قیمت‌گذاری بنزین و پیامدهای آن بر فقر مطلق و نسبی خانوارهای شهری ایران

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار گروه اقتصاد نظری، دانشکده اقتصاد، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران

2 دانشیار گروه اقتصاد منابع و انرژی، دانشکده اقتصاد، دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران، ایران

3 کارشناسی ارشد اقتصاد انرژی، دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران، ایران

چکیده

تخصیص حجم وسیع یارانه به بنزین علاوه بر ایجاد معضلات فراوانی چون مصرف بی‌رویه، قاچاق و ناکارآمدی بازار، از اصلی‌ترین هدف خود مبنی بر حمایت از اقشار ضعیف جامعه منحرف شده و فقر (مطلق و نسبی) را تشدید کرده است. چنین رویکردی اصلاح مکانیزم قیمت‌گذاری فعلی را ضروری کرده است. در مطالعه حاضر، آثار اجرای سناریو پیشنهادی و افزایش قیمت تصاعدی متناسب با مصرف بنزین بر فقر (مطلق و نسبی) بررسی و با وضعیت جاری مقایسه می‌شود. این راهکار به صورت دو نرخی (قیمت سهمیه‌ای و غیر سهمیه‌ای) است؛ بخش سهمیه، مانند روال گذشته بوده و قیمت بنزین غیرسهمیه، به اقتضای میزان مصرف افراد با احتساب 5 درصد مالیات به ازای هر لیتر مصرف مازاد بر سهمیه ماهانه، محاسبه می‌شود. بدین منظور مخارج مصرفی 78255 خانوار شهری طی دوره زمانی 1399-1396 در چارچوب مدل سیستم تقاضای تقریباً ایده‌آل خطی در نُه گروه کالایی منتخب به تفکیک چهار طبقه مصرف ماهیانه بنزین (کمتر از 60 لیتر، 60 تا 80 لیتر، 80 تا 120 لیتر و بیش از 120 لیتر) با در نظر گرفتن متغیرهای جمعیت‌شناختی بررسی شد. کشش‌های قیمتی و درآمدی استخراج و معیار تغییرات جبرانی محاسبه و با فرض اجرای سناریوی پیشنهادی، اطلاعات هزینه‌ای خانوار شبیه‌سازی و فقر (مطلق و نسبی) برآورد شد. در صورت عملی شدن سناریوی مذکور، خانوارهای پُرمصرف با هزینه بالاتری مواجه شده و از یارانه کمتری بهره‌مند می‌شوند که علاوه بر توزیع عادلانه یارانه و کاهش فقر از شدت مصرف کاسته می‌شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Gasoline pricing and its consequences on the absolute and relative poverty of urban households in Iran

نویسندگان [English]

