Accumulation by Dispossession on the ground: a qualitative
case study on the impacts of the Colombo Port City Project in
Sri Lanka
Construction on the Port City. By Adam Dean for The New York Times (2018)
Author Sam Witman
Student number 11910151
Supervisors J.V. Rothuizen & prof. dr. J.M. Bavinck Second reader dr. R.J. Pistorius
Date 28 May 2021
Bachelor Thesis Future Planet Studies University of Amsterdam
Abstract
Political, economic analyses of socio-environmental conflict that draw on the theory of Accumulation by Dispossession often neglect to include local dynamics. This research aims to illustrate how struggles over Accumulation by Dispossession are manifested in the lives of people. By examining the historical and multi-scalar context, uncovering the effect of power asymmetries and searching for structural explanations, political ecology provides a platform that demonstrates how macro-level systems can lead to competitions over natural resources. An example of such a dispute was triggered by the initiation of the Colombo Port City in Sri Lanka, a commercial and residential land reclamation project. The area will become a newly created Special Economic Zone, and is funded by the Chinese government as part of their Belt and Road Initiative. The reclamation has required 65 million m3 of sand, mined from the ocean bed just off the shore of Negombo, where several active fishing communities are located. As a result of the mining, the fishers have expressed fears for the future of their livelihoods, since damage to the fish breeding grounds and increased coastal erosion may have severe long term impacts. There has also emerged a political division between the proponents and opponents of the project. The people who resist the project claim it is
damaging Sri Lankan sovereignty, and that China increasingly has too much influence in the area. However, the government and other advocates claim the project will attract significant amounts of much needed foreign investment. The polarisation and concerns of the fisher communities show that Accumulation by Dispossession in Sri Lanka has both material, and immaterial consequences, and that trying to separate macro- from micro-dynamics does not do justice to the complexity of this case.
DISCLAIMER
This document contains sensitive information, and is therefore strictly private, confidential and personal to its recipients and should not be copied, distributed or reproduced in whole or
Index
List of abbreviations 5
1. Introduction 6
2. Theoretical Framework 8
2.1 Political ecology approach to socio-environmental conflict 8
2.2 Accumulation by Dispossession 9 2.3 Materialising AbD 10 3. Methodology 12 3.1 Research questions 12 3.2 Research design 12 3.3 Data collection 13 3.4 Data analysis 13
4. Outline of the Colombo Port City Project 15
4.1 Political economic context in Sri Lanka 15
4.2 Inception of the Port City 16
4.3 Suspension and second environmental impact assessment 18
4.4 Agitations and the SEZ Bill 19
5. Analysis of the results 22
5.1 Access and property rights 22
5.2 Accumulation processes and mechanisms 23
5.3 Interests of the people vs. interests of the state 25
6. Discussion 29 6.1 A politicised environment 29 6.2 Development strategy 30 7. Conclusion 32 References 34 Appendices 39
Appendix 1: Item list 39
Appendix 2: List of concerns 40
List of abbreviations
AbD Accumulation by Dispossession
CCCC China Communication Construction Company CEA Central Environment Authority
CECB Central Engineering Consultancy Bureau CEJ Centre for Environmental Justice
CHEC Chinese Harbour Engineering Company Port City Colombo (PVT) Ltd. CIFC Colombo International Financial City
CPCP Colombo Port City Project
EIA/SEIA (Supplementary) Environmental Impact Assessment FDI Foreign Direct Investment
FLSSL The Fishermen’s Livelihood Support Society Limited NAFSO National Fisheries Solidarity Movement
NEA National Environmental Act
PMAPC People’s Movement Against Port City
SEZ Special Economic Zone
1. Introduction
Sri Lanka is facing one of its worst economic crises ever, due to a lack of foreign exchange reserves and outstanding foreign debt. One of the ways in which the government is trying to combat this deficit is through the attraction of foreign direct investment. A clear example of this is the initiation of Colombo Port City Project (CPCP), a commercial and residential land reclamation project that started construction in 2014. The project, formally known as the Colombo International Financial City (CIFC), was backed by an initial investment of $1.4 billion from China. However, it was met with protests from various groups of people, who argue that the benefits of the project do not outweigh environmental impacts. In addition, they claim that these adverse effects are not considered and addressed adequately by the
developers and the government (The Daily FT, 2016b). Part of the resistance comes from fisher communities, who assert that their yield is being negatively influenced by the land reclamation and ancillary sand mining practices.
Sri Lanka experienced an economic downturn even before the onset of Covid-19 in the first quarter of 2020, when the national economy contracted with 1.6% (The World Bank, 2021). The Covid-19 crisis has added even more pressure, as the profits from export, tourism, and industry were hit hard. As a response to the deficits, the government under president Rajapaksa has implemented import restrictions, renewed its focus on domestic production, sought out new loans, and applied for debt moratoriums (Srinivasan, 2020). However, the loans that were taken out years ago cannot be postponed forever, and the government has increasingly little time to emerge from this situation (Srinivasan, 2020).
The current debt crisis can be traced back to the first wave of neoliberalism in Sri Lanka that started in 1977, when the liberalisation of the parts of the economy led to a large increase in foreign investment and loans (Kadirgamar, 2017). This trend stagnated during the civil war, before accelerating again when it ended, and a new administration emerged. This government has pursued economic development through neoliberal policies until now. Investments in mainly infrastructural projects have generated little return, and income inequality has risen in the years after the war (World Bank, 2016).
The notion that it is neither economically or socially sustainable to allow capital flows to remain unregulated has been fairly absent from politics on the world stage for the past 50 years or so. However, the proliferation of ‘fictitious’ capital and its effect on economies has
capitalist agents take part in a process that he labels as ‘Accumulation by Dispossession’ in order to prevent crises of overaccumulation. Speculative investments in infrastructure and construction have made up the most part of the foreign capital flow into Sri Lanka
(Kadirgamar, 2017). This type of development strategy is focused on non-productive industries, which have proven to be low on returns in the short term. Such physical
investments can lead to displacement and socio-environmental conflicts among disadvantaged groups of people (Camisani, 2018; Hall, 2013).
However, Harvey’s theory has been criticised for neglecting the perspectives of those groups (Woodward, 2006). This has resulted in a knowledge gap on the impacts of dispossession on the everyday lives of people, or as Ayelazuno (2011, p. 538) puts it, ‘it looks as though journalists and NGOs do better in this than scholars’. The conflict that emerged with the construction of the CPCP illustrates well how international finance flows can result in actual hardships. Besides the fact that existing research into these experiences is lacking, it can also contribute to the opposition and critique of neoliberal policies as the superior road to
economic development. Therefore, the main question this research aims to answer is as follows: ‘What are the impacts of accumulation by dispossession in the case of the Colombo Port City Project?’
First, the theoretical foundation will be elaborated on, as well as its limitations and the implications of materialising the aspects of the theories. Subsequently, the methods of the study will be discussed. The next chapter will detail the political economic context of Sri Lanka and the developments within the case of the CPCP. Lastly, the results and their implications are discussed.
