The government has made a decision to convert the entire agriculture production from non-organic to organic in Sri Lanka. The President declared that Sri Lanka is the first country to achieve 100 percent organic in farming. This is not the first time Sri Lanka is claiming to be the ‘the first’. 

History witnesses several other occasions of being the first in the past. It was legend King Ravana, who ruled Lanka, took wings to fly to India for the first time in his chariot. That was several millenniums before the Wright brothers invented the flying machine in 1903. 

Sri Lanka is ranked within the first five countries in the World Giving Index computed by the World Economic Forum. We are among the first top ranked countries in Human Development Index of the UNDP. We are the first South Asian nation to liberalise the economy. Since the time immemorial we, Sri Lankans, have been boasting and taking the pride of being the first. It is also true that Sri Lanka is the first at the beginning but is faltering and falling behind en route.   

The President’s announcement of achieving 100 percent organic farming was a stone thrown at hornets’ nest. Genuine experts and practitioners in agriculture as well as pseudo experts, who know between nothing and the least about agriculture, filled the television screens, social media and newspaper columns. Pseudo experts, as usual, have been in the forefront banging hollow drums and cracking whips taking the king in parade. They have become much louder and vociferous. Politicians, doctors, dentists, trade unionists and Buddhist priests are among them. They cite agriculture practices adopted during the period of King Parakramabahu and the ‘Granary in the East’. They cite history, past practices, health, nutritional and environmental benefits and much rhetoric in promoting organic farming. For them consumers need to choose healthy food prescribed by health experts.

Consumer preference and the sensitivity to food price, food security, food promotions, taste, habits, affordability and availability are immaterial. They preach merits of organic food from their air conditioned offices away from the farm while drinking non-organic imported coffee and tasting a ‘bite’ deep fried in chemical contaminated palm oil to go with their favourite inorganic stuff. Their mission is pleasing the boss on his courageous bold first step taken; their vision is their own welfare. 

The other category consists of genuine experts and practitioners in agriculture. They have learned, studied and conducted research, experiments, tests and practiced farming and agriculture. Agriculture is their bread and butter. They agree that organic farming be promoted but it should not be rushed. They are of view that the move needs careful planning with a clear roadmap and takes time. It is not an overnight affair that can be achieved with a single pen stroke. 

Farmers and smallholders, who are neither genuine experts nor the pseudo experts, face the brunt. They experience shortage of fertiliser and are confused. They claim that during last election, politicians promised ‘more’ fertiliser and free fertiliser. But, politicians claim what they said was ‘no’ (chemical) fertiliser. Pseudo experts say, due to a hearing impairment caused by use of chemical fertiliser, farmers have heard ‘no’ as ‘more’. 

We have been witnessing on electronic, print and social media of seminars, webinars, dialogues, debates, explanations, arguments, counter arguments, protests, rallies and columns since the decision to convert farming to organic was taken. None speaks against the transformation of agriculture from non-organic to organic. Experts, practitioners, farmers, researchers, extension workers all are supportive and agreeable. No doubt, transforming the entire agriculture organic is a noble thought. Nobleness does not depend on the word alone but on the deed as well. 

While enjoying the amusement made by politicians and pseudo experts, it is worth looking at implications raised by experts and practitioners (involving an array of cultivators of different scales and diverse products) related to fast-tracking the conversion. 

There is no single, universally accepted definition of organic food or organic farming. Organic farming is, in general, expected to conserve biodiversity, recycle resources on the farm and bring about ecological balance. Withdrawal of inorganic inputs is not organic farming by any definition. The government has not declared a clear policy, programme or a formula on use of organic matters to define what is permitted on an organic farm and what is not. 

Converting a farm to organic farming is time consuming (takes three or more years) and expensive. Converting the entire country is nearly impractical and at a prohibitive cost. There are no competent agencies and personnel to prove the farm is meeting organic standards. There are no specific standards and formula laid down applicable to different crops and different stages of growth of a plant. During the conversion farmer is incurring losses, due to non-availability of any type of fertiliser and decline of the yield. 

Organic farming is more labour-intensive; weeding is by hand; spraying of tonnes of compost is manual. Sri Lankan agriculture suffers from absence of labour and high cost of labour. As a result, farmers would have greater costs without a proportionate increase in yield. 

Farmer is running the risk of losing crops to pest/disease that cannot be dealt with by organic methods. Organic pesticides are less effective and not necessarily trouble-free and can be harmful to the environment and health. Crop yields are less in organic farming than non-organic farming. 

