Back Matter
Author:
Mr. Benedict J. Clements
Search for other papers by Mr. Benedict J. Clements in
Current site
Google ScholarClose
,
Mr. David Coady
Search for other papers by Mr. David Coady in
Current site
Google ScholarClose
,
Ms. Stefania Fabrizio
Search for other papers by Ms. Stefania Fabrizio in
Current site
Google ScholarClose
,
Mr. Sanjeev Gupta
Search for other papers by Mr. Sanjeev Gupta in
Current site
Google ScholarClose
,
Mr. Trevor Serge Coleridge Alleyne
Search for other papers by Mr. Trevor Serge Coleridge Alleyne in
Current site
Google ScholarClose
, and
Mr. Carlo A Sdralevich
Search for other papers by Mr. Carlo A Sdralevich in
Current site
Google ScholarClose
Language:
English
Keywords:
BOOK; subsidy; government; price; subsidy reform; enterprise
Download PDF (787.3 KB)

Abstract

Baoping Shang, Ian Parry, and Louis Sears

Appendix A. Estimating Pretax and Posttax Global Energy Subsidies

Baoping Shang, Ian Parry, and Louis Sears

This appendix describes the data sources and methodologies used for the estimation of subsidies for petroleum products, coal, natural gas, and electricity.

Pretax Subsidies

Petroleum Products

Pretax consumer subsidies for gasoline, diesel, and kerosene are estimated as the difference between international prices, adjusted upward for transportation and distribution margins, and domestic consumer prices, for 176 countries between 2000 and 2011.1 It should be noted that all these subsidy estimates are based on comparisons for prices of final products (e.g., gasoline) rather than unrefined products (such as crude oil).

For countries for which the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has detailed data on pretax prices and petroleum product taxes, pretax prices are used to measure supply costs. For other countries, supply costs are based on spot prices from the International Energy Agency (IEA). For net oil-importers among these countries, margins are assumed to be US$0.10 per liter to cover international transport costs and another US$0.10 per liter to cover domestic distribution and retailing costs. For net oil exporters, no adjustment is made, because the international transport cost is saved when the product is consumed domestically rather than exported. This is assumed to offset domestic distribution and retailing costs.

Domestic consumer prices for petroleum products (for both firms and households) are taken from publicly available sources for OECD countries. For other countries, domestic prices were provided by country authorities to IMF staff and supplemented by survey data from the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (Ebert and others, 2009). For gasoline, the price is for regular unleaded or other grades, based on availability. Where consumer prices were unavailable, they were imputed based on observed pass-through behavior for that country. This was done for approximately 54 countries in 2009 and one country (Venezuela) in 2011. End-of-year prices are used to estimate subsidies except for 30 countries, mostly in the Middle East and North African (MENA) region, where quarterly price data are available. Producer subsidies for petroleum products are based on OECD producer support estimates (OECD, 2012a). These estimates capture both direct budgetary transfers and preferential treatment through the tax code to petroleum producers.

The fuel-product consumption levels used to calculate total subsidies are based on OECD and IEA data and include consumption by both households and enterprises.

Coal and Natural Gas

Consumer subsidy estimates are based on IEA data for coal in 39 countries and for natural gas in 37 countries between 2007 and 2011. IMF staff estimates on natural gas subsidies are available for an additional four countries in the MENA region. This calculation measures subsidies as the difference between the reference price and the domestic price paid by households and firms. The IEA reference prices for natural gas and coal, both traded goods, are defined differently for net importers and net exporters.2 In addition, producer coal subsidies for 16 countries between 2007 and 2011 are based on OECD data.

For net importers, the reference price was defined as the price at the nearest international market, adjusted for quality differences, the cost of freight and insurance, distribution and marketing costs, and any value added tax (VAT). The price does not include excise duties. For net exporters, the reference price was calculated as the price at the nearest international market, adjusted for quality differences, less the costs of freight and insurance, plus distribution, marketing, and VAT. It should be noted that the quantities of coal and natural gas used in this calculation do not include the amount used for electricity and heat generation. To estimate pretax subsidies, the VAT is subtracted from the IEA estimates, using the standard VAT rate in the country. Producer subsidies for coal are based on OECD producer support estimates that capture the amount of tax subsidies (such as special income tax treatment) or budgetary expenditures designed to support producer incomes (OECD, 2012a).

Electricity

Given the varying availability of data, a number of different approaches are taken to measure subsidies. For 40 countries in sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East and North Africa, and a few selected emerging economies in Europe, estimates of combined producer and consumer subsidies are compiled from various World Bank reports and IMF staff estimates; thus, they are not necessarily comparable. For these countries, subsidy estimates are based on average domestic prices and cost-recovery prices that cover production costs, investment cost, distributional loss, and the nonpayment of electricity bills. An upward adjustment is also made for the input subsidies that electricity producers may receive through their use of subsidized fossil fuel products. For 31 of these 40 countries, the latest year for which data are available is 2009.

For 37 countries, estimates of consumer price subsidies between 2007 and 2011 are taken from the IEA, based on the difference between costs (adjusted for any subsidy on fossil fuel inputs) and average domestic prices (IEA, 2011b). As these prices do not include investment cost, nonpayment of electricity, or distributional losses, the estimates may understate the subsidies. In total, the sample covers 77 countries.

Posttax Subsidies

Posttax subsidies are estimated as pretax subsidies plus

  • a corrective (or “Pigouvian”) tax, reflecting an (excise) tax on energy products to charge for externalities associated with CO2 emissions, local pollution, and (in the case of gasoline and motor diesel) other externalities such as traffic congestion and accidents; and

  • a revenue component, reflecting an (ad valorem) tax on energy products consumed by households that would be consistent with taxation of any other consumer good at the standard VAT or general sales tax (GST) rate.

Corrective Taxes

This section discusses the estimation of taxes needed to correct for externalities from petroleum products, coal, and natural gas. To avoid double counting we do not measure externalities from electricity generation, and because of the lack of available evidence, we do not measure externalities for other generation fuels.3 Owing to the lack of systematic cross-country data, the subsidy estimates do not take into account certain charges and taxes for energy that are often rationalized on environmental grounds.4 Environmental and transportation-related externalities have been quantified for the United States and just a few other countries.5

Petroleum Products

Combustion of petroleum products (gasoline, diesel, and kerosene) generates both carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, which contribute to future global warming, and local air pollution, which elevates mortality risks for people inhaling the pollution. Other externalities associated with motor vehicle use—which we apportion to gasoline and diesel fuels—include traffic congestion and accidents and (primarily in the case of trucks) road damage. Table A.1 summarizes some estimates of motor fuel taxes to correct for these externalities that have been conducted for the United States, the United Kingdom, and Chile. The corrective tax estimate is highest for Chile, where there is a high incidence of traffic fatalities (especially for pedestrians), a large portion of nationwide driving occurs under highly congested conditions, and vehicles have relatively high emission rates.

Table A.1

Corrective Motor Fuel Taxes, Selected Countries

(Cents per liter, 2011 dollars)

article image
Sources: Institute for Fiscal Studies (2012); Parry (2011); Parry and Small (2005); Parry and Strand (2011). Note: The above studies estimate corrective diesel fuel taxes for the United States and Chile but not for the United Kingdom.

For CO2 emissions, we assume an illustrative value for global warming damages of US$34 per ton (in 2007 dollars), following the United States Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Carbon (2013). The estimates in the literature have varied considerably, however—for example, Nordhaus (2011) estimates damages of US$12 per ton, and Stern (2006) estimates US$85 per ton. The US$34 per ton of CO2 emissions is applied to all fuels and, for example, translates into US$0.07–US$0.09 per liter of gasoline or diesel (Table A.1).

A careful assessment of the noncarbon corrective fuel taxes for other countries would take into account a variety of local factors affecting the willingness to pay for reductions in these negative externalities, including, most important, income, local emission rates, population density, travel delays, and the frequency of traffic accidents. Internationally comprehensive data on these factors are not readily available, except for income per capita. We make adjustments to the estimates of willingness to pay by comparing a given country’s income (e.g., Colombia) in purchasing parity terms with the United States, the United Kingdom, and Chile.6 An income elasticity of 0.8 is assumed between the willingness to pay for reductions in externalities and per capita income, following the OECD (OECD, 2012b). We then apply this correction to the estimates of externalities per liter described in Appendix Table A.1 for the United States, the United Kingdom, and Chile. We then take the average across the three countries to arrive at our estimate for Colombia.

Coal

To estimate the corrective tax per ton of coal for global warming damages, we first derive CO2 emissions per ton of coal, based on IEA data on coal consumption and CO2 emissions from coal by country. The corrective tax per ton of coal is then calculated by multiplying CO2 emissions per ton of coal consumption with the global warming damages of US$34 per ton of CO2 emissions.

Beyond its CO2 emissions, the other major externality associated with coal combustion is local air pollution, where the most important problem is the fine particulates (that permeate the lungs) formed from chemical reactions involving sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions. A state-of-the-art modeling exercise for the United States by a committee of experts (National Research Council, 2009) put the local pollution damages from the average coal plant in 2005 at about US$65 (in 2010 dollars) per (short) ton. This estimate is extrapolated to other countries based on per capita income, in the same way as for petroleum products. This approach does not adjust for cross-country differences in the pollution content of coal or the use of technologies to “scrub” emissions from the smokestack.

Natural Gas

Natural gas is far less emissions-intensive than coal—it produces about half the carbon emissions per unit of energy and only very minimal SO2 emissions. For natural gas, then, only a carbon damage is applied. As with coal, the corrective tax is calculated (based on IEA data) by emissions per thousand cubic feet times US$34 per ton of CO2 emissions.

Revenue Component

Here a scenario where energy products would be taxed just like other consumer goods is considered.7 The estimates are based on VAT rates for 150 countries in 2011. For countries where VAT rates are not available or do not apply, the average VAT rate of countries with a similar level of income in the region is assumed.

Calculating Subsidies with Corrective Tax and Revenue Components

To quantify the magnitude of subsidies, the subsidy-free posttax prices are derived by applying the VAT or GST rates to both pretax prices and excise tax for externalities. The subsidy-free posttax prices are then compared with domestic prices and combined with consumption levels to compute subsidies. In the case of electricity, VAT or GST is estimated only for countries with pretax subsidies. This approach is followed because both domestic prices and cost-recovery prices are unknown for other countries. In the case of coal and natural gas, it is assumed that domestic prices in countries without pretax subsidies are the same as international reference prices.

One complication is that revenue from VAT would be effectively assessed only on energy products as final consumption goods, not on those as intermediate inputs for other consumption goods. To separate intermediate inputs from final consumption goods, we use IEA energy consumption data by industry type. It is assumed that energy products for residential use, commercial and public services, and gasoline for road use are final consumption goods. This approximation indicates that, on average, 99 percent of gasoline consumption, 7 percent of diesel consumption, 39 percent of kerosene consumption, 12 percent of coal consumption, 46 percent of natural gas consumption, and 51 percent of electricity consumption can be categorized as final consumption.

Table A.2

Pretax Subsidies in Percent of GDP for Petroleum Products, Electricity, Natural Gas, and Coal, 20111

(Countries sorted by income category and region)

article image
article image
article image
article image
Sources: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ); International Energy Agency (IEA), World Energy Outlook 2012; IMF staff estimates; IMF, World Economic Outlook; Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD); World Bank. Note: Values are rounded to the nearest one-hundredth percent; electricity subsidies are taken from 2009 for 31 countries, and natural gas data are taken from 2010 for four countries. World estimates are calculated as identified subsidies divided by global GDP. n.a. = not applicable; CEE-CIS = Central and Eastern Europe and Commonwealth of Independent States; LAC = Latin America and the Caribbean; MENA = Middle East and North Africa.

