Government response
Introduction
The Government welcomes the Environment, Food and
Rural Affairs Committee's report on Food Security which is supportive
of key elements of Government policy, including:
- UK food security built on access
to a wide variety of markets including domestic, the EU and an
open, rules-based world trading system;
- The importance of sustainable intensification;
- Making the most of our productivity potential
through the Agri-Tech Strategy.
The Committee asked to ensure policy coherence on
food security across Government, which ought to be led by Defra.
The Government can assure the Committee that Defra is the lead
Department for food security and takes responsibility for ensuring
that it is a priority across all relevant policy areas throughout
Government.
The Committee has also asked for a better understanding
of the focus of the Government's research initiatives into food
security. Recommendation 30 explains the work currently underway
to map the research landscape in the UK and internationally. It
also describes the Global Food Security Programme's recently refreshed
mapping of research priorities across the major public sector
funders, which brings coherence by aligning individual activities
with shared goals.
Food and drink is the UK's biggest manufacturing
industry, with gross value-added of £24.3 billion.
UK food security policy priorities
We have outlined the Government's general approach
to food security in our written evidence to the Committee. The
key things that we are doing to ensure continued food security
in the UK are:
· Pursuing
policies across Government to ensure continued economic growth
and higher levels of income for all UK households;
· Removing
barriers to competitiveness and enhancing the productivity of
the agricultural and food sectors in the UK and globally, to help
meet rising global demand;
· Pressing
for reform of agricultural and trade policies, such as the Common
Agricultural Policy, which distort markets both at home and abroad;
· Ensuring
that the UK food sector continues to foster healthy competition
and delivers real benefits for UK consumers.
The UK food system
1. In order to clarify the resourcing, commitment
and prioritisation of food security across government we request
that the Government set out the financial contributions and support
of each department to the goals and delivery of the Government's
food security strategy. The Government should identify Defra as
the lead Department for food security and appoint a Food Security
Coordinator within it to ensure policy coherence across Government
departments. (Paragraph 11)
The Government agrees with the Committee's recommendation
that Defra should be the lead Department, and is happy to confirm
that it is.
TAKING THE LEAD ON FOOD SECURITY
Defra is the lead Government Department for food
security. The Food Policy Unit within Defra, under the direction
of the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Farming, Food
and Marine Environment, George Eustice, ensures that food security
is a priority across the range of relevant policy areas within
Government.
Across Government, food security issues relating
to developing countries belong to the Department for International
Development (DFID). The Agri-Tech Strategy is a joint Business,
Innovation & Skills (BIS), Defra and DFID programme. Policy
officials across Whitehall collaborate on policy priorities, and
the evidence base, science and technological innovation which
underpins this (delivered by Research Councils, Departments and
industry) is coordinated through the Global Food Security Programme
coordination group and the Food Research Partnership, which is
chaired by Defra's Chief Scientific Advisor.
FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS OF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS
TO THE FOOD SECURITY STRATEGY
The Government invests £450m on food research
(see Fig 1.) Additionally, the UK Strategy for Agricultural Technologies
is supported by £160 million of Government investment to
be matched by private sector funding.[1]
Also, the UK will receive from the CAP, €25.1 billion in
the form of direct payments and €2.6 billion in funding for
our rural development programmes under Pillar 2,
between 2014 and 2020.
Fig 1 Breakdown of £450 million spend on R&D on agricultural and food by public sector bodies in 2011/12 (A UK Strategy for Agricultural Technologies, p21)
| Organisation | How Funding is Used
|
| BBSRC | Bioscience research relating to food security
|
| EPSRC | Engineering and physical sciences research relating to food security
|
| ESRC | Economic and social research relating to food security
|
| MRC | Medical research relating to food security
|
| NERC | Environmental research relating to food security
|
| Defra | Research relating to food security ensures its polices are based on a sound, comprehensive understanding of current evidence
|
| Scottish Government |
Research relating to food security plays an important role in shaping their policies
|
| DFID | Research relating to food security is aimed at directly improving people's lives and outputs are available to those who can use it around the world
|
| FSA | Research relating to food security is focused around food safety and ensures advice is based on the best and most up-to-date science
|
| DH | Research relating to food security is focused around health and ensures a high-quality evidence base
|
| DARD | Research relating to food security helps achieve strategic goals and objectives in the areas of agriculture, fisheries and food
|
| TSB | Research relating to food security is aimed at accelerating economic growth by stimulating and supporting business-led innovation
|
2. Food security is not simply about becoming more self-sufficient
in food production. A diversity of supply is an important safeguard
against diseases, severe weather or other domestic disruptions.
There are opportunities to extend the seasonal production of non-tree
crop fresh fruits and vegetable products. We would like to see
a more coordinated and positive approach by retailers, the Agricultural
and Horticultural Development Board and local and central Government
to examine ways to encourage greater domestic production in these
sectors. (Paragraph 18)
The Government agrees with the Committee that food security is
not about self-sufficiency alone but that an element of UK food
security is instead built on access to a wide variety of markets
including domestic, the EU and an open, rules-based world trading
system.
The increasing demand of UK consumers for British
food and drink is a huge opportunity. The Government is working
with farmers, manufacturers and retailers to enable UK producers
to grow and compete. This includes enabling consumers to select
products through country of origin labelling, supporting industry
to develop a skilled workforce and increase innovation, freeing
farmers from red tape to help them seize economic opportunities
that arise and improving public procurement of food and catering
services so that it contributes to a competitive UK food and farming
sector.
ENCOURAGING DOMESTIC PRODUCTION IN THE FRUIT AND
VEGETABLE SECTOR
The UK's production to supply ratio[2]
is 55% for fresh vegetables and 10% for fresh fruit. This rises
slightly to 57% for indigenous vegetables, but more markedly for
indigenous fruit to around 34%.
In 2010, the Fruit and Vegetable Taskforce Action
plan was agreed by industry, the Agricultural and Horticultural
Development Board (AHDB) and Government with specific actions
aimed at removing barriers to increased productivity in the sector.
We established a Grocery Code Adjudicator, streamlined the approval
process for plant protection products, increased funding for reservoirs
and otherwise clarified rules on water extraction, modernised
planning rules, reduced waste.
The AHDB's work in horticulture, storage and soils
has resulted in successfully extending growing seasons. Examples
include strawberries, asparagus and cherries, due to both variety
development and new production techniques. AHDB's cross-sector
soils research and development platform is helping optimise availability
at either end of the season, and best practice long term soil
management allows land conversion from marginal to viable.
Thirty years ago, the UK strawberry season lasted
for about six weeks. Now, due to modern growing practices, improved
varieties and the use of polytunnels and glasshouses, domestically
produced fruits are available from April until November (Fig 2).
Since 2009, market share of home grown strawberries has been stable.
Fig 2: In the five year period 2008-2012, home
production supply of strawberries was on average 69%, which compared
to 58% in the five year period 2003-2008.
