Global events over the past few years have made one thing unequivocally clear to food and beverage sector leaders: the conditions that shape food safety risk are moving quickly often in ways that are difficult to anticipate and that outpace systems.
The ongoing war in Ukraine is a case in point. What began as a geopolitical crisis quickly translated into disruption across agricultural supply chains, affecting the availability of commodities such as wheat and sunflower oil forcing many food businesses to reconsider where they source critical ingredients. Now, as tensions escalate around Iran, similar questions begin to surface again; perhaps not immediately, perhaps not dramatically, but certainly in ways that prompt organisations to pause and think about how reliant their supply networks are, and more importantly, if their food safety systems can stand up to yet more disruption.
Many of the systems organisations rely on to manage food safety risk were built for a more stable operating environment – one where supply chains moved relatively predictably and regulatory expectations changed at a more gradual pace. What has changed, though, is the speed at which external pressures can now reshape the way food moves through the system.
Governance risk
Recent recall reporting offers another view of how risk can surface in everyday operations across the food sector. One widely discussed report based on the analysis of Food Standards Agency allergy alerts and recall notices placed major supermarket chains such as Aldi and Lidl among those with the highest number of product recalls in 2025. Several of Lidl’s recalls related to contamination risks, including listeria and possible salmonella in certain products. Aldi’s recalls, by contrast, were more commonly linked to undeclared allergens, with ingredients such as egg or wheat not listed on packaging. In both cases, the issues required products to be withdrawn from sale.
Allergens are, of course, one of the food safety risk areas where there is no margin for error. An undeclared allergen presents a serious risk to vulnerable consumers, which is why these incidents always result in immediate product recall. At the same time, allergen information sits within regulatory frameworks that are ununiform. The way allergens must be declared or communicated on packaging can vary between markets; and while that does not appear to have been the cause in these particular recalls, it does illustrate how governance requirements can shift depending on where a product is ultimately sold. For organisations operating across multiple jurisdictions, that variability can quietly add another layer of complexity to managing food safety risk.
This is a useful reminder that risk in modern food systems often emerges in ways that are less obvious than many traditional frameworks assume. The industry has long been adept at controlling hazards within facilities; decades of applying HACCP principles have given food businesses a structured way to identify and manage risks linked to production and processing. What those systems were not originally designed to address, however, is the rapidly growing influence of external factors.
Climate factors
Climate patterns offer a good example of this shift. When climate risk is discussed more broadly it often centres on carbon reduction targets or net zero commitments. Important issues, certainly, but they are not necessarily where the most immediate risk exposure sits for food businesses.
For the food sector, the implications tend to be far more practical. Rising temperatures are beginning to affect where certain crops can be grown and how reliably they can be produced, meaning production zones that have long supplied particular ingredients may gradually shift, prompting organisations to source from new regions and unfamiliar suppliers. That, in turn, introduces new operational variables such as differing regulatory environments and agricultural practices into supply chains.
Temperature itself also becomes part of the risk exposure picture. Higher ambient temperatures put pressure on cold chain logistics, particularly for chilled and high-risk foods where storage and transport conditions are tightly controlled. Maintaining product integrity and, more importantly, safety, becomes increasingly demanding when environmental conditions are less predictable; and while these dynamics are not entirely new, they are becoming more visible.
Economic instability
Economic pressures create another layer of risk. The food and beverage sector has always operated on relatively tight margins, but sustained cost increases across energy, raw materials and labour are forcing organisations to make difficult operational choices. In many instances, investments in infrastructure have been delayed and labour models have shifted towards greater use of temporary or contract workers. Over time, these changes can erode the institutional knowledge and stability that strong food safety systems depend upon.
And, perhaps just as important, is the effect economic uncertainty ultimately has on consumers themselves. The wave of cost increases over recent years has left many feeling frustrated, and that frustration often lands with the organisations trying to manage both sides of the equation: rising operating costs on one hand, and pressure to keep food affordable on the other.
It is, in many ways, an uncomfortable balance. Billions of people rely on the sector for a basic human need, but without stable revenue, there is no brand, no production, no food reaching the shelves. At the same time, consumers facing their own financial pressures will understandably turn to more competitive options when prices rise.
Conclusion
All these pressures intersect with one another in ways that require the operating environments and the systems they depend on to be more agile than they once were and were once designed to be.
This is where the pace of change becomes significant. Food safety systems are typically built around structured processes, often verified and validated on an annual basis – audits, certification programmes, supplier approval mechanisms – all of which assume a degree of continuity in the environments they oversee. When the external landscape shifts more quickly than those processes can respond, gaps emerge.
That does not mean existing systems are no longer effective. Far from it. The discipline the food sector has built around risk management remains one of its greatest strengths. What it does mean is that organisations need to complement those systems with a broader awareness of the environment in which they operate.
In practical terms, this requires a slightly different perspective on risk. Rather than viewing risk solely through the lens of individual incidents or audit findings, organisations are beginning to ask questions like “How exposed are particular supply chains to geopolitical disruption?”, “Where might regulatory differences create compliance challenges if products move between markets?” and “ Which sourcing decisions introduce new uncertainties that existing oversight processes may not yet fully capture?”
For organisations operating across global supply networks, the priority is clear: risk management must evolve alongside the environment it seeks to control. Systems built for stability now need to function in a landscape defined by constant movement; recognising that reality is essential to protecting the integrity and safety of the products they produce and supply.
Fresh thinking today that turns risk into advantage tomorrow
With more than 40 years of sector expertise, LRQA is the trusted global risk management partner to the food and beverage sector.
FOOD AND BEVERAGE SOLUTIONS
Discover our Food and Beverage sector solutions
