Time to rethink export diversification – with India in mind

By Dhananath Fernando

Originally appeared on the Morning

The call to diversify Sri Lanka’s export basket is not new; it’s a conversation that has spanned decades.

For the most part, our approach has relied on supporting Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs), extending credit, and helping companies find overseas buyers – largely driven by the Export Development Board (EDB).

During the ‘Yahapalana’ Government, Sri Lanka unveiled a comprehensive National Export Strategy (NES) targeting six promising sectors:

• Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and Business Process Management (BPM)

• Wellness tourism

• Boating and shipbuilding

• Electrical and electronic components

• Processed foods and beverages

• Spices and concentrates

In addition, four cross-cutting areas were introduced to complete the export ecosystem:

• Logistics: streamline supply chains and reduce time-to-market

• National Quality Infrastructure (NQI): upgrade testing, certification, and compliance standards

• Innovation and entrepreneurship: promote R&D, tech adoption, and startup growth

• Trade information and promotion: enhance market intelligence, branding, and buyer linkages

This strategy was widely appreciated at the time. Even the EDB Chairman appointed under President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s administration pledged to take it forward. But strategies need to evolve. And now, the context has shifted.

A case in point is how Ceylon Cold Stores (CCS) – a subsidiary of John Keells Holdings (JKH) – has taken a new route into India. Rather than exporting directly, as it unsuccessfully attempted in the past due to India’s non-tariff barriers, it has now partnered with Reliance Consumer Products. Through this partnership, CCS products will be distributed across 18,000 Indian outlets.

If the venture proves successful, we could see CCS expanding operations further, either producing in Sri Lanka for export or even setting up shop in India. This is a powerful lesson; if we are truly serious about diversifying exports, India is a market we can’t afford to ignore. But the route may not always be direct; it could mean partnerships, joint ventures, or becoming part of Indian supply chains.

And it’s not just consumer goods. While CCS is expanding into India, some Sri Lankan banks, now holding excess US Dollar reserves, are looking to partner with the Gujarat International Finance Tec-City (GIFT City).

Several bank CEOs in Sri Lanka who have already invested have stated that their goal is to support Sri Lankan companies investing in India – or even Indian companies operating here. In fact, many Sri Lankan service sector firms are already functioning in India. This is a clear signal: the momentum has shifted. The landscape is changing and we are slow to adapt.

Meanwhile, India is also reshaping the global trade map. It has already signed a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the UK, and is in the final stages of a similar deal with the European Union (EU). Under the UK deal, 99% of Indian exports to the UK will be tariff-free, and 90% of UK goods will get similar access to India – significant reductions even for alcohol products.

Once the EU deal is signed, exporters will have even more incentive to route products from India, especially given Sri Lanka’s uncertain GSP+ status. So, if we try to compete head-on with India in the same markets, we may be setting ourselves up for disappointment. Instead, we should look at how we can complement India – join its supply chains and offer what India alone cannot.

One such overlooked area is electricity exports. Back in 2016-’17, when the NES was developed, the potential of renewable energy in Sri Lanka was limited. Today, that picture has changed dramatically. Solar and wind investments have surged, and with the right policy push, electricity exports to India could become a serious reality.

This example illustrates a broader point: strategies must be dynamic. Markets evolve, technologies advance, and regional power equations shift.

India, for instance, is integrating rapidly with global and regional markets. Sri Lanka can ride that wave, or watch others benefit in our place. With geopolitical winds also shifting – particularly with the West looking for reliable partners in the region – India is too big to be left out of any serious trade or investment plan.

If we play our cards right, Indian growth could also drive investment into Sri Lanka, especially in sectors that support exports. But to unlock that opportunity, we need serious structural reforms:

• Industrial lands must be made available, ideally through private sector-led zones with minimal red tape and a streamlined Board of Investment

• Electricity sector reforms are non-negotiable – both to reduce domestic costs and to enable energy exports

• Trade facilitation through a modernised Customs act is essential to attract investors eyeing India via Sri Lanka

• Debt sustainability must be maintained – no investor will bet on a country flirting with default

• State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) must be restructured to reduce the fiscal burden and unlock productivity

In short, if we are serious about export diversification, we must acknowledge that the rules of the game have changed. Old models won’t work in a new world. India is no longer just a neighbour; it is a gateway, a competitor, and a partner all at once.

The question is: will we adapt fast enough to matter?

Sri Lanka needs a bottom-up approach

Originally appeared on The Morning

By Dhananath Fernando

Regrettably, over the years, Sri Lanka's approach to development has primarily relied on aid and subsidies for its impoverished population. Many politicians have spoken about poverty, but they have often neglected to address its root causes. If our policies were centered on eradicating poverty rather than simply targeting the poor, our development framework could have evolved significantly.

