Blog Post

COVID-19 and broken Collusion: the oil price collapse is one more warning for Russia

In the midst of the COVID-19 epidemic, the sharp collapse in the oil price has received little attention. Brent fell by 30% on 9 March, the largest fall since the 1991 Gulf War. The Russian ruble followed suit and its tumble highlights Russia’s continued dependence on resource extraction. The episode should be taken as a sign of things to come in a world where Russia’s main customers are going green.

By: and Date: March 19, 2020 Topic: Global Economics & Governance

On 19 March, Brent opened at $27 a barrel, WTI (West Texas intermediate) was at $22. This is shocking considering they were both above $50 just two weeks previously and were around $120 in 2014, signifying a fall of roughly 75% since then. The latest fall has surprised many market analysts and occurred abruptly after Russia walked away from OPEC+ negotiations in early March. The causes of the fall are twofold.

Firstly, the COVID-19 epidemic has put great strain on demand in international markets. China remains the world’s primary importer of crude, and was the source of 80% of the growth in global oil demand in 2019. In the past weeks, production and consumption in China has fallen substantially, with a major chunk of China’s manufacturing industry grinding to a halt and large parts of the country under lockdown (a pattern currently replicating elsewhere) and Chinese PMIs registered their lowest values ever. Meanwhile, the fear of continued spread of the coronavirus in Europe and the US has put further downward pressure on oil markets. Most EU countries have introduced wide-ranging measures of ‘social distancing’, directly affecting oil demand through reduced travel. The airline industry has slashed numbers of flights (British Airways plans to cut capacity by 75%, Ryanair by 80%), greatly reducing jet fuel demand. Many economists believe a major recession is inevitable. The International Energy Agency on 9 March estimated that global oil demand will decrease by 2.5 million barrels per day in Q2 of 2020 (roughly 2.5% of global demand). Other estimates foresee a reduction as large as 10 million barrels per day, which would equal to 10% of global demand.

The price collapse has been massively reinforced by supply factors. When Russia walked out of the 7-8 March OPEC+ meeting, convened to discuss supply restrictions to ensure price stability, Saudi Arabia retaliated by ramping up production and starting a price war. The breakdown of negotiations ultimately resulted in the elimination of all previous restrictions. The market was flooded with oil – Saudi Arabia alone pledged to increase oil production by 2.6 million barrels per day (a 25% increase) – and reacted accordingly. Beyond its unwillingness to make concessions, Russia’s actions might have been, at least partially, motivated by a desire to push out of the market American shale producers, which have much higher marginal costs of production which might be unsustainable under current prices (though they could be bailed out by the US government). Pressures on demand are putting oil producers in increasingly complicated situations. As potential profits fall, collusion is becoming harder to sustain. It is unclear whether Russia expected Saudi Arabia’s retaliation and was willing to engage in this price war, but even if Russia is able to score a geopolitical win, its economy will pay the price.

Russia’s weakness

For large oil countries that depend on selling oil, there are two important benchmarks: the cost of production per barrel and the minimum price per barrel relied on for fiscal revenue. While Saudi Arabia has the lowest cost of extraction in the world (as low as $3 per barrel), its fiscal reliance on oil is substantial: a price of $80 or above is required to keep a balanced budget. Russia has a much higher cost of extraction (around $20 per barrel) yet its budget assumes a price of $40, providing some initial room for manoeuvre. However, the lack of immediate fiscal necessity does not reduce the Russian reliance on oil; the economic costs will be substantial regardless of the Russian government’s willingness to incur them.

Oil is Russia’s primary export (around half of all exports), accounts for 40% of the federal government’s revenues, and is the focus of most foreign investment (see our Policy Contribution for an analysis of this in the context of Russia’s relationship with the EU). Russia’s rent economy relies on these revenues, which are deeply affected by oil price swings. The oil boom and the accompanying resource curse during the 2000s led to the demise of Russia’s non-resource industry, which had already been weakened by the economic collapse of the 1990s and has not recovered. The lack of property rights protection and the international isolation caused by Russia’s internal and foreign policy has worsened the prospects for Russia’s non-resource industry.