These subsidy estimates may differ from those in the country budget documents because of the methodologies described in this appendix.

Table A.3

Pretax Subsidies in Percent of Government Revenues for Petroleum Products, Electricity, Natural Gas, and Coal, 20111

(Countries sorted by income category and region)

article image
article image
article image
article image
Sources: GIZ; IEA, World Energy Outlook 2012; IMF staff estimates; IMF, World Economic Outlook; OECD; World Bank. Note: Values are rounded to the nearest one-hundredth percent; electricity subsidies are taken from 2009 for 31 countries, and natural gas data are taken from 2010 for four countries. World estimates are calculated as identified subsidies divided by global government revenues. n.a. = not applicable; CEE-CIS = Central and Eastern Europe and Commonwealth of Independent States; LAC = Latin America and the Caribbean; MENA = Middle East and North Africa.

These subsidy estimates may differ from those in the country budget documents because of the methodologies described in this appendix.

Table A.4

Posttax Subsidies as Percent of GDP for Petroleum Products, Electricity, Natural Gas, and Coal, 20111

(Countries sorted by income category and region)

article image
article image
article image
article image
Sources: GIZ; IEA, World Energy Outlook 2012; IMF staff estimates; IMF, World Economic Outlook; OECD; World Bank. Note: Values are rounded to the nearest one-hundredth percent; electricity subsidies are taken from 2009 for 31 countries, and natural gas data are taken from 2010 for four countries. World estimates are calculated as identified subsidies divided by global GDP. n.a. = not applicable; CEE-CIS = Central and Eastern Europe and Commonwealth of Independent States; LAC = Latin America and the Caribbean; MENA = Middle East and North Africa.

Owing to the lack of systematic cross-country data, the subsidy estimates do not take into account certain charges and taxes for energy that are often rationalized on environmental grounds. Principally, these include regional or country-level carbon pricing programs, road user charges (e.g., mileage-based tolls for trucks in Germany), and excise taxes on electricity consumption and vehicle sales. For example, the European Union Emissions Trading System imposes a carbon tax on certain greenhouse gases that are emitted by factories, power plants, and other installations in the system. The current prevailing prices, however, are only a small fraction of estimated damages, and only about half of emissions are covered under the scheme. To take another example, incorporating the road user charges for diesel vehicles in New Zealand would lower our posttax energy subsidy estimates for that country by US$0.8 billion.

The estimate for Luxembourg reflects, to a large extent, cross-border sales of petroleum products to neighboring countries, with buyers attracted by lower tax rates.

Table A.5

Posttax Subsidies in Percent of Government Revenues for Petroleum Products, Electricity, Natural Gas, and Coal, 20111

(Countries sorted by income category and region)

article image
article image
article image
article image
Sources: GIZ; IEA, World Energy Outlook 2012; IMF staff estimates; IMF, World Economic Outlook; OECD; World Bank. Note: Values are rounded to the nearest one-hundredth percent; electricity subsidies are taken from 2009 for 31 countries, and natural gas data are taken from 2010 for four countries. World estimates are calculated as identified subsidies divided by global government revenues. n.a. = not applicable; CEE-CIS = Central and Eastern Europe and Commonwealth of Independent States; LAC = Latin America and the Caribbean; MENA = Middle East and North Africa.

Owing to the lack of systematic cross-country data, the subsidy estimates do not take into account certain charges and taxes for energy that are often rationalized on environmental grounds. Principally, these include regional or country-level carbon pricing programs, road user charges (e.g., mileage-based tolls for trucks in Germany), and excise taxes on electricity consumption and vehicle sales. For example, the European Union Emissions Trading System imposes a carbon tax on certain greenhouse gases that are emitted by factories, power plants, and other installations in the system. The current prevailing prices, however, are only a small fraction of estimated damages, and only about half of emissions are covered under the scheme. To take another example, incorporating the road user charges for diesel vehicles in New Zealand would lower our posttax energy subsidy estimates for that country by US$0.8 billion.

The estimate for Luxembourg reflects, to a large extent, cross-border sales of petroleum products to neighboring countries, with buyers attracted by lower tax rates.

Appendix B. Assessing the Environmental and Health Impacts of Energy Subsidy Reform

Ian Parry and Baoping Shang

This appendix describes the methodologies used to provide calculations of the impact of energy subsidy reform on CO2 emissions, SO2 emissions, and other local pollutants. Here we consider a scenario in which energy prices are raised to levels that would eliminate tax-inclusive subsidies for petroleum products, coal, natural gas, and electricity. For each product, after calculating the increase in prices that is needed to eliminate tax-inclusive subsidies, we estimate how much the quantity demanded decreases for the product. The decrease in quantity demanded is determined by the assumption for the elasticity of demand for the product. The details on how this is estimated for each product are described below.

Petroleum Products

CO2 Emissions

A price elasticity of −0.4 is assumed for gasoline, diesel, and kerosene (Parry, 2011). The reduction in CO2 emissions is then calculated by multiplying the reduction in consumption by the CO2 coefficient of 0.0023 tons per liter of gasoline. The CO2 coefficient is assumed to be 16 percent higher for diesel and kerosene (Parry, 2011).

Local Pollution

The reduction (in percentage terms) in other local pollutants owing to fossil fuel combustion is approximated by the reduction in fuel consumption. Gasoline combustion produces only a small amount of SO2, and thus the impact of petroleum subsidy removal on SO2 is not estimated.

Coal

CO2 Emissions

The reduction (in percent) in coal consumption is calculated by assuming a price elasticity of −0.2 (Energy Information Administration [EIA], 2012).1 The reduction in CO2 emissions resulting from the removal of coal subsidies is then estimated as the same reduction (in percent) in total CO2 emissions from coal, based on Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) data.

SO2 Emissions

This is estimated by using an SO2 coefficient of 0.01 tons of SO2 per short ton of coal (EIA, 2012; Environmental Protection Agency, 2012). Local pollution other than SO2 from coal is considered minor.

Natural Gas

The reduction (in percent) in natural gas consumption is calculated by assuming a price elasticity of −0.3 (EIA, 2012). The reduction in CO2 emissions is then estimated as the same percent reduction in total CO2 emissions from natural gas, based on OECD data. As noted previously, the impact of natural gas use on local pollution is assumed to be relatively small.

Electricity

Electricity subsidies increase the consumption of coal, natural gas, and other generation fuels because of excess demand for electricity. However, for the following reasons, these effects on emissions are not quantified in this paper:

  1. In some countries, part of the electricity subsidies is due to inefficiencies in the electricity sector. In other words, part of the problem is not that prices are too low but that costs are too high. Thus, successful subsidy reforms could reduce these inefficiencies without raising prices and suppressing demand.

  2. Data limitations make it difficult to quantify the environmental impact of electricity subsidy removal. For example, price and cost data are limited, and there is a lack of information on the marginal energy source for electricity generation, which may be different from the average.

  3. The environmental impact of price increases in fuel, coal, and natural gas as inputs for electricity generation is already incorporated in the calculations of these energy products. In addition, electricity subsidies are relatively small as a share of total posttax subsidies, so this omission is expected to have only a small impact on the overall estimates.

Caveats

The methods used here are used to provide some rough estimates of the magnitude of the impacts over the longer term. They have several limitations. For example, they do not take into account the substitution between different energy products and resulting offsetting effects (e.g., there could be some offsetting increase in emissions if subsidy removal raises the price of natural gas to coal).

1

Subsidies for oil- based heating fuels and fuels for non- road transportation vehicles, which are substantial in some countries, are not included because of data limitations.

2

Although coal and natural gas are traded in international markets, transportation costs for these products are high, and a large share of both is consumed domestically or in the regions where they are produced.

3

For example, for nuclear power it is extremely difficult to quantify the risks from radioactive waste and meltdowns.

4

Principally, these include regional or country- level carbon pricing programs, road user charges (e.g., mileage- based tolls for trucks in Germany) and excise taxes on electricity consumption and vehicle sales. For example, the Eu ro pe an Union Emissions Trading System imposes a carbon tax on certain green house gases that are emitted by factories, power plants, and other installations in the system. The current prevailing prices, however, are only a small fraction of estimated damages, and only about half of emissions are covered under the scheme. To take another example, incorporating the road user charges for diesel vehicles in New Zealand would lower our post tax energy subsidy estimates for that country by US$0.8 billion.

5

More detailed work for other countries is under way in the Fiscal Affiairs Department to provide more precise estimates (IMF, forthcoming).

6

Posttax subsidies as a share of GDP for low- income countries would increase from 3.3 percent of GDP to 5.3 percent without this adjustment for noncarbon externalities of petroleum products and coal.

7

In principle, individual products should be taxed more heavily, or less heavily, than the average consumer good (on revenue- raising grounds), depending on whether taxing them causes a significant shift toward untaxed goods (e.g., leisure and products that are exempt from VAT). However, there is little empirical support on which to make these types of adjustments, so they are not pursued here.

1

An upward adjustment is made to the EIA estimate because it is generally viewed as being on the conservative side.

References

  • Ajodhia, V., W. Mulder, and T. Slot, 2012, Tariff Structures for Sustainable Electrification in Africa (Arnhem, the Netherlands: KEMA).

  • Amavilah, V. H. S., 1999, “The Resellers’ Regulated Demand Price of 93 Octane Petrol in Namibia Relative to OPEC Crude Oil Price, 1991,” Discussion Paper No. 10, Ore Body Engineering Ltd.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Antmann, Pedro, 2009, “Reducing Technical and Non-Technical Losses in the Power Sector,” Background Paper for the World Bank Group Energy Sector Strategy (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Arze del Granado, Javier, David Coady, and Robert Gillingham, 2012, “The Unequal Benefits of Fuel Subsidies: A Review of Evidence for Developing Countries,” World Development, Vol. 40 (November), pp. 2234–48.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Atiyas, Izak, and Mark Dutz, 2012, “Competition and Regulatory Reform in the Turkish Electricity Industry,” in Reforming Turkish Energy Markets (New York: Springer).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Bacon, R., E. Ley, and M. Kojima, 2010, “Subsidies in the Energy Sector: An Overview,” Background Paper for the World Bank Group Energy Sector Strategy, July (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Baig, Taimur, Amine Mati, David Coady, and Joseph Ntamatungiro, 2007, “Domestic Petroleum Product Prices and Subsidies: Recent Developments and Reform Strategies,” IMF Working Paper No. 07/71 (Washington: International Monetary Fund). Available via the Internet: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2007/wp0771.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Bank of Namibia, 2005, Quarterly Bulletin, Vol. 14, No. 1 (March).

