Climate change and food security in Sri Lanka: towards food sovereignty

Agriculture depends on climate and natural resources; thus climate change decisively impacts agriculture and food systems. Agriculture, forestry and other land use contributed 24% of global GHG emissions in 2010, and entire food systems contributed about 34% in 2015, underscoring the bidirectional links between food and climate. International assessments highlight drawbacks of conventional food security pathways and propose agroecology and small-scale farming to enhance sustainability, resilience, and food sovereignty. Sri Lanka has experienced severe climate shocks (e.g., 2016–2017 droughts and floods), with major losses in paddy production, widespread displacement, and ranking as one of the worst-hit countries in the Global Climate Risk Index. Increasing temperature, rainfall anomalies, and extreme events threaten food security through impacts on availability, access, utilisation, and stability. Food security is defined as when all people have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food at all times, while food sovereignty emphasises people’s rights to define their food systems and to sustainably manage resources. This study addresses the importance of reorienting Sri Lanka’s agricultural development, as policies have prioritised conventional and export-oriented models with limited inclusion of rural communities. Consequently, the study aims are: (1) Map the interrelation between climate change, food security and food systems; (2) Elaborate how food sovereignty secures rights of people and nature, and explore agrifood activism and discourses; (3) Assess the extent these concepts are established in Sri Lankan development discourse and determine a way forward.

The review synthesises global and local scholarship on climate change, food security, and food sovereignty (1996–2021). It documents that climate change challenges all four dimensions of food security, even as global food production has grown. Hunger and severe food insecurity remain high in Asia, Africa and Latin America. The literature positions food sovereignty—conceptualised and advanced by La Via Campesina—as a response to neoliberal food regimes, prioritising the rights of small-scale producers and communities to control food systems, land, seeds, and resources. It distinguishes the right to food (individual, internationally recognised) from the broader people-centered, collective-rights orientation of food sovereignty. Comparative analyses contrast conventional agriculture (market- and export-oriented, input-intensive, resource privatisation) with food sovereignty (agroecological, locally controlled, community rights, equitable access). Internationally, food sovereignty has influenced UN processes and some national constitutions and policies (e.g., Ecuador, Bolivia, Venezuela), though implementation can be constrained by state interpretations. The Sri Lankan literature highlights climate vulnerabilities in agriculture and fisheries, home garden agroforestry’s contributions to resilience and nutrition, and the role of social movements (e.g., MONLAR) in promoting agroecology and food sovereignty. Evidence gaps include holistic analyses of food systems and climate impacts beyond crops, and limited documentation of agroecology/food sovereignty practices nationally.

Design: Narrative literature review and qualitative in-depth interviews. Scope of review: English-language works (1996–2021) from academic journals, books, policy documents, and reputable agency publications. Databases: Google Scholar, Elsevier, JSTOR, Springer, Taylor & Francis, Kopernio. Search and screening: Initial search identified 378 documents; abstracts screened for relevance; 109 documents selected and accessed; snowballing yielded an additional 71 relevant papers. Exclusion reasons: duplication, outside time window, irrelevance to study focus. Two-tier assessment: (1) global overview of climate change, food security, and food sovereignty; (2) Sri Lankan context and applicability. A process overview is provided (Fig. 3). Interviews: Eight purposively selected participants (social activists, farmer leaders, practitioners, experts) with unique information and extensive experience. Five male, three female; ages 35–65; 15–40 years’ experience. Semi-structured protocol developed in English, translated into Sinhalese; interviews averaged 45 minutes; audio-recorded with consent; ethical approval obtained (USM/JEPeM/20080404); anonymity and confidentiality assured. Sample size limited due to data saturation. Interview focus: food security, climate change, agroecology, sustainable development, and food sovereignty in Sri Lanka.

