Background Local authorities (LA) have been subject to significant local funding cuts placing strain on their ability to fund public services. Environmental and regulatory (ER) services provide vital functions in prevention and notification of infectious disease through Food Safety (FS) and Animal and Public Health; Infectious disease control (APHIDC) services. The depth of funding cuts have differed by deprivation level, rural and urban classification, and LA structure. This study aimed to investigate the inequalities in local funding cuts to ER and sub services FS and APHIDC by socioeconomic deprivation, population density and LA structure.

Methods This observational longitudinal study used a generalised estimating equation (GEE) model to estimate the annual percent change of service expenditure overtime from 2009/10 to 2020/21 for ER expenditure and FS and APHIDC. Additionally, we analysed FS and APHIDC expenditure change as a share of ER expenditure for this period. Each model analysed how trends varied by deprivation, LA structure and population density. All analysis were carried out on R studio.

Results Areas of higher deprivation had the largest reduction in expenditure with cuts to ER of 2.4% (95% CI: -3.5%, -1.3%) and FS and APHIDC of 22.8% (95% CI: -34.9%, -8.4%). The share of ER expenditure spent on FS and APHIDC reduced the most in most deprived areas, falling by 13.4% (95% CI: -21.1%, -5%). Unitary LA’s had the largest cuts in ER expenditure with 1.9% (95% CI: -2.9%, -0.8%) decrease whereas FS and APHIDC expenditure saw the biggest cuts in London boroughs with a 9.9% (95% CI: -16.4%, -2.9%) reduction. Both ER and FS and APHIDC services saw reduced expenditure with increase in population density.

Conclusion Here we provide novel insight into the inequalities of local funding cuts to ER services. Despite the importance of ER services in public health protection these services have been cut substantially since the introduction of austerity, with the largest cuts being in the more deprived and highly populated areas. This shows the need for increased and equitable investment into these services to enable resilience to infectious disease threats and to prevent widening health inequalities. This study is descriptive, meaning we cannot confirm why these trends have occurred or what the implications of these findings are. Further research is needed to understand the impacts of these trends, next steps are to understand how these cuts impact ER services and gastrointestinal infection outcomes.