• Climate Conservation Consortium Director/CEO Sanith de S. Wijeyeratne on Sri Lanka’s lack of understanding on climate change commitments

The 2023 United Nations (UN) Climate Change Conference/Conference of the Parties (COP) of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) (COP28) has been high on the global agenda for the last two weeks with a record-breaking number of people in attendance. Sri Lanka too was in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, with a delegation led by President and National Policies Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, who used the platform to announce plans on the International Climate Change University. As a country, Sri Lanka has submitted its Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to the UNFCCC and signed agreements with Singapore on carbon credits under the Paris Climate Accords and the Global Green Growth Institute headed by former UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and a memorandum with Japan’s Joint Crediting Mechanism. The country also has Erik Solheim as its International Advisor on Climate Change.

Kaleidoscope featured Climate Conservation Consortium Director/Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Sanith de S. Wijeyeratne to discuss carbon credits and the challenges and advantages of earning them. 

Following are excerpts from the interview:

Does the nation fully understand the implications of the agreements that we have signed? What is on the table here?

Where the agreement with Singapore is concerned, there is a marked lack of transparency about what has really transpired. I have been unable to find out any details about what is at stake or what has been committed, so I can’t comment on the implications for Sri Lanka. On the commitments detailed under the Paris Agreement, Sri Lanka is woefully unprepared and is lagging behind on its undertaking. We don’t seem to have any plans to stimulate the development of renewable energy or to move away from fossil fuels. When we deal with Government departments, it’s clear that nobody down the chain has an idea as to what the country has committed to, so I’m not sure how we can meet these undertakings. 

How does a country benefit from carbon credits?

The system of carbon credits was designed to stimulate and support projects that reduce or prevent the emissions of or even re-capture greenhouse gases (GHGs). Today, we see carbon credits being used to fund large-scale reforestation projects for example, which would generally not attract funding from the commercial sector. Countries such as Indonesia have used them to protect its rainforest and endemic species. Indonesia’s “Rimba Raya Biodiversity Reserve” project is about protecting its natural rainforests, orangutan population, and other fauna. My team was involved in developing large-scale mangrove projects in Myanmar at one time and those projects attracted great funding because of carbon credits from the international community. Likewise, there are examples in Africa and South America as well.

For a country to understand the advantages and act on them, its people have to take ownership. How does this happen? What do the people need to know?

There is still a lack of interest in this area from the private sector, as they are only interested in short-term financial returns. The main step would be to do background research properly. I have come across too many companies that have been absolutely misled by foreign (or even local) consultants about the way that carbon credits work. These consultants promise large financial returns (which do not happen) and take upfront consultancy fees before disappearing or letting the projects die a natural death, so there is a huge negative impression about carbon credits in the marketplace. This is the reason that members of the public must make themselves aware of the country’s situation, what we have committed to, what regulations are in place, what a carbon credit actually is, what governs it, and what the market looks like. We need to be better advised before starting the journey. 

What are the challenges and pitfalls that the country faces in the process of getting that ownership?

The biggest challenge Sri Lanka faces is the lack of scale. The upfront costs of designing and registering carbon projects can be up to United States dollars 100,000, with no guarantee of the successful registration of the project. So, there has to be a willingness to invest this kind of money upfront. A typical forestry project would have 10,000-20,000 hectares (ha) at a minimum. In Sri Lanka, we don’t have this scale of land readily available in one place. I have had so many parties approach me to register projects that have 500 ha or even less and I have to discourage them. These projects are too small to bear the registration and management costs and to give a return of investment, however small. Even if we have solar power and renewable energy projects, our scale is miniscule, compared to that of India and China, for instance. We have to be careful of what we are trying to plan and make sure that it’s practical and can be done at sufficient scale. 

Is Sri Lanka doing it right?

I don’t think so. I think that the state sector has a large role to play and that they should take this on more seriously.

What changes should there be in the policy landscape?

I believe that there needs to be a consolidation of State land, forests, and protected areas under one body to manage them centrally. The problem is that lands are under the authority of various departments in Sri Lanka. For example, seaside mangroves come under the purview of the Department of Coast Conservation and Coastal Resource Management and landside mangroves become the problem of the Department of Forest/Forest Conservation. Certain mangroves are also under the authority of the Local Government departments in the area or belong to the Divisional Secretariats, unless they’re looked after by the Sri Lanka Navy. There are seven different authorities in this country just looking after mangroves and they will never act together. If we are to do this, there needs to be a national-level mandate to use these lands to develop carbon projects for use against our climate goals. 

What is the danger of greenwashing when accounting for carbon credits?

There has been a recent spate of reports on global carbon projects not meeting the criteria and have in effect been selling credits that have not reduced carbon. As with any global system, once weaknesses are identified, the system must fix the problems. The answer lies in moving human-centric interventions in the form of monitoring, measuring, and reporting on the progress of credits. Unfortunately, today, many projects are trying to automate these functions through the use of satellite photography or drones coupled with artificial intelligence (AI). This is because it would save money and therefore be more “profitable” to the developers. In fact, if I were to approach an investor and pitch a tech-centric project, they would be interested, but, if I were to say that I would be sending several people to conduct monitoring operations, they’d quickly retract and decline. Carbon projects are not meant to be set up for “profit”; it is meant to only facilitate an environment-friendly project that would otherwise not function. So, in this particular case, I don’t believe that automation or AI is the solution but rather more stringent guidelines with better enforcement and human oversight will be the answer.

How are zero carbon status and carbon neutral status defined? How do companies work towards becoming carbon neutral?

A carbon neutral status is achieved by assessing the total amount of GHGs emitted by a company (or a person, event, or project) and then by supporting projects either within or external to your value chain to reduce, prevent, or recapture the same volume of GHGs. Investing in and supporting projects from within your value chain is called carbon insetting and doing so external to your value chain is called carbon offsetting. Carbon insetting is becoming increasingly popular these days. In fact, Sri Lanka has some great examples of factories, specifically in the apparel sector, that have understood the impact on the environment and have been working over multiple years using solar power and energy efficiency to minimise carbon emissions. We work with an entire group of factories that has been carbon neutral for several years. Don’t forget, Sri Lanka is home to Asia’s first apparel factory that went carbon neutral and Asia’s first group of factories to go carbon neutral. We also have the world’s first water neutral factory. Sri Lanka has some great examples of carbon neutrality in the country, but it needs to come with great management, understanding, and commitment to bettering the environment. 

As a nation, how do we gear for the future where carbon credits are becoming increasingly relevant?

 Sri Lanka needs clear and stringent policies that encourage the development of these credits, both for our international commitments and for our local industries. Over the past decade, we have seen that local industry will not take any significant measures in this area without regulatory requirements or state regulations, so, we need a central body that can work as a cohesive unit, under which all of our lands can be consolidated. There’s also a significant amount of information that needs to be communicated to government departments and the mandate must come from the top. 

(The writer is the host, director, and co-producer of the weekly digital programme ‘Kaleidoscope with Savithri Rodrigo’ which can be viewed on YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, and LinkedIn. She has over three decades of experience in print, electronic, and social media)