Food security is becoming a national resilience priority

Food security and resilience are attracting unprecedented attention from policymakers, industry and wider society. Recent reports, parliamentary scrutiny and public interventions are raising important questions about whether the UK is adequately prepared for serious disruption to food supplies. 

For food businesses, this is more than a policy discussion. Resilience is increasingly becoming a strategic issue affecting investment, competitiveness, business continuity and long-term growth. 

As the debate evolves from understanding risks to identifying practical solutions, there is a growing need for a clearer conversation about the respective roles of government, industry and communities in strengthening the resilience of the UK's food system. 

Scrutiny is increasing 

The twin issues of food security and resilience have rarely commanded so much attention. 

Following last month’s report by the National Audit Office examining whether enough action is being taken to ensure the food supply chain is resilient to disruption, the Public Accounts Committee will hear from: Defra’s Permanent Secretary Paul Kissack; Director General for Food, Farming and Biosecurity Emily Miles; and Interim Deputy Director for Food Preparedness and Response Helen Dallas. 

This scrutiny reflects the scale of the challenge. The publication of the Good Food Cycle last year acknowledged how essential a resilient food supply is to the UK. The National Audit Office report identified ‘acute’ short-term risks including cyberattacks, extreme weather, energy infrastructure failure and disease outbreaks, alongside ‘chronic’ longer-term pressures such as climate change. These risks are interconnected and may trigger or exacerbate one another. 

At the same time, there is growing concern among academics, civil society and food system leaders that food security should be treated more explicitly as a national resilience issue. An open letter from Professor Tim Lang and Professor Paul Behrens, co-signed by over 180 experts called on the Prime Minister to update the 2004 Civil Contingencies Act to: address food supply disruptions at the local level; place responsibility for food storage on national, regional, local and community schemes; and establish a National Council of Food Security, Defence and Resilience. 

While some of these recommendations will provoke debate, the central challenge is difficult to dismiss: if normal arrangements were severely disrupted, is there enough clarity about who would be responsible and accountable for ensuring people can still access food? 

Resilience is a board-level issue 

This increasingly matters for the food industry. As food security moves beyond specialist audiences and enters broader political, media and consumer consciousness, food businesses will face growing expectations to understand their vulnerabilities, invest in the capabilities needed to manage disruption, and work more closely with government and other actors across the food system. 

Resilience can no longer be treated solely as an operational responsibility for risk, procurement or supply chain teams. It is becoming a board-level issue impacting investment, reputation, competitiveness and long-term growth. The question is no longer whether resilience matters, but whether organisations are adapting quickly enough. 

Food security is increasingly being considered as a national resilience issue 

Food security is often framed in terms of availability: whether the UK produces or imports enough food. That remains fundamental, but it does not capture the full challenge. 

A resilient food system must also anticipate disruption, absorb shocks, adapt as conditions change and maintain access to food, particularly for the people who are most vulnerable. 

Resilience cannot be created by individual food businesses acting alone. It depends on proportionate coordination between government, industry, infrastructure providers, local bodies and communities. Crucially, it requires clearer choices about the appropriate balance between efficiency and preparedness. 

Learning from international approaches 

As Tim Lang outlined in the 2025 Just in Case report to the National Preparedness Commission, the UK can learn from international peers about integrating food into wider resilience thinking. Notable examples include: Latvia, where the government engages retailers in scenario workshops and war games for crisis preparedness; Sweden, where a 2024 Cabinet-level review ‘Food preparedness for a new era’ proposed new food security legislation placing legal obligations across all levels of government to feed the population in a crisis; and Switzerland, where the government cooperates with the private sector to maintain several months’ worth of obligatory food stocks. 

These examples demonstrate that governments can make conscious choices about the level of food resilience they expect, who is responsible for providing it, and how preparedness should be tested. 

Defining the UK’s approach 

The UK now needs a clearer conversation of its own. Resilience does not mean eliminating every vulnerability or attempting to produce everything domestically. The UK is, and will remain, part of an interconnected global food system: international trade provides choice, supports affordability, and can itself strengthen resilience by diversifying sources of supply. 

The required conversation needs to determine where greater diversity, domestic capacity, strategic stocks or contingency arrangements would provide the greatest value. It should clarify the roles of national government, devolved administrations, Local Resilience Forums, local authorities, food partnerships and regional supply networks when disruption occurs. 

Food businesses have a central role in shaping and delivering this approach. They hold much of the operational knowledge, infrastructure and capability on which resilience depends. Working with policymakers, they can help identify critical vulnerabilities, test preparedness and determine where targeted investment would most strengthen the system. 

Reasons for optimism  

The growing scale of the challenge shouldn’t obscure the progress being made. The UK food system has repeatedly demonstrated remarkable resilience throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, high inflation and international supply chain disruptions. Over the past several years, the food industry has shown its ability to innovate, invest, act quickly and demonstrate flexibility with limited government intervention. 

The fact that multiple institutions are now discussing the UK’s food resilience suggests the issue is moving closer to the centre of policymaking. This creates an opportunity to turn awareness and accumulated evidence into practical action. 

While opinions differ on the solutions, food security clearly deserves the same strategic attention as energy security, economic security and national resilience.  Feeding the country is itself part of national defence.  

Turning awareness into action 

IGD has been contributing thought leadership to this debate for several years. This summer’s Thriving in a volatile world report highlighted increasing concern about intensifying risk, volatility and the vulnerability of global supply chains. It argued that reacting to disruption is no longer sufficient: organisations must anticipate change, invest in capability, and build adaptable supply chains that are able to withstand shocks. 

IGD has also explored specific exposures, including whether the UK now needs a National Fertiliser Strategy. The UK imports considerably more fertiliser than it produces, while domestic nitrogen fertiliser production remains exposed to international gas prices. This illustrates how risks originating in energy markets or geopolitical conflict can reach farms, food businesses and consumers through critical inputs. 

An opportunity for UK leadership 

Encouragingly, as the UK prepares to take up the G20 presidency in 2027, food security could form part of a wider conversation about global economic resilience. The CBI’s most recent trade and international update reports that government, international and civil society representatives discussed preparations for the presidency at Ditchley Park in September, with resilience, supply chains and food security featuring prominently. 

The G20 cannot resolve every pressure facing national food systems. However, the UK presidency could provide an opportunity to advance international cooperation on resilient supply chains, food system investment and the relationship between food, trade, energy and economic security. 

Most importantly, the conversation is evolving. We are moving from asking “What are the risks?” towards “What should we do about them?”  

The task now is to turn that growing recognition into clearer responsibilities, targeted investment and practical collaboration. Government, industry and communities will each have a role to play. If that momentum is sustained, the UK has an opportunity not simply to respond to the next disruption, but to build a food system better prepared for the decade ahead. 

Continuing the conversation 

Resilience and sustainability are becoming central to commercial success and UK food security. 

At the IGD Future of the UK Food System event on 21 October, leaders from across the system - including Co-op, Compleat Food Group, 3Keel and Fairtrade - will explore how businesses can invest smarter, use data more effectively, work collectively to strengthen supply chains, and ultimately move from risk to readiness while unlocking commercial success.