most affected (Coslet et al., 2017 ). In Sri Lanka, heavy rains, landslides and floods in May 2017 resulted in 246 deaths and the displacement of over 600,000 people, which ranked the island as the second-worst hit in the 2017 Global Climate Risk Index (Eckstein et al., 2019 ). Heat stress due to temperature increases and extreme rainfall anomalies are the two general climate change trends that adversely affect food security in Sri Lanka (Sathischandra et al., 2014 ). The severity of weather-related disasters in Sri Lanka is extreme since flash floods and prolonged droughts are much higher and more frequent than in other countries (IMF, 2018 ). In Sri Lanka, average annual losses from natural disasters between 1998 and 2012 were US$ 380 million, with losses due to flooding and cyclones being the most significant contributors (Siriwardana et al., 2018 ). Floods, landslides, droughts and storms accounted for 74% of the total disaster occurrences during the 1990–2018 period (UNDRR, 2019 ). Studies have claimed that such high climate variances were due to both La Niña and El Niño extremes (Sumathipala, 2014 ; Hapuarachchi and Jayawardena, 2015; Jayawardene et al., 2015 ; Abeysekera et al., 2019 ). Moreover, Sri Lanka is vulnerable to climate change impacts such as upsurges in temperature, changes in rainfall patterns, seawater rise and extreme weather events (Mani et al., 2018 ). Conversely, Sri Lanka’s hidden climate hotspots are at high risk from climate change impacts and are located around agricultural areas, with the North, North Central, Western and North Western provinces being the most adversely affected (The World Bank, 2018 ).

Food security has four dimensions: food availability, accessibility, utilisation and stability (FAO, 2006 ). As per the definition, ‘food security exists when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life’ (World Food Summit, 1996 ; FAO, 2008 ). Figure 1 presents the four dimensions of food security in detail.

(As per its definition, food security has four dimensions ‘Availability, Accessibility, Utilisation and Stability’. Impediments in any of these dimensions would challenge food security at all levels, from person to global. Thus, Figure 1 demonstrates the interconnectedness of said four dimensions and details the definition of food security and each dimension).

In contrast, food sovereignty ‘is the right of people to healthy and culturally appropriate food produced through ecologically sound and sustainable methods, and their right to define their own food and agriculture systems. It puts those who produce, distribute, and consume food at the heart of food systems and policies rather than the demands of markets and corporations. It defends the interests and inclusion of the next generation…. It ensures that the rights to use and manage our lands, territories, waters, seeds, livestock and biodiversity are in the hands of those of us who produce food’ (Nyeleni, 2007a ). Accordingly, food sovereignty has six pillars (Nyeleni, 2007b ; La Via Campesina, 2018 ), which are presented in Fig. 2 .

(Food sovereignty is based on six pillars or approaches: Works with Nature, Focuses on food for people, Values food providers, Localises food systems, Puts control locally, and Builds knowledge and skills. Figure 2 here detailed these six pillars, thus, supports readers to grasp the food sovereignty concept quickly).

Globally, food sovereignty evolved as a solution to climate change impacts on food security, diminishing rights of local food producers and consumers, and increasing poverty, hunger and fragility of food systems (Wittman 2011 ; Chihambakwe et al., 2018 ). The obvious interdependence of climate change and agriculture establishes food security well in development discourse (Firdaus et al., 2018 ; Yadav et al., 2019 ; Tan et al., 2021 ). Despite food security having four dimensions, the focus has mainly been on food availability by increasing food production. As such, less focus has been given to food accessibility and utilisation (Capone et al., 2014 ; Stringer 2016 ; Firdaus et al., 2020 ). Moreover, the vast majority of people that depend on agriculture for their livelihood are adversely affected by hunger and malnutrition worldwide (FAO et al., 2018 ; Yadav et al., 2019 ). Food sovereignty aims to secure the right for people and countries to make independent decisions regarding their food systems without any external influences or deterrents (Levkoe et al., 2019 ; Patel, 2009 ; Wittman, 2011 ). This is vital since small-scale food producers represent 40–85% of food production, while 76% of the world’s poor lives in rural areas and depends on agriculture for their livelihood (FAO and IFAD, 2019 ; IFAD, 2014 ; United Nations, 2019 ).

We felt that authorities and policymakers in Sri Lanka may not adequately be informed of such global initiatives or are reluctant to shift from conventional agriculture to sustainable initiatives. For instance, Yatawara ( 2005 ) elaborated that ‘the agriculture sector has suffered from the absence of a clear and consistent agriculture strategy over the last decade’. Moreover, the draft Overarching Agricultural Policy of Sri Lanka prioritises conventional agriculture while promoting export-oriented agriculture (Ministry of Agriculture, 2019 ) instead of focusing on the country’s food security. Policies focused on food security should be a more significant concern in Sri Lanka, where over 80% of the population live in rural areas (Central Bank of Sri Lanka, 2019 ). Despite being the majority, rural communities have little influence over policymaking and lack sufficient knowledge regarding their right to food, land, water and other inputs, which could be demanded from the government (Foti and De Silva, 2010 ). Thus, it emphasises the significant impacts of climate change on food security, lives, livelihoods, and natural resources in Sri Lanka. Consequently, this study had the following aims: (1) Map the interrelation between climate change, food security and food systems; (2) Elaborate the ways that food sovereignty contributes to securing the rights of people and nature while also exploring agrifood activism and discourses on food security and food sovereignty; (3) Understand the extent to which these concepts are established in Sri Lankan development discourse while determining a way forward.

Methodology

This study applied a narrative literature review of carefully selected works published in academic journals, periodicals, books, policy documents and reputable agencies’ publications from 1996 to 2021. Only English-language works were included and reviewed. Based on our study objectives, we identified key search terms and databases to search for relevant articles. A total of 378 documents were identified through the initial database search process. Lists of papers were outputted from each search, and abstracts were read to assess their relevance. Using this method, 109 documents were identified and accessed. Each document was then read and analysed. This led to the identification of additional relevant references, and a further 71 relevant papers were identified and read. Reasons for removing documents during the screening and eligibility checking process included duplication, being published outside of the study period and not being relevant to the study focus. All of the papers considered in this review were retrieved through online databases such as Google Scholar, Elsevier, JSTOR, Springer, Taylor & Francis and Kopernio. Multiple search terms were used, including agriculture, agroecology, climate change, farmer movements, food security, food sovereignty, peasant movements, poverty, and sustainable development. The selected articles were assessed in two levels: (1) To grasp a more comprehensive global picture of climate change, food security and food sovereignty; (2) To assess the identified concepts and practices in the Sri Lankan context with the aim of applying them locally. Figure 3 presents an overview of the study process.

(This flow chart explains different stages of secondary data analysis, from defining study objectives to analysing the selected documents).

Additionally, we conducted in-depth interviews with social activists, the leaders of farmer organisations, agricultural practitioners, and experts currently involved in climate change, food security and food sovereignty. The eight participants who were involved in this study represent the purposive sample. Thus, the selected participants have unique information and comprehensive experience, facilitating these informants’ engagement (Valerio et al., 2016 ). The objectives of the in-depth interviews were to capture different stakeholders’ perspectives on several key concepts in this review, their importance and the changes required to make food security and food sovereignty a reality in Sri Lanka in the wake of climate change. The key concepts covered in interviews were food security, climate change, agroecology, sustainable development and food sovereignty. On average, the interviews lasted 45 min, and the questions were based on the informants’ expertise. Among the eight participants, five of them were male, and three were female. Their ages ranged from 35 to 65 years; they had 15 to 40 years of experience and were active in their professions. Interviews were conducted using a semi-structured interview protocol. The interview protocol was first developed in English and then translated to the Sinhalese Language as the participants are native Sinhalese. This study complies with ethical standards and guidelines of the institutional ethical committee on human experiments. Before the field data collection, a statement was presented to the participants detailing the anonymity and confidentiality of the participants and that the data will be used in scientific research and publications. With the prior consent of the participants, all the interviews were tape-recorded. The number of participants was limited to eight due to data saturation. The interview findings were restricted to the focus of this study (i.e., climate change, food security and food sovereignty) in the Sri Lankan context (Andrade, 2021 ).

Discussion of findings

This paper first reviews climate change and food security interconnectedness, focusing on poverty, hunger, and malnutrition. In this section, the paper focuses on climate change impacts on food security in Sri Lanka concerning recent climatic change and its impacts on food crop production. The following two sections assess the emergence and progression of food sovereignty in the global and Sri Lankan contexts. This section provides details on the emergence of food sovereignty, different approaches at the ground level, and international policy and decision-making platforms. Next, the study outlines various approaches to making food sovereignty a reality based on cases from different countries worldwide. The study concludes with concluding remarks that provide some policy and structural interventions to ensure food security and food sovereignty in Sri Lanka.

Climate change and food security: the reality in Sri Lanka

Although Sri Lanka is an agriculture-based country, contributions to national gross domestic product (GDP) from the agricultural sector declined sharply from 33.53% in 1974 to 7.24% in 2019, which is even lower than the global average 10.46%. However, the agricultural land area increased from 23,420 km 2 in 1991 to 27,400 km 2 in 2016. Notably, the agricultural sector’s employment percentage declined from 42.84 to 27.1% during the same period (The Global Economy.com, 2020 ). Sri Lanka produces approximately 80% of its food requirements locally, while wheat, sugar, fish and milk products account for 65% of total food imports (World Food Programme, 2017 ). Rice is nearly self-sufficient, while over 75% of the other food crops are produced locally. However, climatic changes challenge local food production and food security in Sri Lanka. In 2019, the country ranked 66th out of 113 countries in the Global Food Security Index 2019, with an overall score of 60.8%—a 1.2% improvement from 2018 (The Economist Intellgence Unit, 2019 ).

Sri Lanka has been experiencing drastic changes in rainfall, rain patterns, droughts and temperature, which poses challenges for agricultural productivity, livelihoods and food security (Coslet et al., 2017 ; Eckstein et al., 2019 ; Marambe et al., 2015 ). According to Ratnasiri et al. ( 2019 ), the increase in temperature adversely impacts rice production more than the rainfall variance under different climate change scenarios for Sri Lanka. Another study in Sri Lanka indicated that an increase in rainfall is beneficial across the country, yet temperature increases will adversely affect dry zone agriculture (Seo et al., 2005 ). Studies on Sri Lankan home gardens highlighted their benefits in food security, providing ecosystem services and being cost-effective and pro-poor (Landreth and Saito, 2014 ; Yapa, 2018 ; Mattsson et al., 2018 ). Moreover, home gardens are considered climate-resilient since they depend on strategies that maintain diversity (Weerahewa et al., 2012 ). Some studies stressed the negative impacts of climate change on agriculture, fisheries and livestock, thus underscoring the execution of adaptation strategies (Esham et al., 2018 ; Marambe et al., 2015 ). However, Menike and Keeragalaarachchi ( 2016 ) found that adaptation practices are mainly based on socio-economic, environmental and institutional factors and the economic structure.

Furthermore, the South Asia Policy and Research Institute ( 2017 ) raised concerns regarding malnutrition, disparities in malnutrition, micronutrient deficiencies, yield stagnation, food price fluctuations, income inequality, poor roads and inefficient food systems in Sri Lanka. Multiple issues related to poverty, land fragmentation and degradation, food safety and gaps in policy and programmatic responses jeopardise food security in Sri Lanka (APWLD, 2011 ; Siriwardana et al., 2018 ; Ratnasiri et al., 2019 ). Although absolute poverty has declined sharply due to social security systems, sectoral and regional disparities, pockets of poverty persist in Sri Lanka. For instance, although the National Poverty Headcount Index for 2016 was 4.1, it was 1.9, 4.3 and 8.8 for urban, rural and estate sectors, respectively (Department of Census and Statistics, 2017 ). The country has also been experiencing pockets of poverty with high regional poverty disparities (Herath, 2018 ). Nevertheless, achieving food and nutritional security is a significant concern due to poor nutritional knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP)—specifically among women in marginalised areas—which adversely affect household food security (Weerasekara et al., 2020 ). Moreover, Esham et al. ( 2018 ) emphasised the lack of research on the climate change impacts on food systems in Sri Lanka, including impacts on livestock and fisheries.

The fishery sector in Sri Lanka is also vulnerable to climate change impacts, coastal and marine resource exploitation, pollution and natural habitat destruction (Wickramasinghe, 2010 ). Notably, development trends focused on the maximum use of marine and coastal resources infringe on fishers’ rights (Amarasinghe and De Silva, 2018 ). Approximately 560,000 people are employed in the fisheries sector, which provides livelihoods for over 2.7 million people in coastal communities throughout Sri Lanka (NARA, 2018 ). Fishing practices and fish availability depend on weather patterns, making coastal fishing dependent on seasonal climate variance (Arunatilake et al., 2008 ). Climate change impacts, illegal fishing, inequalities, user conflicts, outdated policies, the overexploitation of resources and insufficient governance trigger vulnerabilities in the fishery sector (Sosai, 2015 ; The World Bank, 2017 ; Ibrahim, 2020 ). Since fish provides ~70% of the animal protein intake in Sri Lanka and the coastal belt hosts approximately 25% of the population and 70% of the hotels and industries (Ministry of Fisheries, 2007 ), any challenges in the fishery sector will jeopardise food security in Sri Lanka.

Table 1 provides excerpts from the in-depth qualitative interviews. The identified issues are specifically relevant to small-scale food producers. The participants explained climate change impacts in detail while emphasising their adverse impacts on rural communities, peasants and agricultural workers, small-scale fishers, and poor, marginalised and indigenous communities. Some informants felt that climate change is a consequence of neoliberal development drive. Recent efforts have resulted in increasing food crop production via commercial agriculture practices that threaten the food security of ordinary people while making them the victims of climate change impacts.

Esham and Garforth ( 2013 ) found that climate change adaptation strategies lacked connections with national development policies in Sri Lanka. Therefore, they recommended further studies on adaptation practices suitable for smallholder farmers and methods of mainstreaming climate change adaptation into national development policies while finding ways to implement them at the national, regional and local levels. Moreover, the Institute of Policy Studies ( 2018 ) emphasised the dearth of policy and strategic interventions in Sri Lanka addressing food insecurity and malnutrition, specifically in agriculture and climate change impacts on agriculture and food systems.

Table 2 presents some of the climate change adaptation practices in Sri Lanka noted during the in-depth interviews. These practices are prevalent among small-scale farmers and rural communities attached to farmer movements and societies. Simultaneously, agricultural extension services also promote certain climate change adaptation practices.

Approximately 25% of the Sri Lankan population lives on US$ 2.50 per day and is the most vulnerable to climate and economic shocks. Thus, establishing the food and nutrition security of 4.6 million malnourished people while providing safe and high-quality food for 2.4 million additional people by 2050 represents a significant challenge in Sri Lanka (World Food Programme, 2017 ). Local food production in Sri Lanka accounts for approximately 85% of domestic food requirements (Institute of Policy Studies, 2018 ), while the livelihoods of approximately 28% of the population depend on agriculture. The adverse impacts of climate change on agriculture will challenge the entire population’s food security and the livelihoods of the vast majority of people (Climate Change Secretariat, 2016 ). Moreover, the living standards of approximately 90% of the population living in areas projected as having severe and moderate hotspots will decline by 7.0% by 2050 under the carbon-intensive scenario (The World Bank, 2018 ). Therefore, despite focusing on resilient food production, Sri Lanka requires a holistic approach to its entire agricultural system (Esham et al., 2018 ). Accordingly, we assess food sovereignty in the next section with the support of different studies worldwide.

