Physical Address
23,24,25 & 26, 2nd Floor, Software Technology Park India, Opp: Garware Stadium,MIDC, Chikalthana, Aurangabad, Maharashtra – 431001 India
Sri Lanka has been struggling with the economic crisis for around a few years, and local media and environmentalists have lost their attention about some major global environmental indexes and the position of Sri Lanka in those. In this article, we are going to direct our concern to the latest EPI index, released in 2024 as a co-project of Yale/Colombia universities.
Despite its lush scenery, Sri Lanka fares badly on global environmental indices. In the Yale/Colombia 2024 Environmental Performance Index (the latest EPI), Sri Lanka ranked 134th out of 180 countries and scored 38.8 out of 100. Only Bhutan, which is ranked 103 and scored 43.3, scored higher in South Asia, meaning Sri Lanka is effectively second in the region but still among the worst performers globally. This overall rank hides extreme weaknesses: Sri Lanka’s Environmental Health score is only 31.0, which is ranked 133/180, and Ecosystem Vitality is 39.7, which is ranked 142/180. These composite categories include many sub-indicators where Sri Lanka is at or near the bottom worldwide, especially in air quality, sanitation, and waste management.
Key EPI highlights for Sri Lanka (2024) include:
Air Quality: rank 154/180, score 20.0—among the world’s worst. Vehicular traffic and industrial emissions drive pollution levels far above WHO guidelines.
Sanitation & Drinking Water: rank 95/180, score 52.8. While urban tap water is mostly safe, rural sanitation gaps persist.
Wastewater Treatment: rank 146/180, score ~1.1—effectively no large-scale sewage treatment. Most sewage is dumped untreated into rivers or the ocean
Protected Areas: representativeness rank 40/180, score 59. 8. Sri Lanka has set aside many forests and habitats, so the rank and score are higher in this aspect.
Protected Area Effectiveness: rank 136/180, score 32.2—meaning parks and reserves are poorly managed
Red List Index (Species): rank 164/180, score 0.0 . This indicates severe threats to Sri Lanka’s flora and fauna, with many endemic species endangered or extinct.
These data point to serious, practical problems. For example, solid waste management is dire: over half of Sri Lanka’s municipal waste is simply dumped in open pits. A recent report finds roughly 53% of urban garbage ends up in unlined dumps, as there are no public landfills, 35% is incinerated, and only about 1% is recycled. Consequently, trash floods canals and beaches, contributing to marine pollution. The government has begun some cleanup efforts—for instance, a nationwide beach cleaning campaign under the “Clean Sri Lanka” program was launched in February 2025—but these are recent and small compared to the scale of dumping. New laws are in the works, such as Extended Producer Responsibility for plastic containers, and bans on sachet plastics and free plastic bags have begun to reduce litter. However, the Waste Management score, rank 80/180, score 32.6, remains very low, reflecting that proper garbage collection and recycling are still far from reality.
These challenges are mirrored in the waterways. Daily urban waste, heavy vehicle traffic and coal power plants drive airborne pollution, and Colombo’s PM2.5 often exceeds WHO safety levels. The EPI reports Sri Lanka’s air quality rank at 154 and the score at 20.0—slightly better than Bangladesh and India, which score in the mid-20s, but far below most of Asia. Particulate pollution in cities causes respiratory illness and obscures the famous scenic vistas. In short, both land and air show clear signs of neglect.
Sri Lanka does have some environmental bright spots: about 30% of the country is forested, and primary forest loss is relatively low, with a primary forest-loss score of ~88.7, ranked 10/180. In fact, Sri Lanka’s forest category ranks 26th globally, scoring 70.0 thanks to a combination of reserve lands and regeneration. But these forest gains are outweighed by other losses. Sri Lanka is a global biodiversity hotspot, home to many species found nowhere else, yet rapid habitat fragmentation is alarming. A World Bank analysis notes Sri Lanka lost about 7,147 hectares of forest per year from 1992 to 2010, and roughly 30% of dry-zone forests are degraded. This kind of pressure fuels frequent human-wildlife conflict—Sri Lanka has the highest elephant density in Asia and sees about 70 people and 200 elephants killed each year in clashes. In EPI terms this shows up in the near-zero Red List Index, and Sri Lanka scored 0.0, ranking 164. In short, its wildlife and ecosystems are in poor health even if tree cover is not yet gone.
Bhutan and the Maldives illustrate what good and bad indicators look like in this region. Bhutan scored an EPI score of 43.3, ranking 103, and scored well because of stable governance and vast forests. Nearly all of Bhutan’s territory is forest or protected land: Bhutan’s Protected Area Effectiveness is 100% and gets rank 1, and its forest score is 86.7%, getting rank 1. By contrast, Maldives—a small island chain with no trees—also barely cracks 39 points and is ranked 138, but for different reasons. The Maldivian government has invested heavily in environmental health: its air quality rank is 65/180, scoring 47.5, and its environmental health rank is 76, scoring 48.0—far above Sri Lanka’s 133, scoring 31.0. The Maldives treats about 37% of its sewage and ranks 76 versus essentially 1% in Sri Lanka. It also enforces strict fishing rules: bottom trawling is completely banned in Maldivian waters and ranked 1, 100%, whereas Sri Lanka allows much more destructive fishing. In summary, Sri Lanka’s weak performance is a mix of high pollution and poor enforcement, whereas its neighbors either maintain pristine habitats (Bhutan) or have strong public health measures like the Maldives.
Clean Sri Lanka and Governance. Sri Lanka’s government has launched broad initiatives to try to reverse these trends—notably the “Clean Sri Lanka” campaign inaugurated in 2025. This program bundles environmental cleanup plans. For example, in early 2025 officials organized an island-wide beach cleanup with the Marine Environmental Protection Authority coordinating and introduced plastic bans and fees. So far, these moves are symbolic and not big changes at the practical level. At the same time, Sri Lanka does have strong environmental laws on the books: its 1978 Constitution even declares it a duty of the state and citizens to “protect, preserve, and improve” the environment. The problem is implementation.
Sri Lanka’s poor EPI results highlight structural issues as much as technical ones. The country’s stunning biodiversity and reputation as a “beautiful island” are real—but its pollution controls and conservation capacity lag. Without major improvements in governance and infrastructure, like better waste collection, clean-energy transition, and stronger protected-area management, even slogans like “Clean Sri Lanka” will not yield measurable gains. Sri Lanka must move beyond symbolic campaigns and address the root causes of its environmental decline.
References
https://epi.yale.edu/country/2024/LKA
https://epi.yale.edu/country/2024/BTN
https://epi.yale.edu/country/2024/MDV
Banner Image: AI generated
Sections of this article may have been developed with the assistance of artificial intelligence tools to support research, drafting and language refinement. All information has been reviewed, edited and verified by the author/editor to ensure accuracy, context and editorial integrity. The responsibility for the final content, interpretations and conclusions rests solely with the publisher.