As the adage goes, "there are no poor people, only poor places or countries." A recent report by LirneAsia revealed a startling increase in poverty numbers, rising from 3 million to 7 million people, pushing over 4 million individuals below the poverty line. If our long-standing strategies, such as fertilizer subsidies, Samurdhi, and fuel subsidies were on the right track, how did an economic crisis suddenly plunge 4 million Sri Lankans into poverty?

The ability to maintain strong international relationships and secure more aid has been considered a crucial qualification for candidates, during election cycles. Within the voting community, politicians offering the most substantial subsidy handouts are often perceived as popular leaders. While it is true that we need comprehensive international relationships in modern politics and must take care of our citizens, we must do so while keeping a development-oriented mindset at the core. Regrettably, development cannot rely solely on foreign aid, nor can we lift people out of poverty by offering aid exclusively to the poor.

This situation is not unique to Sri Lanka; it's a global phenomenon. No country has achieved development solely through aid programs. Instead, countries that have reached the development stage share strong institutions and reasonably functioning market systems as common denominators.

The primary focus of any government or political leader should revolve around two key conceptual frameworks:

1. Are we establishing institutions that promote a level playing field?

2. Are we encouraging a functioning market system?

Development is generally a bottom-up approach. People often know what's best for themselves better than politicians or leaders do. We simply need to provide them with opportunities in a competitive environment. Recently, I had the privilege of meeting a few small and medium-sized exporters. The entire system and processes seemed designed to hinder their export activities. Many exporters emphasized the difficulties they face when exporting in Sri Lanka, including challenges and harassment from government regulatory authorities, such as Sri Lanka Customs.

A prime example of our low export numbers is not only market access problems but the barriers within our own system that obstruct exports. One exporter from Kandy, specializing in vanilla exports, highlighted how customs consistently questioned HS codes and demanded repetitive documentation, causing him to spend more time on export processes than on developing his product and capacity. These challenges are consistent across the board for exporters, explaining why Sri Lanka's exports remain stagnant despite numerous committees, task forces, and chairpersons at the Export Development Boards.

Real change should start from the bottom by removing barriers for businesses and offering people the freedom to pursue their desired endeavors. Such reforms may not bring personal glory, as they empower individuals to make their own choices. In contrast, an aid-driven approach often results in leaders or countries seeking personal recognition through associated aid packages.

In Sri Lanka's case, we must remind ourselves that only we can make a difference and pull ourselves out of this crisis. While we need the support of international institutions like the International Monetary Fund and bilateral and multilateral creditors, they alone cannot rescue us from our predicament. It is only through economic reforms and the development of inclusive institutions that we can compete on a level playing field and extricate ourselves from this mess. Both small and large reforms are essential, and we must implement them swiftly and effectively.

Policy instability is as bad as political instability

Originally appeared on The Morning

By Dhananath Fernando

The Govt. must start pulling the economy in one direction

We are just over five months away from the 25th anniversary of Sri Lanka’s 1996 Cricket World Cup victory, which is still engraved in every Sri Lankan’s mind. Since then, our players have gone on to break world records and build legendary careers. They have been named in many Greatest XI lists and represented all the major cricket leagues around the world. Therefore, it is clear the quality of our cricketers has improved in leaps and bounds over the past quarter of a century, and we even secured a T20 cricket World Cup in 2014.

However, cricket’s greatest prize has eluded us since 1996 so it is interesting to re-evaluate the contributory factors of the 1996 victory. It is my belief those key takeaways will provide us with some insight on strategies to overcome the current economic storm. There are many elements and ingredients in mapping out the winning formula. However, I see two main contributory factors.

First is the “stability of the team”. Second is a combination of all other factors along with the cricket administration, which I like to call cricket-political stability, or “crickelitical stability” if you will. The 1996 team was not a star-studded team. Most of them became stars after playing the World Cup, including Sanath Jayasuriya, Muttiah Muralitharan, and Chaminda Vaas. It was the above two factors that made them world champions, which have unfortunately remained unattainable to Sri Lanka, even following 25 years of advanced investments and resources.

In an economic context, similar to the cricket team, “policy stability” and “political stability” are both extremely important. Sri Lankans have never had the luck to experience the joy of a World Cup victory in economic terms. This can be mainly attributed to Sri Lanka’s excessive focus on political stability rather than policy stability. The economic equivalent to a World Cup victory in the Sri Lankan context would be achieving lower poverty rates and reaching a GDP per capita of above $ 10,000. This, in my opinion, remains an elusive dream. Over the years, the business community and policy analysts have been highlighting the importance of policy stability and consistency, but we have failed on both fronts.

