IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reducing fuel subsidies and the implication on fiscal balance and poverty in Indonesia: A simulation analysis


  • Dartanto, Teguh


There is an urgent need for phasing out fuel subsidies in Indonesia due to a severe budget deficit and a worsening of income distribution. Fuel subsidies, of which almost 72% are enjoyed by the 30% of the richest income groups, have consumed on average 63.8% of the total subsidies between 1998 and 2013. This paper aims at evaluating the relationship between existing fuel subsidies and fiscal balance and at analysing the poverty impact of phasing out fuel subsidies. Applying a CGE-microsimulation, this study found that removing 25% of fuel subsidies increases the incidence of poverty by 0.259 percentage points. If this money were fully allocated to government spending, the poverty incidence would decrease by 0.27 percentage points. Moreover, the 100% removal of fuel subsidies and the reallocation of 50% of them to government spending, transfers and other subsidies could decrease the incidence of poverty by 0.277 percentage points. However, these reallocation policies might not be effective in compensating for the adverse impacts of the 100% removal of fuel subsidies if economic agents try to seek profit through mark-up pricing over the increase of production costs.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:58:y:2013:i:c:p:117-134 DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.02.040

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Luc Savard, 2005. "Poverty and Inequality Analysis within a CGE Framework: A Comparative Analysis of the Representative Agent and Microsimulation Approaches," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 23(3), pages 313-331, May.
    2. Shenggen Fan & Peter Hazell & Sukhadeo Thorat, 2000. "Government Spending, Growth and Poverty in Rural India," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(4), pages 1038-1051.
    3. Jung, Hong-Sang & Thorbecke, Erik, 2003. "The impact of public education expenditure on human capital, growth, and poverty in Tanzania and Zambia: a general equilibrium approach," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 25(8), pages 701-725, November.
    4. Foster, James & Greer, Joel & Thorbecke, Erik, 1984. "A Class of Decomposable Poverty Measures," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(3), pages 761-766, May.
    5. Benedict CLEMENTS & Hong-Sang JUNG & Sanjeev GUPTA, 2007. "Real And Distributive Effects Of Petroleum Price Liberalization: The Case Of Indonesia," The Developing Economies, Institute of Developing Economies, vol. 45(2), pages 220-237.
    6. Easterly, William & Fischer, Stanley, 2001. "Inflation and the Poor," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 33(2), pages 160-178, May.
    7. Luc Savard, 2003. "Poverty and Income Distribution in a CGE-Household Micro-Simulation Model: Top-Down/Bottom Up Approach," Cahiers de recherche 0343, CIRPEE.
    8. Teguh Dartanto, 2010. "Volatility of World Rice Prices, Import Tariffs and Poverty in Indonesia : A CGE-Microsimulation Analysis," Economics and Finance in Indonesia, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Indonesia, vol. 58, pages 335-364, December.
    9. Teguh Dartanto & Usman, 2011. "Volatility of World Soybean Prices, Import Tariffs and Poverty in Indonesia," Margin: The Journal of Applied Economic Research, National Council of Applied Economic Research, vol. 5(2), pages 139-181, May.
    10. Arze del Granado, Francisco Javier & Coady, David & Gillingham, Robert, 2012. "The Unequal Benefits of Fuel Subsidies: A Review of Evidence for Developing Countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(11), pages 2234-2248.
    11. Baker, Paul & Blundell, Richard & Micklewright, John, 1989. "Modelling Household Energy Expenditures Using Micro-data," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(397), pages 720-738, September.
    12. Shaohua Chen & Martin Ravallion, 2004. "Welfare Impacts of China's Accession to the World Trade Organization," World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 18(1), pages 29-57.
    13. B. Decaluwé & L. Savard & E. Thorbecke, 2005. "General Equilibrium Approach for Poverty Analysis: With an Application to Cameroon," African Development Review, African Development Bank, vol. 17(2), pages 213-243.
    14. Davis, Jennifer & Kang, Alice & Vincent, Jeffrey & Whittington, Dale, 2001. "How Important is Improved Water Infrastructure to Microenterprises? Evidence from Uganda," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(10), pages 1753-1767, October.
