Introduction
Fossil fuels are the single largest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, making it urgent to accelerate the transition towards other forms of energy (IPCC, 2022). The phasing out of inefficient subsidies to fossil fuels has taken center stage in the discussions on decarbonization and is regularly highlighted as one of the most urgent steps to ensure the transition to a green economy. The G20 countries, which are responsible for over 80% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, have reaffirmed several times their commitment to reform inefficient fossil fuel subsidies (OECD, 2021a). At the Glasgow and Sharm el-Sheikh Climate Conferences (COP 26 & 27), negotiators took an important and long overdue step in calling for the “phase-out of inefficient fossil fuel subsidies, while providing targeted support to the poorest and most vulnerable in line with national circumstances and recognizing the need for support towards a just transition” (Decision, p. 5). An increasing number of countries have included FFS reform in their Nationally Determined Contributions, reaching 14 countries as of 2019 (IISD, 2019b).[1]
Yet, effective progress on energy subsidy reforms remains slow, and may even be deteriorating. The year 2022 showed one of the highest figures ever recorded for subsidies to fossil fuels, according to the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) 2023 estimates (IEA, 2023). This was accentuated by high energy prices caused by the Russian invasion of Ukraine and subsequent supply chain disruptions. From 2019 to 2021, at least $55 billion international public finance went to fossil fuel-related projects (Oil Change, 2022). This policy brief addresses three key questions: 1) how to measures fossil fuel subsidies, 2) why there is need to phase out fossil fuel subsidies and reform current energy subsidy systems, and 3) how to ensure a just transition through the reform process.
- Measuring fossil fuel subsidies
The reform of FFS is a delicate policy process, which needs to be informed by robust data. Ensuring awareness and accurate knowledge of existing subsidies based on credible data is a key step in the reform process. This also relates to transparency in the use of public funds. The availability of data on fossil fuel subsidies has improved in the last decade, with an increasing number of governments initiating data collection. Several agencies have greatly contributed to the development of data on fossil fuel subsidies at global and regional levels. The IEA and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) both measure fossil fuel consumption subsidies by looking at the difference between domestic fuel prices and the international fuel market prices, using a price-gap analysis approach. Using this approach, the 2023 IEA report on Fossil Fuel Consumption Subsidies estimated global consumer subsidies – that is subsidies that lower the price for end consumers – at more than 1 trillion USD, the highest level ever recorded (IEA, 2023). This reflects the impact of high energy prices caused by market stress and energy shortages that resulted from conflict between Russia and Ukraine.
The IMF differentiates explicit fossil fuel subsidies (reflecting undercharging for supply costs and producer subsidies) and implicit subsidies (reflecting the undercharging of the environmental costs and loss of consumption taxes for governments), with the latter making up for the vast majority (estimated at 92 percent of subsidies). Globally, fossil fuel subsidies were estimated at $5.9 trillion, or 6.8 percent of GDP in 2020, of which 92 percent was made of implicit subsidies, related to undercharging for environmental costs and foregone consumption taxes (Parry et al., 2021).
The Organization for International Co-operation and Development (OECD) uses a bottom-up inventory approach, to identify and quantify all budgetary transfers and tax support used by governments to support fossil fuel consumption and production. The inventory currently covers 51 economies from the OECD, G20 and EU Eastern partnership economies. Their 2021 report estimated subsidies to fossil fuels to reach US$ 178 billion in 2019, a 5% increase compared to the previous year (OECD, 2021c). 30% of the subsidies go to direct and indirect support for fossil fuel production. A few countries have also initiated national-level data collection on FFS. The Republic of Ireland publishes annual data through their Statistics Department (CSO). Several countries undertook annual exercises, like Indonesia (OECD, 2019b), Italy (OECD, 2019c), and the Netherlands (OECD & IEA, 2020) under the G20 Peer-Review process (OECD, 2019a). Despite this progress in tracking data, differences in methodology used, varying definitions of what constitutes a fossil fuel subsidy, and variance in geographical scope, have meant that global estimates of fossil fuel subsidies vary largely between publications. Furthermore, large data gaps remain at the national level, in addition to discrepancies between national approaches.
