A just transition in the UK food system

A just transition in the UK food system

The UK food sector is entering a period of profound change, and recent discussions convened by the Laudes Foundation underscored just how consequential this transition will be. The workshop brought together food businesses, civil society groups, unions, NGOs and investors to explore what a just transition might look like in practice. Although perspectives varied, a single theme ran consistently through the day, that structural changes within the food system are already underway, and without coordinated planning the pressures will fall disproportionately on those with the least influence in the supply chain. With the UK currently seeing a unique moment of policy momentum through the Food Strategy review, there is a critical window to move beyond siloed decision-making. For investors, fragmented policy across health, climate, and finance creates "policy drag," necessitating joined-up action to ensure private capital is not undermined by contradictory regulations.

Food systems account for around one‑third of global emissions, and the combined pressures of climate change, labour constraints and changing diets are accelerating a fundamental transformation of the sector. Moves towards more plant‑based consumption and regenerative production will create new economic opportunities, but they will also disrupt long‑established sectors, particularly meat and dairy. Most of the disruption will occur at the farm and primary processing stages, where margins are already thin and exposure to volatility is high. For investors, this introduces a complex mix of operational, financial and reputational risks.

Emerging concerns across the value chain

Throughout the workshop, concerns were raised that the financial risks associated with shifting to regenerative and low‑emission farming practices are still poorly understood. While many producers are open to new approaches, they face significant uncertainty about income stability during the transition, the long‑term economic viability of alternative production models and the policy consistency needed to support them. Representatives stressed that without clarity and targeted support, farmers may shoulder disproportionate risk in the move to a more sustainable system.

Participants also highlighted the fragmented nature of the UK food system. Despite being deeply interconnected, growers, processors, retailers and financiers often plan in isolation. This systemic disconnect increases the likelihood of a disorderly transition, exacerbates regional inequalities and prevents coordinated investment towards shared objectives. The lack of coordinated policy, market and financial planning was repeatedly identified as a core barrier to a fair and efficient transition.

Another theme that cut across all contributions was the persistent weakness of available data. Stakeholders pointed to the lack of consistent, comparable information on labour conditions, environmental performance and transition readiness. This challenge mirrors the concerns repeatedly raised by our work in the Investor Coalition on Food Policy, highlighting that without reliable data, investors struggle to engage effectively, monitor progress or meaningfully assess risk exposure. Poor data is not a technical inconvenience it is a structural impediment to sound investment decisions.

Implications for investors in a changing food system

For investors, the implications were clear. The sector urgently needs better data to support credible risk analysis and coherent engagement. With robust, transparent and comparable disclosures on labour practices, environmental performance and capital allocation, investors will be empowered to fairly assess companies’ readiness for a lower-emission future. This improved visibility will level the playing field, enabling purposeful investment towards those genuinely committed to sustainability and encouraging all businesses to raise their standards.

The nature of investor engagement will also need to evolve. The workshop made evident that generic sustainability discussions are no longer sufficient. Investors will need to engage more deeply and more specifically, asking how companies are incorporating worker perspectives, how they are managing transition risks at a regional level, and whether capital expenditure is aligned with low‑emission production pathways. Crucially, this transition will not unfold evenly, different regions and commodities will face very different pressures. Investors need to understand which geographies within their portfolios are most exposed to disruption and where new opportunities may emerge.

The role of workers was another central theme. Participants stressed that a transition narrative that excludes workers risks losing social legitimacy, which in turn increases reputational and regulatory risks for companies and investors alike. Ensuring that workers, trade unions, and migrant-led organisations have a meaningful voice in transition planning is not simply a social imperative, it is core to creating stable and resilient value chains.

Collaboration also emerged as essential, as investors cannot shape a fair transition in isolation. Coordinated action with government, unions, civil society, and industry will be needed to strengthen disclosure frameworks, support regionally targeted transition plans, and ensure that the shift to a low-emission food system is both fair and economically resilient.

The direction of travel for the UK food system is already clear. A just transition supports long‑term stability across supply chains and communities, and investors have a pivotal role to play in building a more sustainable and equitable future.

These findings build on insights shared during the workshop, detailed further in the executive summary and full report.