View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

ELEVENTH MEETING OF GOVERNORS
OF CENTRAL BANKS OF THE AMERICAN CONTINENT
CARACAS, VENEZUELA

THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE RECENT CHANGE
IN THE SUPPLY AND COST OF PETROLEUM

By
Andrew F. Brimmer
Member
Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System

April 30, 1974

THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE RECENT CHANGE
IN THE SUPPLY AND COST OF PETROLEUM
Since last October, all of us have come to realize -- in both our
personal and official lives —

the way in which a reliable and economical

supply of petroleum has become vital to our well-being.
of this period —

the imposition of supply cutbacks and embargoes, the

enormous escalation of prices —
it again.

The history

is widely-known, and I will not describe

Nor do I wish to discuss the rights or wrongs of the political

aspects of what has happened.

Instead, I want to explore the economic

and financial implications of the situation as we find it today —
as it is likely to develop in the period ahead.
is this:

and

Specifically, the question

how can consumer nations best adjust to the real and financial

consequences of a dramatic and abrupt rise in the cost of energy, and, in
the longer run, reduce our reliance on uncertain and environmentally
harmful energy sources?
Impact on Real Incomes

First, I would like to turn to an analysis of the impact on real
activity in oil-importing countries of the drastic
of imported petroleum.

rise in the price

The circumstances of this increase are without

precedent, so far as I know, and we must stretch our imaginations a bit
to grasp the nature of the problem.

What makes this situation unique

is that a group of oil-exporting countries has unilaterally been able
to impose an additional cost that could amount to over $65 billion per
year at current prices on their exports to the rest of the world.




Yet,

-2

it is highly doubtful that they can increase their purchases of other
countries1 goods and services by more than perhaps $15 billion this
year -- leaving a gap on the order of $50 billion.

This means that the

rest of the world cannot begin to repay the debts for these imports in
real terms — that is, with goods and services— until some time in the
future when the oil-producing countries as a group may begin to import more
than they export.

Needless to say, there are great differences among the

oil-exporting countries in their propensities to import, but I believe
the above statement holds as a general proposition.
No one can say how long such a distorted pattern of trade and
payments can persist.

Rapid development of alternative energy supplies

(together with conservation measures) is likely to drive down the present
extreme prices for oil.

But even if this happens, we will probably still

have an imbalance that for some countries would involve disastrous declines
in real income.
I will discuss later the consequences on the financial side and
for balances of payments of this enormous current account surplus of the
oil producers.

But let us consider first what it means for real incomes

in oil-consuming countries and for the changes in economic structure that
will result.

Since only a small part of the increased cost of oil imports

can be paid for with real transfers in the short run, there need not be a
drastic immediate reduction in the real incomes of people in the consuming
countries, taken as a whole.

However, it will take very careful management

to avoid serious deterioration of economic activity within countries as we
work through the adjustment period.

Indeed, the international community

faces an unprecedented task of ensuring that the burden of real adjustment
does not become unbearable for some countries.




3-

It seems clear that for the industrial countries the original
impression that a sharp decline in real economic activity was bound to
occur is now giving way to a calmer analysis that the drag on activity
resulting from the oil problem would be less significant*

Part of the

change in view reflects a better outlook for supply as oil production
levels have been raised, and another part stems from a change in the
over-all outlook for economic activity in most of these countries.
This will be helpful to many countries who will find strong markets
for their products#
It is often said that higher prices for oil have a dampening
effect on consumer demand analogous to that resulting from an increased
excise tax.

However, the analogy should not be pushed too far.

Since

this is a tax on one highly important product, relative costs and
prices within the economy as between energy-intensive industries and
commodities and others are shifted very markedly.

In the United States,

for instance, where over one-third of the oil consumed is used for auto­
mobiles, that industry —

and all the sectors that have come to depend

on the use of automobiles —

has been hit especially hard.

In other

countries, the impact may come most severely through higher costs of
fertilizer or other imports.

This is essentially a tax being imposed

from outside, rather than as part of a national plan designed to achieve
particular national objectives.




Authorities in the oil-consuming countries,

therefore, have

to cope in this adjustment period with a reduction in real consumer
incomes over which they have no control, distortions among industries,
large and persistent deficits in their external transactions, and,
last but far from least, a strong upward push to rates of inflation
that are already far too rapid.
Energy and the Management of Domestic Demand
Before the emergence of the energy problem, authorities had
formed some impression of the outlook for their economies, and they had
determined the kinds of policies that might produce the best combination
of real growth, price stability, and reasonable external balance.
Those goals are still valid, but the policy m i x may have to be changed
to meet the new situation.