- Climate change in Sri Lanka has caused severe droughts and floods (2016–2017), a 40% decline in paddy production in early 2017, 246 deaths and >600,000 displaced in May 2017 floods; the country ranked as second-worst hit in the 2017 Global Climate Risk Index. - Agriculture’s share of GDP declined from 33.53% (1974) to 7.24% (2019); employment in agriculture fell from 42.84% to 27.1% (1991–2016), while agricultural land area increased (23,420 to 27,400 km²). Sri Lanka produces ~80–85% of its food domestically but relies on imports for wheat, sugar, fish, and milk products. In the 2019 Global Food Security Index it ranked 66/113 (score 60.8%). - Empirical studies indicate temperature rises adversely affect rice yields more than rainfall variance; rainfall increases may be beneficial in some zones, but dry-zone agriculture is vulnerable to temperature increases. Home gardens contribute to food security, ecosystem services, and climate resilience via diversity. - Fisheries: ~560,000 employed; livelihoods for >2.7 million; fish provides ~70% of animal protein intake. Climate change, resource exploitation, illegal fishing, policy gaps, and governance issues heighten sectoral vulnerabilities, threatening national food security. - Poverty and nutrition: ~25% live on US$2.50/day; 4.6 million malnourished; by 2050 an additional 2.4 million people will need safe, high-quality food. Under a carbon-intensive scenario, living standards for ~90% of the population in severe/moderate hotspots could decline by ~7% by 2050. - Interview-based evidence (Table 1) documents increased extremes (droughts/floods), crop failures, biodiversity loss, rising agrochemical use, soil/water degradation, food access challenges, price spikes, malnutrition, and social conflicts, disproportionately affecting small-scale producers, fishers, and marginalised groups. - Current adaptation practices (Table 2) include: water conservation (tank renovation, rainwater harvesting, mulch, biochar, non-till); stress-tolerant and traditional crops; community seed banks/exchanges; soil conservation (SALT, contouring, organic inputs); diversification/multicropping; agroecology/organic/natural farming; improved processing/preservation; home gardens, agroforestry, re/mangrove-forestation; efficient cookstoves; and appropriate agrotechnologies. - Food sovereignty is identified as a pathway to address climate impacts on food systems by centring small-scale producers, agroecology, local markets, and rights-based governance. Sri Lankan social movements (notably MONLAR) have introduced and advanced food sovereignty and regenerative/agroecological practices. - International cases (e.g., Zero Budget Natural Farming in India; policy uptake in parts of Latin America) demonstrate that agroecology can reduce costs, maintain/increase yields, alleviate indebtedness, and contribute to multiple SDGs when backed by policy, financing, extension, and market reforms.

The study mapped how climate change disrupts all dimensions of food security in Sri Lanka, especially among smallholders and coastal communities, and synthesised adaptation practices already in use. It argues that prevailing, market-led agricultural models insufficiently address structural vulnerabilities and often exacerbate environmental degradation and social inequities. By reframing the problem through food sovereignty, the paper positions agroecology, localised food systems, and rights-based governance as central to resilience. Evidence from interviews and international cases suggests that food sovereignty can mitigate climate risks by enhancing diversity, reducing input costs, strengthening local markets, and empowering producers and consumers in decision-making. Achieving this requires policy and institutional reforms that prioritise small-scale producers, protect communal resource rights (land, water, seeds), and integrate sustainability as a core dimension in food security assessments. This approach addresses the research aims by linking climate impacts to food systems, detailing how food sovereignty secures people’s and nature’s rights, and assessing its traction in Sri Lanka through social movements, emerging practices, and gaps in formal policy.

Sri Lanka’s predominantly smallholder-based food system faces escalating climate risks alongside policy priorities favouring industrial and service sectors. The paper concludes that transitioning towards food sovereignty—operationalised through agroecology across agriculture, fisheries, and livestock—is a viable and sustainable pathway to enhance food security and resilience. Key contributions include synthesising global and local evidence on climate-food-sovereignty linkages, documenting on-the-ground adaptation practices, and highlighting the roles of social movements (e.g., MONLAR) in advancing agroecology and rights-based approaches. Priority actions include: adopting a national agricultural and development policy grounded in food sovereignty; strengthening regional programmes targeting vulnerable communities; promoting diversified, local production and markets; protecting communal resource rights; and mainstreaming producer–consumer linkages and cooperative networks. Future research should expand holistic, systems-level studies on agroecology and food sovereignty in Sri Lanka, document local seed systems and regenerative practices, and evaluate policy instruments that enable scaling, while ensuring participatory, multi-level governance.

- Narrative review limited to English-language sources (1996–2021), which may omit relevant non-English or earlier/later literature. - Qualitative component based on eight purposively selected interviewees; while data saturation was reported, findings from interviews are not statistically generalisable. - Interview focus restricted to climate change, food security, and food sovereignty within Sri Lanka; perspectives may not capture all sectoral nuances (e.g., livestock/fisheries research gaps noted). - Primary interview datasets are not publicly available due to ethical constraints, limiting external verification; some Sri Lanka-specific agroecology/food sovereignty practices remain underdocumented in the literature.