What might be the ‘New Normals’ for the Environment?
The spreading of COVID-19 has meant that multiple economies have been kept on hold for a period of time. This has slightly lifted the burden of contributions to climate change — for instance, there has been an observed reduction in carbon dioxide (CO2) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) levels in the atmosphere. Further, the pandemic has demonstrated the necessity to have critical infrastructure in place to address this type of an emergency. In order to bounce back, immediate actions from governments could potentially include:
- Investment/stimulus packages on critical infrastructure
- Ramping up fossil fuel production or use
- Focusing more on reaching pre-defined GDP/growth targets
Accordingly, researchers, virologists and environmentalists have conveyed their fears that the environment will be heavily impacted in the aftermath of the crisis, which could, in turn, open up more opportunities for the future spread of unidentified viruses that could further threaten economic development, the well-being of humans and animals alike, and co-existence and interconnectedness of the environment, society and the economy.
On the other hand, to prevent the rapid community spread of COVID-19 across countries, many governments have taken stern measures to lock down countries, making people stay at/work from home and closing their international borders. In many cases, the durations of the lock-downs were often unknown (depending on the spread of the virus), thus creating the possibility of any behavioural changes adopted during the lock-downs becoming embedded more permanently within communities.
Will a post-COVID ‘new normal’ be a world in the wake of not only a health crisis, but an environmental one too?
The policies and procedures that governments design and implement, as well as potential behavioural changes in society, can create ‘new normals’ that could impact the environment positively and/or negatively. The following sections illustrate trends that we could potentially observe at the global level in due course.
Government:
- Reducing environmental-friendly standards to support and easily facilitate industries bouncing back (For example: the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) temporarily relaxing enforcement of environmental regulations and fines during the COVID-19 outbreak ; China postponing the enforcement of new emissions standards to support the automobile industry, etc.).
- Investing more in crucial infrastructure, such as roads, coal power plants, irrigation etc. without the proper environmental impact assessments or focus on renewable energy.
- Lagging efforts to reclaim the role of eco-tourism in economic development.
- Less funding directed towards biodiversity, conservation and environment-related activities.
- A reduction in the attention and priority given to climate change.
Communities:
- People continue with their postponed travels or get on board with new deals from airlines, hotels, cruise ships, contributing further to carbon emissions.
- People stock up on more food as a precaution, which, in turn, contributes towards increased emissions.
- Discussions around climate change and climate-related issues may be sidelined or forgotten.
- Given the concerns raised around using public transportation, people might tend to use their own vehicles more and more.
- Lower oil prices could have an impact on electric vehicle uptake or discourage the use and further exploration of biofuels, potentially resulting in renewables playing a smaller role in transport going forward.
Government:
- Investing and focusing more on low carbon and climate-resilient growth.
- Investing more in clean energy and technologies, in order to reduce emissions.
- Economic recovery plans that take climate-related emergencies into account.
- Supporting global efforts to protect biodiversity, putting an end to illegal trade in wildlife, and safeguarding the handling of chemicals and waste.[1]
- The utilisation of community-level interactions to discuss or act upon climate-related issues.
Communities:
- People cutting down on travel and spending more time with their families.
- Cutting down on food waste due to embedded behavioural changes stemming from previous shortages experienced during the pandemic, leading to the continuation of the planning of purchases, as well as the responsible consumption of food, given the scarcity of food and essential items.
- Communities rapidly responding to climate change-related issues.
- People continuing to use environmentally-friendly transportation mediums.
- New working-from-home culture leading to more virtual meetings, while cutting down on global official travels.
Possible Environmental Impacts
Although the environmental consequences of the outbreak do not constitute a critical priority for Sri Lanka at this juncture, there is already evidence of positive impacts on the environment — for example, recent tests carried out in the Kelani river by the Central Environmental Authority indicated that water quality has improved, due to a decrease in the release of industrial effluents into the river. Also, the air quality of Colombo has improved to a certain extent, due to limited vehicle movements during the curfew.
Given the recent decision to restrict the importing of non-essential items other than medicine and oil, to grow essential vegetables at home during the curfew and to ensure that people will better utilise their time at home, the Mahaweli, Agriculture, Irrigation, and Rural Development Ministry and the Samurdhi Development Department of the Social Security Ministry kicked off a project titled ‘1 million home gardens’. This program expects to provide 10 plants per household (including condominiums), to facilitate a behavioural change in favour of home gardening. Further to this private sector entities have also started similar programmes as cooperate social responsibility efforts to promote home gardening among urban and semi urban areas.
Potential New Sri Lankan Normals
Looking into the future, there is a high possibility that Sri Lanka will similarly follow the above mentioned global patterns or ‘normals’ that harm or protect the environment, or a hybrid of environmentally-friendly and non-environmentally friendly actions.
The new home gardening activities could create a ripple effect, where people consciously continue to use eco-friendly ways of sourcing their fresh food items. This could eventually force mass producers to switch into environmentally-friendly methods of farming, as well as increase the demand for urban and climate-smart agriculture and the supply of seedlings for urban/home gardening, leading to self-sufficiency. Also, there is a tendency among Sri Lankans to utilise abandoned lands for cultivation — this practice could drive community agro-initiatives, allowing the productive utilising of available land without harming or disturbing existing ecosystems.
The prevalence and increased usage of online platforms for distance learning might provide a potential mechanism to educate and provide useful resources to interested audiences regarding biodiversity, conservation and climate change. Further, environmentalists and policymakers could harness the community engagement observed during the COVID-19 response to support biodiversity, energy and climate change-related issues within the country.
FINAL THOUGHTS
The COVID-19 pandemic has changed and is continuing to impact our economic and ecological surroundings drastically. In fact, there is evidence to suggest that it has had positive environmental consequences, notwithstanding the tragically high cost of human lives that perhaps renders it inappropriate to rejoice these positive environmental impacts. However, the outbreak constitutes good lesson for us all to revisit the ways in which we interact with the environment and to think more deeply about the consequences of our actions. Based on the mitigation and containment measures taken by the governments around the globe, we believe that the environment will be significantly impacted (either positively or negatively) once growth is restarted/accelerated.
The path that Sri Lanka will take is yet to be explored. We believe that Sri Lanka can take a middle path , environmentally— the country will most likely have to build critical infrastructure, such as hospitals, roads, etc. that may harm the environment. However, this can be achieved by adhering to existing environment protection rules and regulations, and there is potential to ensure strict enforcement. More encouragingly, a possible silver lining might involve seeing more permanent changes in peoples’ post-pandemic behaviours via shifts towards more ecologically-friendly practices.
We will be sharing the next two position papers on governance and society in the coming weeks — stay tuned!
FOOTNOTE
[1] Commentary by Johan Robinson on 23 April 2020
