MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409231224 · doi:10.5547/01956574.45.si1.iabi

Strategic Commodities' Price Risk and Financial Contagion in Oil and Gas Exporting Countries

2024· article· en· W4409231224 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ilyes Abid, Khaled Guesmi, Christian Urom, Saad Alshammari, Leila Dagher

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Energy Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsOil priceFinancial contagionFossil fuelMonetary economicsFinancial crisisFinancial economicsInternational economicsMacroeconomicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the occurrence of stock market contagion effects stemming from strategic commodities and the United States (U.S.) equity markets to major oil and gas exporting nations amid the COVID-19 and Russian-Ukraine crises. Employing a multi-factor asset pricing model and risks spillover technique, we scrutinize the sensitivities of market returns to these risk factors and the dynamics of shocks transmission among market sensitivities over time. Our findings reveal that these equity markets generally demonstrate positive and variable sensitivities to the three factors, with Canada, UAE, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia experiencing significant periods of negative response to the gas price factor. Notably, the Russian market exhibited the highest responsiveness to the U.S. factor at the outbreak of the Russian-Ukraine war, whereas the Russian market displays the greatest sensitivity to both oil and gas price risks. The degree of shocks propagation among market sensitivities is about 75.8% and is mainly driver by sensitivities to the U.S. market factor in the energy market, followed by the sensitivity of oil prices to the gas market. Policymakers in these nations should be cautious of potential contagion from the US market and these critical commodities, particularly oil, to mitigate any adverse impacts on their economies.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.234
Threshold uncertainty score0.320

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.188 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Energy JournalSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207