Quarterly Journal of Governance Knowledge

Quarterly Journal of Governance Knowledge

A reflection on the gasoline conundrum: what reform is not doomed to failure?

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Morteza Zamanian 1 ΒΆ
Ali Sanaei 2
1 Member of the Faculty of Management, Science and Technology, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran.
2 School of Computational Social Studies, University of Chicago, Chicago, USA.
10.22034/jokog.2024.201821
Abstract
This study investigates the perceptions of Iranians regarding energy subsidies, specifically exploring the key obstacles to reforming gasoline subsidies. Through a mixed-methods approach combining focus groups and two social surveys, this research identifies the primary concerns of the general public regarding subsidy reforms. The results reveal that individuals' resistance to subsidy reform is rooted in uncertainty about the government's motivations for the gasoline subsidy reform and the way in which benefits would be distributed. Notably, the central obstacle to successful reform is the government's dominant role in setting prices and redistributing resources, leading to a price shock. To address this challenge, this study proposes a policy recommendation: establishing an exchange market with a floating price for gasoline, while allocating a tradable quota to diminish the government's central role in the reform process. By democratizing the reform process and redistributing benefits, this approach aims to increase public acceptance and support for gasoline subsidy reforms in Iran.
Keywords
Gasoline price
fuel riots
energy subsidy
trust in the government
Exchangeable quota of gasoline
References
Borenstein, Severin. “The redistributional impact of nonlinear electricity pricing.” American Economic Journal: Economic Policy 4.3 (2012): 56-90.
Borenstein, Severin, A. Colin Cameron, and Richard Gilbert. “Do gasoline prices respond asymmetrically to crude oil price changes?” The Quarterly journal of economics 112.1 (1997): 305-339.
Drabo, Alassane, et al. “Social Unrests and Fuel Prices: The Role of Macroeconomic, Social and Institutional Factors.” (2023), International Monetary Fund.
Dube, Oeindrila, and Juan F. Vargas. “Commodity price shocks and civil conflict: Evidence from Colombia.” Review of Economic studies 80.4 (2013): 1384-1421.
Hamilton, James D. “What is an oil shock?” Journal of econometrics 113.2 (2003): 363-398.
Ishak, Phoebe W., and Mohammad Reza Farzanegan. “Oil price shocks, protest, and the shadow economy: Is there a mitigation effect?” Economics & Politics 34.2 (2022): 298-321.
Kpodar, Kangni, and Chadi Abdallah. “Dynamic fuel price pass-through: Evidence from a new global retail fuel price database.” Energy Economics 66 (2017): 303-312
Le Billon, Philippe. “Fuelling war: Natural resources and armed conflicts.” Routledge, (2013).
McCulloch, Neil, Davide Natalini, Naomi Hossain, and Patricia Justino. “An exploration of the association between fuel subsidies and fuel riots.” World Development 157 (2022): 105935.
Natalini, Davide, Giangiacomo Bravo, and Edward Newman. “Fuel riots: Definition, evidence and policy implications for a new type of energy-related conflict.” Energy Policy 147 (2020): 111885.
Salehi-Isfahani, Djavad, and Mohammad H. Mostafavi-Dehzooei. “Cash transfers and labor supply: Evidence from a large-scale program in Iran.” Journal of Development Economics 135 (2018): 349-367.
Vadlamannati, Krishna Chaitanya, and Indra De Soysa. “Oil price volatility and political unrest: Prudence and protest in producer and consumer societies, 1980–2013.” Energy Policy 145 (2020): 111719.
Vieites, Yan, et al. “Effectively communicating the removal of fossil energy subsidies: Evidence from Latin America.” Global Environmental Change 81 (2023): 102690.
von Uexkull, Nina, Espen Geelmuyden Rød, and Isak Svensson. “Fueling protest? Climate change mitigation, fuel prices and protest onset.” World Development 177 (2024): 106536.
Quarterly Journal of Governance Knowledge
Volume 2, Issue 2
Spring 2024
Pages 2-13