One of the important distinctions used by economists and lawyers interested in the trade or competition effects of subsidies is between specific and non-specific subsidies. Specific subsidies go to particular groups of beneficiaries, as opposed to the population as a whole. A subsidy that is available only to cotton farmers is specific. A subsidy to supply flu vaccine for anybody who needs one is considered (by trade lawyers) to be non-specific, because almost anybody can benefit from it. The notion of specificity provides a useful conceptual framework for considering whether a subsidy is likely to distort trade or competition. However, the distinction between a specific and general subsidy is not always easy to make.
Whether a subsidy is specific or general is less relevant to the question of whether a subsidy has adverse environmental effects. Some very general subsidies can have major environmental impacts. Roads and ports provide numerous economic benefits, but roads may also cut across and fragment wildlife habitat, and ports may damage estuaries or fishing grounds. Subsidies, to the extent they stimulate the construction and use of such physical infrastructure contribute to these damaging effects.
