A senior World Bank economist has said Sri Lanka’s 2021 ban on chemical fertilizer imports “proven to be a bad decision” — but argued the more important lesson is about policy consistency, not that single measure, NewsFirst reported.
The remark came from World Bank Senior Economist Jakob Engel at a media briefing in Colombo held after the release of the Bank’s latest economic assessment of Sri Lanka. Journalists asked what direction the institution believes the current government should take on agribusiness, noting that the blanket fertilizer ban is widely viewed as a contributor to the economic difficulties that preceded the crisis.
NewsFirst notes the comment did not form part of the Bank’s published report. It was made in response to a question.
What was banned, and how it was defended
In 2021 the government led by then-President Gotabaya Rajapaksa restricted imports of chemical fertilizers, pesticides and weedicides — one of the most far-reaching agricultural policy changes in the country’s history.
Defending it at the United Nations Food Systems Summit on 24 September 2021, Rajapaksa called the restrictions a “bold step” towards transforming the food system and moving to organic agriculture, arguing that decades of rising chemical input use had caused health and environmental harm.
Even then he acknowledged the difficulties: farmers who had used chemical fertilizer for generations were reluctant to change, and domestic organic fertilizer production could not meet demand. The government maintained the transition would strengthen food security and reduce rural poverty over the long term.
Engel’s wider argument
Engel’s point was not confined to one minister’s decision. Sri Lanka’s fertilizer policy has shifted repeatedly over several decades, he said, creating uncertainty for farmers, investors and agricultural businesses.
Policy should be built around what is best for production, farmers, the economy and environmental sustainability, he argued, and grounded in the best available evidence — but it also has to stay consistent. Frequent reversals undermine confidence across the sector. Those working in agriculture, he said, need to understand the policy direction not only today but in the years ahead.
Asked what should come next, Engel listed: a level playing field for exporters, removing anti-export biases, raising productivity, strengthening logistics and compliance infrastructure, and improving how land, finance, credit and insurance markets serve agriculture.
Context
The briefing accompanied the Development Update that raised the Bank’s growth forecast to 4.4% while warning that the recovery remains incomplete and poverty is still 16.9%.
Not reported
NewsFirst does not give the date of the briefing, quote Engel beyond the phrase “a bad decision” and his general remarks, or say whether any government representative responded. It does not report whether the Bank has quantified the ban’s cost, or whether Engel was asked about compensation for affected farmers. No response from Gotabaya Rajapaksa or from officials who implemented the ban is reported.
Only NewsFirst appears to have carried this exchange. Other newsrooms covered the Development Update itself but not the fertilizer question, and Ada Derana’s site has been returning a CloudFront block to this newsroom for 15 consecutive days.
Sources: NewsFirst.
