Transparency data

Annual science update to the FSA Board: September 2026

Published 3 September 2026

Applies to England, Northern Ireland and Wales

Report by Julie Pierce to the Food Standards Agency (FSA) September 2026 Board meeting.

1. Summary

1.1 This paper is the annual update to the Board on the FSA’s science delivery. It provides:

• a review of progress made, and impact delivered, over the last year
• a review of strategic science priorities and the approach for delivering them across the remainder of the Spending Review (SR) period

1.2 The Board is asked to:

• review the progress and impact made
• comment on our future priorities and agree the focus for 2027 and beyond

2. Introduction

2.1 This paper updates the Board on progress since the previous FSA Science Update in September 2025.

2.2 It aligns with the annual report of the CSA, presented in June 2026. Annex 1 provides the FSA’s response to the recommendations made and an update on actions taken to date.

2.3 The FSA’s science is delivered through a combination of internal and external expertise and capabilities. Core to this is a team of 160 scientists and analysts, who sit in the Science, Evidence and Research Division (SERD), with an allocated budget of £21 million in the 2026/27 financial year. More detail on how we resource and deliver our science can be found in the Science Performance Report that was presented to the Business Committee.

2.4 To support the FSA, SERD operates across three core areas of science delivery:

• risk analysis and market authorisation: delivering risk assessments to support both the FSA’s risk analysis process and market authorisation service
• research and evidence: delivering a portfolio of internal and external projects through our co-ordinated research and evidence programmes
• science infrastructure: maintaining and building the scientific tools, capabilities and systems required to enable efficient, effective and assured delivery of our science

3. Review of science delivery

3.1 This section reviews progress and impact made across the three core areas, during the previous 12 months, drawing out key achievements and (where applicable) ongoing priorities for the remainder of the 2026/27 financial year.

Risk analysis and market authorisation

3.2 This covers the largest area of science delivery within the FSA and how this contributes to the FSA’s Risk Analysis Process and market authorisation programme. It includes delivering risk and impact assessments and other types of supporting activities around three activity areas:

• incidents: responding to food safety incidents such as pathogen outbreaks
• risk assessment: informing risk management, regulatory decisions and public health advice
• market authorisations: evaluating new food and feed product applications (such as food and feed additives) pre-market

Incidents

3.3 In FY25/26, we provided 172 risk assessments in support of incident response (compared to 147 in the 2024/25 financial year).

3.4 Examples of science input into incident response include:

Cereulide toxin in infant formula/follow-on formula products

During this incident, the initial root cause was identified as contamination of the ingredient arachidonic-rich acid (ARA) oil, which is a synthetic omega 6 oil, to replicate the natural occurrence in breast milk.

Given that this ingredient was used by more than one manufacturer, continued rapid testing and risk assessment of individual products and batches was vital in providing proportionate advice to safeguard the vulnerable consumers of this product.

Imported eggshell membrane supplements

Salmonella enteritidis and other Salmonella serovars were identified in these supplements. The risk assessment identified a complex antimicrobial resistance (AMR) profile of public health concern which, coupled with food chain investigation and application of timely risk management measures enabled the delivery of a targeted consumer food safety warning.  

Following on from this incident, further rapid surveillance of this category of product has been commissioned to better understand the potential extent of risks posed enabling us to strengthen future incident response.

Risk assessment

3.5 Evidence provided by SERD is integral to the FSA’s Risk Analysis Process, enabling colleagues in policy to incorporate risk assessment, economic and social science evidence to inform risk management.

3.6 Between April 2025 and March 2026, 15 risk assessments were completed under the risk analysis process (compared with 19 in the 2024/25 financial year). Examples of risk assessment work delivered this year include:

Fish caught from Lough Neagh

Based on sampling of fish from the Lough to understand the levels of cyanotoxins within the fish during all phases of the seasonal bloom of blue green algae, we delivered an updated risk assessment which confirmed that fish from Lough Neagh remain safe to eat.

Review of Campylobacter reduction interventions

This provides a comprehensive review of interventions to reduce Campylobacter contamination in UK chicken production, spanning farms, slaughterhouses, processing plants, retail, and kitchens.

The findings of this work are now contributing to our wider work to identify appropriate actions and interventions on foodborne disease by informing options to reduce consumer exposure to campylobacter via chicken, for example through evaluating the potential of using probiotics in poultry flocks to reduce campylobacter levels.

Market authorisations

3.7 In the 2025/26 financial year, we continued to deliver risk assessments for the Market Authorisation service, as well as completing technical guidance and scientific support for FSA’s innovation projects.  

3.8 Examples of market authorisation work delivered this year include:

• completing safety assessments for 83 market authorisation applications, which supports risk managers in making recommendations to ministers
• establishing the scientific team in the Cell Cultivated Products Sandbox to develop our understanding of the risk assessment of these new products and to support applicants to the service.  A new sub-group of the Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes (ACNFP) was formed to advise on technical areas and support development of the new supplementary guidance.  The first of three new guidelines was published to aid applicants in addressing requirements for allergenicity and nutrition
• completing the science and technical projects in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology funded Innovation Research Programme to support precision fermentation products. This included expert elicitation events to develop understanding on challenges found in applications for precision fermentation products and potential solutions, as well as supplementary guidance on how to meet the current data requirements
• the assessments of Cannabidiol products continued and were supported by the publication a safe upper limit for delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) by the Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes and Committee on Toxicity
• establishing the scientific components for the Competent Authority auditing process for plastic recycling companies to support export to the EU under regulation 2022/1616. This is a new role for the FSA, and we review both established and novel recycling technologies that will allow UK recycling businesses to export to the EU. The first audit was completed by the November 2025 target with assessments for 13 installations completed this year
• the Precision Bred Organism (PBO) technical guidance was published, following extensive testing and feedback from stakeholders. This will support applicants as they develop and submit applications to the new PBO regime

Research and Evidence

3.9 In 2025, we provided our research priorities for the current spending review period. This section gives highlights of key internal and external projects and their impact. Further resource and financial details of the Research and Evidence Programmes are provided in the Science Performance Report to the Business Committee.

Understanding foodborne disease (FBD)

3.10 This area was the largest research area for the FSA in FY25/26.  Key delivery and impact highlights over the last year include:

The Third Study of Infectious Intestinal Disease in the UK (IID3)

Sampling was completed by August 2025 and analysis is nearing completion. The whole project will complete this year. Over 7,000 participants were recruited, and almost 5,500 samples were tested against a panel of 21 bacterial, viral and protozoal pathogens, creating one of the most extensive datasets on infectious intestinal disease (IID) in the world.  

The study has already delivered important new insights into the epidemiology of IID (with enteropathogenic Escherichia coli the most common bacterial pathogen detected) and generated a nationally significant genomic dataset, as a rich evidence base for future studies. The sequences deposited in the European Nucleotide Archive, provide a permanent resource to support advances in enteric pathogen genomics.

The Food Safety Research Network (FSRN)

Amongst a range of activities, two flagship projects have progressed: The Food-Microbiology Intelligence Network (F-MIN) is entering Pilot Year 2, focusing on finalising security and data import processes in preparation for full launch. The Advancing Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) Diagnostics project brought together an international team at workshop following the Verocytotoxin-producing E. coli (VTEC) 2026 symposium and has drafted Target Product Profile and Reporting Standards Guidance documents to be published later in 2026.  

FSRN convened another major event, the AI for Safe and Sustainable Agri-food Supply Chains workshop with 50 attendees. Planned in-year activities include a workshop on understanding and addressing the recent FBD increase in the UK population, a ‘Campylobacter in poultry’ research forum to disseminate the FSA’s published report and gather further input from the sector, and a workshop on rapid on-site diagnostics in the food.

AMR surveillance

Adding to our understanding of the risks posed by foodborne AMR, four survey reports have been published in year:

• Transmission of AMR during chicken processing: found that interventions during chicken processing appear to be effective in reducing E. coli and Campylobacter contamination and that the overall diversity of bacteria, antimicrobial resistance genes, and bacteriophages were shown to reduce during processing at the processing sites investigated. The findings have informed risk assessments such as Campylobacter interventions.
• Retail survey of AMR E. coli and listeria in raw salmon: gathered evidence on AMR levels in raw salmon following a Veterinary Medicines Directorate report that showed the usage of antibiotics in the UK farmed salmon industry had increased by 168% between 2017 and 2021.  No AMR of public health concern was detected in the raw salmon tested.  The survey also confirmed very low prevalence of Listeria monocytogenes in raw salmon (1.6%, 5 out of 307 samples of the salmon fillets tested low levels less than 20 cfu/g) which has informed our understanding of the food supply chain concerning the salmon sector and intelligence to support Listeria outbreaks linked to salmon that undergoes further processing (such as smoking for the ready-to-eat salmon market)
• Retail survey of foodborne pathogens and AMR on lettuce: confirmed that STEC, Salmonella and AMR bacteria were not detected from any of the whole-head lettuce samples tested.  E. coli was detected in 7.7% (24 out of 313) of whole-head lettuce samples, albeit at low levels.  The findings provide reassurance that the likelihood of being exposed to AMR bacteria or acquiring a foodborne illness caused by STEC or Salmonella through consumption of whole-head lettuce is low
• Retail survey of pathogens and AMR contamination of raw pet food: showed a significant proportion of the raw pet food samples tested were contaminated with pathogenic and antimicrobial resistant bacteria.  29% failed to meet statutory hygiene criteria, either due to the presence of Salmonella and/or Enterobacteriaceae counts exceeded the 5,000 CFU/g regulatory threshold.  High levels of Campylobacter, MRSA and STEC were also detected in the products tested.  The findings have informed risk management action including an update of consumer guidance on the safe handling and storage of raw pet food in the home and maximising the reach of the guidance through closer working with key partners (such as industry, veterinary community) and a social media campaign.
• Consumer knowledge of raw pet food risks: the UK-wide retail survey (above) recommended further social science research. Additionally, although the FSA updated guidance on handling and storage of raw pet food, the extent to which consumers follow this advice and potential barriers to doing so are unknown. We have commenced work to understand the prevalence and use of raw pet food products in domestic settings, as well as consumer knowledge about its risks, awareness and adherence to FSA guidance. The work is due to complete in January 2027 and will inform the FSA’s risk assessment.

Better surveillance

3.11 This priority area has grown over the last few years and is predicted to be 35% of the FSA research spending in the 2026/27 financial year. Key highlights include:

Pathogen Surveillance in Agriculture, Food and the Environment (PATH-SAFE)

This 4-year programme ended in March 2025, and an evaluation concluded that it had produced a variety of useful data, methods and tools, related to foodborne pathogens and AMR, which are valuable to improving surveillance in the UK.

This includes 47 publications since 2022.  The programme’s contribution was recognised in the July 2026 UK Biological Security Strategy (BSS) Implementation Report, published by the Cabinet Office.  

A further paper ‘The Science Behind PATH-SAFE: Key findings and Insights’ is due for publication in Q3 26/27. This will be a synthesis of the key science findings and outputs from the whole programme and act as a policy briefing.

Food Surveillance Programme (FSP)

In 2025/26, the FSP was established to build upon the PATH-SAFE legacy, using £1M of funding secured from the UK Integrated Security Fund (with £0.6M of FSA co-funding).  

The FSP has now evolved into the National Food Surveillance Programme (NFSP) which is discussed in paragraph 4.12. Across the year, the FSP delivered:

• operational testing of the PATH-SAFE Genomic Data Platform (GDP) using real cross-government pathogen genome data, as well as the development of a long-term operating model for transitioning the platform into routine usage
• a discovery project to understand the potential of artificial intelligence (AI)-driven tools to support biosurveillance such as new bioinformatic tools
• demonstration of the ‘sample once, test many’ one health surveillance model which illustrated the feasibility and benefits of integrated, cross-government environmental monitoring (such as using plant health water samples to look for foodborne pathogens)
• building on partnerships established under PATH-SAFE to facilitate ongoing cross-government collaboration and strengthen long-term partnerships, for example through hosting the ‘One Health Connections’ networking event in March 2026
• ongoing evaluation of our biosurveillance programmes (PATH-SAFE and ISF) with findings showing the shift from proof-of-concept development towards implementation

3.12 Retail Surveillance Survey (RSS)

Results from the 2025/26 RSS were published in July, providing intelligence on emerging risks, while also supporting the maintenance of PA laboratory capability. The FSA proactively responded to survey findings by taking action to address risks identified in Dubai-style chocolate products, and issuing an industry alert, through the National Food Crime Unit (NFCU), following findings of goat meat substitution. Evidence generated through the sampling also informed engagement with industry on glycerol use in slush-ice drinks.

From this, slush-ice drinks have been prioritised for inclusion in the RSS 2026/27 to validate industry indications that glycerol is now being used less. Overall, the RSS 2026/27 includes a greater proportion of sampling providing evidence for risk assessment and policy priorities (including areas where data may inform considerations relating to EU alignment), than in previous years (where more focus was given to reacting to intelligence).

