This paper explores the impacts of the COVID-19 crisis as a disruptor to Britain’s beef and sheep supply chains. The assessment of COVID-19 impacts is based on the triangulation of farming and industry news reports, submissions to a government COVID-19 enquiry and interviews with industry experts. We find that livestock farming and farm services were least affected compared to processing, retailing, foodservice, or consumers. Primary and secondary processors continued to operate during the first COVID-19 lockdown but had to quickly become ‘COVID secure’. The most dramatic effect was the overnight closure of hospitality and catering and the redirection of supplies to the retail sector. This picture of a resilient British beef and sheep industry may also be conceptualised as relatively locked in and resistant to change. Red meat production is tied to the land it farms on and operates on 12–36-month production cycles, making it difficult to change trajectory if disruptions do not directly affect farming. Emerging changes in agricultural payments, trade post-Brexit, and societal and environmental pressures may well be the disruptors that have far-reaching impacts on the beef and sheep supply chains.

Grassland is grouped into temporary, permanent, and rough grazing types in the United Kingdom (UK), making up more than 60% of the national agricultural land area. It provides avenues for grazed fodder or ensiled forage contributing a large proportion of the diets consumed by cattle and sheep. The official agricultural census data in 2011 to 2020 showed that, on average, UK cattle and sheep farming can produce meat to satisfy 83.3 and 100.8% of domestic cattle beef and sheep meat consumption levels, respectively. Out of the large agricultural census datasets, we used the populations of cattle and sheep, as well as the UK definition of a standard livestock unit (SLU), to normalise the respective herd populations into a total standard livestock unit (TSLU). We then used the annual domestic meat production in dressed carcass weight to calculate cattle and sheep meat productivity per SLU. Using the potential herbal dry matter yields per year and areas of the different grassland types across the UK, the potential total available pasture feed was calculated. This potential production of herbal biomass was translated into the potential carrying capacity expressed in a TSLU. This total potential carrying capacity was partitioned into cattle and sheep sectors so that the routes of pasture-based-only options with which to produce ruminant meat to meet the current UK domestic consumption demands were assessed. The estimated mean potential annual pasture forage feed in 2011–2020 was approximately 82.0 million (M) metric tonnes (t), which can be translated into a potential carrying capacity of 17.9 M SLUs compared with the current mean 9.36 M SLUs in the survey data of the UK. With the ratio of sheep to cattle at 8.2:25 in the national TSLU, the UK national demands at present consumption levels of cattle and sheep meat can be arithmetically met with pasture grass utilisation rates at or above 65% and 50% by cattle and sheep farming systems, respectively.

This paper explores the role of regulation and legislation on influencing the development and diffusion of technologies and methods of crop production. To do this, the change in pesticide registration under European Regulation 1107/2009 ‘Placing Plant Protection Products on the Market’ was followed through the UK’s agricultural system of innovation. Fieldwork included: a series of interviews conducted with scientists, agronomists and industry organisations; a programme of visiting agricultural events; as well as sending an electronic survey to British potato growers. The innovation system is noted to have made the legislation less restrictive than originally proposed. The most notable system response to the legislation is the adjustment of agrochemical company pesticide discovery strategy and their expansion into biologically derived treatments. There have also been other innovation responses: agricultural seed companies have been breeding in pathogen resistance in their cultivars; agricultural consultancies are prepared to recommend pathogen-resistant seeds; scientists are using the change as justification for adopting their solutions; the agricultural levy boards funded research into off-label pesticide uses; and producers, potato growers in particular, have been seeking advice, but not changing their growing practices.

In the midst of consultation and controversy about impact and research, one ...