Features

Connecting, Communicating and Caring – the need of the hour

Published

3 years ago

2021/09/12

With news of COVID deaths and infection inundating our daily lives and the collective grieving of our customary funeral rites not possible, the mental health and well being of the nation is compromised. Speaking to the Sunday Island, Senior Consultant Psychiatrist and Senior Lecturer at the Kotelawala Defense University, Dr. Neil Fernando, discusses the need for emotionally supporting each other and fostering positive thinking to brave these hard times.

by Randima Attygalle

Q: Although social distancing, hand washing and mask-wearing have become the norm, there is hardly a public discourse on mental well being during this pandemic. How important is it to promote such dialogue?

A: Health is defined by the WHO as the ‘complete physical, mental and social well being of a person.’ Mental health is therefore very much an integral part of overall health, but unfortunately like in all other situations, mental health is neglected during this pandemic too. The mind comprises three important components: cognition (this includes your thinking, your memories, mental images- mainly how you think), emotion (how you feel) and your behaviour. These three components are interrelated and interdependent. For example, how you think will affect how you feel and how you feel will determine how you act. So this principle applies to the COVID pandemic – how people think, how they feel and how they behave. Wearing the mask, hand sanitization and physical distancing are all behaviours and behaviour is part of mental health.

Exposure to too much negative news affects your emotions and your behaviour. Initially when the pandemic broke here, the approach to it was more military than health-induced creating apprehension and fear in people. The initial impression given of the illness was more from a ‘criminal’ angle with media bulletins flooded with news of infected people and their first contacts being chased after. Later when people were exposed to COVID deaths, the scenes of coffins being put into crematoriums and personal protective gear-clad health workers everywhere traumatized many.

The world at large too made a blunder by using the term ‘social distancing’ when it ought to have been ‘physical distancing with social connectivity’. In a culture where social interaction is a norm, the term ‘social distancing’ became a double burden. When one house in a neighbourhood was quarantined, people feared a lockdown of an entire area and fault-finding came into forefront. Those who were responsible for the coining of terms such as ‘Peliyagoda cluster, Minuwangoda cluster etc.’ never thought of mental health implications they would trigger and accompanying discrimination and stigma. Apparel workers who were earning dollars for the country were shunned and were looked at as carriers of the virus.

While the importance of mental health and well being was not promoted, people were exposed to factors detrimental to their mental health. Media too has a responsibility of sending out messages of positive mental health instead of sending ‘news alerts’ with death tolls and the number of infected cases. More positive messages can be sent to the public.

Q: With reports on infected cases and deaths flooding in and anxiety levels of people rising, even among those not directly confronted by death, what coping mechanisms do you propose to foster ‘positive thinking’ in such a backdrop?

A: We need to apply the concept of ‘positive psychology’ promoted by Prof. Martin Seligman, a clinical psychologist from the University of Pennsylvania. Positive Psychology is relatively a new area in psychology where the focus is on well being. Rather than looking at the negative aspects of an illness and what is wrong, this concept looks at the stronger side. Up to the turn of this century, psychology was looking at means of filling deficits – when a person is ill, how he/she can be made well. In Seligman’s own words, “it was bringing a person at minus two to zero.”

Positive Psychology on the other hand, looks at a way of taking a person from zero to plus two. It looks at features a person has rather than looking at features a person has lost. It looks at character strengths and promotes those strengths to make a person better. Promotion of well being as Seligman says, rests on five pillars called PERMA. ‘P’ stands for positive emotions, looking at your past, present and future in a positive way and to find something positive even in your setbacks.

‘E’ is for ‘Engagement’ or flow- to be actively involved in some useful activity. Children not being able to go to school is a drawback; however, they can learn household work or a craft during this time. Even in a lockdown situation, people should be engaged in something, even observing nature is a kind of engagement

‘R’ is for relationships. Social connection promotes well being. Social isolation is the reverse. Even in a quarantine situation, one must be socially connected with family, friends, work mates and neighbours despite physical distancing.

‘M’ is for ‘meaning’- to have a purpose in life. This pillar is connected to your spiritual life as well. Caring for others can give a lot of mental satisfaction and promotes your own well being as well. There are many who have lost their livelihoods, friends, neighbours struggling to survive and those who are more comfortable can help such people in need.

‘A’ is for accomplishment, to have goals and achievements in life; to be proud of what you have achieved.