2. Theoretical Framework
2.1 Political ecology approach to socio-environmental conflict
In order to gain a thorough understanding of the CPCP conflict, its drivers, and outcomes, a political ecology approach is used in this research. Political ecology assumes that changes in the natural environment cannot be seen as separate from political, social, cultural and
economic influences. This field draws on insights from both natural and social sciences, and aims to go beyond superficial explanations of environmental change (Adams, 2019; Robbins, 2012). There are several themes that characterise a political ecology approach (Scholtens, 2021). Particularly, the study of power asymmetries, and different spatial and temporal scales is used to understand the political motivations behind environmental change. Furthermore, the discursive power and ‘politics of knowing’ around nature play a significant role in political ecology analysis (Adams, 2019; Scholtens, 2021). Political ecology originated as a reaction to mainstream explanations of ecological degradation, such as the ‘ecoscarcity thesis’, and researching the underlying aspects can lead to opportunities for alternative approaches to environmental management (Adams, 2019; Robbins, 2012).
Robbins (2012) proposes that scholars of political ecology generally focus on five broad theses. One that is very relevant for this case is ‘environmental conflict and exclusion’, which explains how access to natural resources cannot be separated from a larger framework of social inequalities, such as gender, racial or class. The author states that this body of work mainly investigates how environments can become ‘socialised’ and social conflicts become ‘ecologised’. The exchange between political questions and the environment involve existing social dynamics, structured along power relations and assumptions, which can further
accelerate pre-existing conflicts, or create unequal environmental outcomes for different groups of people (Robbins, 2012, p. 200; Veuthey & Gerber, 2012). For example, this takes place when actors with a power advantage gain control over collective resources, sometimes excluding other users in the process (Bavinck et al., 2018; Robbins, 2012). According to Robbins (2012), this means that examining development activities, inherently requires asking the questions of who controls what, who has the power to make decisions, and what are the underlying assumptions on the roles of different stakeholders in this process. By observing ecological change, and exposing the 'hidden' costs of development through these questions, it is possible to challenge these underlying assumptions and open up pathways for alternatives.
Bavinck et al. (2018) also highlight the relationship between material resources and social dynamics, and apply it to fishery-based power struggles. They argue that the enclosure of natural resources may be, or seem to be, the cause of conflict. Although, existing feelings of injustice or class differences is another factor that is generally present with social struggles in fisheries. The amount and intensity of these struggles is further exacerbated, partly because of the rise in value of coastal areas, which have become more and more attractive to
infrastructure developers, industry, and tourism (Bavinck et al., 2018). As a consequence of this trend, along with the world wide movement towards Neoliberalisation of economic policies, coastal areas and their resources are increasingly privatised (Bavinck et al., 2018).
2.2 Accumulation by Dispossession
The connection between the neoliberal trend in the broader political economy and its ramifications is criticised by Harvey (2003) in his work ‘The New Imperialism’. He details how international finance flows can be fundamental to processes of appropriation. The author theorises how surpluses of capital and labour are absorbed by investments elsewhere and/or diverting the surpluses into the future. Harvey (2003) calls these kind of temporary solutions for crises of overaccumulation ‘spatio-temporal fixes’. Building on Marx’ theory of primitive accumulation, he illustrates how these spatio-temporal fixes can take on the form of
Accumulation by Dispossession (AbD) (Glassman, 2006; Harvey, 2003, 2004).
Primitive accumulation refers to a mode of production, often based on appropriation through e.g. fraud or oppression, and rests on the assumption that it takes place ‘outside’ of the capitalist system. It has been characterised by Marx as the first or original form of accumulation, referring to a cycle that acts as a prerequisite for capitalist development
(Glassman, 2006; Harvey, 2004). However, Harvey (2004) argues that primitive accumulation is not something of the past. Instead, modern capitalism still relies on it, and the process has even intensified. He highlights original forms that Marx described, and states that these - as well as new types of primitive accumulation - are omnipresent in the modern world order. For instance, transforming property rights, monetizing land, or introducing capitalist schemes of production in non-capitalist areas. Therefore, Harvey considers the term primitive
insufficient, and refers to this type of capital accumulation as AbD.
According to Harvey, AbD has become a central dynamic in what he sees as a capitalist class project to expand neoliberalism and increase capital accumulation. This
expansion is the new imperialist order that Harvey argues, based on empirical examples, enables the capitalist elite to maintain their hegemony in the global economy. He places great emphasis on the role of the state in AbD methods, saying that “The state, with its monopoly of violence and definitions of legality, plays a crucial role in both backing and promoting these processes” (Harvey, 2003, p. 145). Main centres of capital, such as Wall Street, are supported by states through international financial institutions, most prominently the IMF and the World Bank, in order to facilitate accumulative processes. Harvey’s illustration of how this works focuses on the U.S., since it has expanded its economic influence through structural adjustment programmes from the 1970s onwards, thereby introducing neoliberal practices elsewhere. Harvey describes this mechanism as follows: “An unholy alliance between state powers and the predatory aspects of finance capital forms the cutting edge of a ‘vulture capitalism’ dedicated to the appropriation and devaluation of assets, rather than to building them up through productive investments.” (2004, p. 72). He stresses the importance of privatisation and enclosing the commons as one of the most important methods of AbD used in this ‘vulture capitalism’ (Glassman, 2006; Harvey, 2003). By privatising public assets, surplus capital can be reallocated in the form of a spatio-temporal fix. When public resources are privatised, it can lead to the exclusion or dispossession of users of those resources.
2.3 Materialising AbD
Harvey’s new imperialism theory has been critiqued because of its abstractness. Harvey argues that AbD has a fundamental political purpose, asserting it as a potential platform for class struggles and social transformation, with the condition that local struggles be connected to the macro-economic system that drives AbD practices. This is vital to him, because local groups “often refuse to abandon their own particularity” (Harvey, 2003, p. 189), which hinders the unionisation of struggles against the capitalist class.
Woodward (2006) argues that the new imperialism lacks a ‘scalar dexterity that allows for a certain picture of the effects of imperialism’s/Empire’s power on the ground, on bodies, and on everyday social life’ (p. 154). The great emphasis on concrete examples of powerful global agents in Harvey’s work, such as Wall street, the IMF, the Reagan administration, starkly contrasts the lack of mention of affected populations. As a result, the experiences of people subjected to dispossession are underrepresented and reduced to static populations (Ayelazuno, 2011). Furthermore, this depicts investment-receiving states and local actors as
passive bystanders and underestimates their role in enabling or stimulating such practices (Hall, 2013).
The application of an abstract theory to a case, such as the CPCP, introduces implications and assumptions that need to be addressed. First, the term and practice of ‘dispossession’ implies that direct ownership over something is taken away from certain actors and transferred to others. Property is comprised of a bundle of rights, especially in the global South and in 'place-based communities' (Bavinck et al., 2017, p. 3; Meinzen-Dick et al., 1997; Robbins, 2012). In the global North, the notion of exclusive ownership has been normalised and codified, yet this is often an inadequate description of how property and resources are being used (Gupta & Dellapenna, 2009; Robbins, 2012). These rights do not refer only to ownership, but also to other uses, such as the generation of income, tenure systems, management, and they can be shared, fluctuating between diverse groups of people or time periods (Meinzen-Dick et al., 1997). Privatisation of common resources can therefore be described as the disintegration of this complex bundle into a “single right, under the control of a single individual” (Robbins, 2012, p. 202).
