Browse all documents

Comparison of Fossil-Fuel Subsidy and Support Estimates

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

This fact sheet by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) compares the methodologies and estimates used by four international organizations—the OECD, IEA, IMF, and GSI—to measure government support and subsidies for fossil fuels. It highlights how differences in coverage, definitions, and measurement techniques (such as the 'Inventory Approach' versus the 'Price-Gap Approach') lead to varying headline estimates.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • Headline estimates for fossil-fuel subsidies vary significantly across organizations due to different scopes and methodologies. The OECD estimated annual support between US$ 55–90 billion from 2005–2011, while the IEA estimated US$ 544 billion for 2012. The IMF provided two distinct 2011 figures: a pre-tax estimate of US$ 492 billion and a post-tax estimate of US$ 2,000 billion.
  • The IMF's 'post-tax subsidies' measure is broader than other estimates because it incorporates implicit support resulting from the failure to charge for environmental damages and consumption externalities, as well as exemptions from general consumption taxes.
  • The OECD utilizes an 'Inventory Approach' based on the Producer Support Estimate and Consumer Support Estimate (PSE-CSE) framework, focusing on budgetary transfers and tax expenditures. This method identifies preferential tax treatment as the source of two-thirds of current subsidy mechanisms and includes measures from sub-national jurisdictions.
  • The IEA and IMF employ a 'Price-Gap Approach,' which identifies a consumption subsidy when domestic fuel prices are lower than international reference prices. While useful for comparing countries with administrative pricing or export restrictions, this method fails to capture producer subsidies caused by inefficiency or direct payments like fuel vouchers to low-income households.

Cite the original document

APA
International Institute for Sustainable Development (2012). Comparison of Fossil-Fuel Subsidy and Support Estimates. https://www.iisd.org/gsi/sites/default/files/ffs_methods_estimationcomparison.pdf
Chicago
International Institute for Sustainable Development. Comparison of Fossil-Fuel Subsidy and Support Estimates. 2012. https://www.iisd.org/gsi/sites/default/files/ffs_methods_estimationcomparison.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=International Institute for Sustainable Development |title=Comparison of Fossil-Fuel Subsidy and Support Estimates |date=2012 |url=https://www.iisd.org/gsi/sites/default/files/ffs_methods_estimationcomparison.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{internationalinstituteforsustainabledevelopment2012comparison, author = {{International Institute for Sustainable Development}}, title = {{Comparison of Fossil-Fuel Subsidy and Support Estimates}}, institution = {International Institute for Sustainable Development}, year = {2012}, url = {https://www.iisd.org/gsi/sites/default/files/ffs_methods_estimationcomparison.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated