This is accomplished by redistributing the #ACY-1215 chemical structure randurls[1|1|,|CHEM1|]# percentage of total ELS points in each option category based upon their pHQ scores (i.e. the most beneficial option will account for the greatest number of points within the category and so on). The number of units of each option is then the total points divided by the options ELS points value. Again, expenditure on categories is maintained to better reflect current enrolment and preferences. This allows the absolute area covered by ELS options to vary, however the total area enrolled in ELS, and the subsequent taxpayer payments,
will remain the same. $$P_ic = \mathop \sum \nolimits P_c \times pHQ_ic$$where P ic is the total ELS points accounted by option i in category c, P c is the total ELS points produced by options in category c. Model C also maintains current ELS budget, however, under this model the ELS points of all options are pooled regardless of their category and the redistribution is based upon the habitat quality benefits of learn more each option in relation to all other options, regardless of their category. As such the most beneficial of all available options will represent the greatest percentage of total redistributed ELS points and so
on. As with model B, this allows the number of units of each option to change, although now there is a degree of substitution between option categories and which may affect their prevalence in the overall ELS. To prevent the outputs of this model from being dominated by arable and grassland options, many of
which are worth several hundred ELS points, the ELS points for hedge/ditch and plot/tree based options were multiplied by 1,000 (assuming 1 m2/unit of hedge/ditch options) PRKACG and 10 (assuming 100 m2/unit of plot options) respectively to scale points of these options relative to 1 ha. $$T_i = \mathop \sum \nolimits T \times tHQ_i$$ T i represents the ELS points accounted by option i, T is the summed points value of all ELS options concerned and tHQ i is the percentage of total HQ of all options represented by each option. For each model the total ELS points and number of units for each option were recalculated to compare with the baseline. Once the ELS composition of each model was calculated the total number of units for each option in each model and the baseline were then multiplied by the average per annum costs per unit (See Table 7 in Appendix) using the costs from the SAFFIE (2007) and Nix (2010), following the establishment and management guidelines laid out in each option (Natural England 2010). Many options had low or no cost.