Following this, the politics of appropriation are not as straightforward as a transfer of ownership. Instead, they revolve more around control over access to resources than who owns what (Cáceres, 2015; Swyngedouw, 2009). Water based reserves are especially prone to political struggles around access, since they are not confined to a certain time frame or bound to a place, making them inherently collective resources (Franco et al., 2013; Swyngedouw, 2009). As Swyngedouw (2009) notes, in line with Robbins' (2012) thesis on
socio-environmental conflict, decision-making processes regarding access to such resources reflect political economic power relations. Accordingly, studying a case that revolves around (denied) access raises issues such as who has access and who does not, who determines this, and on which norms these claims are based. In practice, the impacts of water-based resource appropriation for the sake of capital accumulation are expressed both spatially and
economically, in a lopsided manner. These questions and implications will play a central role in this research.
3. Methodology
3.1 Research questions
The research is aimed at answering the following question and sub questions:
What are the impacts of accumulation by dispossession in the case of the Colombo Port City Project?
• Context of the case and theoretical analysis
o What is the political and economic context of Sri Lanka? o What are the main developments in the CPCP
• Case study and research
o What are the impacts of the CPCP on the fisheries around Negombo lagoon? o How have power asymmetries played a role in the CPCP and its impacts? o What are the political implications of the CPCP for Sri Lanka?
3.2 Research design
The aim of the research is to examine how AbD manifests itself in the everyday lives of people. It should be noted that the research is based on a set of assumptions, already present in the research question. By taking a political ecology approach, it will inherently focus more on the people who have a power disadvantage, which is why the perspective of the fisher communities around Negombo is central to this study. Furthermore, the use of the new
imperialism as the theoretical foundation generates a specific viewpoint to different actors and developments in the case, especially the state. However, these theories also offer entrance points that can reveal dynamics that are not immediately apparent, which are the basis of the sub-questions stated above.
Examining the impacts on the ground is done from the perspective of the opposition of the CPCP, especially the fishers. The qualitative nature of the approach has provided an opportunity to acquire an in-depth understanding of the perceptions, problems and reasonings of the research subjects. For this purpose, mostly inductive research methods have been used, complemented by deductive elements, a method that reflects the main research question. The study revolves around the subjective experiences of people, which requires an inductive approach. However, it does aim to investigate the manifestations of AbD surrounding these experiences, and therefore addresses the themes discussed in the theoretical section, such as the power over legality, control over access, and other accumulation mechanisms.
3.3 Data collection
Unfortunately, the Covid-19 related travel restrictions have severely limited the possibilities for fieldwork. This has undoubtedly affected the level of understanding towards the day-to-day lives of fishers in Negombo. First, this research has been in collaboration with Harsha Madumadhawa, a student from the University of Ruhuna in Matara. He supported a better understanding of the culture and student life in Sri Lanka, and what the impacts of the pandemic were like. Ideally, the data collection would be done by going to the Negombo Lagoon shores, and trying to approach fishers, or attending community meetings organised by NGO’s. However, the pandemic measures have restricted movement and social contact within Sri Lanka, which blocked Harsha from going to the Negombo area. Although alternative ways of interviewing were explored, for example through videocall, this turned out to be not possible, which means no people employed in the fishing industry were interviewed for this research.
To account for this limitation, Herman Kumara, head of the National Fisheries Solidarity Organisation (NAFSO) was interviewed. NAFSO is an NGO which advocates for the interests of fishermen in Sri Lanka, and based in Negombo. They have been involved in activism against the CPCP for the past years, organising protests, together with other
movements under the collective name of the People’s Movement against Port City (PMAPC). The NAFSO and PMAPC are not entirely representative of the fisherfolk, since they take a standpoint against the CPCP, which is not necessarily the opinion of the population in the area. However, they have provided some sources that are insightful of the specifics of their objections against the CPCP and the perspectives of some fishers.
3.4 Data analysis
The data sources used are summarised in an Item List (Appendix 1). The data is comprised of the interview with Mr. Kumara, several online videos of fishers talking about the CPCP and protests against the project, the Facebook page of the PMAPC with posts from the
community, and lastly an International Fact Finding Mission Report, conducted by the PMAPC and NAFSO in 2019. These sources were derived mainly by convenience sampling, since Mr. Kumara was a contact who was introduced through the supervisors of this research project, and he provided the report as well. Furthermore, he video that contained the most information and interviews with fisherfolk (video 2), was produced by prominent members of the PMAPC. The IFFM report separates the viewpoint from fishermen clearly from those of
the other protesters (mainly the Christian community and environmentalists). It also includes quotes and reports from community meetings regarding the project, which makes the report suitable to use as a secondary data source. Still, the data is strongly biased towards the
perspective of the NAFSO and the PMAPC, which needs to be taken into consideration when assessing the research process.
The interview with Mr. Kumara was mostly unstructured, with a broad opening question, the succeeding questions mostly followed the topics that were brought up by him. This method of interviewing increased the degree of flexibility, which is preferable with an in-depth study (Bryman, 2012). The interview was not fully transcribed, because it was not necessary for the analysis (see more below). Instead, detailed notes of the interview were made (Appendix 3). The videos that were in Sinhala (video 1, 3, and 4) were translated by Harsha, from the other two videos, detailed notes were made. Most of the posts on the PMAPC Facebook page were in Sinhala, which were translated with a browser translate option, because of the amount of posts and their differences in relevance. In order to construct a comprehensive background of the CPCP, several articles from news outlets and other case descriptions were used, especially the work of Atapattu et al. (2021) and Kadirgamar (2013; 2017; personal communication, March 2, 2021). Furthermore, Google Earth has been helpful in visualising the land changes and in understanding the area in general. Although a bit banal, its Street View function actually illustrates parts of the daily practices of fisheries well.
The data sources were analysed mostly inductively, with some knowledge of the concerns that came up in preliminary research. This allowed for the analysis of some pre-identified themes, while also accounting for the possibility of additional concerns or topics that are brought up (Bryman, 2012; Creswell, 2013). From the discussed topics, a list of concerns was formed (Appendix 1), and the topics that shared characteristics were grouped together (see Chapter 5). Subsequently, the themes and corresponding concerns were colour-coded in the data notes, appendices 2 and 3 are provided as examples of this method.
Lastly, some additional limitations were present during the research process. The CPCP has become a sensitive topic, and discussions on it are filled with strong political opinions and allegations of wrongdoing, which will be further elaborated on below.
Consequently, some intended interviewees hesitated and declined to participate or talk openly about the aspects of the CPCP and the government’s role in its development. These issues have sometimes led to ambiguity in finding facts about the progress and changes of the case, but have also added another dimension to the research (see Chapter 6).
4. Outline of the Colombo Port City Project
4.1 Political economic context in Sri Lanka
After Sri Lanka gained its independence from colonial Britain in 1948, there was a renewed search for Sri Lankan identity (Kadirgamar, personal communication, March 2, 2021). The democratisation of the political system that was taking place led to a greater representation of the population, of which the majority is Singhalese. The government that was formed in 1956 took on a prominent role in the economy by using state-run corporations for local industries, import substitution and nationalising land (Kadirgamar, 2017). The feeling was that Sri Lanka should determine its own path, through the expansion of the state. At the same time, then-president Bandaranaike adopted the controversial “Sinhala Only” act, making Sinhala the only official language, and exacerbating the tensions between the Sinhala majority and Tamil minority (Kadirgamar, 2013).