2014 saw the first substantial volume of British-grown
apricots on the market, from a partnership between Tesco and fruit
growers. Traditionally, the UK climate has not been suitable for
growing apricots, but with the help of breeders and agronomists
studying the climate changes and the varieties available, they
launched major scale English apricot production with a growing
season that extends to September (a time when no other country
produces apricots.) This could result in demand from other countries
including France, Spain and Portugal for the UK-grown fruit.
RESEARCH
Defra has funded research projects to address the
issue of extending seasonal production of fruits and vegetables.
The Vegetable Genetic Improvement Network and the Pulse Crop Genetic
Improvement Network bring together academia, industry, farmers
and end users to discover and characterise new sources of breeding
material required to produce novel vegetable and pulse crop varieties.
These are tailored to UK production requirements against the background
of a changing climate and changing consumer demands.
3. We should also export, where possible, those
products which are surplus to demand in the UK and can be produced
competitively for export, as this will help boost our production.
We are pleased that the Government is seeking to do this. The
Government must redouble its efforts to negotiate the export of
products such as pigmeat and cheese to China and demonstrate reciprocity
in trade. (Paragraph 20)
The Government agrees that increasing food and drink
exports is key to ensuring continued expansion of the sector.
In 2013 UK exports of food and drink reached £18.9bn, an
increase of £1.2bn since 2010. There is room to grow even
further, particularly in emerging markets. This is why Defra and
UKTI launched a refreshed food and drink Export Action Plan in
October 2013, which aims to add £500m to the UK economy by
October 2015 through a range of ambitious joint Government-industry
targets.
We are already delivering on our commitments to increase
exports. In 2013 Government reached 112 new market agreements
for animals and animal products, helping increase exports outside
the EU by £179m to £1.35bn. Government is also working
hard to secure better deals for UK food and drink through EU Free
Trade Agreement negotiations with the USA, Japan and Vietnam and
elsewhere.
The UK gained access for pigmeat to China in 2012,
and industry is already capitalising on this with exports totalling
£20m in 2013. We are now focusing on extending the Chinese
pork market to cover offal and pigs trotters and lifting their
bans on British beef and lamb. Exports of cheese to China have
resumed following the short temporary suspension imposed by the
Chinese authorities earlier this year.
4. It is right that the Government keeps track
of levels of self-sufficiency in indigenous products—which
will vary from time to time. While the UK may be food secure at
present, it would be unwise to allow a situation to arise in which
we were almost entirely dependent on food imports given future
challenges to food production arising from climate change and
changing global demands. (Paragraph 20)
Increasing domestic production remains a priority
for Defra. This may increase the production to supply ratio ("self-sufficiency")[3]
whether the produce is consumed domestically or exported. Whilst
we agree with the Committee that we should monitor self-sufficiency,
we do not believe it should be regarded as a primary indicator
of food security.
The UK's current production to supply ratio—73%
for indigenous-type foods and 60% for all foods—is not low
in the context of the last 150 years[4]—in
the inter-war period, the rate was as low as 30-40%. "Self-sufficiency"
in the 1980s and early 1990s was inflated through a version of
the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) which distorted markets at
considerable cost to consumers and taxpayers. The self-sufficiency
ratio has been relatively stable since this unwound. The following
graph shows the post-war evolution in the ratio.
The UK's current positive food security position
depends on access to global markets and diverse supply options,
including domestic production. As noted by the EFRA Committee,
a higher production to supply ratio does not necessarily improve
food security, given the opportunity for domestic supply variability
as a result of weather variability and disease risk, and especially
if it entails significant additional consumer costs. Further,
it does not insulate the UK market from any global price variations.
We are working with farmers, manufacturers and retailers to enable
UK producers to grow and compete. Through improving productivity,
UK producers can better compete in domestic and international
markets. Improvements in productivity and competitiveness are
beneficial for the UK, but to ensure the UK's food security, integration
into global markets remains paramount.
5. The CAP has changed significantly over the
years, and now has many more objectives including environmental
protection and conservation. Nevertheless, its original objective
of helping to ensure EU consumers have access to stable food supplies
at reasonable prices remains important particularly in the context
of projected increased global demand for food and potential supply
disruptions. The farming sector also provides public goods which,
by their very nature, have no market value. Some remuneration
through direct payments is warranted, as such provision may entail
specific costs in order to meet environmental or strategic objectives
and targets. (Paragraph 28)
A productive EU agricultural sector and open competitive
markets are major contributors to delivering global food security
and ensuring EU consumers have access to stable food supplies
at reasonable prices. CAP, through tariffs and market intervention,
serves to increase prices for consumers. The Organisation
for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) report that on
average, prices received by farmers were 4% higher than those
on the world market in 2010-12, down from 1986-88 when EU prices
were 71% higher than world market prices. However, for some products
the price gap between European and world prices is still very
significant.
Some further limited reform continues into the 2014-20
EU Multi Annual Financial Framework (MFF) period. For example,
there was agreement to abolish from 2017 one of the last production
controls, on sugar. However, Pillar 1 of the CAP still undermines
the performance of the agricultural sector, at great cost, and
is still in need of fundamental reform. Recent changes to the
CAP have added complexity linked to conditions for receiving direct
payments. Greening is a blunt environmental tool with limited
potential for benefits, whilst direct payments will continue to
slow the process of structural change in the agricultural industry.
Such structural change is an important element of ensuring the
long term productivity and competitiveness of European agriculture.
The Government continues to believe that expenditure
on market price support and direct payments to farmers under Pillar
1 of the CAP represent very poor value for money. The Government's
position is that the best value for money with regard to environmental
benefit can be obtained in Pillar 2.
6. The UK Government must ensure a joined-up approach
to food security within the EU across different policy areas,
and particularly in relation to CAP, to ensure policy coherence.
The Government should set out how it will use the flexibility
provided by the new CAP agreement to help meet the objective of
food security. (Paragraph 29)
The CAP as presently configured is not an effective
tool for delivering food security. Indeed, given the negative
impact of Pillar 1 on structural change, the CAP operates contrary
to the food security interests of the UK, and the rest of the
EU. Additionally in other areas, such as trade and biofuels, EU
policies can push up the price of agricultural goods to the detriment
of manufacturers and food consumers.
We recognise that there are challenges in securing
policy coherence at an EU level where 28 Member States must agree
collective measures. Respondents to Defra's recent Balance of
Competences Review for Agriculture questioned the effectiveness
of EU policy making processes. Many criticised the CAP for its
cost to taxpayers and consumers and its unclear objectives.
The UK has argued for CAP reform to help deliver
an efficient and responsive agricultural sector in the EU and
globally, moving away from subsidies and market interventions.
There is scope for using taxpayers' money to pay farmers for public
goods that the market otherwise would not reward, such as protecting
the natural environment and supporting biodiversity.
During the CAP reform negotiations we achieved greater
CAP regionalisation, providing flexibility for the Devolved Administrations
to implement the new CAP according to their own priorities.
