Drought dilemmas

 Sri Lanka’s weather disasters have been worse than expected with devastating floods being quickly followed by drought. According to government agencies as many as 1.4 million people are affected and it seems the county can barely gather a breath before the next round of disaster challenges. 

The Finance Ministry this week responded by slashing taxes on a range of essential items but relief measures will have an impact on public revenue and could ultimately hobble economic growth for 2017.   

Global rating agencies and local institutions including the Central Bank have warned that drought-related costs would add to Sri Lanka’s fiscal challenge and put further pressure on the B1 negative rating. The situation has turned into crisis as pressure mounts on the Government to find sustainable policies to deal with the economic fallout.

Ratings agency Moody’s expects the lower agricultural output to weigh heavily on the GDP growth, reducing exports, household income and consumption in affected areas. This would in turn affect Government revenue and reserves.

The effects of droughts are certainly not new to Sri Lanka, having been through several in recent years. However, this has not changed the Government’s traditionally reactive efforts to offset the negative effects of water scarcity. Despite the frequency of these droughts, no concerted effort has yet been made to formulate and adopt national drought policies that are timely, well-coordinated and sustainable.

It is imperative that an effective monitoring and early warning system delivers timely information to decision-makers. Effective impact assessment procedures, proactive risk management measures, preparedness plans aimed at increasing the coping capacity and effective emergency response programs directed at reducing the impact of drought are all needed in order to ensure that Sri Lanka doesn’t keep making the same mistakes each time a crisis situation arises.

Change has been extremely slow, largely because knowledge of climate change and its impact has been limited amongst the villages that are worst affected. This has meant that despite the Government’s attempts to change the start of the major paddy seasons and bring them forward by several weeks, the reception at the grassroots level has been sporadic. Even with drought-related taskforces being among the best-funded public bodies, it is difficult to feel a noticeable change in how we have handled these situations. Given the nature of global warming, it is evident that drought and flood-related measures will have to be made a permanent part of policymaking with a strong link to environmental conservation, research and technology.

The Government will also have to create functional relationships with the private sector, communities and research institutions. The private sector can be utilised to help provide farmers with crop insurance, for instance. Furthermore, emphasis must be put on research and improving agricultural technology to counter the ill-effects of droughts; technology such as drought-resistant crops.

The Government must adopt policies that engender cooperation and coordination at all levels of Government in order to increase its capacity to cope with extended periods of water scarcity in the event of a drought. Creating drought-resilient societies should be the main objective. 

Given the already precarious position Sri Lanka finds itself in, it can ill afford to be reactive in these situations any longer. The Government must focus its efforts on empowerment, prevention and awareness with a strong system governed by well thought out policy in place for crisis situations, in order to minimise the damage. Similarly, those affected need to stop accepting mere handouts from the Government once tragedy strikes and demand for a more permanent solution.