The density and dispersion of population has dramatically changed from the King Parakramabahu period to date. Land, which was exclusively available for farming and occupation, has been encroached by many other competing needs. Inorganic farm practices and materials were found and promoted to ensure the food security of a growing population worldwide and to overcome the non-availability of adequate farm land caused by growing competing needs for the land. The current farming practices and materials are results of extensive and lengthy scientific research conducted. Instant replacement of scientifically proven practices with emotional tendencies does more harm than good. 

According to the findings of soil scientists and agriculture scientists, top soil in many parts of the country especially in the hill country is eroded. Hence, enrichment of soil has come as a priority. It has to be done through organic materials. Agriculture extension services have failed to educate farmers on such soil enrichment practices. Farmer does not have access to research findings, technology, inputs and new knowledge reflecting the failure of extension service. He chooses type of fertiliser and the dosage according to his beliefs and practices for generations rather than based on recommendations by agencies responsible. The government decision to ban imports and use of chemical fertiliser is a penalisation of the farmer for the failure of the officials. King Kekille is reborn.   

In 1970s and 80s the priority was for food security rather than food safety. With the population increase, successive governments and agriculture authorities came under pressure to ensure food security. The department was busy with studies and research to develop high-yielding seeds and planting materials and effective fertiliser application. These measures were basically non-organic. The department has been propagating and promoting these practices until the day before the President announced banning non-organic farming. 

Consumer taste, preference, habits, affordability have changed over the time. Different and more varieties of agriculture products came up in response to such changes. Production methods, inputs, cost have changed. Interest and the emphasis were on improving the yield, productivity and cost efficiency. Scientifically researched and tested chemical fertiliser has come up to answer plant needs and consumer needs. Plant and the farmer cannot decide what type, ratio and proportion of fertiliser is required for different plants and at different stages. It is a science and for the experts to decide.

Sri Lanka has been exporting several agriculture crops. They are all using non-organic fertiliser, weedicide and pesticide.  Use of non-organic materials has not been an issue for the volume or the price of exports. By trying to convert export crops production organic yield, production and the quality would drop. On the other hand, some export crops are not edible i.e. rubber and foliage. The said health hazards are not applicable for such products. Economic loss will be much higher than whatever the gain. 

Chemical contamination doesn’t happen only in the field. Most food is processed before they are consumed. Unprocessed organic food, in its journey from the farm to the plate undergoes processing, packaging, storage, and transport. They are all interacting with chemicals such as preservatives, processing aids, additives, packaging material and fuel. What is produced on the farm organically reaches the plate with chemical interaction.

Sri Lanka never had a properly laid down agriculture policy. We did not have a direction, road map, adequate resources, right technology, right raw materials, inputs with a policy and a programme. Our agriculture sector is disorganised and disarrayed. It spans across an array of different actors moving from a peasant to a commercial farmer. Our agriculture value chain is so unique. In addition to passing through varying actors changing from farmer to the end consumer, it involves the President, ministers and officials as well. Value chain is so fragmented; value chain links are scattered or piled up in heaps. Pre-harvest actors and post-harvest actors never see eye to eye.     

Some farmers who were in dire situations due to the inability of repaying the loans committed suicide taking weedicide/pesticide. Ban imposed on chemicals would deprive the farmer an affordable source for committing suicide. But, they need not commit suicide. They have come out of muddy fields and are on streets protesting against the non availability of fertiliser. Robert Knox said, “The Sinhala farmer is fit enough to be king once you wash off his mud.” Thanks to pseudo experts, who still live in the history, farmers have been made kings by taking them away from mud.  Victor Rathnayake, popular Sinhala vocalist, predicted this a few years ago in his song ‘Api Okkoma Rajawaru’ (We are all kings).

The government will be praised for the noble thought but gets tonnes of blame for bad implementation. We, Buddhists believe enlightenment of Prince Siddhartha is the noblest thing happened ever. According to legendary biographies (Jathaka Stories) Buddha’s (bodhisattva) career is spanning hundreds of lifetimes before his last birth as Siddhartha. He has taken many births to convert his noble thought of discovering a path to release clinging and craving and escape the cycle of birth and rebirth. We, Sri Lankans, majority being Buddhists, have no patience to wait for few cultivation seasons to convert the noble thought of transforming agriculture from inorganic to organic. In theory, nothing can travel faster than the light. We will go into the history as the first nation by converting farming from non-organic to organic faster than the light.

Conversion from inorganic to organic is meritorious and welcome but has to be done in a systematic, scientific manner based on research and lessons learning rather than being rhetoric and emotional.

(Chandrasena Maliyadde has served as a Secretary to three ministries before his retirement. He is currently a Vice President of the Sri Lanka Economic Association. 
He can be reached via 
[email protected])