IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/revpol/v36y2019i4p420-447.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Do Sectoral Interests Shape Distributive Politics? Evidence from Gasoline and Diesel Subsidy Reforms

Author

Listed:
  • Brian Blankenship
  • Johannes Urpelainen

Abstract

Sectoral interests play an important role in distributive politics, but their influence is difficult to measure. We compare the effect of international oil prices on subsidies for domestic gasoline and diesel consumption. Because diesel is used by a smaller number of organized agricultural and transportation interests, they are more capable of collective action than the dispersed beneficiaries of gasoline subsidies. The conventional wisdom holds that sectoral interests could mobilize to stop reform (e.g., price increases, deregulation). Challenging this view, we consider the possibility that sectoral interests promote reform by facilitating the targeted allocation of compensation and exemptions. An empirical analysis of gasoline and diesel prices, 1991–2012, strongly supports the second hypothesis: diesel prices respond to international oil prices more strongly than do gasoline prices. Quantitative tests and case studies allow us to explore causal mechanisms, verify that the gasoline‐diesel difference is related to actual policy reforms, and reject alternative explanations. 部门利益如何影响分配政治?从汽油和柴油补贴改革得出的证据 部门利益在分配政治中扮演了重要角色,但其影响却难以衡量。笔者比较了国际石油价格对国内汽油和柴油消费补贴产生的效果。由于柴油由较小数量的有组织农业利益团体和运输利益团体所使用,这些团体便比分散的汽油补贴受益者更能采取合作行动。传统观念认为,部门利益能动员停止改革(例如价格上涨和放松管制)。为对这一观点发起挑战,笔者考量了——部门利益通过促进针对赔偿和豁免的目标分配,进而推动改革——的可能性。一项关于1991‐2012年间汽油和石油价格的实证分析强烈支持第二个假设:柴油价格比汽油价格更能响应国际石油价格(的变化)。定量检测和案例研究允许对其中的因果机制进行探索,证实了汽油和石油的区别和实际政策改革相关,并否定了替代性解释。 ¿Cómo los intereses sectoriales configuran la política distributiva? Evidencia de reformas de subsidios a gasolina y diésel Los intereses sectoriales desempeñan un papel importante en la política distributiva, pero su influencia es difícil de medir. Comparamos el efecto de los precios internacionales del petróleo en los subsidios para el consumo doméstico de gasolina y diésel. Debido a que el diésel es utilizado por un número menor de intereses agrícolas y de transporte organizados, son más capaces de acción colectiva que los beneficiarios dispersos de los subsidios a la gasolina. La sabiduría convencional sostiene que los intereses sectoriales podrían movilizarse para detener la reforma (por ejemplo, aumentos de precios, desregulación). Desafiando este punto de vista, consideramos la posibilidad de que los intereses sectoriales promuevan la reforma al facilitar la asignación específica de compensaciones y exenciones. Un análisis empírico de los precios de la gasolina y el diésel, 1991‐2012, apoya firmemente la segunda hipótesis: los precios del diésel responden más fuertemente a los precios internacionales del petróleo que los precios de la gasolina. Las pruebas cuantitativas y los estudios de caso nos permiten explorar mecanismos causales, verificar que la diferencia entre gasolina y diesel está relacionada con las reformas de políticas reales y rechazar explicaciones alternativas.

Suggested Citation

  • Brian Blankenship & Johannes Urpelainen, 2019. "How Do Sectoral Interests Shape Distributive Politics? Evidence from Gasoline and Diesel Subsidy Reforms," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 36(4), pages 420-447, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:36:y:2019:i:4:p:420-447
    DOI: 10.1111/ropr.12335
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12335
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ropr.12335?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nils Droste & Benjamin Chatterton & Jakob Skovgaard, 2024. "A political economy theory of fossil fuel subsidy reforms in OECD countries," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-14, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:36:y:2019:i:4:p:420-447. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipsonea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.