Using this PERMA model, we can encourage people to think about the best scenario possible and not the extreme. One needs to take a middle path. Otherwise people will be overwhelmed by statistics, because statistics emphasize largely the negative side.

Q: With the rise of elderly deaths, there is apprehension among senior citizen.’ How best can they be supported?

A: It is essential that they keep negative news at bay. Watching and reading too much about COVID and deaths can be detrimental. People should also be encouraged to keep in touch with their loved ones and engage in positive conversation outside the pandemic. Engaging in an activity that interests them such as listening to music, gardening or reading can also help them to get distracted from negativity.

We should also support them psychologically with what we call the ‘Two-Es and I’s’: Emotional support of love and care, Esteem support (showing respect and giving value to a person), Informational support (providing correct information and knowledge to counter myths and misconceptions) and Institutional support (offering practical help).

Q: How vital it is to ensure the mental well being of our health workers?

A: It is of utmost importance to ensure their moral well being as it could affect their productivity. Unlike in the first and the second wave, in this third wave of the pandemic, health workers are facing what is known as ‘moral injury’. That is, with limited resources, they are unable to cater to each and every patient. For example, while there may be two patients who need ventilators, only one machine may be available. So it is the health worker who has to decide who gets it. Of course there could be protocols and guidelines but it is another human being who has to implement these guidelines. Therefore health workers can experience ‘moral injury’ or a kind of guilt that could haunt them later that a decision had to be taken at the cost of another patient’s life. The trauma of the pandemic and its mental health impact will be enormous and could last for years to come.

However, on the brighter side, there is a new concept associated with Positive Psychology called ‘post-traumatic growth’ where people can actually make use of traumatic events as a learning opportunity and be empowered.

Q: Sri Lankan funeral rites enable shared grief with community involvement. The pandemic has deprived our people even of religious rites. How does this impact their mental health?

A: When a death occurs in normal circumstances in our culture, it is referred to as a mala gama or an avamagula, the very terms connoting that it is a community affair where ‘grief reaction’ is a shared one. Almost all our funeral rituals are psychologically very sound. The social and religious customs which follow a funeral support the sharing of grief, so that the bereaved family can come to terms with it.

Sadly this communal exercise is now replaced by solitary grief. You cannot even see the body, there is no funeral ceremony, no rituals performed. The psychological buffer provided by our culture is now being taken away. Some people have lost several family members. There is a lot of silent mental suffering going on right now as survivors also have a ‘guilt feeling’ that they couldn’t even give their loved one a dignified funeral. Hence talking and listening to those who are mourning, sharing of grief should be done using other means while keeping the necessary distance.

Q: We are a nation which went through a civil war. Pandemic is a ‘war’ of a different kind. As a senior professional who dealt with combat-related mental issues/depression etc. do you see a difference in human response to the war and the pandemic from a clinical standpoint?

A: Yes, there is a difference. Compared to war where the majority of Lankans were not directly affected, in this pandemic situation everyone is affected. Right now you don’t see the enemy but only destruction. While war and its impact were ‘structured’ pandemic is a different phenomenon.

In times of war, even when a sealed coffin was sent home, there were funeral rites performed and military funerals accorded with the respect of a nation demonstrated by draping the national flag over the coffin. All these interventions helped families to overcome grief. Today with solitary suffering, people are finding it hard to come to terms with death.

Q: Organizations have lost employees and some employees have lost their loved ones. In such challenging times, what can be done at organizational level to keep people motivated?

A: Organizations can make use of available resources and promote the well being of people. They can make use of virtual platforms to share ideas and grievances and be supported by professionals. At the same time it is important for organizations to maintain proper communication channels with their staffers and support them through difficult times.

Q: With children being home-bound, what tips would you give parents to keep their children optimistic?

A: If parents have a negative attitude, children invariably will be negative and even when schools reopen, some children may fear associating with some of their friends. Parents should encourage children to remain connected with their friends, grandparents and family through other means while maintaining physical distance. Association is very important at this point. They can also be encouraged to make use of this time to learn a new craft, household chores etc.

Online education itself has created problems. Children who are unable to connect due to different reasons can feel sidelined. This could be psychologically traumatic because at the end of the day, all children will have to face the same examination paper. Policy makers should be conscious of this factor.

Q: Do you see a rise in depression in your clinical practice since the onset of the pandemic?

