世界产出和商品价格周期*

IF 0.9 Q3 ECONOMICS INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC JOURNAL Pub Date : 2023-10-05 DOI:10.1080/10168737.2023.2263844
William Ginn
{"title":"世界产出和商品价格周期*","authors":"William Ginn","doi":"10.1080/10168737.2023.2263844","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AbstractThis study investigates the cyclical patterns of energy, agriculture, and metals and minerals (MetMin) commodity prices. We identify three super cycles since 1960, and a potential fourth arising from the Ukraine crisis and global COVID-19 pandemic. Employing a Structural Vector Autoregression (SVAR) approach, we establish an empirical relationship between output, CPI, and commodity prices. Our analysis reveals that an output shock leads to a general increase in all commodity prices, where the highest impact is on energy inflation. Moreover, we examine the heterogeneous effects of commodity inflation on overall inflation, uncovering ‘second round' effects across all commodities. Notably, agriculture inflation has the most significant impact on aggregate inflation, potentially explaining the destabilizing nature of food inflation in many countries. Our findings enhance understanding of these dynamics, offering important insights for policymakers and informing the public.Highlights We analyze the cyclical patterns of energy, agriculture and MetMin commodity prices.Real output, CPI and commodities exhibit the same cyclical patterns.A shock to output increases all commodities, where the highest response is energy inflation.We find ‘second-round' effects, where agriculture prices have the highest impact on inflation.KEYWORDS: Super cyclesGlobal Commodity PricesGlobal Macroeconometric ModelingJEL Classifications: Q43O13L61E23 Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 We convert nominal global GDP (FRED mnemonic NYGDPMKTPCDWLD), which is denominated in U.S. Dollars (FRED mnemonic CPALTT01USA661S), to real GDP by dividing the former with the U.S. CPI.2 The data is publicly available https://www.worldbank.org/en/research/commodity-markets. The agricultural index is a weighted average of prices of food (e.g., cereals, oils), beverages (e.g., coffee, cocoa and tea), agricultural raw materials (e.g., timber, cotton), and metals and minerals (e.g., aluminum, copper, iron ore, lead, nickel, steel, tin, zinc). The oil price is based on the average of the Brent, Dubai and WTI crude oil price.3 The cycle trend is consistent with Christiano and Fitzgerald (Citation2003) who use the asymmetric CF band pass filter of up to 8 years for output.4 The 25 economies include: Australia (‘AUS’), Austria (‘AUT’), Belgium (‘Belgium’), Canada (‘CAN’), Switzerland (‘CHE’), Germany (‘DEU’), Spain (‘ESP’), Finland (‘FIN’), France (‘FRA’), United Kingdom (‘GBR’), Greece (‘GRC’), India (‘IND’), Iceland (‘ISL’), Italy (‘ITA’), Japan (‘JPN’), South Korea (‘KOR’), Luxembourg (‘LUX’), Netherlands (‘NLD’), Norway (‘NOR’), New Zealand (‘NZL’), Portugal (‘PRT’), Sweden (‘SWE’), Turkey (‘TUR’), United States (‘USA’) and South Africa (‘ZAF’).5 Our results are similar to Ratti and Vespignani (Citation2016), who show that the first principal component captures 89.6% of the variation for prices relating to the G5 countries.6 While the focus is on World, we take the USA as a secondary benchmark.7 Filtering methods have been used in business cycle research to isolate cyclical component of a time series. While the Hodrick-Prescott (HP) filter (Hodrick and Prescott, Citation1997) is arguably the most commonly used filtering technique, the HP filter is semi-parametric and has a drawback that the researcher needs to choose an appropriate smoothness parameter (Baxter & King, Citation1999). The Baxter-King filter facilitates an alternative approach to extracting cyclical components based on a symmetric approximation (i.e., no phase shifts, which can result in trimming a series). The Christiano-Fitzgerald filter extends the Baxter-King filter to include an asymmetric band pass filter can utilize the full sample period.8 As Cuddington and Jerrett (Citation2008) mention, the trend is not constant and can evolve slowly over time.9 Note that a minimum of 2 is selected considering that is the minimum value that can be used in to estimate a BP filter.10 The first principal component of the commodity price non-trend and super cycle components account for 95.3% and 89.4%, respectively (Scree plots are provided in Figure A2 and Figure A3 in the Appendix). The contemporaneous correlation between the non-trend and super cycle components for first principal component of energy, agriculture and MetMin commodity prices and output is 