Comparison of Energy Subsidy Payment Alternatives in terms of Health and Environmental Outcomes: Emphasizing Air Pollution via the AHP Method

Background. Energy is the most important prerequisite for the development and socioeconomic activities of any country. However, the payment of subsidies for energy and its excessive consumption in recent years have led to numerous environmental problems, such as air pollution, intensified greenhouse effects, and health damage. Therefore, this study aimed to compare alternatives for paying energy subsidies in Iran. Methods. This descriptive-applied study was designed using the AHP method and conducted with Expert Choice-11 software. In this study, three alternatives of "modifying the payment of energy subsidies (adjusted)", "removing the payment of energy subsidies", and "continued payment in the current form" were evaluated based on 12 health and environmental criteria. Results. Based on the results, the alternative "modifying the payment of energy subsidies (adjusted)" with a relative weight of 0.503 was selected as the best alternative for payment of energy subsidies in the country. The alternatives "removing the payment of energy subsidies" and "continuing payment in the current form" were ranked next with relative weights of 0.377 and 0.119, respectively. The overall consistency coefficient was ≤0.03, indicating the correctness of the decisions. Conclusion. Based on the findings, correcting the payment of energy subsidies allows for more efficient spending of financial resources on improving health and medical services, food security subsidies, developing education, public transportation, and renewable energy. Additionally, this alternative can help control the increasing trend of energy consumption and address the issue of energy imbalance in the country while improving health indicators and the environment, particularly air pollution.