Oil price volatility, financial institutions and economic growth

Abstract

Theory attributes finance with the ability to both promote growth and reduce output volatility. But evidence is mixed in both regards, partly due to endogeneity effects. For example, financial institutions themselves might be a source of volatility, as the events of 2008 suggest. We address this endogeneity issue by using oil price volatility as a source of exogenous volatility, to study the effect of finance. To do this, we use two empirical methodologies. First, we develop a quasi-natural experiment by studying the dramatic decline of oil prices in 2014 and beyond, using a synthetic control methodology. Our hypothesis is that the ability of oil-rich countries to mitigate the effects of this decline rested on the quality of their financial institutions. We focus on 11 oil-rich countries between 1980 and 2014 that had "poor" measures of financial development (treatment group) out of 20 such countries and synthetically create counterfactuals from the remaining (control) group with "superior" financial development. We subject both to the oil price shock of 2014. We find evidence that better financial institutions do indeed reduce output volatility and mitigate its negative effect on growth in the year that showed a sustained decline of the oil price. To address any remaining potential endogeneity between oil prices and finance, we further examine our findings by using a Panel CS-ARDL approach with 30 oil producing countries in our sample (and data over the period 1980-2016), illustrating that the effect of oil price volatility on growth is mitigated with better financial institutions. Our results make a strong case for the support of the positive role of financial development in growth and development.

Asymmetric oil prices and trade imbalances: Does the source of the oil shock matter?

“…This distinction is important because insights from the asymmetric OPM literature can lead us to assume that supply and demand shocks which reduce the oil price would have lower impacts than corresponding shocks that increase it. This is not necessarily the case; indeed, oil price decreases resulting from supply expansions can have large effects on the global economy, even if oil price increases resulting from supply disruptions have muted effects (see for instance Fattouh and Sen 2015;Mohaddes and Raissi, 2019;Jarrett et al, 2019). Recent studies have found asymmetric effects of oil supply and demand shocks on investor sentiment (He and Zhou, 2018) and on stock returns (Zhu et.…”

Bonferroni Probabilistic Ordered Weighted Averaging Operators Applied to Agricultural Commodities’ Price Analysis

“…It is derived from the fact that at the beginning of planting, the price is one figure, and when the harvest is made, it becomes a very different figure. In this sense, it is necessary to use different techniques and models that can be adapted to the volatility of the prices and uncertainty of the market [63,64]-such tools can be the aggregation operators, and this field has been expanded through different techniques and applications [18].…”

The asymmetric and multi-scale volatility correlation between global oil price and economic policy uncertainty of China

“…For example, Peter Ferderer ( 1996 ) provides empirical support for the proposition that oil price shocks may have an adverse impact on the macroeconomy because of both oil price level and oil price volatility. Jarrett et al ( 2019 ) find that oil price volatility can adversely affect the growth and volatility of economy inspired by the dramatic decline of oil prices in 2014. van Eyden et al ( 2019 ) verify the significant negative effect that oil price volatility has on the economic growth of 17 OECD countries, especially for the oil-producing countries such as Canada and Norway. Maheu et al ( 2020 ) conclude that there exists a strong volatility link between the oil price and real economic growth.…”