  • Beaton, Christopher, and Lucky Lontoh, 2010, “Lessons Learned from Indonesia’s Attempts to Reform Fossil-Fuel Subsidies” (Winnipeg: International Institute for Sustainable Development).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Bernardo, Romeo L., Marie-Christine G. Tang, 2008, “The Political Economy of Reform during the Ramos Administration (1992–98),” Commission on Growth and Development Working Paper No. 39 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Besant-Jones, John E., 2006, “Reforming Power Markets in Developing Countries: What Have We Learned?” Energy and Mining Sector Board Discussion Paper No. 19 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Blaschke, W., and U. Lorenz, 2004, “Restructuring of Polish Hard Coal Industry in the Last Decade and Perspectives for the Next Decade,” in European Conference on Raw Building and Coal: New Perspectives (Sarajevo: Wyd IP Svjetlost, d.d.). Available via the Internet: http://www.min-pan.krakow.pl/zaklady/zrynek/zasoby/04_04wb_ul_sarajewo.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • BP, 2012, Statistical Review of World Energy: June 2012. Available via the Internet: http://www.bp.com/statisticalreview

  • Breisinger, Clemens, Wilfried Engelke, and Oliver Ecker, 2011, “Petroleum Subsidies in Yemen: Leveraging Reform for Development,” Policy Research Working Paper No. 5577 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Briceño-Garmendia, C., and M. Shkaratan, 2011a, “Kenya’s Infrastructure: A Continental Perspective,” Policy Research Working Paper No. 5596 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Briceño-Garmendia, C., and M. Shkaratan, 2011b, “Power Tariffs: Caught between Costs Recovery and Affordability,” Policy Research Working Paper No. 5904 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Burniaux, Jean-Marc, Jean Chateau, Romain Duval, and Stéphanie Jamet, 2009, “The Economics of Climate Change Mitigation: How to Build the Necessary Global Action in a Cost-Effective Manner,” OECD Economics Department Working Papers No. 701 (Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Calderón, César, 2008, “Infrastructure and Growth in Africa,” Policy Research Working Paper No. 4914 (Washington: World Bank).

  • Carreón-Rodriguez, Victor, Armando Jiménez San Vicente, and Juan Rosellón, 2003, “The Mexican Electricity Sector: Economic, Legal and Political Issues,” Working paper (Stanford, CA: Program on Energy and Sustainable Development, Stanford University).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Clements, Benedict, Sanjeev Gupta, and Masahiro Nozaki, 2012, “What Happens to Social Spending in IMF-Supported Programs?” Applied Economics, Vol. 45, No. 28, pp. 4022–33.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Clements, Benedict, Hong-Sang Jung, and Sanjeev Gupta, 2007, “Real and Distributive Effects of Petroleum Price Liberalization: The Case of Indonesia,” The Developing Economies, Vol. 45, No. 2, pp. 220–37.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Coady, David, Javier Arze del Granado, Luc Eyraud, Hui Jin, Vimal Thakoor, Anita Tuladhar, and Lilla Nemeth, 2012, “Automatic Fuel Pricing Mechanisms with Price Smoothing: Design, Implementation, and Fiscal Implications,” Technical Notes and Manuals No. 12/03 (Washington: International Monetary Fund). Available via the Internet: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/tnm/2012/tnm1203.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Coady, David, Moataz El-Said, Robert Gillingham, Kangni Kpodar, Paulo Medas, and David Newhouse, 2006, “The Magnitude and Distribution of Fuel Subsidies: Evidence from Bolivia, Ghana, Jordan, Mali, and Sri Lanka,” IMF Working Paper No. 06/247 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Coady, David, Robert Gillingham, Rolando Ossowski, John Piotrowski, Shamsuddin Tareq, and Justin Tyson, 2010, “Petroleum Product Subsidies: Costly, Inequitable, and Rising,” IMF Staff Position Note No. 10/05 (Washington: International Monetary Fund). Available via the Internet: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/spn/2010/spn1005.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Coady, David, and David Newhouse, 2006, “Evaluating the Distribution of the Real Income Effects of Increases in Petroleum Product Prices in Ghana,” in Analyzing the Distributional Impacts of Reforms: Operational Experience in Implementing Poverty and Social Impact Analysis, ed. by A. Coudouel, A. Dani, and S. Paternostro (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Competition Tribunal of South Africa, 2006, “Uhambo Merger Findings,” Case No: 101/LM/Dec04.

  • Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit, 2009, International Fuel Prices 2009 (Bonn and Berlin, 6th ed.).

  • Dick, Herman, Sanjeev Gupta, David Vincent, and Herbert Voight, 1984, “The Impact of Oil Price Increases on Four Oil-Poor Developing Countries: A Comparative Analysis,” Energy Economics, Vol. 6 (January), pp. 59–70.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Ebert, Sebastian, Gerhard P. Metschies, Dominik Schmid, and Armin Wagner, 2009, International Fuel Prices 2009 (Eschborn: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, 6th ed.).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Ellis, Jennifer, 2010, “The Effects of Fossil-Fuel Subsidy Reform: A Review of Modelling and Empirical Studies,” in The Untold Billions: Fossil-Fuel Subsidies, Their Impacts and the Path to Reform (Geneva: Global Subsidies Initiative).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Energy Information Administration (EIA), 2012, “Fuel Competition in Power Generation and Elasticities of Substitution” (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Environmental Protection Agency, 2012, “Quarterly Emissions Tracking,” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Available via the Internet: http://www.epa.gov/airmarkt/quarterlytracking.html

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Escribano, Alvaro, J. Luis Guasch, and Jorge Pena, 2008, “A Robust Assessment of the Impact of Infrastructure on African Firms’ Productivity,” Africa Infrastructure Country, Diagnostic Working Paper (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Fernandez, Luisa, and Rosechin Olfindo, 2011, “Overview of the Philippines’ Conditional Cash Transfer Program,” Social Protection Note No. 2, May (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Fiszbein, Ariel, and Norbert Schady, 2009, Conditional Cash Transfers: Reducing Present and Future Poverty, Policy Research Report (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Fofana, Ismaél, Margaret Chitiga, and Ramos Mabugu, 2009, “Oil Prices and the South African Economy: A Macro-Meso-Micro Analysis,” Energy Policy, Vol. 37 (December), pp. 5509–18.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Foster, V., and C. Briceño-Garmendia, 2010, Africa’s Infrastructure: A Time for Transformation (Washington: World Bank).

  • Foster, Vivien, and Jevgenijs Steinbuks, 2008, “Paying the Price for Unreliable Power Supplies: In-House Generation of Electricity by Firms in Africa,” Policy Research Working Paper No. 4913 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Garcia, Morito, and Charity M. T. Moore, 2012, The Cash Dividend: The Rise of Cash Transfers in Sub-Saharan Africa, (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Gelb, Alan, and associates, 1988, Oil Windfalls: Blessing or Curse? (New York: Oxford University Press).

  • Giambiagi, F., and M. Moreira, 1999, “A Economia Brasileira nos Anos 90” (Rio de Janeiro: Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Global Subsidies Initiative, 2010, “Strategies for Reforming Fossil-Fuel Subsidies: Practical Lessons from Ghana, France and Senegal,” in The Untold Billions: Fossil-Fuel Subsidies, Their Impacts and the Path to Reform (Winnipeg: International Institute for Sustainable Development).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Graham, Carol, 1998, Private Markets for Public Goods: Raising the Stakes in Economic Reform (Washington: World Bank).

  • Grosh, Margaret, Carlo del Ninno, Emil Tesliuc, and Azedine Ouerghi, 2008, For Promotion and Protection: The Design and Implementation of Effective Safety Nets (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Gupta, Sanjeev, 1983, “India and the Second OPEC Oil Shock—An Economy-Wide Analysis,” Review of World Economics, Vol. 119, No. 1, pp. 122–37.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Gupta, Sanjeev, Benedict Clements, Kevin Fletcher, and Isabel Inchauste, 2004, “Issues in Domestic Petroleum Pricing in Oil-Producing Countries,” in Fiscal Policy Formulation and Implementation in Oil-Producing Countries, ed. by J. Davis, R. Ossowski, and A. Fedelino (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Gupta, Sanjeev, Marijn Verhoeven, Robert Gillingham, Christian Schiller, Ali Mansoor, and Juan Pablo Cordoba, 2000, Equity and Efficiency in the Reform of Price Subsidies: A Guide for Policymakers (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Heggie, Ian G., and Piers Vickers, 1998, “Commercial Management and Financing of Roads,” World Bank Technical Paper No. 409 (Washington: World Bank). Available via the Internet: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/1998/05/441617/commercial-management-financing-roads

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2012, “Tax and Benefit Tables” (London). Available via the Internet: http://www.ifs.org.uk/fiscalFacts/taxTables

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • International Energy Agency, 2010, “Energy Policies of IEA Countries: Turkey 2009 Review” (Paris).

  • International Energy Agency, 2011a, “Development in Energy Subsidies,” in the World Energy Outlook (Paris).

  • International Energy Agency, 2011b, “Fossil-Fuel Subsidies—Methodology and Assumptions,” World Energy Outlook. Available via the Internet: http://www.iea.org/publications/worldenergyoutlook/resources/energysubsidies/methodologyforcalculatingsubsidies

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • International Energy Agency, 2011c, World Energy Outlook (Paris).

  • International Finance Corporation, 2012, From Gap to Opportunity: Business Models for Scaling up Energy Access (Washington).

  • International Monetary Fund, 2001, “Ghana,” Country Report No. 01/141 (Washington).

  • International Monetary Fund, 2005a, “Ghana,” Country Report No. 05/292 (Washington).

  • International Monetary Fund, 2005b, “Power Sector Reform in the Philippines,” in Philippines: Selected Issues Paper (Washington).

  • International Monetary Fund, 2008, “Food and Fuel Prices—Recent Developments, Macroeconomic Impact, and Policy Responses” (Washington). Available via the Internet: http://www.imf.org/external/np/pp/eng/2008/063008.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • International Monetary Fund, 2011a, “Ghana,” Country Report No. 11/128 (Washington).

  • International Monetary Fund, 2011b, Regional Economic Outlook: Middle East and Central Asia, World Economic and Financial Surveys (Washington).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • International Monetary Fund, 2012a, “Fiscal Transparency, Accountability, and Risk,” IMF Policy Paper (Washington). Available via the Internet: https://www.imf.org/external/np/pp/eng/2012/080712.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • International Monetary Fund, 2012b, “Ghana,” Country Report No. 12/36 (Washington).

  • International Monetary Fund, 2012c, “Ghana,” Country Report No. 12/201 (Washington).

  • International Monetary Fund, 2012d, “Managing Global Growth Risks and Commodity Price Shocks: Vulnerabilities and Policy Challenges for Low-Income Countries” (Washington). Available via the Internet: http://www.imf.org/external/np/pp/eng/2011/092111.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • International Monetary Fund, 2012e, Regional Economic Outlook: Sub-Saharan Africa: Sustaining Growth amid Global Uncertainty, World Economic and Financial Surveys (Washington).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • International Monetary Fund, forthcoming, “Pricing Energy for Environmental Damages: Putting Principle into Practice” (Washington).

