Helping develop a resilient food system for the East of England

• Purpose: Feed Humanity
  • Peak Oil and Gas
  • Climate Change
  • Economic Shocks
  • Water
  • Phosphate
• Principles: Resilient Food Systems
  • Reducing Meat and Dairy
  • Urban/Peri-urban Horticulture
  • Resilient Bread
  • Low-Input Agriculture
  • Nutrient Recycling
  • Community Supported
  • Seasonal & unprocessed
  • Reducing Waste
• Potential Red Herrings
  • Local Food
  • Supermarkets
• What EAFL is doing
  • Who We Are
  • What We Do
  • Norwich CSA
  • Norwich School Farm
  • Norwich Mill, Norwich Loaf
  • Beans, Barley, Oats project
  • Norwich Food Plan
  • Contact our Team
  • Our Board
• What You Can Do
  • Consumers
  • Business Opportunities
  • Local Authorities

Updated September 2010

Local Food

EAFL has spent several years now working to broker local and regional supply chains of various foods (mainly fruit/vegetables and meat) into "conventional" markets such as schools, hospitals, multiple retailers, independent retailers, hotels, pubs, restaurants and farm shops.

During 2007 and 2008 we have analysed the outcomes of this work and find that such attempts are compromised by three key factors:

The market for local food is much smaller than is generally assumed. Although most consumers state a preference for local food, their preference is insufficiently strong to overcome the understandable reluctance of retailers and restaurateurs to provide local food consistently - particuarly as the latter often costs more. A recent report, produced as part of EAFL's Supply Chains Brokerage project within the Lottery-funded Making Local Food Work programme, goes through the market sectors in considerable detail, explaining our findings to date in relation to each.

Suppliers, and particularly medium-sized suppliers, are "locked into" their current purchasing arrangements by a wide range of factors. Consistently providing local food would often be more expensive, often for reasons that are not immediately obvious. The MLFW Review Report referenced above gives some examples of why this happens (particularly in some of the case studies).

Local food is often neither lower in greenhouse gas emissions, nor more resilient, than non-local food. To give an obvious example, pigs grown 5 miles up the road on grain that has been hauled 100 miles and soya grown in Brazil (possibly increasing pressures for deforestation in the Amazon) is neither a low-carbon nor a resilient food; but many farmers' markets and other "local food" initiatives would be proud to feature such a product. A more in-depth discussion of these issues can be found in another recent EAFL report, Limitations of a Provenance Approach to Local Food. The also argues that a very simplistic approach to local food, focussing overly on "food miles", plays into the hands of supermarkets etc who can appropriate the local food message without really taking significant steps towards a more resilient or low-carbon food system.

National self-sufficiency

EAFL does believe that it is important for food system resilience to move to national self-sufficiency in staple foods. Government documents have recently stated the view that a rich nation like the UK will always be able to import food. We disagree both because the UK economy may be particuarly hard-hit by the unravelling of financial systems that may follow in the wake of peak oil; and because recent actions by India, Egypt and most recently Russia have suggested that producer countries will always act to protect their own food security at the expense of exports.

Regional self-sufficiency

Within the UK we have undertaken a brief analysis that suggests that, with the exception of London, most regions should be able to be self-sufficient in most classes of food. Some classes of food should be grown closer to the consumer than others. Fruit and vegetables, and also pigs and chickens, can sensibly be reared very close to centres of population, whether those be a city (including London) or a market town or village. Arable crops can be transported over greater distances, although most regions can be self-sufficient in these and East Anglia should be able to supply London. Liquid milk can generally be sourced fairly locally, although some regions will need to bring cheese and butter from more distant regions. Beef and sheep can be sourced locally in most regions but London should bring in carcasses from Wales, Scotland and the West of England. Most processing (such as milling, baking, brewing or butchery) should be undertaken close to the consumer rather than close to the primary producer.

Different approaches for different foods

One approach to supporting local food is to try to envision a the resilient, low-carbon food system of the future, and then consider what parts of the current local food system could grow into that future system.

• In the case of fruit and vegetables, we have suggested that in a post-oil world there will need to be a shift towards urban and peri-urban growing. Projects to support at this time include allotment schemes, schemes that help people to learn to grow in their own gardens, dachas, care farming and peri-urban market gardens. They also include encouraging secure markets for the produce from all of these through community supported agriculture.
• In the case of beef and lamb production, much of this is undertaken by small farmers using marginal land such as river valleys or steep hillsides. These same farmers are likely to be the mainstay of the country's meat production post-peak-oil, and there is a good case for supporting them. Some may however need to adjust their husbandry to more extensive techiques, and this may involve changing to more hardy breeds and also to dual-purpose beef/dairy breeds. Local high-street butchers will probably continue to form the other end of this supply chain and again these should be supported and protected.
• Our intensive pig and poultry industries unfortunately can not survive the growing shortages in the world's food system and the rising grain and pulse prices that are accompanying those. The future for pigs and poultry is in small numbers kept at the domestic level or as a side-line on a farm. Trying to use the "local food" message to protect intensive producers would probably be counter-productive.
• Producers of expensive, niche foods are unlikely to survive the oil peak and its accompanying financial hardships. Unfortunately that these currently represent a significant proportion of the producers in the "regional food" market.
• However, basic primary processors such as millers, bakers, brewers, butchers and dairies will be needed in greater numbers than ever in a post-oil world. For reasons described elsewhere, these should generally be located close to the consumer, not close to the primary producer. So in these cases "local food" means supporting bakers, brewers, butchers and dairies in every neighbourhood, town and village. The craft of these skilled processors, and the relationships they enjoy with their customers and suppliers, are key elements of the human and social capital we need to build in preparation for a post-oil food system.

A different approach to local food is one that says that, even if peak oil is already upon us, its effects have yet to be fully felt. In the meantime, it may still be better to buy vegetables from a commodity producer 30 miles away than to buy vegetables that have been imported or brought from the other end of the country. Or, in the meantime people will still eat pork from large-scale production, and it is better that they eat pork from nearby rather than pork that has travelled over long distances. We at EAFL continue to work on this level also.