In the 1970’s, a socialist government emerged, which had to grapple with a global economic downturn and a balance of payment deficit due to the reliance on low-value export products. Because of this economic instability, the incumbent government struggled to maintain popularity. This resulted in opposition leader Jayawardene winning the elections in 1977. With his appointment, Sri Lankan economic and foreign policy started to become more oriented towards the US, where a new neoliberalist trend was emerging (Kadirgamar,
personal communication, March 2, 2021; Moore, 1990). The IMF implemented a Structural Adjustment Programme in Sri Lanka, in order to increase foreign direct investment (FDI) and liberalise the economy. There was a huge increase in economic growth and foreign
investment, which mainly flowed towards construction and infrastructure development (Kadirgamar, 2017).
This liberal turn in the economy involved a political shift towards centralised power and an increasingly oppressive government (Kadirgamar, 2017; Moore, 1990). The Tamil-Sinhala tensions erupted in the form of a decades-long civil war from 1983 until 2009. The new president Mahinda Rajapakse emerged as the victor of the war, having defeated the Tamil Guerilla group in a violent series of offenses, sparking allegations of war crimes and human rights abuses (Abi-Habib, 2018; Sengupta, 2009). In spite of this, Rajapakse remained profoundly popular after ending the brutal conflict that had killed tens of thousands of people.
The post-war economy of Sri Lanka is characterised by Kadirgamar (2013) as the ‘second wave of neoliberalism’. Foreign capital returned in great amounts, in the form of
loans, sovereign bonds, and aid, coming from international financial institutions such as the IMF, the World Bank, and the Asian Development Bank (Kadirgamar, 2013). Mahinda Rajapakse started a series of huge infrastructure projects that aimed to signify the renewed Sri Lankan economy as an international centre of economic development, financed with loans from the Chinese government (Abi-Habib, 2018; Bavinck, personal communication, February 25, 2021). This includes the Magampura Mahinda Rajapaksa Port, or Hambantota Port. Same as the airport, the shipping port, financed with Chinese loans, was struggling to attract
commerce. Only 34 ships moored in 2012, two years after the port was inaugurated, incurring huge yearly losses (Abi-Habib, 2018). Eventually, the Chinese and Sri Lankan governments made a deal. The Chinese would relieve the $1.1 billion in debt that the port had raked up, in exchange for 85 percent of the ownership (Abi-Habib, 2018).
Though writing off the Hambantota port to China, relieved some of the national debt, Sri Lanka still owes billions of dollars to foreign investors (The World Bank, 2021). The loans that Rajapakse has taken out in the early stages of his premiership have been catching up with the government in the past years (Srinasavan, 2020). Although poverty in the country has declined drastically according to some measures, taking a closer look reveals another story. There are significant differences between different regions, and most people living in poverty are employed in the agricultural sector (Fernando, personal communication, March 4, 2021). In addition, the economy has taken huge blows during the Covid-19 pandemic, and the government has fallen into a debt crisis (Srinasavan, 2020). However, employing the same development strategy as it has been doing over the last decade, the government maintains that the way forward is through another infrastructural mega-project, financed by China: the Colombo Port City.
4.2 Inception of the Port City
The first proposal of a waterfront construction project in Colombo was made by Singaporean investors in 2004. However, it did not materialise because of high costs and the ongoing war in Sri Lanka (Jayawardene, 2015; PMAPC & NAFSO, 2019). In 2012, the concept was revived with a new and unsolicited proposal from the Chinese Harbour Engineering Company (CHEC), a subsidiary company of the majority state-owned China Communication
Construction Company (CCCC). As part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative, an investment of $1.4 billion was made by the CHEC, the largest single foreign direct investment ever in Sri Lanka (Safi, 2018). The original 2011 plans for construction involved an area of 233 ha of land to be reclaimed, though the number later changed to 269 ha (Atapattu et al., 2021;
PMAPC & NAFSO, 2019). This has required around 65 million m3 of sand, and 3,6 million m3 of rock (CHEC, 2021). The sand was mined from designated areas along the western coast of Sri Lanka, from Colombo up to Negombo lagoon (Figure 3). The rock was mined from existing quarries in surrounding districts. The sand mining and reclamation started in 2014, and was finalised in January of 2019 (Figure 4). However, there has been fierce opposition against the CPCP from the start, mainly coming from fisher communities, NGO’s,
environmentalists, and religious leaders close to the sand mining area. The objections were mainly about the excessive sand mining, claiming it would negatively affect marine life and subsequently, the livelihoods of fisherfolk.
Before the deal was finalised, an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was conducted in 2011, as required under Sri Lanka’s National Environmental Act (NEA) of 1988. This law mandates that such an assessment has to be conducted for every proposed project that might have environmental impacts, before it can be approved (NEA, 1988, s. 23BB (1)). The EIA was heavily criticised from the start by NGO’s, and environmental experts. One of the main issues was that it only focused on the sand reclamation site, and not the impacts on the areas where dredging would take place or where the rock material would be extracted from, because those were not specified at that time (Atapattu et al., 2021; PMAPC & NAFSO, 2019; The Daily FT, 2016a, Video 2). There were also concerns over a lack of transparency, and objectiveness of the agencies tasked with the assessment (Atapattu et al., 2021; PMAPC & NAFSO, 2019). Furthermore, some of the most significant activities that would either cause or alleviate environmental harm were unspecified, which caused doubt about their expected ecological impact. Despite these concerns, the project was approved in 2012.
The construction started on the 17th of September in 2014 with an elaborate opening ceremony, led by Sri Lankan president Mahinda Rajapaksa and Chinese president Xi Jinping (Mahinda Rajapaksa, 2014). The ceremony exemplified the cosmopolitan vision of the CPCP, “Building a World Class City for South Asia” (CHEC, 2021). It will consist of five districts: the Financial District, Island Living, International Island, Central Park Living, and the Marina (Bendix, 2018; CHEC, 2021; Figure 1; Figure 2). The project is set to be finished in 2041, with an expected cost of $15 billion and 80,000 residents (Bendix, 2018; Safi, 2018). Other than most infrastructural investments in Sri Lanka, not only a port is being built, but a whole new city district, with schools, residential areas, parks, theatres, shopping centres, hospitals, a theme park and more. The original plan even included a Formula 1 race track, though this was
4.3 Suspension and second environmental impact assessment
After the project started, president Rajapaksa lost the 2015 presidential election. His
opponents, incoming president Sirisena, and especially prime-minister Wickremesinghe, had campaigned on opposing the project, saying they would stop it if they would be elected (Video 2). They won, and suspended the construction of the CPCP due to the environmental concerns and issues with permits on March 6th, 2015, only six months after the start of construction. As a result, the CHEC sought compensation for financial losses due to the suspension of the project (Safi, 2018).
