Cost-effectiveness assessment of soil erosion control measures for UK agriculture

The study focused on cultivated arable land in the UK, considered at highest risk of soil erosion among all land uses. 

The total agricultural area in the UK was estimated at 18.3 million hectares in 2009, with approximately 17 per cent (3.1 million hectares) affected by soil erosion. 

The analysis acknowledged significant spatial and temporal variability in erosion rates and costs, noting that 'critical source areas' within catchments contribute disproportionately to erosion-related impacts due to hydrological connectivity with watercourses.

To assess the cost-effectiveness of erosion control measures based on an ecosystem services approach, enabling better-informed decisions about which measures to promote and incentivise in UK agriculture.

The research utilised existing UK data sources and secondary datasets, including Farm Management Pocketbook costs, Natural England agri-environment scheme payment rates, and findings from previous studies (Evans 1996; ADAS 2006; Environment Agency 2007). 

Agri-environment schemes examined include Environmental Stewardship (England), Tir Gofal (Wales), Rural Stewardship Scheme (Scotland), and Catchment Sensitive Farming.

The study found that payments available under Entry and Higher Level Stewardship Schemes were generally insufficient to compensate farmers for losses incurred by implementing erosion control

• Environmental benefits identified include reduced soil loss (ranging from 5–98% depending on measure), reduced surface run-off, and decreased loss of sediment-bound phosphorus. 
• Economic benefits include avoided off-site costs related to flood damage, watercourse siltation, and eutrophication. 
• Social benefits include reduced damage to infrastructure and associated public health issues from muddy floods. 

The study notes that several measures likely have positive impacts on biodiversity and landscape value, though these were not quantitatively assessed due to data limitations.

The study applied a four-step methodology: 

•  establishing the economic baseline cost of soil erosion on ecosystem services at national level; 
•  determining financial costs and benefits of control measures at field level, including investment costs, maintenance costs, and production losses; 
•  determining effectiveness of measures on soil erosion processes (run-off, soil loss, phosphorus loss);
•  calculating economic NPVs including ecosystem service impacts. 

Measures were ranked by cost-effectiveness using formulas accounting for both economic value and percentage reduction in soil loss.

None available

Soil erosion control in UK agricultural landscapes

This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of various erosion control measures for arable agriculture in the UK using an ecosystem services approach. The research addressed the challenge that many erosion control measures result in negative financial returns for farmers, explaining their reluctance to implement such measures without compensation or incentives.

An estimated 2.2 Tg of arable topsoil is lost annually in the UK due to water erosion, with rates varying between less than 1 and 20 Mg/ha/yr across different areas. These erosion rates significantly exceed soil formation rates of 0.3–1.4 Mg/ha/yr for most of Europe. Soil erosion causes both on-site impacts (damage to crops, loss of nutrients and fertile topsoil, land management difficulties) and off-site impacts (blockages of drains and watercourses, water pollution, damage to infrastructure from muddy floods).

The economic appraisal followed Defra's ecosystem services framework, quantifying and valuing impacts on ecosystem services including food and fibre production, carbon sequestration, water quality, flood regulation, and infrastructure protection. The study evaluated 24 different erosion control measures across categories including agronomic practices (cover crops, mulching, crop rotation), structural measures (buffer strips, earth banks, swales), and management changes (reduced tillage, tramline management, land-use change).

Analysis showed that off-site costs of soil erosion (£237–£458 million nationally) far exceed on-site costs (£11 million), with flood damage, siltation and eutrophication representing the biggest costs. However, most erosion control measures show negative financial net present values (NPVs) at field level, even with agri-environment payments included. This creates a market failure where socially beneficial measures are economically unviable for individual farmers.