A: Yes I do. There is what is called post-viral depression. Any viral infection can precipitate depression. COVID too began as a viral disease and it is natural to expect people who recover from it to develop symptoms of depression. Loss of a loved can also precipitate depression in certain people.

Q: How can family and friends support someone who is at risk of depression?

A: Grief is a natural reaction to loss, but it could turn into abnormal grief especially when death is sudden and unexpected. When grieving is prolonged (beyond six to eight months), a person can develop depressive illnesses and in order to help we should be conscious of the three Cs: Connect, Communicate and Care.

It is important that you listen to a person grieving because listening itself is therapeutic. For this, one need not necessarily be a mental health expert nor does one need to have solutions to all problems. What is important is to encourage a person to talk taking his/her own time and listening in an understanding, non-judgmental manner. Empathetic listening is vital and this entails communication – showing your understanding and most importantly, acknowledging and validating a person’s emotions.

Q: With lifestyles turned upside down, working from home arrangements interfering with domestic chores, socializing in office and outside being a thing of the past, and visiting loved ones being restricted, the ‘new normal’ has become stressful to many. How best can we navigate these challenges?

A: The pre-frontal lobe/cortex or the front most part of the human brain is well developed enabling humans to adjust to new situations. This is the reason why man is ahead in terms of evolution. It is true that the new normalcy has created its own set of problems but it is imperative that we make changes and adjust accordingly rather than trying to persist with what we were once used to. A good example is working from home – this concept was not heard of before COVID but people are getting adjusted to it. This shows that on the whole humans are capable of adjustment, although some may be quite comfortable and others may be less comfortable with adapting to new situations.

All News Advertisement

Features

Now is the time to rethink trade

Published

2 days ago

2024/12/6

Thilina Walpola

ranil - sajith - anura

by Gomi Senadhira

During the presidential election campaign, the importance of trade, particularly exports, to Sri Lanka’s was emphasised by President Anura Kumara Dissanayake (AKD) and the other two main contenders in the fray, namely Sajith Premadasa (SP) and Ranil Wickremesinghe (RW) in their manifestos. These three candidates together polled more than 90 percent of the votes at the presidential elections. During the parliamentary elections the political parties which based their campaign on these manifestos – Jathika Jana Balawegaya (NPP), Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) and New Democratic Front (NDF) together polled more than 83%. Therefore, the electoral support for these pro-trade policies is undisputed. For the Sri Lankan export community this should be a superb development, as for many years, the trade policy had been, one of the more contentious areas of island’s politics. Our main trading partners and the foreign investors would also welcome this policy convergence.

Pro- trade policies in the policy statements of RW and SJ were not unexpected. But the pro-trade approach in the AKD’s manifesto surprised many, mainly because all other parties had repeatedly warned the people against voting for AKD as he would turn Sri Lanka into another North Korea or Cuba.

For example, during the election campaign, at a conference organised by the National Bankers Association, RW stated, “On September 4th, MP Anura Kumara Dissanayake emphasised the importance of focusing on exports for our country’s businessmen and industrialists. While this principle is commendable, there is a concern. Their policy statement suggests that Sri Lanka plans to cancel its free trade agreements.

This raises a significant question: how can we develop an export industry without these agreements? Such contradictions pose challenges.” Since then, he had repeated these comments at several other meetings. In the same way, SP’s trade policy wonks also had spread similar misinformation on NPP policies. However, the NPP policy statement clearly states its position on Free Trade Agreements, that is “… updating of existing free trade agreements and negotiating new free trade agreements.” The updating of the trade agreements certainly does mean cancelling of these agreements. All FTAs need to be reviewed and updated periodically.

During the election seasons, politicians sometimes manipulate public opinion about the crucial issues by arousing fear. But this is not the time to deliberately mislead the public in general and, more particularly, the business community and our trading partners with false information on trade policy. At this juncture, what we need are facts. Not scare tactics and false information. So, let’s hope our politicians would avoid such scare tactics in the future and join together to strengthen this consensus on export-oriented, outward-looking trade policy.