Food sovereignty: a global perspective

The 1996 World Food Summit in Rome declared that the goal set during the World Food Conference 1974 to eradicate hunger, malnutrition and food insecurity within a decade was not achieved, mainly due to policy and funding failures (FAO, 1996 ; World Food Summit, 1996 ). While over 800 million people worldwide lack sufficient food, the World Food Summit of 1996 pledged to reduce the number of malnourished people globally by half by 2015. The Rome Declaration on World Food Security emphasised sustainable food security and the eradication of hunger, poverty and malnutrition (Shaw and Clay, 1998 ). However, many studies claim that climate change challenges all dimensions of food security (FAO et al., 2018 ; Firdaus et al., 2019 ; Islam and Wong, 2017 ; Schmidhuber and Tubiello, 2007 ; Wheeler and von Braun 2013 ). Stringer ( 2016 ) claimed that only food availability has succeeded since the world produces enough food to feed everyone. For instance, global food production has increased by 2.5 times over the last 40 years (Greenpeace International, 2009 ); however, hunger, poverty, and malnutrition increased drastically. Globally, approximately 821 million people were undernourished in 2017 compared to 804 million in 2016, while food insecurity has increased steadily in Asia, Africa and Latin America (FAO et al., 2018 ).

People who depend on family farming are the primary targets and contributors to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in the 2030 Agenda of the United Nations (UN) (FAO and IFAD, 2019 ). However, such people have been considered as obstacles to development than integral parts of the solution (FAO, 2014a , 2014b ). Conversely, progress indicators for achieving the SDGs reveal that 690 million people were hungry, while approximately 750 million people were exposed to severe food insecurity in 2019 (FAO et al., 2020 ). Notably, healthy diets would reduce 97% of health costs and 41 to 74% of the social costs of GHG emissions by 2030. Without overall changes in the current global food systems, the burning issues of poverty, hunger, malnourishment, climate change, and other socio-political and environmental issues will not be resolved. Moreover, the COVID 19 pandemic will have a lasting negative impact on overall progress towards achieving the SDGs (FAO et al., 2020 ).

The food sovereignty concept brought much attention in public debates during the World Food Summit of 1996 and afterwards since it challenges the neoliberal development policies that are driving the world into poverty, hunger and food insecurity (Gordillo and Jeronimo, 2013 ; Levkoe et al., 2019 ; Shaw and Clay, 1998 ; Windfuhr and Jonsen, 2005 ). Although numerous organisations have taken the food sovereignty policy framework forward, La Via Campesina (LVC) originally developed the concept in the early 1990s (La Via Campesina, 2003; Windfuhr and Jonsen, 2005 ; Wittman, 2011 ). LVC is a transnational network organisation of over 200 million peasants and farmers, small-scale food producers, landless people, agricultural workers, women, young farmers and indigenous people from 182 social organisations in 81 countries worldwide (Walsh-Dilley et al., 2016 ). LVC emerged from the agrarian movements in Latin America and Europe and established itself as a global network of peasant movements in 1993 in response to the Uruguay Round of GATT (McKeon, 2015 ). LVC gradually converged into a transnational social movement and has merged various cultures, epistemologies and diversities (Rosset and Martínez-Torres, 2014 ). LVC and its wider networks demanded the inclusion of a food sovereignty framework into global food policymaking and advocated with relevant organisations such as the WTO, UN General Assembly and FAO by participating in various processes, forums and discussions (La Via Campesina, 2003; Brem-Wilson, 2015 ).

Food sovereignty challenges current global food systems and promotes the creation of new food systems that protect the rights of small-scale food producers, food providers and consumers regarding their choices (Nyeleni, 2007a ; Walsh-Dilley et al., 2016 ). The right to food is an internationally recognised and legally enforceable human right that is considered an individual right. In contrast, food sovereignty advocates the right to food as a people’s right (Cotula et al., 2008 ). To realise the right to food, individuals should have access to enough food that meets their dietary needs. Food availability refers to a country’s available food stock to meet domestic demand, whether locally produced or imported (Firdaus et al., 2019 ). The right to food was first affirmed in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, followed by several international treaties and instruments (Cotula et al., 2008 ). Despite this, the conventional food security approach does not establish the right to food emphasised in the concept of food sovereignty (Cotula et al., 2008 ; Gordillo and Jeronimo, 2013 ).

On the other hand, food sovereignty supports the rights of individuals, communities, people and countries to produce their food domestically. Since it emphasises land and natural resources access, it has evolved as a collective right with specific policy orientations (Claeys, 2015 ; Patel, 2009 ; Walsh-Dilley et al., 2016 ). The food sovereignty policy framework focuses on providing food for people by framing it as the right to food. It promotes and supports the values and contributions of food and respects rights while bringing food providers and consumers together in decision-making processes (Cotula et al., 2008 ; Nyeleni, 2007b ). It also underscores locally controlled food production, distribution and consumption patterns, builds on local food providers’ knowledge and skills, sustains such wisdom and works in harmony with nature while preserving ecosystem functions (Nyeleni, 2007b ; Rosset and Martínez-Torres, 2014 ). Table 3 provides a detailed comparative analysis of conventional agriculture and food sovereignty approaches on different issues.

However, Patel ( 2009 ) claimed that the egalitarian view of food sovereignty is the central issue in functional democracy and resource distribution since it limits conversations on food policies. Thus, the rights emphasised in food sovereignty must be met for everyone in a meaningful way. However, this raises the question of how this aim could be achieved. Sage ( 2014 ) explained the UN Special Rapporteur’s involvement in the right to food constituting food sovereignty, agroecology and small-scale farming in high-profile policy forums. Moreover, several studies have explained how food sovereignty campaigns utilise UN systems while building alliances and social movements to amplify the voice of the voiceless and promote food-producing constituencies and other stakeholders in decision-making processes (Brem-Wilson, 2015 ; Desmarais et al., 2014 ; Edelman et al., 2014 ; Plahe et al., 2017 ; Walsh-Dilley et al., 2016 ). Several countries have made food sovereignty a constitutional and legal right in local legislature and policies while creating right-based standards in high-level policy forums, including the UN (Brem-Wilson, 2015 ; Claeys, 2015 ; Gordillo and Jeronimo, 2013 ; McKay et al., 2014 ). The above assessment provides a solid foundation to apply food sovereignty and assess to what extent it was established in the Sri Lankan context.

Food sovereignty in Sri Lanka

Climate change impacts food systems, prevailing poverty, hunger and food insecurity, food rights, neoliberal economic policies and development displacements in Sri Lanka, which has led to social movements towards food sovereignty. Although uncertainties remain regarding who introduced the food sovereignty concept into Sri Lanka, one could strongly claim that it was Movement for National Land and Agricultural Reform (MONLAR). As a founding member of LVC and a leader in LVC South Asia (La Via Campesina, 2020 ), MONLAR has applied the food sovereignty framework and supported agrarian struggles in Sri Lanka. MONLAR advocates for agricultural and land policy reforms, ecological agriculture, land to the landless, the protection of natural resources, seed rights and food sovereignty while participating in high-level policy forums locally and internationally (Fernando, 2013 ). The late Sarath Fernando, the founder of MONLAR, was a true believer in nature’s capacity to regenerate itself, which was later termed as ‘regenerative agriculture’. He reframed agroecology with nature’s capacity to regenerate and applied the same natural principles in regenerative agriculture to promote diversity, natural functions and interconnectedness in farmland (Fernando, 2008 ; 2014 ).

In the present study, the participants in the in-depth interviews first learned about food sovereignty through their affiliations with MONLAR and confirmed that MONLAR had introduced food sovereignty into Sri Lanka (Box 1 ). They are long-standing activists and professionals in the development and education sectors related to agriculture, people’s development rights, and environmental conservation. The views gathered from the in-depth interviews indicate that MONLAR and its peasant movement have introduced and promoted food sovereignty and agroecological practices in Sri Lanka.

Ecological agriculture applies ecology to agricultural fields while emphasising agricultural biodiversity conservation (Delgado, 2008 ), which integrates social and ecological principles in agriculture to enhance and promote sustainable food systems (FAO, 2018 ). This process maximises natural functions in farmlands where soil, water, weather patterns, plants, microbes, insects, animals and humans work together to improve biodiversity and food production while tackling climate change (Ching, 2018 ; Ortega-Espes and Finch, 2018 ; Schaller, 2013 ). Since nature has a great capacity to regenerate, ecological agriculture enhances nature’s capacity to provide food. Agroecology goes beyond the farmland, having broader interactions and interdependence with ten elements of agroecology. They function as an analytical tool or guiding principles that help policymakers, agroecological practitioners and other stakeholders to plan, implement and evaluate the agroecological transition process (FAO 2018 ; Barrios et al., 2020 ).

MONLAR uses ecological agriculture as a core strategy of small-scale food producers’ struggle. For instance, Van Daele ( 2013 ) described that ‘while proposing the alternatives of regenerative agriculture, MONLAR frames it in terms of reducing input prices, providing equitable access to markets and achieving food sovereignty in the face of World Trade Organization-induced trade liberalisation’. To address agricultural and environmental crises, MONLAR proposed strengthening the rural agrarian economy. This requires new approaches and methodologies, promotes ecological agriculture, utilises local knowledge and experience, promotes local food production and enables policies (Fernando, 2007 ). Predominantly, MONLAR’s struggle is twofold: (1) Finding urgent solutions for the burning issues of the poor, landless, marginalised and underprivileged; (2) Being involved in pro-poor public policy reforms on land, agriculture, fisheries, water, trade and the environment. The lasting experience of farmer organisations, peoples’ movements and communities demonstrate the effectiveness of ecological agriculture to overcome hunger, poverty and health issues while healing nature against the ecological destruction caused by conventional chemical farming (Fernando, 2014 ).

For instance, zero budget natural farming (ZBNF) in India brings millions of farming families out of poverty, indebtedness and agrarian crises of the neoliberal economy. Notably, ZBNF is not merely an agroecological farming practice but a peasant social movement for justice and change. ZBNF reduces the direct costs of farming, improves the lives and livelihoods of farming families and changes the agricultural practices while being centred in agriculture policy planning and extension services in some state governments in India (Bharucha et al., 2020 ; Khadse et al., 2018 ; Tripathi et al., 2018 ). In Cuba, Mexico, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Brazil, India and the Latin American region, agroecology and food sovereignty have become integral components of overall food and agriculture policies, extension services and sustainability approaches. The development rights of the people and stability of food systems are grounded as participatory, transformative and transdisciplinary actions (Altieri and Toledo, 2011 ; Cacho et al., 2018 ; Gliessman, 2013 ; McKay et al., 2014 ; Reardon and Perez, 2010 ). In Ecuador, food sovereignty and agroecology have become a government obligation and a strategic goal as per the country’s constitutional provisions and food sovereignty laws (Giunta, 2014 ; Intriago et al., 2017 ). However, some impediments in government policies that go against the realities remain.

In Sri Lanka, academic studies related to agroecology have extensively focused on agroforestry, home gardens and traditional agricultural practices. Home gardens are a mixture of crops, plantations, livestock and occasionally fish (Pushpakumara et al., 2012 ; Yapa, 2018 ; Haan et al., 2020 ). They provide various benefits such as food and nutritional security, firewood and timber, household income and herbal medicines while promoting ecosystem services such as biodiversity conservation, carbon sequestration, soil and water conservation and resilience to climate change (Landreth and Saito, 2014 ; Mattsson et al., 2018 ; Melvani et al., 2020 ; Weerahewa et al., 2012 ). The issues surrounding home gardens emphasise a poor understanding of climate change adaptation and mitigation, less stakeholder participation in policy processes, and information and empirical study gaps. Home gardens fully follow agroecological practices with a mixture of chemical and non-chemical agriculture. Studies on food sovereignty and agroecology have noted MONLAR’s involvement in diverse peasant networks (Fernando, 2008 ); however, such efforts have not been adequately documented.

Van Daele ( 2013 ) stated that ‘MONLAR proposes a shift towards non-chemical agriculture, which restores the capacity of the soil and nature to regenerate itself’. In Sarath Fernando’s words, ‘when the soil is provided with organic manure or compost, it can recover its capacity to become an ‘eternal spring of gifts’’. He argues that regenerative agriculture restores ecological relations, making farming viable again and accessible for everyone. The current neoliberal development model in Sri Lanka has failed since nearly all human development indicators provide a daunting picture of the country. Thus, it must move to small-scale sustainable ecological agriculture, developing a cordial relationship between nature and society (Fernando, 2012 , 2013 ). Ecological agriculture promotes soil fertility, enhances soil water and moisture content, promotes integrated pest management, uses organic matter, promotes microbial activity, prevents soil erosion and environmental degradation, and reduces carbon footprints (Ching, 2018 ; Ortega-Espes and Finch, 2018 ; Schaller, 2013 ). Therefore, Fernando ( 2014 ) proposed shifting from conventional to ecological agriculture for economic enhancement, poverty and hunger reduction, and uplifting social justice. Since food sovereignty and ecological agriculture have provided promising results worldwide (Bharucha et al., 2020 ; Chappell et al., 2013 ; Intriago et al., 2017 ; McKay et al., 2014 ; Wittman, 2011 ), it is appropriate for Sri Lanka to take progressive steps towards applying these concepts.

Table 4 provides various reasons to promote food sovereignty in Sri Lanka and some possible strategies and policy interventions based on in-depth interviews with informants. These underscore the importance of introducing a new national agricultural policy and development framework for the agricultural sector that promotes sustainable development practices. With this understanding, the next section of the article will look at how food sovereignty has been placed in different parts of the world, the pros and cons of policy reforms and the realities of putting food sovereignty into practice.

Box 1. Expert views on promoting food sovereignty in Sri Lanka

Informant 1 (Development Practitioner/Social Researcher): I received an opportunity to work with MONLAR and its founder Sarath Fernando since the early 1990s, where I learned about food security and the need to go beyond it with food sovereignty to find solutions for the global food crisis and rural poverty. Since then, I began to work for food sovereignty.

Informant 2 (President-National Farmer Movement): As a social activist, I have known the MONLAR founding members since the 1970s. We have been learning about and practising organic farming methods since the year 2000 as an alternative to chemical agriculture. The concept was further improved beyond organic to ecological agriculture and food sovereignty with a broader socio-economic, political and environmental vision, as envisioned by La Via Campesina and locally by MONLAR.

Informant 3 (National Coordinator-MONLAR): In 2003, I joined MONLAR’s youth movement, where I first heard about food sovereignty. As a founding member of La Via Campesina, MONLAR introduced the food sovereignty concept into Sri Lanka. We promote and apply the food sovereignty concept and its principles and practices locally, regionally, and globally.

Informant 4 (Professor-University of Sabaragamuwa): As a professor of ecological agriculture, I was fascinated with the concept of food sovereignty while listening to a lecture given by the late Sarath Fernando of MONLAR in 2007. Since then, I have tried to complement the concepts of ecological agriculture and food sovereignty while providing thorough knowledge to my university students on these subjects.

Informant 5 (National Coordinator-Uva-Wellassa Women Organisation): I first became involved in farmers’ rights and protecting nature in the early 1980s during the Sri Lankan government’s efforts to privatise vast areas of farming and forest lands into a sugarcane factory. Although national policies have not promoted food sovereignty since then, it has become a familiar concept widely discussed locally and globally.

Informant 6 (President-Ecological Agricultural Producers and Entrepreneurs Cooperative Society): I first learned about food sovereignty in the early 2000s while working with mothers and children. If I compare it with the past, food sovereignty is now widespread in public discussions, policy forums and civil rights movements.

Informant 7 (National Coordinator-Savisthri National Women’s Movement): I began to work on food security and sovereignty in the late 1990s. Although food sovereignty is a popular concept discussed in different forums, it has not been a genuine interest of policy and decision-makers.

Informant 8 (Field Coordinator-Bio Foods Pvt. Ltd.): I heard about food sovereignty in 2000 and have received a broader understanding of it from MONLAR since 2001. This concept is prevalent in America, Europe and Latin America; yet, less popular in Asia, including Sri Lanka. Thus, we should move to food sovereignty to safeguard our rights, cultural diversity, health, biodiversity and nature.