In England, we have made the greening rules as flexible
and simple as we can for farmers to meet, so farmers can concentrate
on producing food and helping to grow the economy. To help farmers
meet the EFA criteria, we are offering the inclusion of hedges
towards their requirement. Within the Nitrogen-fixing crops option,
we will allow the widest range of crop types.
We argued hard to ensure that crop diversification
was more appropriate for UK conditions. We are exploring what
further flexibility might be possible and will be seeking changes
to the 3 crop rule when the opportunity arises in Brussels.
The UK, working with like-minded Member States, negotiated
hard for a final outcome that was a significant improvement on
the Commission's original proposals. However, it is still very
disappointing and does not move CAP as far as we would have wanted
in the direction of reform.
7. There is a significant challenge to feed a
growing global population in a sustainable manner. The key question
for us, is how the UK responds to that challenge—that is,
what role it plays in global markets given that it is both a small
part of the global food economy, and its agriculture is a relatively
minor contributor to global GHG emissions. (Paragraph 37)
The Government agrees with the Committee that increases
in global population and income will increase demand for food,
and increase pressure on scarce inputs such as land, water and
soil. The UK represents a small proportion (approximately 1%)
of global food production and consumption.
However, we can demonstrate leadership through our
strengths in agricultural research, our dynamic food and farming
sector, our work internationally to promote transparent open global
markets, and through reducing emissions and waste.
AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH
Through the Agri-Tech Strategy we are seeking to
match our world-leading basic research capability with a renewed
focus on applied research in order to bring innovations onto farms
and raise productivity. Such applied research can help improve
productivity in the UK and overseas.
WORKING INTERNATIONALLY
The UK is pushing for an ambitious set of new universal
Sustainable Development Goals to take effect when the Millennium
Development Goals expire in 2015. The UK is advocating for a dedicated
goal on food security, nutrition and sustainable food systems,
underpinned by a set of ambitious targets to drive delivery on
the ground.
The UK Government collaborates with the Food and
Agriculture Organization and other Rome-based UN agencies (IFAD
and WFP) across a range of policy areas to ensure sustainable
food security. We also engage on these issues in discussions in
the G7/8 and G20.
The UK will chair the Agricultural Markets Information
System (AMIS) group from October 2014. AMIS is an inter-agency
platform agreed as part of the 2011 G20 Action Plan to help address
food price volatility. It aims to enhance market transparency
and improve policy coordination in response to market uncertainty.
Economic growth and poverty reduction alongside sustainable
agricultural practices, robust supply chains and open, fair and
well-functioning markets and trade policies are essential to achieve
long-term food security for all people. The UK directly supports
developing countries to increase agricultural outputs in a sustainable
way,[5] and is also engaged
in the Climate Smart Agriculture Alliance of countries working
together to share expertise and technologies to deliver a food
secure world.
The UK is a leader in responding to the challenge
of food waste. Working with industry under the voluntary Courtauld
Commitment, we have reduced supply chain food and packaging waste,
and total household food waste is down by 15% since 2007. In June
2012 an agreement with the hospitality and food service sector
was launched to support the sector in preventing and recycling
food and packaging waste.
Defra is co-ordinating work with key UK palm oil
using sectors towards achieving 100% sourcing of credibly certified
sustainable palm oil by the end of 2015.[6]
8. Consumers should be able to make informed choices
about what and how much they consume, and health and resource
impacts should play a part in these choices. There is an important
role for protein from a variety of sources in our diet, and some
of the animals we consume—for example, cattle and sheep—also
play a vital role in ensuring our hillsides and upland farms remain
viable. The production of protein, whether from animals or plants,
must make efficient use of land and water, and discourage waste
and reduce harmful emissions. (Paragraph 38)
Food security is dependent on access to a variety
of affordable food of good nutritional quality, and meat is a
valuable source of nutrients in a balanced diet. Through the Green
Food Project Sustainable Consumption report, Defra brought together
a wide range of stakeholders to engage in a debate across the
food chain and civil society, about the role of diet and consumption
in the sustainability of the food system, and the roles of different
sectors in addressing consumption patterns.
We are improving labelling, including introducing
mandatory country of origin labelling for the first time for pork,
poultry, sheep and goat meat from April 2015 in order to respond
to consumer demand to know where their meat comes from.
We are committed to supporting and developing the
UK livestock farming sector and sustainable food production is
a priority. We are working with the farming industry to improve
the productivity and competitiveness of food and farming businesses,
with better environmental performance.
We agree with the Committee that well-managed livestock
farming contributes significantly to preserving the landscape
and biodiversity, particularly in the uplands and on permanent
grazing less suited to other forms of agriculture.
The sustainable intensification platform aims to
make the best use of land available while addressing environmental
impacts.[7] Initiatives
to reduce emissions are discussed under Recommendation 13.
Fish and seafood constitute approximately 20% of
the global supply of animal proteins and are an important and
affordable source of protein. Living marine resources are globally
important both from a food security as well as a nutritional perspective.
9. We are concerned about the potential impact
of projected rising trends in global demand for animal protein
on the price of animal feeds and the cost of production. The Government
is aware of this issue and has funded some research in this area.
(Paragraph 39)
10. In view of the significant strategic risk
and cost the UK is exposed to in relation to its animal feed imports,
we recommend that the Government give higher priority to research
to enable us to source more of our animal feed from within the
EU. The Government must promote the growth of more legumes which
ensure greater output per hectare. Additionally, the Government
should monitor the demand for soya and other animal feeds at the
global level and ensure that there is a long term "Plan B"
for animal proteins within the EU. (Paragraph 40)
The Government continues to monitor developments
in agricultural global markets, including production and trade
of animal feed. The UK uses a wide variety of ingredients for
animal feed produced domestically and from abroad, worth £5.6bn.
Cereals make up at least 40% of total feed used in the UK (mainly
wheat), while soybean makes up around 10%. The UK is typically
a net wheat exporter but is a net importer of animal feed, importing
around £2.1 billion (with imports of soya cake and meal being
the single largest category) in 2013.
Soya bean meal can make up around 15 to 25% of diets
fed to young pigs and poultry, as it is a rich source of high-quality
protein providing a balanced source of essential amino acids.
Replacing soya with domestically-produced vegetable proteins without
having negative impacts on animal productivity and economic performance
represents a significant technical challenge. Nonetheless, industry
is taking action, and there has been a drop in soya bean use in
the pig sector due to increased use of alternative home produced
proteins, such as rapeseed meal, increased use of synthetic amino
acids and reductions in the protein content of pig diets.
Two major bioethanol production facilities have recently
been established in the UK. Whilst the public policy debate around
supporting biofuel consumption in the EU is still live, such facilities
also produce high-quality animal feed protein in the form of distillers
dried grains. Industry estimates indicate that the UK biofuels
industry could reduce animal feed import dependency by around
1.5 million tonnes when operating at full capacity.
The Technology Strategy Board (TSB), in partnership
with Defra, the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research
Council (BBSRC) and the Scottish Government is investing £16m
in industry-led collaborative R&D to address the challenges
of sustainable protein production.