As weak as 2014?

It is hardly the first oil price collapse in recent years, and lessons can be learnt from a similar episode in 2014, when Brent lost over half of its value in a matter of weeks: from $112 to $53. This collapse was caused by both supply and demand factors, although market analysts generally agree that the growth in supply played a predominant role. Furthermore, expectations about the future balance of supply and demand played a major role. This put substantial pressure on Russia’s currency, heightened by the central bank taking the final step in its change of monetary regime: the exchange rate had been pegged, but shortly before the collapse, the central bank entered an inflation-targeting regime. There was doubt about the ability of the central bank to control the collapse of the ruble and prevent capital flight. The ruble depreciated by 50% against the euro during 2014, and the central bank had to deplete its foreign exchange reserves by over 30% in order to stabilise the currency.

 

This happened at the same time as the introduction of Western sanctions limiting Russian access to international financial markets. While the collapse of the ruble probably had the biggest effect, the combination of both caused a banking crisis and pushed the Russian economy into a recession. Notably, Russian GDP measured in US$ has not grown over the last decade.

While the current oil price collapse is the biggest daily in recent memory, it is yet to be seen if it will have the same effects as in 2014. The Russian government has made huge efforts to shield its budget from the effect of currency fluctuations, by exerting fiscal discipline and by reinforcing the national wealth fund, which invests in foreign reserves oil revenues from prices above $40. Furthermore, the floating currency cushions some of the effect of the change in oil prices. However, the Russian government has not managed to diversify its economy away from fossil fuels, and its international isolation in terms of trade has not decreased. It was a notable aim of the government to jumpstart the stagnating economy through fiscal expenditure programmes called ‘National Projects’, partly financed by the national wealth fund. It is unlikely these projects are viable in world of sub-$30 oil prices.

Outlook

The COVID-19 pandemic, of as-yet uncertain magnitude, will undoubtably also affect Russia and its economy. Russia will not be able to avoid contagion in the medical and economic senses. All this adds to the structural challenges Russia is facingfaces already. The Russian economy population is ageing, and the EU, its premier market for its main export of fossil fuels, has pledged to decarbonise.

This is perhaps what should worry the Kremlin most. The oil price could recover in the coming months, as demand rebounds, and fiscal considerations might bring both Saudi Arabia and Russia back to the negotiating table. However, it is likely that any recovery will be short-lived. Bouts of collapsing demand are bound to become more frequent as the world becomes progressively greener. In its sustainability scenario, which takes climate goals seriously, the IEA forecasts that global oil demand will fall by 30% up to 2040, and European demand – Russia’s primary market – will fall by 60%. While withholding reserves and lower degrees of investment might temporarily halt the price decline, periods of recovery will be short and underwhelming. Decreasing demand will make collusion between the oil-producing countries more difficult. COVID-19 foreshadows what might happen with a permanent fall in demand, for which Russia has done little to prepare. Regardless of whether the low oil price persists or not, it is another example of Russian foreign policy impeding its economic development. This time it is operating in a period of major global macroeconomic uncertainty. This will likely only accelerate the decline of Russia on the world stage.


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint. Anyone is free to republish and/or quote this post without prior consent. Please provide a full reference, clearly stating Bruegel and the relevant author as the source, and include a prominent hyperlink to the original post.

Read about event More on this topic
 

Past Event

Past Event

An EU budget for Europe's future with Johannes Hahn

How do we make the EU fit for future?

Speakers: Zsolt Darvas, Johannes Hahn and Mehreen Khan Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: July 7, 2020
Read article More on this topic
 

Opinion

Credible emerging market central banks could embrace quantitative easing to fight COVID-19

Emerging economies are fighting COVID-19 and the economic sudden stop imposed by the containment and lockdown policies, in the same way as advanced economies. However, emerging markets also face large and rapid capital outflows as a result of the pandemic. This column argues that credible emerging market central banks could rely on purchases of local currency government bonds to support the needed health and welfare expenditures and fiscal stimulus. In countries with flexible exchange rate regimes and well-anchored inflation expectations, such quantitative easing would help ease financial conditions, while minimising the risks of large depreciations and spiralling inflation.

