KEY FINDINGS: Fossil Fuels: At What Cost? Government support for upstream oil activities in three Canadian provinces
Fossil Fuels: At What Cost?
Key Findings
· The current subsidies have a slight positive impact on economic activity. The largest impacts are found in Alberta, where the size of the total economy (i.e. GDP) is about 0.16 per cent larger in 2020 because of the subsidies. This in effect increases the annual GDP growth rate in 2020 from about 1.64 per cent to 1.8 per cent. This has a marginal effect on the overall size of the Alberta economy, which is projected to be about 27 per cent larger in 2020 than it is today.
| Federal/National | Alberta | Saskatchewan | Newfoundland & Labrador |
GDP (region) | 0.0% | 0.16% | 0.14% | 0.10% |
· Subsidies to the oil sector are increasing the level of production. The impact of subsidies on the marginal producer of oil is important. With subsidies in place, oil production nationally is projected to be in the order of 5 per cent larger in 2020, with a range of 0.3 per cent increase in Newfoundland & Labrador to a high of 6 per cent in Alberta. In 2020, the sector is projected to be about twice as large as it was in 2005, with or without subsidies, which implies that subsidies influence growth in the sector but are not a major determinant.
| Federal/National | Alberta | Saskatchewan | Newfoundland & Labrador |
GDP Oil Producers | 4.8% | 6.0% | 1.2% | 0.3% |
· Net Exports are fuelled by subsidies. Subsidies are contributing to oil exports, which in turn generate foreign exchange. Our results indicate that net exports in oil (or the trade surplus) increase about 14 per cent nationally with subsidies in place.
| Federal/National | Alberta | Saskatchewan | Newfoundland & Labrador |
Net Oil Exports (trade surplus) | 13.6% | 9.9% | 1.6% | -1.0% |
· The employment benefit of the subsidies is questionable. While the economy does expand with the oil subsidies in place, most of this happens in the capital-intensive oil sector. The impacts on total employment are therefore negligible.
| Federal/National | Alberta | Saskatchewan | Newfoundland & Labrador |
Employment | 0.0% | -0.4% | -0.3% | 0.0% |
· Government balances are lower even with higher corporate taxes and royalty payments. While the increased economic activity due to the subsidies does increase corporate taxes and royalties paid, labour taxes are likely lower due to the spending in the capital-intensive oil sector. More significantly, major subsidy outlays are relatively large. Government balances are therefore worse off with the subsidies: the federal government is lower by 1 per cent, Alberta by 5 per cent, and Saskatchewan by 4 per cent. A small increase is observed in the Newfoundland & Labrador budget, where the federal subsidy infusion creates more activity and revenue while not being offset by provincial subsidies paid.
| Federal/National | Alberta | Saskatchewan | Newfoundland & Labrador |
Government Budget | -0.9% | -4.8% | -3.8% | 0.2% |
· Subsidies drive production and hence more emissions. Nationally, emissions are about 2 per cent higher in 2020 with the subsidies. In Alberta, the likely increase in emissions attributable to the subsidies is large, with about 5 per cent more provincial emissions than if the subsidies were removed.
| Federal/National | Alberta | Saskatchewan | Newfoundland & Labrador |
GHG Emissions | 2.1% | 4.6% | 0.9% | 0.04% |
· Non-conventional production is experiencing the greatest benefit from the subsidies, followed by new drilling. With targeted programs for the oil sands, as well as a large share of total production, the oil sands are disproportionately benefiting. Our assessment indicates that the subsidies are adding 6 to 7 per cent more production to the sector and about 12 per cent more emissions. Most of the targeted programs are for more exploration activity and drilling in the provinces.
With oil production forecast to more than double between now and 2020, with or without the subsidies in place, the share of subsidy relative to overall government expenditures could grow. Scaling up current subsidies to future production indicate subsidies more than double as a share of government expenditures.
Media contacts
In Canada: In Switzerland:
Nona Pelletier Damon Vis-Dunbar
IISD Media and Communications Officer GSI Communications and Network Coordinator
Phone +1 204 958-7740 Phone: +41 22 917-8848
Cell: +1 204 962-1303 Cell: +41 78 818-0501
E-mail: npelletier@iisd.ca E-mail: dvis-dunbar@iisd.org
About IISD
The International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) is an award-winning independent think tank working to accelerate solutions for a stable climate, sustainable resource management, and fair economies. Our work inspires better decisions and sparks meaningful action to help people and the planet thrive. We shine a light on what can be achieved when governments, businesses, non-profits, and communities come together. IISD’s staff of more than 250 experts come from across the globe and from many disciplines. With offices in Winnipeg, Geneva, Ottawa, and Toronto, our work affects lives in nearly 100 countries.
You might also be interested in
This Is What Young People Have to Say About INC-5
The treaty must address the entire life cycle of plastics, youth tell INC-5 negotiators. We couldn’t agree more.
COP 29 Outcome Moves Needle on Finance
In the last hours of negotiations, concerted pressure from the most vulnerable developing countries resulted in an improved outcome on the finance target, with a decision to set a goal of at least USD 300 billion per year by 2035 for developing countries to advance their climate action.
Stabilization Clauses: The hidden provisions that can hinder tax and investment policy reform
Stabilization clauses should no longer automatically be included in contracts between states and investors. If they are, they should, at a minimum, build on the latest international standards on stabilization to avoid being a barrier to sustainable development.
Why Trade Matters in the Plastic–Pollution Treaty Negotiations
The global push to end plastic pollution by 2040 highlights the critical intersection of trade and environmental action, with upcoming INC-5 negotiations focusing on reducing plastic production, consumption, and waste within a fair and effective international framework.