IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/332451.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Distributional impacts of energy consumption subsidy phase out in Indonesia: A computable general equilibrium analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Durand-Lasserve, Olivier
  • Campagnolo, Lorenza
  • Chateau, Jean
  • Dellink, Rob

Abstract

This paper focuses on the distributional impacts of a phasing out of energy consumption subsidies in Indonesia. Macroeconomic and environmental consequences are also considered. The analysis highlights the importance of redistribution schemes that can replace subsidies to make the reform progressive while being neutral for the government’s budget. A new version of the OECD ENV-Linkages CGE model is used that integrates more than 10 000 representative household groups for Indonesia, taken from IFLS4 survey data, to simulate a full phasing out of energy consumption subsidies for both households and firms at horizon 2020. Three alternative stylized redistribution schemes are considered: direct payment on a per household basis (cash transfer scenario), support to labour incomes (labour support scenario), and subsidies on food products (food subsidies scenario). It appears that the direct effect of the reform due to the increase in commodity prices (mostly energy) is regressive but that the cash transfers, and, to a lower extent the food subsidies, can make the total effect progressive. In contrast, the scenario with support to labour income is regressive, given that it fails to reach households with revenues from the informal sector, which are overrepresented among the poor. Depending on the redistribution scheme, the GDP impact ranges from +0.7% to +0.5% compared with a baseline. Beneficial impacts come from both the reduction of deadweight losses due to the subsidy phase out and from increased savings and investments. The best GDP performance is achieved by the cash transfers scenario, while food subsidies harm efficiency in the long run and labour support is detrimental to investment. The phasing out of subsidies contributes to a decrease of national energy-related CO2 emissions (w.r.t. baseline) by 10-12%, with the bulk of the emission reduction effort coming from the households. The more progressive the scheme is, the larger the contribution of high income household groups to total emission reductions.

Suggested Citation

  • Durand-Lasserve, Olivier & Campagnolo, Lorenza & Chateau, Jean & Dellink, Rob, 2014. "Distributional impacts of energy consumption subsidy phase out in Indonesia: A computable general equilibrium analysis," Conference papers 332451, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:332451
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/332451/files/7127.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cheon, Andrew & Urpelainen, Johannes & Lackner, Maureen, 2013. "Why do governments subsidize gasoline consumption? An empirical analysis of global gasoline prices, 2002–2009," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 382-390.
    2. Dartanto, Teguh, 2013. "Reducing fuel subsidies and the implication on fiscal balance and poverty in Indonesia: A simulation analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 117-134.
    3. World Bank, 2008. "Climate Change and the World Bank Group - Phase I : An Evaluation of World Bank Win-Win Energy Policy Reforms," World Bank Publications - Reports 10594, The World Bank Group.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Scobie, Michelle, 2017. "Fossil fuel reform in developing states: The case of Trinidad and Tobago, a petroleum producing small Island developing State," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 265-273.
    2. Olivier Durand-Lasserve & Lorenza Campagnolo & Jean Chateau & Rob Dellink, 2015. "Modelling of distributional impacts of energy subsidy reforms: an illustration with Indonesia," OECD Environment Working Papers 86, OECD Publishing.
    3. Bah, Muhammad Maladoh & Saari, M. Yusof, 2020. "Quantifying the impacts of energy price reform on living expenses in Saudi Arabia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    4. Dennis, Allen, 2016. "Household welfare implications of fossil fuel subsidy reforms in developing countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 597-606.
    5. Acharya, Rajesh H. & Sadath, Anver C., 2017. "Implications of energy subsidy reform in India," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 453-462.
    6. Svetlana Avdasheva & Svetlana Golovanova, 2017. "Oil explains all: desirable organisation of the Russian fuel markets (on the data of three waves of antitrust cases against oil companies)," Post-Communist Economies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(2), pages 198-215, April.
    7. Xu, Jiayi & Tan-Soo, Jie-Sheng & Chu, Yanlai & Zhang, Xiao-Bing, 2023. "Gasoline price and fuel economy of new automobiles: Evidence from Chinese cities," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    8. McCulloch, Neil & Natalini, Davide & Hossain, Naomi & Justino, Patricia, 2022. "An exploration of the association between fuel subsidies and fuel riots," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    9. Jeroen Klomp, 2020. "Subsidizing power," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 67(3), pages 300-321, July.
    10. Scarpellini, Sabina & Sanz Hernández, M. Alexia & Llera-Sastresa, Eva & Aranda, Juan A. & López Rodríguez, María Esther, 2017. "The mediating role of social workers in the implementation of regional policies targeting energy poverty," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 367-375.
    11. Haqiqi, Iman & Yasharel, Sepideh, 2018. "Removing Fossil Fuel Subsidies to Help the Poor," MPRA Paper 95907, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Csereklyei, Zsuzsanna & Stern, David I., 2015. "Global energy use: Decoupling or convergence?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 633-641.
    13. Anan Wattanakuljarus, 2019. "Effects and burdens of a carbon tax scheme in Thailand," Eurasian Economic Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 9(2), pages 173-219, June.
    14. Cecile Couharde & Sara Mouhoud, 2020. "Fossil Fuel Subsidies, Income Inequality, And Poverty: Evidence From Developing Countries," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(5), pages 981-1006, December.
    15. Fahman Fathurrahman & Bora Kat & Uğur Soytaṣ, 2017. "Simulating Indonesian fuel subsidy reform: a social accounting matrix analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 255(1), pages 591-615, August.
    16. Hadi Sasana & F. Salman & Suharnomo Suharnomo & S. B. M. Nugroho & A. G. Edy Yusuf, 2018. "The Impact of Fossil Energy Subsidies on Social Cost in Indonesia," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 8(2), pages 168-173.
    17. Wang, Yanxiang & Ali Almazrooei, Shaikha & Kapsalyamova, Zhanna & Diabat, Ali & Tsai, I-Tsung, 2016. "Utility subsidy reform in Abu Dhabi: A review and a Computable General Equilibrium analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 1352-1362.
    18. Acquah-Andoh, Elijah & Putra, Herdi A. & Ifelebuegu, Augustine O. & Owusu, Andrews, 2019. "Coalbed methane development in Indonesia: Design and economic analysis of upstream petroleum fiscal policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 155-167.
    19. Moshiri, Saeed & Lechtenböhmer, Stefan (ed.), 2015. "Sustainable energy strategy for Iran," Wuppertal Spezial, Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy, volume 51, number 51.
    20. Chandra Setiawan, Indra & Indarto, & Deendarlianto,, 2021. "Quantitative analysis of automobile sector in Indonesian automotive roadmap for achieving national oil and CO2 emission reduction targets by 2030," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).

    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:ags:pugtwp:332451. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gtpurus.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.