by Sampath Perera

With Sri Lanka’s presidential elections approaching, a key question for the new leader is how to reconcile the country’s economic problems with the requirements of international climate agreements.

With a global climate framework that often places disproportionate burdens on developing countries, including Sri Lanka, how can the new administration balance ambitious climate goals with the country’s financial realities? Given Sri Lanka’s modest carbon footprint of 1.02 tons of CO2e per person, the challenge of achieving net-zero emissions by 2050 seems daunting, especially when many citizens already struggle to meet basic economic needs. How will the next leader navigate this complex landscape, ensuring that international commitments are feasible and equitable while also addressing the unique economic challenges facing developing countries?

Consider a four-member Sri Lankan family where the sole breadwinner earns a meager Rs 50,000 a month. For this family, daily survival is a challenge, let alone the luxury of choosing organic food over cheaper alternatives. The struggle to make ends meet highlights the broader economic reality that many Sri Lankan households face. They focus on affordability and basic food, not the additional cost of organic produce. This scenario epitomizes Sri Lanka’s difficulty in meeting stringent climate goals while also battling economic hardships.

The next leader must ensure that any international commitments are carefully balanced with the country’s economic capacity, avoiding overburdening its already vulnerable economy. It is essential to advocate for fair terms that recognise the unique struggles of developing countries like Sri Lanka, ensuring that global climate goals are met in a way that is both equitable and achievable.

An unfair burden

In the ongoing global debate on climate action, it is crucial to ask why world leaders continue to impose stringent climate targets on developing countries while failing to address the economic inequalities that make such targets unrealistic.

Developing countries like Sri Lanka are under pressure to adopt expensive green technologies and reduce carbon emissions, despite limited economic resources and reliance on cost-effective traditional energy sources. The pressure to immediately comply with expensive climate measures, without providing adequate financial and technological support, places an unjustified burden on these countries.

This approach not only ignores their economic vulnerabilities, but also ignores the fact that developed countries, which have historically contributed the most to global emissions, still rely heavily on fossil fuels. The world’s leading economies should consider shifting their focus toward protecting their economies and giving developing countries the flexibility to find more affordable, sustainable solutions. Such an approach would ensure a more equitable transition to a low-carbon future, taking into account the diverse economic capabilities and needs of all countries involved.

Sri Lanka’s commitment to achieving net-zero carbon emissions by 2050, as set out in its updated Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC), is a noble but difficult task. The country is working to achieve this goal amid significant economic pressures, including a recent decline in GDP and ongoing inflationary challenges. The drive towards a low-carbon economy includes ambitious targets such as reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 14.5% by 2030, achieving 70% renewable energy in electricity generation by 2030 and increasing forest cover to 32% by the same year.

Global inequality

However, major emitters such as China and the United States continue to rely on fossil fuels. China, the world’s largest CO2 emitter, continues to invest in coal-fired power plants, drawing criticism for its perceived insufficient efforts to reduce emissions. Meanwhile, the United States, despite progress in renewable energy, maintains a significant carbon footprint due to its continued reliance on fossil fuels and extensive industrial activity.

Not only do these major emitters contribute disproportionately to global greenhouse gas emissions, but they also benefit from relatively less stringent climate regulations than those imposed on developing countries. The economic models of China and the US are deeply rooted in high-emission industries, and their transition to greener alternatives is often gradual and selective.

The gap between the emissions targets of developing countries like Sri Lanka and the practices of major emitters highlights significant global inequality. Developing countries, including Sri Lanka, are often forced to adopt stringent climate measures while their economies are still growing. The economic burden of transitioning to a low-carbon economy is significant, given that these countries are still grappling with fundamental development challenges such as poverty alleviation and infrastructure development.

Sri Lanka’s climate strategy, including the development of the Carbon Net Zero Roadmap and Strategic Plan 2050, aims to address key sectors such as energy, transport, industry, waste, agriculture and forestry. However, implementing these measures requires significant financial investment and technological support that is often lacking in developing contexts.

For Sri Lanka, the challenge is to balance the immediate needs of its people with long-term climate goals. The pressure to comply with international climate agreements while ensuring economic stability and growth creates a complex scenario in which immediate survival often takes precedence over environmental concerns.

Climate vs. Economy

Sri Lanka’s development, economic stability and price fluctuations are heavily dependent on the energy and transport sectors. However, the country’s obligations under international treaties and past promises by past leaders, often made without fully considering Sri Lanka’s economic realities, have placed serious strain on these key sectors.

In the energy sector, Sri Lanka faces significant challenges due to its commitments to international climate agreements. The country must achieve a target of 70% renewable energy by 2030 – a target that is proving increasingly difficult to achieve due to current economic constraints. Coal-fired power has traditionally been the most cost-effective option for generating power, but Sri Lanka cannot expand its coal-fired power generation capacity due to climate commitments. This restriction places an additional financial burden on the country, making the renewable energy target seem almost unattainable. The Ceylon Electricity Board’s (CEB) Long-Term Generation Expansion Plan (LTGEP) aims to achieve this target and maintain high levels of renewable energy beyond 2030, but the financial and logistical challenges are significant. The government’s drive to conserve energy through demand management could help, but the constraints of international commitments continue to hinder progress.

Similarly, the transport sector is critical to Sri Lanka’s economic stability and overall development. It accounts for 94% of passenger transport and 98% of freight transport, making it a central part of everyday life and economic activity. The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a significant decline in demand for transport, with passenger-kilometres falling from 231.5 billion in 2019 to 185.5 billion in 2020, partly due to a shift away from public transport. By 2021, demand had only partially recovered to 191.8 billion passenger-kilometres. Public transport’s share of transport fell from 40.6% in 2019 to 33.0% in 2021.

In this context, the government’s standard operating procedure (SOP) for the auto industry has further exacerbated the problems. Under the SOP introduced by former President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the assembly of inexpensive petrol-powered three-wheelers—a necessary and cheap means of transport for many Sri Lankans—has been banned. This policy, intended to promote electric vehicles, ignored the economic realities faced by the general public. Electric solutions are prohibitively expensive for most Sri Lankans, and the lack of assembly of three-wheelers has led to the continued use of older, more polluting vehicles. As a result, the lack of affordable, eco-friendly transport options has forced many to rely on outdated and inefficient vehicles, further exacerbating environmental and economic problems.

Sri Lanka’s adherence to international climate commitments has placed undue strain on its energy and transport sectors. Restrictions on the expansion of coal-fired power plants and a ban on the assembly of inexpensive three-wheeled petrol vehicles underscore the disconnect between global climate goals and domestic economic realities.

The country’s path to achieving net zero carbon emissions by 2050 is evidence of its commitment to global climate goals. However, this commitment is challenged by the economic realities facing its population, with families struggling to meet basic needs. The contrast between Sri Lanka’s efforts and the continued high-carbon practices of major emitters underscores the need for a more equitable global approach to climate action. To ensure that all nations can contribute to and benefit from a sustainable future, it is essential to address these imbalances and provide support where it is needed most.

(The author is a lawyer with an LLM in International Trade and Commercial Law. He can be contacted at [email protected].)