BBSRC provides long term strategic funding for research
on crop genetics, genomics and germplasm at the Institute of Biological,
Environmental and Rural Sciences (IBERS) at Aberystwyth University,
to inform breeding of new and improved varieties of forage grasses
and legumes for cultivation in the UK.
The new greening requirement introduced as part of
CAP reform from 2015 can be expected to result in an increase
in domestic protein crop production. The new Crop Diversification
requirements can be expected to drive a broader range of crops
to be grown. In addition, the Ecological Focus Area requirements
can be met by growing a nitrogen fixing crop (e.g., broad beans).
The challenge of climate change
11. Climate change will have significant implications
for our agricultural production in the long run. While it may
be that the UK climate becomes better suited to particular types
of agriculture, farmers will need the know how to adapt their
crops or livestock without productivity losses and in a sustainable
manner. Farmers would be greatly assisted by having access to
more reliable long range weather predictions so that they can
be better prepared for extreme weather events and conditions.
(Paragraph 50)
12. We urge the Government to explore the cost
implication for farmers of access to more long term weather forecasts
as a first line of defence against extreme weather. (Paragraph
51)
The Government recognises the impacts climate change
will have on agricultural production and the resulting need for
adaptation.
The demand to increase the accuracy of long-range
weather forecasting is not peculiar to the farming industry. Doing
so would have obvious benefits for the decision-making processes
of numerous types of business, the public, and the government
itself.
In the UK, the Met Office already runs the most detailed
operational long-range forecasting system in the world. These
seasonal and monthly predictions can provide useful guidance for
decision makers, and recent progress in science and modelling
means they can be expected to accurately predict seasonal weather
patterns 60% of the time (the rate for short-term forecasts is
closer to 90%[8]). However,
uncertainties will always exist, and they will always be greater
the longer the range of the forecast.
Given this, it is important to recognise that it
is not enough to increase scientific capability and translate
this into an operational service. That service must also be tailored
to its audience. It is known that demand for improved longer-range
forecasts is particularly pronounced among the farming community.
That is why, through Defra's Farming Resilience Group, work is
ongoing with farming stakeholders (including major industry bodies,
charities, high street banks, and others) and the Met Office to
improve the way in which forecasts are communicated to farmers.
The Met Office has already made significant improvements
to its forecast services, as well as supporting the National Farmers
Union in the creation of its online weather pages, and producing
its own webpage (part of the "Get Ready" web campaign)
focused specifically on providing advice and tips to the farming
community on improving their resilience to weather. Discussions
are taking place with a number of organisations about the development
of bespoke services for the agricultural community, with the Met
Office due to host a working group. As a one off in response to
the severe flooding experienced by many farmers over the winter
of 2013/14, Defra also provided a £10 million Farming Recovery
Fund to financially support farmers to recover from the floods
and get their land back into production as quickly as possible.
13. Building on the Climate Change Evidence Plan,
the Government must produce an up-to-date action plan for reducing
UK emissions. This should draw on the conclusions of the latest
IPCC Report and on the methodologies for risk assessment outlined
in it. (Paragraph 52)
(Note: An action plan resulting from the Climate
Change Evidence Plan would not be an action plan for reducing
UK emissions. The focus of the evidence plan was on adaptation
and ensuring mitigation activity is sustainable. In addition,
the IPCC report advocated a risk-based approach to decision making
in face of uncertainty, but it did not set out risk assessment
methodologies.)
Under the Climate Change Act the whole UK economy
must reduce its emissions by 80% by 2050, and agriculture must
play its part. Not all sectors have equal capacity to reduce emissions.
The Carbon Plan published in 2011, described how Government intends
to meet its budgets in each sector. Government will set the fifth
carbon budget in 2016 and will publish updated plans shortly afterwards.
Defra is working with industry to achieve cost-effective
reductions in emissions from agriculture by 3Mt CO2e
by 2022 in line with the Industry GHG Action Plan. A Defra-led
review of the action plan in 2012 concluded that the industry
aspirations were reasonable and achievable.[9]
Defra will review the action plan again in 2016.
The Government is working with the food and drink
sector (along with seven other industry sectors) to develop a
roadmap for carbon emissions reduction out to 2050. Lead trade
associations and major businesses have also developed sustainability
strategies which tackle emissions reduction.[10]
The ambitious GHG Inventory Research and Development
Platform, valued in excess of £12m over five years, aims
to improve our understanding of UK agriculture's contribution
to climate change, and to identify ways of reducing this.
Through the Sustainable Intensification Research
Platform, Defra is continuing to support industry efforts to reduce
agriculture's contribution to climate change. This work will include
climate change mitigation and adaptation as part of an integrated
approach to increasing food production whilst improving the economic,
social, and environmental performance of UK agriculture.
Defra is currently developing the next Rural Development
Programme for 2014-20. This will be a major opportunity to invest
in the rural environment and farming competitiveness and has climate
change adaptation and mitigation embedded as a cross-cutting theme.
14. We were impressed with the range of practical
research we saw at Rothamsted Research Institute. There is an
important role for ruminant livestock on less intensively-farmed
and environmentally valuable hills and uplands in the UK where
a significant reduction in livestock numbers would have negative
consequences for these environments. (Paragraph 57)
The new Rothamsted Research, North Wyke farm platform
provides unique research capabilities for the UK which help to
address some of agriculture's most pressing challenges.
Hill farming is an important contributor to the national
livestock industry by providing breeding and finishing stock to
lowland farming systems. Through appropriate land management practices,
it can also contribute to a wide range of public benefits including
uplands landscapes, ecosystem services, biodiversity, and cultural
and natural resources.
The Government recognises these benefits and through
its Uplands Policy Review gave a clear message of support for
England's hill farmers who are highly dependent on livestock.
15. The bulk of our meat and dairy however is
produced on lowlands, and if this is to continue, there is a need
for greater research effort and funding directed at reducing emissions
from more intensive beef, sheep and dairy farming systems. Given
the limited projected progress made in reducing emissions from
the agricultural sector as a whole, the Government should identify,
as a priority, specific actions which will ensure the sector can
meet national greenhouse gas reduction targets. (Paragraph 58)
Within the overarching framework set by the Climate
Change Act, the Government is committed to taking a whole-government
approach. Tackling climate change and demonstrating leadership
through action is the responsibility of every part of government,
central and local, and the wider public sector. DECC is responsible
for coordinating overall compliance with carbon budgets, and Defra
is responsible for mitigation of emissions from waste, agriculture,
and fluorinated greenhouse gases.
As discussed under Recommendation 13, there are no
specific national GHG emissions reductions targets for the agricultural
sector as yet, but Defra is working with industry to achieve cost-effective
reductions in agricultural GHG emissions in line with the Industry
GHG Action Plan.
RESEARCH INTO REDUCING EMISSIONS
Under the Government's UK Agricultural GHG R&D
Platform,[11] researchers
have been measuring methane emissions from ruminant livestock.