95.2% and 97.4%, respectively.11 In the case of expected degrees of freedom equal to 1 would indicate that the estimated penalized smooth term would be consistent with a simple linear relationship.12 The complete IRFs are provided in the Appendix via Figures A4–A8, relating to models that include the energy, non-energy, agriculture, metals and minerals, and oil price index, respectively. We provide the variance decomposition for all five models in the Appendix via Figure A13. We find that output growth and aggregate inflation have a considerable influence on energy and the oil inflation, jointly accounting for circa 30% of the variance.13 The impact on oil inflation is consistent.14 Defined as real commodity prices to a change in real global economic growth.15 Buyuksahin et al. (Citation2016) estimate the price elasticity of global output growth for oil, metals and agriculture to be 14.0, 9.2 and 7.2 percentage points, respectively.16 We extend the SVAR to a time-varying parameter VAR (TVP-VAR). Consistent with the SVAR model, one lag was chosen for the TVP-VAR estimation for all three models. The IRFs between the SVAR and TVP-VAR are consistent, see Figure A11 in the Appendix.17 The standard deviation over the entire sample is 0.254, 0.096 and 0.152 for energy, agriculture and MetMin, respectively. The standard deviation since 1990 is 0.245, 0.071 and 0.165 for energy, agriculture and MetMin, respectively.18 According to Buyuksahin et al. (Citation2016), agricultural production reacts much more quickly, usually within the next growing season, considering investment costs are generally higher for oil and metal projects which can have long gestation periods (e.g., Radetzki, Citation2006; Cuddington & Jerrett, Citation2008).19 According to Amaglobeli et al. (Citation2022), ‘[a] demand response can be sizable for energy, but much less so for food because people need to eat about the same amount.’20 Ginn & Pourroy, Citation2019 and Ginn & Pourroy, Citation2022 show an endogenous fiscal policy response in regards to sizable producer and consumer food price subsidies designed to cushion the effects of rising prices, which may be a policy-induced price smoothing mechanism that is different to, yet in parallel with, the classic Calvo price stickiness approach.21 Wiggins et al. (Citation2010) notes that once food prices started to increase in 2007, there were amplifying reactions that accelerated the price increases such as export restrictions, country-imposed increase in import taxes on food goods.22 The results remain the same if one compares the IRFs for food inflation and oil inflation, see Figure A6.23 Based on IEA data, the energy share is 3.2% for the USA. According to the USDA, the food share is 10.3% in the USA for 2021.24 According to Pourroy et al. (Citation2016), changes in food prices can induce significant variations in inflation, where the expenditure share on food is typically higher in lower income economies. Pourroy et al. (Citation2016) show that the expenditure share on food in low-income, middle-income and high-income economies is 48%, 31% 20%, respectively. This relationship is known as Engel’s law.25 See https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/brainard20191108a.htm.Additional informationNotes on contributorsWilliam GinnWilliam Ginn is a Sr Economist/Data Scientist at Labcorp. He is originally from the USA and has spent numerous years abroad in Europe, where he is currently residing in Germany. Ginn completed a B.S. in Economics at East Carolina University; a M.A. in Economics at Duke University; an MBA at Jesus College at University of Oxford; and a doctorate in Economics at University of Erlangen-Nuremberg.","PeriodicalId":35933,"journal":{"name":"INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC JOURNAL","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"World Output and Commodity Price Cycles*\",\"authors\":\"William Ginn\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10168737.2023.2263844\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"AbstractThis study investigates the cyclical patterns of energy, agriculture, and metals and minerals (MetMin) commodity prices. We identify three super cycles since 1960, and a potential fourth arising from the Ukraine crisis and global COVID-19 pandemic. Employing a Structural Vector Autoregression (SVAR) approach, we establish an empirical relationship between output, CPI, and commodity prices. Our analysis reveals that an output shock leads to a general increase in all commodity prices, where the highest impact is on energy inflation. Moreover, we examine the heterogeneous effects of