  • Komives, Kristin, Todd Johnson, Jonathan Halpern, Jose Luis Aburto, and John Scott, 2009, “Residential Electricity Subsidies in Mexico: Exploring Options for Reform and for Enhancing the Impact on the Poor,” Working Paper No. 160 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Koplow, Doug, 2009, “Measuring Energy Subsidies Using the Price-Gap Approach: What Does It Leave out?” IISD Trade, Investment and Climate Change Series (Winnipeg: International Institute for Sustainable Development). Available via the Internet: http://www.iisd.org/publications/pub.aspx?pno=1165

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Kumar, Manmohan S., and Jaejoon Woo, 2010, “Public Debt and Growth,” IMF Working Paper No. 10/174 (Washington: International Monetary Fund). Available via the Internet: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2010/wp10174.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Kumar, Manmohan S., Anthony A. Kolb, Sumila Gulyani, and Vahram Avenesyan, 2011, “Utility Pricing and the Poor: Lessons from Armenia,” Technical Paper No. 497 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Lampietti, Julian, Anthony A. Kolb, Sumila Gulyani, and Vahram Avenesyan, 2011, “Utility Pricing and the Poor: Lessons from Armenia,” World Bank Technical Papers No. 497 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Larrain, Felipe B., 2010, “Nuevos Mecanismos de Protección ante Variaciones de Precios de Combustibles,” Presentation, Chilean Ministry of Finance. Available via the Internet: http://www.chiletransporte.cl/3w/images/Documentos/Sipco.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Lofgren, Hans, 1995, “Macro and Micro Effects of Subsidy Cuts: A Short Run CGE Analysis for Egypt,” TMD Discussion Paper No. 5 (Washington: International Food Policy Research Institute).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Márquez, Miguel, 2000, “El Fondo de Estabilización de Precios del Petróleo (FEPP) y el Mercado de los derivados en Chile,” División de Recursos Naturales e Infraestructura, ECLAC. Available via the Internet: http://www.eclac.org/publicaciones/xml/9/5789/Lcl1452e.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Mota, Raffaella, 2003, “The Restructuring and Privatisation of Electricity Distribution and Supply Business in Brazil: A Social Cost-Benefit Analysis,” Working Paper No. WP 0309 (Cambridge: University of Cambridge, Department of Applied Economics).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Mourougane, Annabelle, 2010, “Phasing out Energy Subsidies in Indonesia,” OECD Economics Department Working Paper No. 808 (Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • National Research Council, 2009, “Hidden Costs of Energy: Unpriced Consequences of Energy Production and Use,” Committee on Health, Environmental, Other External Costs and Benefits of Energy Production and Consumption (Washington: National Academies Press).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Nixson, Frederick, and Bernard Walters, 2005, “Utilities’ Pricing and the Poor: The Case of Armenia,” UNDP Armenia White Paper (New York: United Nations Development Program).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Nordhaus, William, 2011, “Estimates of the Social Cost of Carbon: Background and Results from the RICE-2011 Model,” NBER Working Paper No. 17540 (Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Okigbo, Patrick O., and Dili Enekebe, 2011, “Nigeria: Fuel Subsidy Removal—Achieving the Optimal Solution,” Nextier Policy Brief, December 15 (Washington: Nextier).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Okonjo-Iweala, Ngozi, 2011, “Brief on Fuel Subsidy,” December 6 (Nigeria: Federal Ministry of Finance).

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2004, Mexico: Progress in Implementing Regulatory Reform (Paris).

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2009, “The Economics of Climate Change Mitigation Policies and Options for Global Action beyond 2012” (Paris).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2012a, “Inventory of Estimated Budgetary Support and Tax Expenditures for Fossil Fuels” (Paris). Available via the Internet: http://www.oecd.org/tad/environmentandtrade/inventoryofestimatedbudgetarysupportandtaxexpendituresforfossilfuels.htm

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2012b, “Mortality Risk Valuation in Environment, Health and Transport Policies” (Paris).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2013, “Chile: Inventory of Estimated Budgetary Support and Tax Expenditures for Fossil Fuels,” Overview Note, OECD-IEA Fossil Fuel Subsidies and Other Support. Available via the Internet: http://www.oecd.org/site/tadffss/Chileoverviewfossilfuelsupport2013.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • O’Ryan, Raul, Sebastian Miller, Jorge Rogat, and Carlos de Miguel, 2003, “The Impact of Removing Energy Subsidies in Chile,” in Energy Subsidies: Lessons Learned in Assessing Their Impact and Designing Policy Reforms (Geneva: United Nations Environment Program). Available via the Internet: http://www.unep.ch/etb/publications/energySubsidies/Energysubreport.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Parry, Ian W. H., 2011, “How Much Should Highway Fuels Be Taxed?” in U.S. Energy Tax Policy, ed. by Gilbert E. Metcalf (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Parry, Ian W. H., and Kenneth A. Small, 2005, “Does Britain or the United States Have the Right Gasoline Tax?” American Economic Review, Vol. 95, No. 4, pp. 1276–89.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Parry, Ian W. H., and Jon Strand, 2011, “International Fuel Tax Assessment: An Application to Chile,” IMF Working Paper No. 11/168 (Washington: International Monetary Fund). Available via the Internet: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2011/wp11168.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Philippines, Department of Energy, 2006, “8th EPIRA Implementation Status Report” (Manila).

  • Ranganathan, R., and Vivien Foster, 2012, “Uganda’s Infrastructure: A Continental Perspective,” Policy Research Working Paper No. 5963 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Sargsyan, Gevorg, Ani Balabanyan, and Denzel Hankinson, 2006, “From Crisis to Stability in the Armenian Power Sector: Lessons Learned from Armenia’s Energy Reform Experience,” Working Paper No. 74 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Stern, Nicholas, 2006, Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change (London: Her Majesty’s Treasury).

  • Sterner, Thomas, ed., 2012, Fuel Taxes and the Poor: The Distributional Effects of Gasoline Taxation and Their Implications for Climate Policy (Washington: RFF Press).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Suwala, Wojciech, 2010, “Lessons Learned from the Restructuring of Poland’s Coal-Mining Industry” (Geneva: Global Subsidies Initiative). Available via the Internet: http://www.iisd.org/gsi/sites/default/files/poland_casestudy_ffs.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Uganda, Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development, 2012a, Energy and Mineral Sector Performance Report, 2008–2011 (Kampala).

  • Uganda, Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development, 2012b, Performance of the Uganda Power Sector (Kampala).

  • United Nations Environment Program and the International Energy Agency, 2002, “Reforming Energy Subsidies: An Explanatory Summary of the Issues and Challenges in Removing or Modifying Subsidies on Energy that Undermine the Pursuit of Sustainable Development” (Paris).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • United Nations Environment Program, 2008, “Reforming Energy Subsidies: Opportunities to Contribute to the Climate Change Agenda,” Division of Technology, Industry and Economics (Paris).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • United States, Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Carbon, 2013, “Technical Support Document: Technical Update of the Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis Under Executive Order 12866.” Available via the Internet: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/inforeg/social_cost_of_carbon_for_ria_2013_update.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Vagliasindi, Maria, 2013, “Implementing Energy Subsidy Reforms: Evidence from Developing Countries” (Washington: World Bank). Available via the Internet: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/11965

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Velody, Mark, Michael J. G. Cain, and Michael Philips, 2003, “Energy Reform and Social Protection in Armenia,” in A Regional Review of Social Safety Net Approaches: In Support of Energy Sector Reform (Washington: United States Agency for International Development).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • von Moltke, Anja, Colin McKee, and Trevor Morgan, 2004, Energy Subsidies: Lessons Learned in Assessing Their Impact and Designing Policy Reforms (Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • World Bank, 2008, Philippines Quarterly Update (Washington). Available via the Internet: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2008/11/11962976/philippines-quarterly-update

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • World Bank, 2009, “Philippines—First Development Policy Loan Project.” Available via the Internet: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2009/09/11415139/philippines-first-development-policy-loan-project

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • World Bank, 2010a, “Project Appraisal Document for the Electricity Expansion Project,” Report No. 54147-KE, May (Washington).

  • World Bank, 2010b, “Subsidies in the Energy Sector: An Overview,” Background Paper for the World Bank Group Energy Sector Strategy, July. Available via the Internet: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTESC/Resources/Subsidy_background_paper.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • World Bank, 2011a, “Uganda: Strategic Review of the Electricity Sector,” Draft policy note (Washington).

  • World Bank, 2011b, “Proposed Credit to the Republic of Uganda for an Electricity Sector Development Project,” Report No. 59310-UG, May (Washington).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • World Bank, 2012a, Improving the Targeting of Social Programs in Ghana, ed. by Q. Wendon (Washington).

  • World Bank, 2012b, “Proposed Credit in the Amount of SDR 32.3 million (US$50 million equivalent) to the Republic of Niger for a First Shared Growth Credit,” Report No. 69131-NE, May 31 (Washington).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Zhang, Fan, 2011, “Distributional Impact Analysis of the Energy Price Reform in Turkey,” Policy Research Working Paper No. 5831 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Contributors

Trevor Alleyne, Advisor, African Department

Andreas Bauer, Assistant Director, Strategy, Policy, and Review Department

Benedict Clements, Division Chief, Fiscal Affairs Department

David Coady, Deputy Division Chief, Fiscal Affairs Department

Antonio David, Economist, Institute for Capacity Development

Ozgur Demirkol, Senior Economist, Middle East and Central Asia Department

Allan Dizioli, Economist, Fiscal Affairs Department

Stefania Fabrizio, Deputy Division Chief, Fiscal Affairs Department

Katja Funke, Economist, Fiscal Affairs Department

Sanjeev Gupta, Deputy Director, Fiscal Affairs Department

Farayi Gwenhamo, Economist, African Department

Mumtaz Hussain, Senior Economist, African Department

Christian Josz, Deputy Division Chief, African Department

Alvar Kangur, Economist, Fiscal Affairs Department

Javier Kapsoli, Economist, Fiscal Affairs Department

Kangni Kpodar, Senior Economist, Fiscal Affairs Department

Clara Mira, Economist, African Department

Luc Moers, Senior Economist, Middle East and Central Asia Department

Masahiro Nozaki, Senior Economist, Fiscal Affairs Department

Anton Op de Beke, Resident Representative, African Department

Dragana Ostojic, Economist, Middle East and Central Asia Department

Ian Parry, Technical Assistance Advisor, Fiscal Affairs Department

Edgardo Ruggiero, Senior Economist, African Department

Carlo Sdralevich, Deputy Division Chief, Middle East and Central Asia Department

Louis Sears, Research Assistant, Fiscal Affairs Department

Baoping Shang, Economist, Fiscal Affairs Department

Sukhwinder Singh, Assistant to the Director, African Department

Mauricio Soto, Economist, Fiscal Affairs Department

Vimal Thakoor, Economist, African Department

Genevieve Verdier, Senior Economist, African Department

Mauricio Villafuerte, Deputy Division Chief, African Department

Younes Zouhar, Senior Economist, Middle East and Central Asia Department

Index

[Page numbers followed by b, f, n, or t refer to boxes, figures, footnotes or tables, respectively.]