  • Aliasghar Salem 1
  • siyab mamipour 2
  • Masoumeh Azizkhani 3
1 Associate Professor, Faculty of Economics, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran
2 Associate Professor, Faculty of Economics, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran
3 Master of Economics of Energy, Faculty of Economics, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Extended Abstract
Purpose: Pricing of gasoline and the necessity of reforms in this area are perpetual concerns among experts and policymakers of the country. By allocating a large volume of subsidy to gasoline, not only has the main goal of supporting the poor classes of the society remained unrealized, but it has also created various problems such as excessive consumption, smuggling, and the spread of pollution. In this study, an effort is made to propose a new pricing policy for gasoline with the aim of reducing poverty in the society. In this scenario, a certain allocation (60 liters per month at a fixed price of 15000 Rials) will be preserved, and only non-allocated gasoline will be subject to a floating price and a 5% tax based on consumption. This study introduces a scenario and examines its effects on various types of poverty (absolute and relative) compared to the current situation.
Methodology: The gasoline consumption data of 78255 households residing in the provinces of the country during the years 2017-2020 were collected and categorized into four groups (less than 60 liters, 60 to 80 liters, 80 to 120 liters, and more than 120 liters). This was based on the view that the amount of gasoline consumption is a part of the household income. The data were derived from expenditure surveys conducted by the Statistical Center of Iran. By employing an ideal demand system model and seemingly unrelated regression method, the share of nine selected commodity groups from the household consumption basket, including (food, clothing and footwear, housing, water, sewage, fuel, lighting, health and medical services; gasoline; transportation excluding gasoline; cultural and recreational services, prepared foods, hotels, and restaurants, and other goods and services) were examined while taking into account demographic variables including household size, gender, age, marital status, employment status, education, and home ownership of the heads of households. Price and income elasticities were extracted, the Compensating Variation (CV) measure of changes was calculated, and household cost information, poverty (absolute and relative) simulation and estimation were conducted, assuming the implementation of the proposed scenario.
Findings and Discussion: The income elasticity of gasoline demand is less than one for all consumption categories. This elasticity has the highest value for consumption categories of less than 60 liters per month (the monthly allocation) and indicates a higher sensitivity of this category compared to other gasoline consumption categories. With the increase of income, the gasoline consumption of this group, as it has not yet reached its saturation point, increases more than other groups. For non-rationed consumption, there is a positive income elasticity trend alongside an increase in gasoline consumption, indicating that gasoline consumption also increases with increasing income. The elasticity of gasoline price showed that this commodity is essential for households, and an increase in its price has no significant effect on their consumption. Nevertheless, gasoline consumers within the monthly rationed range (60 liters) have a stronger reaction to price changes, and any price change affects the basic needs of households belonging to this consumption category. Households belonging to the consumption category of more than 120 liters have the lowest price elasticity, and it is necessary to change the pricing method to make them sensitive to the price of gasoline. Implementing the proposed scenario and imposing taxes on the consumption exceeding the allocated ration for households will result in changes in the welfare of households based on their level of consumption. To estimate the Compensating Variation (CV), the percentage change in the allocated budget share of the commodity group, the approximate relative price changes, and Hicksian price elasticity (compensation) were calculated. By implementing the policy of imposing taxes on excess consumption, households that consume between 60 to 80 liters of gasoline monthly will receive an additional 800,467 Rials for their welfare, and households with consumption between 80 to 120 liters and over 120 liters monthly will lose 5,843,089 Rials and 21,361,290 Rials of welfare, respectively. After adding and subtracting the calculated welfare to household expenses, simulations were performed, and poverty (absolute and relative) was recalculated. The results showed that adding welfare to low-consumption households reduces the poverty rate compared to the current situation. Among the demographic variables examined, except for the virtual age variable, which has an inverse relationship with gasoline consumption, the other demographic variables including household size, home ownership, gender, education, employment, income ownership, and marital status of the heads of households have significant and direct relationships with gasoline consumption
Conclusion and Policy Implications: Currently, the policy of stabilizing gasoline prices in a two-tiered system (allocated and non-allocated prices) is being implemented, which will not be a logical solution in inflationary conditions. A solution needs to be proposed to partially amend and control the gasoline consumption pattern while taking into account the social-political dimensions of pricing reforms. Therefore, in this study, the scenario of non-allocated gasoline pricing proportional to the level of consumption was analyzed as a proposed solution. The results showed that implementing the proposed scenario leads to a reduction in poverty (absolute and relative). This finding has a significant impact on the decision-making of policymakers in order to improve the level of welfare in the society.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Subsidy reform
  • absolute poverty
  • relative poverty
  • almost ideal demand system
  • micro data simulation

