Zachary Leather
@zackleather.resolutionfoundation.org
Climate policy @resfoundation.bsky.social
We also need to protect tenant farmers, who don't get to make their own decisions on how land is used. They're some of the nations best but most vulnerable farmers.
A fair transition can't sweep away productive tenants in favour of passive landlord income.
A fair transition can't sweep away productive tenants in favour of passive landlord income.
February 3, 2026 at 3:41 PM
We also need to protect tenant farmers, who don't get to make their own decisions on how land is used. They're some of the nations best but most vulnerable farmers.
A fair transition can't sweep away productive tenants in favour of passive landlord income.
A fair transition can't sweep away productive tenants in favour of passive landlord income.
Land use is a different challenge. Nearly a fifth of farmland may need to shift away from food - mostly to forestry and restored peatlands (solar and energy crops will play a much smaller role)
February 3, 2026 at 3:41 PM
Land use is a different challenge. Nearly a fifth of farmland may need to shift away from food - mostly to forestry and restored peatlands (solar and energy crops will play a much smaller role)
The bad news: farmers can't absorb these costs. With razor-thin margins, even a 2.5% cost increase would cut average farm income by a fifth - from £43k to £35k.
Farmers have almost no pricing power, so they can't just pass costs to supermarkets.
Farmers have almost no pricing power, so they can't just pass costs to supermarkets.
February 3, 2026 at 3:41 PM
The bad news: farmers can't absorb these costs. With razor-thin margins, even a 2.5% cost increase would cut average farm income by a fifth - from £43k to £35k.
Farmers have almost no pricing power, so they can't just pass costs to supermarkets.
Farmers have almost no pricing power, so they can't just pass costs to supermarkets.
The good news: decarbonising food production shouldn't be ruinously expensive. Costs peak at ~2.5% of farm output. If passed to consumers, food prices would rise by comfortably less than 1% - some individual months last year saw bigger jumps.
February 3, 2026 at 3:41 PM
The good news: decarbonising food production shouldn't be ruinously expensive. Costs peak at ~2.5% of farm output. If passed to consumers, food prices would rise by comfortably less than 1% - some individual months last year saw bigger jumps.
The sector isn't starting from a position of strength to deal well with further burdens. In 2024, the typical family farm made enough profit to pay its owners just £6/hour - half the minimum wage.
Nearly 1 in 3 farms lost money. Another quarter were only profitable because of government subsidies.
Nearly 1 in 3 farms lost money. Another quarter were only profitable because of government subsidies.
February 3, 2026 at 3:41 PM
The sector isn't starting from a position of strength to deal well with further burdens. In 2024, the typical family farm made enough profit to pay its owners just £6/hour - half the minimum wage.
Nearly 1 in 3 farms lost money. Another quarter were only profitable because of government subsidies.
Nearly 1 in 3 farms lost money. Another quarter were only profitable because of government subsidies.
There's no silver bullet here. Unlike EVs for transport or heat pumps for homes, farming needs 30+ different measures to decarbonise - from greener machinery to changing what land is used for entirely.
And this comes on top of nature targets and major subsidy reforms already underway.
And this comes on top of nature targets and major subsidy reforms already underway.
February 3, 2026 at 3:41 PM
There's no silver bullet here. Unlike EVs for transport or heat pumps for homes, farming needs 30+ different measures to decarbonise - from greener machinery to changing what land is used for entirely.
And this comes on top of nature targets and major subsidy reforms already underway.
And this comes on top of nature targets and major subsidy reforms already underway.
The transition hasn't really hit UK farms yet, with emissions declining just 5% since 2010. That's set to change soon, and it should - delaying further would add £12 billion to the capital cost of meeting net zero
February 3, 2026 at 3:41 PM
The transition hasn't really hit UK farms yet, with emissions declining just 5% since 2010. That's set to change soon, and it should - delaying further would add £12 billion to the capital cost of meeting net zero
While esteemed colleagues won prestigious awards for great work last, I'm also proud to have won 2.5kg of smarties for best report title of the year, the best return on writing two words I'm ever likely to get
www.resolutionfoundation.org/publications...
www.resolutionfoundation.org/publications...