A

Africa. See Middle East and North Africa; Sub-Saharan Africa

Agência Nacional do Petróleo (Brazil), 104–5

alternative energy, affordable, 38

Armenia, 28, 36

  • bill collection rate for electricity in, 128–29, 131f, 133

  • electricity sector financial deficit in, 130f

  • electricity subsidies in, 127–33

  • macroeconomics and, 127t, 131f

  • residential electricity tariffs in, 129f

  • Azerbaijan conflict and, 128

Arroyo administration, 83

Asia, reforms in, 75–85

  • in Indonesia, 75–79

  • magnitude of subsidies and, 11, 11f, 12f

  • in Philippines, 79–85

Asian crisis, 75, 78, 81

assessment of reform impact, 31

  • in Ghana, 45, 46

  • in Nigeria, 62

automatic pricing mechanisms, 39, 64

  • in Mauritania, 93–94, 95–96

  • in Niger, 53

  • in Turkey, 124–25

B

Balabanyan, Ani, 130

balance-of-payments, 18

Bantuan Langsun Tunai (Indonesia), 77–78

Belgium, 13

black markets, 98

block tariff scheme (IBT), 66

Brazil, 29, 33, 34

  • electricity subsidies in, 115–18

  • fuel prices in, 105–6, 106f

  • macroeconomics and, 104t, 105f, 117f

  • petroleum product subsidies in, 103–8

Briceño-Garmendia, C., 68

budgets, recording of subsidies in, 7, 26

  • in Mexico, 120

  • in Niger, 55

  • in Uganda, 71, 71t

Bujagali hydro generation unit (Uganda), 71–72

Burkina Faso, 35

C

Cape Verde, 35

capital-intensive industries, 2

Cardoso administration, 107, 118

Caribbean, 11, 11f, 12f, 13

case studies, 4, 23, 24–25t, 26, 26n2

cash transfers, 36–37

  • in Armenia, 132

  • in Brazil, 107

  • in Indonesia, 77–78

  • in Iran, 87–90

  • in Mauritania, 95

  • in Mexico, 122

  • in Yemen, 99–100

Central and Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS)

  • Armenia and, 127–33

  • magnitude of subsidies and, 11, 11f, 12f

  • Poland and, 136–42

  • Turkey and, 123–27, 133–36

Central Energy Fund (South Africa), 63–64

CFE (Comisión Federal de Electricidad) (Mexico), 119–20

Chile

  • macroeconomics and, 108t

  • petroleum product subsidies in, 108–11

  • stabilization funds in, 110f

China, 13, 40

CIS. See Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS)

CO2 emissions

  • corrective taxes and, 145, 146

  • environmental and health impact of, 165–67

  • subsidy reform and, 19

coal

  • corrective taxes and, 147

  • environmental and health impact of, 166

  • international prices of, 2f

  • pretax subsidies and, 144, 144n2

coal subsidies

  • as percent of total, 9

  • in Poland, 136–42

collection rates, in Armenia, 128–29, 131f, 133

Comisión Federal de Electricidad (Mexico), 29, 119

Comisión Reguladora de la Energia (Mexico), 119

communication strategy, 32–33

  • in Ghana, 45, 46

  • in Indonesia, 79

  • in Iran, 90

  • in Niger, 56

  • in Nigeria, 59–60, 61

  • in Philippines, 80, 82

  • in Uganda, 74

community development, 100

competitiveness, 15–16, 17–18b, 28

comprehensive reform plans, 29–32

  • in Namibia, 51

  • in Philippines, 80, 82, 84–85

  • in Yemen, 100

consequences of subsidies, 2–3

  • depression of economic growth and, 15–18

  • inequity and, 19–21, 20f

  • macroeconomic imbalances and, 18

  • overconsumption of energy and, 18–19

Consumer’s Protection System for Fuel Excise Taxes (SIPCO) (Chile), 110

consumer subsidies, 1–2, 5–13, 6b

corrective taxes, 6n3, 8, 145–47, 145n4, 146t

cost of subsidies. See consequences of subsidies; financing of subsidies

CRC (Conta de Resultados a Compensar) (Brazil), 116

crises, economic

  • 1997 Asian, 75, 78, 81

  • 2007–8 global fuel and food, 2, 46, 81, 92

crude oil

  • in Brazil, 103

  • in Chile, 108

  • international prices of, 2f

  • in South Africa, 62

D

definition and measurement of subsidies, 5–13

  • caveats and, 8–9, 167

  • consumer, 1–2, 5–13, 6b

  • environmental and health impact and, 165–67

  • posttax, 6, 6b, 8, 13, 145–48, 157–64t

  • pretax, 1–2, 5–13, 6b, 9f, 10f, 11f, 143–45, 149–55t

  • producer, 1, 5, 8, 8n4

  • tax, 2, 5

Deutsche Gesellschaftfur Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), 7, 143

diesel

  • in Brazil, 29, 34, 103–7

  • effects of subsidies on, 19, 20f

  • environmental impact of, 165

  • in Indonesia, 76

  • international prices of, 2f

  • in Mauritania, 93, 93f, 94

  • in Namibia, 48–49

  • in Niger, 53, 55

  • in Nigeria, 57, 57n3

  • in Peru, 34, 111–12

  • in Turkey, 125, 126, 126f

  • in Uganda, 73

  • in Yemen, 96, 98

distributional effects of subsidies, 19, 20f

E

economic growth, depression of, 15–18

electricity

  • dual rate meters and, 132–33

  • generators and, 15n1, 68

  • pretax subsidies and, 144–45

  • price regulation and, 41

  • subsistence level of, 68

  • supply cost and, 6b

  • thermal power and, 70–71, 73, 94

Electricity Regulatory Authority (Uganda), 70, 72

electricity subsidies

  • in Armenia, 28, 31, 36–37, 127–33

  • in Brazil, 31, 115–18

  • in Cape Verde, 35

  • effects of, 19

  • in Kenya, 31, 33, 64–69

  • low-income groups and, 20, 37 (see also poverty, impact of subsidies on; poverty, mitigating measures for)

  • in Mauritania, 94, 96

  • measurement and, 8

  • in Mexico, 27–30, 119–22

  • as percent of total, 9

  • in Philippines, 82–84

  • pretax, 9

  • reform and, 3, 30–31

  • in Sub-Saharan Africa, 16b

  • in Turkey, 29–30, 34, 133–36

  • in Uganda, 27, 33, 69–74

Electric Power Industry Reform Act (Philippines), 83

Emerging and Developing Asia. See Asia

ENAP (national oil company of Chile), 108–9

energy, affordable alternative, 38

energy consumption, 2–3, 18–19

Energy Market Regulatory Authority (Turkey), 40, 125, 127

Energy Regulatory Commission (Philippines), 83

Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) (Kenya), 65–67, 69

energy sector investment, 15–16, 16b

energy shortages, 15, 15n1

Energy Tribunal, 65

enterprise

  • development, 100

  • restructuring, 89, 138–39

environmental impact, 165–67

Equalization Fund (South Africa), 63

equity and subsidies, 19–21, 20f

  • see also poverty, mitigating measures for

Eskom Uganda, 70

ethanol, in Brazil, 106–7

Europe. See Central and Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS)

European Union (EU), Turkey and, 124–25, 127

excise taxes, 110, 112, 114, 125, 126f

Extended Arrangement (1998) (Philippines), 79

Extended Credit Facility (ECF) (Mauritania), 92

F

FEPC (Fondo de Estabilización de Precios de los Combustibles) (Chile), 109–10

FEPC (Fondo de Estabilización de Precios de Combustibles) (Peru), 112–14

FEPP (Fondo de Estabilización de Precios del Petróleo) (Chile), 109–11

Finance and Public Credit, Ministry of (Mexico), 119–20

financial partners, engaging, 56

financing of subsidies, 7, 7b

fiscal imbalances, 2

Fox administration, 120–21

French Development Agency, 94, 96

Fuel Prices Stabilization Fund (FEPC) (Chile), 109–10

G

G-20 Pittsburgh Communiqué, 1n1

Gabon, 39

gasoline

  • in Brazil, 34, 104, 106

  • effects of subsidies on, 19, 20f

  • environmental impact of, 165

  • international prices of, 2f

  • in Iran, 87, 89

  • in Niger, 53, 55

  • in Nigeria, 31, 57–61

  • in Peru, 34, 115

  • in Turkey, 125, 126f

  • in Yemen, 96, 98, 98n2

gas vouchers, in Brazil, 107–8

generators, cost of, 15n1, 68

Ghana, 31, 33, 36, 38, 39

  • fuel prices and, 45f

  • macroeconomics and, 44t

  • petroleum product subsidies in, 43–47

Ghana Commercial Bank, 44

global subsidies landscape, 1–2

global warming

  • estimates of damage of, 8

  • overconsumption of energy and, 18–19

government and governance

  • improvements in, 102

  • lack of confidence in, 27, 78

  • role of, in liberalizing regime, 41

  • SOEs and, 35

H

Hankinson, Denzel, 130

health impact, 165–67

I

IMF (International Monetary Fund)

  • Extended Credit Facility (Yemen), 98

  • pretax subsidies and, 7–8, 143–45

  • programs of, 52–53, 53n2, 75, 79–80, 82, 92–94

  • reform case studies and, 3–4, 26

implicit subsidies, 26, 26n4

import tax, 107

incentives

  • domestic energy consumption and, 18

  • energy efficiency and, 18

  • smuggling and, 3, 16, 16n2

independent bodies/agencies, 39–40

  • in Armenia, 133

  • in Ghana, 46

  • in Indonesia, 78–79

  • in Kenya, 69

  • in Turkey, 125, 127

  • in Uganda, 74

India, financing fuel subsidies in, 7b

Indonesia, 27, 31–32, 36, 38

  • macroeconomics and, 76t, 77f

  • petroleum product subsidies in, 75–79

industrial sector, 28

inflation

  • opposition to reform and, 28–29

  • smoothing rule and, 40

  • subsidy reform and, 3

information, campaign of public

  • in Armenia, 129, 133

  • in Ghana, 46

  • in Iran, 90

  • in Niger, 56

  • in Nigeria, 59–61

  • in Philippines, 80

  • in Yemen, 98, 100

information, impact of lack of, 26–27, 120, 120n8

interest group opposition, 28–29

  • in Ghana, 46

  • in Indonesia, 75

  • in Mexico, 120–21

  • in Nigeria, 60

  • in Philippines, 79, 79n1

  • in Poland, 136, 138

international energy prices. See prices, international

investment

  • in energy, 3, 15–16

  • lack of and inefficiencies, 74

  • private, 2, 15–16

IPPs (independent power producers) (Philippines), 82

Iran, 28, 30, 38

  • macroeconomics and, 88t

  • petroleum product subsidies in, 87–90

Islamic Development Bank, 94

J

Justice and Development Party (Turkey), 125

K

Kenya, 31, 33, 37

  • electricity subsidies in, 64–69

  • hidden costs in power sector, 67f

  • macroeconomics and, 65t

  • power sector indicators, 66t

Kenya Electricity Generating Company (KenGen), 65–66

Kenya Power and Lighting Company (KPLC), 65–68

kerosene

  • effects of subsidies on, 19, 20f

  • environmental impact of, 165

  • in Indonesia, 38, 76, 77–78

  • international prices of, 2f

  • in Niger, 53

  • in Nigeria, 57–59

  • in Uganda, 73

  • in Yemen, 38, 96, 98, 100

L

labor market program, in Poland, 139–42

labor unions. See unions

Latin America and Caribbean, reforms in

  • in Brazil, 103–8, 115–18

  • in Chile, 108–11

  • magnitude of subsidies and, 11, 11f, 12f, 13

  • in Mexico, 119–22

  • in Peru, 111–15

(LFC) Luz y Fuerza del Centro (Mexico), 119n5

liabilities, assumption of, 142

lifeline tariffs, 37, 69, 73, 74, 84

liquefied petroleum gas (LPG)

  • in Brazil, 103–4, 106–7

  • consumer subsidies for, 8

  • effects of subsidies on, 20f

  • in Indonesia, 38, 76, 77–78

  • in Peru, 112, 114

  • in Philippines, 37

  • in Turkey, 34, 126

  • in Yemen, 38, 96, 98, 100

Liquid Fuels Industry Task Force (South Africa), 63

Livelihood Empowerment against Poverty (LEAP) (Ghana), 47

LPG. See liquefied petroleum gas (LPG)