The results will help to identify ways of reducing GHG emissions
and climate change mitigation.
Defra is funding a major £3.5m project to explore
if protein intake can be reduced in high-yielding dairy cows to
reduce GHG and other emissions, but without having negative impacts
on milk productivity and the economic sustainability of the UK
dairy industry.
The Sustainable Intensification Platform is examining
how production can be increased while simultaneously reducing
GHG emissions and enhancing the environment under a variety of
agricultural systems, including lowland grazing.
The environmental performance of agriculture would
be significantly improved by reducing the incidence of common
(endemic) diseases, enabling production with lower GHG emissions
per unit of output, or the same total output to be obtained from
fewer animals. BBSRC supports research to counter the effects
of widespread animal diseases that undermine animal health and
the efficiency and sustainability of livestock production in the
UK.
Under the Livestock Research Group of the Global
Research Alliance, the UK is leading an international network
on Animal Health and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Intensity, which
brings together researchers to investigate links between efforts
to reduce livestock disease and GHG emissions intensity reductions.
Defra is supportive of and keeps under review the
roadmaps developed by the dairy, and sheep and beef industries
which are helping them to develop a more efficient and profitable
livestock sector whilst reducing GHG emissions. For example, a
large body of evidence is being transferred from Defra's applied
Sustainable and Competitive Farming research programme, which
includes the UK Agricultural GHG Research Platform and provides
evidence to show that improvements in the efficiency of production
from lowland grazing systems can be made through (i) more resource-efficient
fertiliser and feeding regimes and (ii) improved genetics. These
can have a significant impact on reducing emissions per unit of
product as well as increasing productivity.
Sustainability and sustainable intensification
16. We need to increase agriculture output without
increasing the amount of land used. It is clear that in some key
crops this is not happening and yield levels have stagnated. We
also need to ensure our agricultural production systems preserve
the soil on which these crops are grown and ensure it retains
key nutrients. (Paragraph 66)
17. Sustainable intensification in relation to
key UK cereal crops has made limited progress. The plateauing
of yield levels in wheat must be addressed as a matter of urgency.
As part of its efforts towards sustainable intensification, we
recommend the Government also direct greater funding to research
on maintaining and improving soil quality. (Paragraph 67)
Defra's statistics suggest that average wheat yield
has not increased in the past decade and on some measures may
have fallen.[12]
Defra directly funds or co-funds a number of projects
aimed at improving cereal yields, both through increasing genetic
potential and reaching existing yield maximum. The flagship project
is the Wheat Genetic Improvement Network (WGIN). This is a wide
network of stakeholders (UK plant breeders, farmers, agri-food
industry) to provide a 'platform' supporting applied pre-breeding
genetics research to increase yield, nitrogen and water use efficiency,
and pest and disease resistance in wheat. WGIN together with Wheat
2020, carried out by Rothamsted Research, are looking at increasing
the genetic potential of wheat and making improved varieties available
to growers.
BBSRC has led the development of the recently launched
International Wheat Yield Partnership[13]
which aims to increase the genetic yield potential of wheat by
up to 50% in 20 years. IWYP will support both core infrastructure
and facilitate transnational open calls for research, all targeted
at raising the yield potential of wheat.
BBSRC has also led a £7M research industry club,
Crop Improvement Research Club[14],
to improve productivity and resource use efficiency. Research
is already delivering tools to enable better trait selection for
improved yields.
The Sustainable Intensification Platform is investing
£4.5m over three years to establish collaborations between
researchers from multiple disciplines and institutions to identify
ways to increase farm productivity, reduce environmental impacts,
and enhance ecosystem services.
Sustainable intensification in agriculture goes beyond
increasing output per hectare, and the Rural Development Programme
for England targets important measures such as labour productivity
through investments in farmer education and skills, and encouraging
uptake of best practice through demonstration farms, discussion
groups and benchmarking exercises. We are also concerned with
the overall ratio of outputs to inputs, known as total factor
productivity, and will work with farmers, the AHDB and the agri-tech
industry to improve this by linking farmers more closely with
agricultural research.
SOIL
The Government continues to work with the Research
Councils to increase levels of funding for soil research. Defra
has a soils research programme, to improve soil protection, enhance
quality and minimise environmental consequences of soil erosion,
such as flooding. Last year, the Global Food Security Programme
brought together BBSRC and NERC to create the joint Soil and Rhizosphere
Interactions for Sustainable Agri-ecosystems call, a £5M
programme to provide an improved understanding of agricultural
soil and rhizosphere interactions to underpin the development
of agricultural ecosystems. A second £5M Soil Security Call
is currently being developed by NERC in collaboration with BBSRC
and Defra.
BBSRC and NERC have also launched the £10M Sustainable
Agriculture and Innovation Club[15],
successfully engaging with a broad range of industry to address
water and nutrient related challenges to deliver resilient and
robust crop and livestock production systems.
18. Organic production uses fewer pesticides and
inorganic fertilisers and, in so doing, makes an important contribution
to environmental stewardship. We believe organic production also
has a place in the market in adding to consumer choice. However,
organic yields—certainly for extensive crops such as cereals
and also for potatoes and some fruit—are generally lower
than those for conventional agriculture. (Paragraph 73)
The Government agrees that organic yields are generally
lower than those for conventional agriculture, and notes the conclusion
of the 2011 Foresight report that organic agriculture could not
be adopted as the main strategy to achieve sustainable and equitable
global food security[16].
We also agree that organic farming delivers a wide
range of environmental benefits, including water quality, soil
improvement, reduced nitrate and pesticide pollution, and nutrient
balance. Organic farming also offers greater consumer choice and
certified animal welfare standards. Organic conversion and maintenance
is supported through the Organic Entry Level Stewardship scheme
(OELS). Support under the scheme was maintained for the 2014 transition
year and around 14,000ha of land will convert to organic under
Agreements struck this year. Organic conversion and maintenance
will also be supported in the new Rural Development Programme,
and specific agri-environment options will be available for organic
farmers in the successor scheme to environmental stewardship.
Supply Chain Resilience
19. Shorter supply chains minimise the threat
of disruption and therefore help food security. As we said in
our Report on Food Contamination, we are concerned about the length
of supply chains, particularly for processed and frozen meat products,
and we welcome the efforts made by some retailers to shorten these.
As a result of horsemeat contamination in 2013 the Government
commissioned a review of supply chain resilience. We look forward
to the final report on this matter, and to receiving any evidence
that supply chains in general are becoming shorter. (Paragraph
84)
All food businesses are responsible for ensuring
that the food they sell meets the required standards and that
there is effective traceability throughout the supply chain. Last
year's horsemeat fraud highlighted the need to review food supply
systems which is why the Government asked Professor Chris Elliott
to lead a Review into the integrity and assurance of food supply
networks. The final report of the Review was published on 4th
September 2014.