November 13, 2025 at 2:18 PM
While esteemed colleagues won prestigious awards for great work last, I'm also proud to have won 2.5kg of smarties for best report title of the year, the best return on writing two words I'm ever likely to get
www.resolutionfoundation.org/publications...
www.resolutionfoundation.org/publications...
May be other factors but a) SW is bigger than the other regions b) the farms there are smaller so more of them
November 13, 2025 at 10:15 AM
May be other factors but a) SW is bigger than the other regions b) the farms there are smaller so more of them
Salary sacrifice is a poor way of subsidising.
More cash for those with higher tax rates (meaning more income) is the opposite of what we should be doing - getting solar panels onto the rooves of fuel poor families. Poorer families have less salary to sacrifice, meaning less or no subsidy for them
More cash for those with higher tax rates (meaning more income) is the opposite of what we should be doing - getting solar panels onto the rooves of fuel poor families. Poorer families have less salary to sacrifice, meaning less or no subsidy for them
October 14, 2025 at 3:03 PM
Salary sacrifice is a poor way of subsidising.
More cash for those with higher tax rates (meaning more income) is the opposite of what we should be doing - getting solar panels onto the rooves of fuel poor families. Poorer families have less salary to sacrifice, meaning less or no subsidy for them
More cash for those with higher tax rates (meaning more income) is the opposite of what we should be doing - getting solar panels onto the rooves of fuel poor families. Poorer families have less salary to sacrifice, meaning less or no subsidy for them
But this will inevitably affect some vulnerable households so must be balanced with consumer protection - a time of use price cap, seeing fixed prices in peak and off-peak hours, is one way to manage the risks posed by fluctuating prices.
July 9, 2025 at 11:30 AM
But this will inevitably affect some vulnerable households so must be balanced with consumer protection - a time of use price cap, seeing fixed prices in peak and off-peak hours, is one way to manage the risks posed by fluctuating prices.
We should start by making sure that households with the most 'flexibility' to contribute do so - that's those with big electricity intensive technologies like electric vehicles.
July 9, 2025 at 11:30 AM
We should start by making sure that households with the most 'flexibility' to contribute do so - that's those with big electricity intensive technologies like electric vehicles.
That would be a big shift for households, who largely pay the same price for electricity at all times of the day
July 9, 2025 at 11:30 AM
That would be a big shift for households, who largely pay the same price for electricity at all times of the day
So we need consumer protection too – a new regulated time-of-use with caps for peak and off peak would set consistent and fair prices for all who want or need a variable tariff.
Crucially, this would also protect from short term price volatility that families can't be expected to manage
Crucially, this would also protect from short term price volatility that families can't be expected to manage
June 24, 2025 at 10:38 AM
So we need consumer protection too – a new regulated time-of-use with caps for peak and off peak would set consistent and fair prices for all who want or need a variable tariff.
Crucially, this would also protect from short term price volatility that families can't be expected to manage
Crucially, this would also protect from short term price volatility that families can't be expected to manage
But that risks hitting other household types like big families and those with electric heating.
June 24, 2025 at 10:38 AM
But that risks hitting other household types like big families and those with electric heating.
But there are ‘flexible technologies’ that can be shifted easily. A tumbledryer run in the morning won’t save much – but an EV uses enough electricity in peak times that average savings of charging overnight reach £120 a year
June 24, 2025 at 10:38 AM
But there are ‘flexible technologies’ that can be shifted easily. A tumbledryer run in the morning won’t save much – but an EV uses enough electricity in peak times that average savings of charging overnight reach £120 a year
Those with children and unmovable work schedules will find the highest costs of moving to time of use, as they consume (slightly) more of their energy in the expensive peak hours.
That means more costs of pricy peak energy and less saved in off-peak discounts.
That means more costs of pricy peak energy and less saved in off-peak discounts.
June 24, 2025 at 10:38 AM
Those with children and unmovable work schedules will find the highest costs of moving to time of use, as they consume (slightly) more of their energy in the expensive peak hours.
That means more costs of pricy peak energy and less saved in off-peak discounts.
That means more costs of pricy peak energy and less saved in off-peak discounts.
But this inevitably means transferring price risk to households, who might struggle to manage it.
The evening peaks are when households are coming home and cooking – not schedules most will want to shift.
The evening peaks are when households are coming home and cooking – not schedules most will want to shift.
June 24, 2025 at 10:38 AM
But this inevitably means transferring price risk to households, who might struggle to manage it.
The evening peaks are when households are coming home and cooking – not schedules most will want to shift.
The evening peaks are when households are coming home and cooking – not schedules most will want to shift.
Electricity is around twice as expensive at peak times (430pm-8pm), when domestic and industrial demand overlap.
But almost nine-in-ten households pay the same price all day
But almost nine-in-ten households pay the same price all day
June 24, 2025 at 10:38 AM
Electricity is around twice as expensive at peak times (430pm-8pm), when domestic and industrial demand overlap.
But almost nine-in-ten households pay the same price all day
But almost nine-in-ten households pay the same price all day
Salary sacrifice for heat pumps (shorturl.at/0D5lf) not the way forward - we should be making heat pumps cheaper for poorest not the richest
As we showed for the EV scheme, salary sacrifice locks most low-income households out of meaningful subsidy and chucks huge sums to the highest earners
As we showed for the EV scheme, salary sacrifice locks most low-income households out of meaningful subsidy and chucks huge sums to the highest earners
May 14, 2025 at 10:48 AM
Salary sacrifice for heat pumps (shorturl.at/0D5lf) not the way forward - we should be making heat pumps cheaper for poorest not the richest
As we showed for the EV scheme, salary sacrifice locks most low-income households out of meaningful subsidy and chucks huge sums to the highest earners
As we showed for the EV scheme, salary sacrifice locks most low-income households out of meaningful subsidy and chucks huge sums to the highest earners
A Spending Review settlement that allocated funding in this more balanced way would deliver a cash-equivalent gain of £370 a year on average for the poorest decile, compared to a £150 boost for the richest.
April 9, 2025 at 10:33 AM
A Spending Review settlement that allocated funding in this more balanced way would deliver a cash-equivalent gain of £370 a year on average for the poorest decile, compared to a £150 boost for the richest.
This approach, where day-to-day health spending grew at 2% (vs. 3.6%), would avoid cuts to other departments, raising in kind benefits at the bottom by 1.4% a year. Higher capital to health than before could make this, and NHS productivity gains, more feasible.
April 9, 2025 at 10:33 AM
This approach, where day-to-day health spending grew at 2% (vs. 3.6%), would avoid cuts to other departments, raising in kind benefits at the bottom by 1.4% a year. Higher capital to health than before could make this, and NHS productivity gains, more feasible.
A ‘health only’ approach – in which NHS spending rose by 3.6% while unprotected departments faced cuts up to 1.1% each year – would see all households receive similar cash-equivalent gains of around £260.
April 9, 2025 at 10:33 AM
A ‘health only’ approach – in which NHS spending rose by 3.6% while unprotected departments faced cuts up to 1.1% each year – would see all households receive similar cash-equivalent gains of around £260.
We analyse new YouGov polling to show lower-income families (with incomes less than £25,000) report lower satisfaction on a range of public services than richer households (£70,000+). Addressing this satisfaction deficit should lie at the heart of the upcoming Spending Review.
April 9, 2025 at 10:33 AM
We analyse new YouGov polling to show lower-income families (with incomes less than £25,000) report lower satisfaction on a range of public services than richer households (£70,000+). Addressing this satisfaction deficit should lie at the heart of the upcoming Spending Review.
Day-to-day public service spending is tilted towards low-income families. Poorest fifth of households receive £15,900 benefits-in-kind, 53% more than richest fifth. Some services (e.g. schools and adult social care) are much more weighted towards the less well-off.
April 9, 2025 at 10:33 AM
Day-to-day public service spending is tilted towards low-income families. Poorest fifth of households receive £15,900 benefits-in-kind, 53% more than richest fifth. Some services (e.g. schools and adult social care) are much more weighted towards the less well-off.