Editing Subsidy (section)

===Implementation===
Perverse subsidies are not tackled as robustly as they should be. Principally, this is because they become "locked" into society, causing bureaucratic roadblocks and institutional inertia.<ref name="Myers 1996">{{cite journal|last=Myers|first=N.|title=Perverse Subsidies|journal=Sixth Ordinary Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity|year=1996|pages=268–278|url=http://www.cbd.int/doc/case-studies/inc/cs-inc-iucn-05-en.pdf|access-date=2013-09-08|archive-date=2012-05-12|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120512232032/https://www.cbd.int/doc/case-studies/inc/cs-inc-iucn-05-en.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="Myers 1998b">{{cite journal|last=Myers|first=N.|title=Consumption and sustainable development: the role of perverse subsidies|journal=Background Paper for the 1998 Human Development Report|year=1998|pages=1–31|url=http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr1998/papers/MYERS-Norman_Subsidies.pdf|access-date=2013-09-08|archive-date=2019-12-09|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191209172517/http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr1998/papers/MYERS-Norman_Subsidies.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref> When cuts are suggested many argue (most fervently by those "entitled", special interest groups and [[Lobbying|political lobbyists]]) that it will disrupt and harm the lives of people who receive them, distort domestic [[Competition (companies)|competitiveness]] curbing trade opportunities, and increase unemployment.<ref name="van beers and van den bergh 2009" /><ref name="Bellman et al 2012">{{cite journal|last=Bellmann|first=C.|author2=Hepburn, J.|author3=Sugathan, M.|author4=Monkelbaan, J.|title=Tackling Perverse Subsidies in Agriculture, Fisheries and Energy|journal=International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development: Information Note June 2012.|year=2012|url=http://ictsd.org/downloads/2012/06/tackling-perverse-subsidies-in-agriculture-fisheries-and-energy.pdf|access-date=2013-09-08|archive-date=2020-08-08|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200808030440/http://www.ictsd.org/downloads/2012/06/tackling-perverse-subsidies-in-agriculture-fisheries-and-energy.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref> Individual governments recognise this as a "[[prisoner's dilemma]]" – insofar as that even if they wanted to adopt subsidy reform, by acting unilaterally they fear only negative effects will ensue if others do not follow.<ref name="van beers and de moor 1998" /> Furthermore, cutting subsidies, however perverse they may be, is considered a vote-losing policy.<ref name="Myers 1996" />

Reform of perverse subsidies is at a propitious time. The current economic conditions mean governments are forced into fiscal constraints and are looking for ways to reduce activist roles in their economies.<ref name="Myers 1998b" /> There are two main reform paths: unilateral and multilateral. Unilateral agreements (one country) are less likely to be undertaken for the reasons outlined above, although New Zealand,<ref name="Myers and Kent 2001 box 3.2">{{cite book|last=Myers|first=N.|title=Perverse subsidies: how tax dollars can undercut the environment and the economy|year=2001|pages=[https://archive.org/details/perversesubsidie00myer/page/ box 3.2]|publisher=Island Press|location=Washington, DC|isbn=978-1-55963-835-7|author2=Kent, J.|url=https://archive.org/details/perversesubsidie00myer/page/}}</ref> Russia, Bangladesh and others represent successful examples.<ref name="Myers 1998a" /> Multilateral actions by several countries are more likely to succeed as this reduces competitiveness concerns, but are more complex to implement requiring greater international collaboration through a body such as the [[WTO]].<ref name="Robin et al 2003" /> Irrespective of the path, the aim of policymakers should be to: create alternative policies that target the same issue as the original subsidies but better; develop subsidy removal strategies allowing market-discipline to return; introduce "sunset" provisions that require remaining subsidies to be re-justified periodically; and make perverse subsidies more transparent to taxpayers to alleviate the "vote-loser" concern.<ref name="Myers 1998a" />