{"id":115083,"date":"2021-06-10T15:24:40","date_gmt":"2021-06-10T22:24:40","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/?p=115083"},"modified":"2021-06-10T15:27:21","modified_gmt":"2021-06-10T22:27:21","slug":"importing-organic-fertiliser-do-we-need-plant-deceases-unwanted-pests-and-plagues-to-add-to-the-countrys-woes","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/2021\/06\/10\/importing-organic-fertiliser-do-we-need-plant-deceases-unwanted-pests-and-plagues-to-add-to-the-countrys-woes\/","title":{"rendered":"Importing organic fertiliser; Do we need plant deceases, unwanted pests and plagues to add to the country\u2019s woes?"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Raj Gonsalkorale<\/em><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n

The\nPresident and the government is urged to at least postpone the decision made to\nban the import of inorganic fertiliser at least for one year until it has had\ntime to consult widely with experts and arrive at a more informed decision. Depriving\nsome crops with inorganic fertiliser in the immediate term, and importing\norganic fertiliser as a substitute could be catastrophic in many ways.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Judging\nby comments made by politicians and even some experts\u201d on the subject of\nfertilisers, both organic and inorganic, it appears there is a clear need for a\nbetter understanding on the pros and cons of using either or both categories of\nfertilisers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\nentire discourse on the fertiliser issue seems to be riddled with confusing and\nincomplete statements. What some understood to be a policy decision applicable\nto the current season, which is the Yala<\/em> season is now understood to be\nfrom the following Maha<\/em> season. The Minister for Agriculture also was\nheard in Parliament stating that organic fertiliser is currently being imported\nby some 20 importers and that the government will not import it. If his\nstatement was correctly heard, he is saying that the country is already\nimporting unwanted, undesired foreign substances and living matter and\npolluting and even poisoning the ground and possibly, ground water. He was also\nheard saying that there is enough stock of fertiliser for the current season,\nassuming the available stock referred to inorganic stock, although some\nfeedback from growers seemed to indicate they do not have adequate fertiliser\nfor this season.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\ngovernment must realise that the policy decision on the banning of imports of\ninorganic fertiliser, and how it is being implemented, information on the\nstatus quo when it comes to availability of fertiliser (organic and inorganic),\nand how it plans to address the gap between the requirement for organic\nfertiliser and what might be available locally and how they intend increasing\nthe manufacture of it over the next few years, how they would contend with the\nafter effects of not providing some crops with its essential nutrients found in\ninorganic fertiliser, and other related consequences will be managed. Perhaps a\ncomprehensive press statement that covers all aspects will be not just helpful,\nbut essential.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In\na wide ranging opinion by Professor Janendra De Costa, Professor of Crop\nScience at the University of Peradeniya (See The Fertiliser Saga; A Considered\nOpinion, https:\/\/island.lk\/fertilizer-saga-in-sri-lanka-a-considered-opinion\/<\/a>), a well-researched and\nbalanced opinion, Professor De Costa explains how a balance could be found\nbetween the progressive reduction of inorganic fertiliser and the increase in\nuse of organic fertiliser, without endangering the health of people, with a\nguided, guarded and selective use of inorganic fertiliser, needed to ensure\nfood security and export earnings in the immediate and medium term, and a self-sufficiency\nprogram for organic fertiliser through local manufacture. Resorting to\nimportation of organic fertiliser with all its negatives associated with the\nintroduction of unwanted evils that come when importing organic fertiliser, and\ncreating a potential catastrophe even in the nature of a devastating plague\nthat could impact very seriously on the country\u2019s agrarian economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Readers\nare urged to consider the opinion expressed by Professor De Costa, and get\nclarity on why fertiliser is needed, and also the role played by inorganic\nfertiliser in particular for crops like Tea, Rubber and Coconut, and Rice, and\nhow organic fertiliser introduction could be achieved without a disruption to\ncrop yield, which will have a direct cascading effect on foreign exchange\nearnings and also on the country\u2019s food security. Some have questioned,\ncynically perhaps, whether food importation is the real desired outcome of this\nsudden shift to organic fertiliser.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\nmerits associated with not using inorganic fertiliser are many, and health\nbenefits are significant. Neither Professor Costa nor any other person\nquestions these benefits or the duty of care that is owed to the people of the\ncountry. Inorganic fertiliser manufacture is also very expensive and using the\nmoney spent on importing it could be better used to manufacture organic\nfertiliser.