Cold chain calls for critical infrastructure status as UK food resilience comes under scrutiny

The federation is stepping up its campaign for the cold chain to be recognised as critical national infrastructure, arguing that businesses responsible for storing and transporting food must be included in government emergency planning.

Speaking at Cold Chain Live at the Telford International Centre, CCF chief executive Phil Pluck outlined progress following the launch of the federation’s The Critical Link white paper, which called for greater recognition of the cold chain’s role in protecting the UK’s food supply.

The federation is seeking closer engagement with government, particularly the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), and wants the sector to have a stronger voice in decisions affecting national food security.

One of its proposals is the appointment of a dedicated minister for the cold chain, reflecting the importance of temperature-controlled storage and distribution to the wider food system.

For hauliers and logistics operators, the issue is whether the infrastructure, energy and transport capacity needed to keep food moving would remain available during a major disruption.

Pluck said the federation had raised the question of access to emergency power and energy supplies with the food security minister. He described the response as indicating that the government did not have direct control over all the arrangements, although the issue was to be discussed at ministerial and Secretary of State level.

A loss of power can put chilled and frozen stock at risk, while disruption to fuel supplies could quickly affect the ability of vehicles to collect and deliver goods. Pluck highlighted how freezer facilities can retain their temperatures for a period after a power failure, whereas chilled facilities have less time before conditions become a concern.

The federation wants the cold chain’s requirements to be considered when government plans emergency access to energy and fuel. Without that, businesses could find themselves responsible for protecting food stocks without having reliable access to the resources needed to do so.

Just-in-time resilience

Pluck was careful not to suggest that the UK’s food supply chain is fundamentally broken. Instead he praised the system developed by retailers, manufacturers, distributors and logistics businesses, describing it as a highly effective example of “just-in-time” distribution.

But that efficiency depends on a complex network of businesses and infrastructure, much of which is outside the control of any single organisation.

The challenge, he argued, is to make that system more resilient without losing the benefits it delivers. The cold chain cannot plan for emergencies in isolation: government, local authorities, retailers, manufacturers, distributors and logistics providers all need to understand their roles and how they will work together.

Pluck described work involving local authorities to examine their emergency planning. While councils had arrangements and teams in place to respond to major incidents, the federation found a gap when it came to the practical question of food supply: “Where does the food come from in an emergency?” he asked. 

An emergency plan may identify the need to feed a population, but that is only the starting point. Food still needs to be sourced, stored at the correct temperature and moved through a functioning distribution network.

Pluck also highlighted the difference between the UK’s approach to food reserves and that of Switzerland, saying the country holds enough food for around six and a half months. By comparison, he referred to the UK having a total of just five days.

The comparison underlined the CCF’s concern about the UK’s reliance on continuous supply rather than substantial reserves. For temperature-controlled logistics operators, that makes the resilience of the infrastructure supporting food distribution all the more important: if normal supply routes are disrupted, the ability to keep existing stocks safe and move them where they are needed becomes critical.

The CCF wants the cold chain to be part of emergency planning conversations before a crisis occurs, rather than being brought in once disruption has already begun.

Cyberattacks and infrastructure risks

Cybersecurity was another key part of Pluck’s presentation. Attacks on retailers and other parts of the food supply chain have demonstrated how disruption to one business can have consequences well beyond its own operations.

For temperature-controlled operators, the risk is that a cyber incident affecting a customer, supplier or distribution partner could interrupt orders, warehouse operations or the flow of goods, even if the haulier itself has not been directly targeted.

Pluck’s message was that the industry must not regard such incidents as isolated events. Referring to attacks and disruption affecting businesses in Europe, he argued that operators and the wider supply chain need to prepare on the basis that another incident will happen.

That means resilience needs to extend beyond individual business continuity plans. The sector must consider how it would respond if several parts of the supply chain were affected at the same time, including the availability of power, fuel, data and the infrastructure on which distribution depends.

The federation is also looking at how existing cold storage and distribution infrastructure could contribute to a more resilient food system. Pluck discussed the potential to make better use of available freezer capacity, including freezing surplus food to extend its shelf life and provide greater flexibility in the event of disruption. Such measures would need coordination between food producers, retailers, distributors and cold storage businesses, rather than relying on individual operators to act independently.

For the sector, however, greater resilience comes at a cost. Cold stores and refrigerated transport are energy-intensive, while operators are already facing substantial pressure from operating, employment and infrastructure costs.

The CCF’s argument is that the industry cannot be expected to shoulder the full burden of national food resilience without government recognising the role it plays and helping to address the practical barriers.

The federation’s discussions with Defra are therefore an important step, but the test will be whether that engagement leads to tangible changes in emergency planning and access to essential resources.

The UK’s food supply chain has been built around keeping products moving efficiently, with temperature-controlled transport and storage forming an essential link between producers, retailers and consumers. The CCF wants government to recognise that the infrastructure behind that system is part of the country’s ability to feed itself when normal operations are disrupted, and the businesses operating it need to be included in plans to protect it.