3.13 Method development

The FSA continues to invest in method research and development, extending beyond statutory requirements (mainly covered through our NRL network). This included a new project on Spatially offset Raman spectroscopy (SORS) and PCR methods for assessing sugar syrups used for adulteration of honeys, including testing samples acquired from the Chinese production supply chain.

A pilot study was completed investigating the accreditation of non-targeted data-based methods, and how the regulatory framework may need to adapt to scientific advancement in this area. Another project investigated what methods exist for the emerging engineering biology for food market.

3.14 Environmental contaminant methods

We continue to develop and validate analytical methods for contaminants of emerging concern such as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). We have recently completed and published work on methods for detecting 27 PFAS compounds in a range of fruit and vegetables (kale, potato, carrot, beetroot, tomato, blueberries, apple, pear, wheat flour and mushrooms) sourced from supermarkets. This project builds on the previous FSA-funded work that developed and validated methods for the detection of PFAS compounds in products of animal origin. 

Innovation in regulatory science

3.15 This priority area was the 2nd largest area of research for the FSA in FY25/26 accounting for around 15% of the external research spending.

Key highlights over the last year include:

Exposure Biomonitoring

We undertook a proof-of-concept research project that used urine samples collected as part of the National Diet and Nutrition Survey (NDNS) to understand if consumption of non-sugar sweeteners (NSS) could be estimated from analysis of these samples. The work revealed some points of note, including that younger people have a significantly higher number of detectable NSS in their samples than older people. However, the researchers noted that the sample size used was relatively small and the use of spot samples, compared to 24-hour urine samples, coupled with the short half-life of many of the NSS examined means that these estimates are best considered on a qualitative basis and cannot provide quantitative estimates of intake.

New Approach Methods (NAMs)

As part of our ongoing NAMs programme and work supporting the next generation of regulatory food scientists (see paragraph 3.24), we funded research that that developed next-generation AI tools for food safety chemical risk assessment. 

Phage Regulatory Sandbox

The FSA is a partner in the Multi-Agency Regulatory Groundwork for Engineered Phage Regulatory Sandbox, led by MHRA. This 2 year, £1M project started in 2025 and was a result of a successful cross-government bid that included the FSA, The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA), The Veterinary Medicines Directorate (VMD) and Defra. It aims to address critical gaps in the regulation of engineered bacteriophage (phage) products across the veterinary, food, environment and health sectors, by developing guidance, reference materials and other tools aimed at providing clarity on the regulated use of phage in GB.

Innovation in novel foods

Building on the Cell Cultivated Products (CCP) Sandbox and Innovation Hub programmes including ongoing consumer monitoring including research on consumer insights on innovative food technologies and guidance for industry.

Evidence to regulate a changing food system

3.16 This priority area is the smallest area of research spend for the FSA (accounting for around 10% of external spend). A significant portion of work under this priority is delivered as internal projects by the FSA’s analytical function.  

Key highlights over the last year include:

Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS)

Continuing to work closely with Defra to deliver economic analysis of policy options aimed at reducing trade barriers under an SPS Agreement, assessing impacts on businesses, consumers and government. This includes developing a suite of SPS-related Impact Assessments commissioned by Defra to support future legislation.  We are also providing analytical support to the SPS consultation, helping to gather, assess and interpret evidence from businesses, industry bodies and other stakeholders to strengthen the evidence base. 

In addition, we are supporting Defra’s SPS Programme evaluation prioritisation exercise, assessing and comparing SPS interventions to identify evaluation priorities and ensure that analytical resources are focused on projects with the greatest potential strategic, economic and public value.

Meat charging analysis

Meat charging analysis was reported to the Board in December 2025.  

This economic analysis explored a range of options for how to change the current discount scheme for abattoirs, including looking at impacts on different segments of the industry.  The analysis was repeatedly updated for different scenarios, including in response to concerns raised by businesses during a consultation exercise.

Food hypersensitivities

We are evaluating the impact of best practice guidance on the provision of allergen information, published in February 2025, to understand how the recommendations are being received by food businesses and consumers and identify barriers and enablers. Findings will inform the development and design of future legislation.

Future of Food Regulation Programme

The Programme vision is to deliver an effective, resilient and trusted regulatory system that is fit for the future to ensure that food is safe and what it says it is. We have developed a Theory of Change, providing a framework for how proposed reforms are expected to address system problems and deliver the programme’s intended outcomes.

Food and You (F&Y2)

Published the first annual Food and You 2 Official Statistics consumer survey moving from a bi-annual cycle, enabling cost savings and improved comparability, reporting trends for key findings for the first time. We continue to produce secondary analysis reports for FHRS and NI teams and, with Food Standards Scotland (FSS), are working towards UK-wide datasets to extend impact, including on food hypersensitivities.

Science infrastructure

3.17 In addition to our research programmes, we sustain and build underpinning scientific infrastructure (including skills, testing capabilities, research tools, governance and assurance mechanisms) to enable the ongoing delivery of the FSA’s science and address its evidence needs and ensuring that can be done effectively and efficiently in the future.  This section provides details across three different areas:

Building and sustaining science capabilities

3.18 Official Control Laboratories and National Reference Laboratories: Across 2025/26, we continued to support Public Analyst (PA) Official Laboratories (OLs) in England and Wales, to sustain capacity and build capability.  Key examples of this are:

• OL Open Grant Programme: with an investment of £317k in 2025/26, these grants have established the introduction of digital polymerase chain reaction (PCR) as a new official analytical method and supported method development for the detection of EDTA via HPLC. It also allowed performance trial involvement and UKAS accreditation required for official activity and essential equipment maintenance such as on key mass spectrometer instruments
• Skills: eight MChemA students undertook exams in 2025, which will significantly increase the number of PAs, with <20 currently qualified in the UK. This was achieved by the investment of £72k in PA training, supporting incumbent PAs and MChemA students
• National Reference Laboratories (NRLs): continue to use our NRL network to support OLs in incident response and have supported national incidents such as the cereulide contamination of baby formula, where the UKHSA NRL for Microbiology was fundamental to the success for the formed ‘sampling cell’. NRLs continue to perform the development of methods that are rolled out to OLs, such as the case of the adapted pour plate method for enumeration of E. coli use in Live Bivalve Molluscs now being used in English control laboratories. We have developed new approaches to facilitate this, including subsidised access to NRLs by OLs, thus extending testing capacity and capabilities.