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However,\nin assessing benefits of using it for a better crop yield, at least in regard\nto some crops where subsidies are extended, it is possible that the costs may outweigh\nthe benefits in regard to some crops if the actual cost rather than subsidised\ncosts are taken as the cost of inputs. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Whilst\nnot wishing to label it as a benefit in using inorganic fertiliser, the reality\nas pointed out by Professor De Costa, in the role played by inorganic\nfertiliser for Tea, Rubber and Coconut, and Rice output, Sri Lanka\u2019s key\nforeign exchange earners, and the staple food of Sri Lankans, Rice, is indeed a\nbenefit or could even be labelled a necessary evil\u201d for this key export based\nagriculture industry which could have a significant downturn in yield, and\ntherefore export earnings, in attempting to switch virtually overnight to\norganic fertiliser. In regard to Rice, such a drop in yield will result in the\nneed to import Rice. Ironically, such imports of Rice will very likely be from\ninorganic fertiliser fed Paddy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Besides\nthe pros and cons associated with the fertiliser issue, the timing of the\ndecision to impose a total ban on imports of inorganic fertiliser, switching to\norganic fertiliser, reliance on imported organic fertiliser to meet gaps in\ndemand for it along with all the pitfalls associated with imported organic\nfertiliser, looks like a self-inflicted punishment, when this decision is considered\nfrom the troubled environment faced by Sri Lanka at present. It has more than\nenough of a share of bad luck and bad management. First, the COVID pandemic,\nwhich has impacted on the country\u2019s health, education, the economy and brought\nout the worst in the country\u2019s citizens, then the X Press ship linked pollution\nthat will affect the environment of the country for more than 100 years\naccording to several experts, and the rain and floods ravaging the country that\nposes a serious danger to the lives of many, and the country\u2019s agriculture and\nfood production.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\npit falls associated with importing organic fertiliser is explained by Professor\nDe Costa as follows, Almost all organic fertilizers,\nbeing material of plant, animal or human origin, retain\na diverse population of microorganisms.  Unlike\ninorganic fertilizers, which are inert material, organic\nfertilizers are live material.\n Microorganisms, whether in soils, plants or any other location or entity, are often highly environment-specific. Introduction of such alien microorganisms to Sri Lankan soils could cause all types of unforeseen interactions with local microorganisms. Some of these\ninteractions could have environmental repercussions, which are irreversible as once\nreleased to the\nsoil, these alien microorganisms cannot be \u2018recalled back\u2019.  Therefore, it is\nalways advisable and safer to develop organic fertilizers locally rather than importing from\noverseas.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

S<\/em>terilization of imported organic fertilizer to kill all alien microorganisms via a\nprocess of fumigation after importation is suggested as a solution to this problem.\n However, in view of\nthe large quantities of organic fertilizers that are required to be imported and the toxicity levels\nof the chemicals that are used in fumigation could lead to environmental issues that the organic\nfertilizers are aiming\nto prevent. The Cabinet Minister of Agriculture went on record saying that only sterilized organic fertilizer conforming to quality\nstandards acceptable to a\ngovernment-appointed expert committee will be imported. Given the poor record of regulation, implementation and enforcement of quality standards on a range of items, both imported and\nlocally-produced and both agricultural and non-agricultural, it remains to be seen whether these promises will be fulfilled<\/em>\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In\nreading Professor De Costa\u2019s article, one gets the impression that the hurried\ndecision to impose and immediate ban on inorganic fertiliser has been a\ndecision based on an inadequate degree of consultation with experts on this\nsubject. In this regard, the President and the government is also urged to\nconsider the issue of fertiliser from a wider perspective of land management,\nand a long term policy on it with immediate, medium term and long term\nobjectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

As\nthe President rightly acknowledged at the inauguration of the Investment Forum\non the 7th<\/sup> June, the long term goal should be to produce more with\nless, meaning using research and development to produce crop varieties that\nwill yield higher crops using less land. This objective can only be achieved\nthrough research and development work and not by chance activity. In this\nregard, it is abysmal that, according to Professor De Costa, the country spends\nonly 0.11 % of GDP on research and development including in Agriculture. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\nanswer to a higher yield is not to use more land in order to achieve that goal.\nUnless someone has missed it, Sri Lanka is not exactly blessed with huge tracts\nof arable land!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Land\nmanagement and a policy on land management should also take into account the\ncurrent use of land for different agriculture products, and the future of such\nproducts. This is especially relevant when it comes to Tea, Rubber and Coconut.\nPlucking tea and tapping rubber is increasingly becoming a challenge, and is\npredicted to be even more of a challenge say in 10-20 years.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mechanisation\nof this activity may be a possibility, but in regard to Tea, the land terrain\nin most Tea growing areas will be a challenge by itself for mechanisation. Again,\nresearch work will be needed as to how best technology could be used to find\nsolutions to such difficulties. In the event some land that is presently used\nfor Tea and Rubber becomes so unproductive and therefore unprofitable, thought\nwill have to be given as to what other agricultural use such land can be\nemployed to serve the needs of the country.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As\nregards coconut, an assessment of whether land used for coconut cultivation is\noptimally used or not is an assessment that will have to be made. In some\ncountries land used for coconut cultivation is also used for other crops like\ncocoa and coffee.  Perhaps even crops\nlike cinnamon, and other spices may be possible in some areas. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Optimum\nuse of land therefore has a direct relationship to fertiliser as all\nagricultural products need to be fed, either with inorganic fertiliser or\norganic fertiliser. The better, safer, cheaper and healthier option is to use\norganic fertiliser indigenously produced and on lands that has been acclimatised\nto organic fertiliser. This however, needs to be done progressively, ensuring\nthere is no reduction in crop yield and no threat to food security in the\ncountry.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Water\nmanagement is the other key aspect that needs to be considered in formulating a\nland management policy. Agriculture without water is not a possibility and\nenvisaged land use needs to be considered along with availability of water to\nsustain the use of land for agriculture. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\ngovernment is therefore urged to consider the issue of fertiliser more\nholistically and from the wider perspective of a policy on land management, which\nmust also include water management, and do so through a long term plan that has\nshort term, medium and long term objectives and relevant action plans, targets\nand milestones. This requires an extensive consultation process, not just with\nexperts, but also with people who are currently engaged in agriculture, health\nofficials, community leaders and economists, and very importantly, the private\nsector.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It\nis hoped that the government will commence such a consultative process and\nperhaps by the middle of 2022, come up with a long term vision and a plan that\nis suitable for the country and which has broad acceptance of the people,\ntherefore a sense of ownership of the plan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\ngovernment is also urged to partner with the private sector in the country, and\nwith universities (we have 17 of them now), so that the future direction when\nit comes to land management encompasses the interconnected, mutually dependent\naspects which are all driven by research and development and private sector\nentrepreneurship. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Unfortunate\nas it is, it needs to be stated that the calibre and the quality of the\ncountry\u2019s elected representatives, even highly educated academics who have\nturned politicians, leaves much to be desired, and government driven\nentrepreneurship would be an oxymoronic contradiction, and this task should be\none that is driven and managed by the private sector in combination with\nuniversities that will be responsible for research and development work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\nplanning horizon should not be when the next election is to be held, but how\nmany generations are to be advantaged with sound, long term policy decisions.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By Raj Gonsalkorale The President and the government is urged to at least postpone the decision made to ban the import of inorganic fertiliser at least for one year until it has had time to consult widely with experts and arrive at a more informed decision. Depriving some crops with inorganic fertiliser in the immediate […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":true,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[176,172],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-115083","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-chemical-fertilizer-ban","category-raj-gonsalkorale"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/115083","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=115083"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/115083\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=115083"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=115083"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=115083"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}