brand logo

The precise price of pollution

31 May 2021

  • How can Sri Lanka value the damages the burning ship caused to its marine ecosystem?

By Sumudu Chamara   Sri Lanka’s environmentalists fear that the recent incident where a ship caught fire near Sri Lanka may cause a new spate of environmental issues, and a public discourse has begun on social media platforms about the same. Singapore-flagged container ship MV X-press Pearl caught fire on 20 May off the west coast of Sri Lanka, and as the Sri Lankan authorities including the Sri Lanka Navy struggled to extinguish the fire, almost the entire ship and its containers were destroyed by the flames. However, chemicals and chemical products as well as plastics released to the ocean as a result of the fire, continue to pollute Sri Lankan waters. Last week, several days after the ship caught fire, environmentalists started raising awareness about the damage the said substances are causing Sri Lankan marine ecosystems as well as the coast/beach. In addition, people started collecting the debris of the ship, which mainly consisted of plastics and various cosmetic products, and the law enforcement authorities started missions to stifle it, as some of the debris was considered highly toxic. Even though Sri Lanka did not suffer any property damage due to the incident, the damage that was caused and is continuing to be caused to marine ecosystems as well as the beaches resulted in a public furore. Even though the authorities such as the Marine Environment Protection Authority (MEPA), Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA), and the Central Environmental Authority (CEA), and the ministers in charge have said that they are taking necessary steps in order to mitigate the perpetuating environmental damage, environmentalists claim that Sri Lanka is yet to assess the degree and nature of the damage the incident has caused. Speaking to the media last week, Minister of Ports and Shipping Rohitha Abeygunawardena said that steps are underway to obtain compensation for all the damage caused to Sri Lanka including the coastal area and the marine environment with the ship’s insurance company. To look into the process of evaluating the damage caused to the environment, especially marine ecosystems, and obtaining co-operation, The Morning spoke to several persons who are in a position to shed some light on the matter.   Inadequate laws Speaking to The Morning, the Centre for Environmental Justice (CEJ), one of the leading organisations striving to protect the environment, said that when it comes to demanding compensation for the damage caused to the environment, Sri Lanka needs stronger laws and procedures in order to obtain adequate compensation. CEJ Chairman Attorney-at-Law Ravindranath Dabare said that the Marine Pollution Prevention Act (MPPA) (No. 35 of 2008) needs to be stronger, and that certain sections of the MPPA have not been drafted to match the Sri Lankan context in a practical manner. He added: “For example, when it comes to obtaining compensation for damage caused to the environment, the MPPA does not clearly specify the court through which compensation should be obtained. Once when a case was filed in a district court, the entire case was dismissed on the grounds that a district court does not have the necessary powers to order compensation.” Adding that there are several such inadequacies in the MPPA, Dabare said that since Sri Lanka is not a signatory to the Hazardous and Noxious Substances (HNS) Convention which primarily focuses on hazardous chemicals, and that Sri Lanka, therefore, cannot refer to it when taking action. He also alleged that in this context, the MPPA mainly pertains to bunker oil spillages or leakages, expressing concerns as to whether such legal provisions can cover the impacts caused by incidents such as fire aboard the MV X-press Pearl. Speaking of the MT New Diamond ship, which caught fire off the east coast of Sri Lanka last September, Dabare said that following the incident, Sri Lanka had reached an agreement with regard to covering the costs (incurred due to the fire on the ship) which was considered to be the final compensation Sri Lanka receives. He noted that later, a case was filed seeking compensation for the damages caused to the environment, and that there is a delay on that front and that the hearing of the case has not been concluded yet. He expressed doubts about the possibility of Sri Lanka receiving adequate compensation (for the damages caused to the environment), as the case was filed a considerable period of time after the said agreement was reached. He added: “There were legal provisions to deal with that incident due to the oil leakage. But, when it comes to incidents such as the one involving the MV X-press Pearl, there is an overall lack of laws.” Meanwhile, CEJ Executive Director Hemantha Withanage, speaking of the fire aboard the MT New Diamond, told The Morning last week that even though compensation of $ 2.2 million was anticipated from the ship, only a sum of $ 65,000 had been paid to the country. He also stressed the need for efficient laws to both prevent such disasters in Sri Lankan waters and to see to it that Sri Lanka receives adequate compensation for any damages such incidents cause. He stressed the lack of a proper rapid response mechanism. He also said that it is extremely difficult to obtain compensation for such disasters due to Sri Lanka’s lack of adequate laws, and that with a proper disaster management plan, Sri Lanka could have both equipment, and a system capable of fighting, preventing, and responding to such situations, including a separate team, instead of relying solely on the Sri Lanka Navy. Speaking of legal actions with regard to the fire aboard the MV X-press Pearl, Dabare said that in addition to the steps taken by other institutions, the CEJ is planning to file a case seeking immediate action against those responsible for the incident. He explained: “CEJ is planning on filing a separate case under various laws applicable to the incident. The objective of this move is to take the initiative to identify all the parties responsible for this incident. There may have been shortcomings on the part of the Sri Lankan Government, and perhaps it is the fault of the ship (ship’s management). After conducting a complete investigation to find out who is responsible, steps should be taken to prosecute them as per the relevant legal provisions, and to obtain compensation for the damages.” He added that there is a practice called “polluter pays principle”, and even though it is not specifically mentioned in the MPPA, it is a part of Sri Lankan law. Also, he opined that since the provisions contained in the MPPA are weak to some extent, Sri Lanka will have to seek the court’s assistance based on other applicable laws. The “polluter pays principle” Dabare mentioned is a practice that stipulates that those who cause environmental pollution/damage to the environment should bear the costs pertaining to managing the damage. A number of countries including the US, UK, Zimbabwe, Switzerland, Australia, and France have adopted this particular practice or practices similar to/based on it. Dabare emphasised that even though Sri Lanka can obtain compensation under the existing legal provisions, there may be obstacles and perhaps it would be difficult to obtain adequate compensation due to the said inadequacies in the laws. Also, he said that the legal procedures aimed at obtaining compensation may also face certain obstacles.   