In order to track progress on the SDG target 12.c (see Box 1), the SDG framework has included the SDG indicator 12.c.1, on the measure of fossil fuel subsidies as a share of GDP. This will also respond to the need for a globally comparable, national-based dataset. The data collection process initiated under this indicator will lead to the development of the first inventory of FFS data relying on national data. As the custodian agency of this indicator, UNEP is responsible for supporting countries in the monitoring and reporting of the data. To guide countries and ensure the use of a common approach, Global Methodology on the Measure of Subsidies in the Context of the SDGs was developed jointly by UNEP, OECD and the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) and published in 2019 (See Box 1). The first round of data collection was completed in June 2022. The UN and other partners provide technical assistance to countries to support the building of a global database based on national data. Guidance material and data are available on the SDG 12 Hub portal. Country reporting on fossil fuel subsidies as a share of GDP is part of the effort to track global progress on the reform of inefficient fossil fuel subsidies, but it is also key to ensure national ownership and the development of credible data to inform the design of fair, effective reforms.
2. Why reform fossil fuel subsidies
The use of fossil fuel subsidies by governments is usually motivated by the intention to protect the poor from fluctuating fuel and commodity prices and facilitate access to cheaper energy. It is also viewed as a way to boost the competitiveness of domestic industries, in particular for energy-heavy industries like transport, agriculture, or fisheries (IISD, 2022). Finally, for fossil fuel producing countries, they are seen as a way to redistribute wealth to citizens (IMF, 2022; Solarin, 2022). However, despite the social aspect of these objectives, research has repeatedly showed that fossil fuel subsidies are not efficient in meeting their objectives and often result in several adverse, unintended consequences that significantly undermine the positive impacts.
Fossil fuel subsidies have significant environmental externalities. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s 2014 report, emissions from the energy sector account for 35% of the total GHG emissions increase in the past decade (IPCC 2014). By keeping prices artificially low, fossil fuel subsidies encourage excessive consumption and production of energy, which puts pressure on finite natural resources. In Venezuela, which has some of the highest levels of fossil fuel subsidies in the world, gasoline consumption per capita is 40% higher than in any other country in Latin America, and more than three times the regional average (Davis, 2013[QW1] ). In addition to incentivizing the overconsumption of fossil fuels, they prevent alternative, cleaner energy sources from competing on price. This subsequently reduces investment into renewable energy and reduces its supply.
Supporting clean energy transition. We continue to fall short of climate finance objectives, including for the transition to net-zero in the energy sector. In 2020, investment in the supply of fossil fuel continued to outweigh investments in low-carbon fuels and renewables (IEA, 2021). Reducing FFS would free up large fiscal resources, of which a proportion should be redirected towards green energy investments, and towards implementing mechanisms to leverage private finance for clean energy supply (IISDa, 2019).
Fossil fuel subsidies are highly regressive and fail to target the poor. In fact, previous analyses found that the richest 20% of households receive more than 40% of the benefits from energy subsidies, which is equivalent to six times the share of the bottom 20%. In some countries this trend is even more pronounced. Prior to implementing reforms, the highest and lowest income quintiles in Egypt were receiving 70% and 1% of diesel consumption subsidies respectively (Sab, 2014). By opening up the market to competition, the latest subsidy reform in Ghana lowers the pump prices to end users, which indirectly cuts global crude oil prices as well (Addo, Bazilian and Oguah, 2017).
Subsidies are a drain on public finances and reduce the funds available for addressing social and developmental objectives. Subsidy reform will create much needed fiscal space, which can not only free public finance to be reinvested into the green transition, but also in supporting a just transition. The IMF estimates of pre-tax fossil fuel subsidy (pre-tax being defined as a situation where energy consumers pay prices below the costs incurred to supply them with this energy) in the Middle East and North Africa region amount to approximately 7.5% of GDP (Coady et al., 2017). In the Middle East, North Africa, Afghanistan, and Pakistan (MENAP) region, subsidies account for 13% of regional GDP, at $152 billion (Coady et al., 2019). This also applies to countries subsidizing producers. In Kazakhstan, one of the major global fossil fuel producers, the total share of subsidies takes up 6% of national GDP. This represents a major diversion of fiscal resources away from more productive uses, such as reducing poverty, improving health, promoting gender equality, and addressing climate change (IEA, 2022).
