世界银行-从近期经验看能源补贴改革背景下的现金转移（英）-2023.6-82页_3mb

Summary of Energy Subsidy Reform and Cash Transfers

Introduction

This report examines the role of cash transfers in mitigating the impact of energy subsidy reforms in low- and middle-income countries. Energy subsidies are widely recognized as inefficient, regressive, and environmentally harmful, prompting reforms with the support of targeted social assistance.

Key Findings

• Energy Subsidy Challenges: Globally, energy subsidies can exceed US$1 trillion annually, diverting critical fiscal resources and harming equity and the environment. Reforms often face tradeoffs between fiscal savings and social impact.

• Global Stocktaking Highlights:

  • In 20 out of 24 reform episodes (1995-2016), cash transfers addressed fiscal crises and socio-political pressures.
  • Coverage and generosity of transfers varied, with some reaching nearly universal coverage (e.g., Islamic Republic of Iran in 2010) while others targeted specific groups (e.g., poor households).
  • Compensation mechanisms evolved, including new programs and expansions of existing social assistance, often leveraging digital payment systems.

• Country Case Studies:

  • Dominican Republic: Transitioned from generalized to targeted energy subsidies via social assistance programs like Solidaridad, Bonogas, and Bonoluz. This reduced fiscal costs by approximately 50% while building trust and enabling broader reforms.
  • Ukraine: Used the Housing and Utility Subsidy (HUS) to compensate for sharp tariff increases. Expansion reached nearly 50% of households, but monetization improved targeting and fiscal sustainability.

• Lessons Learned:

  • Communication and Stakeholder Engagement: Proactive communication builds trust and manages expectations, facilitating smoother reforms.
  • Design and Implementation: Tradeoffs exist between transfer coverage/generosity and fiscal savings. Careful upfront planning and iterative refinement based on experiences are critical for success.
  • Use of Existing Systems: Leveraging established social protection frameworks (e.g., conditional cash transfers) for energy compensations can reduce implementation costs and enhance efficiency.
  • Fiscal Prudence and Equity: Balancing reforms requires progressive targeting to avoid exclusion errors, especially in informal settings.

Conclusion

Cash transfers are an effective tool for mitigating the welfare impacts of energy subsidy reforms, supporting both fiscal sustainability and broader equity goals. Moving toward targeted or universal transfers can build public support and foster long-term, adaptive social protection systems.