By: Gianluca Benigno, Jon Hartley, Alicia García-Herrero, Alessandro Rebucci and Elina Ribakova Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: July 6, 2020
Read article More on this topic
 

Blog Post

EU recovery plans should fund the COVID-19 battles to come; not be used to nurse old wounds

In its proposed Recovery Fund, the European Commission uses allocation criteria mainly linked to infection rates and past economic performance. To foster an efficient economic rebound post COVID-19 crisis, we propose instead to allocate funds through a forward-looking approach based on specific industrial and economic structure of EU regions.

By: Carlo Altomonte, Andrea Coali and Gianmarco Ottaviano Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: July 6, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Podcast

Podcast

Redefining Europe’s role after the Covid-19 Pandemic

How will the Covid 19 crisis change the role of the EU in Europe and the world?

By: The Sound of Economics Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: June 25, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

A tale of two pandemics

The two narratives briefly examined here cast light on different aspects of the EU in the times of Covid-19. Euroskeptic nationalists typically propagate claims of EU failure but have been rather subdued during the pandemic as mainstream governments have taken over their trademark policy of closing borders to foreigners. Nonetheless, the grip on power of several pro-EU mainstream leaders, including President Emmanuel Macron in France, Prime Minister Conte in Italy and Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez in Spain, remains tenuous.

By: Michael Leigh Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: June 23, 2020
Read about event More on this topic
 

Past Event

Past Event

The role of AI in healthcare

How can AI help us fight through a pandemic crisis?

Speakers: Dimitris Bertsimas, Georgios Petropoulos, Effy Vayena and Reinhilde Veugelers Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: June 23, 2020
Read article Download PDF More by this author
 

Parliamentary Testimony

Italian Parliament

EU priorities and the recovery during Covid19

Testimony at the Committee on EU Policies of the Italian Chamber of Deputies.

By: Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Italian Parliament, Testimonies Date: June 18, 2020
Read about event More on this topic
 

Past Event

Past Event

Biological threats and EU preparedness: How can we make the system more resilient?

Can the EU handle biological threats?

Speakers: Maria Demertzis, Magnus Normark, Ilkka Salmi, Jukka Savolainen, Anne Sénéquier and Reinhilde Veugelers Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: June 18, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Blog Post

The EU’s recovery fund proposals: crisis relief with massive redistribution

Poorer European Union countries and those hardest hit economically by the COVID-19 crisis could obtain up to 15% of their GNI in grants and guarantees from the EU’s proposed recovery instruments. Yet the proposal would represent a net benefit for all EU countries, even if there is only a small positive economic impact over the long-term. The proposed very long-maturity loans would lead to non-negligible benefits, exceeding 1% of GDP for some countries.

By: Zsolt Darvas Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: June 17, 2020
Read about event More on this topic
 

Past Event

Past Event

Reopening: Upper Rhine

As European borders reopen this is a unique and valuable time to conduct a “temperature reading” of diverse actors about the local impact of the Covid-19 response.

Speakers: Giuseppe Porcaro, Jean-Baptiste Cuzin, Lioba Markl-Hummel and Frédéric Pfliegersdoerffer Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: June 16, 2020
Read about event More on this topic
 

Past Event

Past Event

The role of the IMF in the post-COVID-19 fiscal stabilization and recovery

Fireside chat with Kristalina Georgieva, Managing Director, International Monetary Fund

Speakers: Henri de Castries, Kristalina Georgieva, Vazil Hudák, Robert Vass and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Global Economics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: June 15, 2020
Read article More on this topic
 

Blog Post

Has COVID-19 dented the EU’s credibility in the Balkans?

Muddled initial reactions to the COVID-19 crisis tarnished the EU’s image in the Western Balkans. Europe should not take for granted the extent of its influence over its backyard in the face of Chinese and Russian charm offensives.

By: Aliénor Cameron and Michael Leigh Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: June 15, 2020
Load more posts