M

macroeconomic conditions as barriers, 29

macroeconomic imbalances, 18

Mali, 35

Mauritania, 33

  • macroeconomics and, 91t

  • petroleum product subsidies in, 90–96

measurement

  • price-gap approach, 5, 7, 8

  • See also definition and measurement of subsidies

messages, key, in communication, 32

Mexico, 27, 28–29

  • electricity subsidies in, 119–22

  • macroeconomics and, 121f

Middle East and North Africa, reforms in

  • in Iran, 87–90

  • magnitude of subsidies and, 11, 11f, 12f, 13

  • in Mauritania, 90–96

  • in Yemen, 96–102

Mines and Energy, Ministry of (Namibia), 48–51

mitigating measures. See poverty, mitigating measures for

Mota, Raffaella, 118

Motherland Party (Turkey), 124–25

motor fuel, corrective taxes and, 146t

multitier tariffs, 89

N

Namibia, 30, 31, 32, 33

  • macroeconomics and, 47t, 50f

  • National Energy Fund and Slate Account, 49f

  • petroleum products subsidies in, 47–51

Namibian Petroleum Corporation (Namcor), 48, 50

National Deregulation Task Force (Namibia), 31, 49

National Energy Council (Indonesia), 79

National Energy Council (Namibia), 31, 49

National Energy Fund (NEF) (Namibia), 48–51

National Petroleum Agency (NPA) (Ghana), 43, 45–46

National Power Corporation (NPC) (Philippines), 82–84

National Union of Namibian Workers, 47

natural gas

  • in Brazil, 106

  • corrective taxes and, 147

  • effects of subsidies on, 19

  • environmental and health impact of, 166

  • international prices of, 2f

  • pretax subsidies and, 9, 144, 144n2

natural resources, 3

Niger, 31, 33

  • fuel prices and, 54f

  • macroeconomics and, 52t, 54f

  • petroleum products subsidies in, 51–57

Nigeria, 28, 33

  • fuel prices and, 58f, 58t

  • macroeconomics and, 57t

  • petroleum products subsidies in, 57–62

North Africa. See Middle East and North Africa

O

objectives, long-term, 30–31, 78

OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development)

  • environment and health impact and, 166

  • posttax subsidies and, 147

  • pretax subsidies and, 7–8, 143–44

oil-exporting countries

  • budgets and, 26

  • subsidy magnitude and, 11

  • subsidy reform and, 3

oil price stabilization fund (Brazil), 103, 107

Oil Price Stabilization Fund (Philippines), 79–81

Oil Prices Stabilization Fund (FEPP) (Chile), 109–11

OMCs (oil marketing companies), 7b

Oportunidades (Mexico), 122

P

participative approach, 56

pass-through to domestic prices, 1, 18

  • in Brazil, 106, 108

  • in Kenya, 65–66

  • in Namibia, 48, 50

  • in Niger, 52–53, 53n2

  • in Peru, 113

  • in Yemen, 101f

“People’s Power” revolution (Philippines), 79

Peru, 29, 34, 40

  • fuel subsidies and, 113f

  • petroleum product subsidies in, 111–15

  • stabilization fund and, 112–14, 114t

Petrobras (Brazil), 103–6

Petroleum Market Law (Turkey), 40, 125, 127

petroleum products

  • corrective taxes and, 146–47

  • environmental and health impact of, 165

  • pretax subsidies and, 143–44

Petroleum Products Pricing Regulatory Agency (Nigeria), 57

petroleum products subsidies

  • in Brazil, 103–8

  • in Chile, 108–11

  • in Ghana, 43–47

  • in Indonesia, 75–79

  • in Iran, 87–90

  • in Mauritania, 90–96

  • in Namibia, 43–47

  • in Niger, 51–57

  • in Nigeria, 57–62

  • as percent of total, 9

  • in Peru, 111–15

  • in Philippines, 79–82

  • pretax, 9, 20f

  • in South Africa, 62–64

  • in Turkey, 123–27

  • in Yemen, 96–102

Petroleum Support Fund (PSF), 57–58

Petrol Ofisi (Turkey), 123

PetroPerú, 112

phasing of price increases, 33–34

  • in Brazil, 107

  • in Indonesia, 76

  • in Iran, 87–88, 90

  • in Niger, 53, 55

Philippines, 27, 30, 32, 34, 37, 39

  • electricity subsidies in, 82–84

  • macroeconomics and, 80t, 81f, 8t, 84f

  • petroleum product subsidies in, 79–82

“Pigouvian” taxes, 6n3, 145

plans for reform. See comprehensive reform plans

Poland, 29, 38

  • coal industry indicators in, 140t, 141f

  • coal prices in, 138f

  • coal subsidies in, 136–142

  • macroeconomics and, 137t, 139f

politics and depoliticization, 38–41

  • in Armenia, 130, 133

  • in Brazil, 107, 118

  • in Ghana, 46, 51

  • in Mauritania, 95

  • in Mexico, 120–21

  • in Philippines, 79–80, 84

  • in Poland, 139–42

  • in Turkey, 127

pollution

  • environmental and health impact of, 165

  • overconsumption of energy and, 18–19

posttax subsidies

  • calculating, 148

  • corrective taxes and, 145–47

  • definition and measurement of, 6, 6b, 8, 13

  • low-income countries and, 147n6

  • as percent of GDP, 157–60t

  • in percent of government revenues, 161–64t

  • revenue component of, 147–48

poverty, impact of subsidies on, 20

poverty, mitigating measures for, 28, 36–38

  • in Armenia, 132–33

  • in Brazil, 107–8, 118

  • in Chile, 111

  • in Ghana, 44–47

  • in Indonesia, 77–78

  • in Iran, 88–89, 90

  • in Kenya, 68–69

  • in Mauritania, 92, 94–96

  • in Mexico, 122

  • in Namibia, 51

  • in Niger, 56–57

  • in Nigeria, 61

  • in Philippines, 81–82, 84

  • in Poland, 139–42

  • in Turkey, 125–26

  • in Yemen, 99–100

Poverty Family Benefit (Armenia), 36–37

Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility (PRGF), 92

pretax subsidies

  • coal and natural gas and, 144

  • definition and measurement of, 1–2, 5–8, 6b, 9f

  • electricity and, 144–45

  • geography of, 11–13, 11f, 12f

  • magnitude of, 9–11, 10f

  • in percent of GDP, 149–52t

  • in percent of government revenues, 153–56t

  • petroleum products and, 143–44

PRI (Partido Revolucionario Institucional) (Mexico), 121

price-gap approach, 5, 7, 8

prices, international, 1–2, 2f, 94

  • competitiveness and, 17–18b

  • domestic prices and, 18, 27–28, 34, 38–41

  • opposition to reform and, 28

  • overconsumption of energy and, 19

  • subsidy measurement and, 5, 6b, 7b

pricing

  • depoliticization of, 38–41

  • multiple prices and, 100

  • phased and sequenced increases in, 33–34, 107

  • See also automatic pricing mechanisms

private sector investment, 2, 15–16

privatization

  • in Armenia, 130

  • in Brazil, 104–5, 115–18

  • in Mexico, 27, 120

  • in Philippines, 84–85

  • in Poland, 141–42

  • in Turkey, 40, 124

  • in Uganda, 69

producer subsidies, 1, 5, 8, 8n4

Public Electricity Service Act (Mexico), 119n6

public spending, 2, 15, 17f, 20–21, 37

public support for subsidy reform, 3, 3n2, 26–29, 32

Public Works Project (Yemen), 100

Q

Quasi-fiscal deficit (QFD), in Uganda, 71–72, 72t

R

Ramos administration, 80, 82

reform, 23–41

  • barriers to, 26–29

  • challenges and success of, 3

  • episodes of, 24–25t

  • See also coal subsidies; electricity subsidies; petroleum products subsidies; strategies for reform

regional integration, SOEs and, 35

Relapasa (Peru), 112

renewable energy investment, 3

research. See assessment of reform impact

Rural Electrification Agency (Uganda), 70

Russia, 13

S

safety net, 21, 28, 33, 34

  • in Armenia, 132

  • in Mauritania, 94–95

  • in Mexico, 122

  • in Nigeria, 61

  • in Poland, 139–42

  • reforms and, 36, 37, 41

  • See also poverty, mitigating measures for

Sargsyan, Gevorg, 130

sequencing of price increases, 34

Shkaratan, M., 68

Small Power Utilities Group (Philippines), 84

smoothing rules/mechanisms, 40

  • in Chile, 109–11

  • in Mauritania, 94–95

  • in Namibia, 51

  • in Niger, 53

  • in Peru, 112–13, 114–15

smuggling, 3, 16, 16n2

  • in Niger, 53

  • in Nigeria, 58–59

SO2

  • corrective taxes and, 147

  • environmental and health impact of, 165–66

  • subsidy reform and, 19

Social Fund for Development, 100

social spending. See public spending

Social Welfare Fund, 100

SOMELEC (Mauritania), 94

SONIDEP (Niger), 52

SORAZ (Niger), 52, 55

South Africa, 33, 39

  • gasoline pump prices in, 63f

  • macroeconomics and, 62t

  • petroleum product subsidies in, 62–64

Southern African Customs Union (SACU), 47

Soviet Union collapse, 128

stabilization funds

  • in Brazil, 103

  • in Chile, 109–11

  • in Peru, 112–14

  • in Philippines, 79–81

stakeholders, consultation with, 31–32

  • in Ghana, 46

  • in Niger, 55, 56

state-owned enterprises (SOEs)

  • improved efficiency of, 35, 69

  • investment in energy by, 15

  • as obstacles to reform, 28, 123–24

  • pretax subsidies and, 7

  • restructuring and, 136

  • social measures and, 38

strategies for reform, 29–41

  • communication and, 32–33

  • comprehensive plan and, 29–32

  • depoliticization of pricing and, 38–41

  • phased and sequenced price increases and, 33–34

  • protection for the poor and, 36–38

  • SOEs improved efficiency and, 35

sub-Saharan Africa, reforms in, 35, 43–74

  • electricity subsidies and, 16b

  • in Ghana, 43–47

  • in Kenya, 64–69

  • magnitude of subsidies and, 11f, 12f, 13

  • in Namibia, 47–51

  • in Niger, 51–57

  • in Nigeria, 57–62

  • in South Africa, 62–64

  • in Uganda, 69–74

Subsidy Reinvestment and Empowerment (SURE) Program (Nigeria), 59–61

Suharto administration, 76, 78

supply cost, 5, 5n2, 8

  • electricity and, 6b

T

Taiwan Province of China, 13

tariffs

  • lifeline, 37, 69, 73, 74, 84, 128

  • multitier, 89

  • “summer subsidies” and, 121–22

taxes, excise, 110, 112, 114, 125

tax subsidies, 2, 5, 126

technical assistance missions, 26, 26n3

Tema Oil Refinery (TOR) (Ghana), 43–44

thermal power, 70–71, 73, 94

transparency, 32–33

  • in Chile, 111

  • in Kenya, 69

  • in Niger, 56

  • in Peru, 115

  • in South Africa, 62

TÜPRAŞ (Turkey), 123–25

Turkey, 23n1, 29, 30, 34, 39, 40

  • electricity subsidies in, 133–36

  • macroeconomics and, 124t, 125f

  • petroleum product subsidies in, 123–27

Türkiye Petrolleri Anonim Ortakl1ğ1 (TPAO), 123

U

Uganda, 32, 33

  • electricity subsidies in, 69–74

  • explicit fiscal subsidies in, 71t

  • macroeconomics and, 70t

  • quasi-fiscal deficit QFD in, 71–72, 72t

Uganda Electricity Board (UEB), 69

Uganda Electricity Distribution Company, Ltd. (UEDCL), 70

Uganda Electricity Generation Company Ltd. (UEGCL), 70

Uganda Electricity Transmission Company, Ltd. (UETCL), 70–71

UMEME Ltd. (Uganda), 70, 71, 74

UNICEF, 95–96

unions, 29

  • in Mexico, 120–21

  • in Nigeria, 60–61

  • in Poland, 136–37, 142

United States, 13

United States Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Carbon (2013), 146

urban middle class, 28

V

VAT (value added tax)

  • Kenya and, 66

  • Philippines and, 81–82, 83

  • posttax subsidy estimates and, 8, 12f, 145, 147–48, 147n7

  • pretax subsidy estimates and, 144

  • Turkey and, 126

W

West Texas Intermediate (WTI) prices, 110

World Bank, 68, 94, 96, 98

World Food Program, 95–96

Y

Yemen, 27, 38

  • fuel prices and pass-through prices, 101f

  • macroeconomics and, 97t, 99f

  • petroleum product subsidies in, 96–102

Yudhoyono, Susilo Bambang, 76, 78

Z

Zedillo administration, 120

  • Collapse
  • Expand
Cover Energy Subsidy Reform
Energy Subsidy Reform
Lessons and Implications
Author:
Mr. Benedict J. Clements
,
Mr. David Coady
,
Ms. Stefania Fabrizio
,
Mr. Sanjeev Gupta
,
Mr. Trevor Serge Coleridge Alleyne
, and
Mr. Carlo A Sdralevich
ISBN:
9781475558111
Publication Date:
13 Sep 2013
Publisher:
International Monetary Fund
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5089/9781475558111.071
Pages:
194

  • Ajodhia, V., W. Mulder, and T. Slot, 2012, Tariff Structures for Sustainable Electrification in Africa (Arnhem, the Netherlands: KEMA).