Source: In-depth interviews with experts.

Food sovereignty: a case for change

Many countries worldwide are increasingly vulnerable to climate change and natural disasters that can destroy decades of development and cause harm to the natural environment, thereby increasing poverty, hunger, conflicts, and inequality since vulnerable people typically depend on nature for their livelihoods (The World Bank and UN, 2010; Thomas, 2017 ). Concerning crop adaptations to climate change, the effect of CO 2 concentration could be beneficial. With increasing latitude, the adverse effects of increased temperature are reduced, which increased rice crops by 24% under the crop simulation model in East Asia’s monsoon climates (Kim et al., 2013 ). However, climate change negatively impacts crops such as rice, which depends on specific agronomic conditions (Fahad et al., 2019 ). Increased CO 2 levels in the atmosphere will substantially reduce the iron, zinc and protein content of rice, wheat, soybeans and field peas while increasing the carbohydrates (Myers et al., 2014 ; Al‐Hadeethi et al., 2019 ). Despite this, agriculture decisively contributes to climate change. Entire food systems, including production, distribution and consumption, account for approximately 20% of global GHG emissions. Additionally, 6–17% of GHG emissions stem from global land-use changes related to agriculture (Greenpeace International, 2009 ). As one of the primary GHG producers, agriculture should apply sound abatement policies and practices—especially pro-poor mitigation measures—while modifying agricultural practices and productions to meet the growing global food demand.

Recent progress assessments on attaining the SDGs indicate that the world will not achieve the goals by 2030 unless significant changes occur (Moyer and Hedden, 2020 ). The SDGs are interconnected in their nature. Concerning climate change and food security, the key SDGs are Goal 1 (No Poverty), Goal 2 (Zero Hunger) and Goal 13 (Climate Action). Goal 1 focuses on ending global poverty in all forms by ensuring sustainable livelihood and addressing various forms of discrimination and exclusions in development decision-making. Goal 2 focuses on eradicating hunger, malnutrition and achieving food security by promoting sustainable agriculture, changing food production systems, and protecting the environment. Goal 13 relates to taking immediate actions to tackle climate change impacts by responding nationally and globally (United Nations, 2015 ; Herath, 2018 ; Moyer and Hedden, 2020 ). After decades of struggling to combat poverty, food insecurity, hunger, malnutrition and climate change, the entire world is at a crossroads to take firm decisions on whether to continue our efforts with food security approaches or move on to food sovereignty. The obvious option is to move on to food sovereignty since dominant neoliberal agriculture approaches, and corporate food chains have failed to feed the world. Hence, it is essential to find ways to make food sovereignty a reality by switching from conventional to sustainable agriculture. However, this may require significant changes in policy decisions and agricultural practices.

Agroecology promotes farming without significant investments, utilises family labour, creates partnerships with consumers, and eliminates factors affecting food insecurity, hunger, poverty and disasters while ensuring food sovereignty. ZBNF in India is one of the best cases for justifying this claim. Khadse et al. ( 2018 ) elaborated on how ZBNF developed as a social movement in Karnataka, India, by addressing the indebtedness and suicides of peasants and farmers. The ZBNF movement goes beyond the technical aspects of agroecological farming by applying social aspects such as networking, movement building, setting up local markets, advocating for public policies, organising stakeholders at different levels, leadership building, and pedagogical processes and discourses. In Andhra Pradesh, India, ZBNF drastically reduced farming costs while producing high yields with non-chemical inputs, which led the state government to initiate ZBNF among all 6 million farmers in the state. This case signifies the importance of policy formation, financing and institutional support, capacity building and extension, farmer-centred development initiatives, learning ecosystems and networking (Bharucha et al., 2020 ). ZBNF widely contributes to achieving the SDGs in India. The massive-scale ZBNF programme in Andhra Pradesh has already experienced progress related to all SDGs and approximately 25% of the relevant targets (Tripathi et al., 2018 ).

By assessing the key drivers and multidimensional process of scaling up agroecological movements in Central America, Cuba, Mexico, Brazil and India, Cacho et al. ( 2018 ) identified eight key drivers: (i) catch a crisis that requires alternatives, (ii) establish social organisations and social process, (iii) progressive learning processes, (iv) effective agroecological practices, (v) mobilising discourses, (vi) established external allies, (vii) favourable markets and (viii) favourable policies. Accordingly, crises in society define the social process drivers while social organisations bring people together, and social processes promote sharing and learning among people. Concise and compelling agroecological processes help farmers practice and replicate them, which makes these processes easy to teach and learn. Concise and well-framed discourses promote people to support and practice them while motivating them to stand against the neoliberal agricultural model. External allies and stakeholders bring many resources to scale up the process by playing critical roles and amplifying the process. As a strategic approach, alternative market systems transform the food system and promote agroecological food, influencing public policies. Enacting relevant public policies and supportive political systems helps establish and scale up agroecology while institutionalising the entire process.

Food sovereignty is a concept of action’ that emerged from transnational peasant movements and offered new visions and prospects for resolving the most pressing issues of our time. It is above the right to food and emerged as a reaction to food security, neoliberal industrial agriculture and corporate food systems (La Via Campesina, 2018 ). Food sovereignty is a revolutionary approach capable of preventing food systems, environments and societies from totally collapsing. Conventional agriculture and the agro-industrial approach could not eradicate global hunger, malnutrition and poverty. Indeed, conventional agriculture is one of the significant contributors to global warming and climate change. Conversely, food sovereignty relates to peoples’ and countries’ rights to decide on and produce their food, safeguard nature and promote ecosystem services (La Via Campesina, 2003).

Since the food sovereignty concept was presented at the World Food Summit in 1996, it influenced propaganda, debates and discussions in many international forums, including the UN. Such involvement was instrumental in developing several UN guidelines (e.g., the UN Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas). The Nyeleni Forum and Nyeleni Declaration on Food Sovereignty are critical milestones in bringing food sovereignty to the international level. This has led some countries to include food sovereignty in their constitutions. Since Ecuador first constitutionalised food sovereignty in 2008, Senegal, Bolivia, Mali, Nepal, Egypt and Venezuela have followed. Moreover, countries such as Argentina, Brazil, Nicaragua, Uruguay, Mexico, Colombia, Honduras and Guatemala have legally recognised food security, food sovereignty and the right to food. Such constitutional, legal and institutional recognition underscores the credibility and validity of food sovereignty approaches while providing a boost for a paradigm shift on a global scale.

By assessing the state’s role in food sovereignty in three Latin American countries (i.e., Bolivia, Ecuador and Venezuela), McKay et al. ( 2014 ) underscored state-society relations in terms of development approaches, the redistribution of power over controlling food systems, resources and the class struggle. However, they noted that food sovereignty in said countries limits the way states recognise it, which has resulted in a reduction in pro-poor initiatives in some situations. During the new constitutional drafting process in Ecuador in 2007, the assembly diluted the food sovereignty proposal of social movements by limiting peasants’ participation to a bureaucratic ‘council’ and removing land and land reform provisions. Even with such impediments, food sovereignty involvement promotes participatory decision-making at local levels, which sets the groundwork to achieve food sovereignty in the long run.

Climate change impacts on food systems are complex, yet impacts on agriculture production, incomes, food prices, safety, quality and food delivery are evident (Vermeulen, Campbell, and Ingram, 2012 ). Low-income food producers and consumers would face the adverse impacts of climate change. Thus, modern agriculture and food systems should go beyond the farm gate to rural communities to attain new food systems, while farms should be designed using ecological principles where the place, people and species inhabit spaces together (Francis et al., 2003 ; Gliessman, 2013 ; Cacho et al., 2018 ). This very idea views sustainability as the key to addressing issues surrounding agriculture and food systems. Therefore, ensuring sustainability as the fifth dimension of food security assessments is the way forward. Otherwise, current policies and interventions could intensify future food insecurity (Berry et al., 2015 ). Hence, it is essential to assess sustainability in detail. Nonetheless, persisting Poverty and food insecurity challenge the current food production and distribution systems (Windfuhr and Jonsen, 2005 ). Therefore, food security, nutritional security and food sovereignty should be considered together within the framework of the right to food (Gordillo and Jeronimo, 2013 ).

Pimbert ( 2010 ) claims that ‘existing decision-making and policy processes that are based on models of representative democracy are inadequate for transformation towards food sovereignty’. Therefore, it requires establishing a direct democratic system in which citizens can exercise their rights related to governance setting at local, regional and national levels. Food sovereignty is a socio-political solution to the global food system crisis that requires the awareness and actions of all stakeholders. Moreover, it requires structural changes in the global economic order to end global hunger by transforming the global food system. Resolving the looming issues of climate change and food security while moving towards food sovereignty requires all countries worldwide to take immediate and accelerated actions and develop partnerships among governments and relevant stakeholders at all levels. Therefore, this requires comprehensive and radical changes in government structures, international trade and policies, organisations, and bureaucratic and global systems.

Concluding remarks

Sri Lanka is predominantly an agriculture-based country, with over 80% of its food producers being small-scale farmers. Thus, promoting food sovereignty and applying agroecological practices in agriculture, fisheries and livestock farming are viable and sustainable practices to combat ongoing massive-scale agro-industrial approaches. In Sri Lanka, food security extensively depends on agriculture, fisheries and livestock production. However, government policies are far more favourable towards the industry and service sectors. Therefore, the agricultural sector’s share in national accounts has been declining sharply. New development projects have resulted in tremendous adversities for natural resources while also creating labour shortages in agriculture. A holistic approach to food security and sustainability is paramount to make the agricultural sector productive and sustainable. It also requires targeted interventions in marginalised and vulnerable communities, regional agricultural development programmes, and employment opportunities to tackle malnutrition, poverty and hunger. Realising the right to food requires safeguarding the rights of small-scale food producers, local distributors and consumers to decide on what they produce, share and eat. This approach should be brought to the regional and national levels by defining and designing a local production-oriented food and agricultural system that forms an integral part of the country’s agricultural policy framework.

Achieving food sovereignty in Sri Lanka and many other countries have become the focus of peasant development and social movements. Owing to the current development drive, profit-oriented agro-industries and different priorities of governments, greater possibilities for food sovereignty and agroecology have been sidelined. In Sri Lanka, few studies have been conducted on agroecology and food sovereignty, while studies on climate change and food security are limited to sectoral rather than holistic approaches. Therefore, academics should initiate research and publish scientific articles on food sovereignty, agroecology, small-scale food producers (i.e., agricultural workers, small-scale fishers, pastoralists and landless people), local food distributors and consumers. The emergence and development of peasant movements, local seed banks, traditional seed and planting material conservation, natural farming systems, and peasant and social movements in lobbying, advocacy, policy and decision-making processes also require much attention from academics and social researchers. Overall, suppose we aim to make this world sustainable and liveable over the long term by resolving food insecurity, hunger and poverty while addressing climate change. In that case, we should recognise, secure and promote the rights of small-scale food producers, revamp food systems and sustain ecosystem services by promoting agroecological principles and food sovereignty.

Data availability

All secondary data analysed and cited in this article are available in the public domain, while the primary datasets analysed during the study are not publicly available due to ethical considerations but may be provided upon an appropriate request to the corresponding author.

Abeysekera AB, Punyawardena BVR, Marambe B et al. (2019) Effect of El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) events on inter-seasonal variability of rainfall in wet and intermediate zones of Sri Lanka. Trop Agric 167:14–27

Google Scholar  

Al‐Hadeethi I, Li Y, Odhafa AKH et al. (2019) Assessment of grain quality in terms of functional group response to elevated [CO 2], water, and nitrogen using a meta‐analysis: grain protein, zinc, and iron under future climate. Ecol Evol 9:7425–7437. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5210

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Altieri MA, Toledo VM (2011) The agroecological revolution in Latin America: rescuing nature, ensuring food sovereignty and empowering peasants. J Peasant Stud 38:587–612. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2011.582947

Article   Google Scholar  

Amarasinghe O, De Silva N (2018) Aiming for holistic management. SAMUDRA Issue no. 80. International Collective in Support of Fishworkers

Andrade C (2021) The inconvenient truth about convenience and purposive samples. Indian J Psychol Med 43:86–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0253717620977000

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

APWLD (2011) Climate justice briefs: rural women’s adaptation strategies, Sri Lanka. Asia Pacific Forum for Women Law and Development, Chiang Mai, Thailand

Arunatilake N, Gunawardena A, Marawila D et al. (2008) Analysis of the fisheries sector in Sri Lanka: guided case studies for value chain development in conflict-affected environments. United States Agency for International Development, Washington, DC

Barrios E, Gemmill-Herren B, Bicksler A et al. (2020) The 10 Elements of Agroecology: enabling transitions towards sustainable agriculture and food systems through visual narratives. Ecosyst People 16:230–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/26395916.2020.1808705

Berry EM, Dernini S, Burlingame B et al. (2015) Food security and sustainability: can one exist without the other? Public Health Nutr 18:2293–2302. https://doi.org/10.1017/S136898001500021X

Bharucha ZP, Mitjans SB, Pretty J (2020) Towards redesign at scale through zero budget natural farming in Andhra Pradesh, India*. Int J Agric Sustain 18:1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2019.1694465

Brem-Wilson J (2015) Towards food sovereignty: interrogating peasant voice in the United Nations Committee on World Food Security. J Peasant Stud 42:73–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2014.968143

Cacho MMYTG, Giraldo OF, Aldasoro M et al. (2018) Bringing agroecology to scale: key drivers and emblematic cases. Agroecol Sustain Food Syst 42:637–665. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2018.1443313

Capone R, El Bilali H, Debs P et al. (2014) Food system sustainability and food security: connecting the dots. J Food Secur 2:13–22. https://doi.org/10.12691/jfs-2-1-2

Central Bank of Sri Lanka (2019) Economic and social statistics of Sri Lanka. Colombo, Sri Lanka

Chappell MJ, Wittman H, Bacon CM, et al (2013) Food sovereignty: an alternative paradigm for poverty reduction and biodiversity conservation in Latin America. F1000Research 2: https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.2-235.v1

Chihambakwe M, Mafongoya P, Jiri O (2018) Urban and peri-urban agriculture as a pathway to food security: a review mapping the use of food sovereignty. Challenges 10:6. https://doi.org/10.3390/challe10010006

Ching LL (2018) Agroecology for sustainable food systems. Third World Network, Penang, Malaysia

Claeys P (2015) Food sovereignty and the recognition of new rights for peasants at the UN: a critical overview of la via campesina’s rights claims over the last 20 years. Globalizations 12:452–465. https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2014.957929

Climate Change Secretariat (2016) National adaptation plan for climate change impacts in Sri Lanka: 2016–2025. Colombo, Sri Lanka

Coslet C, Goodbody S, Guccione C (2017) Special report: FAO/WFP crop and food security assessment mission to Sri Lanka. FAO and WFP, Rome, Italy

Cotula L, Djire M, Tanga RW (2008) The right to food and access to natural resources. FAO, Rome, Italy

Crippa M, Solazzo E, Guizzardi D et al. (2021) Food systems are responsible for a third of global anthropogenic GHG emissions. Nat Food 2:198–209. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-021-00225-9

Van Daele W (2013) The political economy of desire in ritual and activism in Sri Lanka. In: Carbonnier G, Kartas M, Silva KT (eds) International development policy: religion and development. Palgrave Macmillan, UK, London, pp. 159–173

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Delgado A (2008) Opening up for participation in agro-biodiversity conservation: the expert-lay interplay in a Brazilian social movement. J Agric Environ Ethics 21:559–577. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-008-9117-6

Department of Census and Statistics (2017) Poverty indicators household income and expenditure survey-2016. Colombo, Sri Lanka

Desmarais AA, Rivera-Ferre MG, Gasco B (2014) Building alliances for food sovereignty: La Vía Campesina, NGOs, and social movements. In: Research in rural sociology and development. pp. 89–110

