Private payments for Public Goods......

[N.Yorks.]

Just been reading up on future farm support payments and it looks like government is keen for private investment in farm based environment schemes. Creating markets where private companies buy environmental goods eg. carbon sequestered, from farmers and land managers.

I'm starting to think that governement see a way of reducing their spending on future ELMS......... (cynical??)

Think there are some landscape wide schemes where farm based schemes are advertised and companies can bid for them, think it's mainly water companies who have 'bought' projects that deliver clean water benefits. I can understand that but are many other businesses investing to directly buy 'public goods' / 'ecosystem services' from farmers and land managers????

Government are looking at encouraging these types of trades and markets - which worries me big time!!

 

[steveR]

I am already in bed with Severn Trent, so Guilty as charged.

I guess the plant a tree schemes to "offset" a flight to Geneva, to go ski-ing, will be a common occurence...

 

[Clive]

Just been reading up on future farm support payments and it looks like government is keen for private investment in farm based environment schemes. Creating markets where private companies buy environmental goods eg. carbon sequestered, from farmers and land managers.

I'm starting to think that governement see a way of reducing their spending on future ELMS......... (cynical??)

Think there are some landscape wide schemes where farm based schemes are advertised and companies can bid for them, think it's mainly water companies who have 'bought' projects that deliver clean water benefits. I can understand that but are many other businesses investing to directly buy 'public goods' / 'ecosystem services' from farmers and land managers????

Government are looking at encouraging these types of trades and markets - which worries me big time!!

why does it worry you ? would you rather our support dint come from the commercial world that benefits rather than remain beholden to the taxpayer ?

This is exactly how things should go - ie if an insurance company benefit from lower flooding risk due to farming practice then they should pay for that risk reduction, if pollutant are kept from water rather than removed at water company cost they should pay for that if companies that produce CO2 to make money like airlines can pay to offset that population they should ................ etc

 

[deleted user 837354]

'Private payment for public goods', isn't that a bit like letting folk pay for access your girlfriend's onlyfans cam show?

I'm not entirely sure why private enterprise would pay money for something intangible like this to be honest.

 

[N.Yorks.]

I am already in bed with Severn Trent, so Guilty as charged.

I guess the plant a tree schemes to "offset" a flight to Geneva, to go ski-ing, will be a common occurence...

You're not guilty of anything - if the cash is on the table take it! I bet it's not a sum that would compensate for loss of BPS in 2024 though.........

I heard about a company called EnTrade who brokers these landscape payments and they had secured funds from a dairy to support dairy farmers to farm in a more eco friedly way, so I suppose this is all about passing these costs on to the end consumers . From the government's perspective it's better getting business to do this rather than taxing everyone more and passing it on to farmers through ELMS?

 

[Hampton]

I am already in bed with Severn Trent, so Guilty as charged.

I guess the plant a tree schemes to "offset" a flight to Geneva, to go ski-ing, will be a common occurence...

Isn’t it noticeable that they are trying to claw as much back for themselves as possible. Metaldehyde scheme now £3/ha less than it used to be, another water company using a reverse auction for cover crops

 

[N.Yorks.]

why does it worry you ? would you rather our support dint come from the commercial world that benefits rather than remain beholden to the taxpayer ?

This is exactly how things should go - ie if an insurance company benefit from lower flooding risk due to farming practice then they should pay for that risk reduction, if pollutant are kept from water rather than removed at water company cost they should pay for that if companies that produce CO2 to make money like airlines can pay to offset that population they should ................ etc

Worries me as these markets might not work out to offer everyone the same opportunities and ultimately these costs are passed on to the consumers, which then means that some bright spark is always prepared to find a way round it like importing from less regulated areas etc. There are many possibilities for market failure.......

 

[N.Yorks.]

View attachment Rethinking-what-it-is-to-be-a-good-farmer-policy-brief-1.pdf

Have a look at this........

 

[7610 super q]

" Farmers often enjoy traditional farmwork ".

Hate to blow my own trumpet off, but I is already a proper farmer, using proper tractors to plough up proper farm land to sow proper crops in a traditional manner, which has been used successfully for 4000 years. Therefore 3/4 of the entire budget should be placed in my bank account.

 

[farmerm]

'Private payment for public goods', isn't that a bit like letting folk pay for access your girlfriend's onlyfans cam show?

I'm not entirely sure why private enterprise would pay money for something intangible like this to be honest.

Because companies making token efforts in carbon offsetting etc get brownie points with ethical share buyers and it increases the company share price...