Despite their campaign promise, the new government signed a Tripartite agreement with the Urban Development Authority and the CHEC in 2016 (Atapattu et al., 2021; Safi, 2018). The Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government stated that the environmental issues were cleared up (PMAPC & NAFSO, 2019; Safi, 2018). This agreement included some significant changes to the original deal from 2014, mainly about land holding agreements. However, the details are not very clear, since the contract was never released to the public. One of the aspects that did make it to the general public was that the CCCC would not be granted any land on a freehold basis, but on a 99-year leasehold instead. The original plan was that they would obtain 20 ha. on freehold ownership, which was seen as damaging to Sri Lankan security and sovereignty by critics and a part of the public (Atapattu et al., 2021). Another part of the tripartite agreement of 2016 was a Rs. 500 million (2.54 million USD)
compensation programme for affected fisher communities, The Fishermen’s Livelihood Support Society Limited (FLSSL) (Daily News, 2019). Most of the money, around Rs. 300 million was used for beach nourishment projects in the area between Negombo Lagoon and Colombo (Figure 3). The rest was allocated to fisher associations along the coast in the same area.
During the suspension of the CPCP, an addendum was added to the EIA in 2015, referred to as the Supplementary Environmental Impact Assessment (SEIA). The SEIA was conducted by the government agency Central Engineering Consultancy Bureau (CECB), and the aim was to address the shortcomings of the 2011 EIA. However, the SEIA faced many of the same criticisms that the previous version did. There were worries that the social impacts of the project were not evaluated sufficiently (PMAPC & NAFSO, 2019; Video 2).
the environmental mitigation measures were still vague, and some of the assessments inaccurate (Atapattu et al., 2021; video 2).
The PMAPC also opposed the lack of opportunity for the public to respond to the report, which has to be within 30 days of release, according to the NEA (NEA, 1988, s. 23BB (3)). They argued that public participation was made impossible for three reasons: the report was only released in English, the language was too technical and scientific, and it was released in December, during the month of Christmas. These issues were raised because the people living around Negombo Lagoon are predominantly Catholic Christian and do not always speak English. Furthermore, it is required under the NEA to offer the EIA in Sinhala and Tamil as well, and to ensure the ability for the public to react (NEA, 1988, s. 23BB (2), (3)). The PMAPC and NAFSO felt that it was not realistic that the people who were directly affected could respond within 30 days to a 421-page report when they were celebrating their most important holiday of the year and were not able to read or understand it (Iddamalgoda, 2016; H. Kumara, personal communication, April 26, 2021). Nonetheless, the SEIA was presented as the solution to the environmental issues and the project was continued.
4.4 Agitations and the SEZ Bill
Following the tripartite agreement in 2016, there were already indications that the CPCP would become a special economic zone (SEZ), an area within a country where different laws apply, in order to attract foreign investment (Lanka Business Online, 2016; PMAPC & NAFSO, 2019). On April 8, 2021, the ‘Colombo Port City Economic Commission Bill’ was introduced in the parliament. This bill establishes exemptions from certain Sri Lankan tax, labour and development legislation for the CPCP, and the instalment of a commission that will administer the Port City (Wickramasinghe, 2021). The president will appoint the commission members, without needing authorisation from parliament or the Colombo Municipal Council (Perera, 2021; Wickramasinghe. 2021). According to some opposition parties, this strengthens the already encroaching use of executive presidential powers in Sri Lanka (Wickramasinghe, 2021). After the introduction of the SEZ bill, the public had a week to respond. Nineteen civil society groups, NGO’s and labour unions challenged the bill, requiring the supreme court to determine the legal validity of the bill (Srinivasan, 2021a). Unsuccessfully so, as the court rejected the petitions, clearing the way to be approved by the Sri Lankan parliament (Srinasavan, 2021b). This has sparked new agitations throughout the population of Sri Lanka, though the consequences of the bill have yet to be determined.
Figure 1: Proposed arrangements of districts in Port City. Source: CHEC (2021)
Figure 3: Sand mining area. Source: CECB (2015).
Figure 4: Land reclamation for Port City. Source: Google Earth
November 2013 March 2015 December 2016
5. Analysis of the results
From the data, which consisted of websites, videos, interviews, and documents, various concerns emerged (Appendix 1: Item list; Appendix 2: List of concerns). These are not confined to the direct loss of materials, but encompass less tangible dynamics and feelings as well. There are three main areas of concern that can be identified, based on the literature. I have identified these as 'access and property rights', 'the interests of the people versus those of the state', and 'accumulation processes and mechanisms'. The themes and their implications are further discussed in this chapter. Table 1 shows a selection of the most substantial quotes obtained from the various sources, ordered in accordance with the themes, in order to provide more insight into the results.
5.1 Access and property rights
There are several issues relating to access to natural resources and property rights. As discussed earlier, in this context, the term ‘property rights’ refers to a bundle of rights of different users of the coastal resources available. The first issue, which was especially
prominent in the accounts of fishers, is the environmental impact that appears to be caused by the sand mining. This includes an increase of coastal or ‘sea’ erosion and damage to local ecosystems, coral reefs, and other fish breeding grounds (FB; I1; IFFM report; Video 1, Video 2, Video 3, Video 4). This has severe impacts on the lives of the people working in the fishing industry around Negombo Lagoon. They have noted decreases in fish catch and damages to properties along the shore, which leads to a loss of income. The communities on the strip of land between the lagoon and the ocean, have especially expressed worries on the amount of coastal erosion they are witnessing (IFFM report, p. 24; Video 2). One fisher from the Kuttiduwa community describes the changes as follows:
Just after PC (Port City) started, erosion started too, and water flooded our house, there was water till the street […] This village includes 350 families who depend on fisheries. It is surrounded by the sea that used to be a precious area, but with the erosion, it is
becoming dangerous. (IFFM report, p. 17)
The fisherfolk have also expressed worries for the future, a fear for the loss of culture and their way of life (FB; IFFM report; Video 1, Video 2). Often, whole communities depend on small-scale fishing activities, which include – besides catching – cleaning, drying, and selling the fish. The fishers derive a sense of pride, identity and community from their jobs, and fear that this will disappear if they cannot sustain themselves any longer (IFFM report;
Video 2). Moreover, the damage to breeding grounds and the ecosystem raises concerns about the amount of time the fish population will need to recover, and with it, their income security (I1; Video 2).
There was also a temporary restriction of access to certain areas where the mining was taking place (Figure 3), which forced fishers to change their practices and travel further, thereby using more fuel and increasing their expenditures (IFFM report; Video 2). This can be seen as a direct form of dispossession, where physical access is restricted. However, the decrease of fish catch is a more indirect consequence of the CPCP construction. Similarly, the hindrance and damage to properties due to the coastal erosion have impacted the property rights of fishers greatly, but are not explicitly linked to the sand mining. The coastal area is a collective resource, its features are not bound in place and part of a larger system, which makes it harder to mitigate the adverse impacts. In addition, this allows the project developers to avoid responsibility when it comes to the restriction of access to these resources. After all, the only time there was an instance of ‘real’ enclosure, it was limited to the mining area. In the next section, the influence of power in struggles over access will be discussed further, as well as the ways in which this power is used.
