Search

The current re-evaluation of responsibility and cost sharing between the public and private sectors with reference to animal health and welfare (AHW) would be improved by a greater understanding of the contributions made at farm level. This knowledge would facilitate the design of a cost-sharing system which best balances technical, economic and political objectives. This paper presents a framework by which the farm-level investment in AHW can be assessed. An evaluation of data available for the framework was made and, as a benchmark, an estimate of total expenditure on veterinary medical inputs for commercial agricultural holdings in England calculated. In 2010/2011 it is calculated that farmers on commercial holdings in England spent £230 million on veterinary medicines and fees, with an additional £160 million being spent for horses kept on non-commercial holdings. By contrast, for 2012/2013, Defra budgeted £277 million on AHW. The results presented emphasise the critical importance of generating sufficient evidence to support the development of an efficient, equitable and sustainable AHW strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper studies the relation between different national cost-sharing models and how students from different socio-economic backgrounds finance their higher education in six different European countries: the Czech Republic, England, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, and Spain. The findings reveal considerable differences both between the countries and also between different socio-economic groups of students within each country. Even though there are only small social differences in the students' level of income, there are considerable social differences in the students' sources of income. The findings are discussed related to the country's specific policy and higher education funding structures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The biodiversity and climate crises demand ambitious policies lowering the environmental impacts of farming. Most current interventions incentivise so‐called land‐sharing approaches to address the widespread trade‐off between farm yields and on‐farm environmental outcomes by compensating farmers who adopt yield‐reducing interventions that encourage wildlife or reduce net emissions within farmed land.Here, we present the first quantification of the likely costs to taxpayers of land sharing compared with land sparing, in which large areas are removed from production altogether because of high‐yielding practices elsewhere in the landscape. Focusing on arable production in the United Kingdom, we used a choice experiment to explore farmer preferences and estimated the overall costs of contrasting agri‐environment schemes that delivered increased populations of three well‐studied farmland birds and reduced net carbon emissions in England. We included capital, administration and monitoring costs, and lost food production.Sparing delivered our target biodiversity and carbon emission outcomes at 79% of the food production cost and 48% of the taxpayer cost of sharing. The difference in subsidy payments required by farmers roughly tracked lost food production but other costs favoured sparing even more strongly.The cost‐related merits of sparing would probably increase further in studies incorporating (1) the many species and ecosystem services not deliverable on farmland, (2) the costs of food imports to compensate domestic lost production and (3) countries without as long and extensive a history of agriculture as the United Kingdom.Our results suggest that, for at least some conservation outcomes, continuing a land‐sharing approach in countries such as the United Kingdom is not only an inefficient use of government funds but also undermines conservation and food security in food‐exporting countries which bear the burden of compensating domestic production forgone in the name of conservation. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The water and sewerage industry in England and Wales had undergone several reforms since its privatization. To evaluate to what extent they had impacted on the performance of water companies, an input distance function and its derived cost share equations was estimated. This allowed measuring technical efficiency, economies of scale and cost complementarities between water and sewerage services over the period 1991–2016. The results indicate that an average water and sewerage company (WaSC) reported a technical efficiency score of 0.731 which means that its inputs could be reduced by 26.9% over time. It is also shown that an average WaSC operated under decreasing economies of scale. Cost complementarities between water and sewerage connected properties were found. This implies that WaSCs could benefit from remaining integrated, i.e. providing both water and sewerage services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]