3. Understanding the Diversity of Contexts
Reforming fossil fuel subsidies requires an in-depth understanding of the coverage and impact of the existing support schemes, once again highlighting the importance of good quality data. Understanding the volume, mechanisms, recipients, and impacts of the existing schemes is key, as different reform and sequencing will be needed based on the national context. A large range of factors will need to be accounted for to inform the reform policy design, including the types of energy subsidized, the types of subsidy schemes in place, conditions of the local energy market, the political context and public perceptions (IISD, 2013).
There are three main types of subsidies used by governments: direct transfer of government funds, induced transfers or price support, and tax expenditure (see Box 1). The composition of subsidy schemes takes different forms across countries and regions. For example, in Eastern Europe, most subsidies target residential consumers and go to natural gas, to ensure affordable access to energy (OECD, 2021b). On the other hand, an Asian Development Bank study identified that the majority of subsidies in Thailand, India, and Indonesia target petroleum, followed by electricity (ADB, 2016). Using OECD data, a study showed that tax expenditure made up for approximately two-thirds of fossil fuel subsidies among OECD countries. This figure is likely to be underestimated, as data on tax expenditure is often of poor quality (CEP, 2022).
Countries can provide price support by setting a fixed price or restricting energy price inflation. For example, Thailand and El Salvador have set a price cap for diesel and gasoline products. The Korean government provided direct support in the form of vouchers to 1.2 million energy-price-vulnerable households to reduce the upscaling price impact (IEA, 2023). Nigeria, as the biggest crude oil producer in Africa, had a nearly $9.6 billion subsidy payment to sustain its petrol prices in 2022 (Tayo, 2022), the majority of which goes to consumers (McCulloch et al., 2020).
In countries involved in the extraction, and processing of fossil fuels, producer subsidies are a typical way for governments to support the domestic energy industry. Though the knowledge about the total scale of fossil fuel producer subsidies in developing and emerging countries remains incomplete, the OECD estimated that 13% of the total support for fossil fuels went to producers globally (OECD, 2018), and tit has been rising since 2017 (OECD, 2021c). Recapitalization and debt suspension are common examples of subsidies provided through direct transfers by governments to energy companies. (IEA, 2022).
4. Reforming while ensuring a Just Transition
Although it is well understood that fossil fuel subsidies are an inefficient poverty reduction measure, they can play a role in protecting consumers from soaring energy prices in times of high inflation. This is illustrated by the strong correlation between fossil fuel subsidies to consumers and global oil prices, with fuel-importing countries spending more to artificially keep energy prices low in times of high prices (2023). For example, in 2022, the fossil fuel industry faced stress from the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, which resulted in high and volatile prices. Yet, prices paid by the end-users stayed in an affordable range, in part as the result of government increasing subsidies to the energy sector (Sgaravatti et al., 2023). Because of this important role FFS play in stabilizing energy prices for households, any sudden or ill-planned removal of FFS could harm household finances and consequently affect poverty levels. In many countries, energy costs make up a large proportion of household expenditure, which makes the reform process more delicate and reinforces the need to include safety nets measures to limit the short-term impacts on the poorest population.
While governments must urgently phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies, this must be done in a manner that ensures that poorest households, particularly vulnerable to abrupt price variation, can still obtain or keep access to energy. Energy-dependent sectors must also receive support in their transition to a low-carbon alternative model. Simply removing subsidies could disproportionally impact some economic sectors and populations if no safety-net measures are accompanying the reform. There is also a risk for social backlash, as was in France (2017) and Ecuador (2019) when governments of these two countries attempted to reform the energy taxation system without counterpart measures to mitigate the impact on vulnerable households. Instead, a well-designed subsidy reform can represent an opportunity to both accelerate the transition to a net-zero society while also supporting the No Poverty by 2030 target. Building on previous reform attempts and successes, an increasing amount of literature provides guidance to governments on how to tackle the reform of inefficient fuel subsidies.