Assuring our science and performance

3.19 Science Advisory Committees (SACs): the FSA funds 6 different committees. In 2025/26, we hosted and supported 63 SAC meetings and initiated the recruitment campaign for 23 new members.

3.20 A summary of key activities undertaken by the SACs across 25/26 are summarised in Annex 2.

3.21 Cross-government science: The work of the FSA is a component of a wider government science system within which we actively engage.  Key highlights in the previous 12 months include:

• Deputy CSA and CSA-Officials networks: sharing best practice on all aspects of science governance and assurance.  The FSA have been commended and highlighted as examples of good practice for others, for our research portfolio governance and work on mis- and dis-information
• GSE profession: actively working to review how the pay of government scientists compares to the private sector and what can be done to maintain and access cross-government scientific expertise.  This work is expected to result in better retention of scientists within government
• ARI officials’ network: key participant and using learning on best practice in preparation for the publication of updated FSA ARI in FY26/27

Delivering impact, communications and engagement

3.22 Studentships and fellowships: investing in studentships and fellowships is vital to ensure there is sufficient expertise in the future and sustain national capability. Details of support in this area can be found in the Science Performance Report to the Business Committee.

3.23 Publications: We continue to ensure that the results of our science and research are published and hence made accessible to the wider community. In the previous 12 months we published 38 research reports and 33 regulated products safety assessments. More details about publications statistics and full list of publications can be found in the Science Performance Report to the Business Committee.

3.24 Impact monitoring: Ensuring our science has impact, and understanding that impact, is critical to providing the assurance we are doing the right science and delivering it efficiently. Since the last annual science update, we have advanced our approach to defining and monitoring impact and have presented the first annual Science Performance Report to the Business Committee. That report outlines the investment made into science and the work undertaken.  We have also begun producing impact case studies for our work, a sample of which is presented in annex 3.

4. Future priorities

4.1 This section presents a summary of our priorities and high-level plans for the 2027/28 financial year and beyond, across the 3 functions described in section 3.

Risk analysis and market authorisations

4.2 When an SPS agreement is implemented with the EU, the risk assessment that we undertake in relation to risk analysis and market authorisations will need to adapt and change to reflect the conditions of such an agreement.

4.3 The FSA and FSS currently conducts independent UK risk assessments, drawing on its Scientific Advisory Committees, leading fully on evidence generation, methodology and timelines. However, under dynamic alignment with EU SPS rules, risk assessment underpinning European Commission proposals would be undertaken by The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). The FSA and FSS will still undertake UK specific risk assessments in policy areas where this is deemed necessary.

4.4 Risk assessments to support rapid and timely incident response across the UK will continue to be part of our risk assessment deliverables.

Research and evidence

4.5 We have developed and are implementing a research and evidence model that helps us access the best available science, based around three different classifications:

• FSA-generated evidence that aligns specifically to FSA priorities and where only the FSA is likely to lead, such as FSA-led and funded research projects
• FSA-influenced evidence that aligns to FSA and wider UK government priorities and where the FSA seeks to leverage research or funding such as research projects delivered using external-funding with FSA support
• FSA-relevant evidence that aligns to FSA scientific interests being delivered by the wider national/international academic community such as comprehensive review and synthesis of global scientific literature

4.6 To deliver this model, engaging with and working in partnership with others will be critical.  To achieve this, we will:

• through engagement across the academic community, identify the best expertise and proactively encourage them to bid for research, join our SACs or become part of our College of Experts
• expand our use of fellowships and secondments to deliver research
• build links with doctoral training partnerships and research networks to expand our cohort of co-sponsored studentships and funded internships
• leverage research funding from others. The new UKRI Food, Animal and Plant Health programme, starting in 26/27 represents a specific opportunity. Closer engagement with Europe, and access to EU/EFSA funding, presents another

4.7 Future research priorities: as well as how we deliver and access research and evidence, we also have specific priorities around what we will deliver across our four research priority areas.

Understanding foodborne disease

4.8 Foodborne illness remains one of the most significant risks to UK consumers. Rising reported case rates and other drivers make it essential that we understand not only what is happening, but why. In March 2026, a Foodborne disease update paper was presented to the FSA Board that noted that understanding foodborne disease is a research priority across the next three years that will allow us to focus further on addressing knowledge gaps related to FBD thresholds.

4.9 This research priority is about sharpening the UK’s understanding of foodborne disease at a fundamental level: the pathogens circulating in the system, the behaviours that drive transmission, and the points at which interventions will have the greatest effect.

4.10 It is an area where we must continue not only to lead research but also work in partnership with other funders (such as UKRI), research networks (such as UK Food Safety Research Network, Health Protection Research Unit for Gastrointestinal Illness) and research organisations (such as Quadram, UKHSA, APHA).

4.11 Key areas of research focus will include:

• addressing the increases in foodborne disease rates, through identifying the causes and testing interventions
• building a new FBD cost of illness model, using the outputs of IID3 to update the previous version from 2018
• understanding risky behaviours in both domestic and commercial kitchens, recognising that good hygiene and cooking is critical to preventing foodborne illness
• understanding the risk of foodborne AMR through continuing to work across government under the UK’s AMR National Action Plan

Better surveillance

4.12 This priority is about building a national Food Surveillance Programme (NFSP) that offers earlier identification of risk, greater confidence in detection, and stronger ability to respond at pace. The NFSP will enhance and sustain a resilient national laboratory capacity and take a cross-government, One Health approach to protect the UK’s biosecurity. To achieve this, we will align with the work of our partners (such as Defra and UKHSA), wider cross-government initiatives (such as UK Biological Security Strategy, BSS) and build on the legacy of previous initiatives (such as PATH-SAFE). Alongside using FSA research budgets, we will leverage external funding to support this work. Our programme will focus on FSA-relevant surveillance applications including:

• improved foodborne pathogen monitoring at a population-level to identify disease trends, emerging risks, and generate policy-focused evidence
• better methods to verify food standards and authenticity, to support monitoring and enforcement and build national laboratory capabilities
• innovation to enhance the FSA’s work across incidents, borders and inspection. For example, genome data sharing and AI bioinformatic tools and onsite diagnostics
• increasing monitoring for persistent chemical pollutants within the environment, as sources of food contamination and to better understand exposure. This will include a large-scale survey to measure levels of PFAS in the UK diet (due to finish in spring 2028). The aim is to measure levels of up to 40 PFAS chemicals in a range of foods including fish and dairy. A survey of this scale will enable us to better quantify dietary exposure to PFAS, supporting future risk assessment and risk management decision making
• conducting technology foresight, ensuring the FSA has sight of new and emerging technologies, and the potential application of these in food surveillance

4.13   Upcoming activities and opportunities to note include:

Laboratories review

In FY26/27 we will undertake a review to explore the sustainability of the current laboratories model, opportunities for growth and enable action on any persisting challenges.  This will consider how we can work more effectively with other departments, agencies and institutes (such as better use of MOUs) and seek to build surge capacity and resilience.