5.2 Accumulation processes and mechanisms
The second theme in the list of concerns is classified as accumulation mechanisms. This is not a reference to forms of AbD themselves, but rather the ways in which they are enabled. Harvey (2003, p. 148) discusses that “the power of the state is frequently used to force such processes through even against popular will”. The accumulation mechanisms that were discussed revolve around accusations of bribery and the exertion of political control. State power over legality came up the most during the interview with Mr. Kumara, in news articles, and the IFFM report, and to a lesser extent in the videos and the PMAPC Facebook page as well. Most of the concerns in this category referred to the handling by the government of the EIA, SEIA, and the SEZ bill. The comments on the EIA and SEIA correspond with the criticism already discussed in the previous chapter. For example, Mr. Kumara, when talking how both the SEIA and SEZ were published during holiday periods, stated that “The
government is trying to use as much as they can to avoid people to intervene any kind of legal, or any kind of a matter that we legally fight against this thing” (I1). The lack of
They condemn the fact that their inquiries into multiple agreements and processes, under the Right To Information Act, have been rejected repeatedly (FB, 2018; IFFM report, pp. 25-26)
In addition to this, the required technical and ecological standards for the EIAs were not followed properly, according to some sources, since they neglected to provide information on a number of components of the project (Video 2; IFFM report; FB). Ravindranath Dabare, chairman of the Centre for Environmental Justice, expresses their issues with the absence of specificity in the SEIA by saying “an EIA under the existing laws of the CCPA is absolutely essential. If an EIA does not state what the environmental parameters of such a project should be, we cannot accept it.” (Video 2). As a result, the EIAs are seen as ‘a greenwash’(CEJ, 2018), enabling the government to say they have considered the environmental concerns, while continuing the project without legitimate or further evaluation (IFFM report, p. 13; Video 2).
There are also a number of allegations concerning outright illegal methods to promote the CPCP. For instance, there have been reports by fishers working around the coast that the sand dredgers approached the shore much closer than outlined in the SEIA, possibly
damaging the coastal ecosystem (FB, 2017; I1; Video 2). Furthermore, the media and the catholic church have allegedly taken bribes from the CHEC and the government in order to steer public opinion (FB, 2017; I1; Video 2). NAFSO has also suggested that the FLSSL (the compensation programme) was another tactic to weaken and silence the opposition (I1; IFFM report, pp. 20-21). Especially because the money was distributed in part through loans – not grants – by the fishery associations, which are politically controlled (Daily News, 2019; I1. However, these claims have not been proven, and the opposition movement has been accused of lying and overexaggerating on these issues in return (FLSSL, n.d.).
The last major point of disapproval is the SEZ bill. This became especially prominent after it was introduced in April 2021, although fear of such legislation was already expressed in the IFFM report (2019) and a video from 2016 (Video 2). The area will be exempted from certain laws, which raises concerns over the socio-economic inequalities already present in Colombo. By creating an SEZ, the government uses their power over legality to promote and attract investment. However, some citizens and organisations fear the impacts this will have on the rest of Colombo. The SEZ could be used as a free pass to avoid regular labour and tax laws, which protect workers and limit money laundering and tax evasion (AFP, 2021; IFFM report, p. 33). One person states “Port City has a separate power area. It has a separated people” (FB, 2021), expressing a concern, shared by many, that only a few will benefit, but
Whether all of the concerns and allegations discussed above are grounded in truth is not relevant for this research. However, it does demonstrate the hostility and distrust between the opponents and proponents of the CPCP. The ways in which this polarisation is asserted, is further discussed in the next section.
5.3 Interests of the people vs. interests of the state
The last theme is the notion that the Sri Lankan government is not acting in the interest of its own citizens, but rather that of a financial elite and the Chinese government. This sentiment is expressed in multiple ways, often through the evocation of a dichotomy between different groups. This places the public, fishers, or Sri Lankan nationals opposite from the consecutive Sri Lankan administrations, the Chinese government and people, or the wealthy elite. For example, in one of the videos, an activist states that the CPCP “is for the mega rich at the expense of the poor. This project is completely unfair and anti-democratic.” (Video 5). A cartoon, posted on the PMAPC Facebook page, illustrates this clearly as well (Figure 5). A man, representing poor citizens of Colombo, is bumped off a bench by the Sri Lankan government, in order to make room for the Chinese Port City.
Figure 5: Cartoon posted on Facebook. Artist: Awantha Artigala.
This cartoon is also an example of resistance towards Chinese interests. This argument suggests that the CPCP is only built for Chinese gain, or their geopolitical interests, since Sri Lanka is located in an economically and militarily strategic position (FB, Video 2, IFFM
report, I1). One post reads “The Port City is not ours but part of China’s economic strategy. Our country’s resources, our country’s land, our country’s future for another country.” (FB, 2021).
The government and the project developers often use the same argument as a response, or to back certain legal measures, namely that the project is beneficial and necessary for Sri Lankan economic development. By dominating the conversation with this argument, the government further exacerbates the feeling of neglect among the citizens of Sri Lanka. Even one of the four ‘key elements’ of the SEIA was described as “The significance and the contribution of the project towards national development and the potential evolution of Colombo [as] a financial, commercial and tourism hub” (CECB, 2015, p. 421). This painfully exposes the differences in priority, since the socio-economic impacts of the CPCP were apparently extensively considered in the EIA, while the lack of mention of social impacts on fisheries was heavily criticised from the start (Atapattu et al., 2021; IFFM report; Video 2).
The people who oppose the CPCP, feel that the environment, their needs, and their rights, are being disregarded, in favour of the national development strategy. The loss of marine resources, also entails a loss of cultural value and an established way of life for the fisher communities. On top of this, they feel that their struggles have not been taken seriously by officials when they addressed them (IFFM report, p. 25; Video 2). The fixation on
development, with a disregard for community needs, has led to an apprehension towards the government amongst the opponents of the project.
Table 1: Selection of strongest quotes
Source People vs. State-capital
alliance
Access restriction Power over legality
Video 1 “Please provide some
donations to rebuild our house it is destroyed”
Video 2 “When our wealth is
given to another country where can we go? Can we get a piece of land from China?”
“As a fisherman I feel this land will be the Kingdom of the Rich, of people from other parts of the world, the gamblers and the sexual exploiters.” “They destroy the environment and the economic activity in this area and call it
"development".”
“The massive mining of sand will harm the deposits of sediment. The natural environment for marine life is destroyed. “
“The current
government has decided to continue the CPCP after adjusting the rules to legalise its approval. Media and religious institutions have been deceived by the Chinese companies who are trying to make this project a success. By doing this they try to subvert all the legal barriers”
Video 3 “keep your
promises prime minister”
“port city project is changing water currents in the ocean and it will badly affect fishing”
Video 4 “No one understands the
destruction at deep sea caused by sand mining.” Video 5 “this project is for the
mega rich at the expense of the poor. This project is completely unfair and anti-democratic”
“Environmentalist claim the project will not benefit ordinary citizens and have a severe impact on the countries marine resources and the livelihood of fishermen. The megaproject will cause major sea erosion, affecting the island-nation’s famous beaches they stated”
I1 The way the government shows these projects is “this is THE way to develop the country” “When the government is focusing mainly on investors, they will go along that direction without considering any people’s voice or
agitation, uprising, in the country.”
“The government is trying to use as much as they can to avoid people to intervene any kind of legal or any kind of a matter that we legally fight against this thing” “The main focus was to silence the peoples agitations. They provided around 300 million rupees to communities. To silence agitations” IFFM Report
"Future generations have no option in fisheries, so we start to consider other options. During the off-season, we used to go to the north-western region, but now we have to concentrate on our children and give them other knowledge than fisheries since fisheries have no future. We used to teach the children how to fish and initiate them very early, but now it isn't worth it"
“Flagrant lack of transparency” p. 12
6. Discussion
6.1 A politicised environment
The data collection has shown three trends: the complexity of access to collective resources and bundles of rights, the ways in which power over legality is used, and the political division which these have produced. The lack of transparency in intentions, competing narratives, and allegations of fraud and lying, from all sides can sometimes lead to ambiguity. However, it also demonstrates how the project and its impacts are driven by political choices.