One question to be dealt with

potential behavior of consumer incomes and expenditures.

is the
If we assume

that consumers have little scope for meeting increased oil costs out
of current savings,

then we have to consider whether there will be a

serious decline in their expenditures for other goods and services.
When the situation for over-all demand is serious, an appropriate
response under ordinary circumstances might be to make an adjustment
in government revenues or expenditures
consumer incomes.

aimed largely at bolstering

However, at present, many countries are going through a

period when shortages of supply of many materials and intermediate products
have become acute, and prices have been moving up much too rapidly.




-

5-

That situation would seem to call fee: a determined effort to alleviate
shortages and remove obstacles to supply, while keeping a rein on
demand*

The perennial trade-off between the appropriate shares of

investment and consumption in the economy is sharpened by the energy
problem.

The need to create new energy sources —

and to adjust

industry toward less energy-intensive processes and products -- is
speeding up the investment process and dictating an emphasis on
investment over consumption in the near term greater than had been
contemplated.
It seems to me that the adjustment to be made cannot be
accomplished simply by stimulating demand to restore consumer
spending power.

Rather we need more selective measures to deal with

sectors of the economy most severely affected by this new situation.
Consequently, I would be extremely cautious about the use of monetary
policy to offset any weakening in demand associated with higher oil
prices.

I would not try to suggest the size of the problem that

may exist in individual countries, or the specific features that
require a particular response.

Indeed, within the Western Hemisphere

we have many examples of countries who will be little affected, as
well as many who will be in great difficulty.
tive will offer his own assessment

I hope each representa­

in the discussion period.

However,

it might be helpful if I assess the impact of the energy crisis on the
U.S. economy.




Impact on the U.S. Economy
At the time the oil embargo was imposed in the fall of
1973, economic growth in the United States was already slowing.
To some degree,

the moderating pace of activity last year reflected

the influence of accelerating inflation on consumer buying.

Sales

of automobiles began to slip in the spring of 1973, as did sales
of other durable goods.

The effects of credit restraint were

also evident in a sharply declining pace of new housing starts.
However, activity in the industrial sector was also hampered by
widespread shortages of industrial materials and component parts.

Thus, the embargo

hit at a time when demands were weakening

in some sectors and shortages were limiting production in others •
Partly as a consequence, estpectations developed of a decline —
probably shortlived —
inflationary pressures.

decline of business activity and of intensified
There were, however, great uncertainties as

to the probable effects of the embargo that were related to questions
regarding the extent and duration of the shortfall in imports and
the sectoral distribution of shortages in the U.S. economy.
The strategy of the U.

S# Government in dealing with the

oil crisis was to design policies to insulate the industrial sector
of the economy from the effects of the shortage of oil

with the

hope of avoiding widespread declines in output and employment.
achieve this objective,

the Administration reduced the allocation

of fuels for consumer uses.




To

Allocations of fuel for commercial

-

7-

and industrial space heating and for commercial.air travel were
also curtailed.
By and large,

the objective of the Government's energy

policy appears to have been achieved.

There

is little evidence

that industrial production was held back by shortages of petroleum
for industrial heating or as raw material.

The major adverse effects

of the oil shortage were concentrated in industries related
travel, especially passenger car use.

used

to

Sales of new domestic type automo­

biles W ere hard hit--dropping 30 per cent by February, 1974.

Declines

were extremely large among big car sales, because of the uncertainty
of gasoline availability and the sharply rising cost of gasoline.
Demands for small cars, meanwhile,
of these models were drawn down.
industries^

remained strong and inventories
Activity among automobile supplying

sales of conventional homes in outlying suburban areas;

sales of mobile homes; sales of recreational vehicles, and sales of other
travel-re la ted goods and services —

were also cut back.

These adverse effects began to be evident quite promptly.
Industrial production began to decline in December,

and it continued

to fall in the opening months of 1974. Unemployment in the first
quarter of 1974 rose to 5.2 per cent of the labor force, compared
with 4.7 per cent in the fourth quarter of last year.

Real GNP

growth in the first quarter probably declined appreciably __
at a 5.8 per cent annual rate, according to the preliminary estimate.




-

8-

Nevertheless, the economy appears to have come through
the winter decline without developing the cumulative characteristics
that often accompany a softening in output.

Secondary effects appear

to have been minimal, and declines in employment and production
have been concentrated mainly in travel-related industries* Moreover,
automobile sales recently appear to have leveled off, and sales of
larger cars have actually improved somewhat.

Housing starts have

also stabilized, and retail trade in lines other than automobiles
has remained relatively good.
Capital spending of business has remained particularly
strong, and this has been an important factor sustaining the overall
economy.

New orders for durable goods have continued to rise and

the backlog of unfilled orders has grown further.

