Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences· 2026Q1
Reallocating fossil subsidies via social assistance reduces poverty and preserves emissions cuts
- 0citations
- Q1SCImago
- 2026year
Short summary
Redirecting fossil fuel subsidy savings through social assistance programs can reduce poverty and inequality while preserving emissions cuts, with partial recycling (retaining ~20% of savings) being optimal.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- Removing fossil fuel subsidies without compensation increases poverty, particularly for low-income households in emerging economies.
- Reallocating subsidy savings through social assistance programs, especially targeted cash transfers, reduces poverty and inequality.
- Full revenue recycling of subsidy savings is not optimal; partial recycling (retaining ~20% of savings) preserves emissions cuts and poverty reduction.
- Fossil fuel subsidy reform is most effective when social assistance compensates low-income households without absorbing all fiscal savings.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
Fossil fuel subsidies are widespread, regressive, and environmentally costly, yet abrupt removal can raise poverty. To identify a practical reform pathway, we evaluate the effectiveness of compensatory policies grounded in existing national social protection systems. We develop a high-resolution global social accounting matrix to quantify how reallocating subsidies through actual social assistance impacts poverty, inequality, and CO 2 emissions. Without compensation, reform lowers emissions but increases poverty, especially for low-income households in emerging economies. Redirecting funds via social assistance disproportionately benefits the bottom half and reduces national poverty, particularly under targeted cash transfers or expanded programs where savings are large. However, full revenue recycling is not always desirable: Once vulnerable households are adequately protected, additional recycling can weaken both fiscal and climate gains. We therefore treat full recycling through social assistance as an analytical benchmark rather than a policy prescription and show that partial, targeted recycling, as illustrated by retaining roughly 20% of savings while channeling the remainder through social protection, can still reduce poverty while preserving emissions cuts. Overall, fossil fuel subsidy reform is most effective when social assistance is used to compensate low-income households, not to absorb all fiscal savings, leaving residual revenues available for other public priorities.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2026 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment
Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the EnvironmentEnergy