  • Amavilah, V. H. S., 1999, “The Resellers’ Regulated Demand Price of 93 Octane Petrol in Namibia Relative to OPEC Crude Oil Price, 1991,” Discussion Paper No. 10, Ore Body Engineering Ltd.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Antmann, Pedro, 2009, “Reducing Technical and Non-Technical Losses in the Power Sector,” Background Paper for the World Bank Group Energy Sector Strategy (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Arze del Granado, Javier, David Coady, and Robert Gillingham, 2012, “The Unequal Benefits of Fuel Subsidies: A Review of Evidence for Developing Countries,” World Development, Vol. 40 (November), pp. 2234–48.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Atiyas, Izak, and Mark Dutz, 2012, “Competition and Regulatory Reform in the Turkish Electricity Industry,” in Reforming Turkish Energy Markets (New York: Springer).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Bacon, R., E. Ley, and M. Kojima, 2010, “Subsidies in the Energy Sector: An Overview,” Background Paper for the World Bank Group Energy Sector Strategy, July (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Baig, Taimur, Amine Mati, David Coady, and Joseph Ntamatungiro, 2007, “Domestic Petroleum Product Prices and Subsidies: Recent Developments and Reform Strategies,” IMF Working Paper No. 07/71 (Washington: International Monetary Fund). Available via the Internet: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2007/wp0771.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Bank of Namibia, 2005, Quarterly Bulletin, Vol. 14, No. 1 (March).

  • Beaton, Christopher, and Lucky Lontoh, 2010, “Lessons Learned from Indonesia’s Attempts to Reform Fossil-Fuel Subsidies” (Winnipeg: International Institute for Sustainable Development).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Bernardo, Romeo L., Marie-Christine G. Tang, 2008, “The Political Economy of Reform during the Ramos Administration (1992–98),” Commission on Growth and Development Working Paper No. 39 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Besant-Jones, John E., 2006, “Reforming Power Markets in Developing Countries: What Have We Learned?” Energy and Mining Sector Board Discussion Paper No. 19 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Blaschke, W., and U. Lorenz, 2004, “Restructuring of Polish Hard Coal Industry in the Last Decade and Perspectives for the Next Decade,” in European Conference on Raw Building and Coal: New Perspectives (Sarajevo: Wyd IP Svjetlost, d.d.). Available via the Internet: http://www.min-pan.krakow.pl/zaklady/zrynek/zasoby/04_04wb_ul_sarajewo.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • BP, 2012, Statistical Review of World Energy: June 2012. Available via the Internet: http://www.bp.com/statisticalreview

  • Breisinger, Clemens, Wilfried Engelke, and Oliver Ecker, 2011, “Petroleum Subsidies in Yemen: Leveraging Reform for Development,” Policy Research Working Paper No. 5577 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Briceño-Garmendia, C., and M. Shkaratan, 2011a, “Kenya’s Infrastructure: A Continental Perspective,” Policy Research Working Paper No. 5596 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Briceño-Garmendia, C., and M. Shkaratan, 2011b, “Power Tariffs: Caught between Costs Recovery and Affordability,” Policy Research Working Paper No. 5904 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Burniaux, Jean-Marc, Jean Chateau, Romain Duval, and Stéphanie Jamet, 2009, “The Economics of Climate Change Mitigation: How to Build the Necessary Global Action in a Cost-Effective Manner,” OECD Economics Department Working Papers No. 701 (Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Calderón, César, 2008, “Infrastructure and Growth in Africa,” Policy Research Working Paper No. 4914 (Washington: World Bank).

  • Carreón-Rodriguez, Victor, Armando Jiménez San Vicente, and Juan Rosellón, 2003, “The Mexican Electricity Sector: Economic, Legal and Political Issues,” Working paper (Stanford, CA: Program on Energy and Sustainable Development, Stanford University).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Clements, Benedict, Sanjeev Gupta, and Masahiro Nozaki, 2012, “What Happens to Social Spending in IMF-Supported Programs?” Applied Economics, Vol. 45, No. 28, pp. 4022–33.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Clements, Benedict, Hong-Sang Jung, and Sanjeev Gupta, 2007, “Real and Distributive Effects of Petroleum Price Liberalization: The Case of Indonesia,” The Developing Economies, Vol. 45, No. 2, pp. 220–37.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Coady, David, Javier Arze del Granado, Luc Eyraud, Hui Jin, Vimal Thakoor, Anita Tuladhar, and Lilla Nemeth, 2012, “Automatic Fuel Pricing Mechanisms with Price Smoothing: Design, Implementation, and Fiscal Implications,” Technical Notes and Manuals No. 12/03 (Washington: International Monetary Fund). Available via the Internet: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/tnm/2012/tnm1203.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Coady, David, Moataz El-Said, Robert Gillingham, Kangni Kpodar, Paulo Medas, and David Newhouse, 2006, “The Magnitude and Distribution of Fuel Subsidies: Evidence from Bolivia, Ghana, Jordan, Mali, and Sri Lanka,” IMF Working Paper No. 06/247 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Coady, David, Robert Gillingham, Rolando Ossowski, John Piotrowski, Shamsuddin Tareq, and Justin Tyson, 2010, “Petroleum Product Subsidies: Costly, Inequitable, and Rising,” IMF Staff Position Note No. 10/05 (Washington: International Monetary Fund). Available via the Internet: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/spn/2010/spn1005.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Coady, David, and David Newhouse, 2006, “Evaluating the Distribution of the Real Income Effects of Increases in Petroleum Product Prices in Ghana,” in Analyzing the Distributional Impacts of Reforms: Operational Experience in Implementing Poverty and Social Impact Analysis, ed. by A. Coudouel, A. Dani, and S. Paternostro (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Competition Tribunal of South Africa, 2006, “Uhambo Merger Findings,” Case No: 101/LM/Dec04.

  • Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit, 2009, International Fuel Prices 2009 (Bonn and Berlin, 6th ed.).

  • Dick, Herman, Sanjeev Gupta, David Vincent, and Herbert Voight, 1984, “The Impact of Oil Price Increases on Four Oil-Poor Developing Countries: A Comparative Analysis,” Energy Economics, Vol. 6 (January), pp. 59–70.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Ebert, Sebastian, Gerhard P. Metschies, Dominik Schmid, and Armin Wagner, 2009, International Fuel Prices 2009 (Eschborn: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, 6th ed.).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Ellis, Jennifer, 2010, “The Effects of Fossil-Fuel Subsidy Reform: A Review of Modelling and Empirical Studies,” in The Untold Billions: Fossil-Fuel Subsidies, Their Impacts and the Path to Reform (Geneva: Global Subsidies Initiative).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Energy Information Administration (EIA), 2012, “Fuel Competition in Power Generation and Elasticities of Substitution” (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Environmental Protection Agency, 2012, “Quarterly Emissions Tracking,” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Available via the Internet: http://www.epa.gov/airmarkt/quarterlytracking.html

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Escribano, Alvaro, J. Luis Guasch, and Jorge Pena, 2008, “A Robust Assessment of the Impact of Infrastructure on African Firms’ Productivity,” Africa Infrastructure Country, Diagnostic Working Paper (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Fernandez, Luisa, and Rosechin Olfindo, 2011, “Overview of the Philippines’ Conditional Cash Transfer Program,” Social Protection Note No. 2, May (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Fiszbein, Ariel, and Norbert Schady, 2009, Conditional Cash Transfers: Reducing Present and Future Poverty, Policy Research Report (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Fofana, Ismaél, Margaret Chitiga, and Ramos Mabugu, 2009, “Oil Prices and the South African Economy: A Macro-Meso-Micro Analysis,” Energy Policy, Vol. 37 (December), pp. 5509–18.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Foster, V., and C. Briceño-Garmendia, 2010, Africa’s Infrastructure: A Time for Transformation (Washington: World Bank).

  • Foster, Vivien, and Jevgenijs Steinbuks, 2008, “Paying the Price for Unreliable Power Supplies: In-House Generation of Electricity by Firms in Africa,” Policy Research Working Paper No. 4913 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Garcia, Morito, and Charity M. T. Moore, 2012, The Cash Dividend: The Rise of Cash Transfers in Sub-Saharan Africa, (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Gelb, Alan, and associates, 1988, Oil Windfalls: Blessing or Curse? (New York: Oxford University Press).

  • Giambiagi, F., and M. Moreira, 1999, “A Economia Brasileira nos Anos 90” (Rio de Janeiro: Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Global Subsidies Initiative, 2010, “Strategies for Reforming Fossil-Fuel Subsidies: Practical Lessons from Ghana, France and Senegal,” in The Untold Billions: Fossil-Fuel Subsidies, Their Impacts and the Path to Reform (Winnipeg: International Institute for Sustainable Development).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Graham, Carol, 1998, Private Markets for Public Goods: Raising the Stakes in Economic Reform (Washington: World Bank).

  • Grosh, Margaret, Carlo del Ninno, Emil Tesliuc, and Azedine Ouerghi, 2008, For Promotion and Protection: The Design and Implementation of Effective Safety Nets (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Gupta, Sanjeev, 1983, “India and the Second OPEC Oil Shock—An Economy-Wide Analysis,” Review of World Economics, Vol. 119, No. 1, pp. 122–37.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Gupta, Sanjeev, Benedict Clements, Kevin Fletcher, and Isabel Inchauste, 2004, “Issues in Domestic Petroleum Pricing in Oil-Producing Countries,” in Fiscal Policy Formulation and Implementation in Oil-Producing Countries, ed. by J. Davis, R. Ossowski, and A. Fedelino (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Gupta, Sanjeev, Marijn Verhoeven, Robert Gillingham, Christian Schiller, Ali Mansoor, and Juan Pablo Cordoba, 2000, Equity and Efficiency in the Reform of Price Subsidies: A Guide for Policymakers (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Heggie, Ian G., and Piers Vickers, 1998, “Commercial Management and Financing of Roads,” World Bank Technical Paper No. 409 (Washington: World Bank). Available via the Internet: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/1998/05/441617/commercial-management-financing-roads

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2012, “Tax and Benefit Tables” (London). Available via the Internet: http://www.ifs.org.uk/fiscalFacts/taxTables

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • International Energy Agency, 2010, “Energy Policies of IEA Countries: Turkey 2009 Review” (Paris).