Furthermore, it shows that ecological change, in this case around the southwestern coast of Sri Lanka, cannot be separated from political influences and opinions. Using the
socio-environmental conflict theory (Robbins, 2012), the environment has become politicised. The existing asymmetries in power are expressed through the politics in the case. The influence of political power on what is seen as acceptable environmental conduct is
demonstrated clearly by the temporary suspension of the CPCP in 2015, after the government changed administrations. The Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government was politically motivated to address the shortcomings of the project, because of their election promise. Similarly,
Rajapakse was not addressing these shortcomings for political reasons as well, to commence the project and acquire foreign investment.
The succeeding governments have also exerted their control over the knowledge and understandings around the natural environment. The first EIA was executed before
construction, and the SEIA during the suspension of construction in 2015, when only a small percentage of the required amount of sand was dredged and reclaimed (Figure 4). The SEIA concludes that the impacts would be ‘minimal/negligible’, ‘unlikely’, and ‘only local and temporary’ (CECB, 2015, p. 415, 418, 420). As a result, there has not been any (publicised) evaluation of the mining in a later stage, nor after it was finished in 2019. This also affected the mitigation and compensation efforts that were taken. The expected ‘temporary’ nature of adverse impacts was the basis of the loans to fishers, provided through the FLSSL, which ran only when the mining was taking place, even though fishers have reported severe coastal erosion after 2019 as well.
The government, through the SEIA, has determined a set definition of the
environmental impact of the CPCP, which is insignificant according to them. Furthermore, these impacts were compared to the benefits of the project, deemed more important. In
around Negombo. They derive meaning and identity from them, and some people fear for a total transformation of their lives. These competing narratives on the value of the natural environment
6.2 Development strategy
Analysing the externalities of AbD through the CPCP has shown that the project is significantly altering the livelihoods of fishers and the political stability in the Western province. It has also shed light on how the government justifies its involvement in this, by stressing the economic prosperity that the project will bring. The amount of public debt is estimated at 109.7 percent of the GDP, a reality which the government has to face in the coming years. The course that the government has taken is one of huge infrastructural ventures, in the hopes of attracting foreign investment. Leasing 41% of the CPCP to the CCCC, cutting taxes through the SEZ bill, are measures intended to promote economic growth and decrease national debt. This will supposedly reduce poverty and increase collective welfare in the long term. The ‘rising tides lift all boats’ argument is embedded in assumptions on GDP growth and trickle down effects, popularised during the rise of
neoliberalism. These assumptions help legitimise destructive accumulation processes, override opposition and assert the benefits as indisputable.
Such tactics have increasingly been criticised by scholars and activists, especially the damaging effects of ‘unlimited’ growth on socio-economic equality and the environment (Bregman, 2020). The development approach neglects to critically reflect on one question that is central in political ecology research: who wins and who loses? It is true that the CPCP fits in an international financial system in which huge amounts of capital are generated through this type of strategy. However, these kinds of non-productive investments – or
‘spatio-temporal fixes’ – can lead to uneven distribution of wealth, or even result in debt crises if they are devalued. The case in Hambantota has amplified the fear of failed investment, with debt dependency to China as the fallout.
In Harvey’s work, the focus is mainly on the unequal geographical development between countries. Reflecting on this case, illustrates the ways in which unequal power relations are manifested on a local, regional, and national level as well. The experiences of fishers regarding their access to resources, and the concerns from a broader part of society about sovereignty and Chinese involvement, have sparked resistance among the population of
Sri Lanka. Observing these implications encourages the reconsideration of the desirability of such development strategies.
Historically, western development and economic growth has relied on forms of imperialism and primitive accumulation, such as colonialism, exploitation, and slavery (Ayelazuno, 2011; Harvey, 2003; Schwartz, 2019). Assuming that such types of production continue to be practiced, in the form of AbD and the ‘new’ imperialism, it is worthwhile to examine the costs. There may be potential in Harvey’s suggestion that struggles over AbD can serve as a platform to challenge wider class relations. However, this case has shown that struggles over AbD are not confined to a specific area of discussion. His approach aggregates and generalise the experiences of affected people, and do not do justice to the complexity of politicised claims over resources.
7. Conclusion
This research has illustrated how processes of accumulation by dispossession manifest themselves in the lives of people in Sri Lanka. The original approach to this study was to examine concrete implications and consequences of AbD on the ground, focused on the localised and physical struggles of fisheries. However, over the course of the research, this approach has proven to be inadequate. The fisherfolk, are not only concerned with their direct environment, but engage in national politics. Furthermore, the opposition of the CPCP is involved in a wider debate on the sovereignty of Sri Lanka and the influence of China.
Therefore, the interactions between the dynamics on multiple levels should not, and cannot be separated from each other. The initial proposition was based on the assumption that this is possible, and arguably subject to the same shortcomings as the new imperialism theory.
The political ecology approach aims to connect socio-environmental conflict to structural explanations, by examining how power asymmetries are reflected in the exclusion of access to common resources. The new imperialism theory offers an explanation of these structural dynamics, focusing on the dominant financial system that drives processes of dispossession in its pursuit of infinite capital accumulation. Harvey has extensively discussed the workings of this system, but fails to provide an in-depth account of how the local
dynamics around the appropriation of resources. As a result, research into AbD is usually focused on the macro-economic drivers and unequal relations globally. This has led to a misconception of micro-level implications and actors, and underestimates their potential influences on the political economic system.
In order to understand the connection between these levels, an analysis of the political economic context of Sri Lanka was given. Neoliberal waves have led to a political regime that is hugely indebted, and relies on foreign loans and infrastructure development to alleviate those debts. The CPCP is an exemplary result of this strategy. However, the extraction of the huge amount of raw materials required, mainly sand and rock, has been a source of grievance from the beginning of the project. The sand was mined from the coast of Negombo, an actively used fishing area, excluding the fishers and their access to those coastal resources in the process. The views of people who oppose the project have been examined in this research, to understand how the CPCP has impacted their lives and became a source of political
The concerns over the decrease in fish catch and coastal erosion are direct and physical implications of the CPCP on the lives of fisher folk. These aspects were prioritised by the fishers. However, they also derive social values from marine resources, and it has turned out that a threat to these resources also has implications for their sense of community, and the trust in their national government. Hence, the outcomes of AbD in this case are not solely expressed materially or confined to a local, or physical dimension. The main
shortcoming of Harvey’s theory, the lack of scalar dexterity, is clearly illustrated by this. The result of the CPCP has not solely been the appropriation of 65 million m3 of sand, or the restriction of fishing areas. It includes political polarisation and agitations as well as material hardships.