مراجع

Akimaya, M. & Dahl, C. (2017). "Simulation of Price Controls for Different Grade of Gasoline: The Case of Indonesia". Energy Economics 68: 373-382.
Akimaya, M. & Dahl, C. (2022). "Political Power, Economic Trade-Offs, and Game Theory in Indonesian Gasoline Subsidy Reform". Energy Research & Social Science 92: 102782.
Alleyne, M. T. S. C. & Hussain, M. M. (2013). Energy Subsidy Reform in Sub-Saharan Africa: Experiences and Lessons, International Monetary Fund.
Angel-Urdinola, D. & Wodon, Q. (2007). "Do Utility Subsidies Reach the Poor? Framework and Evidence for Cape Verde, Sao Tome, and Rwanda". Economics Bulletin 9(4): 1-7.
Arzaghi, M. & Squalli, J. (2015). "How Price Inelastic is Demand for Gasoline in Fuel-Subsidizing Economies? Energy Economics 50: 117-124.
Atamanov, A. Mostafavi-Dehzooei, M. H. & Wai-Poi, M. G. (2020). "Welfare and Fiscal Implications from Increased Gasoline Prices in the Islamic Republic of Iran". World Bank Policy Research Working Paper.(9235)
Azizi, M. Kazemi, Sh. & Heydari Beyuki, A. (2011). "Analyzing the Inflationary Effects of Energy Carrier Price Adjustments in the Topic of Targeting Subsidies with the Approach of Economic Management". The First International Conference on Oil and Gas in Tehran. (In Persian)
Bergh, A. & Nilsson, T. (2014). "Is Globalization Reducing Absolute Poverty?". World Development42-61.
Breton, M. & Mirzapour, H. (2016). "Welfare Implication of Reforming Energy Consumption Subsidies". Energy Policy 98: 232-240.
Coady, M. D. Parry, I. W. Sears, L. & Shang, B. (2015). How Large are Global Energy Subsidies?, International Monetary Fund.
Coxhead, I. & Grainger, C. (2018). "Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform in the Developing World: Who Wins, Who Loses, and Why?". Asian Development Review 35(2): 180-203.
Dahl, C. A. (2012). "Measuring Global Gasoline and Diesel Price and Income Elasticities". Energy Policy 41: 2-13.
Dartanto, T. (2013). "Reducing Fuel Subsidies and the Implication on Fiscal Balance and Poverty in Indonesia: A Simulation Analysis". Energy Policy 58: 117-134.
Davis, L. W. (2014). "The Economic Cost of Global Fuel Subsidies". American Economic Review 104(5): 581-585.
Deaton, A. & Muellbauer, J. (1980). "An Almost Ideal Demand System". The American Economic Review 70(3): 312-326.
Del Granado, F. J. A. Coady, D. & Gillingham, R. (2012). "The Unequal Benefits of Fuel Subsidies: A Review of Evidence for Developing Countries". World Development 40(11): 2234-2248.
Díaz, A. O. & Medlock, K. B. (2021). "Price Elasticity of Demand for Fuels by Income Level in Mexican Households". Energy Policy 151: 112132.
Eltony, M. N. & Al-Mutairi, N. H. (1995). "Demand for Gasoline in Kuwait: an Empirical Analysis using Cointegration Techniques". Energy Economics 17(3): 249-253.
Engstrom, R. Hersh, J. S. & Newhouse, D. L. (2017). "Poverty from Space: using High-Resolution Satellite Imagery for Estimating Economic Well-Being". World Bank Policy Research Working Paper (8284).
Etang Ndip, A. (2019). "Fuel Subsidy Reform in Sudan: An Assessment of the Direct Welfare Impact on Households". Poverty and Equity Global Practice, Africa 1-17.
Friedman, J. & Levinsohn, J. (2002). "The Distributional Impacts of Indonesia's Financial Crisis on Household Welfare: A “Rapid Response” Methodology". The World Bank Economic Review 16(3): 397-423.
Gasim, A. A. Agnolucci, P. Ekins, P. & De Lipsis, V. (2023). "Modeling Final Energy Demand and the Impacts of Energy Price Reform in Saudi Arabia". Energy Economics 120: 106589.
Ghoddusi, H. Rafizadeh, N. & Rahmati, M. H. (2018). "Price Elasticity of Gasoline Smuggling: A Semi-Structural Estimation Approach". Energy Economics 71: 171-185.
Ghoddusi, H. Morovati, M. & Rafizadeh, N. (2022). "Dynamics of Fuel Demand Elasticity: Evidence from Iranian Subsidy Reforms". Energy Economics 110: 106009.
Giuliano, F. Lugo, M. A. Masut, A. & Puig, J. (2020). "Distributional Effects of Reducing Energy Subsidies: Evidence from Recent Policy Reform in Argentina". Energy Economics 92: 104980.