The Commerce

Department recently reported that total plant and equipment expendi­
tures planned for 1974 were, on balance, unchanged by the energy
crisis.

The petroleum industry reported a large upward revision

in expenditure plans, and-.there were also substantial upward revisions
for gas utilities and railroads.

Cutbacks in plans were reported for

motor vehicle manufacturers, air transportation, electric utilities,
and the commercial and other sector.
With the oil embargo now lifted, the prospects for some
pickup in economic activity over the remainder of the year have
improved materially.

Nevertheless, adjustments to the energy

problem will probably continue to plague the economy over the
remainder of 1974.

Prices of gasoline and heating fuel have

risen dramatically since last fall, and as increased supplies of




-

9-

fuels become available, a larger part of consumer buying power will be
absorbed by increased purchases of these goods.

Furthermore, consumer

demands for large cars, mobile homes, recreational vehicles, and homes
far out in the suburbs may prove to have been permanently reduced by
higher fuel costs.

The rise in economic activity that can reasonably

be expected over the remainder of 1974 may, therefore, be less vigorous
than is characteristic of a typical cyclical recovery.
Prices, meanwhile, continue to rise rapidly.

There is some

hope that the rate of increase in domestic prices will moderate later
this year as petroleum prices level off in response to the substantial
adjustments now underway in oil markets and as our food supplies
expand because of larger harvests.

However, the inflation underway

does not yet show concrete signs of abatement.

Industrial commodity

prices are still rising sharply, and unit labor costs are also
increasing rapidly.
Public policy at the present time is confronted with a most
difficult problem.

Inflationary pressures are likely to continue

at a very high pace through 1974, even though economic activity
may remain sluggish, with unemployment rising further.

Any effort

to bolster aggregate demand would worsen an already grave inflationary
problem.

Yet, some response to the effects of the energy problem is

clearly in order.




In the present environment, it has seemed wise to use selective
fiscal measures to alleviate unemployment and to avoid the broad stimulus
that would come from a general relaxation of fiscal and monetary restraint.
Proposals are under consideration to enlarge our public employment
program and to increase unemployment benefits as a means of cushioning
economic adjustments to the energy problem.
Impact on International Balance
Let me turn now to the balance of payments and international
financial consequences of the oil problem.

The higher price of oil will

no doubt reduce the demand for oil well below previous estimates for 1974.
Moreover, this higher price has certainly made obsolete the projections
that showed huge increases in oil imports from the OPEC countries as we
go out toward the end of the century.

But even if demand is held down,

the likely demand even at present price levels will generate export
revenues on the order of $90 billion for the oil producers this year and
a net current account surplus on the order of $50 billion.

In 1974 alone,

the increase in the net import bill for oil of the developed countries
as a group will be about $50 billion; for non-oil exporting LDCs the oil
import bill will be increased by perhaps $9-10 billion. In the Western
Hemisphere, the effect on Canada is about neutral (since Canada*s imports
and exports of oil are roughly equal). Of course, Venezuela will generate
a huge surplus, and some other countries in Latin America will be able to
supply most of their own needs or even export some surplus oil production.
For the United States, the extra cost of oil in 1974 will be perhaps $15
billion, and for countries in Latin America, other than oil producers, the
increased price for oil could impose a balance of payments burden of $2%




-

billion.

11-

As I understand it, the countries in this region that

would be hardest hit would be those of Central America, as well
as Paraguay and Uruguay and some Caribbean countries.
As I noted above, to the extent the oil producers will
not be paid in goods or services for their petroleum, they must,
one way or another, store up savings (mainly channeled into invest­
ments in the rest of the world) or use them to provide aid to
countries in need.

Consequently, when the oil consumers look at

their balances of payments, they will all see much larger trade
deficits than expected -- and much larger deficits than have been
thought of as being sustainable over any long period.

Moreover,

efforts by any individual country to reach a goal for the trade
balance that earlier had seemed reasonable may only succeed in
pushing other countries into more serious difficulties.

We

have a new and difficulty task of analysis and policy adjustment.
The financial side of the trade imbalances created by the
jump in oil prices presents a host of new and formidable problems.

If

these imbalances persist for even a few years, the accumulation of
external investments by the oil producers would reach dimensions never
before experienced- - with managements problems that might prove to be




-

insuperable.
face is that —

12-

I would emphasize that the greatest immediate danger we
while some countries may find their need for financing

of their deficits automatically taken care of as oil producers' funds
are recycled through the market —

others will have much greater

difficulty in obtaining financing and will need help quickly and
perhaps over a very extended period.
Recycling surplus Revenues
Perhaps I should discuss very briefly the process of recycling
these enormous surplus revenues of the oil producers.