SPS negotiations

The UK will need to consider potential realignment with EU mandated surveys such as the harmonised AMR retail meat surveys. This has been included in the FY26/27 research budget (noting that Northern Ireland have continued to deliver these surveys under the Windsor Framework). In addition to surveillance, there is potential need for increased monitoring in areas of divergence that will need to be brought back into alignment and areas where further sampling is required to re-baseline UK commodities against EU regulation. A further consideration could be the realignment of UK NRLs with the EU’s European Reference Laboratory (EURL) network.

Innovation in regulatory science and safer food and feed

4.14 This priority ensures the FSA is ready to regulate what comes next by developing the tools, data, methods and expertise that modern regulation demands. It recognises that beyond the major priority of foodborne pathogens, we still need to understand and assess other food safety risks, for example, chemical contaminants and allergens. To become a better regulator, we must innovate how we deliver regulatory science, obtaining new information and developing new approaches and methods to improve our risk assessment, analysis and other regulatory science functions. Increasingly this includes investigating the use of AI to support data analysis. Under this priority area, we will continue to build on current innovation programmes and push these towards deployment for routine usage. Specifically, this will include:

• continued development of new toxicological/chemical risk assessment tools including NAMs and in silico modelling, associated skills development and practical examples of application to chemicals of concern, to improve our risk assessment capability and throughput
• evaluating and using AI to support and enhance our science including literature reviews, data synthesis and advanced informatics
• new methods to improve our understanding of exposure assessment in relation to people’s diets, including additives often associated with ultra processed foods (UPFs). This includes further development of biomonitoring as a potential mechanism for monitoring exposure, based on our pilot (section 3.14). We will also review the NDNS (National Diet and Nutrition Survey) programme, due for renewal in 2029, and consider how best to get the most accurate measures of exposure
• using the new UKRI Policy fellowship (due to start in early 2027) to focus on risks associated with ultra processed foods and develop our future research plan for this area
• enhancing our understanding of the risks associated with chemical additives or contaminants in food, including a study focusing on PFAS in food contact materials (FCMs). The evidence generated will be used to develop our approach towards PFAS in food packaging and provide a clearer picture of the occurrence and migration of PFAS from FCMs and their contribution to dietary exposure (if any)

Evidence to regulate a changing food system

4.15 The focus in this area will be on evidence to support the implementation of regulation. This is driven by both longer-term shifts and rapid disruption in the food system. Priority areas include:

• for the Future of Food Regulation programme, evidencing the programme rationale, identifying the costs and benefits of regulatory changes, setting up monitoring and evaluation measurements and developing pilot interventions
• identifying how disruptions to the UK food system have changed the behaviours of food system actors, to inform resilience planning
• we are looking to refine how our foresight analysis can be more clearly focused to support strategic decision making and system resilience needs
• seek to expand our analytical capacity and capability to deliver new government initiatives, including healthier food targets and reporting and school food standards
• developing an evidence-based on ‘what works’ interventions that can be applied effectively at a local level to support the FSA’s work with local authorities and as part of the government devolution programme

Science infrastructure

4.16 Alongside maintenance of the core capabilities required to sustain the FSA’s science and evidence function, we have the following areas of strategic focus over the coming years:

• enhancing national laboratory system resilience through building partnerships with Defra, UKHSA, and Quadram Institute
• building our international relationships with equivalent competent authorities, reducing duplication of research, leveraging our research funds effectively, and building common understanding in areas of scientific uncertainty across key topics of mutual interest. One focus will be rebuilding a closer scientific working relationship with our scientific counterparts in Europe

5. Conclusions

5.1 As confirmed by the Chief Scientific Advisor’s (CSA) report to the Board, the FSA continues to deliver impactful science supporting risk analysis, incidents, policy-making and other statutory work. This has included delivery of in-house analysis and external research. Alongside this, the ongoing science infrastructure required to enable this science delivery has been maintained and new technical capabilities built.

5.2 Looking forward across the SR period, we will continue to build our strategic approach to science and research; focusing on FSA evidence priorities and the development of new capabilities including any implications of the SPS agreement that will be implemented with the EU. In coming years, research efforts will focus on foodborne disease, chemical contaminants and food additives, and generating the evidence needed to be an effective food regulator. We will continue to innovate, investing in new methods and approaches to enhance our surveillance and regulatory science capabilities. Building and maintaining strong scientific partnerships will be critical in achieving this; both as delivery and funding partners.

Annex 1: response to the recommendations in the CSA’s Annual Report

The CSA presented his annual report in June 2026. Below is a summary of how the work in this annual science update, or in addition to what has been presented above, addresses the recommendations in the CSA report.

Recommendation 1

Develop processes to agree specific objectives at an early stage when commissioning Science Council to look at a broad area.

Recommendation 2

An FSA policy update should be a standing item on the ACSS agenda

Recommendation 4

For commissioned research projects and other commissioned work, ensure that outcomes are clearly and explicitly linked to potential policy actions

Response

As noted in paragraph 3.18 we support a range of Scientific Advisory Committees (SACs) and more details about their work is contained in annex 3. However, we are working with colleagues across the FSA to identify strategic scientific issues and emerging challenges that could benefit from independent expert advice. Once these have been prioritised, any that are addressed by the Science Council will have specific objectives that will be implementable by the teams requesting the advice. An update on key FSA activities and changes will be presented at each Science Council and ACSS meeting. All commissioned work has impact considered as part of the commissioning process to ensure that outcomes, not just outputs, are part of the design process. We will also consider additional improvements as a result of this and other recommendations of the periodic review of the SACs that will be undertaken later in the 2026/27 financial year.

Recommendation 3

Review operating arrangements for the FSA Register of Experts and consider any measures required to align with the GO-Science recommendations for a College of Experts.

Response

We continue to participate in GO-Science discussions to ensure we are following best practice and applying any guidance produced (see paragraph 3.20). The FSA Register of Specialists is analogous to a College of Experts and aligns with the recommendations produced by GO-Science. Additionally, as active participants in the cross-government College of Experts Community of Practice, we continue to monitor the operation of our register and frequently introduce optimisations and review where improvements could be made, as well as sharing our examples of best practice with OGDs. We have recently been contacted by Defra who want to learn about how we run our Register of Specialists, to help them establish their own College of experts.