commodity inflation on overall inflation, uncovering ‘second round' effects across all commodities. Notably, agriculture inflation has the most significant impact on aggregate inflation, potentially explaining the destabilizing nature of food inflation in many countries. Our findings enhance understanding of these dynamics, offering important insights for policymakers and informing the public.Highlights We analyze the cyclical patterns of energy, agriculture and MetMin commodity prices.Real output, CPI and commodities exhibit the same cyclical patterns.A shock to output increases all commodities, where the highest response is energy inflation.We find ‘second-round' effects, where agriculture prices have the highest impact on inflation.KEYWORDS: Super cyclesGlobal Commodity PricesGlobal Macroeconometric ModelingJEL Classifications: Q43O13L61E23 Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 We convert nominal global GDP (FRED mnemonic NYGDPMKTPCDWLD), which is denominated in U.S. Dollars (FRED mnemonic CPALTT01USA661S), to real GDP by dividing the former with the U.S. CPI.2 The data is publicly available https://www.worldbank.org/en/research/commodity-markets. The agricultural index is a weighted average of prices of food (e.g., cereals, oils), beverages (e.g., coffee, cocoa and tea), agricultural raw materials (e.g., timber, cotton), and metals and minerals (e.g., aluminum, copper, iron ore, lead, nickel, steel, tin, zinc). The oil price is based on the average of the Brent, Dubai and WTI crude oil price.3 The cycle trend is consistent with Christiano and Fitzgerald (Citation2003) who use the asymmetric CF band pass filter of up to 8 years for output.4 The 25 economies include: Australia (‘AUS’), Austria (‘AUT’), Belgium (‘Belgium’), Canada (‘CAN’), Switzerland (‘CHE’), Germany (‘DEU’), Spain (‘ESP’), Finland (‘FIN’), France (‘FRA’), United Kingdom (‘GBR’), Greece (‘GRC’), India (‘IND’), Iceland (‘ISL’), Italy (‘ITA’), Japan (‘JPN’), South Korea (‘KOR’), Luxembourg (‘LUX’), Netherlands (‘NLD’), Norway (‘NOR’), New Zealand (‘NZL’), Portugal (‘PRT’), Sweden (‘SWE’), Turkey (‘TUR’), United States (‘USA’) and South Africa (‘ZAF’).5 Our results are similar to Ratti and Vespignani (Citation2016), who show that the first principal component captures 89.6% of the variation for prices relating to the G5 countries.6 While the focus is on World, we take the USA as a secondary benchmark.7 Filtering methods have been used in business cycle research to isolate cyclical component of a time series. While the Hodrick-Prescott (HP) filter (Hodrick and Prescott, Citation1997) is arguably the most commonly used filtering technique, the HP filter is semi-parametric and has a drawback that the researcher needs to choose an appropriate smoothness parameter (Baxter & King, Citation1999). The Baxter-King filter facilitates an alternative approach to extracting cyclical components based on a symmetric approximation (i.e., no phase shifts, which can result in trimming a series). The Christiano-Fitzgerald filter extends the Baxter-King filter to include an asymmetric band pass filter can utilize the full sample period.8 As Cuddington and Jerrett (Citation2008) mention, the trend is not constant and can evolve slowly over time.9 Note that a minimum of 2 is selected considering that is the minimum value that can be used in to estimate a BP filter.10 The first principal component of the commodity price non-trend and super cycle components account for 95.3% and 89.4%, respectively (Scree plots are provided in Figure A2 and Figure A3 in the Appendix). The contemporaneous correlation between the non-trend and super cycle components for first principal component of energy, agriculture and MetMin commodity prices and output is 95.2% and 97.4%, respectively.11 In the case of expected degrees of freedom equal to 1 would indicate that the estimated penalized smooth term would be consistent with a simple linear relationship.12 The complete IRFs are provided in the Appendix via Figures A4–A8, relating to models that include the energy, non-energy, agriculture, metals and minerals, and oil price index, respectively. We provide the variance decomposition for all five models in the Appendix via Figure A13. We find that output growth and aggregate inflation have a considerable influence on energy and the oil inflation, jointly accounting for circa 30% of the variance.13 The impact on oil inflation is consistent.14 Defined as real commodity prices to a change in real global economic growth.15 Buyuksahin et al. (Citation2016) estimate the price elasticity of global output growth for oil, metals and agriculture to be 14.0, 9.2 and 7.2 percentage points, respectively.16 We extend the SVAR to a time-varying parameter VAR (TVP-VAR). Consistent with the SVAR model, one lag was chosen for the TVP-VAR estimation for all three models. The IRFs between the SVAR and TVP-VAR are consistent, see Figure A11 in the Appendix.17 The standard deviation over the entire sample is 0.254, 0.096 and 0.152 for energy, agriculture and MetMin, respectively. The standard deviation since 1990 is 0.245, 0.071 and 0.165 for energy, agriculture and MetMin, respectively.18 According to Buyuksahin et al. (Citation2016), agricultural production reacts much more quickly, usually within the next growing season, considering investment costs are generally higher for oil and metal projects which can have long gestation periods (e.g., Radetzki, Citation2006; Cuddington & Jerrett, Citation2008).19 According to Amaglobeli et al. (Citation2022), ‘[a] demand response can be sizable for energy, but much less so for food because people need to eat about the same amount.’20 Ginn & Pourroy, Citation2019 and Ginn & Pourroy, Citation2022 show an endogenous fiscal policy response in regards to sizable producer and consumer food price subsidies designed to cushion the effects of rising prices, which may be a policy-induced price smoothing mechanism that is different to, yet in parallel with, the classic Calvo price stickiness approach.21 Wiggins et al. (Citation2010) notes that once food prices started to increase in 2007, there were amplifying reactions that accelerated the price increases such as export restrictions, country-imposed increase in import taxes on food goods.22 The results remain the same if one compares the IRFs for food inflation and oil inflation, see Figure A6.23 Based on IEA data, the energy share is 3.2% for the USA. According to the USDA, the food share is 10.3% in the USA for 2021.24 According to Pourroy et al. (Citation2016), changes in food prices can induce significant variations in inflation, where the expenditure share on food is typically higher in lower income economies. Pourroy et al. (Citation2016) show that the expenditure share on food in low-income, middle-income and high-income economies is 48%, 31% 20%, respectively. This relationship is known as Engel’s law.25 See https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/brainard20191108a.htm.Additional informationNotes on contributorsWilliam GinnWilliam Ginn is a Sr Economist/Data Scientist at Labcorp. He is originally from the USA and has spent numerous years abroad in Europe, where he is currently residing in Germany. Ginn completed a B.S. in Economics at East Carolina University; a M.A. in Economics at Duke University; an MBA at Jesus College at University of Oxford; and a doctorate in Economics at University of Erlangen-Nuremberg.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35933,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC JOURNAL\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC JOURNAL\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10168737.2023.2263844\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC JOURNAL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10168737.2023.2263844","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们发现产出增长和总通货膨胀对能源和石油通货膨胀有相当大的影响,共同占方差的30%左右对石油通货膨胀的影响是持续的定义为实际商品价格对全球实际经济增长的变化Buyuksahin等人(Citation2016)估计,全球石油、金属和农业产出增长的价格弹性分别为14.0、9.2和7.2个百分点我们将SVAR扩展为时变参数VAR (TVP-VAR)。与SVAR模型一致,选择一个滞后对所有三个模型进行tpv - var估计。SVAR和TVP-VAR之间的irf是一致的,见附录17中的图A11。能源、农业和MetMin在整个样本上的标准差分别为0.254、0.096和0.152。能源、农业和MetMin自1990年以来的标准差分别为0.245、0.071和0.165Buyuksahin等人(Citation2016)认为,农业生产的反应要快得多,通常在下一个生长季节,考虑到石油和金属项目的投资成本通常更高,这些项目可能有很长的酝酝期(例如,Radetzki, Citation2006;Cuddington & Jerrett, Citation2008).19根据Amaglobeli等人(Citation2022)的说法,“能源的需求反应可能相当大,但食物的需求反应要小得多,因为人们需要吃同样多的食物。”[20] Ginn & Pourroy, Citation2019和Ginn & Pourroy, Citation2022显示,在旨在缓冲价格上涨影响的大规模生产者和消费者食品价格补贴方面,存在一种内生的财政政策反应,这可能是一种政策诱导的价格平滑机制,与经典的卡尔沃价格粘性方法不同,但又相似Wiggins等人(Citation2010)指出,2007年食品价格一旦开始上涨,就会出现放大反应,加速价格上涨,如出口限制,国家强加的食品进口税增加如果比较食品通胀和石油通胀的irf,结果仍然是一样的(见图A6.23)。根据IEA的数据,美国的能源份额为3.2%。根据美国农业部的数据,到2021.24年,美国的食品支出占比为10.3%。根据Pourroy等人(Citation2016)的数据,食品价格的变化会导致通货膨胀的显著变化,而在低收入经济体,食品支出占比通常更高。Pourroy等人(Citation2016)表明,低收入、中等收入和高收入经济体的食品支出份额分别为48%、31%和20%。这种关系被称为恩格尔定律参见https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/brainard20191108a.htm.Additional信息投稿者说明william Ginn william Ginn是Labcorp的高级经济学家/数据科学家。他来自美国,在欧洲生活了多年,目前居住在德国。他在东卡罗莱纳大学(East Carolina University)获得经济学学士学位;杜克大学经济学硕士学位;牛津大学耶稣学院MBA学位;并在埃尔兰根-纽伦堡大学获得经济学博士学位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
World Output and Commodity Price Cycles*