To those who are familiar with the way the NPP policies evolved in the recent past, their shift towards pro-trade policies is not a surprise. After all, if the NPP and AKD want a socialist model to emulate, they have many examples of socialist governments, other than North Korea and Cuba, to draw lessons from. For example, the success story of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. While cautiously staying away from the labels AKD’s policy statement refers to Vietnam, Bangladesh, and South Korea (and not North Korea) as export success stories, Sri Lanka can acquire lessons from. More importantly, Vietnam’s success story was also highlighted at the top of RW’s policy statement and by the trade experts in the SJB as a success story to follow. What is needed now is to strengthen this consensus further and develop a pro-export national trade strategy approved by the parliament. That would help to attract much-needed foreign investments and export orders.

If we already have a general consensus on pro-trade and pro-export policies, then why do we need to rethink trade policies now?

From export-oriented economy to import dependent economy

Sri Lanka was the first country in South Asia to liberalise trade policies with the ‘open’ economy introduced in the late 1970s. However, the open economy introduced then was not fully open. It had a strong focus on the expansion of the export of goods while discouraging imports, particularly nonessential imports. A special cess was imposed on the nonessential imports to protect local farmers and manufacturers and to collect funds for export development.

The main thrust of the trade policy was exports. During that period, the government proactively managed to get an adequate level of market access to Sri Lankan exports through multilateral trade rules (GATT/WTO rules) as well as the distortions to those rules (textile quotas). These policies worked well, and during the 1980s and 90s, Sri Lanka’s exports registered almost a fivefold increase, from US$1.35 billion in 1981 to US$6.37 billion by the year 2000. The exports-to-GDP ratio increased from 30.46% in 1981 to 39.02% in 2000. During the period, Sri Lanka was slowly but surely progressing into an export-oriented economy.

Unfortunately, during the next two decades, the export growth slowed down and only increased from US$6.37 billion (in 2000) to US$13.03 billion (in 2020). The exports-to-GDP ratio also declined substantially during this period. At 15.46% in 2020, it was the lowest ever recorded. More alarmingly, the growth of exports during the last decade was almost stagnant, and it increased only from US$ 10 billion in 2013 to US$ 12 billion in 2023. During the same period, Vietnam’s exports increased from US$132 billion in 2013 to US$370 billion in 2023.

Hijacking of trade policy by importers and profiteers

The main reason for this decline was the absence of interest in export development by the successive governments and the influence of the importers, the profiteers and perhaps even hawaladars on trade policy formulations. If one analyses the trade policy formulation in the recent years, it is easy to understand how trade policies and even free trade agreements were directed towards import promotion at the expense of export development. After signing Sri Lanka’s first bilateral FTA with India in December 1998 and second with Pakistan in August 2002, and the enhanced GSP arrangement in the EU, no new tangible initiatives were taken by the government to develop market access for Sri Lankan exports.

During the last decade the situation deteriorated further and even the free trade agreements, which countries normally negotiate at the request and on behalf of their exporters to get better levels of market access for them in other countries, were negotiated at the request of the exporters of other countries to provide them with enhanced market access into Sri Lanka without reciprocal concessions for Sri Lankan exporters. The free trade agreements Sri Lanka signed with Singapore and Thailand are clear examples of this approach.

These agreements were negotiated under RW’s leadership, first as the prime minister and then as the president. Despite his rhetoric about the critical need to swiftly transform Sri Lanka into an export-oriented economy, as stabilising the economy alone would not solve Sri Lanka’s problems due to the country’s heavy dependence on imports, it was under RW’s leadership that the trade policy got blatantly hijacked by the importers mafia and profiteers.

Another adverse development during the last two decades was the relaxation of foreign exchange regulations. Due to this Sri Lanka also does not fully benefit even from the limited amount of exports, as a substantial portion of the export proceeds are not repatriated. In July 2022 the Central Bank revealed that less than 20% of export proceeds are being repatriated by the exporters. Though this may have improved since then, the conversion rate remains below accepted levels. In addition to that, a significant amount of money is transferred out through trade misinvoicing by the exporters and importers.

As the elections are over now it is the time for a new beginning. It is the time to intensify analysis and advocacy regarding the numerous ways that trade agreements and po8licies must be reformed and strengthen the consensus on trade policies and adjust them to undo decades of capture by the importers’ mafia, profiteers, and hawaladars.

