Why the UK should grow more gluten free grains

For most people in the UK, a shortage of one type of flour is an inconvenience. For someone with coeliac disease, it can be a much more serious problem. Gluten is not simply an ingredient we can choose to avoid, yet the UK's supply of gluten free staples depends on a complex international supply chain that is increasingly exposed to climate change, geopolitical instability and rising costs.

This raises an important question - should the UK be doing more to grow and process its own gluten free grains and crops?

The answer deserves serious consideration.

The UK's conventional flour supply is relatively resilient because Britain produces a substantial proportion of the wheat used by its flour mills domestically. Gluten free baking is different. Rice flour, maize, tapioca and other ingredients are widely used in gluten free bread and baking, but many of these rely heavily on international supply chains.

Rice is perhaps the clearest example. The UK Government describes the UK as entirely dependent on imports to meet domestic rice demand, with India and Pakistan among the major suppliers. The Government has also identified climate events and export restrictions as potential risks to rice supplies. A poor harvest, an export restriction or disruption to shipping can therefore have consequences for UK consumers without a single grain of rice being grown in the UK.

Maize presents a similar, though somewhat different, vulnerability. The UK does grow maize, but much of it is produced for animal feed rather than food grade grain. Defra reports that almost all grain maize used for human and industrial purposes is imported. Meanwhile, tapioca is derived from cassava, a tropical crop that Britain cannot grow commercially at meaningful scale.

This means that the ingredients underpinning something as ordinary as a gluten free loaf can pass through an incredibly long international supply chain before reaching our kitchens.

That matters because gluten free food already carries a significant price premium. Research from Coeliac UK has highlighted the high cost of GF staples and reported that some people with coeliac disease have compromised their diets because of affordability and availability. The problem is therefore not simply whether food exists somewhere in the global market, it is whether safe food is consistently available and affordable to the people who medically require it.

This is a national food security issue that deserves greater recognition.

A person without coeliac disease can respond to a shortage of rice flour by buying wheat flour. A person with coeliac disease cannot. They may be able to substitute rice with maize, potato, buckwheat or another gluten free ingredient, but those alternatives must themselves be safe and, where appropriate, protected from gluten cross-contamination during processing.

That creates a form of ‘double dependency’ - dependence on the availability of the underlying crop, and dependence on specialist processing and supply chains capable of guaranteeing gluten free safety.

The UK does, however, have an opportunity to reduce this vulnerability.

Rather than attempting to become completely self sufficient in every ingredient, the UK could begin developing a more resilient domestic market for British grown gluten free grains and crops. Crops such as buckwheat, millet, sorghum and suitable varieties of oats could potentially form part of a more diversified domestic GF supply, alongside potatoes and other crops already well suited to British agriculture.

There is no single crop that can simply replace wheat in every application. Nor would domestic production eliminate the need for imports. Climate, soil, yields, processing infrastructure and consumer demand all have to be considered. But resilience does not require complete self sufficiency. It requires having alternatives when international supply chains fail.

Developing British production would also mean developing the infrastructure around it: dedicated milling, storage and processing facilities capable of preventing gluten contamination; research into varieties suited to British conditions; and stronger links between farmers, processors, food manufacturers and the coeliac community.

The objective should therefore not be to abandon international trade. It should be to avoid excessive dependence on a small number of international supply chains for medically essential food.

Climate change and geopolitical instability make this increasingly relevant. A poor harvest in Asia, export restrictions, disruption to shipping or a sudden increase in energy and transport costs could all raise the price of imported GF ingredients. If several shocks occurred simultaneously, the problem could move from higher prices to intermittent shortages.

Domestic production would provide a buffer.

There is also a wider agricultural opportunity here. Britain already has farmers, land, milling expertise and food manufacturers capable of producing sophisticated grain products. What is missing is, in part, the scale and market structure to make a broader range of gluten free crops commercially attractive.

Government could help change that through agricultural research, crop trials, supply chain investment, procurement and support for specialist GF processing. Supermarkets and manufacturers could also play a role by creating reliable markets for British grown GF ingredients.

For people with coeliac disease, this is ultimately about more than choice. Food security means being able to obtain sufficient safe food at an affordable price. A food system that is resilient for the general population but leaves a medically restricted group disproportionately exposed to international commodity shocks has a vulnerability that deserves attention.

Britain does not need to grow every grain it consumes.

But it should perhaps ask a more fundamental question:

If gluten free bread is medically necessary for hundreds of thousands of people, why should so much of the agricultural and ingredient supply behind it depend on distant and potentially fragile supply chains?

Growing more suitable gluten free crops in the UK would not solve every problem. But it could provide something increasingly valuable in an uncertain world: a domestic source of safe, nutritious and affordable alternatives for people who cannot eat wheat.

That is not just an agricultural opportunity, it should be food security policy.