Building support for the reform. Fossil fuel subsidies are difficult to reform because they are often seen as a convenient fiscal tool, requiring little administrative capacity. Citizens may also have a flawed understanding of the effectiveness of the subsidies. There are also concerns about the adverse impacts that can arise from reforming fossil fuel subsidies, such as a rise in inflation or a decline in household purchasing power. Communication needs to be broad and efficient, with simple, positive messages broadcast through multiple channels (IISD, 2017). This plays a key role in bringing credibility and acceptability of the reform to the general public. In Egypt for example, the subsidies reform initiated in 2014 was supported by a communications strategy targeting citizens, illustrating the needs and tangible benefits that would result from it (World Bank, 2017). Successful reforms also require internal coordination across government agencies and ensuring a unified, integrated policy across all government bodies susceptible to play a role in the design and implementation of a successful, equitable reform. The design and monitoring of the policy should also leave space for the integration of workers’ rights, gender, and minority consideration. This can be done by enforcing extensive consultations and representation in the discussion on the reform.
Integrating mitigation measures. Different instruments can be used to mitigate the impact on low-income households, vulnerable groups, businesses and key macroeconomic indicators such as inflation (IISD, 2013). Measures can include the introduction of targeted cash or near-cash transfers, or expanding existing social programs. Mitigation measures can also come through the implementation of other reforms (e.g. improving the efficiency in state-owned enterprises to reduce producer subsidies) that can reduce the initial price impact of removing energy subsidies. This should be informed by extensive prior research, both quantitative (e.g. modelling) and qualitative (e.g. consultations with affected groups to assess political acceptability) to identify the potential losers and winners, although in practice this remains a challenge (OECD, 2022). In Indonesia, the removal of gasoline and diesel subsidies in 2015 allowed Indonesia to free up around USD 15.6 billion and invest the savings into special programs for poverty eradication and human development, infrastructure development, and social welfare programs such as assistance to poor students and cash transfers (IISD, 2016). Similarly, Egypt has been reforming its consumer subsidies for the last six years, gradually freed resources that were redirected towards sectors like health and education (Breisinger at al, 2019).
Aiming for a sequenced, data-informed, long-term intervention. The reform of fossil fuel subsidies should be integrated into a comprehensive energy sector reform plan, with clear long-term objectives, including on the use of savings (e.g. which sectors to prioritize for investment). Experience shows that subsidy and taxation reforms are more successful and sustainable when part of a wider energy sector transformation (Sanchez et al., 2020) Furthermore, adopting a sequenced approach will reduce the impact on price increases. Any subsidy reform should be done in structured steps with a clear order prioritized by the government. For instance, when moving away from a price support system, it might be necessary to include
intermediary steps in the path towards market-based pricing (IISD, 2013). For example, the Mexican Government took a gradual approach by first reducing subsidies, applying a low-rate carbon tax on most fossil fuels, to finally progressively transitioning towards higher tax levels. This approach increased the political acceptability of the policies. (Arlinghaus and Dender, 2017). This is also an opportunity to align the reform with other objectives, such as the NDC implementation and other environmental commitments.
5. What UNEP is doing
Through analytical work, UNEP provides advice to countries on how fiscal reforms across different sectors can mobilize public finances for green investment, while addressing environmental and social externalities. With funding from the Global Environment Facility (GEF), UNEP is leading the development of the Net Zero Nature Accelerator (NZNPA). NZNPA is a Global Platform that will strengthen institutions and catalyze investments for accelerated nature-positive, net-zero pathways.
UNEP is also the custodian of SDG indicator 12.C.1, which calls for the measurement of fossil fuel subsidies as part of the work being undertaken on ensuring sustainable consumption and production patterns under SDG12. UNEP is supporting knowledge sharing on the methodology and compiling and reporting data for the UN Secretary General’s SDG progress report. In addition, UN Environment is a founding member of the Green Fiscal Policy Network, a web-based platform which aims to disseminate knowledge and share country experiences of green fiscal policy reforms to deliver the SDGs. It also promotes policy dialogue on green fiscal policy in order to shape the global agenda in this area.
