Dr Sarath Obeysekera

Sri Lanka today struggles with fertilizer shortages, high import costs, and a heavy dependence on foreign suppliers for a commodity that is essential for our agricultural survival. Few people remember that decades ago Sri Lanka possessed the capability to manufacture fertilizer locally with the assistance of world-class engineering firms.

During my early professional career, I had the opportunity to work in London with the engineering group KBR (Kellogg Brown & Root), which was then closely associated with Halliburton. Kellogg engineers were globally recognized for designing and constructing large industrial facilities including fertilizer plants, petrochemical complexes, and energy projects. The same engineering expertise was involved in building Sri Lanka’s fertilizer manufacturing facility.

However, during the economic reforms that followed the open-economy policies introduced under President J. R. Jayewardene, the government led by Finance Minister Ronnie de Mel decided to close the fertilizer plant. While the reforms aimed to liberalize the economy after years of state control under Sirimavo Bandaranaike, the closure of this strategic industrial asset was, in my view, one of the most damaging decisions taken during that period.

The shutdown effectively dismantled Sri Lanka’s domestic capability to manufacture fertilizer. From that point onward, the country became almost entirely dependent on imports to sustain its agriculture. This decision did not merely close a factory—it eliminated an entire industrial ecosystem of engineers, technicians, and skilled workers who were capable of supporting a national fertilizer industry.

Over the decades that followed, Sri Lanka’s agriculture became increasingly vulnerable to global supply disruptions, currency shortages, and international price fluctuations. The fertilizer crisis experienced in recent years has highlighted how dangerous it is for an agricultural nation to depend entirely on external suppliers for such a critical input.

Ironically, while Sri Lanka dismantled its fertilizer manufacturing capability, many countries around the world expanded their petrochemical and fertilizer industries using advanced technologies. For example, in Qatar, companies such as Shell plc invested billions of dollars in projects like the Pearl GTL Project, which converts natural gas into ultra-clean liquid fuels using advanced chemical processes. These large-scale industrial developments demonstrate how energy resources and industrial technology can be integrated to create long-term economic value.

Sri Lanka may not possess vast natural gas reserves like Qatar, but the lesson remains clear: countries that maintain and develop their industrial capabilities gain strategic economic advantages. Those that dismantle them often become permanently dependent on imports.

The closure of our fertilizer plant should therefore be studied not only as a historical decision but also as a lesson in long-term national planning. Industrial capacity, once lost, is extremely difficult and costly to rebuild. Yet rebuilding such capacity is precisely what Sri Lanka must consider if it wishes to strengthen its food security and economic independence.

Today, as the country debates agricultural policy, fertilizer supply, and economic resilience, policymakers would do well to remember the industrial decisions of the past. The story of Sri Lanka’s fertilizer plant is not merely history—it is a reminder that strategic industries should be protected, modernized, and expanded rather than abandoned.

---

Sarath Obeysekera

Regards

Dr Sarath Obeysekera