Lessons from the previous Government

Initially, the last national Government had a two-thirds majority in Parliament. However, policy stability was non-existent. Different parts of the Government functioned with opposing views which resulted in public policy being pushed in two opposing directions. This filtered down to all levels of government.

The then Prime Minister’s policy statement and the Budget Speech by the then Finance Minister prioritised two different policy agendas. Significant salary hikes for the public sector which were not affordable to the state balance sheet, and revising the VAT (value-added tax) rate several times, are a few examples of policy inconsistency. The Vision 2025 policy statement which was the main policy agenda of the Government, was released a considerable time after taking over office. Moreover, in implementation, it was not given equal priority by all sections of the Government. The Cabinet Committee on Economic Management (CCEM) was then replaced by the then President with the National Economic Council (NEC), which was later dismantled by the then President himself. This resulted in a major setback, since important policy decisions took place without sufficient deliberations, thereby leading to further policy inconsistency within the Government. 

Cabinet reshuffles on key portfolios were observed a few times. The constitutional crisis that emerged with the appointing of a new Prime Minister was a key highlight of the island’s policy instability. It goes without saying that this level of instability and inconsistency is beyond the capacity of a small economy in the Indian Ocean. Policy stability and consistency is something that cannot be achieved only at the top level. Consensus between political leaders executing government functions in order to get something done is political stability. The policy implementation team and the execution of those decisions have to fall in line with the policy. It is only then that we can achieve policy stability.

There are so many things that can get held up at the lower level, starting from misplacing documents. This may have a significant effect on policy implementation, especially if we fail to get policy execution in line with the policy agenda. The World Cup victory in 1996 was a team effort where everyone contributed equally at all levels, from the team manager to the water boy. Another important element is political stability in Sri Lanka. This requires policy stability in the economic front, especially to overcome the current crisis.

Evaluation of the current Government: Post one year

In completing one year of being in power, the current Government should be extra cautious and re-evaluate their performance on realistic measures. The accuracy and relevance of their actions, policy consistency, and stability should be the Government’s priority.

Last week’s Economic Summit organised by the Ceylon Chamber of Commerce highlighted a few sentiments that are reflective of some elements of policy inconsistency.

The Governor of the Central Bank highlighted the importance of self-sufficiency with an emphasis on state sector-led development as a key strategy to support local industries to navigate these uncertain times. The Governor expressed his lack of interest in resorting to advice or support of any foreign agencies.

This statement was followed by a session where the Chairman of the Export Development Board (EDB) and Director General of the BOI (Board of Investment) emphasised on the importance of the Government simply playing the role of an enabler. They highlighted the importance of the private sector in driving economic growth and exports. Furthermore, they reiterated the importance of attaining know-how and capital through Foreign Direct Investments (FDIs). This, in their opinion, was the only way forward, if Sri Lanka is to seriously consider development.

For any economy to thrive there are few drivers that come into play. The ability of the people to connect with the economy and link with global production networks has become a fundamental necessity of the modern world. However, the question remains as to how we can achieve the above and if we will ever get implement the reforms to enable this.

From a public policy perspective, “self-sufficiency” stands in contrast to driving global trade, increasing exports, getting connected to global production networks, and FDIs. They are opposing policy outcomes. Having such opposing policy outcomes makes it difficult for a government to have a twin strategy to approach problems which are interconnected and it sends mixed signals to markets.

A common mistake of many governments that is attributed to their failure is their inability to consider the economy in its entirety. FDIs, exports, exchange rates, labour market, debt management, and all other factors of the economy are interconnected. If we fail to look at an overall picture and only target certain sections of the economy, policy instability will be inevitable. This in turn leads to a vicious cycle of political instability. Sadly, this has been Sri Lanka’s excruciating reality for a while.

This vicious cycle is precisely what this administration must strive to avoid.

In my opinion, getting the reforms done, expanding our connectivity to global value chains, and letting the private sector drive the economy is of paramount importance.

Policy stability goes beyond keeping the tax rates consistent or retaining certain sectors as priorities. It requires cohesiveness from all levels. Mainly at the implementation level where there has to be a continuous follow up between the different actors, while simultaneously keeping in mind the overall picture of the economy. It is about creating an ecosystem between sectors where all sectors work at an optimum capacity and level. The only way to do it is to allow the price mechanism to lead the market and let the resource allocation be done based on market prices.

If Sri Lanka is looking for a World Cup-winning era in terms of our economy, we must focus on policy consistency and stability, while maintaining political stability.

The opinions expressed are the author’s own views. They may not necessarily reflect the views of the Advocata Institute or anyone affiliated with the institute.