The Review examines the strengths and weaknesses
of food supply networks in the UK. It recognises that current
systems for safeguarding food safety and public health in this
country are robust and that UK consumers have access to some of
the safest food in the world.
The review highlights the complexity of the food
chain that gives consumers access to all kinds of seasonal and
unseasonal products and identifies ways to help make systems providing
assurance about food integrity as robust as those for food safety.
The Government agrees that audit and assurance regimes
should be strengthened to remove duplication and to cover food
fraud prevention.
Professor Elliott reports a concerted effort by industry
to simplify supply chains where possible. We will continue to
support the actions being taken by the British Retail Consortium
(BRC) to review the BRC Audit Standard to provide an additional
food fraud module, and to encourage an approach by its members
to reduce the overall number of supply chain audits whilst increasing
their effectiveness in addressing potential food fraud. One suggested
mechanism promoted by Professor Elliott is shifting the balance
towards unannounced audits and including food sampling as part
of the process.
We will also support the work of the Food and Drink
Federation and the British Hospitality Association to update guidance
to the manufacturing, food service and catering sectors on protecting
themselves against food fraud in recognition of the large proportion
of SMEs operating in the sector.
We will look for further opportunities to reduce
regulatory burden on food businesses by building on the benefits
of the Primary Authority Partnership Scheme which reduces the
need for regulatory inspections and by expanding earned recognition
across the sector for businesses which can demonstrate a good
compliance and audit record.
Co-funded by Defra and FSA, the British Standards
Institute will be publishing an updated version of Publicly Available
Specification (PAS) 96 (Defending Food and Drink) which will provide
guidance and advice to food and drink industry sectors about defending
supply chains against malicious attack. This incorporates an "all-threats"
approach to include economically motivated adulteration and cyber
threat as well as the traditional focus on deliberate contamination
with intent to cause harm to human health. The updated PAS will
be freely available via a link on the FSA website which will make
it easily accessible for small and medium sized businesses.
20. We want to ensure that the role of the Grocery
Code Adjudicator works for farmers and buyers, and therefore ultimately
the consumer, so that the farming industry remains both sustainable
and efficient. If farm incomes are squeezed unduly, farmers are
unlikely to make the necessary investments in sustainable production.
The creation of the role is welcome and must be properly resourced
as part of a wider effort to promote security. (Paragraph 91)
The Government agrees farming must be sustainable
and efficient but the GCA has no role in relation to prices or
farm incomes. Its role is to ensure the large supermarkets act
fairly towards direct suppliers.
The Government agrees that the GCA Office must be
sufficiently resourced and understands this is now the case.
21. We recognise that assessing "fairness"
in relation to producer and consumer prices is fraught with difficulty,
not least those of determining whether markets are working efficiently
and transparently. However, we fully support the role of the Adjudicator
in assessing whether contractual and other commercial practices
may be unfair within the supply chain, or prejudicial to farmers
and the longer run visibility of their businesses, and whether
there is evidence of abuse of market power in the supply chain.
(Paragraph 92)
The Government agrees that it is difficult to assess
fairness in relation to producer and consumer prices. However,
food prices do not fall within the GCA remit. Although the GCA
is not directly concerned with farmers unless they directly supply
the large retailers, the GCA is required to act on evidence of
market power abuse brought to its attention. Some of the actions
the Adjudicator has taken over the past year are set out in the
response to Recommendation 22 below.
22. We request an update on progress made and
outcomes achieved to date from the Office of the Grocery Code
Adjudicator. We suggest that it would be better if the Office
had the power to initiate an investigation. (Paragraph 93)
In its first Annual Report issued on 23 June 2014,
the GCA set out the progress it had made since June 2013.[17]
Regarding the power to initiate investigations, the
GCA is governed by the GCA Act 2013 which makes no provision for
a GCA investigation without a formal complaint, which can be anonymous.
Changes to this procedure require a change to the GCA Act.
Harnessing technology
23. We support the Agri-Tech Strategy as a bold
and innovative response to the need to ensure our agricultural
production methods are modern and sustainable. The Government
must ensure that it creates new partnerships between academia
and those involved in developing technology. It should identify
alternative funding mechanisms with the Technology Strategy Board
in case adequate industry co-funding is not forthcoming, particularly
where technology can deliver significant public benefit. We also
recommend that the Government monitor the early competitive rounds
of catalyst funding to assess whether there could be justification
for expanding the funding base. (Paragraph 99)
We welcome the Committee's support for the Agri-Tech
Strategy. We believe that the funding available under the Agri-Tech
Strategy can leverage private investment which will make the UK
farming and agri-tech sectors more competitive.
As the Committee recommends, we are monitoring uptake
of the Agri-Tech Catalyst. Awards have been made under the first
round. Applications received under the second round are currently
being assessed. The response to date has been high, both in terms
of numbers and quality.
We are also monitoring the success of the catalyst
as it relates to other funding streams, such as the TSB's Sustainable
Agriculture and Food Innovation Platform (SAF-IP), and work funded
through the Research Councils, to ensure that there is a range
of funding available for basic and applied research in this area.
24. We were impressed by some of the possibilities
provided by precision technology to make farming easier and more
efficient. There are, for example, already sensor technologies
which have the potential for development in a range of engineering
and other precision farming applications where quick-wins could
be achieved for UK farming. (Paragraph 105)
25. As the Government's new Agri-Tech Strategy
addresses technological developments that are close to being brought
to commercial reality, research funding bodies should place additional
emphasis on pre-commercial and multidisciplinary applied research
into precision farming technologies. (Paragraph 106)
The possibilities of precision agriculture are firmly
embedded in the delivery of the Agri Tech Strategy. Successful
projects in the first round of the Agri Tech Catalyst included
several on sensor and other engineering solutions. This builds
on the success of the sensor and engineering calls run through
the TSB over the last couple of years.
The Agri-Tech Strategy's prospectus on Centres for
Agricultural Innovation highlighted the possibilities for bringing
together public and private sector funding to address issues in
a range of farming systems. The Centres will link into publicly
funded pre-competitive work, such as that which we are supporting
through our involvement with the Europe-wide Joint Programming
Initiative on Food Security, Agriculture and Climate Change.[18]
BBSRC also runs a stand-alone LINK scheme which supports
pre-competitive research with industry.[19]
Research that is strategically important to industry is also supported
under the BBSRC research and technology clubs.[20]
26. UK agriculture must embrace new technologies
which are consistent with the principles of evidence and balanced
risk-based assessment whilst meeting criteria of both economic
and environmental sustainability, if it is to meet the challenges
to food security in the future. (Paragraph 111)
27. Given the evident concern about the way in
which the EU regulatory framework operates and its potential implications
for the future productivity and competitiveness of our agricultural
sector, the Government should tell us what conclusions it has
drawn regarding its scope for unilateral action on the EU regulatory
regime for crop protection and GM crop approval as part of its
wider review of the Balance of Competences between the UK and
EU. (Paragraph 112)
The Government agrees that it is vital for UK farmers
to be able to adopt new technologies, and that there are instances
where EU regulations are failing to operate appropriately, in
particular for pesticides and GM crops. This is prejudicing the
ability of our farmers to remain competitive and achieve sustainable
increases in production. The Government will continue to argue
for the EU to take a risk rather than hazard-based approach to
regulation, firmly grounded on the scientific evidence. The aim
must be to allow predictable and timely access to the market for
safe and beneficial products.