AbstractThis study investigates the cyclical patterns of energy, agriculture, and metals and minerals (MetMin) commodity prices. We identify three super cycles since 1960, and a potential fourth arising from the Ukraine crisis and global COVID-19 pandemic. Employing a Structural Vector Autoregression (SVAR) approach, we establish an empirical relationship between output, CPI, and commodity prices. Our analysis reveals that an output shock leads to a general increase in all commodity prices, where the highest impact is on energy inflation. Moreover, we examine the heterogeneous effects of commodity inflation on overall inflation, uncovering ‘second round' effects across all commodities. Notably, agriculture inflation has the most significant impact on aggregate inflation, potentially explaining the destabilizing nature of food inflation in many countries. Our findings enhance understanding of these dynamics, offering important insights for policymakers and informing the public.Highlights We analyze the cyclical patterns of energy, agriculture and MetMin commodity prices.Real output, CPI and commodities exhibit the same cyclical patterns.A shock to output increases all commodities, where the highest response is energy inflation.We find ‘second-round' effects, where agriculture prices have the highest impact on inflation.KEYWORDS: Super cyclesGlobal Commodity PricesGlobal Macroeconometric ModelingJEL Classifications: Q43O13L61E23 Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 We convert nominal global GDP (FRED mnemonic NYGDPMKTPCDWLD), which is denominated in U.S. Dollars (FRED mnemonic CPALTT01USA661S), to real GDP by dividing the former with the U.S. CPI.2 The data is publicly available https://www.worldbank.org/en/research/commodity-markets. The agricultural index is a weighted average of prices of food (e.g., cereals, oils), beverages (e.g., coffee, cocoa and tea), agricultural raw materials (e.g., timber, cotton), and metals and minerals (e.g., aluminum, copper, iron ore, lead, nickel, steel, tin, zinc). The oil price is based on the average of the Brent, Dubai and WTI crude oil price.3 The cycle trend is consistent with Christiano and Fitzgerald (Citation2003) who use the asymmetric CF band pass filter of up to 8 years for output.4 The 25 economies include: Australia (‘AUS’), Austria (‘AUT’), Belgium (‘Belgium’), Canada (‘CAN’), Switzerland (‘CHE’), Germany (‘DEU’), Spain (‘ESP’), Finland (‘FIN’), France (‘FRA’), United Kingdom (‘GBR’), Greece (‘GRC’), India (‘IND’), Iceland (‘ISL’), Italy (‘ITA’), Japan (‘JPN’), South Korea (‘KOR’), Luxembourg (‘LUX’), Netherlands (‘NLD’), Norway (‘NOR’), New Zealand (‘NZL’), Portugal (‘PRT’), Sweden (‘SWE’), Turkey (‘TUR’), United States (‘USA’) and South Africa (‘ZAF’).5 Our results are similar to Ratti and Vespignani (Citation2016), who show that the first principal component captures 89.6% of the variation for prices relating to the G5 countries.6 While the focus is on World, we take the USA as a secondary benchmark.7 Filtering methods have been used in business cycle research to isolate cyclical component of a time series. While the Hodrick-Prescott (HP) filter (Hodrick and Prescott, Citation1997) is arguably the most commonly used filtering technique, the HP filter is semi-parametric and has a drawback that the researcher needs to choose an appropriate smoothness parameter (Baxter & King, Citation1999). The Baxter-King filter facilitates an alternative approach to extracting cyclical components based on a symmetric approximation (i.e., no phase shifts, which can result in trimming a series). The Christiano-Fitzgerald filter extends the Baxter-King filter to include an asymmetric band pass filter can utilize the full sample period.8 As Cuddington and Jerrett (Citation2008) mention, the trend is not constant and can evolve slowly over time.9 Note that a minimum of 2 is selected considering that is the minimum value that can be used in to estimate a BP filter.10 The first principal component of the commodity price non-trend and super cycle components account for 95.3% and 89.4%, respectively (Scree plots are provided in Figure A2 and Figure A3 in the Appendix). The contemporaneous correlation between the non-trend and super cycle components for first principal component of energy, agriculture and MetMin commodity prices and output is 95.2% and 97.4%, respectively.11 In the case of expected degrees of freedom equal to 1 would indicate that the estimated penalized smooth term would be consistent with a simple linear relationship.12 The complete IRFs are provided in the Appendix via Figures A4–A8, relating to models that include the energy, non-energy, agriculture, metals and