Sri Lanka’s food security problem: Are we getting this right? Part 2

What went wrong in Sri Lanka? 

 Sri Lanka initiated many food security activities in disparage sectors with very little collaboration and laced with evocative phrases such as ‘back to nature’, ‘Api wawamu’, etc. The ad hoc nature of these activities initiated to solve the food crisis with no clearly defined objectives is at the heart of the problem. This is due to the disorganised and haphazard manner in which the agricultural sector in Sri Lanka was managed and years of mismanagement, corruption and short-sighted policymaking, especially regarding fertiliser. There was no coherent national plan to address the short-term and long-term food security needs in Sri Lanka There is a need to widen and strengthen the participation and engagement of civil society actors and farmer groups in national food security decision making in the country.   

The Sri Lankan Government failed to understand that food security must extend beyond the provision of relief including free rice since the 1960s. This echoes the need for an enlightened food policy to improve the ability of the poor to break away from the vicious circle of poverty. Sri Lanka must approach the food security problem, by developing their capabilities and skills and not just by providing income support which will be discussed in the next section under the capability approach. 

Sri Lanka spent millions of rupees on fertiliser and agrochemical subsidies, pesticides and low interest agricultural credit which distorted the picture on agricultural profitability (Herath and Jayasuriya 1996). Recently Ranil Wickremesinghe cancelled the cultivation loans of more than 100,000 farms. This has been the normal ritual for the last 60 years. Fertilisers and pesticides have exhausted the regenerative capacity of agricultural land. We know how Sri Lankan policymakers dictated salvation of Sri Lankan agriculture via organic methods in 2021. Current disorganised food security policies may end up in a similar fate if policies are not developed to enhance the skills and capabilities of the farming population. Any effective approach to achieve food security must focus on poverty alleviation, water scarcity, soil erosion, wetlands and deforestation and waste management. In addition, many complementary requirements such as fertiliser, irrigation facilities and rural roads must be put in place on time.  

The capability approach of Prof. A.K. Sen: Some insights for Sri Lanka  

How do we develop our policies to enhance capabilities, skills and vision of the farming population? The capability approach propounded by Prof. A.K. Sen of Harvard University (he received the Nobel Prize for economics in 1998) can be used to better understand how capabilities, skills, poverty alleviation and food security are connected. The capability theory argues that we must develop the capabilities, skills and knowledge of the farming community to ensure their own food needs and a good standard of living. The capability approach views poverty as multidimensional (we wrongly assume that poverty is only a lack of income) which stresses the importance of empowerment of the poor. According to A.K. Sen (2001), poverty signifies the lack of some basic capabilities to function. He argues that poverty is the major driver of food insecurity, and empowerment of women can help them to get rid of poverty and reduce food insecurity. 

The root causes of food security are lack of education, health and incomes and other basic capabilities that constitute people’s wellbeing. Many studies found that hunger is highly correlated with educational deprivation. The correlations are highest at the primary level, and it agrees with the Capability Approach, which stresses education’s active role in developing people’s capabilities. In Mali, doubling access to primary education by rural people could reduce rural food insecurity by around 25%. Through the self‐help development projects for village women in Samoa, participants experienced significant changes in their capabilities, not only as a result of learning new skills but also as a result of discovering capabilities they already had that could be valuable in creating new opportunities for themselves. 

Study of rainwater harvesting in South Africa to secure water availability to increase food production among rural youth in the Mpumalanga Province showed that youth have high levels of certain capabilities such as trust, social cohesion and inclusion, cooperation, self-esteem, and meaning. However, these youth had fewer opportunities, like access to networks, access to knowledge and information and sociability, which restrict opportunities for them to engage in food and water security issues. 

Climate change adaptation of impoverished rural populations who are financially and technically least equipped to adapt to changing conditions is paramount. HEA uses Amartya Sen’s entitlement theory and detailed social and economic data to simulate the impact of weather related, price, policy and other shocks on household income and food access, to provide information for decision making. 

The ability of women to adapt to climate change pressures will be enhanced by using the ‘capabilities approach’. This approach will improve women’s wellbeing, and act more readily as agents of change within their communities. Women in India are particularly vulnerable to climate change because they lack access to healthcare, literacy, and control over their own lives. Gaining these would reduce their vulnerability to changing environmental circumstances.

Our policymakers must understand basic concepts such as food security, food sovereignty and sustainable development to learn their complexities and learn what they actually mean. Collaboration with agricultural scientists is essential here. 

Policies to improve food security Short-run measures  

1. Food security is complex and holistic in nature and should only be part of the broader agricultural development strategy of Sri Lanka. It should be integrated with other policies on the environment, rural development, health and markets, etc. The current big bang approach to the food security problem in Sri Lanka with no coordination reflects a serious lack of understanding of the issue and how to systematically handle it. Governments and institutions now must rebalance agricultural policy and investment to achieve improvements on interlinked themes of food security, climate change, biodiversity conservation, and social wellbeing. 

2. Sri Lanka must immediately facilitate the movement of agricultural inputs, services and products and fuel to support Yala harvesting to avoid shortage and wastage of rice. Easy financial resources should be made available to farmers to prevent disruption of farm activities. There should be special focus on developing rural roads.

3. Malnutrition affects children’s educational outcomes and in the short term we need an immediate and adequate cash transfer program for the poor and vulnerable groups. The prevalence of malnutrition among children means that school meals may be appropriate in the short run to develop intellectual and physical capabilities of children. 

4. We can improve food security by increasing women’s access to land and natural resources.  SDG 5 focuses on women’s access to land and property, and their access to natural resources. For women farmers whose proportions are growing in Sri Lanka especially in the north and east, access to natural resources, such as forests and fisheries, can provide important additional sources of nutritional diversity.  

Long-term measures  

5. Bio-technology may have potential for a second green revolution but proponents of food sovereignty however, may be resistant to genetically modified foods. Food sovereignty critiques of GM foods remain valid as large foreign corporations can obtain patent control of local production and distribution of seeds and plants. Seeds are part of the heritage of rural farmers and seeds are the first link in the food chain. Sri Lanka must examine very carefully all issues related to genetically modified foods in any food security initiatives.   

6. The top-down approach, and a bottom-up approach together can offer new perspectives on how to implement climate policy integration to support adaptive planning. Any long-term plan to improve food security must incorporate mitigation and adaptation methods based on farmers’ traditional knowledge, their experience and awareness and adaptability to the ecological environment. Food security can be threatened by natural disasters such as frequent floods which are important for policy decisions and farmers’ adaptation processes. A variety of adaptation practices such as changes in cropping systems, technological innovations have been observed. The Government must provide support to farmer groups, novel information networks, better access to markets and value chains, credit, irrigation infrastructure enhancement, and the introduction of disaster resistant food crops to enhance adaptation. 

7. To fight food insecurity, governments should invest more in the education sector, especially primary education for rural people. Education for rural people can be seen as a key factor for promoting overall national food security. Education at all levels to provide better thinking skills and practical tools to manage interactions of people with the environment is essential to sustain critical ecological systems. Besides, agricultural extension authorities should provide information about climate change to farming communities to deal with the adverse impacts of sudden climate changes on productivity. 

8. Lack of adequate Research and Development (R&D) investment can exacerbate hunger and food insecurity in the long term. Increasing funding on agricultural R&D to develop innovations in increasing agricultural production is a vital element to ensure food security. We need a well-designed agenda for investing in agricultural R&D in Sri Lanka to meet the long-term needs which currently suffers from underinvestment, poor infrastructure, and inadequate flow of qualified researchers to drive local innovation. Government must encourage participation in development by academics in universities, research institutes, bureaucrats and independent thinkers in Sri Lanka who can provide this multidisciplinary expertise to coordinate common policy responses to the food security problems. 

The distilled essence of this analysis, although not exhaustive, is that the Government did not understand the concept of poverty which was treated simply as lack of income. Income transfers were treated as the only panacea to overcome poverty and food but governments were happy because they were politically visible and palatable. Food security is complex and holistic in nature and should only be part of the broader agricultural development strategy of Sri Lanka integrated with other policies on the environment, rural development, health and markets, rural roads, etc. Sri Lanka failed to develop a more coherent and all-encompassing policy framework. 

The current big bang approach to the food security problem in Sri Lanka with no coordination reflects a serious lack of understanding of the issue and how to systematically handle it. Governments and institutions now must rebalance agricultural policy and investment to achieve improvements on interlinked themes of food security, climate change, biodiversity conservation, and social wellbeing. Poverty is a multidimensional concept with education, health and several other elements. Any solution to poverty and food security must focus on developing the skills and capabilities of the rural poor and not income transfers. If not, Sri Lanka will simply be flogging a dead horse to achieve food security.