The Government's thinking on the EU regime for GM
crops is given in response to Recommendation 29, below. Regarding
pesticides, the EU regulation on plant protection products includes
a requirement for the Commission to report to the European Parliament
and Council by the end of 2014 on the functioning of several key
aspects of the regime. The Government believes that this review
should be assigned a high priority. All parties need a clear and
evidence-based picture of the regime's impact, to ensure that
it supports a competitive and productive agriculture sector, while
protecting human health and the environment. The review should
also look closely at the impact of current legislation on the
future availability of pesticides for EU farmers.
The Review of the Balance of Competences provides
an informed and objective analysis of where the EU helps and where
it hampers. It is not designed to make specific policy recommendations
or draw conclusions, although it will set out some of the challenges
and policy options that will face future decision-makers.
Genetically modified food
28. The technology involved in the production
of genetically modified crops generates public concern. In particular
there are concerns that there may be unknown implications of this
technology. In relation to the consumption of GM foods many people
in other countries, and a large percentage of our poultry and
livestock, consume GM products with no known or documented ill-effects.
This should offer some reassurance to the wary. In terms of concerns
about the production of GM crops, the EU process for approval
of such crops is, as noted, extremely rigorous, and appropriate
regulations can be put in place to guard against cross-contamination.
(Paragraph 131)
As the Committee suggests, there is no reliable evidence
that existing GM foods or animal feeds pose a serious health risk.
The independent and science-based EU assessment procedures for
GM products are robust, and the Government is confident that this
offers sound assurance that they will only be authorised for use
if it is clear that safety will not be compromised. In this context,
the potential for cross-contamination from GM crops should not
be seen as a safety issue, but the Government recognises that
measures will be needed to segregate GM and non-GM production
to facilitate choice and protect economic interests. Defra will
ensure that pragmatic and proportionate 'coexistence' measures
are in place before GM crops are grown commercially in England.
29. The Government should do more to inform the
public about the potential beneficial impacts of growing GM crops
in the UK. It should encourage an evidence-led public debate about
GM crops and also counter food safety fears about the consumption
of GM. In order to give consumers the opportunity to make informed
choices, GM foods should be labelled as such, in the same way
as organic produce. The Government must continue to work within
the EU to argue for a system which is more flexible for those
member states that wish to take advantage of GM technology, while
still ensuring that all EU consumers are protected, in the same
way it does with non-GM technologies. Progress towards this objective
must be research and science-led. The Government must also ensure
that any GM products grown legitimately in any member state may
be freely traded across the EU. (Paragraph 132)
A fair appraisal of the evidence supports the view
that responsible use of GM technology can help alongside other
options to make agriculture more efficient and sustainable. This
is the conclusion reached by the European Academies of Science
Advisory Council, representing national science academies of EU
Member States and by the Council for Science and Technology who
advise the Prime Minister. The Government is clear that given
the challenges ahead on food security, this technology is not
something we can afford to ignore. Ministers have spoken out to
highlight the potential benefits of GM crops and the robustness
of the safety controls. The Government will continue to encourage
a more informed, evidence-led debate, although everyone has a
role to play in this, including farmers, scientists, NGOs, the
media and the general public.
It is already an EU requirement for any food or feed
made from an approved GM crop to be clearly labelled, so that
consumers can decide for themselves whether or not to buy them.
In June EU Environment Ministers reached political
agreement on a proposal that would give Member States more power
to decide whether to accept commercial GM cultivation in their
own territory, whilst retaining the existing EU-level safety assessment
and decision-making process. This proposal should make it easier
to reach EU decisions to authorise GM cultivation, allowing it
to take place in those Member States or regions that are open
to this possibility. It would not affect the free trade of authorised
GM products throughout the EU single market. The proposal still
has to be agreed with the European Parliament, which means that
it may not be finally adopted until late this year or next year.
The Government will continue to support these negotiations, and
more generally for the EU to follow a proportionate and science-led
approach to GM regulation.
Securing food for the future
30. We recommend that the Government, through
its Global Food Security Programme, undertake a themed mapping
of the current scientific research programmes, projects and reports
that are directed specifically towards enhancing our food security
either publically funded or co-funded, and of those which might
exert a potentially important indirect impact on food security.
This would provide a first line of co-ordinated communication
of research to potential users, and indicate more transparently
where current priorities lie. (Paragraph 136)
The Global Food Security (GFS) programme coordinate
food-related research and innovation across major public sector
funders through its high-level strategy. The programme builds
on partners' existing activities, and helps to ensure alignment
of activities with shared goals, providing a platform for partnership
working nationally and internationally.
The programme's refreshed themes represent a high-level
mapping of priorities across the major public sector funders,
based on those set out in the UK Cross-Government Food Research
and Innovation Strategy.[21]
The priority research themes for the programme are (i) resilience
(ii) sustainable production and supply and (iii) nutrition, health
and wellbeing.
GFS has undertaken two '100 questions' activities,
building on the 2010 Foresight Report's challenges to help funders
and stakeholders develop research priorities on food security
in terms of the future of global agriculture,[22]
and research priorities for the UK food system.[23]
These exercises were used to develop the GFS Strategy refresh
and GFS activity.
More broadly, the UK has agreed to lead a review
of international research priorities in sustainable agriculture
at the recent Meeting of Chief Agricultural Scientists, and the
GFSP will coordinate this work for the UK.
The RCUK Gateway to Research portal also enables
any interested party to search Research Council funded projects
for publications, people, organisations and outcomes.[24]
31. UK research councils should encourage the
research-intensive universities and institutes which they fund
to explore opportunities to extend the scope for farm-level research
through greater co-operation with specialist land-based sector
universities and colleges, thereby bringing the scientific research
closer to application and the farming community, and ensuring
best use of scarce and expensive resources. The Government should
recognise the contribution made by our universities and research
institutes and ensure the long term security of their funding.
(Paragraph 139)
Research Councils encourage universities and institutes
to maximise the impact of their research by working with relevant
partners, including those in specialist land-based sectors.
In 2012, Rothamsted Research North Wyke launched
the BBSRC-funded Farm Platform to bring together scientists from
across disciplines and countries to spark new ideas to meet the
food security challenge. Three farmlets will compare the benefits
of different production systems.
BBSRC also funds research utilising research farms
in the HEI sector and field-based studies at BBSRC strategically
funded research institutes. It also runs the BBSRC Advanced Training
Partnership scheme to provide a range of specialist high level
training to meet industry needs in partnership with the higher
and further education sectors.
32. There are gaps in the co-ordination and flow
of knowledge from research institutes to the farmers who would
use and benefit from it. We recommend that the Government develop
an integrated knowledge transfer strategy and action plan, which
can be delivered and co-ordinated within the present funding frameworks,
to ensure engagement between researchers and the relevant end
users. (Paragraph 147)
The flow of knowledge from research to farmers is
a key component in driving sustainability and growth in the agricultural
sector. We know from the Farm Business Survey that there are differences
among farmers and between farm-types in the degree to which they
access advice through technical services, discussion groups and
demonstrations.
The investment in the Centres for Agricultural Innovation
through the Agri-tech Strategy is designed to be part of the solution
to this issue. Each centre is expected to have a programme of
outreach to farmers to allow information to flow between them
and the research base (as there are benefits to be gained from
knowledge transfer in both directions.)
The Government will also be supporting the European
Innovation Partnership for agricultural productivity and sustainability
(EIP-Agri) in the next Rural Development Programme from 2015.
The EIP-Agri is a new European Commission initiative which will
boost innovation. It is intended to foster a resource-efficient,
productive and low-emission agricultural industry by bringing
together researchers and farmers to apply technologies on farm
and exchange knowledge. RDP funds will support the setting up
and running of Operational Groups to conduct projects. The topic
will be chosen by Group participants, mainly farmers.
This will be integrated with support for knowledge
transfer, advice and skills in the next RDP, and will build on
the results of the implementation of the Agri-tech strategy.
Previous work on advice and incentives to farmers
has shown this to be a complex landscape and one where peer to
peer information exchange is one of the most effective methods
of knowledge transfer. Based on this, our approach to providing
such advice is to simplify the landscape of advice to farmers,
and make sure that Government communicates only on issues where
it will have most impact, working with other partners, especially
in the private sector, to provide advice and enable knowledge
transfer on other topic.
We do not feel that a Government Strategy and action
plan on knowledge transfer would add value to the initiatives
we already have in place. However, we are closely monitoring the
impact of the Agri Tech Strategy over the next five years and
into the long term. We will use this information and direct feedback
from the industry via the Agri Tech Leadership Council to understand
the reasons behind any areas of the industry where the uptake
of new technologies is not as high as anticipated, so that we
can base any further initiatives on robust evidence of barriers
to uptake.
33. Our food security depends on a vibrant, innovative
and professional UK farming sector. This in turn requires a regular
inflow of new entrants to the sector. Farming in the UK does not
have this and efforts must be made to encourage new entrants who
are willing and able to take advantage of new technologies in
order to ensure the sector is modern and competitive. We are pleased
that the Government is examining ways to do this in conjunction
with the industry which can also help with the costs associated
with entry into farming. (Paragraph 152)
34. We recommend that the Government update us
on its efforts and on the likely actions that will emerge from
the Future of Farming Review. It should also clarify whether any
Rural Development Programme funding will be made available to
support the implementation of the recommendations arising from
the Future of Farming Review. (Paragraph 153)
The industry-led Future of Farming Review published
its findings in July 2013, which centred on the themes of skills
and professionalism in the industry, flexible routes into farming
professions, affordable housing, succession planning and access
to finance. These actions were for both industry and Government
to address, in some cases working jointly, and we have begun to
do so.
For example, Defra is reviewing all agri-tenancy
legislation to modernise and simplify the legislative framework
between landlords and tenants, through a Red Tape Challenge process.
We are supporting the National Federation of Young Farmers Clubs
through a grant of £60,000 to develop training programmes
and promote awareness of careers opportunities. Government has
also transformed apprenticeships to make them more rigorous and
responsive to the needs of employers. Employer-led Trailblazers
are leading the way in piloting the changes and one of the Trailblazers
is developing the standard for a Land-based Engineering Technician.
We are considering the design of the new Rural Development
Programme so that the younger generation of farmers can access
support, training and advice to innovate and become more competitive.
We are also considering how to encourage robust business and succession
planning, and effective investment during the early years of business
operation. This will complement the new CAP Pillar 1 arrangements
which enable us to make a top up to the basic payment for new
entrant young farmers aged 40 or under.
1 This consists of: (i) £90m to establish Centres
for Agricultural Innovation to support wide-scale adoption of
innovation and technology across key sectors (ii) a £70m
Agri-Tech Catalyst to help commercialise new agri technologies
and innovations, co-funded with industry. Back
2
The 'production to supply ratio' measures domestic production
(including exports) as a proportion of domestic consumption (including
imports). At the product level (e.g. fruit, vegetables), this
calculation is in volume terms. Back
3
Depending on trends in consumption Back
4
Food Security and the UK: An Evidence and Analysis Paper (Defra,
2006). Available online at: http://archive.defra.gov.uk/evidence/economics/foodfarm/reports/documents/foodsecurity.pdf
Back
5
For example, through supporting implementation of low carbon techniques
by smallholder farmers in Brazil to increase yields and profits
whilst reducing emissions and avoiding deforestation. Back
6
This is set out in the UK statement on the sustainable production
of palm oil, published in October 2012. Back
7
This is discussed under Recommendation 17. Back
8
As at May 2014 90.6% of Met Office maximum temperature forecasts
are accurate to within +/- 2°C on the next day (36-month
average). http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/who/accuracy/forecasts Back
9
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/2012-review-of-progress-in-reducing-greenhouse-gas-emissions-from-english-agriculture. Back
10
For example, the British Retail Consortium's 'A Better Retailing
Climate', and the Food and Drink Federation's 'Five-fold Environmental
Ambition' both include industry targets for reducing emissions. Back
11
This is jointly funded by Defra and the Devolved Administrations
of Scotland and Northern Ireland. Back
12
This is particularly important when, although the aggregate land
use for agriculture has increased over recent years, the FAO estimate
that per capita agriculture land will continue a downward trend
due to pressure on land for other uses, e.g. urbanisation. Fig
1, ftp://ftp.fao.org/agl/aglw/docs/ResourceOutlookto2050.pdf Back
13
http://iwyp.org/ Back
14
http://www.bbsrc.ac.uk/circ Back
15
http://www.bbsrc.ac.uk/saric Back
16
The Future of Food and Farming: Challenges and Choices for Global
Sustainability Final Project Report, Government Office for Science,
Jan 2011. Page 82 Back
17
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/322415/10143-GCA-Annual_Report_2014.pdf Back
18
https://www.faccejpi.com/Strategic-Research-Agenda/First-Biennial-Implementation-Plan-2014-2015 Back
19
A number of relevant case studies can be found here: www.bbsrc.ac.uk/business/collaborative-research/stand-alone-link.aspx. Back
20
www.bbsrc.ac.uk/business/collaborative-research/industry-clubs/industry-clubs-index.aspx Back
21
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/food-research-and-innovation-strategy Back
22
www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3763/ijas.2010.0534#.U4c5VfldXz4 Back
23
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs12571-013-0294-4 Back
24
http://gtr.rcuk.ac.uk/ Back
| 