    15. Clemens Breisinger & Wilfried Engelke & Olivier Ecker, 2012. "Leveraging Fuel Subsidy Reform for Transition in Yemen," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 4(11), pages 1-26, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. repec:eee:enepol:v:111:y:2017:i:c:p:102-110 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:eee:enepol:v:106:y:2017:i:c:p:367-375 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. 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.
    4. Saeed Solaymani, 2016. "Impacts of energy subsidy reform on poverty and income inequality in Malaysia," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 50(6), pages 2707-2723, November.
    5. Moshiri, Saeed, 2015. "The effects of the energy price reform on households consumption in Iran," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 177-188.
    6. Acharya, Rajesh H. & Sadath, Anver C., 2017. "Implications of energy subsidy reform in India," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 453-462.
    7. van Ruijven, Bas J. & O’Neill, Brian C. & Chateau, Jean, 2015. "Methods for including income distribution in global CGE models for long-term climate change research," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 530-543.
    8. Herbert W. V. Hasudungan & Sulthon S. Sabaruddin, 2016. "The Impact of Fiscal Reform on Indonesian Macroeconomy: A CGE Framework," Central European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics, CEJEME, vol. 8(3), pages 181-202, September.
    9. Jon Jellema & Matthew Wai-Poi & Rythia Afkar, 2017. "The Distributional Impact of Fiscal Policy in Indonesia," Commitment to Equity (CEQ) Working Paper Series 40, Tulane University, Department of Economics.
    10. Jiang, Zhujun & Ouyang, Xiaoling & Huang, Guangxiao, 2015. "The distributional impacts of removing energy subsidies in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 111-122.
    11. repec:eee:eneeco:v:68:y:2017:i:c:p:373-382 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Colenbrander, Sarah & Gouldson, Andy & Sudmant, Andrew Heshedahl & Papargyropoulou, Effie, 2015. "The economic case for low-carbon development in rapidly growing developing world cities: A case study of Palembang, Indonesia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 24-35.
    13. repec:spr:annopr:v:255:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-015-1954-x is not listed on IDEAS
    14. 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.
    15. Jeon, Chanwoong & Lee, Jeongjin & Shin, Juneseuk, 2015. "Optimal subsidy estimation method using system dynamics and the real option model: Photovoltaic technology case," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 33-43.
    16. Dennis, Allen, 2016. "Household welfare implications of fossil fuel subsidy reforms in developing countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 597-606.
    17. 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.
    18. Siddig, Khalid & Aguiar, Angel & Grethe, Harald & Minor, Peter & Walmsley, Terrie, 2014. "Impacts of removing fuel import subsidies in Nigeria on poverty," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 165-178.
    19. Bhattacharyya, Ranajoy & Ganguly, Amrita, 2017. "Cross subsidy removal in electricity pricing in India," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 181-190.
    20. Levent Aydin, 2016. "Potential Economic and Environmental Implications of Diesel Subsidy: A Computable General Equilibrium Analysis for Turkey," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 6(4), pages 771-781.
    21. Siddig,Khalid & Minor,Peter J. & Grethe,Harald & Aguiar,Angel & Walmsley,Terrie Louise, 2015. "Impacts on poverty of removing fuel import subsidies in Nigeria," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7376, The World Bank.
    22. Moshiri, Saeed & Lechtenböhmer, Stefan (ed.), 2015. "Sustainable energy strategy for Iran," Wuppertal Spezial, Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy, volume 51, number 51.

    More about this item


    Removing fuel subsidies; Fiscal balance; Poverty;

    JEL classification:

    • C68 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computable General Equilibrium Models
    • I32 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Measurement and Analysis of Poverty
    • Q42 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Alternative Energy Sources
    • Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy


    Access and download statistics


    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:eee:enepol:v:58:y:2013:i:c:p:117-134. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.