Recommendation 5

Liaise with UKHSA regarding availability of additional data on testing for foodborne disease.

Response

The work of the FSA and UKHSA are interlinked and efficient cross organisational collaboration is essential. To facilitate this, we have begun a review of the current MoU between FSA and UKHSA and are looking to expand it to encompass all relevant areas of joint working. Refreshing and expanding on our current MoU (which is based only around commercial arrangements) and including all areas where establishing standard processes for joint working, would improve delivery for both organisations. This revised MOU will have a section devoted to data sharing.

Recommendation 6

Engage with Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) to discuss current arrangements and protocols for the National Diet and Nutrition Survey to ensure that FSA needs are addressed.

Recommendation 7

Review current proposals to assess dietary exposure to additives in ultra processed foods (UPFs), and consider best international practice and how it could be applied using established UK-based cohort studies.

Response

As noted in paragraph 3.14, we have undertaken innovative proof of concept biomonitoring research that has shown the potential for measuring intake of sweeteners via urine samples collected as part of the NDNS. We continue to build upon this research and explore the potential for biomonitoring approaches to be used to better identify and quantify exposure to other additives and also contaminants in the diet.  Alongside this we continue to engage with DHSC on the development of NDNS methodology in future years to enable collection of more accurate consumption data to support future exposure assessment (see paragraph 4.14).

The planned UKRI Policy Fellowship (due to start in 2027) will also help guide our science and research thinking on UPFs.

Recommendation 8

Explore potential of additional linkage to health data and availability of anonymised industry data to improve understanding of foodborne disease.

Response

The Sampling Oversight Team (SOT) has been established in 2026/27 with a G7 lead.  A review will be undertaken in the 2026/27 financial year to understand our current access levels, what we want to achieve and what can be achieved with industry data. Based on this, we can potentially develop fit-for-purpose data sharing agreements. This includes our ongoing work with UKHSA and Quadram (such as F-MIN). We have also discussed this issue with OGDs (such as VMD) and will work to align activities to ensure we can maximise our efforts.  SOT are liaising with the National Food Crime Unit (NFCU) to gain greater access to their data to understand its scale and explore whether it could be used in a different way.

Recommendation 9

Continue work to explore the use and implementation of AI (including consideration of agentic AI) to increase the speed and confidence with which SACs and SERD can safely complete risk assessments, potentially including the integration of New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) into the process.

Response

To better understand the potential usage options for AI in in our toxicological risk assessment the Committee on Toxicity held a workshop on AI in chemical risk assessment in October 2025. The workshop explored the complexity of data storage and security and state of the art AI technologies. It also discussed the opportunities and challenges associated with application of AI in chemical risk assessment.

The main conclusions from the workshop were:

• there are opportunities to use AI technologies to improve efficiency, accuracy and relevance in predictive chemical risk assessment
• AI should be used for augmentation rather than replacement. Human expert oversight must remain and is essential as part of the risk assessment process
• toxicology knowledge needs to be retained, and traditional science needs to be used in training
• rigorous validation, verification and/or endorsement of these technologies will be key to ensure assurance

Following this, the COT carried out a Strengths, Weakness, Opportunities Threats (SWOT) analysis on AI in chemical risk assessment. The findings will be published in due course.

Initially the Secretariat will be exploring whether AI can be used to accelerate administrative tasks such as the preparation of technical minutes. For the risk assessment process, AI-based models such as benchmark dose modelling (BMD), quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) can also be applied, and it will be important to ensure both the COT Members and Secretariat have the appropriate skills and knowledge to use these tools and to interpret the data they provide. We are exploring options around upskilling staff in these areas to enable greater use of these tools in our assessments in the future.

This is a fast-changing topic and so continuous monitoring and learning is essential.

Annex 2: work of the Science Advisory Committees (SACs)

Find more detailed information about the FSA Science Advisory Committees and their work, including links to their publications. However, key updates for the last 12 months are here.

Science Council (SC) 

The Council contributed to the FSA’s research, evidence and strategic insight programmes by supporting horizon scanning and providing scientific advice and challenge on research priorities, strategic assessments and emerging issues. Specifically, the Council completed one project and initiated a second they were:

• in October 2025, the Science Council published a report on its project exploring the application of artificial intelligence (AI) in food safety and authenticity. The report set out six recommendations for the FSA, all of which have been considered as part of our ongoing programme of work on AI
• the Council has recently initiated a project to explore the food safety and authenticity implications of food system disruption, including events such as extreme weather, contamination incidents, cyber-attacks and supply chain disruptions. The project will identify actions that can strengthen resilience and minimise risks to consumers, with recommendations for the FSA due to be published in Autumn 2026

Advisory Committee for Social Science (ACSS)

The ACSS continues to provide valuable support to the social sciences in the FSA and have undertaken work in many strategically important areas. Members have provided independent expert guidance on specific research projects and informed the development of internal assurance processes, supporting the FSA identify and meet key research needs, and develop robust analysis and research. Activities have included:

• conducting a feasibility study exploring the development of metrics to measure the impacts of food crime and the National Food Crime Unit (NFCU). The final output will inform any commissioned work in this area which the ACSS will input into
• providing expert advice to support our programme of evaluation activities exploring the impact of the FSA’s Provision of Information Best Practise Guidance
• contributing to the strategy outlining our research and evidence needs for the FSA future of food regulation (FFR) programme
• supporting our portfolio of work exploring consumer attitudes and behaviours relating to raw pet food, precautionary allergen labelling, and the FSA’s glycerol guidance

ACNFP

ACNFP plays a critical role in supporting the FSA’s approach to food innovation, providing expert scientific advice and delivering robust assessments under the novel food and GMO regulatory frameworks.

Precision fermentation and cell-cultivated products

The Committee reviewed and advised on 27 novel food dossiers last year, supporting both the FSA’s Innovation Research Programme and the Cell-Cultivated Products Sandbox. This included making progress in assessing the first two cell-cultivated product applications submitted in Great Britain, marking a significant milestone for food innovation regulation. This work drew heavily on the expertise of the ACNFP Cell-Cultivated Products Subgroup, which has been instrumental in the development of a proportionate, science-based approach to assessing the risks of these emerging technologies. As the Sandbox enters its second year, the Committee’s advice continues to inform the development of a regulatory framework that enables innovation while maintaining high standards of consumer safety and confidence.