Glomm, G. & Jung, J. (2015). "A Macroeconomic Analysis of Energy Subsidies in a Small Open Economy". Economic Inquiry 53(4):1783-1806.
Groot, L. & Oostveen, T. (2019). "Welfare Effects of Energy Subsidy Reform in Developing Countries". Review of Development Economics 23(4): 1926-1944.
Hatemvand, Z. Shadabfar, E. Amraie, A. Shokri, M. (2020). "Investigating the Pricing of Gasoline and its Subsidies in Iran's Economy". Economic Magazine (Bimonthly Review of Economic Issues and Policies); 20(1 and 2): 49-91 (In Persian)
Hausman, J. A. (1981). "Exact Consumer's Surplus and Deadweight Loss". The American Economic Review 71(4): 662-676.
Hong, L. Liang, D. & Di, W. (2013). "Economic and Environmental Gains of China's Fossil Energy Subsidies Reform: A Rebound Effect Case Study with EIMO Model". Energy Policy 54: 335-342.
IMF, D. F. (2014). IMF Country Report No. 14/336. Denmark, Financial System Stability Assessment, IMF Publication Services, Washington, December, 1-48.
Inchauste, G. & Victor, D. G. (2017). The Political Economy of Energy Subsidy Reform, World Bank Publications.
Iwayemi, A. Adenikinju, A. & Babatunde, M. A. (2010). "Estimating Petroleum Products Demand Elasticities in Nigeria: A Multivariate Cointegration Approach". Energy Economics 32(1): 73-85.
Jiang, Z. Ouyang, X. & Huang, G. (2015). "The Distributional Impacts of Removing Energy Subsidies in China". China Economic Review 33: 111-122.
Khiyabani, N. (2008). "A Calculable General Equilibrium Model for Evaluating the Increase in the Price of Energy Carriers in Iran's Economy". Energy Economics Studies (5): 16-34. (In Persian)
Kimbrell, C. M. (2022). "Energy Policy as a Driver of Energy Poverty? Perhaps Not". Energy for Sustainable Development 71: 568-572.
Koomson, I. & Danquah, M. (2021). "Financial Inclusion and Energy Poverty: Empirical Evidence from Ghana". Energy Economics 94: 105085.
Krajňák, M. (2023). "Fuels Taxation in the Context of Tax Reforms in the Czech Republic". Journal of Tax Reform 9(1): 34-46.
Li, Z. & Solaymani, S. (2021). "Effectiveness of Energy Efficiency Improvements in the Context of Energy Subsidy Policies". Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy 23: 937-963.
Lin, C.-Y. C. & Zeng, J. J. (2013). "The Elasticity of Demand for Gasoline in China". Energy Policy 59: 189-197.
Madden, D. (2000). "Relative or Absolute Poverty Lines: A New Approach". Review of Income and Wealth 46(2): 181-199.
Majlis Research Center (2007). "The Effects of Increasing the Price of Some Energy Products (Gasoline and Diesel) on the General Level of Base Inflation". Bureau of Economic Studies (Commodity Economy Group). (In Persian)
Mamipour, S. Sayadi, M. Azizkhani, M. (2022). "Theoretical Analysis of Gasoline Pricing Policies in Iran: Challenges and Solutions". Review of Iran's Economic Issues 2(8) serial number: 18. (In Persian)
Moerenhout, T. (2017). "Harnessing Social Safety in a Context of Changing Social Contracts: Compensation Schemes and Subsidy Reforms in the GCC". Oxford Institute for Energy Studies 1-23.
Morgan, T. (2002). "Reforming Energy Subsides: An Explanatory Summary of the Issues and Challenges in Removing or Modifying Subsidies on Energy that Undermine the Pursuit of Sustainable Development".
Moshiri, S. (2013). Energy Price Reform and Energy Efficiency in Iran, SSRN. ZBW – Leibniz-Informationszentrum Wirtschaft/Leibniz Information Centre for Economics. 1-10.
Moshiri, S. & Santillan, M. A. M. (2018). "The Welfare Effects of Energy Price Changes Due to Energy Market Reform in Mexico". Energy Policy 113: 663-672.
Moshiri, S. (2020). "Consumer Responses to Gasoline Price and Non-Price Policies". Energy Policy 137: 111078.
Murjani, A. (2017). "Energy Goods Demand in Tabalong Regency: Almost-Ideal Demand System Approach". Jurnal Bina Praja: Journal of Home Affairs Governance 9(2): 307-319.
Mousavi Jahormi, Y. (2013). "Predicting Value Added Tax on Gasoline Consumption". Economic Growth and Development Research 6(21): 107-120. (In Persian)
Olivier, A. & Ruggeri Laderchi, C. (2018). Analyzing the Incidence of Consumer Price Subsidies and the Impact of Reform on Households—Quantitative Analysis, World Bank: 1-48.