At this time, the

revenues are paid largely in dollars and some sterling, and they are
initially paid to the accounts of these countries in the Euro-market
banks and, to some extent, in banks of individual countries.

In the

present early stage of the evolution of these financial flows, we are
dealing largely with flows through banking channels.

The banks, of

course, must find appropriate outlets for these funds, and they must
resolve the problem, as they see it, of matching very liquid liabilities
with longer-term assets.

Oil producers' revenues are just now reaching

the scale they are likely to sustain -- at least for a while.

Already

some consuming countries have anticipated the need for financing and
have raised loans in the market somewhat ahead of the arrival of the
supply of funds from oil producers.

In these early stages, the Euro­

markets have been effectively providing a meeting place for the demand
and supply of funds, but we may soon see stresses appearing that the
market may not be able to resolve by itself.

One kind of stress will

occur if the banks become apprehensive about accepting such enormous




-

13-

amounts of funds from so few depositors, or because funds are being
attracted in too large amounts to countries with higher interest rates.
Moreover, there are few financial markets that are large enough to
absorb such flows without extreme distortion.
Another kind of stress will occur as the producing countries
accumulate funds far in excess of any possible need for imports and
development of their domestic economies.

We should expect them to

make an effort to balance off the advantages of adding to their assets
against reducing the level of oil production.

Thus, the quality of the

investment portfolio is important as a factor in helping to sustain
a desirable level of production.
But the crucial problem, if we are to share the burden of higher
oil prices equitably, is to see to it that financing is available to
countries threatened with a drastic decline in real incomes.

Many

countries will be incurring debts that take the form of short-term or
medium-term credits -- but will in fact be debts that cannot be repaid
as long as payments of this size must be made for oil.

We cannot expect

market institutions to meet such extraordinary and accumulating
credit needs over long periods.
I hope there is by now a growing recognition on the part of the
oil producers that they have an obligation to help finance countries who
cannot afford these higher prices.

Among the actions that have been

announced, I should certainly put high on the list the offer of Vene­
zuela to set up a trust fund within the Inter-American Development Bank
to extend loans to countries in this area. I understand that a portion of
the funds will be lent on concessionary terms and that Venezuela has also




-

14-

agreed to purchase bonds of the World Bank and the Inter-American
Development Bank.

Another initiative is the action taken by the

Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries at a recent meeting
in Geneva to set up a special fund to cushion the impact of higher
oil prices on the poorer countries of the world.
The Arab countries have organized a number of instrumentalities
to provide financing for similar purposes, and Iran has been willing
to contribute in various ways, including responding to the initiatives
of the IMF and the IBRD in their efforts to bridge over the immediate
financing problem.
Nevertheless, we are still pretty much in the dark as to the
aggregate amounts involved in these actions, and in many cases the lender
appears to be expecting a return comparable to that provided by invest­
ments in financial markets.

Perhaps this is because the time has been

too short for the full scope of the financing problem to be grasped. It
seems to me that —

if the oil producers really wish to avoid imposing a

loss in welfare on the poorer countries --they must be prepared to fund
the incremental cost of oil to such countries over an indeterminate
period at highly concessionary terms.

This does not mean at all that

the developed countries can relax their aid efforts, since such aid
will be needed at least as much as before to support the hoped for gains
in real per capita incomes.




-

15-

Concluding Observations
We are all at an early stage in identifying the problems that
the new oil situation has created, and up to now we have been thinking
mainly of the problems more immediately ahead.

One danger in this situa­

tion is that we may lose sight of some of our longer-run objectives.

I

have in mind, for instance, the temptation to enter into barter arrange­
ments of one kind or another to assure supplies of necessities, or
attempts to control and manipulate markets for scarce commodities.
Whatever short-term advantages such schemes may seem to have, I am
convinced they would lead to far less than optimal use of the worldfs
resources, and they would inevitably bring reprisals and countermeasures
of all kinds.
In the period ahead countries will need to review their current
account targets to ensure that, apart from extraordinary payments for
oil, they continue to progress in an equilibrating direction.

This

will help to support an adequate net transfer of real resources from
wealthy countries to those who need help for development.

To sustain

such a flow of real resources will require, as I have pointed out, a
comparable rechanneling of the financial flows that will be going to
the oil producers.
Even if there were not an energy problem, we would be struggling
with the problems of economic development, inflation, the international
monetary system, and the reduction of barriers to international trade
and investment.

We should not let the energy problem distract us from

dealing with those issues.




I would like to conclude with an optimistic

-

expectation:

16-

working together, I am reasonably confident that we

will not allow economic progress to be set back by this dramatic
new development*

I also expect that we will succeed in developing

new energy sources that will greatly improve the quality of life in
the future.