ping regions World Source: Fay and Yepes, 2003. These estimates appear to be substantially lower than the figures reported in the preceding section. Based on detailed estimates of allowed expenditure in the United Kingdom and in the case of the United States on a Needs Survey (EPA, 2005), the equivalent figures were 0.72% and 0.75% of GDP respectively, although in Canada it is about 0.6%. The figure for the United Kingdom is further supported by rough estimates of required maintenance expenditures based on water sector asset values. The value of assets in England and Wales is in excess of GBP 200 billion, based on 3% (Fay and Yepes, 2003) of asset value being spent on maintenance. This implies an expenditure of GBP 6 billion per annum, or the equivalent 0.6% of GDP, excluding new investments and expenditures required for Scotland and Northern Ireland. Thus there is a strong contrast with the figure of 0.03% of GDP for high-income countries given in the table above. According to Dangeard (2003): "There are few reliable data on water distribution and water pollution abatement expenses as a percentage of GDP. The figures in international sources depend on the sector covered: does it include urban water or also irrigation? Does it cover services and investments? Orders of magnitude concur on some USD 30 billion per year for developing countries investment expenses, the equivalent figure from Fay and Yepes is USD 13.8 billion per year. Thus, surprisingly, developing countries do not seem to devote a higher percentage of GDP for water infrastructure than industrialised countries. A figure for China's pollution abatement expenses given by the National Environment INFRASTRUCTURE TO 2030: TELECOM, LAND TRANSPORT, WATER AND ELECTRICITY - ISBN 92-64-02398-4 © OECD 2006 THE IMPACTS OF CHANGE ON THE LONG-TERM FUTURE DEMAND FOR WATER SECTOR INFRASTRUCTURE Protection Agency is close to 1%, which seems low, although increasing. India's expenditure is believed to be less than 1% of GDP. In France, water expenses of private sector