[1] The number of countries referring to FFS in their NDCs increased to 29 by 2023. For more information, please visit IISD’s insights page.
a The WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures considers as “subsidies” (1) any financial contribution by a government or any public body within the territory where (i) a government practice involves a direct transfer of funds, potential direct transfers of funds or liabilities, (ii) government revenue that is otherwise due is foregone or not collected (e.g. fiscal incentives such as tax credits), (iii) a government provides goods or services other than general infrastructure, or purchases goods (iv) a government makes payments to a funding mechanism, or entrusts or directs a private body to carry out one or more of the type of functions illustrated in
(i) to (iii) above which would normally be vested in the government and the practice, in no real sense, differs from practices normally followed by governments; OR (2) when a) and there is any form of income or price support in the sense of Article XVI of GATT 1994; and b) a benefit is thereby conferred (SCM Agreement).
b According to the IEA Fossil Fuel Statistics Manual, “Fossil fuels are taken from natural resources which were formed from biomass in the geological past. By extension, the term fossil is also applied to any secondary fuel manufactured from a fossil fuel.”
Authors:
Claire Potdevin and Quinhong Wu
Bibliography:
ADB. (2016). Fossil Fuel Subsidies in Asia: Trends, Impacts, and Reforms—Integrative Report. Asian Development Bank. https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/182255/fossil-fuel-subsidies-asia.pdf
Addo, S., Bazilian, M., & Oguah, S. (2017). Ghana: Lessons Learned, New Strategies. World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1007-7
Arlinghaus, J., & Dender, K. van. (2017). The environmental tax and subsidy reform in Mexico. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. https://doi.org/10.1787/a9204f40-en
Breisinger, C., Mukashov, A., Raouf, M., & Wiebelt, M. (2019). Energy subsidy reform for growth and equity in Egypt: The approach matters. Energy Policy, 129, 661–671. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.02.059
CEP. (2023). Fossil Fuel Tax Expenditures: Date Gaps and Reporting Guidelines [Discussion note]. Council on Economic Policies. https://www.cepweb.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Aliu-and-Redonda-2023-Fossil-Fuel-Tax-Expenditures_Discussion-Note.pdf
Coady, D., Parry, I., Le, N.-P., & Shang, B. (2019). Global Fossil Fuel Subsidies Remain Large: An Update Based on Country-Level Estimates. IMF. https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2019/05/02/Global-Fossil-Fuel-Subsidies-Remain-Large-An-Update-Based-on-Country-Level-Estimates-46509
Coady, D., Parry, I., Sears, L., & Shang, B. (2017). How Large Are Global Fossil Fuel Subsidies? World Development, 91, 11–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2016.10.004
Davis, Lucas W. (2013). The Economic Cost of Global Fuel Subsidies. NBER Working Paper Series. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w19736/w19736.pdf
IEA. (2021). World Energy Investment 2021. International Energy Agency. https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-investment-2021
IEA. (2023). Fossil Fuels Consumption Subsidies 2022. IEA. https://www.iea.org/reports/fossil-fuels-consumption-subsidies-2022
IISD. (2013). A Guidebook to Fossil-Fuel Subsidy Reform for policy-makers in Southeast Asia. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/gsi/sites/default/files/ffs_guidebook.pdf
IISD. (2016). Financing Development With Fossil Fuel Subsidies: The reallocation of Indonesia’s gasoline and diesel subsidies in 2015. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/sites/default/files/publications/financing-development-with-fossil-fuel-subsidies-indonesia.pdf
IISD. (2017). Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform and the Just Transitions: Integrating approaches for complementary outcomes. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/fossil-fuel-subsidy-reform-just-transition.pdf
IISD. (2019a). Fossil Fuel to Clean Energy Subsidy Swaps: How to pay for an energy revolution. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/fossil-fuel-clean-energy-subsidy-swap.pdf
IISD. (2019b). Raising Ambition Through Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/raising-ambition-through-fossil-fuel-subsidy-reform.pdf
IISD. (2022). Background Note on Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2022-08/background-note-fossil-fuel-subsidy-reform.pdf