Eckstein D, Hutfils M-L, Winges M (2019) Global climate change index 2019: who suffers most from extreme whether events? Germanwatch, Bonn, Germany

Edelman M, Weis T, Baviskar A et al. (2014) Introduction: critical perspectives on food sovereignty. J Peasant Stud 41:911–931. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2014.963568

Esham M, Garforth C (2013) Climate change and agricultural adaptation in Sri Lanka: a review. Clim Dev 5:66–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2012.762333

Esham M, Jacobs B, Rosairo HSR, Siddighi BB (2018) Climate change and food security: a Sri Lankan perspective. Environ Dev Sustain 20:1017–1036. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-017-9945-5

Fahad S, Adnan M, Noor M, et al (2019) Major constraints for global rice production. In: Hasanuzzaman M, Fujita M, Nahar K, Biswas JK (eds) Advances in rice research for abiotic stress tolerance. Elsevier, pp. 1–22

FAO (2016) The state of food and agriculture: climate change, agriculture and food security. FAO of UN, Rome, Italy

FAO (2018) The 10 elements of agroecology: guiding the transition to sustainable food and agricultural systems. FAO of UN, Rome, Italy

FAO (2006) Food security: policy brief. FAO of UN, Rome, Italy

FAO (2008) Climate change and food security: a framework document. FAO of UN, Rome, Italy

FAO (2014a) The state of food and agriculture: innovation in family farming. FAO of UN, Rome, Italy

FAO (1996) The World Food Summit 1996. http://www.fao.org/wfs/ . Accessed 12 Jan 2021

FAO (2014b) The right to food: past commitment, current obligation, further action for the future. FAO of UN, Rome, Italy

FAO and IFAD (2019) United nations decade of family farming 2019-2028: global action plan. FAO and IFAD, Rome, Italy

FAO, IFAD, UNICEF. et al. (2018) Food security and nutrition in the world: building climate resilience for food security and nutrition. FAO of UN, Rome, Italy

FAO, IFAD, UNISEF. et al. (2020) The state of food security and nutrition in the world 2020: transforming food systems for affordable healthy diets. FAO of UN, Rome, Italy

Fernando S (2013) Who should own and control land. MONLAR, Colombo, Sri Lanka

Fernando S (2008) Approaching food as a strategy towards global survival in a better world Omertaa, J Appl Anthropol 0039:312–318

Fernando S (2014) Ecological agriculture is the way out of poverty. In: Social watch (ed) Social watch report 2014. Montevideo, Uruguay

Fernando S (2007) Peasants situation and human rights in Sri Lanka. Focus Asia-Pacific 50:1–4

Fernando S (2012) People and the environment should be first. In: Social Watch (ed) Social Watch Report 2012-The Right to a Future. Social Watch, Montevideo, Uruguay, pp. 174–175

Firdaus RBR, Gunaratne MS, Rahmat SR, Kamsi NS (2019) Does climate change only affect food availability? What else matters? Cogent Food Agric 5:1707607. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311932.2019.1707607

Firdaus RBR, Leong Tan M, Rahmat SR, Senevi Gunaratne M (2020) Paddy, rice and food security in Malaysia: a review of climate change impacts. Cogent Soc Sci 6:1818373. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2020.1818373

Firdaus RBR, Mohamad SS, Singh PSJ et al. (2018) Impact of climate change on agriculture based on the crop growth simulation (CGS) model. Geogr Malaysian J Soc Sp 14:53–66

Foti J, De Silva L (2010) A seat at the table: including the poor in decisions for development and environment. World Resources Institute, Washington DC, USA

Francis C, Lieblein G, Gliessman S et al. (2003) Agroecology: the ecology of food systems. J Sustain Agric 22:99–118. https://doi.org/10.1300/J064v22n03_10

Giunta I (2014) Food sovereignty in Ecuador: peasant struggles and the challenge of institutionalization. J Peasant Stud 41:1201–1224. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2014.938057

Gliessman S (2013) Agroecology: growing the roots of resistance. Agroecol Sustain Food Syst 37:19–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/10440046.2012.736927

Gordillo G, Jeronimo OM (2013) Food security and sovereignty- base document for discussion. FAO, Rome, Italy

Greenpeace International (2009) Agriculture at a crossroads: food for survival. Greenpeace International, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Haan R de, Hambly Odame H, Thevathasan N, Nissanka SP (2020) Local knowledge and perspectives of change in homegardens: a photovoice study in Kandy District, Sri Lanka. Sustain 12: https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12176866

Hapuarachchi HASU, Jayawardena IMSP (2015) Modulation of seasonal rainfall in Sri Lanka by ENSO extremes. Sri Lanka J Meteorol 1:3–11

Herath G (2018) Challenges to meeting the UN sustainable development goals in Sri Lanka. Asian Surv 58:726–746. https://doi.org/10.1525/as.2018.58.4.726

Ibrahim FA (2020) Between the sea and the land: small-scale fishers and multiple vulnerabilities in Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka J Soc Sci 43:5–20. https://doi.org/10.4038/sljss.v43i1.7641

IFAD (2014) The international year of family farming: IFAD’s commitment and call for action. International Fund for Agricultural Development, Rome, Italy

IMF (2018) Sri Lanka: selected issues. International Monetary Fund, Washington DC, USA

Institute of Policy Studies (2018) Climate change, food security and rural livelihoods in Sri Lanka. Colombo, Sri Lanka

Intriago R, Amézcua RG, Bravo E, O’Connell C (2017) Agroecology in Ecuador: historical processes, achievements, and challenges. Agroecol Sustain Food Syst 41:311–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2017.1284174

Islam S, Wong AT (2017) Climate change and food in/security: a critical nexus. Environments 4:1–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/environments4020038

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Jayawardene H, Jayewardene D, Sonnadara D (2015) Interannual variability of precipitation in Sri Lanka. J Natl Sci Found Sri Lanka 43:75. https://doi.org/10.4038/jnsfsr.v43i1.7917

Khadse A, Rosset PM, Morales H, Ferguson BG (2018) Taking agroecology to scale: the Zero Budget Natural Farming peasant movement in Karnataka, India. J Peasant Stud 45:192–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2016.1276450

Kim H-Y, Ko J, Kang S, Tenhunen J (2013) Impacts of climate change on paddy rice yield in a temperate climate. Glob Chang Biol 19:548–562. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12047

Article   ADS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

La Via Campesina (2018) Food sovereignty now: a guide to food sovereignty. European Coordination Via Campesina, Bruxelles, Belgium

La Via Campesina (2003) Food sovereignty: Via Campesina. https://viacampesina.org/en/food-sovereignty/ . Accessed 13 Jan 2021

La Via Campesina (2020) Via Campesina: International Peasants’ Movement. In: La Via Campesina. https://viacampesina.org/en . Accessed 13 Jan 2021

Landreth N, Saito O (2014) An ecosystem services approach to sustainable livelihoods in the homegardens of Kandy, Sri Lanka. Aust Geogr 45:355–373. https://doi.org/10.1080/00049182.2014.930003

Levkoe CZ, Brem-Wilson J, Anderson CR (2019) People, power, change: three pillars of a food sovereignty research praxis. J Peasant Stud 46:1389–1412. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2018.1512488

Mani M, Bandyopadhyay S, Chonabayashi S et al. (2018) South Asia’s hotspots: the impact of temparature and precipitation changes on living standards. The World Bank Group, Washington, DC

Book   Google Scholar  

Marambe B, Ranjith Punyawardena PS, Premalal S et al. (2015) Climate, climate risk, and food security in Sri Lanka: the need for strengthening adaptation strategies. In: Leal Filho W (ed) Handbook of climate change adaptation. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 1759–1789

Mattsson E, Ostwald M, Nissanka SP (2018) What is good about Sri Lankan homegardens with regards to food security? A synthesis of the current scientific knowledge of a multifunctional land-use system. Agrofor Syst 92:1469–1484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-017-0093-6

McKay B, Nehring R, Walsh-Dilley M (2014) The ‘state’ of food sovereignty in Latin America: political projects and alternative pathways in Venezuela, Ecuador and Bolivia. J Peasant Stud 41:1175–1200. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2014.964217

McKeon N (2015) La Via Campesina: the ‘peasants” way’ to changing the system, not the climate.’. J World-Systems Res 21:241–249. https://doi.org/10.5195/jwsr.2015.19

Melvani K, Myers B, Palaniandavan N, et al (2020) Forest gardens increase the financial viability of farming enterprises in Sri Lanka. Agrofor Syst 9: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-020-00564-9

Menike LMCS, Keeragalaarachchi KAGP (2016) Adaptation to climate change by smallholder farmers in rural communities: evidence from Sri Lanka. Procedia Food Sci 6:288–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.profoo.2016.02.057

Ministry of Agriculture (2019) Sri Lanka Overarching Agricultural Policy (Draft). Colombo, Sri Lanka

Ministry of Fisheries (2007) Ten year development policy framework of the fisheries and aquatic resources sector. Colombo, Sri Lanka

Moyer JD, Hedden S (2020) Are we on the right path to achieve the sustainable development goals? World Dev 127:104749. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104749

Myers SS, Zanobetti A, Kloog I et al. (2014) Increasing CO 2 threatens human nutrition. Nature 510:139–142. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13179

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

NARA (2018) Fisheries industry outlook-2017. National Aquatic Resources Research and Development Agency (NARA), Colombo, Sri Lanka

Nyeleni (2007a) Declaration of Nyeleni 2007. Selingue, Mali

Nyeleni (2007b) Nyeleni synthesis report. Selingue, Mali

Ortega-Espes D, Finch S (2018) Agroecology: innovating for sustainable agriculture & food systems. Friends of the Earth International, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Patel R (2009) Food sovereignty. J Peasant Stud 36:663–706. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150903143079

Pimbert M (2010) Towards food sovereignty: reclaiming autonomous food systems. CAFS, IIED and RCC, London and Munich

Plahe J, Wright S, Marembo M. (2017) Livelihoods crises in Vidarbha, India: food sovereignty through traditional farming systems as a possible solution. J South Asian Stud 40:600–618. https://doi.org/10.1080/00856401.2017.1339581

Pushpakumara DKNG, Marambe B, Silva GLLP et al. (2012) A Review of research on homegardens in Sri lanka: the status, importance and future perspective. Trop Agric 160:55–125

Ratnasiri S, Walisinghe R, Rohde N, Guest R (2019) The effects of climatic variation on rice production in Sri Lanka. Appl Econ 51:4700–4710. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2019.1597253

Reardon JAS, Perez RA (2010) Agroecology and the development of indicators of food sovereignty in cuban food systems. J Sustain Agric 34:907–922. https://doi.org/10.1080/10440046.2010.519205

Rosset PM, Martínez-Torres ME (2014) Food sovereignty and agroecology in the convergence of rural social movements. In: Constance DH, Renard M-C, Rivera-Ferre MG (eds) Alternative agrifood movements: patterns of convergence and divergence. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 137–157

Sage C (2014) Food security, food sovereignty and the special rapporteur. Dialogues Hum Geogr 4:195–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/2043820614537156

Sathischandra HGAS, Marambe B, Punyawardena R (2014) Seasonal changes in temperature and rainfall and its relationship with the incidence of weeds and insect pests in rice (Oryza sativa L) cultivation in Sri Lanka. Clim Chang Environ Sustain 2:105–115. https://doi.org/10.5958/2320-642X.2014.00002.7

Schaller N (2013) Agro-ecology: different definitions, common principles. Centre for Studies and Strategic Foresight, Cedex, France

Schmidhuber J, Tubiello FN (2007) Global food security under climate change. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:19703–19708. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0701976104

Article   ADS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

De Schutter O (2014) Report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Final report: the transformative potential of the right to food, United Nations General Essembly, New York, NY, USA

Seo S-NN, Mendelsohn R, Munasinghe M (2005) Climate change and agriculture in Sri Lanka: a Ricardian valuation. Environ Dev Econ 10:581–596. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355770X05002044

Shaw DJ, Clay EJ (1998) Global hunger and food security after the World Food Summit. Can J Dev Stud Can d’études du développement 19:55–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/02255189.1998.9669778

Siriwardana CSA, Jayasiri GP, Hettiarachchi SSL (2018) Investigation of efficiency and effectiveness of the existing disaster management frameworks in Sri Lanka. Procedia Eng 212:1091–1098. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2018.01.141

Sosai AS (2015) Illegal fishing activity‒a new threat in mannar island coastal area (Sri Lanka). Transylvanian Rev Syst Ecol Res 17:95–108. https://doi.org/10.1515/trser-2015-0051

South Asia Policy & Research Institute (2017) National strategic review of food security and nutrition towards zero hunger. WFP, Rome, Italy

Stringer R (2016) Food security global overview. In: Caraher M, Coveney J (eds) Food poverty and insecurity: international food inequalities, First. Springer International Publishing AG, 125

Sumathipala W (2014) El Nino-A short term signal of a long term and a large scale climate variation. J Natl Sci Found Sri Lanka 42:199–200. https://doi.org/10.4038/jnsfsr.v42i3.7405

Tan BT, Fam PS, Firdaus RBR et al. (2021) Impact of climate change on rice yield in Malaysia: a panel data analysis. Agriculture 11:569. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11060569

The Economist Intellgence Unit (2019) Global Food Security Index 2019: strengthening food systems and the environment through innovation and investment. London, UK

The Global Economy.com (2020) Sri Lanka Economic Indicators. Bus Econ data 200 Ctries. https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/Sri-Lanka/ . Accessed 28 Aug 2020

The World Bank (2018) Sri Lanka’ s hotspots:the impact of temperature and precipitation changes on living standard. The World Bank Group, Washington, DC

The World Bank (2017) Sri Lanka: managing coastal natural wealth. The World Bank Group, Washington, DC

The World Bank, UN (2010) Natural hazards, unnatural disasters: the economics of effective prevention. The World Bank Group, Washington DC

Thomas V (2017) Climate change and natural disasters: Transforming economies and policies for a sustainable future. Taylor & Francis, London and New York, NY

Tripathi S, Shahidi T, Nagbhushan S, Gupta N (2018) Zero budget natural farming for the sustainable development goals. Council on Energy, Environment and Water, New Delhi, India

Tubiello FN, Salvatore M, Cóndor Golec RD et al. (2014) Agriculture, forestry and other land use emissions by sources and removals by sinks. FAO, Rome, Italy

UNDRR (2019) Disaster risk reduction in Sri Lanka. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, Bangkok, Thailand

United Nations (2015) Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. United Nations general assembly, New York. NY, USA

United Nations. 2019. The sustainable development goals report 2019. The sustainable development goals report 2019. New York, USA. https://doi.org/10.29171/azu_acku_pamphlet_k3240_s878_2016

Valerio MA, Rodriguez N, Winkler P et al. (2016) Comparing two sampling methods to engage hard-to-reach communities in research priority setting. BMC Med Res Methodol 16:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-016-0242-z

Vermeulen SJ, Campbell BM, Ingram JSI (2012) Climate change and food systems. Annu Rev Environ Resour 37:195–222. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-020411-130608

Walsh-Dilley M, Wolford W, McCarthy J (2016) Rights for resilience: food sovereignty, power, and resilience in development practice. Ecol Soc 21 (1): https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-07981-210111

Weerahewa J, Pushpakumara G, Silva P, et al (2012) Are homegarden ecosystems resilient to climate change? An analysis of adaptation strategies of homegardens in Sri Lanka. APN Sci Bull 02: 22–27

Weerasekara PC, Withanachchi CR, Ginigaddara GAS, Ploeger A (2020) Food and nutrition-related knowledge, attitudes, and practices among reproductive-age women in marginalized areas in Sri Lanka. Int J Environ Res Public Health 17:3985. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17113985

Article   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Wheeler T, von Braun J (2013) Climate change impacts on global food security. Science (80-) 341:508–513. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1239402

Article   ADS   CAS   Google Scholar  

Wickramasinghe D (2010) Coastal ecosystems and climate vulnerability in Sri Lanka. In: Shaw R, Pulhin JM, Jacqueline Pereira J (eds) Climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction: an Asian perspective (community, environment and disaster risk management). Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 307–326

Windfuhr M, Jonsen J (2005) Food sovereignty: towards democracy in localized food systems, first edit. ITGD Publishing, Warwickshire, UK

Wittman H (2011) Food sovereignty: a new rights framework for food and nature? Environ Soc Res 2:87–105. https://doi.org/10.3167/ares.2011.020106

World Food Programme (2017) Sri Lanka country strategic plan (2018-2022). WFP, Rome, Italy

World Food Summit (1996) Rome declaration on world food security. http://www.fao.org/3/w3613e/w3613e00.htm . Accessed 14 Aug 2020

Yadav SS, Hegde VS, Habibi AB, et al. (2019) Climate change, agriculture and food security. In: Yadav SS, Redden RJ, Hatfield JL, et al., DH (ed) Food security and climate change, First Edit. John Wiley & Sons Ltd

Yapa LGDS (2018) Contribution of home gardens to household food security in Sri Lanka: a comparative study on wet zone and intermediate zone. J Soc Sci Humanit Rev 3:124. https://doi.org/10.4038/jsshr.v3i3.11

Yatawara RA (2005) Poverty and trade issues in Sri Lanka. Centre for Poverty Analysis, Colombo, Sri Lanka

Download references

Acknowledgements

Acknowledgement to ‘Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia for Fundamental Research Grant Scheme with Project Code: FRGS/1/2018/SS08/USM/02/5’. The authors of this article further acknowledge the contributions of Mr. Renuka Liyandeniya in field data collection.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Social Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Pulau Pinang, 11800, Malaysia

Mahinda Senevi Gunaratne & R. B. Radin Firdaus

Department of Economics, Faculty of Arts, University of Peradeniya, Peradeniya, 20400, Sri Lanka

Shamila Indika Rathnasooriya

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. B. Radin Firdaus .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This study was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM/JEPeM/20080404).

