Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas Clearly Explains Why Speculation Didn’t Drive Oil Prices in 2008
And that applies similarly to food….
This past week there have been a couple of news items announcing that a large petition by “450 economists” wants to limit global food commodity speculation which is causing high food prices for the world’s poor food consumer. Since I just posted, Round Two. Does Speculation Cause High Food Prices? on this blog ten days ago, I wanted to follow-up by connecting a few dots.
Just my luck, the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas has just produced a new report which clearly states and illustrates why the oil price peak of 2008 was not caused by speculators but by the fundamentals of supply and demand. (The dynamics for oil are very similar to the food commodities.)
First, about this news item that the world’s “economists” are going after the food speculators:
More than 450 economists from some 40 countries, and at institutions including Berkeley, Cambridge and Oxford universities, urged this week’s meeting of finance ministers from the G20 group of leading industrialised countries to “curb excessive speculation” in agriculture futures. The letter, which blamed speculators for “contributing to increasing volatility and record high food prices”, and so “exacerbating global hunger”, demand caps on their positions.
“Limits could be set at a level that would maintain sufficient liquidity in the markets while preventing an excessive concentration of purely financial actors,” the letter said. “Clear limits would provide regulatory certainty, promoting stable and sustainable derivatives markets to the benefit of food producers, consumers and broader economic stability.”
… “On balance, we see more potential upside than downside to ag prices as speculators look to reposition on any sustained risk-on rally,” Mr Deane said.
The economists said that proposals to increase market transparency were vital, but would not go far enough to tackle excessive financial speculation. Instead, they urged finance ministers to support a move to cap the proportion of agricultural commodity derivatives markets that can be held by traders. … Deborah Doane, director of the World Development Movement, said that “excessive” lobbying from the finance sector seemed to be delaying political action, both in the UK and elsewhere.
What does the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas have to do with it?
Those concerned need pointed to this new report out from the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas by Michael D. Plante and Mine K. Yücel which so clearly demonstrates and concludes that that market fundamentals, and not speculation, were behind the dramatic rise and fall in oil prices, the dynamics of which, are similar to food prices.
In the explanation, after going through hoarding possibilities, and comparisons to a few commodity movements not having futures markets that mirrored oil’s move, they conclude that the commodity movements were “consistent with a pure demand story, rather than a speculation one.”
This chart demonstrates the dynamics of the price movement quite well:
I hope this helps the doubters out there. I have been occasionally visiting a TED sponsored discussion thread about this that is attempting to convince readers that speculation is causing dangerous food price movements and many assume and believe this because it seems right to them (faith-based). I am grateful to Scott Irwin and a few other key economists such as Paul Krugman, Andy Harless, Michael J Roberts, James Hamilton, Mark Thoma, and Parke Wilde, who have helped educate me on this issue, along with others rjs, jjb, and Nevil Speer. And, lastly, if people want to go after something causing global high food prices, they need to go after the corn ethanol policy here in the U.S.
UPDATE: 5 minutes after posting this I’ve seen the Bloomberg article “For those who say no evidence exists linking excessive speculation and prices, they just aren’t looking,” CFTC Commissioner Bart Chilton said today in a statement. “Scores of studies and papers exist which document the linkage.”