minerals, and oil price index, respectively. We provide the variance decomposition for all five models in the Appendix via Figure A13. We find that output growth and aggregate inflation have a considerable influence on energy and the oil inflation, jointly accounting for circa 30% of the variance.13 The impact on oil inflation is consistent.14 Defined as real commodity prices to a change in real global economic growth.15 Buyuksahin et al. (Citation2016) estimate the price elasticity of global output growth for oil, metals and agriculture to be 14.0, 9.2 and 7.2 percentage points, respectively.16 We extend the SVAR to a time-varying parameter VAR (TVP-VAR). Consistent with the SVAR model, one lag was chosen for the TVP-VAR estimation for all three models. The IRFs between the SVAR and TVP-VAR are consistent, see Figure A11 in the Appendix.17 The standard deviation over the entire sample is 0.254, 0.096 and 0.152 for energy, agriculture and MetMin, respectively. The standard deviation since 1990 is 0.245, 0.071 and 0.165 for energy, agriculture and MetMin, respectively.18 According to Buyuksahin et al. (Citation2016), agricultural production reacts much more quickly, usually within the next growing season, considering investment costs are generally higher for oil and metal projects which can have long gestation periods (e.g., Radetzki, Citation2006; Cuddington & Jerrett, Citation2008).19 According to Amaglobeli et al. (Citation2022), ‘[a] demand response can be sizable for energy, but much less so for food because people need to eat about the same amount.’20 Ginn & Pourroy, Citation2019 and Ginn & Pourroy, Citation2022 show an endogenous fiscal policy response in regards to sizable producer and consumer food price subsidies designed to cushion the effects of rising prices, which may be a policy-induced price smoothing mechanism that is different to, yet in parallel with, the classic Calvo price stickiness approach.21 Wiggins et al. (Citation2010) notes that once food prices started to increase in 2007, there were amplifying reactions that accelerated the price increases such as export restrictions, country-imposed increase in import taxes on food goods.22 The results remain the same if one compares the IRFs for food inflation and oil inflation, see Figure A6.23 Based on IEA data, the energy share is 3.2% for the USA. According to the USDA, the food share is 10.3% in the USA for 2021.24 According to Pourroy et al. (Citation2016), changes in food prices can induce significant variations in inflation, where the expenditure share on food is typically higher in lower income economies. Pourroy et al. (Citation2016) show that the expenditure share on food in low-income, middle-income and high-income economies is 48%, 31% 20%, respectively. This relationship is known as Engel’s law.25 See https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/brainard20191108a.htm.Additional informationNotes on contributorsWilliam GinnWilliam Ginn is a Sr Economist/Data Scientist at Labcorp. He is originally from the USA and has spent numerous years abroad in Europe, where he is currently residing in Germany. Ginn completed a B.S. in Economics at East Carolina University; a M.A. in Economics at Duke University; an MBA at Jesus College at University of Oxford; and a doctorate in Economics at University of Erlangen-Nuremberg.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC JOURNAL
INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC JOURNAL Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics, Econometrics and Finance (all)
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: International Economic Journal is a peer-reviewed, scholarly journal devoted to publishing high-quality papers and sharing original economics research worldwide. We invite theoretical and empirical papers in the broadly-defined development and international economics areas. Papers in other sub-disciplines of economics (e.g., labor, public, money, macro, industrial organizations, health, environment and history) are also welcome if they contain international or cross-national dimensions in their scope and/or implications.
期刊最新文献
Efficiency and Welfare Effects of Fiscal Policy in Emerging Economies: The Case of Morocco The Impact of Green Innovation on CO 2 Emissions in China: Evidence from Spatial Regression Model Wealth Elasticity, Agent Heterogeneity and Fiscal Dynamics Effect of Grain Corridor Agreement on Grain Prices External Debts, Re-Election Possibilities and the Infrastructure Development Via Public Private Partnership: Evidence from Low- and Middle-Income Countries
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1