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Gunaratne, M.S., Radin Firdaus, R.B. & Rathnasooriya, S.I. Climate change and food security in Sri Lanka: towards food sovereignty. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 8 , 229 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00917-4

Download citation

Received : 27 February 2021

Accepted : 27 September 2021

Published : 12 October 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00917-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

The links between climate change and migration: a review of south asian experiences.

• Mufti Nadimul Quamar Ahmed
• Jennifer E. Givens
• Aaron Arredondo

SN Social Sciences (2024)

Using best-worst scaling to inform agroecological interventions in Western Kenya

• Kerstin K. Zander
• Adam G. Drucker
• Kristin Davis

Environment, Development and Sustainability (2024)

Herbicide Use in the Era of Farm to Fork: Strengths, Weaknesses, and Future Implications

• Vassilios Triantafyllidis
• Antonios Mavroeidis
• Ioanna Kakabouki

Water, Air, & Soil Pollution (2023)

Modern plant biotechnology as a strategy in addressing climate change and attaining food security

• T. I. K. Munaweera
• N. U. Jayawardana
• Nipunika Dissanayake

Agriculture & Food Security (2022)

Intelligently driven performance management: an enabler of real-time research forecasting for innovative commercial agriculture

• Prabath Chaminda Abeysiriwardana
• Udith K. Jayasinghe-Mudalige
• K. B. Madhushani

SN Social Sciences (2022)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Farmers’ Attitude Towards Organic Agriculture: A Case of Rural Sri Lanka

• Articles in this Issue

Published Online : Jun 12, 2020

Page range: 12 - 19, received : dec 30, 2019, accepted : apr 18, 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.2478/contagri-2020-0003, keywords organic agriculture , farmers’ attitude , farming community , potentials , challenges , rural sri lanka, © 2020 s. h. pushpa malkanthi, published by sciendo, this work is licensed under the creative commons attribution-noncommercial-noderivatives 3.0 license..

Organic agriculture has the potential to reduce the negative impacts of conventional agricultural practices and enhance rural economic development. Since research on Sri Lankan farmers’ attitude towards organic agriculture has been rare, this research aims to explore the farmers’ viewpoint on organic agriculture. Two main rural districts were purposely selected for this investigation since these districts have a high potential for organic agriculture. Two Divisional Secretariat (DS) divisions from each district and 75 farmers from the farming community of each DS division were randomly selected to form a sample of 300 farmers. Data were collected from July 2017 to April 2018 and analyzed using descriptive statistics and binary logistic regression. The results revealed that a majority of the farmers (74%) were well-aware of organic agriculture and agricultural extension programs, while training was the primary information source in both districts. As per the mean analysis, the farmers had a positive attitude towards health-related and environmental protection aspects. However, they had a negative attitude towards the complexity of organic agriculture and unavailability of a suitable market for organic products. Results of the binary logistic regression revealed that the education level of the farmers significantly affect their attitude towards organic agriculture. The availability of traditional knowledge and technology relevant to organic agriculture, favorable climatic condition, and some government support were the main potentials, while labor intensiveness was the main challenge. Thus, creating better marketing facilities for organic products, providing the required amenities for producing organic food, processing, and value addition will promote organic agriculture among more farmers, supporting sustainable development.

• Print this article

Research Articles

Behavioral intention of paddy farmers towards adoption of organic sources for soil nutrient management consequent to policy decision to ban agro-chemicals in sri lanka: a case study.

• B. U. I. Prabhavi
• J. M. P. N. Anuradha
• M. R. Pinnawala
• S. P. Nissanka

Department of Agricultural Extension, Faculty of Agriculture

Department of Sociology, Faculty of Arts

Department of Crop Science, Faculty of Agriculture

This stu dy was aimed at investigating the behavioral intention towards and factors influencing adoption of organic  soil nutrient management by paddy farmers, consequent to the banning of agro-chemicals in April 2021 in Sri Lank a. A questionnaire survey, supplemented by key informant discussions was used to collect the primary data after six  months of the banning when farmers were preparing for the next Maha season (starting from Novemb er 2021). Paddy farmers (N=120) from the Mahaillu ppallama irrigation block of the Mahaweli system H in Anuradhapura district were randomly selected as the respond ents. The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) was used as the conceptual framework of the study. The study revealed  that the majority (85%) of farmers did not agree with the sudden decision of the government to ban agro-chemicals  to enable a complete transformation of agriculture to one that is totally organic. Only 11% of the farmers  preferred a fully organic paddy production system. The majority (58%) preferred to use both organic and inorganic  fertilizers. However, 31% of the farmers preferred conventional farming as usual. Perceived difficulties were the major barriers for farmers to use organic f ertilizers. Attitude on production, age, perceived knowledge of organic agriculture, and farming income significant ly affected (P < 0.1) paddy farmers’ intention to adopt organic fertilizers. It is concluded that a scientifically designed gradual transition would be more appropriate for nutrient management in paddy cultivation. 

• Page/Article: 221-233
• DOI: 10.4038/tar.v35i3.8599
• Peer Reviewed

Main navigation

• Our Articles
• Dr. Joe's Books
• Media and Press
• Our History
• Public Lectures
• Past Newsletters
• Photo Gallery: The McGill OSS Separates 25 Years of Separating Sense from Nonsense

Subscribe to the OSS Weekly Newsletter!

Sri lanka and organic farming.

• Add to calendar
• Tweet Widget

Nicknamed the teardrop of India for its distinctive shape, the island of Sri Lanka off the southeast coast of the subcontinent has dug itself into an economic hole. In April of 2021, Sri Lanka’s then-president, Gotabaya Rajapaksa, banned synthetic fertilizers and agrochemicals (pesticides and herbicides) forcing farmers to use organic fertilizers in the attempt to build a country more “in sync with nature”.

For decades, Sri Lanka had been importing and subsidizing synthetic fertilizer, leading to great success in exports such as rice, tea, and rubber. In 2020, the cost of these imports and subsidies amounted to hundreds of millions of dollars per year. So apart from wanting to come off as a “natural” man, Rajapaksa really wanted a budget cut.

Besides carbon dioxide from the air, plants require the presence of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium compounds in the soil for growth. Synthetic fertilizers typically have nitrogen in the form of ammonia (NH 3 ) or its derivatives, urea, or ammonium nitrate as a base. Ammonia is produced by the Haber process, which allows hydrogen (produced from natural gas) and nitrogen from the air to combine with the aid of iron acting as a catalyst to speed up the reaction. Continual recycling of unreacted nitrogen and hydrogen allows 98% of these reactants to be converted into ammonia. But production of ammonia is an energy-intensive process and is plagued by the emission of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas. Synthetic fertilizer also contains phosphates and potash to supply phosphorus and potassium.

“Natural” fertilizer supplies nitrogen phosphorus and potassium in the form of compounds found in manure and compost although these are not as readily absorbed as the components of scientifically blended synthetic fertilizer. The latter commonly results in faster growth and higher yield. To improve the efficacy of “natural” or “organic” fertilizer, minerals, ground sea shells, bloodmeal , bone meal , feather meal , hides, hoofs, and horns may be added. While sewage sludge does contain the nutrients plants require, it is usually not acceptable as an “organic” fertilizer due to possible contamination by environmentally persistent residues from various industrial products.

Unfortunately, in a popular tale – chemicals are “evil” and are found in synthetic substances. That, of course, is irrational. Everything in the world, including compost and manure is composed of chemicals. Indeed, there are far, far more chemicals in natural fertilizers than in synthetics. Yes, the hydroxylamine, nitrates, ammonium phosphates, potassium carbonates, peptides, fatty acids and hundreds of other compounds are “natural,” but that in terms of efficacy or toxicity is neither here nor there. The properties of chemicals do not depend on their source.

Natural fertilizers do have some benefits. They can contain more micro-nutrients than synthetics and produce less pollution due to run-off. However, the lower yield associated with organic farming means more land must be devoted to agriculture to feed the same number of mouths. Deforestation isn’t all that good for the environment. In Sri Lanka, around six times more manure is needed to provide the same amount of nitrogen as was available from synthetic fertilizer in the past. Organic fertilizer may sometimes contain concerning amounts of bacteria present.

Ignoring the many economists and scientists who urged the Sri Lankan government not to follow through with a ban on synthetic fertilizer, Rajapaksa instead sided with advocates like Vandana Shiva, an Indian environmental activist who does not have a background in agriculture.

Some health professionals have also called for the synthetic ban because they believe that agrochemicals are causing the chronic kidney disease (CKD) epidemic in Sri Lanka’s North Central Province. The World Health Organization (WHO) launched an investigation that found traces of cadmium and arsenic in the population and environment. Although the levels were not found to be unsafe, continuous exposure could possibly be causing the damage. Cadmium is sometimes used in fertilizer, and some pesticides use arsenic (though these pesticides are banned in Sri Lanka). Despite all this, WHO has yet to release the full study, and not enough research has been conducted to confirm this possible connection. Diabetes and hypertension are usually the primary causes of CKD, and farmers in other parts of the country, who also used synthetic fertilizer, aren’t affected by the illness.

Fast forward a few months and the government backtracked on the synthetic fertilizer ban because yields dropped significantly. Rice production fell 20%, and the loss in tea production is estimated to be worth almost as much as was gained by scrapping the original synthetic fertilizer subsidies. Sri Lanka had to start importing food and compensating farmers. Along with many other factors such as the pandemic and poor economic decision-making, this all contributed to the wreckage of the country’s economy.

Rajapaksa stepped down July 13 th after protesters forced their way into the presidential palace. What we have here is a cautionary tale that you can’t make a transition to all-organic overnight, nor can you scale it up across an entire country. It is not like deciding that you will go “organic” in your back yard vegetable garden.

Haleh Cohn just finished her first year at McGill University and is interested in the health sciences .

What to read next

There are safe sunscreens but no safe tans 2 jul 2024.

A Taste of Bitter Melon 28 Jun 2024

On the Trail of Chemtrail Nonsense 21 Jun 2024

High Protein Milk; It’s Not Just Milk With Added Protein Powder 14 Jun 2024

Are Electric or Manual Toothbrushes Better? 7 Jun 2024

Beware the Latrines; An Unexpected Source of Energy 31 May 2024

Department and University Information

Office for science and society.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Farmers’ Attitude Towards Organic Agriculture: A Case of Rural Sri Lanka

Contemporary Agriculture

Summary Organic agriculture has the potential to reduce the negative impacts of conventional agricultural practices and enhance rural economic development. Since research on Sri Lankan farmers’ attitude towards organic agriculture has been rare, this research aims to explore the farmers’ viewpoint on organic agriculture. Two main rural districts were purposely selected for this investigation since these districts have a high potential for organic agriculture. Two Divisional Secretariat (DS) divisions from each district and 75 farmers from the farming community of each DS division were randomly selected to form a sample of 300 farmers. Data were collected from July 2017 to April 2018 and analyzed using descriptive statistics and binary logistic regression. The results revealed that a majority of the farmers (74%) were well-aware of organic agriculture and agricultural extension programs, while training was the primary information source in both districts. As per the mean analysis, th...

Related Papers

Prasad Mahindarathne

The authors sought to assess the entrepreneurial behaviour of the organic vegetable farmers in the Badulla District of Sri Lanka. The primary data were collected through use of a structured questionnaire that was used to interview 231 farmers. The study found that there are three main agribusiness models operating in the district. Entrepreneurial orientation (EO) of the farmers fitted into three business models was measured following the method suggested by Covin and Slevin and by Lumpkin and Dess. The study revealed that the highest EO was exhibited by the Member Farmers of Organic Association (2.4 of 5) followed by the Contract Organic Farmers (2.24 of 5), and the lowest EO was exhibited by the Independent Organic Farmers (1.8 of 5). The analysis of variance revealed that the EO is significantly different across the three business models, and mean separation revealed that the Member Farmers’ of Organic Organizations model exhibited the highest EO followed by the Contract Farmers model and then the Independent Farmers’ model. KEYWORDS entrepreneurial orientation, organic agribusiness models

Mohamed Aheeyar

The government of Sri Lanka has taken action to rehabilitate and modernize the small irrigation systems including anicut schemes under the ‘Mahinda Chintana’ policy to increase the capacity of water storage structures. There are 12, 950 small anicut schemes in working condition in the country with a total command area of 98,416 ha benefiting 333,413 farmer families. The number of families benefiting from small anicuts is almost equal to number of beneficiaries under small tank systems. Walawe river basin comprise of around 730 anicut schemes with a total command area of 6,550 ha cultivated by 20,000 farmers. Almost all the anicuts of the basin are dispersed in Badulla and Ratnapura districts except one, which is located in the Moneragala district. About 62% and 78% of the anicuts in Ratnapura and Badulla districts respectively contain command areas of less than 10 ac. According to the available literature, the productivity of anicut schemes is much lower than other types of irrigate...

Dr. P.B. Dharmasena

Home gardens in Sri Lanka offer a highly diversified and economically viable form of land use. They produce a variety of products such as food, fruits, medicine, spices, fuel wood and timber. Many home gardens in the Central highlands are under-utilized. Various programmes are being implemented to enhance the productivity of these home gardens by various authorities. Sustainable land management is of vital importance in improving the home garden productivity. As the selected districts in the Central Highlands are highly vulnerable to land degradation especially due to erosion of top soil and consequent reservoir sedimentation, the adoption of SLM practices in all agricultural lands will enhance the land productivity.

JOURNAL OF RESEARCH TECHNOLOGY AND ENGINEERING

Sustainable Land management Programmes in Sri Lanka

Need for Sustainable Land Management (SLM) is the manifestation of unregulated intensive land use practices due to high land pressure. Sri Lanka is recognized as one of the 19 countries with high population densities with land degradation being one of the most serious environmental problems. Land degradation is widespread in the country and occurs in all agro-ecological regions at different intensities. Land as a resource interconnected with other natural resources such as air, water, fauna, flora etc., which are essential for human survival, proper land management will help protecting the environment and conservation of natural resources while augmenting the food supply.

Nimalka Sanjeewani

Sujeewa Athukorala

Executive summary is too lengthy to include here

Organic is Life Knowledge for Tomorrow

Fernando Casanoves

806 farmers were surveyed in Nicaragua, Costa Rica & Guatemala, using COSA® format to determine the socio economic and environmental impact of coffee certification. 40 farmers from each certification (organic, fair trade (FT), Rainforest Alliance (RA), CAFE Practices (CP) and Utz Certified) were interviewed and compared with 80 non-certified farmers on each country. Results showed better performance of environmental indicators (Carbon footprint) in organic farms. Economic impacts were affected by farm altitude and ...

… Knowledge Transfer to Strengthen Disaster Risk …

Gayan Illeperuma

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Climate Change and Agriculture in Central Highlands of Sri Lanka

Papers Submitted

Ingrid Hartmann

Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge

Rex Immanuel

Tropical Agricultural Research

Akeel Mohamed

Agriculture

janaki sandamali

Jagath Edirisinghe

Proceedings of conference of the 17th IFOAM OWC held in South Korea

Mohammadreza Davari

Measuring the Success of Women Led “Dry Zone Home Gardening” Program with Organic Amendments in Sri Lanka

Pathmanathan Sivashankar

The Journal of Agricultural Sciences - Sri Lanka

Pathmanathan Sivashankar , Pushpa Malkanthi

Assam Economic Journal

Manuranjan Gogoi

… Knowledge Systems of …

Unnikrishnan Payyappalli

Nicholas Landreth

… Systems of India and …

Proceedings of conference of the 17th IFOAM OWC

dharmaratne A thenuwara

Vinay Verma

Thushyanthy Yathavakulasingam

Abstracts of the 8th International Conference on Environmental and Rural Development; Bangkok, Thailand; 25-26 February 2017; p. 19

Hamid Bilali

Abstracts of the 8th International Conference on Environmental and Rural Development; Bangkok, Thailand; 25-26 February 2017; p. 98

Akwasi Owusu Antwi

International Journal of Agricultural Management

Pushpa Malkanthi

Seetharam Annadana

Training Manuals for Organic Agriculture

Simon Ferrigno

Anthropology & Aging

Amarasiri deSilva

Abstracts of the 8th International Conference on Environmental and Rural Development; Bangkok, Thailand; 25-26 February 2017; p. 88

Nalani Hennayake

Sisira Pinnawala

Steffanie Scott

Journal of Threatened Taxa

Surendranie J Cabral de Mel , Sanjaya Weerakkody

Magdy Torab

Namal Wijesundara , Athula Gnanapala

Journal of Organic Systems

John Paull, PhD

Afsaneh Mohammadi

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Wednesday Jul 03, 2024

Group News Sites

Dailymirror

Sunday Times

Tamil Mirror

Middleast Lankadeepa

Life Online

Home delivery

Advertise with us

Organic agriculture in Sri Lanka: Are we going down the slippery slope? Part 2

Wednesday, 27 October 2021 00:00 -     - {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}

 Food security implies food production, availability and access. The approach to organic agriculture by the Sri Lankan Government in 2021 has compromised food production and long-term food security of the nation – Pic by Shehan Gunasekara

Food security implies food production, availability and access. The approach to organic agriculture by the Sri Lankan Government in 2021 has compromised food production and long-term food security of the nation. Nearly 88% of the organic farmers, are in developing countries; India (0.6 million), Ethiopia (0.2 million), and Mexico (0.2 million) producing traditional export crops, such as coffee and tea. Organic agriculture cannot overcome flood or drought risk and food shortages. Sri Lanka’s subsistence farmers are more vulnerable to these risks which affects food availability.  More land would be required to produce the same quantity of output with organic methods and hence organic agriculture cannot guarantee food security. Most smallholder farmers in Sri Lanka are poor and spend over 70% of their income on food. Any increase in the price of food is associated with higher levels of food insecurity and malnutrition and spread of poverty. Organic smallholders sell their harvest in conventional markets to local traders at lower prices in return for immediate cash. Increasing yields requires large quantities of organic material (e.g., manure) not available at the farm itself and the cost can be substantial. Switching to organic is not always beneficial for smallholders and should therefore not be considered a general strategy for poverty reduction. If larger number of farmers switch to organic practices in Sri Lanka let us sat for rice, total output will fall, prices will increase, making food less affordable for poor consumers threatening food security.  Organic farming today only accounts for 1% of the agricultural land, a full conversion to organic agricultures as envisaged by the government of Sri Lanka is totally unrealistic. Organic farming cannot spread automatically in developing countries simply using subsidies. Successful early innovations are needed to enhance adoption of OA. More rigorous empirical studies are needed to show that organic farming can be profitable. But with existing support through subsidies, it is less clear whether organic farming could also be profitable without subsidies in the long term.  Sustainable food security needs a combination of organic, conventional, and possibly ‘hybrid’ systems to produce more food at affordable prices, and reduce the environmental costs of agriculture. Food waste has increased and this is an incredibly complex. If we retain the yield and land-use improvements of conventional agriculture and reduce food waste, we can spare more land for nature. (f) Subsidies, markets and pricing in organic farming  The Government, through sheer ignorance, still uses these failed agricultural policies to continue to subsidise and even to give free compost for farmers. This policy to encourage organic farming is totally incorrect because it will lead to inefficient production. Government subsidies for organic farming can add to policy risk because risk-reducing inputs are not allowed. The use of compensation to reward organic farmers for lost yields is irrational. When we lose production due to organic farming, the prices of food (say rice) will increase. Once we compensate these farmers with money, the purchasing power will increase and this will lead to further increase in prices. Inflation will nudge through the roof. Why cannot these Brahmins understand this simple truth? This will affect food security in the country. For traded commodities such as tea, price competition is essential.  Certification of organic products require crops to be grown on organically farmed land at least for three years before they can be labelled organic and this is a cost to farmers. Certification of organic tea is very expensive (see Rajadurai). And this may affect export markets for Sri Lanka. Tea plantation needs an additional 100 to 150 men per hectare to tend to the fields. Hence, the use of organic fertilisers, natural pesticides and other permitted substances is uneconomical in the long-term.  Currently we are being entertained by a very interesting spectacle where plane loads of compost are being imported from India. We also saw nano-nitrogen being imported and plane loads were unloaded with several minsters present. But this is done for political visibility and no one cares. But I would urge the Ministers to give all the data on the cost of these imported compost and nano nitrogen. We would like to get an idea on the price of a kilogram of rice with those imports. I hope that the data will not be deleted.   The market must be understood and allowed to work for agricultural commodities including organic products. Consumers search for new quality organic products and the price may be generally high due to lower yields. Sri Lanka’s ‘organic’ tea prices may have to rise 75% to compensate the increase in production costs and reduced yields. Recovery may take at least three years to achieve (see Rajadurai).The challenge is how to increase yields and reduce prices for a rapidly increasing population. Farmers may opt for organic agriculture, if there is a strong demand for organic products and premium prices.  If properly understood and planned, Sri Lanka could have promoted viable organic opportunities for farmers in niche markets. The gluten-free quinoa in Peru, saraceno grain in Italy, re-introduction of local rice varieties in traditional diets and cultures in Indonesia and promotion of old varieties of rice in Sri Lanka are examples. Agri-tourism or (around farm) and ecotourism for city dwellers, who appreciate healthy rural landscape, creates new income opportunities for organic farmers. In Sri Lanka, some private tea producers with long term experience have created small organic zones for tea, which they utilise to supply limited demand in niche international markets.  Why not focus on this without producing organic tea in the whole country? The world demand for organic tea is only 1%. According the Rajadurai, “Organic is a certification,” “This is a very niche market with many restrictions and specifications are required to get certification. At a commercial scale it is not viable.” Another example of a niche market is farmers producing Maya chocolates for tourists in Mexico. Sikkim's tourism sector, benefited greatly from the new organic image: between 2014 and 2017, the number of tourists increased by over 50%. Organic farming by itself cannot provide sustainable agriculture and food security, but innovative combinations of organic and conventional methods can contribute toward sustainable productivity increases in agriculture. The highly polarised ideological debates between advocates of organic agriculture and advocates of conventional agriculture are totally unproductive. According to Prof. Foley, combining organic and conventional practices can create truly sustainable food systems. (h) Climate change  Climate scientists agree that our climate is changing and increasingly uncertain extreme weather events can occur. Approximately 25% of the anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are attributable to food production. Evidence suggests that organic agriculture uses less energy per unit of land. But organic farming has lower impacts when expressed per unit of land but not when expressed per unit of output. Overall, the evidence does not support the notion that organic agriculture is more climate friendly than conventional agriculture (WBA 2016). Future of organic and conventional agriculture in Sri Lanka Ideally, for success in organic agriculture, new varieties are required that are adapted to organic farming systems. In the short run, organic crops must be introduced within selected market segments. But conventional agricultural research is moving away from high inputs of nutrients and chemical pesticides. They now focus on developing crops that can grow in a drought; that can survive in a flood; that can resist pests and disease and higher yields on the same land with less fertilisers. Future research will focus on growing plants that can create their own nutrients to reduce the use of fertilisers and minimises pesticides. The aim is to shift the yield frontier and increase resistance to stress. The yield gaps may increase with increasing conventional yields because there are slower plant genetic improvements in organic farming.  This second GR will improve yields of crops grown in infertile soils by farmers with little access to fertiliser. These crops will tolerate low soil fertility and enhance acquisition of immobile nutrients such as phosphorus and potassium more efficiently. Substantial yield gains in low-fertility soils (e.g. phosphorus efficiency in bean and soybean) improve the productivity of low-input agro ecosystems, and reduce the environmental impacts of intensive fertilisation. These new varieties will almost achieve the objectives of organic farming. Organic agriculture should only be a supplement to these new challenges because organic agriculture cannot feed the world Sri Lanka must not repeat the mistakes of the past. The country should have a broader vision to achieve multiple goals namely food security, environmental protection, poverty alleviation, elimination of hunger and nutritional deficits and not just organic farming. These issues are interconnected. Harnessing the best of scientific knowledge in the country is crucial for these challenges. It requires cooperation, innovation and communication across the scientific community. Scientists from multiple disciplines must be involved in trans-disciplinary studies, and all scientists must broaden their focus.  Organic farming should be part of overall farming in Sri Lanka with conventional farming still at the forefront. The synergies that exist between organic farming and conventional farming systems must be integrated to get a hybrid system. In many situations, crop productivity and environmental efficiency of organic farming could be further improved by combining with moderate levels of synthetic fertilisers. The ban on chemical fertilisers must be withdrawn. At the time of writing I heard that the Government decided to import 100,000 tons of ammonium sulphate for tea (has it reversed the ban?).  In the short term, it is very important for the President to remove the Minister for Agriculture and replace him with an educated person (at least B.Sc agriculture or biological sciences, other qualifications from an international university and an extremely good command of the English language so that he can communicate with local and international professionals). An insurance agent cannot guarantee food security for Sri Lanka. Enlightened leadership by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa can still provide much-needed support to the agricultural sector to increase food production and fight poverty, inequality, and environmental degradation. However, if he is weak, the massive waves of distrust and fear among farmers will remain a dangerous flash point. Gotabaya must use all the knowledge, experience and above all listen to scientists and professionals to carefully balance the conflicting dimensions. We are on the brink of disaster and Sri Lanka will be down the slippery slope sooner than later.  Organic agriculture in Sri Lanka: Are we going down the slippery slope? Part 1 Recent columns Future Perfect Sri Lanka’s organic farming disaster, explained A shift to better farming practices is possible, but Sri Lanka’s abrupt switch to organics offers a bitter lesson in how to change food systems in a sustainable way. by Kenny Torrella Sri Lanka’s economy is in free fall. Runaway inflation reached 54.6 percent last month, and the South Asian country is now headed toward bankruptcy. Nine in 10 Sri Lankan families are skipping meals, and many are standing in line for days in the hope of acquiring fuel. The dire situation culminated last weekend in an uprising in which an estimated 300,000 protesters took over President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s home and offices and set fire to Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe’s home. Rajapaksa resigned after fleeing the country , leaving Wickremesinghe as interim president . There’s no singular cause for the crisis, which had been building for years due to political corruption and right-wing authoritarian politics that weakened democracy. In April 2019, the crisis accelerated after suicide bombings at churches hurt the island nation’s critical tourism industry, which weakened its currency and made it more difficult for the government to import essential goods. Sign up for the Future Perfect newsletter Twice a week, we’ll send you a roundup of the best ideas and solutions for tackling the world’s biggest challenges — and how to get better at doing good. Sign up here . At the end of 2019, tax cuts slashed government revenue, while in 2020 the Covid-19 pandemic further decimated the tourism industry, with skyrocketing inflation pouring more fuel on the fire. Pandemic aside, that’s not an atypical set of conditions for the collapse of a developing country like Sri Lanka. But in the spring of 2021, President Rajapaksa made an unusual decision: He banned synthetic fertilizer and pesticide imports practically overnight, forcing Sri Lanka’s millions of farmers to go organic. It proved disastrous, as a group of Sri Lankan scientists and agriculture experts had warned . According to one estimate , the president’s agrochemical ban waspoised to save Sri Lanka the $400 million it was spending yearly on synthetic fertilizer, money it could use toward increasingimports of other goods. But Rajapaksa also argued that chemical fertilizers and pesticides were leading to “adverse health and environmental impacts” and that such industrial farming methods went against the country’s heritage of “sustainable food systems.” “There is a section of the Sri Lankan NGO society and civil society, which has been arguing for the spread of organic farming in Sri Lanka for quite a while. ... This has also been actively supported by many international groups,” R. Ramakumar, an agricultural economist at the Tata Institute of Social Sciences in India, told me. Instead of fixing the crisis, however, the move only worsened it. “The organic policy was implemented to sort of ameliorate an ongoing crisis … ironically, what it did was that it ended up exacerbating the crisis,” Ramakumar said. The agrochemical ban caused rice production to drop 20 percent in the six months after it was implemented, causing a country that had been self-sufficient in rice production to spend $450 million on rice imports — much more than the $400 million that would’ve been saved by banning fertilizer imports. The production of tea, Sri Lanka’s literal cash crop — it’s the country’s biggest export — fell by 18 percent . The government has had to spend hundreds of millions on subsidies and compensation to farmers in an effort to make up for the loss of productivity. While agrochemicals cause a host of environmental and public health problems , which in part inspired the ban, they also help farmers grow more food on less land, which is critical for small, developing countries like Sri Lanka that rely on agriculture for both sustenance and export income. Moving away from an agrochemical-heavy food system makes sense in a lot of ways, but the Sri Lanka example underscores the importance of being mindful of the economic, political, and social context of any reform. Around five months into the ban, farmers were allowed to begin using synthetic fertilizers on tea and a few other crops while keeping the ban in place for others, but by that point, much of the damage was done. The blinkered organic rollout accelerated an economic crisis long in motion, but it also crystallized the stakes of the debate over conventional versus organic farming, demonstrating just how critical high-yield crops are in economies still based largely on agriculture. Sri Lanka, which only recently emerged from a catastrophic civil war, had been a bright spot in international development: In 2000, 17 percent of Sri Lankans were undernourished and by 2019, that figure fell dramatically to 7 percent, lifting around 2 million people out of hunger. The economic crisis that has now reached a boiling point, caused in part by the organic farming disaster, will horrifically, and ironically, undo some of that progress. Agriculture is all about trade-offs Synthetic fertilizer makes crops grow faster and bigger than organic fertilizer, such as animal manure, and pesticides control insect infestations and diseases that can destroy crops. Experts say the widespread adoption of the two agricultural inputs since the mid-20th century, known as the Green Revolution , helped lift countries like Sri Lanka out of grinding poverty. “Sri Lanka started subsidizing fertilizers in the 1960s and we saw that rice yields tripled,” says Saloni Shah, a food and agriculture analyst at the Breakthrough Institute, a US-based environmental nonprofit that advocates for technological solutions. “[Sri Lanka] became self-sufficient in rice ... that’s huge for all Asian countries, from the food security standpoint.” That resulted in much of the labor force moving out of agriculture and into higher-paying jobs, Shah says, a story that played out across the globe over the past 60 years. But the expansion of conventional agriculture hasn’t been without steep costs; agrochemical use is also rife with serious environmental and public health problems. Pesticide exposure is linked to a range of health issues, including respiratory and central nervous system symptoms, and around 1 in every 8 suicides worldwide is done by ingesting pesticides, with especially high rates in South Asia. When synthetic fertilizer and pesticides leach into waterways, they can kill off wildlife and poison drinking water sources, and their production and application emit high amounts of greenhouse gases and degrade soil . Many organic agriculture advocates also argue that low-income countries’ reliance on imported chemicals from high-income countries strips them of their own food security and makes them vulnerable to the kind of agrochemical price hikes that Sri Lanka experienced.A majority of Sri Lankan farmers supported an organic transition, but wanted more than one year to do so — and they needed more support than they were given to switch to organic. As horrible as the effects of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides are, they have to be weighed against the consequences brought to bear by crop yield loss: hunger, decreased export income, increased deforestation, and, if banned outright, as Sri Lanka has shown, political crisis. But there are ways to minimize the effects of agrochemicals without abandoning them altogether. Minimizing the harms of industrial agriculture The US-based environmental nonprofit World Resources Institute (WRI) says that it’s not enough to just maintain current yields — governments around the world need to increase yields per acre to feed 10 billion people by 2050, lest farmers be forced to clear more and more land to make up for lower yields, with massive environmental effects . Meeting that inevitable demand — while also minimizing the environmental and public health issues brought about by agrochemicals while continuing to increase crop yields — is tricky but possible. Shah, the food and agriculture analyst, says a more sustainable approach requires making crops higher-yield through breeding, making nitrogen fertilizers more efficient, and instituting “precision farming” technologies, like drones and sensors, to more accurately analyze where fertilizer is being over- or under-applied. A 10-year study in China , in which 21 million farmers were trained on how to better manage soil, water, and fertilizer, shows the progress that can be made. The program resulted in an 11 percent yield increase for maize, wheat, and rice, and a 15-18 percent reduction in nitrogen fertilizer use. Practices popular among organic agriculture proponents would also help, like employing cover cropping, double cropping, adding organic fertilizer along with chemical fertilizer on fields, and planting trees and shrubs on farms, known as agroforestry. “I think that in the Western world, we can get lost in the organic/conventional debate,” Shah said. “Agriculture is the backbone of economic development — for livelihoods, for food security. … It should be less so about ideology and which one is better, but more so what combination of technologies, practices, and market conditions will be helpful to spur development and to empower farmers.” But implementing any of these practices in the near future won’t be possible in Sri Lanka, given that they’d all require money the government doesn’t have. “It seems like it’ll be a long road to recovery,” Shah added. “It’ll depend on what type of financial aid package they’re able to negotiate with the [International Monetary Fund]. And if they’re able to reduce some of the debt burdens.” “I’m speculating now at this point,” Ramakumar, the agricultural economist, said, “but if they follow the voice of science and reason, then it is not an irretrievable situation ... But it depends on who comes to rule Sri Lanka and what policies they adopt.” In time, Sri Lanka may get some relief from the tension of its agricultural trade-offs. According to the economic theory of the Environmental Kuznets Curve , once countries reach a certain level of per capita income, economic growth and environmental pollution can decouple as the country can afford to implement stronger environmental regulations and practices without sacrificing economic growth, like crop yields. Decoupling the two is far from guaranteed, but some countries have achieved it. As Sri Lanka gets richer, it’ll be more able to prioritize the environment and public health without millions going hungry, but the current crisis — made worse by the sudden, hastily executed organic transition — has made that day farther away. Most Popular The supreme court’s disastrous trump immunity decision, explained, the supreme court also handed down a hugely important first amendment case today, the caribbean has a defense system against deadly hurricanes — but it’s vanishing, do other democrats actually do better against trump than biden, 5 terrible reasons for biden to stay in the race, today, explained. Understand the world with a daily explainer plus the most compelling stories of the day. More in Future Perfect America’s international public health plan is too focused on Americans Two ways to go wrong in predicting AI The most important Biden Cabinet member you don’t know What if quitting your terrible job would help the economy? The best plan to help refugees might also be the simplest What nuclear annihilation could look like What about Kamala? Food is no longer a main character on The Bear Should Biden drop out? The debate, explained. Do other Democrats actually poll better against Trump than Biden? How white victimhood is shaping a second Trump term If it’s 100 degrees out, does your boss have to give you a break? Probably not. Español (Spanish) Français (French) Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian) Brasil (Portuguese) हिंदी (Hindi) Drawing the wrong lessons from Sri Lanka’s organic farming experience (commentary) Long-standing organic farmers have performed well in the past two years even though conventional farmers in Sri Lanka suffered due to a sudden ban on the import of chemical fertilizers. The real lesson to be learned from the Sri Lankan economic crisis is that good governance matters for the health and nutrition of a nation. Researchers say that a more diverse set of farming approaches can make Sri Lanka less vulnerable to the next crisis. This article is a commentary. The views expressed are those of the authors, not necessarily of Mongabay. Since the downfall of Sri Lanka’s former president, Gotabaya Rajapaksa , in mid-July, some commentators have blamed the economic crisis and social unrest that precipitated his departure on his nominal experiment with organic agriculture in 2021. This is a misreading of the situation. Long-standing organic farmers have performed well throughout this period, while conventional farmers have suffered from the financial mismanagement and incompetence of the former president. On July 13, then-President Gotabaya Rajapaksa fled the country amid popular protests by citizens unhappy with his management of the nation’s economy. Sri Lanka was defaulting on its loans, energy, and food prices were surging , and limited foreign exchange reserves meant widespread shortages. Convenient excuse Some trace his downfall back to an ill-fated decision in April 2021 to stop all imports of chemical fertilizers and abruptly put the country on a path to organic agriculture. One commentator wrote that “Mr. Rajapaksa’s imperious decision to impose organic farming on the entire country … led to widespread hunger after the agricultural economy collapsed.” The reality is that this policy had everything to do with foreign currency shortages and an inability to pay for imports rather than a planned shift to organic agriculture. As such, the former president’s hasty call for an organic transition was a convenient excuse to stop paying for fertilizer imports. Our research on the diets of long-term organic versus conventional tea farmers in Sri Lanka suggests that it is actually the established organic tea farmers who have done much better over the past two years. They receive a price premium for their product, have well-established internal supplies of high-quality organic compost to maintain their soils, and their tea yields are the same or better than those of conventional tea farmers. Their steady earnings combined with vegetable gardens for home consumption mean that they have nutritious diets. This compares with conventional tea farmers who had to deal with the sudden loss of chemical fertilizer supplies last summer, struggled to find good-quality organic compost, and then saw declining yields, lower incomes, and poorer diets. While former president Rajapaksa abandoned his ban on chemical fertilizer imports at the end of 2021, supplies are still erratic and only available to wealthier farmers as the underlying problem of a lack of foreign exchange reserves remains a problem. Low yields, low incomes The real lesson to be learned from the Sri Lankan crisis is that good governance matters for the health and nutrition of a nation. Furthermore, farmers dependent on high levels of imported inputs are much more vulnerable to supply chain disruptions and price fluctuations . The perfect storm of the former Sri Lankan president’s economic mismanagement, colliding with high energy and fertilizer prices linked to the war in Ukraine, piled on top of supply chain disruptions related to the COVID-19 pandemic, resulted in agricultural production declines, high food prices, and growing rates of hunger and malnutrition . Furthermore, rampant fuel shortages mean that farmers can’t run their tractors or get their products to markets , meaning the vegetables are often left rotting on the farm. The current crisis has not only severely impacted the agricultural sector and rural areas of Sri Lanka, but also the urban poor. A recent World Food Programme report suggests that 30% of Sri Lanka’s population is suffering from food insecurity, especially farm workers in the tea estate sector and urban workers who buy most of their food and are sensitive to food price increases. Gradual transition While supporters of big agriculture are using the current debacle in Sri Lanka to argue for a return to energy-intensive food and cash crop production, this would be a serious mistake as it would do nothing to address the vulnerabilities of the current system. Although Sri Lanka needs agricultural inputs — mainly chemical fertilizer — to address its short-term crisis, a gradual and planned transition to a more diverse food production system using agroecological or organic methods would actually make a lot of sense. To be clear, we are not arguing that Sri Lanka go completely organic. Rather, we see an opportunity to slowly and deliberately grow an already established organic sector where farmers are thriving. Organic farming, which uses agroecological practices such as crop associations and composting to maintain soil fertility and manage pest problems, is not only more sustainable but less prone to supply chain disruptions and energy price fluctuations. A more diverse set of farming approaches in Sri Lanka will make it less vulnerable to the next crisis, whether it be self-inflicted or globally imposed. Nethmi S. Perera Bathige is a native of Sri Lanka and graduate student in the Department of Geography at the University of Kentucky, U.S. Find her on Twitter @nethmisachy .   William G. Moseley is the DeWitt Wallace Professor of Geography at Macalester College, U.S. Find him on Twitter @WilliamGMoseley . Banner image of a paddy field in Sri Lanka, courtesy of Nilanka Sampath . Bathige, N. S. (2022). Food security and dietary diversity among conventional and organic tea-smallholders in Central and Southern Sri Lanka  (Honors project). Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/geography_honors/72 Clapp, J., & Moseley, W. G. (2020). This food crisis is different: COVID-19 and the fragility of the neoliberal food security order.  The Journal of Peasant Studies ,  47 (7), 1393-1417. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2020.1823838 Special series Forest trackers. Narco activity takes heavy toll on Colombia’s protected forests, satellite data show Photos confirm narcotraffickers operating in Peru’s Kakataibo Indigenous Reserve Bolivia’s El Curichi Las Garzas protected area taken over by land-grabbers Authorities struggle to protect Bolivian national park from drug-fueled deforestation ‘It is indeed our problem’: Interview with Mário Soares on Brazil’s mangroves In northern Spain, climate change is killing shellfish — and women’s livelihoods New approach to restore coral reefs on mass scale kicks off in Hawai‘i Indonesia’s Avatar sea nomads enact Indigenous rules to protect octopus Amazon Conservation Study says 40% of Amazon region is potentially conserved — more than officially recorded Environmental agents intensify strike amid record fires in Brazil Fire bans not effective as the Amazon and Pantanal burn, study says Reintroduction project brings golden parakeets back to the skies of Brazil’s Belém Land rights and extractives Critics see payback in Indonesia’s plan to grant mining permits to religious groups Impunity and pollution abound in DRC mining along the road to the energy transition Women weave a culture of resistance and agroecology in Ecuador’s Intag Valley Hyundai ends aluminum deal with Adaro Minerals following K-pop protest Endangered Environmentalists Mother Nature Cambodia activists sentenced to prison — again Mongabay video screening at Chile’s Supreme Court expected to help landmark verdict in Brazil Indonesian activist freed in hate speech case after flagging illegal shrimp farms Final cheetah conservationists freed in Iran, but the big cat’s outlook remains grim Indonesia's Forest Guardians On a Borneo mountainside, Indigenous Dayak women hold fire and defend forest Fenced in by Sulawesi national park, Indigenous women make forestry breakout In Borneo, the ‘Power of Mama’ fight Indonesia’s wildfires with all-woman crew Pioneer agroforester Ermi, 73, rolls back the years in Indonesia’s Gorontalo Conservation Effectiveness How effective is the EU’s marquee policy to reduce the illegal timber trade? The conservation sector must communicate better (commentary) Thailand tries nature-based water management to adapt to climate change Forest restoration to boost biomass doesn’t have to sacrifice tree diversity Southeast Asian infrastructure Study: Indonesia’s new capital city threatens stable proboscis monkey population Indonesia’s new capital ‘won’t sacrifice the environment’: Q&A with Nusantara’s Myrna Asnawati Safitri Small farmers in limbo as Cambodia wavers on Tonle Sap conservation rules To build its ‘green’ capital city, Indonesia runs a road through a biodiverse forest you're currently offline Ground Reports 50-Word Edit National Interest Campus Voice Security Code Off The Cuff Democracy Wall Around Town PastForward In Pictures Last Laughs ThePrint Essential A n influential section of Sri Lankan agricultural economists and scientists has deplored the recent course change in the country’s agricultural policy made by the Gotabaya Rajapaksa government. The decision by the government to ban the use and import of chemical fertilisers and pesticides in pursuit of a “100 per cent organic food producer” status for Sri Lanka has already had disastrous consequences for the economy of the island nation, the Sri Lanka Agricultural Economics Association (SAEA) warned in a letter to President Rajapaksa on May 25, 2021. It pointed to the adverse effects of the policy on “food security, farm incomes, foreign exchange earnings and rural poverty.” President Rajapaksa’s ill-conceived and extremist policy, announced in April this year, of banning the import of all chemical fertilisers and pesticides as a way of promoting organic farming, is  threatening  to plunge the country’s agriculture into a deep production slump. As a consequence, the export of tea, Sri Lanka’s primary agricultural export, and of other commodities are projected to decline. The economy appears set for a fall in foreign exchange earnings in the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic. The SAEA letter provided the following detailed estimates of the potential economic loss to farmers due to the policy: “When converting from conventional agriculture into organic farming, the Government should weigh the technological, environmental, and economic costs and benefits. The preliminary findings of the studies conducted by the SAEA on potential economic losses of the import ban and respective estimations are given below for your consideration. (a) Agronomic studies reveal that the  average yields from paddy can drop by 25 per cent  if chemical fertilisers are fully replaced by organic fertilisers. This loss in productivity could  reduce the profitability of paddy farming by 33 per cent and rice consumption by 27 per cent  if paddy is cultivated just with organic fertilisers with a complete ban on rice imports. In contrast, applying organic fertiliser with the recommended dosages of chemical fertilisers would improve the profitability of farming by 16 per cent. (b) Absence of chemical fertiliser would  drastically reduce the productivity of the Vegetatively Propagated Tea (VPT) . With a 35 per cent productivity drop, the export volume of tea would go down from 279 to 181 million kg, causing an  income loss of Rs. 84 billion . The estate sector will likely incur significant losses compared to those of tea smallholders. These losses could further be aggravated due to increased cost of labour to apply bulky organic fertilisers. (c) The  coconut yields would go down by 30 per cent  if chemical fertilisers and pesticides are not applied. This situation will adversely impact fresh coconut availability for the production of coconut oil, desiccated coconut and other coconut products. The  loss in foreign exchange earnings can be as high as Rs. 18 billion , based on the assumption that only 26 per cent of the total coconut extent is fertilised. When the additional cost for the importation of edible oils is considered, the loss of foreign exchange earnings will be even higher. (d) The above results were derived considering the immediate effects on three agricultural sub-sectors. An analysis performed accommodating adjustments in the economy over the medium to long run reveals that  a reduction in average agricultural productivity by 20 per cent could cause a decrease in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by 3.05 per cent  suggesting an overall contraction of the economy with the implementation of the import ban. ( emphases added )” The letter requested the President to “substitute the import ban on chemical fertilisers and pesticides with the set of alternative measures” that included making scientifically validated Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) as a mandatory national standard and disincentivising overuse of chemicals in agriculture through an appropriate mix of legal standards, taxes, subsidies and output price support. The letter also asked for the strengthening of agricultural extension to “improve awareness of the safe use of chemical fertilisers and pesticides”. On coming to office in 2019, President Rajapaksa promised subsidised imported fertilisers to farmers. Yet in a matter of just two years, the Sri Lankan cabinet  approved  Rajapaksa’s proposal to completely ban the import of inorganic fertilisers and all synthetic agro-chemicals — effectively, the imports of all chemical fertilisers, pesticides, fungicides and weedicides. A gazette notification on May 6, 2021 brought this into immediate effect. For any shipment after 6 th  May 2021, permissions for unloading were cancelled, and banks told not to issue Letters of Credit on the import of banned substances. What caused this about-turn? The two factors behind the change in policy direction, according to news reports, are first, Sri Lanka’s foreign exchange crisis, and second, the rise in food prices owing to the lockdowns and other disruptions induced by Covid-19. It is  estimated  that Sri Lanka spends about US$ 400 million on fertiliser imports annually. A ban on chemical fertilisers, it was thought, would reduce the pressures on foreign exchange. Added to this was the pressure from President Rajapaksa’s group of advisors that included a medical doctor, who  reportedly  convinced him that the use of chemicals in agriculture was leading to the spread of chronic kidney disease. Sri Lankan scientists have in fact argued that there are no links between the use of chemicals as farm inputs and kidney disease. They  attributed  the rise in kidney diseases to “hard water in conjunction with fluoride present in many wells” (for a short review, see  here ). But these voices of reason were disregarded, and the organic farming lobby pushed the policy through. On May 10 2021, the “Presidential Task Force on Creating a Green Sri Lanka with Sustainable Solutions to Climate Change” was formed under President Rajapaksa’s Chairpersonship. The Task Force was authorised to implement the import ban and submit a plan to create a “Green Sri Lanka”. Initially, the Task Force had 46 members, but later the number of members was reduced to 25 with Mahinda Amaraweera as the Chairperson. Many senior agricultural scientists were  excluded  from its membership, and it appears that it was filled with people with questionable scientific credentials. One member of this task force, for example, had once  claimed  to have identified a self-generating rice variety of yore that had fed the  ten giant warriors  of the Sinhala King Dutugemunu of the Anuradhapura Kingdom between 205 BC to 161 BC. Agricultural scientists tested the claim and found that the claimed variety was of sorghum and not of rice at all! Yet another member had claimed that glyphosate even dissolved reservoir bunds! Such was the state of scientific rigour within the Task Force. A decision was also taken to import large quantities of compost, as well as boost the domestic production of compost, to substitute for chemical fertilisers. It is  well-known  that compost can hardly be classed as “organic” as it contains many potentially toxic trace elements, a fact that, alas, has never persuaded the soldiers of organic agriculture to stop promoting it as an alternative to chemical fertilizers. It is not just the SAEA that sounded the alarm over the outcome of the new policy. Growers of tea, which is the most severely affected crop in the present crisis followed by rice, pepper and cinnamon, are very worried. Herman Gunaratne, a master tea maker from Ahangama and a member of Task Force himself, says that Sri Lanka’s tea production of 300,000 tonnes may be halved due to the organic farming policy. Given that 10 per cent of Sri Lanka’s export incomes come from tea, this presents a serious potential problem. In an  interview  to the  South China Morning Post , he said: The ban has drawn the tea industry into complete disarray … The consequences for the country are unimaginable … The tea industry depends on nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potash (K) … Mainly it is the nitrogen component that we cannot do without. Without it, you can expect the decline in production by as much as 50 per cent … I cannot subscribe to the view that it [i.e., going organic] helps the tea quality except for the fact that if we go completely organic, we will lose 50 per cent of the crop. [But] we are not going to get 50 per cent higher prices … And there is an extremely limited market for organic tea in the world. There is no way in which it can compensate for the decline in the crop. Sensing trouble and responding to widespread  protests from farmers  and growers, the Rajapaksa government reversed some aspects of the policy by the end of May 2021. On 31 st  May 2021, the Cabinet  approved  the “import of carbonic fertilisers, natural minerals and chelated herbal trace minerals”. A tender was also floated to import organic fertilisers with a minimum of 10 per cent nitrogen, even though such a product is not known to exist outside  blood meal , which contains about 13.25 per cent nitrogen. On 31 st  July 2021, some fertiliser mixtures were permitted to be imported by the “protected agriculture sector”. However, no detailed guidelines exist for the orders issued above, and much confusion exists on what can be imported and what cannot. A list of 25 agrochemicals were recommended for imports for emergency use by agricultural scientists, but this recommendation was rejected by the government. To top it all, even the import of compost was banned after officials raised questions about the violation of the regulations pertaining to plant and animal quarantine. The muddled and unscientific policy has caused damage in other sectors as well. For instance, 20,000 out of 107,000 hectares of rubber in Sri Lanka are affected by Pestalotiopsis, a fungal leaf disease that is controlled by Carbendazim and Hexaconazole application through spraying. Further, chemical fertilisers need to be applied to promote better leaf growth. Neither are available in the market. As a result, the Colombo Rubber Traders Association  expects  rubber production to drop by 15-20 per cent. According to the Association, “This leaf disease is possibly best described as the equivalent of Covid-19 in the case of the rubber industry, considering both its devastation and the rapid speed at which it is spreading.” The havoc caused by the Sri Lankan experiment with organic farming is a warning to developing countries across the world against falling into a similar trap.  The irrational reduction in chemical inputs to agriculture even at low levels of productivity can spell disaster. Take a  country like India  where soils are generally poor in organic matter content. An estimated 59 per cent of soils are low in available nitrogen, about 49 per cent in available phosphorus, and about 48 per cent in available potassium. Indian soils are also deficient in varying degrees in micronutrients such as zinc, iron, manganese, copper, molybdenum and boron. Micronutrient deficiencies are not just yield-limiting in themselves; they also disallow the full expression of other nutrients in the soil, leading to an overall decline in fertility. Agricultural scientists have always been aware of the nutrient deficiencies of soil, as well as the perils of overuse of chemicals and the improper/imbalanced application of fertilisers. They therefore recommend location-specific solutions to nurture soil health and sustain increases in soil fertility. They suggest soil-test-based location-specific  balanced fertilisation  and  integrated nutrient management  methods combining organic manures (i.e., farmyard manure, compost, crop residues, biofertilisers, green manure) with chemical fertilisers. Thus, while they may advocate reducing the use of chemical fertilisers in some locations, they would promote its use in others. Such a comprehensive and integrated approach requires a firm adherence to science and the scientific method, and an equally firm rejection of anti-science models dressed up as “organic,” “eco-friendly,” “pro-nature” and so on. President Rajapaksa’s policy falls squarely into the latter category, much like the promotion of Zero Budget Natural Farming (ZBNF) by the present Government of India. Only the total withdrawal of this policy can save Sri Lankan agriculture. The Sri Lankan government would do well to listen to the country’s agricultural scientists and not to quacks masquerading as experts. R. Ramakumar is Professor, School of Development Studies, Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai. Views are personal. The article originally appeared on the Foundation for Agrarian Studies website. It has been published with permission. Subscribe to our channels on YouTube , Telegram & WhatsApp Support Our Journalism India needs fair, non-hyphenated and questioning journalism, packed with on-ground reporting. ThePrint – with exceptional reporters, columnists and editors – is doing just that. Sustaining this needs support from wonderful readers like you. Whether you live in India or overseas, you can take a paid subscription by clicking here . Organic farming LEAVE A REPLY Cancel Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. Most Popular No lawyer unless permitted, no appeal — what’s enemy agents ordinance j&k cops want to use more often, india to host first ever bimstec business summit in august, agenda yet to be finalised, base price of rafale agreed upon, fighters for navy to have india-specific enhancements. Required fields are marked * Copyright © 2024 Printline Media Pvt. Ltd. All rights reserved. Terms of Use Privacy Policy 191 IMAGES (PDF) A Role of Organic Farming for minimize the Environmental Impacts (PDF) Eco: Digitization of Organic Farming in Sri Lanka (PDF) Impact of Crop Rotation, Government Support, and Financial (PDF) ENHANCE FOOD SECURITY AND CONSERVE ENVIRONMENT THROUGH ORGANIC TAMAP Organic Farming and Sustainable Agriculture in Sri Lanka (PDF) Reliance on Organic Farming Resulted in Food Crises in Sri Lanka VIDEO CPM Sri Lanka Hydroponic farming Sri Lanka Mushroom Farming Tour in Reecha Sri Lanka promueve una agricultura más ecológica en una feria de productos orgánicos தரமான சம்பவம்... நாசாவின் செவ்வாய் கிரக ஆராய்ச்சிக்கான நான்கு பேர் கொண்ட குழுவில்இலங்கையைச் சேர்ந்த பெண் COMMENTS A Review on Organic Farming: Issues and Strategies The organic agriculture sector in Sri Lanka is still in its early stages of development. The sector supplies about six pe rcent of the total agricultural production Outlook of Present Organic Agriculture Policies and Future Needs in Sri In 2019, 72.3 million hectares of organic farm lands were present in the world (IFOAM. - Organics International, 2021). Based on the findings of the Organic Trade Association in. the USA, there ... PDF A Review on Organic Farming: Issues and Strategies concerning organic farming in Sri Lanka, issues and challenges faced by farmers when adopting organic farming strategies and effective implementation. This paper has used a non-systematic literature review () adopting the techniques used by Bandara, et al.(2021) for organic farming in Sri Lanka. Issues in Adopting Organic Farming [PDF] Organic Farming in Sri Lanka Organic Farming in Sri Lanka. U. R. Sangakkara. Published 2004. Agricultural and Food Sciences. The agricultural production system in Sri Lanka consists of two traditional and well-defined components. One is the plantation section, established during the colonial period, consisting of large units, and producing perennial crops such as coffee ... Role of organic farming for achieving sustainability in agriculture Specially Sri Lanka used to export rice to other countries using the organic farming system in ancient times. It originated early in the 20th century in reaction to rapidly changing farming practices (Kulasooriya et al., 1994). Organic farming plays the main role in the sustainability of agricultural systems. Climate change and food security in Sri Lanka: towards food ... Although Sri Lanka is an agriculture-based country, contributions to national gross domestic product (GDP) from the agricultural sector declined sharply from 33.53% in 1974 to 7.24% in 2019, which ... (PDF) Reliance on Organic Farming Resulted in Food Crises in Sri Lanka Fig 1: Data of expected crop reduction and crop reduction experienced during the crisis in Sri Lanka (Ranwala, 2021). Fig 2: The percentage of farmers using inorganic fertilizers in Sri Lanka (R ... PDF Organic Farming in Sri Lanka be greatly expanded in Sri Lanka. However, research is needed to develop organic farming systems and practices that are efficient, productive, and profitable. Introduction The Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, situated off the southeastern coast of the Indian subcontinent, is an island of 65,614 km2. The geographic location of the ... Outlook of Present Organic Agriculture Policies and Future Needs in Sri The agricultural land area under organic farming increased substantially from 62,560 ha in 2014 to 165,553 ha in 2017 (Table 1). Table 1. Organic agriculture areas in Sri Lanka Year Organic agriculture area (ha) 2014 62560 2015 96318 2016 96318 2017 165553 Source: FiBL Statistics - European and global organic farming statistics, 2019. Farmers' Attitude Towards Organic Agriculture: A Case of Rural Sri Lanka Organic agriculture has the potential to reduce the negative impacts of conventional agricultural practices and enhance rural economic development. Since research on Sri Lankan farmers' attitude towards organic agriculture has been rare, this research aims to explore the farmers' viewpoint on organic agriculture. Two main rural districts were purposely selected for this investigation since ... PDF Organic Fertiliser Transition in Sri Lanka: Farmers Were Providing an Organic Fertiliser Transition in Sri Lanka: Farmers Were Providing an Early Warning of a Food Shortage Author: Verité Research Keywords: environment, farming, fertiliser, fertilizer, organic farming, organic fertiliser, sri lanka, survey, sustainability, verité research Created Date: 3/8/2022 3:59:27 PM Behavioral Intention of Paddy Farmers Towards Adoption of Organic This stu dy was aimed at investigating the behavioral intention towards and factors influencing adoption of organic  soil nutrient management by paddy farmers, consequent to the banning of agro-chemicals in April 2021 in Sri Lank a. A questionnaire survey, supplemented by key informant discussions was used to collect the primary data after six  months of the banning when farmers were ... Outlook of Present Organic Agriculture Policies and Future Needs in Sri Sri Lanka has a higher number of organic farming lands and a higher share of organic land among the Asian countries. The volume of organic exports from Sri Lanka increased from 4,216 MT in 2007 to 44,300 MT in 2018 and the value of organic exports reached Euro 259 million in 2015 (Willer, Lernoud, and Kemper, 2019.) Sri Lanka and Organic Farming? For decades, Sri Lanka had been importing and subsidizing synthetic fertilizer, leading to great success in exports such as rice, tea, and rubber. In 2020, the cost of these imports and subsidies amounted to hundreds of millions of dollars per year. So apart from wanting to come off as a "natural" man, Rajapaksa really wanted a budget cut. (PDF) Present situation of organic farming in Sri Lanka ... SSM Peramunagama 13. 1. Pri nc iple of health. • Organic Agriculture should sustain and enhance the health of soil, plant, animal, hum an and planet as on e and indivisible. • Healthy soils ... Farmers' Attitude Towards Organic Agriculture: A Case of Rural Sri Lanka In Sri Lanka, organic farming is a longstanding tradition. Earlier, local farmers trusted traditional planting strategies such as astrology, different types of biodynamic applications, specific time schedules, pest and disease control methods like "Kem" methods, and so on (SLEDB, 2015). ... Research paper for publication. dharmaratne A ... PDF Eco: Digitization of Organic Farming in Sri Lanka Eco: Digitization of Organic Farming in Sri Lanka. 2. LITERATURE REVIEW. Research on hybrid neural networks and the H-P filter model for short-term vegetable price forecasting was carried out and the focus of this research is on time series data on vegetable costs, which have a significant impact on people's lives. Organic agriculture in Sri Lanka: Are we going down the ... The approach to organic agriculture by the Sri Lankan Government in 2021 has compromised food production and long-term food security of the nation. Nearly 88% of the organic farmers, are in developing countries; India (0.6 million), Ethiopia (0.2 million), and Mexico (0.2 million) producing traditional export crops, such as coffee and tea. Sri Lanka's organic farming disaster, explained But in the spring of 2021, President Rajapaksa made an unusual decision: He banned synthetic fertilizer and pesticide imports practically overnight, forcing Sri Lanka's millions of farmers to go ... Farmers' Attitude Towards Organic Agriculture: A Case of Rural Sri Lanka Faculty of Agric ultural Sciences, Sabaraga muwa University of Sri Lanka, P O Box, 02, Beli huloya, Sri Lanka. * Corresponding author: [email protected]; [email protected]. SUMMARY ... Drawing the wrong lessons from Sri Lanka's organic farming experience Our research on the diets of long-term organic versus conventional tea farmers in Sri Lanka suggests that it is actually the established organic tea farmers who have done much better over the past ... PDF A Role of Organic Farming for minimize the Environmental Impacts: A paper highlights and status of organic farming especially involving female farmers in the village of Valachchenai, Korralai Pattu, Batticaloa, Sri Lanka. Using the case study method like semi Rajapaksa's experiment with organic farming in Sri Lanka a ... A n influential section of Sri Lankan agricultural economists and scientists has deplored the recent course change in the country's agricultural policy made by the Gotabaya Rajapaksa government. The decision by the government to ban the use and import of chemical fertilisers and pesticides in pursuit of a "100 per cent organic food producer" status for Sri Lanka has already had ... assignment essay homework paper phd report review speech thesis