different approaches and their usefulness. Efforts by various organizations to collect data and make them publicly available on a regular basis have facilitated subsidy measurement as well as benchmarking of pricing policies with one’s peers. At the same time, the pursuit of different approaches has sown confusion among non-specialists.

As Jones and Steenblik (2010) point out, the absence of adoption of international standards for subsidy measurement in part reflects the diverse backgrounds and aims of subsidy-accounting practitioners. Working toward common standards requires a dialogue to reconcile the differences among the various methods used to quantify subsidies. Consensus building in conceptual areas also forces examination of an issue from various angles and can help deepen understanding.

There may be useful lessons from the evolution of corporate financial reporting—accounting is among the most advanced professions in setting international standards. Prompted by globalization, international accounting and auditing standards are now used extensively, including many developing countries. Financial reporting is critical to the efficient functioning of capital markets, just as accurate subsidy tracking is critical to the efficient functioning of the government and the energy market and, depending on the subsidy delivery mechanism, potentially to other sectors in the economy. Both financial and subsidy reporting need to address complex measurement challenges in a transparent and standardized way, and to integrate information from a wide variety of actors operating under many different sets of regulatory and statutory systems. The International Federation of Accountants and the International Accounting Standards Board develop international accounting standards for the public sector and private sector, respectively. Similarly, the International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions develops and issues international auditing standards for the public sector and the International Federation of Accountants does the same for the private sector. Compliance with international financing reporting requirements is mandatory for some or all companies in a number of developing countries (Cattaneo et al. 2010, 274–275). These organizations have resolved complex issues gradually over time. Some issues are similar to those facing subsidy accounting, such as long-term contingent liabilities, valuing credit guarantees, and reporting of tax benefits.

Learning from other countries that are farther down the road on subsidy tracking helps avoid duplication of efforts and frees up resources to make more rapid progress. Global efforts can also contribute by making data sources and calculations publicly available.

- **Disclosure in user-friendly format** . The OECD makes all values available in spreadsheets for its member countries, and its country reports document all sources. While intellectual property rights may prevent disclosing the details of calculations containing proprietary data, spelling out all data sources, assumptions, and calculation methodologies would go a long way in enabling appropriate interpretation of the results as well as replication. The IMF’s public disclosure of the spreadsheet that computes costs of externalities is exemplary from the point of view of transparency and aiding the global research community.

- **Data sharing with regularity** . GIZ’s biennial survey of retail gasoline and diesel prices and its monthly newsletters on fuel pricing policy developments around the world are helpful not only because the information itself is useful but also because they are regularly issued and the price data collected are directly comparable across countries and across time. The ideal end goal is

40