ساختار بازار نفت، اثرات شبکه و انتخاب ارز برای صورتحساب نفت
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|19808||2012||10 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Energy Policy, Volume 44, May 2012, Pages 385–394
Crude oil is a homogeneous good traded on specialised exchanges and quoted and invoiced predominantly in US dollars. Despite the strong case for the use of the US dollar as a vehicle currency in the oil trade, we provide an alternative view. We develop a simple network effects model to identify the conditions under which either a complete switch in the oil invoicing currency or parallel invoicing in different currencies is possible and economically sensible. We calibrate the model using low actual values for the transaction costs of using euro and/or US dollars, as well as a proxy for information costs, which decline with the increase in the use of the new currency. The results show that there will be a switch to parallel invoicing in both currencies when two conditions are met: first, oil exporters expect that a certain minimum number of other oil exporters will also start using the new currency; and second, the information costs associated with quoting oil contracts in two currencies are low.
Why is oil priced, invoiced and settled in US dollars? The surge in oil prices from USD 10 per barrel in 1998 to USD 145 in July 2008, combined with the rise of the US dollar/euro exchange rate from a low of USD 0.83 in 2000 to a high of USD 1.60 in July 2008, encouraged discussions in various circles—from the media (Islam, 2003) and academia (Alhajji, 2005) to the European Parliament (2004) and OPEC (Koch, 2004)—about the possibility of pricing oil in euro or using a basket of currencies. In the recent environment of increasingly heated debates about currency wars, trade sanctions, global imbalances and national interests, this discussion about alternatives to invoicing crude oil contracts in US dollars may gain prominence again. The literature on trade invoicing suggests that primary commodities, such as crude oil, tend to be priced in vehicle currencies, because they are homogeneous and prices are easily comparable. Physical crude oil is not a homogenous commodity: Platts, the world's leading pricing service, provides daily price quotes for 62 grades of crude oil.1 However, standardised grades, such as Brent and West Texas Intermediate (WTI), have been developed to create homogeneity which allows the trading of “paper” oil contracts on commodity exchanges. Historically, petroleum has mostly been traded in US dollars since the Seneca Oil Company drilled the first oil well in Pennsylvania in 1859. But there are some notable exceptions to this statement. In the 1940s Anglo-Iranian (now BP) concluded some large crude oil contracts with Standard Oil of New Jersey and Standard Oil of New York (now ExxonMobil) in pounds sterling (Bamberg, 2000). Another case is the 1950s sterling-dollar oil controversy, in which the British government established exchange controls on oil imports and required the pricing of petroleum in pounds sterling in order to stop a short-term dollar drain (Schenk, 1996). A third example is the practices of the countries of the Persian Gulf which were part of the sterling area, which quoted their oil prices in US dollars but accepted payment in pounds sterling (McKinnon, 1979, p. 77). Fourth, in 1972 and 1973 OPEC signed two agreements, known as Geneva I and Geneva II, which attempted to price oil in a basket of currencies. The agreements aimed to protect the price of oil against fluctuations in the value of the US dollar against other major currencies (Al-Chalabi, 1980). More recently, in October 2000 the Iraqi government demanded the settlement of its petroleum exports in euro under the UN Oil-for-Food Programme (CNN, 2000), and in April 2008 Iran stopped conducting oil transactions in US dollar (CBS, 2008). In addition to these instances, when actual settlement of the international oil trade occurred in pounds sterling or euro, there is also the case of crude oil exports to the United States being priced in Canadian dollars but settled in US dollars, so that the producers bear the exchange rate risk. Finally, Chinese oil companies—such as the two largest, CNOOC Ltd. and Petrochina Company Ltd.—price their locally produced crude oil in US dollars on the basis of international benchmark grades, but settle domestic contracts (the majority of their crude oil sales) entirely in renminbi. While several of these cases are reflections of political intentions rather than economic considerations, the present study considers the economic setting of the oil market and the arguments that may support or argue against the case for invoicing and settling oil trades in a currency other than the US dollar. After a review of the literature this paper examines in detail the characteristics of the crude oil market and current oil invoicing/settling practices (Section 3) and develops a network effects-based model defining the conditions under which a complete switch in the oil invoicing currency or parallel invoicing in different currencies would be possible (Section 4).
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
The theoretical literature on trade invoicing explains the almost universal use of the US dollar in international trade in crude oil by the fact that petroleum is a homogeneous good traded in organised exchanges and the United States is an economically dominant country. Apart from serving as a medium of exchange, the US dollar fulfils the function of a unit of account by providing price transparency in the oil market. Thirdly, the macroeconomic stability of the United States and the depth of the US financial markets explain the role of the US dollar as a store of value and the low liquidity costs associated with holding the currency. Despite the strong case for the use of the US dollar as a vehicle currency in the oil trade, a thorough review of the international market for crude oil unveils some evidence that the introduction of a new currency might be both possible and economically sensible. A group of 12 developing countries highly dependent on petroleum exports dominates the international oil trade. The outflow of crude oil from most exporting countries is matched by an inflow of other goods and services from their trading partners—usually nearby developed countries. Similarly, the United States, the biggest importer of petroleum, relies mainly on western hemisphere sources. Thus, owing mainly to the specific features of the industry, the international oil trade is predominantly regional in nature. In addition, the introduction of trading in futures contracts for petroleum grades more relevant to local industry, with such contracts denominated in domestic currencies and traded in financial centres other than New York and London, has contributed further to the segmentation of the crude oil market. To explain the dominant use of the US dollar in oil invoicing, the model developed in this paper treats currencies as network goods. Sellers in the market respond to the currency choices of buyers so as to minimise costs associated with the use of an established vehicle currency or a newly introduced currency. The model explains the possibility of multiple equilibria with one or two vehicle currencies. When calibrated using actual values for the transaction costs of using euro and/or US dollars, together with a proxy for information costs, which decline as use of the new currency increases, the model predicts a switch to parallel invoicing in both currencies provided either that the players expect a certain minimum number of other players also to start using the new currency, or that the information costs associated with quoting oil contracts in two currencies are low.