On the feasibility of an agricultural revolution: Sri Lanka’s ban of chemical fertilizers in 2021

IF 5.6 1区农林科学 Q1 FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

Food Security Pub Date : 2025-04-02 DOI:10.1007/s12571-025-01528-6

Pay Drechsel, Piumi Madhuwanthi, Duleesha Nisansala, Dushiya Ramamoorthi, Thilini Bandara

{"title":"On the feasibility of an agricultural revolution: Sri Lanka’s ban of chemical fertilizers in 2021","authors":"Pay Drechsel, Piumi Madhuwanthi, Duleesha Nisansala, Dushiya Ramamoorthi, Thilini Bandara","doi":"10.1007/s12571-025-01528-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Sri Lanka Government’s ambitious decision to ban synthetic agrochemicals, including chemical fertilizers (and pesticides), in April 2021 made it the first nation in the world to embark on a full-scale transition to – as the Government called it—organic farming, and address concerns about human health and the environment. Previous policies had envisioned a gradual shift, but the sudden ban caught agriculture off guard. Declining foreign exchange reserves to import chemical fertilizers and coinciding peak fertilizer prices appeared to support the timing of the move. However, the ensuing rush for organic fertilizers failed to meet the national demand, resulting in severe losses in rice and export-oriented plantation crops. Facing decreasing yields and food insecurity, the government lifted the ban in November 2021. The events raised critical questions about the necessity and feasibility of such a drastic transition and alternative ways. To explore the general feasibility of transitioning toward organic fertilizers, this study considered the actual and potential availability of biomass to “replace” chemical fertilizers at the national scale as was envisioned by the Government. The analysis focused on the four main national crops and showed that in none of the selected scenarios, Sri Lanka’s actual and potentially available organic fertilizer could supply rice- and plantation-based agrosystems with sufficient nitrogen, not to mention other crops or nutrients. The Government will in every scenario, including one that assumes a stepwise transition, remain compelled to spend significantly on importing organic fertilizer to maintain the required crop yields, which would cost the Government more foreign currency than purchasing chemical fertilizer. Even more costly is purchasing rice to close the national production gap, as Sri Lanka eventually did at the end of its nationwide experiment, which resulted in major food security concerns.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":567,"journal":{"name":"Food Security","volume":"17 3","pages":"585 - 602"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s12571-025-01528-6.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food Security","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12571-025-01528-6","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Sri Lanka Government’s ambitious decision to ban synthetic agrochemicals, including chemical fertilizers (and pesticides), in April 2021 made it the first nation in the world to embark on a full-scale transition to – as the Government called it—organic farming, and address concerns about human health and the environment. Previous policies had envisioned a gradual shift, but the sudden ban caught agriculture off guard. Declining foreign exchange reserves to import chemical fertilizers and coinciding peak fertilizer prices appeared to support the timing of the move. However, the ensuing rush for organic fertilizers failed to meet the national demand, resulting in severe losses in rice and export-oriented plantation crops. Facing decreasing yields and food insecurity, the government lifted the ban in November 2021. The events raised critical questions about the necessity and feasibility of such a drastic transition and alternative ways. To explore the general feasibility of transitioning toward organic fertilizers, this study considered the actual and potential availability of biomass to “replace” chemical fertilizers at the national scale as was envisioned by the Government. The analysis focused on the four main national crops and showed that in none of the selected scenarios, Sri Lanka’s actual and potentially available organic fertilizer could supply rice- and plantation-based agrosystems with sufficient nitrogen, not to mention other crops or nutrients. The Government will in every scenario, including one that assumes a stepwise transition, remain compelled to spend significantly on importing organic fertilizer to maintain the required crop yields, which would cost the Government more foreign currency than purchasing chemical fertilizer. Even more costly is purchasing rice to close the national production gap, as Sri Lanka eventually did at the end of its nationwide experiment, which resulted in major food security concerns.

查看原文本刊更多论文

关于农业革命的可行性：斯里兰卡将于2021年禁止使用化肥

斯里兰卡政府于2021年4月作出了一项雄心勃勃的决定，禁止包括化肥（和农药）在内的合成农用化学品，使其成为世界上第一个全面过渡到（斯里兰卡政府称之为）有机农业的国家，并解决了对人类健康和环境的关切。以前的政策设想的是逐步转变，但突然的禁令让农业措手不及。用于进口化肥的外汇储备不断减少，同时恰逢化肥价格见顶，似乎支持了这一举措的时机选择。但是，有机肥供不应求，导致大米和出口作物遭受严重损失。面对产量下降和粮食不安全，政府于2021年11月取消了禁令。这些事件提出了关于这种剧烈过渡和替代方式的必要性和可行性的关键问题。为了探索向有机肥过渡的总体可行性，本研究考虑了政府所设想的在全国范围内生物质“取代”化肥的实际和潜在可用性。该分析集中在四种主要的国家作物上，并表明在所有选定的情况下，斯里兰卡的实际和潜在可用的有机肥都不能为以水稻和种植园为基础的农业系统提供足够的氮，更不用说其他作物或养分。在每一种情况下，包括假设逐步过渡的情况下，政府将继续被迫大量花费进口有机肥料以维持所需的作物产量，这将比购买化学肥料花费更多的外汇。更昂贵的做法是购买大米，以缩小全国的生产差距，斯里兰卡在其全国性试验结束时最终就是这样做的，这导致了重大的粮食安全问题。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Food Security FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY-

CiteScore

14.00

自引率

6.00%

发文量

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： Food Security is a wide audience, interdisciplinary, international journal dedicated to the procurement, access (economic and physical), and quality of food, in all its dimensions. Scales range from the individual to communities, and to the world food system. We strive to publish high-quality scientific articles, where quality includes, but is not limited to, the quality and clarity of text, and the validity of methods and approaches. Food Security is the initiative of a distinguished international group of scientists from different disciplines who hold a deep concern for the challenge of global food security, together with a vision of the power of shared knowledge as a means of meeting that challenge. To address the challenge of global food security, the journal seeks to address the constraints - physical, biological and socio-economic - which not only limit food production but also the ability of people to access a healthy diet. From this perspective, the journal covers the following areas: Global food needs: the mismatch between population and the ability to provide adequate nutrition Global food potential and global food production Natural constraints to satisfying global food needs: § Climate, climate variability, and climate change § Desertification and flooding § Natural disasters § Soils, soil quality and threats to soils, edaphic and other abiotic constraints to production § Biotic constraints to production, pathogens, pests, and weeds in their effects on sustainable production The sociological contexts of food production, access, quality, and consumption. Nutrition, food quality and food safety. Socio-political factors that impinge on the ability to satisfy global food needs: § Land, agricultural and food policy § International relations and trade § Access to food § Financial policy § Wars and ethnic unrest Research policies and priorities to ensure food security in its various dimensions.