  • International Energy Agency, 2011a, “Development in Energy Subsidies,” in the World Energy Outlook (Paris).

  • International Energy Agency, 2011b, “Fossil-Fuel Subsidies—Methodology and Assumptions,” World Energy Outlook. Available via the Internet: http://www.iea.org/publications/worldenergyoutlook/resources/energysubsidies/methodologyforcalculatingsubsidies

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • International Energy Agency, 2011c, World Energy Outlook (Paris).

  • International Finance Corporation, 2012, From Gap to Opportunity: Business Models for Scaling up Energy Access (Washington).

  • International Monetary Fund, 2001, “Ghana,” Country Report No. 01/141 (Washington).

  • International Monetary Fund, 2005a, “Ghana,” Country Report No. 05/292 (Washington).

  • International Monetary Fund, 2005b, “Power Sector Reform in the Philippines,” in Philippines: Selected Issues Paper (Washington).

  • International Monetary Fund, 2008, “Food and Fuel Prices—Recent Developments, Macroeconomic Impact, and Policy Responses” (Washington). Available via the Internet: http://www.imf.org/external/np/pp/eng/2008/063008.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • International Monetary Fund, 2011a, “Ghana,” Country Report No. 11/128 (Washington).

  • International Monetary Fund, 2011b, Regional Economic Outlook: Middle East and Central Asia, World Economic and Financial Surveys (Washington).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • International Monetary Fund, 2012a, “Fiscal Transparency, Accountability, and Risk,” IMF Policy Paper (Washington). Available via the Internet: https://www.imf.org/external/np/pp/eng/2012/080712.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • International Monetary Fund, 2012b, “Ghana,” Country Report No. 12/36 (Washington).

  • International Monetary Fund, 2012c, “Ghana,” Country Report No. 12/201 (Washington).

  • International Monetary Fund, 2012d, “Managing Global Growth Risks and Commodity Price Shocks: Vulnerabilities and Policy Challenges for Low-Income Countries” (Washington). Available via the Internet: http://www.imf.org/external/np/pp/eng/2011/092111.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • International Monetary Fund, 2012e, Regional Economic Outlook: Sub-Saharan Africa: Sustaining Growth amid Global Uncertainty, World Economic and Financial Surveys (Washington).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • International Monetary Fund, forthcoming, “Pricing Energy for Environmental Damages: Putting Principle into Practice” (Washington).

  • Komives, Kristin, Todd Johnson, Jonathan Halpern, Jose Luis Aburto, and John Scott, 2009, “Residential Electricity Subsidies in Mexico: Exploring Options for Reform and for Enhancing the Impact on the Poor,” Working Paper No. 160 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Koplow, Doug, 2009, “Measuring Energy Subsidies Using the Price-Gap Approach: What Does It Leave out?” IISD Trade, Investment and Climate Change Series (Winnipeg: International Institute for Sustainable Development). Available via the Internet: http://www.iisd.org/publications/pub.aspx?pno=1165

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Kumar, Manmohan S., and Jaejoon Woo, 2010, “Public Debt and Growth,” IMF Working Paper No. 10/174 (Washington: International Monetary Fund). Available via the Internet: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2010/wp10174.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Kumar, Manmohan S., Anthony A. Kolb, Sumila Gulyani, and Vahram Avenesyan, 2011, “Utility Pricing and the Poor: Lessons from Armenia,” Technical Paper No. 497 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Lampietti, Julian, Anthony A. Kolb, Sumila Gulyani, and Vahram Avenesyan, 2011, “Utility Pricing and the Poor: Lessons from Armenia,” World Bank Technical Papers No. 497 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Larrain, Felipe B., 2010, “Nuevos Mecanismos de Protección ante Variaciones de Precios de Combustibles,” Presentation, Chilean Ministry of Finance. Available via the Internet: http://www.chiletransporte.cl/3w/images/Documentos/Sipco.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Lofgren, Hans, 1995, “Macro and Micro Effects of Subsidy Cuts: A Short Run CGE Analysis for Egypt,” TMD Discussion Paper No. 5 (Washington: International Food Policy Research Institute).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Márquez, Miguel, 2000, “El Fondo de Estabilización de Precios del Petróleo (FEPP) y el Mercado de los derivados en Chile,” División de Recursos Naturales e Infraestructura, ECLAC. Available via the Internet: http://www.eclac.org/publicaciones/xml/9/5789/Lcl1452e.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Mota, Raffaella, 2003, “The Restructuring and Privatisation of Electricity Distribution and Supply Business in Brazil: A Social Cost-Benefit Analysis,” Working Paper No. WP 0309 (Cambridge: University of Cambridge, Department of Applied Economics).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Mourougane, Annabelle, 2010, “Phasing out Energy Subsidies in Indonesia,” OECD Economics Department Working Paper No. 808 (Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • National Research Council, 2009, “Hidden Costs of Energy: Unpriced Consequences of Energy Production and Use,” Committee on Health, Environmental, Other External Costs and Benefits of Energy Production and Consumption (Washington: National Academies Press).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Nixson, Frederick, and Bernard Walters, 2005, “Utilities’ Pricing and the Poor: The Case of Armenia,” UNDP Armenia White Paper (New York: United Nations Development Program).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Nordhaus, William, 2011, “Estimates of the Social Cost of Carbon: Background and Results from the RICE-2011 Model,” NBER Working Paper No. 17540 (Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Okigbo, Patrick O., and Dili Enekebe, 2011, “Nigeria: Fuel Subsidy Removal—Achieving the Optimal Solution,” Nextier Policy Brief, December 15 (Washington: Nextier).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Okonjo-Iweala, Ngozi, 2011, “Brief on Fuel Subsidy,” December 6 (Nigeria: Federal Ministry of Finance).

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2004, Mexico: Progress in Implementing Regulatory Reform (Paris).

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2009, “The Economics of Climate Change Mitigation Policies and Options for Global Action beyond 2012” (Paris).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2012a, “Inventory of Estimated Budgetary Support and Tax Expenditures for Fossil Fuels” (Paris). Available via the Internet: http://www.oecd.org/tad/environmentandtrade/inventoryofestimatedbudgetarysupportandtaxexpendituresforfossilfuels.htm

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2012b, “Mortality Risk Valuation in Environment, Health and Transport Policies” (Paris).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2013, “Chile: Inventory of Estimated Budgetary Support and Tax Expenditures for Fossil Fuels,” Overview Note, OECD-IEA Fossil Fuel Subsidies and Other Support. Available via the Internet: http://www.oecd.org/site/tadffss/Chileoverviewfossilfuelsupport2013.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • O’Ryan, Raul, Sebastian Miller, Jorge Rogat, and Carlos de Miguel, 2003, “The Impact of Removing Energy Subsidies in Chile,” in Energy Subsidies: Lessons Learned in Assessing Their Impact and Designing Policy Reforms (Geneva: United Nations Environment Program). Available via the Internet: http://www.unep.ch/etb/publications/energySubsidies/Energysubreport.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Parry, Ian W. H., 2011, “How Much Should Highway Fuels Be Taxed?” in U.S. Energy Tax Policy, ed. by Gilbert E. Metcalf (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Parry, Ian W. H., and Kenneth A. Small, 2005, “Does Britain or the United States Have the Right Gasoline Tax?” American Economic Review, Vol. 95, No. 4, pp. 1276–89.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Parry, Ian W. H., and Jon Strand, 2011, “International Fuel Tax Assessment: An Application to Chile,” IMF Working Paper No. 11/168 (Washington: International Monetary Fund). Available via the Internet: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2011/wp11168.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Philippines, Department of Energy, 2006, “8th EPIRA Implementation Status Report” (Manila).

  • Ranganathan, R., and Vivien Foster, 2012, “Uganda’s Infrastructure: A Continental Perspective,” Policy Research Working Paper No. 5963 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Sargsyan, Gevorg, Ani Balabanyan, and Denzel Hankinson, 2006, “From Crisis to Stability in the Armenian Power Sector: Lessons Learned from Armenia’s Energy Reform Experience,” Working Paper No. 74 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Stern, Nicholas, 2006, Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change (London: Her Majesty’s Treasury).

  • Sterner, Thomas, ed., 2012, Fuel Taxes and the Poor: The Distributional Effects of Gasoline Taxation and Their Implications for Climate Policy (Washington: RFF Press).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Suwala, Wojciech, 2010, “Lessons Learned from the Restructuring of Poland’s Coal-Mining Industry” (Geneva: Global Subsidies Initiative). Available via the Internet: http://www.iisd.org/gsi/sites/default/files/poland_casestudy_ffs.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Uganda, Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development, 2012a, Energy and Mineral Sector Performance Report, 2008–2011 (Kampala).

  • Uganda, Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development, 2012b, Performance of the Uganda Power Sector (Kampala).

  • United Nations Environment Program and the International Energy Agency, 2002, “Reforming Energy Subsidies: An Explanatory Summary of the Issues and Challenges in Removing or Modifying Subsidies on Energy that Undermine the Pursuit of Sustainable Development” (Paris).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • United Nations Environment Program, 2008, “Reforming Energy Subsidies: Opportunities to Contribute to the Climate Change Agenda,” Division of Technology, Industry and Economics (Paris).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • United States, Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Carbon, 2013, “Technical Support Document: Technical Update of the Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis Under Executive Order 12866.” Available via the Internet: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/inforeg/social_cost_of_carbon_for_ria_2013_update.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Vagliasindi, Maria, 2013, “Implementing Energy Subsidy Reforms: Evidence from Developing Countries” (Washington: World Bank). Available via the Internet: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/11965

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Velody, Mark, Michael J. G. Cain, and Michael Philips, 2003, “Energy Reform and Social Protection in Armenia,” in A Regional Review of Social Safety Net Approaches: In Support of Energy Sector Reform (Washington: United States Agency for International Development).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • von Moltke, Anja, Colin McKee, and Trevor Morgan, 2004, Energy Subsidies: Lessons Learned in Assessing Their Impact and Designing Policy Reforms (Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • World Bank, 2008, Philippines Quarterly Update (Washington). Available via the Internet: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2008/11/11962976/philippines-quarterly-update

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • World Bank, 2009, “Philippines—First Development Policy Loan Project.” Available via the Internet: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2009/09/11415139/philippines-first-development-policy-loan-project

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • World Bank, 2010a, “Project Appraisal Document for the Electricity Expansion Project,” Report No. 54147-KE, May (Washington).

  • World Bank, 2010b, “Subsidies in the Energy Sector: An Overview,” Background Paper for the World Bank Group Energy Sector Strategy, July. Available via the Internet: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTESC/Resources/Subsidy_background_paper.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • World Bank, 2011a, “Uganda: Strategic Review of the Electricity Sector,” Draft policy note (Washington).

  • World Bank, 2011b, “Proposed Credit to the Republic of Uganda for an Electricity Sector Development Project,” Report No. 59310-UG, May (Washington).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • World Bank, 2012a, Improving the Targeting of Social Programs in Ghana, ed. by Q. Wendon (Washington).

  • World Bank, 2012b, “Proposed Credit in the Amount of SDR 32.3 million (US$50 million equivalent) to the Republic of Niger for a First Shared Growth Credit,” Report No. 69131-NE, May 31 (Washington).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Zhang, Fan, 2011, “Distributional Impact Analysis of the Energy Price Reform in Turkey,” Policy Research Working Paper No. 5831 (Washington: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation