Droughts in Europe have caused at least €14 billion in damage to agriculture this year. Wars in the Middle East and Black Sea have sent fertiliser, energy and grain prices surging. El Niño is looming, threatening to pummel agriculture further.No wonder resilience - the capacity and decision to bounce back, adapt or transform in response to a shock - is the term du jour in conversations around food. This week, the UK government has even issued warnings to stockpile tins of tuna and bottled water to be more ‘resilient’ to shocks. As we’ll explore in this edition of TABLE’s contested terms series, resilience is a semantic minefield. Depending on the framing, resilience can be used to justify all sorts of interventions in food systems, from actions to secure the status quo to radical systems change.  For some farmers, resilience is about being able to stay in business. For others, it’s about changing their model by reducing fertiliser and inputs. For supermarkets, resilience is keeping the shelves full and supply chains running. For some organisations promoting agroecology, building resilience is, variously, an opportunity for farmers to reduce reliance on farm inputs based on fossil fuels; fertiliser, diesel and pesticides, to shorten the distance between farm produce and the end consumer, and, more far reachingly, to change the incentives structures which determine what foods are produced, how they are transformed and consumed, and who benefits. In this latest in our series, we’re asking our experts, Monika Zurek, titular associate professor and leader of the Food Systems Transformation Group at the University of Oxford, Tim Lang, professor emeritus of Food Policy at City St George's, and Nick Hughes, editor of Footprint: Resilience according to whom? And to achieve what? Because when these crucial concept-defining questions are left unarticulated, people often end up talking at cross purposes simply because they mean very different things by the word they’re both using. And this gap in understanding means it’s possible to have conversations that mean one thing to someone, and something completely different to another – which makes for unproductive exchanges. Our guests will also explain how building resilience in one sector can often undermine it in others, impacting those more vulnerable. More positively, new terms – despite their bagginess – can catalyse fresh thinking and the possibility of change. What change that is, remains to be negotiated. Look out for TABLE’s explainer on Resilience in the new year, which will unpack these different perspectives in-depth. 

This paper examines how UK seafood processing businesses responded to COVID-19 and Brexit disruptions, focusing on flexibility, diversity, and connectivity as key characteristics of resilience. It finds that during the crisis businesses with diversified products, customers, labour force, and suppliers showed greater resilience. To build more resilience, the industry forums should develop UK processing capacity to reduce dependence on overseas supply chains, and expand digital infrastructure for direct-to-consumer sales. 

A new report from the Nature Friendly Farming Network in the UK argues that an ambitious transition to nature-friendly farming is correct way forward for farm businesses as well as for people and planet. It sets out how emphasising soil health, water management and nature on farms will help farmers navigate the growing economic and environmental pressures they face. 

The report, produced by Nature Friendly Farming Network and the Wildlife Trust, finds that a modelled reduction of farming inputs; pesticides, fertilisers and animal feeds, would result in commercial gains for 165 UK farmers. They refer to this balancing act as the ‘Maximum Sustainable Output’ -- the point where a farm achieves maximum output while harnessing the natural resources available to it.

This paper examines the threat to current wilderness from climate-driven agricultural expansion. Through modelling future crop suitability, the authors establish that 2.7 million km2 of wilderness, particularly at high-latitude, will become newly suitable for agriculture within the next 40 years.

The conflict in Ukraine has spotlighted significant insecurities in the global food system. Many countries with restricted access to imported staples have seen their food prices soaring and populations become increasingly food insecure, with effects most pronounced in the world’s poorest countries who tend to be import reliant. This paper highlights the impacts of current international crises on food security, highlights over-reliance on imports as the major threat to food security, and offers four suggestions as to how food systems can be diversified to enhance future food security

This paper investigates the resilience of the UK fish farms to risk through their level of adherence to circular economic principles. The authors define circular economics as a shift from a wasteful linear system, to a regenerative closed-loop system, through reduced resource use, the elimination of waste and pollution, and a focus on repair, reuse and recycling rather than disposal. They argue that through aligning with circular economic principles, seafood companies may be able to increase their resilience to future economic and environmental risks whilst simultaneously improving their environmental impacts.

This book examines subsistence agriculture practices in the United States, including hunting, fishing, gardening, gathering, and keeping livestock. It frames subsistence activities as “shadow structures” in response to industrial capitalism.