Food security: shortages on the way?

By Richard North - December 23, 2023

Days before Christmas, when the supermarkets are groaning with food and those that can are focusing on over-eating for the next week or so, does not seem the best time for the Telegraph to run an article headed: “Food shortages ‘alarmingly likely’ in the UK next year”, with the warning that “global conflicts and climate change will lead to empty shelves”.

Still, it’s marginally better than The Times running a piece headed, “Weary Ukraine fears war is ‘extremely unlikely’ to end in victory”, telling us that, as the second anniversary of the invasion approaches, “Kiev shifts its focus to holding on to its territory rather than defeating its enemy”.

To my certain recollection, that story has been running for weeks and I did a recap a few days ago, covering much the same ground.

When that paper is also declaring: “Net migration likely to rise before next election”, straight out of the No shit Sherlock box, one gets the impression that the media is struggling to find news topics to write about.

Nevertheless, food security is a valid subject, and it is also one of those where individuals can have a direct effect on personal outcomes, by keeping carefully gauged reserve stocks in the case of supply chain interruptions.

As a rule of thumb, I reckon households should keep a minimum of a month’s reserves of basic foods and beverages, the foods mainly in the form of canned and dried goods. There have been a number of articles on this theme recently, especially in relation to the possibility of power cuts, which might have the more direct impact on food availability, and a certain amount of preparation seems sensible.

Turning to the Telegraph article, the paper’s soothsayer this time is Chris Elliott, of Queen’s University Belfast – he who chaired the government inquiry into the 2013 horsemeat scandal – who seems to be taking on the role of Tim Lang as purveyor of gloom about the global food supply.

His thesis, though, doesn’t seem quite as terrible as the article headline would seem to imply. Elliott is saying that fruit and vegetables would be particularly affected, following in the wake of the disruption to some supermarket supplies earlier in the year.

Then there were shortages of eggs and cooking oil, and supermarkets were forced to ration tomatoes and cucumbers as a result of poor weather in southern Europe in February.

With no particular evidence on offer, Elliott’s expectation seems to be that, because we’ve already seen supply disruptions in 2023, with some empty supermarket shelves for months, this “will become more persistent as we go forward”.

But he does add that access to food will also be about affordability as well as availability, although that doesn’t stop him predicting that in the coming year, the likelihood of empty shelves, particularly fresh produce shelves, “is alarmingly high”.

Oddly enough, and not entirely unrelated when it comes to empty shelves, the Guardian has done a piece about shoplifting in supermarkets and the effects of food poverty, posting that “Britons” are increasingly turning to food black-markets, buying goods from career shoplifters at knockdown prices.

This is more about fencing stolen goods than the traditional black market, although the two are related, but the piece does serve to underline Elliott’s reference to “affordability”, which is a significant factor for both domestic and international communities, where incomes are under pressure.

In general terms, though, Elliott wants to make his predicted food shortages in 2024 as down to climate change, transportation issues and global conflicts. The cultists tried climate change as the reason for shortages last February, but that didn’t really work.

As for “global conflicts”, that is a given and we are seeing dire warnings about famine in Gaza as a result of the fighting there. We also see reports of a food emergency of unprecedented proportions in Yemen, affecting 17 million people. Catastrophe in Sudan is also predicted for the summer, if the conflict continues, with the UN warning that more than six million people are “one step away from famine”.

Transportation also remains an issue, as the disruption caused by the Red Sea attacks threatens to cut global shipping capacity by 20 percent, as journey times are extended.

Then there is a definite impact from the restrictions on the use of the Panama Canal, where countries such as Peru face difficulties in maintaining supplies if ships carrying refrigerated containers of fruit, vegetables and other goods such as coffee and meat are subjected to excessive delays or diverted via longer shipping routes.

Perishable goods from Peru scheduled to arrive in Britain for Christmas are said to be worth £22 million, including fruit with a value of £18 million. Some goods could be delayed, leading to temporary shortages. In all, Peru sends goods worth £2 billion a year to the UK, including more than £350 million of fresh produce ranging from prawns and mangoes to coffee, tea and cocoa.

The industry group representing UK importers and exporters have warned that a worse squeeze on goods from Central and South America is set to follow in the New Year.

These difficulties aside, the global food supply actually remains fairly healthy. For instance, world wheat production for 2023/2024 will be 783.43 million metric tons, down on latest projections about 6.06 million tons or 0.77 percent of global production – nothing that is causing any great concern.

Similarly, the global rice outlook is marginally up, despite Indian restrictions on exports. The global stock forecast is higher than last year and prices are healthy.

Food insecurity for the moment, therefore, seems to be a function of affordability – largely attributable to inflation – plus specific factors such as transportation problems and the effects of local and regional conflicts.

Elliott, however, is also concerned about the decline in domestic food production. “We are virtually totally dependent on other countries for most of our fresh produce, our fruit and our vegetables”, he says. “We were reasonably self-sufficient in dairy, we were reasonably self-sufficient in poultry and eggs. But that’s also on the decline now as a result of the collapse of the food industry or sectors of the food industry in the UK”, he says.

A 2021 food security report found that 46 percent of food consumed in the UK in 2020 was imported, so Elliott points to Singapore, which has introduced plans to grow up to 30 percent of its own food by 2030, having relied almost exclusively on imports. This, he believes, is a good example for the UK to follow.

Then, there is the possibility of a little local difficulty as this year – at last (unless changed again), the full SPS checks will apply to foodstuffs imported from EEA members. Eggs, dairy, meat and other “high-risk” items, in particular, will all be subject to more health checks at the border from 31January.

The new procedures will take some bedding-in time, so there’s a risk of disruption to some supplies – which could lead to gaps in supermarket shelves – and marginal increases in costs.

The only real worry is that the government does not seem to be worried. A Defra spokesman said his department “did not recognise” Elliott’s claims and that the UK’s food chain was “well equipped to deal with disruption”.

The spokesman also said: “We produce 60 percent of all the food we need here in the UK – figures which have changed little over the last 20 years – and our farming reforms are designed to back British farmers and maintain domestic food production”.

On the basis that, whenever the government tells us something, we should believe exactly the opposite, we have some cause for concern. But, that apart, there seems to be nothing very specific on the horizon that should be causing us to worry in the UK, apart from the need to exercise normal prudence.