Farmers have risen to challenge of living in difficult global times

The problems are however the same and just as insoluble as they were before the summer break. The war in the Middle East shows no signs of resolution; the war between Russia and Ukraine is getting worse. The problems of climate change and how to live in European agriculture with potentially permanently hot summers and drought are weighing heavily in politics and with those at the sharp end of agriculture. For grain in particular 2026 has been a challenging year, thanks to that long, hot summer. Farmers have risen to the challenge of living in difficult times. That has always been what farmers do best they cope with whatever cards nature deals them. There is also the reality that while it is the extremes that make headlines the wider picture is different. It is in the wider scene that farmers find ways to cope and continue producing food. They do so under circumstances where others would simply give up and waste time debating the scale of the challenge instead of facing it head on. This is confirmed in figures from the International Grains Council, which says global grain production in 2026 will be down by five million tonnes. That may sound a lot, but it is against production of 2.4 billion tonnes. That translates as a three per cent drop in output, which will still leave 2026 as the second highest production year recorded. That confirms farmers’ ability to cope with difficult times and should point to some much needed stability for often volatile markets. Inevitably within those figures there are winners and losers. Wheat production suffered from the heat and Europe was worse affected by the high temperatures and difficult drought conditions. The report also points to the inevitable geopolitical risks associated with trade in grain, not least the continuing conflict between Russia and Ukraine. It says this has made shipping so dangerous that exports from Russian and Ukrainian key Black Sea export ports is just about halted. The other climate issue coming down the tracks is the impact of a severe El Nino weather pattern from warming Pacific Ocean temperatures. In broad terms this threatens agriculture in much of South America, Australia and New Zealand with the prospect of unpredictable weather patterns, in the shape of either drought or extreme rainfall. Where and how it will hit remains impossible to predict, beyond the knowledge that on the impact index this will be classed as a severe El Nino. Climate change may make the impacts worse this year, but El Nino is a natural weather pattern. Which commodities will be affected remains at best a guess, although in the past the most volatile impacts have been for tropical products like cocoa and coffee. With no prospect of a resolution to the war between the US and Iran the consequences seem to be locked in. Donald Trump will pay a heavy price in the mid-term elections for a war Americans did not want and which he cannot win or find a way to exit without admitting defeat. That means energy prices will remain high and a vital source of fertiliser ingredients will remain closed. The result will be inescapable high input costs for farmers. In the EU the European Commission came up with about 500 million in compensation, which member states could top up if beleaguered economies could afford to do so. However this is a sticking plaster, not a resolution of the problem. The EU remains focussed on green solutions to fertiliser availability, pinning unjustified faith in so-called bio-fertilisers. It is also maintaining, despite pressure from the farming lobby, CBAM (carbon border adjustment mechanism) taxes on fertiliser component imports as part of its net zero thinking. If these high input costs persist farmers will ultimately decide whether to reduce inputs and production, depending on higher product prices from a reduced supply to maintain profitability. That would create a situation where consumers and food security pay a heavy price for political failure to tackle an out of control geopolitical situation that has permanently disrupted trade patterns around the world. The impact of that approach might be a greener, lower carbon, much less productive agriculture. But it would be a farming industry without the tools needed to deliver food security. That is the choice politicians and consumers face if input cost pressures cannot be resolved or mitigated.