Following this, the abstract drivers of AbD and concrete outcomes are not easily separated, and should be treated as interconnected and in continuous exchange. The political struggles may influence the economic development strategy in the future. Though, the short-term reality is still one of an uncompromising amount of foreign debt and economic
inequality. The Port City is set to be finished in 2041, and is envisioned to become the main source of capital inflow. However, it remains to be seen whether the fears of it turning into another white elephant, run by the Chinese government, will become true. The current intersection of crises and possibility for regime change urges a further examination of the impacts of dispossession in Sri Lanka. If the dominant system can overcome this crisis, and continue to expand accumulation of capital, what will that mean for the less powerful?
References
Abi-Habib, M. (2018, September 22). How China Got Sri Lanka to Cough Up a Port. The
New York Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/25/world/asia/china-sri-lanka-port.html?searchResultPosition=1
Adams, W. M. (2020). Green Development: Environment and Sustainability in a Developing
World (4th ed.). Abingdon, United Kingdom: Taylor & Francis.
Atapattu, S. A., Gellers, J. C., & Guruswamy, L. (2021). Colombo International Financial City. The Cambridge Handbook of Environmental Justice and Sustainable
Development, 225–240. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108555791.018
Ayelazuno, J. (2011). Continuous primitive accumulation in Ghana: the real-life stories of dispossessed peasants in three mining communities. Review of African Political
Economy, 38(130), 537–550. https://doi.org/10.1080/03056244.2011.633827
Bavinck, M., Berkes, F., Charles, A., Dias, A. C. E., Doubleday, N., Nayak, P., & Sowman, M. (2017). The impact of coastal grabbing on community conservation – a global reconnaissance. Maritime Studies, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40152-017-0062-8
Bavinck, M., Jentoft, S., & Scholtens, J. (2018). Fisheries as social struggle: A reinvigorated social science research agenda. Marine Policy, 94, 46–52.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2018.04.026
Bendix, A. (2018, September 15). Sri Lanka is building a $15 billion metropolis meant to rival cities like Hong Kong and Dubai. Business Insider.
https://www.businessinsider.nl/sri-lanka-port-city-dubai-2018-9?international=true&r=US
Bregman, R. (2020, May 14). Het tijdperk van het neoliberalisme loopt ten einde. Wat komt
ervoor in de plaats? De Correspondent.
https://decorrespondent.nl/11125/het-tijdperk- van-het-neoliberalisme-loopt-ten-einde-wat-komt-ervoor-in-de-plaats/427700625-2a78dcc4
Bryman, A. (2012). Social Research Methods (Vol. 4). Oxford University Press.
Cáceres, D. M. (2015). Accumulation by Dispossession and Socio‐Environmental Conflicts Caused by the Expansion of Agribusiness in Argentina. Journal of Agrarian
Change, 15(1), 116-147.
Camisani, P. B. (2018). Sri Lanka: a political ecology of socio-environmental conflicts and development projects. Sustainability Science, 13(3), 693-707.
Central Engineering Consultancy Bureau (CECB). (2015, December). Supplementary
Environmental Impact Assessment Report. Available at:
https://ejustice.lk/2017/10/21/supplementary-environmental-impact-assessment-seia/
Center of Environmental Justice (CEJ). (2018, January 2). Comments on EIA of Development
Activities and Infrastructure Facilities within the Reclaimed Land Area of Proposed Colombo Port City Development Project. Ejustice.
https://ejustice.lk/2018/01/02/3640/
CHEC. (2021). CHEC Port City Colombo (Pvt) Ltd - Sri Lanka. https://www.portcitycolombo.lk/
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Daily News. (2019, July 11). Port City completes Rs.500 mn livelihood support programme.
Daily News. https://www.dailynews.lk/2019/07/11/finance/190763/port-city-completes-rs500-mn-livelihood-support-programme
Fishermen’s Livelihood Support Society Limited (FLSSL). (n.d.). Fishermen’s Livelihood
Support Society Limited - FLSSL. Facebook. Retrieved 28 May 2021, from
https://www.facebook.com/FLSSL/about/
Franco, J., Mehta, L., & Veldwisch, G. J. (2013). The Global Politics of Water Grabbing.
Third World Quarterly, 34(9), 1651–1675.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2013.843852
Glassman, J. (2006). Primitive accumulation, accumulation by dispossession, accumulation by ‘extra-economic’ means. Progress in Human Geography, 30(5), 608–625. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132506070172
Gupta, J., & Dellapenna, J. W. (2009). The challenges for the twenty-first century: A critical approach. In The evolution of the law and politics of water (pp. 391-410). Springer, Dordrecht.
Hall, D. (2013). Primitive accumulation, accumulation by dispossession and the global land grab. Third World Quarterly, 34(9), 1582-1604.
Harvey, D. (2003). The New Imperialism. Oxford University Press.
Harvey, D. (2004). The 'New' Imperialism: Accumulation by Dispossession. Socialist
Register, 40, 71-90.
Iddamalgoda, S. (2016, January 9). EIA Report On The Environmental Impact Of The Colombo Port City. Colombo Telegraph.
https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/eia-report-on-the-environmental-impact-of-the-colombo-port-city/
Jayawardane, D. (2015, February 16). Critical Analyses of Colombo Port City Project. The
Daily Mirror.
http://www.dailymirror.lk/63749/critical-analyses-of-colombo-port-city-project
Kadirgamar, A. (2013, August 27). Second Wave of Neoliberalism: Financialisation and
Crisis in Post-War. Economic and Political Weekly.
https://www.epw.in/journal/2013/35/web-exclusives/second-wave-neoliberalism-financialisation-and-crisis-post-war-sri
Kadirgamar, A. (2017). The neoliberal turn in Sri Lanka: Global financial flows and construction after 1977. Polity, 7(2), 8-13.
Lanka Business Online. (2016, August 4). Sri Lanka’s Port City developer withdraws
compensation claims.
https://www.lankabusinessonline.com/sri-lankas-port-city-developer-withdraws-compensation-claims/
Mahinda Rajapaksa. (2014, September 17). Colombo Port City Launch [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RO79WgJMz_w
Meinzen-Dick, R. S., Brown, L. R., Feldstein, H. S., & Quisumbing, A. R. (1997). Gender, property rights, and natural resources. World development, 25(8), 1303-1315.
Moore, M. (1990). Economic Liberalization versus Political Pluralism in Sri Lanka? Modern Asian Studies, 24(2), 341-383. doi:10.1017/S0026749X00010350
National Environmental (Amendment) Act, No. 56 of 1988 (CEA), Sri Lanka. Retrieved from
http://www.cea.lk/web/images/pdf/acts/act56-88.pdf
People’s Movement Against Port City (PMAPC) & National Fisheries Solidarity Movement (NAFSO). (2019, July). Report of the International Fact-Finding Mission on the
Colombo International Financial City. https://www.nafso-online.org/
Perera, J. (2021, April 26). THE DOUBLE-EDGED SWORD THAT IS COLOMBO PORT
CITY. The Island Online.
https://island.lk/the-double-edged-sword-that-is-colombo-port-city/
Robbins, P. (2012). Political Ecology: A Critical Introduction (2nd ed.). Wiley.
Rutnam, E. (2021, April 27). Concerns were raised Colombo Port will be monitored using Port City - Ranil Wickremesinghe. Daily Mirror Online.
http://www.dailymirror.lk/opinion/Concerns-were-raised-Colombo-Port-will-be-monitored-using-Port-City-Ranil-Wickremesinghe/172-210651
