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 book presents a captivating exploration of the often-overlooked experiences, challenges, and enduring triumphs of black farmers in America. It examines the historical roots, present-day realities, and future possibilities of Black farming in the United States through the lens of equity, land, and local food systems, tacing Black agriculture from slavery and Reconstruction to contemporary struggles and innovations. 

In this report by the Food, Farming and Countryside Commission revisits the questions in the 2024 False Economy of Big Food report -- how much does the UK’s current food system cost the nation through diet-related ill health; and how much additional household expenditure would be required to ensure access to a healthy diet for everyone. Using updated data it also takes into consideration new insights and research, published since the earlier work, highlighting the decline in health conditions and increase in food inequality within the country. 

While many factors drive low fertilizer usage in sub-Saharan Africa, high prices are key and a significant constrain for many smallholder farmers who have limited resources. Focusing specifically on the East and Southern Africa (ESA) region, this report shows that these high fertilizer prices are the consequence of highly concentrated markets that rely on imported fertilizers supplied by a limited number of companies.

This report estimates how many deaths linked to diet-related diseases could be delayed in the US each year if F&B companies shifted towards healthier product sales, making healthier foods become the norm. It models a scenario in which sales shift towards the healthiest 50% of products within each food category that are already available on the market, as defined by the Health Star Rating (HSR), an internationally recognised nutrient profiling system. 

This report by Action Against Hunger shows Two-thirds of the people facing extreme hunger are concentrated in ten countries. The World’s Hunger Hotspots analyses the countries with the highest numbers of people experiencing acute food insecurity, combining data from internationally recognized sources. 

This report by IPES-Food claims to exposes the systemic exploitation running through the global food chain – from farms, fishing vessels, and factories to supermarkets, restaurants, and delivery platforms. It also shows how workers are organising to win better pay, safer workplaces, and stronger labour rights – and sets out how governments, employers, and labour movements can build worker power, guarantee decent work and equal rights for migrant workers, rein in corporate power, and properly value the people who feed the world.

This review presents a systematic literature review of cybersecurity threats affecting digital food systems and supporting infrastructures. Findings show that integrity-related and access-oriented threats, including data manipulation, false data injection, tampering, unauthorized access, and system takeover, are frequently represented. 

This study argues that, despite minor leakage risks, a uniform social cost of carbon (SCC) approach offers the highest global mitigation potential but could harm health in some countries. SCC scenarios reflecting common but differentiated responsibility lower mitigation but lessen the negative health effects, and subsidies can improve health but lower mitigation.