Last summer IGD’s report, ‘Driving growth through a thriving food system’, outlined how strategic action in poultry could unlock £4bn of investment, boost annual domestic production value by £1.1bn by 2030, create 40,000 jobs, and improve the UK’s food security.
It also showed that without policy action, we could lose 322kt of annual production capacity (–17%), £481m in annual production value, and around 15,000 jobs, leaving other nations to benefit from an increasing demand for chicken from the UK consumer.
We are already Europe’s biggest importer of poultry, and without protections against lower-welfare imports there is a very real risk that British farmers, who are already investing heavily in higher-standard production, will be undercut.
The challenges of producing to higher welfare standards were thrown into sharp focus last week as eight businesses announced they are withdrawing from the Better Chicken Commitment (BCC) in favour of the newly established Sustainable Chicken Forum, put together by 18 UK brands.
Introduced in 2018, the BCC has been one of the most ambitious voluntary welfare pledges ever undertaken by the food industry. More than two hundred processing, foodservice and retail businesses signed up, each recognising the need to raise the bar for broiler welfare and respond to a public that increasingly expects more from the food system. Higher welfare is not a niche concern; it’s a mainstream consumer expectation. Industry, shoppers and government are all broadly aligned on this.
Poultry’s planning limitations
Yet intent alone is not enough. As many businesses make real efforts to meet BCC requirements, they are running headlong into a significant practical barrier: the planning system. Even the most committed producer cannot deliver the shed upgrades, additional space, natural light and enrichment required without planning processes that enable rather than obstruct investment. Nor can businesses transition to slower-growing breeds while domestic capacity is constrained.
Government has proposed significant changes to the National Planning Policy Framework, which we wholeheartedly welcome. The framework is targeting the current limitations within the system which make it extremely difficult for producers to modernise or expand facilities. These include delays, uncertainty, and inconsistencies between local authorities and regulators including the Environment Agency, which prevent the very improvements government policy and consumers want to see.
But planning reform takes time and must be matched with regulatory alignment across agencies to avoid new bottlenecks and ensure farmers can invest with confidence.
Furthermore, the critical weakness in action on trade and imports is a concern echoed across the Farming Profitability Review and the government’s own Good Food Cycle strategy, both of which are clear that trade deals must not undermine British producers, but we are yet to see this implemented in practice. Without government assurances on these matters, farmers and integrators will be unlikely to invest in higher-welfare production within the UK if there is a constant risk of cheaper and lower-welfare imports undermining that move.
Level playing field
These fundamental infrastructure problems are not easy ones to solve – but the opportunities are significant if we can. This won’t happen without an environment that supports responsible producers and protects them from unfair competition.
Industry remains committed to improving welfare and delivering what shoppers expect – there is an open door. The government’s new Animal Welfare Strategy for England marks an important shift towards embedding higher welfare expectations in regulation. It levels the playing field and ratifies the leadership many British businesses have already shown.
The government has taken encouraging first steps but must now ensure the planning system becomes a catalyst, and that regulatory mismatches and trade policy do not become the constraint. Three things are needed now. Firstly, full buy-in and consistent application of reforms from all relevant government agencies – at pace. Secondly, ensuring trade deals uphold British standards and support environmentally sustainable growth.
And finally, a clear, practical timeline for industry to implement higher welfare standards. The goals of BCC are absolutely achievable, but original timelines are now unlikely.
If industry, government, regulators and NGOs move together with shared ambition, the UK can set a new global benchmark for animal welfare while strengthening domestic production and rural economies. British farmers are ready to lead. They just need a level playing field. And we must be realistic: even with reform, planning approvals and construction take time.
Better chicken is possible, but it desperately needs better infrastructure.
Naomi Kissman is social impact director for IGD
No comments yet