 

[deleted user 837354]

Because companies making token efforts in carbon offsetting etc get brownie points with ethical share buyers and it increases the company share price...

Does it?

 

[farmerm]

Does it?

I don't know, but if major shareholders think it does then they will give it a go...

 

[GeorgeK]

I agree government will be looking to shift the cost of environmental work onto the private sector. Once big businesses get involved they will wind the thumbscrews down on farmers just like supermarkets do at the moment, they will only be concerned about getting their carbon credits as cheap as possible. There is a lot of talk of 'reverse auctions' being used to bid for environmental work where the lowest bid wins, aka race to the bottom, which doesn't bode well. Finally I'm certain businesses will lobby hard to be able to use foreign offsetting schemes which will undercut us with cheap labour, poor regulation and corruption.
Hope I'm wrong but I can see the whole thing being a complicated mess

 

[steveR]

You're not guilty of anything - if the cash is on the table take it! I bet it's not a sum that would compensate for loss of BPS in 2024 though.........

Nope, not a chance.... But more appealing to me than CS!!

Just positioning for the next 3 years.... cannot really do much more...

 

[neilo]

why does it worry you ? would you rather our support dint come from the commercial world that benefits rather than remain beholden to the taxpayer ?

This is exactly how things should go - ie if an insurance company benefit from lower flooding risk due to farming practice then they should pay for that risk reduction, if pollutant are kept from water rather than removed at water company cost they should pay for that if companies that produce CO2 to make money like airlines can pay to offset that population they should ................ etc

It worries me in that my business might need to depend on the income generated from a 'made up bollox' scheme like carbon trading, which could be changed at the whim of a politician, or when someone comes up with yet another way of calculating carbon sequesting.

It also worries me in that it may well exclude many tenants. Any sequestering of carbon can only be a long term project, and most tenanted land is on relatively short term lets.

Edit: the swear filter changed my original spelling of bollox to 'rubbish', but it was still right.

 

[deleted user 837354]

It worries me in that my business might need to depend on the income generated from a 'made up bollox' scheme like carbon trading, which could be changed at the whim of a politician, or when someone comes up with yet another way of calculating carbon sequesting.

It also worries me in that it may well exclude many tenants. Any sequestering of carbon can only be a long term project, and most tenanted land is on relatively short term lets.

Edit: the swear filter changed my original spelling of bollox to 'rubbish', but it was still right.

Totally agree.

Business reliant on private money being paid for make-believe product or service.

 

[Clive]

It worries me in that my business might need to depend on the income generated from a 'made up bollox' scheme like carbon trading, which could be changed at the whim of a politician, or when someone comes up with yet another way of calculating carbon sequesting.

It also worries me in that it may well exclude many tenants. Any sequestering of carbon can only be a long term project, and most tenanted land is on relatively short term lets.

Edit: the swear filter changed my original spelling of bollox to 'rubbish', but it was still right.

why would having a new high demand product to sell worry you ?

it worries me that most farm businesses are currently depend upon tax payer dole check charity ! ....... but thats ok ?

 

[Clive]

Worries me as these markets might not work out to offer everyone the same opportunities and ultimately these costs are passed on to the consumers, which then means that some bright spark is always prepared to find a way round it like importing from less regulated areas etc. There are many possibilities for market failure.......

BPS doesn’t offer all the same opportunity?

BPS favours landowners not farmers

i would rather take private money than public thanks

a business dependent upon subs is nothing to be proud of

 

[DrWazzock]

Its all so complicated and fiddly though. And so many fingers in the pie all to be paid and fed. I can see it now. A great big form to fill in every year, points for this, points for that, waiting for somebody at the other end to decide if I can scratch my arse. Maps and measuring wheels, seminars and "workshops".



No, I have got rid of all the fiddly stuff and returned the farm to being just three big fields, all combinables. Part time job. Do something else more exciting with the spare time. I feel better already.

 

[N.Yorks.]

BPS doesn’t offer all the same opportunity?

BPS favours landowners not farmers

i would rather take private money than public thanks

a business dependent upon subs is nothing to be proud of

I was thinking more along the lines that ELMS is better for providing support through provision of public goods - 'public goods for public money', rather than 'public goods paid for by private money'.

Private money is exactly that and may not provide the widest possible range of benefits that are needed by us all. Private companies will only pay the minimum they can for the specific things they want........

Some upland landscapes don't support the productive agreicultural margins that say an efficient midlands arable farm might, but may be well placed to provide public goods, so being incentivised, subsidised to do this is totally acceptable. It's just a different type of good that is being produced with a different reward mechanism.

My worry is that private markets for public goods won't work properly.......