It shouldn’t take a war for Britain to wake up to the need for food security

## Summary
Photograph: Stephen Chung/Alamy It shouldn’t take a war for Britain to wake up to the need for food security Tim Lang Everyone has a part to play in reducing our reliance on imported foods, but ministers must provide incentives Tim Lang is professor emeritus of food policy at the Centre for Food Policy, City St George’s, University of London T he British state has form on food security. My report for the National Preparedness Commission, Just in Case, summarised why we should be diversifying supplies, growing more of our own food, coming off the oil-based farming treadmill and engaging the public in protecting itself for coming shocks. We must move rapidly to protect food supply from the hybrid war the government’s national security strategy acknowledged last June . Tim Lang is professor emeritus of food policy at the Centre for Food Policy, City St George’s, University of London Explore more on these topics Food Opinion Food poverty Supply chain crisis Rachel Reeves US-Israel war on Iran Poverty Agriculture comment Share Reuse this content

## Article Content
Outdoor vegetable display at a supermarket in Stanmore, north-west London.
Photograph: Stephen Chung/Alamy
View image in fullscreen
Outdoor vegetable display at a supermarket in Stanmore, north-west London.
Photograph: Stephen Chung/Alamy
It shouldn’t take a war for Britain to wake up to the need for food security
Tim Lang
Everyone has a part to play in reducing our reliance on imported foods, but ministers must provide incentives
Tim Lang is professor emeritus of food policy at the Centre for Food Policy, City St George’s, University of London
T
he British state has form on food security. It ignores it until there’s a crisis – and then it’s forced to do rapidly what could have been done better, if only food had been taken more seriously in the first place. We’re revisiting this truth today as the food system’s oil dependency is revealed by the
US-Israel war on Iran
. Oil transports the food from farm to fork. It’s turned into the fertilisers that have allowed food production to rise since the second world war. It takes us to the shops (unless we walk or cycle).
This dependency was also revealed when Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, and when oil hit $100 a barrel in 2008, and in the 1970s oil shock. When the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, and the environment secretary, Emma Reynolds,
called the big food retailers in last week
, it showed they were aware of this impact but weren’t prepared for what to do.
In fact, the UK is awash with scientific and expert advice on what should be done. My report for the National Preparedness Commission, Just in Case, summarised why we should be diversifying supplies, growing more of our own food, coming off the oil-based farming treadmill and engaging the public in protecting itself for coming shocks. Now it emerges that defence analysts have been urging action too.
So how do we get prepared?
First, politicians need to get real about food security. The big political worry until recently for ministers has been food price inflation, not whether the food system is itself vulnerable to shocks. They are linked. Inflation hits people on low incomes hardest. But the bigger national food security issue is now critical in terms of consumers’ capacity to spend. Even if the war in the Middle East stops now,
the inflationary impact will roll on for months
. This is because we have built long, complex supply chains that are more vulnerable to disruption by global events.
What we actually need now is more short, diversified chains, with more incentives to primary producers to grow food domestically. Agriculture today receives
only 8.9% of gross value added
across the agri-food system. The big money is a fight-out between retailers, processors and hospitality.
Second, we must apply defence-strategy thinking to our understanding of food security. My report showed that all UK retail food goes through only 131 distribution centres. For modern drone warfare, these centres are sitting ducks. We must move rapidly to protect food supply from the hybrid war the government’s national security strategy
acknowledged last June
. Vulnerabilities include climate breakdown, creeping ransomware, cable cutting, drone probes, mass disinformation and choke-point attacks. These all disrupt food supply, which makes our country weak.
Third, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs must prioritise a push to regionalise food production. The public says it wants more local food,
yet it buys globo food
. It’s time for a reality check: food systems depend on ecosystems. Britain’s
favourite fruits
include strawberries, tangerines and bananas. The latter two cannot grow here, and we depend on oil to transport them. In the UK, strawberries only grow easily for a few months.
Consumer tastes are out of sync with what can be grown seasonally and in a low-carbon way, and expectations need to readjusted. Across our national diet, we only grow
62% of what we consume
. We import
83%
of the dreadfully low amount of fruit we consume. Rebuilding a regional horticulture sector could be the real growth the Treasury wants. When Rachel Reeves promised “
securonomics
” in the Mais lecture hosted at Bayes Business School in 2024, I thought it might herald food growth. So far, not.
Fourth, to our shame,
one in five people across England, Wales and Northern Ireland
are already technically food insecure, because they lack consistent access to nutritious food. It would be wise to address this food inequality now, because building social cohesion means we are better prepared when crises hit.
Fifth, the public must be treated as adults over food security. The government’s Prepare campaign advises people to store some food that does not need cooking, plus some bottles of water. This is poor advice. We need better, more realistic guidance. The scientific advisory committee on nutrition at the Department of Health and Social Care should produce nutrition guidelines for resilience, and help plan what modern food rationing would look l

---

## Expert Analysis

### Merits
N/A

### Areas for Consideration
- But the bigger national food security issue is now critical in terms of consumers’ capacity to spend.
- That insecurity is now reaching these shores, turning what has been an anxiety for British people into a real threat.

### Implications
- Photograph: Stephen Chung/Alamy It shouldn’t take a war for Britain to wake up to the need for food security Tim Lang Everyone has a part to play in reducing our reliance on imported foods, but ministers must provide incentives Tim Lang is professor emeritus of food policy at the Centre for Food Policy, City St George’s, University of London T he British state has form on food security.
- It ignores it until there’s a crisis – and then it’s forced to do rapidly what could have been done better, if only food had been taken more seriously in the first place.
- When the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, and the environment secretary, Emma Reynolds, called the big food retailers in last week , it showed they were aware of this impact but weren’t prepared for what to do.
- In fact, the UK is awash with scientific and expert advice on what should be done.

### Expert Commentary
This article covers food, war, security topics. Areas of concern are also raised. Readability: Flesch-Kincaid grade 0.0. Word count: 1204.