Two panel sessions debated the issue in depth at the London meet

Two panel sessions debated the issue in depth at the London meet

The food security debate at a top level Westminster forum swung dramatically last week when the issue turned from production to the whole supply chain.

Pervious meetings of the Westminster Food & Nutrition Forum had seen the proposed increase in crops, research, developments in crop management and genetically modified foods form the centre of debate with an emphasis on increasing production.

But several key figures who have shaped the UK debate told delegates at the Whitehall event that waste management and effective retailing could prove as, if not more, important as meeting the National Farmers’ Union’s (NFU) well established idea of “producing more, while impacting less” on the environment.

Steve Visscher, chief operating officer at the Biotechnology and Biological Research Council, said: “It is to be expected that many funders will not just look to support primary production but glue all the sectors together. Sectors such as transport are very important and it needs to be ensured this is reflected in a global food security programme.”

Dr Isobel Tomlinson, policy and campaigns officer at the Soil association, said “meeting projected food demand targets will not solve food insecurity”, suggesting the global food system remains at fault for the possibly critical food situation on the world’s horizon.

In a debate on research, John Ingram, executive officer at the University of Oxford’s Environmental Change institute cited engaging with agribusinesses, retailers, distribution companies and consumer groups as “very important” in addressing the issue.

It was widely agreed that interested parties across the UK have driven an advanced debate on the topic of food security but this will be rendered useless without informed discussions in Brussels.

Paul Leonard of BASF said from the floor: “Around 70 per cent of our governance comes from Europe and when people are looking at R&D in agriculture, you have to look to Brussels. We are 10 years ahead of Brussels and we need to flow this information back to where the policies are coming from.”

In recent years the UK has produced a plethora of reports with DEFRA, the NFU and the Royal Agricultural College among those looking at the issue in depth.

Sue Popple, development director of DEFRA’s farming and food group, admitted that it was “early days” and the budget was “very tight” in the department but urged partnerships across the entire food system and said the debate needed to shift its focus from primary production.