CBD and Hemp-Derived Products

This year marked the completion of the first phase of the Joint ACNFP and Committee on Toxicity (COT) Subgroup’s work on cannabidiol (CBD) and hemp-derived products.  The subgroup published a report addressing key scientific challenges associated with the safety assessment of these products and delivered internationally significant outputs, including the development of world-first guidelines to support risk assessment in this rapidly evolving sector. The subgroup continues to advise on emerging issues and has reviewed new evidence on reproductive and developmental toxicity of CBD.

Precision bred organisms (PBOs)

The ACNFP Products of Genetic Technologies subgroup has supported the implementation of the new regulatory framework for precision bred organisms. This included scientific advice on the technical guidance for applicants, helping to establish a clear, proportionate and science-based assessment process. The subgroup’s work has supported the effective implementation of this new legislation and enabling innovation while safeguarding consumers.

Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food (ACMSF)

The ACMSF and its subgroups provide independent scientific advice on microbiological safety of food, supporting risk assessment and government decision making.  Activities have included:

• provision of quality assurance and expert review of research specifications, final reports from commissioned work, and risk assessment outputs produced by the FSA, ensuring that FSA policy decisions are informed by science and high-quality evidence
• horizon-scanning for issues likely to affect the microbiological safety of food on sale to UK consumers. Members participated in a workshop to understand challenges to the microbiological safety of food arising from climate change, disruption to supply chains, new production methods and technologies, changes in consumer behaviour and changes in vulnerable groups. This also completed one of the FSA’s commitments under the cross-government Climate Change National Adaptation Programme (2023-2028).
• expert advice on emerging issues relating to risk assessment methodology. A subgroup completed a report evaluating opportunities, barriers and challenges to using molecular and genotypic information about Listeria strains for improved risk assessments in the future

Advisory Committee on Animal Feedingstuffs (ACAF)

The ACAF continues to provide independent scientific risk assessment advice to the FSA and ministers on the safety of animal feed products, supporting evidence-based decision making and regulatory oversight. Activities have included:

Assessment of applications for animal feed additives

The Committee provided advice on 17 different applications for the authorisation of animal feed additives. These assessments covered a broad range of products, including zootechnical, technological and nutritional additives, with Members evaluating safety for consumers, target animals, users and the environment, as well as efficacy where appropriate. The Committee also continued to support implementation of the FSA’s regulatory reform programme, adapting its processes to enable more efficient assessment of applications while maintaining robust scientific scrutiny.

Horizon-scanning on emerging challenges and opportunities affecting animal feed

In October 2025, Members participated in a horizon-scanning exercise to identify emerging trends, risks and opportunities relevant to the feed sector.  A range of topics were covered including new technologies and practices, supply-chain pressures and skills shortages, climate change impacts, and the development of alternative protein ingredients.

Consideration of coccidiostats and antimicrobial resistance (AMR), and emerging feed technologies

The Committee provided specialist input on the potential links between coccidiostat use and antimicrobial resistance, considering the regulatory framework, current farming practices and potential public health implications, delivering advice to FSA officials.  The position paper on coccidiostats is expected to be published in August 2026.  Members also discussed the assessment of bacteriophage-based feed additives, exploring issues such as target animal and consumer safety, allergenicity, infectivity, and the suitability of existing guidance for these novel products.  These insights were intended to support future risk assessments and help develop a consistent scientific approach to emerging technologies and regulatory challenges.

Committee on Toxicity (COT)

The COT continues to provide toxicological risk assessment advice, assurance of our own risk assessment work and horizon scanning capacity to ensure that our decisions are informed by science and evidence. Activities have included:

Mycotoxins in food  

COT delivered a statement on the risk for T-2 and HT-2 mycotoxins in food.  This assessment was carried out because new European limits for the mycotoxins T-2/HT-2 came into force in July 2024, prompting the FSA and FSS to undertake a review incorporating new information and data collected from across the cereal supply chain to update understanding of current exposure levels and any potential health risks. Their assessment found that while occasional high exposures cannot be ruled out, the limited evidence available does not show signs of a widespread health risk.

Per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)

Following on from prior COT work reviewing the 2020 EFSA opinion on PF AS which significantly decreased the PFAS tolerable weekly intake (TWI), the COT sub-group on PFAS group is undertaking an independent review of toxicological and epidemiological data and considering the biological relevance of the endpoints assessed. The group will also consider the potential for grouping PFAS for assessment and whether health-based guidance values can be delivered on the basis of available evidence. Once completed, we can use this evidence, alongside the research mentioned earlier to determine our wider approach and potential actions on the issue of PFAS.

Artificial intelligence (AI) in chemical risk assessment

In October 2025, the COT held a workshop that brought together external experts to consider the status of and opportunities for use of AI in chemical risk assessment. We will use the findings to determine future options for how we improve our risk assessment delivery using AI tools. More information on this work is provided under recommendation 9 in annex 1.

Annex 3: impact case studies

1. Strengthening the UK’s defences against food fraud 

Food fraud - international misinterpretation, adulteration or substitution of food for financial gain – remains a significant challenge for the integrity of the UK food system. While the vast majority of food in the UK is safe and authentic, the FSA’s Food Crime Strategic Assessment 2024 highlights that food crime is evolving in response to geopolitical pressures, supply chain disruption and economic instability. The 2024 assessment estimates the annual cost of food crime to the UK at £410 million - £1.96 billion, underscoring the significance of the threat to both consumers and legitimate businesses.

The FSA is strengthening the UK’s response to the threat of food crime by undertaking intelligence-based surveillance activities and supporting the development of methods to improve detection. FSA funded surveillance sampling plays a critical in identifying, assessing and monitoring food authenticity risks, in addition to Local Authority (LA) and industry sampling initiatives. For example, in 2025, the FSA funded the testing of over 350 samples for speciation checks, an important aspect of authenticity. This included targeted analysis of 40 samples of meat marketed as ‘raw goat meat’ through the FSA’s Retail Surveillance Survey. The results highlighted significant misleading information being provided to consumer. Of the samples tested, 20 contained only sheep meat, one sample was a mixture of sheep and goat, and one sample was identified as deer. The FSA worked at pace to share these findings with Local Authorities and the food industry as they emerged, enabling timely follow up, enforcement activity, and improved awareness of this risk.