IMF. (2022). Fossil Fuel Subsidies. IMF. https://www.imf.org/en/Topics/climate-change/energy-subsidies
IPCC. (2014). IPCC Fifth Assessment Report. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. https://www.ipcc.ch/assessment-report/ar5/
IPCC. (2022). Climate Change 2022 Mitigation fo Climate Change Summary for Policymakers. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_SummaryForPolicymakers.pdf
McCulloch, N., Moerenhout, T., & Yang, J. (2020). Fuel subsidy reform and the social contract in Nigeria: A micro-economic analysis. Energy Policy, 156, 112336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112336
OECD. (2018). Companion to the Inventory of Support Measures for Fossil Fuels 2018. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/energy/oecd-companion-to-the-inventory-of-support-measures-for-fossil-fuels-2018_9789264286061-en
OECD. (2019a). G20 Peer Review of Fossil Fuels Subsidies Self-Report Italy. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. https://www.oecd.org/fossil-fuels/publication/Italy%20G20%20Self-Report%20IFFS.pdf
OECD. (2019b). Indonesia’s Effort To Phase Out And Rationalise. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. https://www.oecd.org/fossil-fuels/publication/G20%20peer%20review%20Indonesia_Final-v2.pdf
OECD. (2019c). Italy’s effort to phase out and rationalise its fossil fuel subsidies. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. https://www.oecd.org/fossil-fuels/publication/Italy%20G20%20Peer%20Review%20IFFS%20.pdf
OECD. (2021a). Update on recent progress in reform of inefficient fossil-fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption 2021. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. https://www.oecd.org/g20/topics/climate-sustainability-and-energy/OECD-IEA-G20-Fossil-Fuel-Subsidies-Reform-Update-2021.pdf
OECD. (2021b). Fossil-Fuel Subsidies in the EU’s Eastern Partner Countries: How governments supported fossil fuels in 2020. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. https://doi.org/10.1787/38d3a4b5-en
OECD. (2021c). OECD Companion to the Inventory of Support Measures for Fossil Fuels 2021. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. https://doi.org/10.1787/a368232d-en
OECD. (2022). Lessons learnt and good practice from APEC-economy fossil-fuel subsidy peer reviews. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. https://doi.org/10.1787/63ba96a5-en
OECD & IEA. (2020). The Netherlands’s Effort to Phase Out and Rationalise its Fossil-Fuel Subsidies. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. https://www.oecd.org/fossil-fuels/publication/2020-OECD-IEA-review-of-fossil-fuel-subsidies-in-the-Netherlands.pdf
Oil Change. (2022). At a Crossroad: Assessing G20 and MDB International energy Finance Ahead of Stop Funding Fossils Pledge Deadline. Oil Change International. https://foeus.wpenginepowered.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/At-A-Crossroads-report.pdf
Parry, I., Black, S., & Vernon, N. (2021). Still Not Getting Energy Prices Right: A Global and Country Update of Fossil Fuel Subsidies. IMF. https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2021/09/23/Still-Not-Getting-Energy-Prices-Right-A-Global-and-Country-Update-of-Fossil-Fuel-Subsidies-466004
Sab, R. (2014). Energy Subsidies in the Middle East and North Africa: Lessons for Reform. International Monetary Fund. https://www.imf.org/external/np/fad/subsidies/pdf/menanote.pdf
Sanchez, L., Wooders, P., Mostafa, M., & Bechauf, R. (2020, August 19). 53 Ways to Reform Fossil Fuel Consumer Subsidies and Pricing | GSI. IISD. https://www.iisd.org/gsi/subsidy-watch-blog/53-ways-reform-fossil-fuel-consumer-subsidies-and-pricing
Sgaravatti, G., Tagliapietra, S., Trasi, C., & Zachmann, G. (2023, February 13). National fiscal policy responses to the energy crisis. Bruegel | The Brussels-Based Economic Think Tank. https://www.bruegel.org/dataset/national-policies-shield-consumers-rising-energy-prices
Solarin, S. A. (2022). The impact of fossil fuel subsidies on income inequality: Accounting for the interactive roles of corruption and economic uncertainty. International Journal of Social Economics, 49(12), 1752–1769. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSE-11-2021-0675
Tayo, T. (2022, June 20). Nigeria’s petrol subsidy is a climate issue. ISS Africa. https://issafrica.org/iss-today/nigerias-petrol-subsidy-is-a-climate-issue
World Bank. (2017). ESMAP Country Brief Egypt [Policy brief]. World Bank Group. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/873871506492500301/pdf/120075-WP-PUBLIC-26-9-2017-12-41-5-FINALESMAPCountryBriefEgypt.pdf
