by Pat Crawford of Hadlow College, near Tonbridge

Despite a generally gloomy summer, UK markets are reporting a return of measured optimism. The Markit Household Finance Index Standing at 40.6 in June was the most positive since February 2010 and the joint highest since Markit initiated the surveys in 2009.

At the same time, in many parts of the world, food prices are rising as farmers and growers battle poor conditions and an increasing number of extreme weather events.

Commentators have suggested that bread, fruit and vegetables could be especially affected. UK farmers are predicting a sharp decline in the amount of wheat harvested. The yield last year, hampered by bad weather, was 13.3mn tonnes.

Some market analysts are suggesting this could reduce to 11m tonnes this year. On a brighter note, although quantity is predicted to be affected there is a great deal more optimism in relation to quality.

Projections for a poor harvest indicate that the UK will be a net importer of cereals which will further increase prices as it is more expensive to import. Livestock producers will also be badly affected because animal feedstuffs will rise in price.

Experts have been predicting increasing climate change-related problems for a long time but it is only comparatively recently that the impact on food production has been appreciated. It takes scarcities and price hikes to convince shoppers that climate change is impacting on farming.

'It takes scarcities and price hikes to convince shoppers that climate change is impacting on farming'

Research undertaken for Defra indicates the volatility of commodity prices as a result of climate change.

The assumption that shortfalls can be redressed by increasing imports is threatened by the fact that, when a commodity is in short supply, major food-producing countries take protectionist measures in order to safeguard their own food security.

Meanwhile the debate about GM crops is accelerating with the pro lobby arguing that disastrous weather and the predicted poor harvest make a compelling case for exploiting the science while, at the same time, eco-campaigners remain staunch in their objections.

Rather than greater consensus, the gap between the “for” and “against” grows wider.