The FSA has also participated in a coordinated programme of science and evidence to close knowledge gaps, working across government, laboratories and with international partners to develop, test and embed more robust approaches to honey authenticity. Unlike many food products, honey varies naturally depending on geography, floral source and production methods, meaning there is no single test that can definitively identify adulteration. The programme combined method development, improved use of reference databases, and practical tools to support enforcement. For example, FSA-funded research with Cranfield University demonstrated the potential of rapid screening using SORS alongside DNA barcoding as a confirmatory method, while follow-on work is extending this to the types of imported and blended honey that dominate the UK market. Going forward, the FSA will work with Defra to validate chemical methods that are more accessible to Official Laboratories, as well as working with the Government Chemist to develop tools and protocols to support consistent and defensible decision making.

This science is turning a technically uncertain and disputed area into one where the UK can act with greater confidence. The UK is now better equipped to challenge contested evidence (including at international level), to assess emerging analytical methods more rigorously, and to ensure that laboratory results are robust enough to stand up in regulatory and legal contexts.  This work has also positioned the UK to influence international standards and respond to external scrutiny of its honey market.

These activities enable earlier identification of emerging fraud risks, protects consumers and upholds confidence in the authenticity of food on the UK market. 

2. Understanding consumers

Understanding consumer attitudes, behaviours and concerns about food is important because effective food policy, regulation and risk management depend on reliable evidence about how people perceive and respond to food risks.

To address the need for both long-term trend data and timely intelligence, the FSA runs 2 complementary consumer monitoring surveys  Food and You 2 (F&Y2) is the FSA’s official statistic annual survey and the only government source of robust, population-level data monitoring key n issues over time such as food safety behaviours, food hypersensitivities, FHRS and trust in the FSA. Alongside this, the monthly Consumer Insights Tracker (CIT) provides rapid insight into emerging issues, including food affordability and novel foods, enabling the FSA to respond quickly to changing consumer concerns.

Data has informed policy on mandatory display of hygiene ratings, evaluation of Provision of Information best practice guidance, precautionary allergen labelling research, risk assessments (on ingredients, additives and supplements), Spending Reviews, as well as FSA consumer campaigns on food hygiene behaviour and novel foods. Both datasets are widely used by other government departments, parliamentary bodies, academics and external policy organisations, reinforcing the FSA’s reputation as an evidence-led regulator.

3. Quantifying the societal impact of foodborne disease

Microbiological FBD imposes significant public health and economic costs on society.  The FSA’s Cost of Illness Model provides the UK’s most comprehensive assessment of these impacts, estimating an annual societal cost of £11.8 billion (2025 prices).

The model has strengthened the FSA’s ability to quantify and communicate the real-world consequences of foodborne disease, supporting proportionate, evidence-led regulation and more transparent engagement with government, stakeholders, and the public.

The model converts surveillance and burden attribution data into consistent and comparable estimates of societal cost, underpinning the FSA’s analytical, research and decision-making capabilities. This enables the FSA to:

• prioritise between high-volume and high-severity hazards
• link disease burden to specific control points in the food system
• assess the value for money of preventative interventions

The model also provides a consistent economic framework that supports antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and One Health-aligned work, acting as a core analytical asset across multiple research areas.

It is now used to support risk prioritisation, strengthen economic appraisal and inform decisions on where interventions can deliver the greatest public benefit. The approach has also attracted international interest, helping organisations such as US Department of Agriculture, Food Standards Australia New Zealand and Singapore Food Agency develop similar methodologies.

4. Supporting regulation of emerging food technologies

Cell-cultivated meat is an emerging food technology that grows animal cells in controlled environments to produce meat without traditional farming. As interest in these products increases, the FSA is strengthening the UK’s evidence base to ensure that any future market entry is underpinned by robust safety assessment, public transparency and clear regulatory pathways.

The Consumer Insights Tracker (October 2025 - December 2025)  identified significant uncertainty around cell-cultivated meat. When shown a list of potential concerns, the most commonly selected were concerns about safety, ‘unnaturalness’ and the impact on farmers. Only a minority of respondents said they would be willing to include these products in their diet in the future, highlighting the importance of regulator assurance and clear labelling. This highlights a clear role for the FSA in addressing uncertainty, providing assurance on safety and labelling to build public confidence ahead of any market introduction. 

Complementing this regulatory work, the FSA’s rapid evidence review found that although some consumers recognise potential benefits (such as sustainability), a large majority still express concerns (particularly around food safety) and expect strong regulatory oversight before cultivated meat should be sold in the UK. The review also emphasises the need for clear terminology and labelling as consumer understanding of terms like ‘cell-cultivated’ or ‘lab-grown’ varies widely. 

To prepare for potential applications, the FSA and FSS launched a £1.6 million, two-year scientific programme to gather evidence on production processes, safety considerations and analysis methods for cell-cultivated foods. This programme brings together UK and international research groups, including the University of Bath’s Cellular Agriculture Manufacturing Hub, and industry partners working on cultivated fat, meat and alternative protein technologies. Its aim is to ensure the FSA is ‘regulation-ready’ and able to evaluate novel food dossiers with the same scientific rigour applied to existing regulated products. 

This research demonstrates how FSA science supports innovation while prioritising consumer protection. By combining public insight, scientific assessment and cross-sector collaboration, the FSA is laying the groundwork for evidence lead regulation of cell-cultivated meat, ensuring that any future products entering the UK market are safe, clearly labelled and aligned with public expectations.  

5. Preparing for future risks

Climate change presents a growing risk to the resilience, safety and affordability of the UK food system, with implications across production, processing, distribution and consumption. To support anticipatory regulation and system-level preparedness, the FSA commissioned a rapid evidence assessment to examine how climate-driven shocks could affect areas within the FSA’s regulatory remit over the next five years, and to inform future policy and resilience planning.

The assessment provided a system-wide synthesis of the evidence, drawing on literature, expert insight and analysis of UK policy and programmes. It identified food production and international supply chains as particularly vulnerable to climate impacts, alongside increased pressures from extreme weather, flooding, drought and heat on food safety controls, critical infrastructure and price stability. The work highlighted where climate risks may exacerbate existing vulnerabilities in the food system, with potential implications for consumer protection and regulatory oversight.

The evidence has directly informed policy discussions on food system resilience and climate adaptation across the UK and devolved administrations. It has been cited in policy outputs from the Scottish Government and the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), demonstrating the relevance of FSA-commissioned science beyond the UK and its contribution to international policy dialogue on climate risk and food governance.

By providing a clear, evidence-based assessment of near-term climate risks within the food system, this work strengthens the FSA’s ability to anticipate emerging pressures, support cross-government adaptation planning and ensure that food safety regulation remains effective under changing environmental conditions. Overall, the research illustrates how FSA science is shaping understanding of climate resilience and supporting proactive, system-wide responses to one of the most significant long-term challenges facing the food system.