Equity,externalities and energy subsidies The case of kerosine in Indonesia

This paper examines two arguments used to justify the subsidy provided kerosine, the primary commercial fuel of Indonesian households. One argument holds that the subsidy reduces deforestation externalities resulting from wood gathering. Econometric analysis of a large cross-section of households finds that firewood/kerosene substitution is very limited in Java, where the deforestation problem is most severe, so that kerosene subsidy is not an effective means of alleviating the problem. The second argument holds that social equity requires the subsidization of ‘basic needs’ such as kerosene. It is found that the kerosene subsidy disproportionately benefits urban and wealthier households.