Presented at ‘Addressing Energy Governance: A question of Scale and Scope’,

18 July, 2016

Laura Merrill (lmerrill@iisd.org) and Richard Bridle (rbridle@iisd.org)

Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform

Gender

Coal vs Renewables

Countries that have undergone some form of fossil

fuel subsidy reform since 2014 past two years

Source: IISD, 2015 based on IEA, WEO 2014 and 2015 and GIZ.

Research Question

Do Fossil Fuel Subsidies and their reform have

Gender-Differentiated Impacts?

There are two major areas where knowledge gaps exist:

• Understanding gender differentiated impacts of existing

subsidy policies

• Understanding gender differentiated impacts of subsidy

reform

Phase 1

• Answering the Research Question through

a Literature Review

• Categorising the Literature under the

following themes

Phase 2

• Research in India, Nigeria and Bangladesh: data

audit, survey, and FGDs.

Gender Dimensions of

Energy Use

Gender Dimensions of

FF Subsidies

Gender Dimensions

of FF Subsidy Reform

Mitigation Measures

Gender Differentiated Impacts of FF

Subsidy Reform

Methodology

http://www.iisd.org/gsi/fossil-fuel-subsidies/genderhttp://www.energia.org/research/

Phase 1 : Literature Review

Many studies across welfare, empowerment

and productivity

Gender Dimensions of Energy Use

•Some from GSI

•Poverty perspective

Gender Dimensions of Fossil Fuel Subsidies

•World Bank 2015

Gender Dimensions of Subsidy Reform

•Universal and conditional cash transfers

•Energy coupon or voucher schemes

•Better targetting

Gender Dimensions of mitigation measures

One qualitative study via interviews on reform and gender for Europe and

Central Asia

Gender Dimensions of Fossil Fuel Subsidies

and ReformAnalysing Gender Differentiated

Impacts of Fossil Fuel Subsidies and their Reform

Income Effect

When subsidies are an income transfer to

the household

Energy Use Effect

When subsidies change the relative

price and consumption of fuels

Energy Supply Effect

When subsidies change the

availability of an energy source

Transport & Non-transport Fuels

Other Country Perspectives

Peru’s Mitigation Measures • Subsidy Reforms from 2009-2012 led to significant increases to domestic fuel prices

• Implemented the ‘improved cooking stove distribution programmes’ (Project Nina) in 2009

• LPG voucher scheme (FISE) introduced in 2012

• The existing Conditional Cash Transfer programme (Juntos – created in 2005) also

expanded significantly in 2009

• All three measures have served to soften the impact of increasing energy prices on the

poor and particularly on women

Morocco’s Mitigation Measures• Subsidy reform between 2011 and 2015 increased gasoline prices 25 per cent and and

diesel prices by 35 per cent

• two existing nationwide social safety nets were significantly enlarged

> Conditional cash transfer programme (Tayssir) targeting poor rural households

expanded from 80,000 families in 2009 to 466,000 families in 2014

> health insurance scheme for the poor, Regime d’Assistance Medicale (RAMED),

increased its coverage

• Regressive subsidies – those that don’t benefit the rich - were eliminated

(gasoline and diesel)

• Poor Households sheltered from any adverse impacts

http://www.iisd.org/gsi/fossil-fuel-subsidies/genderhttp://www.energia.org/research/

Coal vs renewables

Presented by Richard Bridle

July 2016

Jobs

Coal vs Renewables 18/07/2016

Jobs

Coal vs Renewables 18/07/2016

Visualising the costs of

subsidies and externalities

Air pollution CNY 212 – 8,446 billion

Renewable subsidies CNY 45 - 103 billion

Producer subsidies CNY 36 billion

GHG emissions CNY 1,044 – 4,172 billion

Consumer subsidies CNY 8.8 – 158 billion

Notes on figure:

a) Ranges indicate the range of all available data. Size of circle indicates average of all available data. Consumer subsidies based on (Lin & Ouyang, 2014)

and (IEA, 2014)

b) Renewable energy subsidies based on Shen & Luo (2015) and IEA (2014) GHG emissions based on (Coady, Parry, Sears, & Shang, 2015) and Authors’

calculations

c) Producer subsidies based on (Xue et al., forthcoming)

d) Consumer subsidies based on Lin & Ouyang (2014) and IEA (2014)

e) GHG emissions based on Coady, Parry, Sears, & Shang (2015) and Authors’ calculations

f) Air pollution based on Coady, Parry, Sears, & Shang (2015), NRDC (2014) and Chinese Academy for Environmental Planning (2014)

Coal vs Renewables 18/07/2016

Coal phase out in Ontario

1. A 2005 independent study estimated that the total annual cost of coal-fired electricity, including health, financial and environmental costs, was $4.4 billion (2004$).

2. Coal went from 25% of Ontario’s supply mix in 2003 to zero in 2014, all while grid reliability and domestic supply improved.

3. The elimination of coal stands as the single largest GHG emissions reduction action on the continent.

Coal vs Renewables 18/07/2016

How to remove coal

subsidies?

1. Coal subsidy reform is a difficult but worthwhile activity;2. Social impacts are hugely important and must be understood and

mitigation measures must be put in place;3. In the longer term the price of energy should include the cost of

externalities;4. If just a fraction of the true cost of energy is included in the price

renewables will out compete coal.

Coal vs Renewables 18/07/2016