Fertiliser – the villain of the UK Food Security Report 2024

The UK Food Security Report 2024 reads like an intriguing story, full of plot twists highlighting the incoherence of the UK food system. And there is one bad guy in this story who is associated with every key risk to our food security named in the report:  geopolitical shocks, food price hikes, soil degradation, river pollution and climate change. This character is hidden in plain sight – the most dangerous type. The villain’s name? Fertiliser.

It’s there lurking in the shadows when the report outlines the three key risks for domestic food production, it’s there propping up our reliance on unreliable global supply chains and it’s there entrenching our damaging relationship with fossil fuels.

What are the risks?

Fertiliser features in the story of risks to food security through negative impact on soil health and our reliance on inputs sourced from global supply chains. The intensification of agriculture and the corresponding overuse of fertiliser can lead to nutrient imbalances in soil, with wider implications for soil degradation and productivity.

The UK is totally dependent on imports for nitrogen fertiliser. Fertiliser prices follow energy prices closely, as natural gas is the key ingredient in producing ammonia. In the past few years, with geopolitical tensions including Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, fertiliser prices have fluctuated dramatically. Fertiliser costs for UK farms rose from £1.5 billion in 2021 to £2.0 billion in 2022 and were £1.4 billion in 2023 – and higher fertiliser costs means higher food costs.

And what food do we produce with this fertiliser?

The UK’s ‘food production to supply ratio’ (which in non-technical terms means what food is available in the UK) is a fine example of policy incoherence. What we produce in the UK does not align with dietary guidelines. We overproduce meat and dairy and underproduce vegetables and fruit.

In 2023, the UK produced most of the meat, dairy and eggs that it consumed, as well as cereals, which were predominantly used for animal feed. In the same year it produced a significantly lower proportion of vegetables (53% were produced domestically) and fruits (a mere16%).

We know that availability of fresh produce in the UK is an important part of food security and supports human health. The Eatwell Guide indicates that just over a third of all food consumed every day should be a variety of fruits and vegetables, a minimum of five portions. These are good sources of micronutrients, but we are currently highly dependent on imports to meet demand and many of the countries the UK imports from are also subject to their own climate and sustainability risks.

The science is clear: the food we grow is an important lever in addressing the climate emergency, biodiversity destruction, the public health crisis and animal suffering.

If we move away from industrialised meat and dairy, and shift towards plant-based diets, we could afford to reduce nitrogen-based fertilisers and produce food more efficiently. In other words, we could grow more food in the UK which is good for us, good for the planet and good for animals, while using less fertiliser. Why? Because plant-based foods have higher nitrogen use efficiency than animal agriculture. Diets that are predominantly plant-based also correlate with lower nitrogen footprints, reduced greenhouse gas emissions and positive health outcomes. They would also reduce energy dependency and increase resilience in the food system.

One of the fascinating plot lines in the UK food system story is that, although fertiliser is a complex villain, by shining a light on the role it plays we can set about resolving these urgent challenges. We can write a new chapter about a sustainable food and energy transition. With a shift in diets, and coherent choices around how we produce food, we have the potential to see gains across a range of environmental, health and climate outcomes.

In 2025, Feedback Global will be rewriting the story of fertiliser and food.

Watch this space.