Global impacts of oil price shocks: the trade effect
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Oil price shocks greatly impact the global economy, but the effects vary among countries. While higher oil prices benefit oil-exporting countries, they harm the economic performance of oil-importing nations, and vice versa for lower oil prices. However, economic relations, such as trade, can mitigate the impacts of oil price shocks on both groups. In this paper, the authors aim at estimating the effects of oil price shocks on the major net oil-exporting and net oil-importing countries while accounting for international trade. Design/methodology/approach The authors derive a reduced form of a macro model and set up a Panel VAR model to estimate the direct and indirect impacts of oil price shocks on economic growth. The sample includes data on macroeconomic variables from 30 oil-exporting and oil-importing countries that comprise more than 73 percent of the world's economy. The authors construct the spillover variables using bilateral trade matrix. To control for institutional and structural variations across the countries, they are divided into four groups of developed and developing oil-exporting and oil-importing countries. Findings The results reveal that all oil-exporting countries have significantly benefited from oil price shocks, although trade has dampened the effect. The positive growth effect has been more pronounced in oil-exporting developing countries. The impact of oil price shocks on oil-importing countries has been negative with a one-year delay, but not statistically significant, and trade has only had a small effect. The effect has been more substantial in oil-importing developing countries. Research limitations/implications One of the limitations of this study is the focus on trade as the main spillover channel. Given the data availability, other channels such as foreign investment and financial markets can also be included in future studies. Practical implications Removing trade restrictions would help both oil-exporting and oil-importing countries to mitigate the negative impacts of the oil price shocks. However, the asymmetric oil-macroeconomy relationship across oil-exporting and oil-importing countries puts oil-exporting countries in a more vulnerable position as they cannot rely on trade with oil-importing countries to reduce the negative impacts of lower oil prices on their growth. Therefore, it is crucial for oil-exporting countries to reassess their oil-dependent development plans and invest their oil revenues in non-oil sectors to diversity their economies and prepare for a future with reduced dependence on oil. Social implications The recent technological advances, structural changes, and increasing energy efficiency suggest that major oil-importing countries will become less dependent on oil in near future. As a result, oil-exporting countries will also need to undergo structural changes in order to sustain their income level. These significant changes will have important social implications, particularly in the labor market, during the transition, for which preparation will be necessary. Originality/value While the literature on the total impact of oil price shocks on either oil-exporting or oil-importing countries is rich, studies on their spillover impacts are limited. Recent research has shown that trade and migration can affect the impact of oil price shock on the economy in federated countries such as Canada. However, the trade effect on oil price shocks in the international level, where countries are subject to different regulations/restrictions and institutional variations, remains scarce. By considering the trade relationship between different groups of oil-exporting and oil-importing countries, the authors aim to contribute to the literature of the global impacts of oil price shocks on the world economy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it