Criticism of subsidy abuse is closely tied with freedom of speech. Rulers have been doling out taxpayer money to favoured benefici-aries, or wasting it on lavish lifestyles or grandiose projects, for millennia. People feel safe in questioning government expenditures only if they know they will not be put in jail, or worse, for doing so.
Domestic criticism of subsidies has traditionally come from four quarters: opposition political parties, liberal economists, non-beneficiary producers, and taxpayer organizations. Political parties and producers can be fickle in their opposition to subsidy abuse, however. By contrast, the resources and the organization of the beneficiaries of subsidies tends to grow over time. Short-term bursts of public outrage against particular subsidies are usually ineffectual; the offending programmes simply get renamed or cloaked in the latest policy fashion.
Fortunately, a new voice has been added to the chorus of subsidy sceptics: that of environmentalists. As awareness of the harm that subsidies can cause for the environment, and for sustainable development more generally, has increased, so have the number of non-governmental organizations who are taking an interest in subsidies.
Among the first to raise alarm bells was the World Resources Institute, over subsidized energy. Groups such as the Environ-mental Working Group, which has become a powerful force for the reform of agricultural subsidies in the United States, and the World Wildlife Fund, which has been highly effective in its efforts to prod governments into forging an agreement at the WTO that would sharply reduce global subsidies to fishing, have joined the fray. The following pages list some examples of current campaigns.
