Publications

Fossil fuel subsidy reforms: state of play and ways forward

BACKGROUND:

Fossil fuel subsidies are incompatible with the low carbon energy transition

 

SUMMARY:

Promoting the production and consumption of fossil fuels through subsidies is incompatible with the Paris Agreement on climate change.

While G20 countries have committed to phase out “inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption” since 2009, the progress towards reform has been mixed. The G20 countries still provide about USD 70 billion in production fossil fuel subsidies, while the total global consumption subsidies are estimated to be in the range of USD 320 billion to USD 5 trillion per year.

Recent examples demonstrate that subsidy reforms, combined with compensation mechanisms, are feasible. While there is no silver bullet to tackle the fossil fuel subsidy issue – and some of them are actually necessary –, the next steps towards a sounder and more efficient approach to fossil fuel subsidies may include:

 

  • Establish clear action roadmaps for the reform of fossil fuel subsidies;
  • Work within existing platforms such as the WTO to refine existing definitions in the specific case of fossil fuel subsidies;
  • Reinforce existing peer-review processes and extend them through international cooperation platforms such as the UNFCCC;
  • Use transparency frameworks to improve the national and international reporting on fossil fuel subsidies and their reform;
  • Reinforce international initiatives that allow for transnational research, such as the Global Subsidy Initiative and the OECD/IEA works, and efforts such as the World Bank’s of IMF’s that foster capacity building on these issues.
Fossil fuel subsidy reforms: state of play and ways forward Download
I4CE Contacts
Dr. Sébastien POSTIC
Dr. Sébastien POSTIC
Chercheur – Finances publiques, Développement Email
Sébastien POSTIC, Phd
Sébastien POSTIC, Phd
Research Fellow – Public finance, Development Email
To learn more
  • 01/21/2026 Blog post
    On Carbon Removals and Carbon Farming the devil is in…the demand

    The implementation of carbon farming practices on European farms and in European forests is a lever for achieving carbon neutrality, but also for farm resilience, the adaptation of forest stands to climate change and for contributing to our strategic independence. Certifying and financing low-carbon practices is the objective of the CRCF (Carbon Removals and Carbon Farming) regulation, which will come into effect in 2026. Now seems the right time to draw lessons from six years of experience with a similar standard in France: the “Label Bas-Carbone” (Low Carbon Label – LBC). The results show that striking a balance between scientific rigour and accessibility for stakeholders has led to the development of a substantial range of projects. However, the real challenge is to build sufficient and appropriate demand to finance the projects. There is no miracle solution, but complementary financing channels may emerge. 

  • 01/16/2026 Foreword of the week
    2026: An electric atmosphere

    The year ahead promises to be electric. In a highly unpredictable geopolitical context, the European Union must balance its commitment to the long-term goals of climate neutrality and the immediate attention to security and competitiveness concerns. This puts electrification high on the agenda in Brussels. First, the Grids Package, presented in December 2025, provides for a more centralised approach to planning and is expected to be adopted by the Council in June. Second, before the summer, the Commission intends to present an Electrification Action Plan, which will focus on lowering prices and reinforcing demand. 

  • 12/12/2025 Blog post Foreword of the week
    Paris +10: France and Europe must step up on climate – to protect our security, sovereignty, competitiveness, and public finances

    How distant December 12, 2015 now seems. All delegations at COP21 had then rallied behind Laurent Fabius’s little green hammer. Ten years later, the trend is closer to backlash. Climate action is now often portrayed in the public debate as too costly, because it requires major investment. Ineffective, since our share of global emissions is small. Unfair, because it cuts into purchasing power. Too divisive, supported only by part of the electorate. Too late, since keeping the planet below +2°C of warming now seems out of reach. Arguments that are partly true—yet require substantial nuance. 

See all publications
Press contact Amélie FRITZ Head of Communication and press relations Email
Subscribe to our mailing list :
I register !
Subscribe to our newsletter
Once a week, receive all the information on climate economics
I register !
Fermer