(The writer, a retired public servant and diplomat, can be reached at senadhiragomi@gmail.com)

Features

Navigating Sri Lanka’s economic recovery: Opportunities and risks in the aftermath of Cyclone Fengal

Published

2 days ago

2024/12/6

Thilina Walpola

by Prof. Chanaka Jayawardhena,
Professor of Marketing, University of Surrey, UK.
Chanaka.j@gmail.com

Sri Lanka finds itself at a crossroads. The devastation caused by Cyclone Fengal, which displaced over half a million people, destroyed critical infrastructure, and claimed numerous lives, highlights the country’s vulnerability to natural disasters. At the same time, the nation is tentatively emerging from its first-ever sovereign debt default, buoyed by a $12.5 billion bond swap and an IMF bailout. Together, these events pose an urgent question: Can Sri Lanka navigate the treacherous path of recovery without derailing its fragile economic stability?

The answer lies in the delicate balance the government must strike. Cyclone Fengal is more than just a natural disaster—it is a stress test for the economic goodwill painstakingly built up over the past year. How Sri Lanka’s policymakers respond could define the trajectory of its recovery for years to come. This is not just about reconstruction; it is about rethinking priorities, leveraging the current crisis as an opportunity to build resilience, and ensuring the hard-won economic gains are not squandered in the process.

Cyclone Fengal: A Catalyst for Change or a Step Backward?

The immediate economic impact of Cyclone Fengal is staggering. Agriculture, one of the backbones of Sri Lanka’s economy, has suffered significant losses, with thousands of acres of paddy fields and tea plantations—critical export sectors—being submerged. Damaged transport networks have disrupted supply chains, delaying the movement of goods and escalating costs for businesses and consumers alike. The government now faces the twin challenges of financing disaster relief and rebuilding vital infrastructure, all within the constraints of a tight fiscal envelope.

The human cost is equally dire. Families have lost homes, livelihoods, and loved ones. The socio-economic fallout of such displacement is long-lasting, with vulnerable communities pushed further into poverty. Moreover, the environmental damage, including soil erosion and the destruction of ecosystems, adds another layer of complexity to recovery efforts.

Yet, there is an opportunity amidst this tragedy. Disasters often serve as catalysts for long-overdue reforms. Cyclone Fengal could prompt Sri Lanka to implement policies aimed at climate resilience, investing in infrastructure that can withstand future storms and floods. Such investments would not only protect lives and livelihoods but also reduce the economic disruptions caused by such events. However, realising this opportunity requires vision, coordination, and a clear commitment to long-term planning—qualities that have not always been hallmarks of Sri Lankan governance.

The risks, however, are equally pronounced. With limited fiscal space and the need to adhere to IMF conditionalities, there is a real danger that recovery efforts might siphon funds away from critical economic reforms. If mismanaged, this could erode investor confidence, putting at risk the progress made in stabilising the economy. The government must guard against the temptation to prioritise short-term relief over the long-term restructuring that is vital for sustainable growth.

Debt Restructuring: The Elephant in the Room

Sri Lanka’s recent $12.5 billion bond swap was a bold move to address its debt crisis, but the relief it offers is conditional. Investors and international institutions are closely watching how the government navigates its commitments to fiscal discipline and structural reform. Cyclone Fengal has now added an unexpected layer of complexity to this equation.

The IMF bailout, which released $333 million in its latest tranche, demands not only fiscal prudence but also tangible progress in revenue generation and state enterprise restructuring. These measures, while necessary, are politically sensitive and require a stable economic environment to succeed. The cyclone’s aftermath threatens to upset this balance, with rising expenditure on disaster relief potentially crowding out these reforms.

Moreover, the bond swap itself is not without controversy. While it offers breathing room, it also raises questions about the sustainability of Sri Lanka’s debt strategy. With global interest rates on the rise, the cost of future borrowing could escalate, particularly if the government fails to demonstrate fiscal discipline. In this context, the pressure to deliver results has never been greater. Successfully managing this dual challenge of recovery and reform will be the ultimate test of Sri Lanka’s political and economic leadership.

Lessons from other economies

Sri Lanka is not the first country to face the dual challenge of disaster recovery and economic reform. Indonesia’s response to the 2004 tsunami offers valuable lessons. By channelling international aid into long-term development projects and maintaining fiscal discipline, Indonesia turned a crisis into an opportunity for economic transformation. Key to its success was the establishment of a dedicated reconstruction agency that ensured transparency and accountability in the use of funds.

Bangladesh, another country prone to natural disasters, has demonstrated how investing in disaster preparedness—through early warning systems, robust infrastructure, and community education—can mitigate economic losses. These measures have not only saved lives but also reduced the financial impact of natural disasters, enabling the economy to recover more quickly.

Sri Lanka would do well to follow these examples. The establishment of a specialised disaster management authority with a clear mandate and adequate funding could go a long way in ensuring a coordinated and effective response. Such an agency could also play a critical role in securing international aid, which is often contingent on transparent governance and accountability. Ensuring such mechanisms are in place will be crucial to sustaining international goodwill and ensuring long-term economic stability.

Investing in Resilience

The case for strategic investment in resilience is clear. Renewable energy projects, for instance, could reduce the country’s reliance on costly fuel imports while aligning with global sustainability trends. Sri Lanka’s abundant natural resources—sunlight, wind, and hydro potential—position it well to transition to a greener energy mix. Such investments would not only lower energy costs but also make the economy less vulnerable to global fuel price shocks.

Rebuilding transport and communication networks with a focus on durability would also yield significant benefits. Modern, resilient infrastructure is essential for economic growth, facilitating trade, tourism, and investment. Furthermore, the construction phase itself could create jobs, providing a much-needed stimulus to the domestic economy.

Public health must also be a priority. The cyclone has triggered a surge in dengue cases, exposing gaps in the healthcare system’s ability to respond to emergencies. Strengthening healthcare infrastructure and preventive measures could yield significant economic and social dividends. Healthier populations are more productive, and the costs of prevention are far lower than those of treatment and lost productivity.

Building on Goodwill

Sri Lanka enters this challenging phase with a degree of goodwill that is rare for a country emerging from economic collapse. The Central Bank’s policy rate reforms and the government’s efforts to stabilise public finances have been cautiously welcomed by investors. Moody’s recent decision to place Sri Lanka’s credit rating under review for a potential upgrade reflects this optimism.

However, goodwill is a finite resource. The government must tread carefully, avoiding populist measures that could derail its reform agenda. Transparency in disaster relief spending and clear communication about the trade-offs involved in balancing recovery with reform are essential. Failure to do so could erode the trust of both domestic and international stakeholders.

The risk of political complacency is real. The government’s recent electoral mandate, while overwhelming, should not be taken as a licence to abandon fiscal prudence. Populist policies, such as unsustainable subsidies or tax cuts, could undo the progress made and jeopardise long-term stability.

A Path Forward

Cyclone Fengal has exposed the vulnerabilities in Sri Lanka’s economic and social fabric, but it has also provided an opportunity to address them. The government’s response must be both immediate and strategic, balancing the urgency of disaster relief with the long-term necessity of economic reform.

First, the government must prioritise investments that yield both short-term relief and long-term benefits. For example, rebuilding flood-damaged roads and bridges with climate-resilient materials can create jobs today while reducing costs in the future. Second, it must strengthen institutions to ensure that recovery funds are used effectively and transparently. Third, it must actively engage with international partners, not only for financial support but also for technical expertise in disaster management and economic planning.

Sri Lanka’s recovery is not just a matter of economics; it is a test of governance, competence, and foresight. By investing in resilience, maintaining fiscal discipline, and leveraging international goodwill, the country can navigate this crisis and emerge stronger. The stakes are high, but so are the potential rewards. This is a moment for bold but measured action—a chance to turn adversity into a turning point for sustainable growth.

The eyes of the world are on Sri Lanka. Let this be the moment when it rises to the challenge.

Features

Protecting blue carbon ecosystems, a key to climate resilience

Published

2 days ago

2024/12/6

Thilina Walpola

By Ifham Nizam

Blue carbon ecosystems, such as mangroves and sea grasses, are emerging as critical players in global climate mitigation strategies. However, these ecosystems face mounting challenges due to coastal development, climate change, and mismanagement.

Speaking to The Island, renowned expert Dr. Mat Vanderklift, Director of the Indian Ocean Blue Carbon Hub, who is on a short visit to Sri Lanka stressed the urgency of integrating high-integrity principles and sustainable practices to safeguard these vital habitats.

Excerpts of the interview

Q: Dr. Can you elaborate on the unique challenges that blue carbon ecosystems, such as mangroves and sea grasses, face compared to terrestrial carbon sinks like forests?

A:Mangroves and sea grasses are located on the coastal margins, which places them in areas where many activities occur and competition for space is high. Most people live near coasts, so there are pressures from development as well as infrastructure such as ports. They are also spaces where activities like aquaculture and fishing can lead to degradation if they are not done in a sustainable way.

Q: How do you assess the long-term effectiveness of blue carbon ecosystems in carbon sequestration, especially in the face of climate change impacts like rising sea levels and extreme weather?

A: Mangroves and ecosystems can cope with sea level rise well enough as long as there is space for them to retreat to – although seawalls, roads and other infrastructure can block them. In some places that can simply rise vertically by accumulating sediment. Extreme weather events like heatwaves are a growing problem, and can cause death of vegetation over large areas.

Given the complexities of carbon credit markets, what do you believe are the most promising strategies to ensure that blue carbon credits maintain high environmental integrity? We need to follow principles to ensure that our desire to generate credits does not create further damage or infringe on people’s rights. Principles like doing no harm, respecting rights, empowering people, acting and sharing benefits equitably, and using the best available knowledge. We can follow a ‘mitigation hierarchy’ in which we ensure that we protect first, and restore when we need to.

Q: What role do you see for governments in regulating the emerging market for blue carbon credits to ensure its effectiveness in climate mitigation efforts?”

A: Each government will take a different approach, but some regulation can be helpful. Regulations can help ensure that high integrity principles are followed. Regulations can also help ensure that the right kind of knowledge is generated for a national context. Most nations, including Sri Lanka, have international commitments, and regulation can help make sure that those commitments are realised.

Q: What are some innovative financial models or partnerships that have shown success in attracting private sector investment for the restoration of blue carbon ecosystems?

A: Sometimes we don’t need innovation because the mechanisms already exist, we just need to make them work properly. Carbon and biodiversity markets are an example – they have promise, but are not as successful as they could be because there are barriers to effective implementation.

Q: How can smaller nations or communities with rich blue carbon ecosystems access funding or investment to protect and restore these vital habitats?

A: In some situations, there might be potential to engage with the private sector, and building public-private partnerships can help. These are mostly used for infrastructure projects, but could be harnessed towards climate mitigation and nature protection. In other contexts, some international investment might be needed – the recent climate meeting in Baku finalised some of the international rules under which this can occur.

Q: You mentioned the importance of blue carbon ecosystems for supporting livelihoods, particularly in fisheries and tourism. How can we ensure that the restoration of these ecosystems also benefits local communities economically?

A: This is fundamental, and part of building markets with integrity. Local peoples need to be involved all the way through projects and need to receive an equitable share of benefits. This might mean a share in revenue from the sale of credits, but it might also mean new business or livelihood generation opportunities. If lives are not improved, there will be little support for climate action or nature protection.

What are the potential risks or unintended consequences for coastal communities if blue carbon financing schemes are not properly designed or implemented? In some situations, destructive activities are simply displaced elsewhere, so there is no net benefit. In others, locals do not receive an adequate share of benefits, so trust and long-term success is eroded.

Q: What are some of the key metrics used to assess the health and carbon sequestration potential of blue carbon ecosystems? How reliable are these metrics across different regions?

A: Measuring carbon is relatively easy. Measuring other benefits, such as improvements in fisheries or improved resilience of a community, is much harder but just as important. We need to put more effort into measuring these other benefits.

Q: In terms of monitoring blue carbon projects, what are the most significant technical or logistical challenges that need to be addressed?

A: Cost is often the main barrier. The methods and technologies exist but can be expensive. This can be a barrier in two ways. One is that it makes projects so expensive that revenue from sale of credits does not offset the cost of doing the project. Another is that poorer nations and communities can be left behind. Ensuring that we have low-cost methods that work in developing countries is important for international equity.

Q: As we look to the future, do you think blue carbon credits will become as established and integrated into global carbon markets as terrestrial carbon credits?

A:Yes, they already are. The scale is not as great as it is for forests, but blue carbon credits from the protection and restoration of mangroves and sea grasses are being generated in multiple countries.

Q: How do you envision the evolution of blue carbon and biodiversity financing over the next decade, especially in terms of its role in achieving international climate targets like those in the Paris Agreement?”

A:My aspiration is that we continue to break down the barriers that prevent protection and restoration of blue carbon ecosystems. This can include finance, and developing low-cost technologies and building capacity is key. Just as important will be adoption of high integrity principles and development of an enabling regulatory environment. Some things governments and communities can already do, they just need a little help or a clearer mandate. The emergence of broader nature and biodiversity markets also has potential to reward good ecosystem stewards who are currently locked out of carbon markets.