Evaluating damages When it comes to the fire aboard the MV X-press Pearl, more than the damage caused to the properties (if any) and the costs incurred by the Sri Lankan authorities during the process of dousing the fire and assisting the ship’s crew, it is obvious that Sri Lanka also needs to pay more attention to the damage the incident caused to marine ecosystems and coastal areas. Following the incident, many parties pointed out that various substances released into the ocean owing to the fire have caused massive damage to marine ecosystem, especially fish living in the area in question. According to environmentalists, this situation calls for a comprehensive investigation which involves evaluating the true nature and extent of the damage suffered by Sri Lanka’s environment in order to obtain compensation. This evaluation, according to Dabare, needs to focus on air pollution, damages suffered by marine ecosystems, coastal area pollution, damage to beach ecosystem, damage to fish and the fishing industry, costs incurred by the Government, as well as recovery costs in the long run. Speaking of this, environmental lawyer Dr. Jagath Gunawardana told The Morning that the damage caused to the environment is evaluated through a process called “environmental cost analysis”, which should be conducted by a team of experts in the field including experts in environmental economics. He added that this process should focus on both the economic value and biological value. To look into the process of evaluating the damage, The Morning spoke to University of Peradeniya Economics and Statistics Department Prof. Wasantha Athukorale, who has conducted extensive research in the field of environmental economics, agricultural economics, and sustainable development. He added that when it comes to evaluating the value or damage caused to the environment or an ecosystem, there are a number of ways to do that, and there are a number of factors that should be taken into account. Among these factors are damage caused to sea water, marine species, coast, flora, and fauna endemic to coastal areas, other natural resources, as well as damage/obstacles to conservation activities in these areas. He added these factors need to be identified and evaluated separately, and that their values also need to be evaluated separately. When asked about long-term impacts that may not be visible or intense at the moment, Prof. Athukorala said that an ideal evaluation should focus on both immediate and short-term impacts and long-term impacts. He noted: “When evaluating the impacts on the environment, it is done under two steps, namely, short-term evaluation and long-term evaluation. But, developing countries such as Sri Lanka do not assign a high value to these impacts. Even though we pay attention to short-term impacts, most of the time, we do take into account what are the long-term impacts and what is the estimated value. Also, we tend not to pay adequate attention to formulating mechanisms to recover from the long-term impacts. When it comes to long-term degradation in an environment, there is a certain extent that the world can endure that damage. Once that limit is exceeded in an environment, natural disasters occur.” Speaking of the importance of having a proper mechanism to evaluate the damage caused to Sri Lanka due to the aforementioned incident, Prof. Athukorala said: “I am of the opinion that Sri Lanka does not have a systematic mechanism in place for such an evaluation. When looking at some of the largest development projects in Sri Lanka, it can be seen that Sri Lanka does not have a proper mechanism to identify and evaluate the value of the natural resources those projects involve and make it (evaluation) a part of the decision-making process. However, this is not happening only in Sri Lanka. As a matter of fact, developing countries in general give little value to such aspects of the environment and natural resources. However, we cannot look at the environment like we did around 100 years ago. A large amount of natural resources are on the wane, and therefore, we should get rid of the mindset that Sri Lanka does not need to pay attention to evaluating the value of the environment. Time has come to integrate a proper environmental assessment mechanism in every development project.” He added that monetary value also plays a role in the process of estimating the value of natural resources. He explained: “What we receive from the environment can be identified under two main classifications, depending on whether the resources in question are given a monetary value. Oxygen or the process that converts carbon dioxide into oxygen, for example, is not given a value. There are a large number of such processes that have not been assigned a value, since there is no market value to those processes. There are also other resources that have been assigned a value.” Even though The Morning tried to get in touch with several MEPA officials to obtain information about the process of evaluating the damage caused to the environment and also the shortcomings in the MPPA mentioned by Dabare, they were not reachable. Environmentalists claim that the Sri Lankan authorities should take responsibility for the incident, as they allowed the ship to enter the country’s territorial seas in a context where India and Qatar had already turned down a request to offload certain containers that allegedly contained chemicals and caused the fire. However, the ship has already released a large amount of chemicals and chemical products to the ocean and these have started affecting Sri Lanka’s environment. Even though measures are being taken by the authorities, the damage it has already caused is difficult to reverse, and there is no assurance that Sri Lanka would be able to get rid of all non-eco-friendly substances the ship released, according to environmentalists. In this context, the least Sri Lanka can do is make sure the country receives adequate compensation for the damage the ship has caused to the environment. As some who spoke with The Morning pointed out, the country should focus on the long-term impacts, not only the damage caused in the short term.


More News..