Ofori, R. O. (2023). "The Economic Cost of Fuel Subsidies in Ghana". Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 101587.
Oré, M. A. H. Sousa, L. D. & Tornarolli, L. (2017). Fiscal and Welfare Impacts of Electricity Subsidies in Central America, World Bank Publications.
Pezhoyan, J. (1995). Identification and Support of Vulnerable Groups, Ministry of Economic Affairs and Finance - Deputy of Economic Affairs, Tehran. (In Persian)
Piraei, Kh. and Shaheswar, M. R. (2009). "Investigating the Poverty Situation in Urban and Rural Areas of Fars Province". Economic Journal 9(3 (series 34)): 233-264. (In Persian)
Razini, I. Sabouri Deilmi, M. H. (2009). "Investigating the Effects of the Implementation of the Targeted Subsidies Plan on Gasoline Consumption in Iran". Economic Modeling 2(8): 123-152. (In Persian)
Ravallion, M. (2020). "On Measuring Global Poverty". Annual Review of Economics 12: 167-188.
Rentschler, J. & Bazilian, M. (2017). "Reforming Fossil Fuel Subsidies: Drivers, Barriers and the State of Progress". Climate Policy 17(7): 891-914.
Saadat Mehr, M. (2015). "The Effect of Increasing the Price of Gasoline and Diesel on the Inflation Rate in Iran". Quarterly Journal of Energy Planning and Policymaking Research 3: 85-104. (In Persian)
Sarrakh, R. Renukappa, S. Suresh, S. & Mushatat, S. (2020). "Impact of Subsidy Reform on the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia's Economy and Carbon Emissions". Energy Strategy Reviews 28: 100465.
Schaffitzel, F. Jakob, M. Soria, R. Vogt-Schilb, A. & Ward, H. (2020). "Can Government Transfers Make Energy Subsidy Reform Socially Acceptable? A Case Study on Ecuador". Energy Policy, 137: 111120.
Siddig, K. Aguiar, A. Grethe, H. Minor, P. & Walmsley, T. (2014). "Impacts of Removing Fuel Import Subsidies in Nigeria on Poverty". Energy Policy 69: 165-178.
Skovgaard, J. & Van Asselt, H. (2019). "The Politics of Fossil Fuel Subsidies and their Reform: Implications for Climate Change Mitigation". Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 10(4): e581.
Tang, K. Li, Z. & He, C. (2023). "Spatial Distribution Pattern and Influencing Factors of Relative Poverty in Rural China". Innovation and Green Development 2(1): 100030.
Timilsina, G. R. & Pargal, S. (2020). "Economics of Energy Subsidy Reforms in Bangladesh". Energy Policy 142: 111539.
Townsend, P. (1970). "Concept of Poverty". International Seminar on Poverty (1967: University of Essex).
Ur Rahman, Z. (2021). "A Micro‐Level Data Analysis of Household Energy Demand in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan: An Application of Linear Approximate Almost Ideal Demand System". Growth and Change 52(1): 518-538.
Van Vliet, O. & Wang, C. (2015). "Social Investment and Poverty Reduction: A Comparative Analysis across Fifteen European Countries". Journal of Social Policy 44(3): 611-638.
Vandeninden, F. Grun, R. & Fecher, F. (2022). "Energy Subsidies and Poverty: The Case of Fossil Fuel Subsidies in Burkina Faso". Energy for Sustainable Development 70: 581-591.
Wan, G. Hu, X. & Liu, W. (2021). "China's Poverty Reduction Miracle and Relative Poverty: Focusing on the Roles of Growth and Inequality". China Economic Review 68: 101643.
Yemtsov, R. G. & Moubarak, A. S. (2018). Assessing the Readiness of Social Safety Nets to Mitigate the Impact of Reform: Households. (No. 128013, pp. 1-54). The World Bank.
Zarepour, Z. & Wagner, N. (2022). "Cash Instead of Subsidy: Assessing the Impact of the Iranian Energy Subsidy Reform on Households". Energy Policy 168: 113145.
Zellner, A. (1962). "An Efficient Method of Estimating Seemingly Unrelated Regressions and Tests for Aggregation Bias". Journal of the American statistical Association 57(298): 348-368.
Zhang, T. Zhang, Y. Wan, G. & Wu, H. (2020). "Poverty Reduction in China and India: a Comparative Study". The Singapore Economic Review 65(supp01): 95-115.
سیاست گذاری اقتصادی
دوره 15، شماره 29
شهریور 1402
صفحه 1-39

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار