Home / Chroniques / War in Ukraine: how to forecast the impact on the world economy?
π Economics π Geopolitics

War in Ukraine : how to forecast the impact on the world economy ?

SAMPOGNARO_Raul
Raul Sampognaro
economist in the analysis and forecasting department of the OFCE
Key takeaways
  • Germany is the country most affected by the Russian invasion, with a loss of 1.1 points of GDP, compared to a loss of 0.4 points for France.
  • World trade fell by 0.7 points in volume, and world industrial production by 0.6 points.
  • The evolution of oil, gas and electricity prices would have cut French growth by 1.4 points, but the shock was compensated by fiscal policy.
  • By mobilising resources to alleviate the energy crisis, we end up with fewer resources to ensure the environmental transition.
  • Rising tensions between the US and China may be a new source of uncertainty, which could have a major impact on global economic activity.

On 24th Februa­ry 2022, Rus­sia inva­ded Ukraine. Beyond the direct effects on the coun­tries invol­ved in the conflict, there were nume­rous eco­no­mic impacts on other states. Raul Sam­po­gna­ro, an eco­no­mist at OFCE (Obser­va­toire fran­çais des conjonc­tures éco­no­miques), has wor­ked on the impact of the war in Ukraine on the eco­no­mic acti­vi­ty of six coun­tries : France, the Uni­ted States, the Uni­ted King­dom, Ger­ma­ny, Ita­ly, and Spain. To do this, the resear­cher used an indi­ca­tor that cal­cu­lates the level of geo­po­li­ti­cal risk.

What is the starting point for your study ?

At the OFCE, we make two fore­casts a year on the state of the world and French eco­no­mies. At the begin­ning of 2022, the war in Ukraine was one of the major shocks for the world eco­no­my. We had to try to quan­ti­fy the impact of this shock on the tra­jec­to­ry of the French eco­no­my. In a total­ly unre­la­ted way, at the begin­ning of the year, two Ita­lian resear­chers, Dario Cal­da­ra, and Mat­teo Laco­viel­lo, publi­shed a quan­ti­ta­tive indi­ca­tor of geo­po­li­ti­cal risk that uses very old and very exten­sive data­bases based on press articles, main­ly from the English-spea­king press, tal­king about geo­po­li­ti­cal risks and ten­sions. With new tech­niques in Big Data, they select a dic­tio­na­ry of words rela­ted to geo­po­li­tics and count the num­ber of articles tal­king about these sub­jects. The pro­por­tion of articles tal­king about geo­po­li­tics is their mea­sure of geo­po­li­ti­cal risk. Fur­ther­more, both resear­chers manage to create coun­try risk indices. I have the­re­fore repro­du­ced their metho­do­lo­gy for the six coun­tries that the OFCE fol­lows, inclu­ding France.

Is Dario Caldara and Matteo Lacoviello’s geopolitical risk indicator effective ?

If we look at the geo­po­li­ti­cal risk index on a glo­bal level, the last four signi­fi­cant peaks were the Gulf War in the 1990s, Sep­tem­ber 11th 2001, the war in Iraq, and the out­break of the Ukraine war a year ago. These are the mas­sive geo­po­li­ti­cal shocks that have been iden­ti­fied by this index since 1985. For the French geo­po­li­ti­cal risk index, in the first quar­ter of 2022 there is an increase of almost 4 stan­dard devia­tions – a very big change. For Ger­ma­ny, the shock is equi­va­lent to 6 stan­dard devia­tions, which is explai­ned by the fact that the coun­try is very dependent on Rus­sian fos­sil fuels. After Euro­pean coun­tries, there are also Chi­na and the Uni­ted States. This metho­do­lo­gy clear­ly shows the effects and depen­den­cies of the dif­ferent coun­tries in res­ponse to this glo­bal shock.

How did you adapt this indicator to calculate the impact of the war in Ukraine ?

I tried to find the cor­re­la­tions of these sud­den and unfo­re­seeable evo­lu­tions on macro-eco­no­mic variables. For France, I made a model where this index is cor­re­la­ted with five variables : busi­ness invest­ment, GDP, prices, and inter­est rates. I also added effects on the stock mar­ket : the CAC 40.

What are your results ?

In France, the shock is 0.4 points of GDP com­pa­red to 1.1 points in Ger­ma­ny. Ita­ly, the Uni­ted King­dom, and the Uni­ted States are next with 0.3 points less. Final­ly, Spain saw a 0.2 point drop. We have also car­ried out ana­lyses on the world eco­no­my : in terms of volume, world trade – exclu­ding price and com­mo­di­ty effects exclu­ding gas – would have fal­len by 0.7 points. World indus­trial pro­duc­tion would have fal­len by 0.6 points, which is consistent with the magni­tude of the shock in the advan­ced countries.

In this study, you are specifically interested in the impact of geopolitical risk, leaving aside the effect of the energy crisis…

We have asses­sed the mar­ket rela­ting spe­ci­fi­cal­ly to clean ener­gy using other tools. Accor­ding to the model we use, a geo­po­li­ti­cal risk shock will reduce invest­ment, which decreases GDP. It is the­re­fore an effect pure­ly lin­ked to uncer­tain­ty : players delay or stop cer­tain pro­jects, par­ti­cu­lar­ly in the long term – some­thing we quan­ti­fy as being 0.5 points.

What are the effects of this energy crisis on GDP, according to your forecasts ?

The first major shock in 2022 will be the rise in the price of raw mate­rials and ener­gy. The evo­lu­tion of the price of oil, gas and elec­tri­ci­ty would have redu­ced French growth by 1.4 points, but this shock has been part­ly com­pen­sa­ted by fis­cal poli­cy, with many mea­sures to miti­gate the conse­quences of this cri­sis. We have eva­lua­ted the sup­port to French acti­vi­ty of these mea­sures at 0.8. The ener­gy cri­sis the­re­fore adds 0.6 points of GDP loss in 2022.

The ener­gy cri­sis adds 0.6 points of GDP loss in France in 2022.

Beyond GDP, the evo­lu­tion of the price of oil and gas is a dete­rio­ra­tion of the terms of trade for France. Consu­ming so many impor­ted pro­ducts shows that we need to pro­duce more. INSEE shows that the loss of natio­nal income, the nation’s pur­cha­sing power, has never been so degra­ded since the first oil shock in the 1970s. There is an effect of geo­po­li­ti­cal ten­sions, but we must not for­get that the pri­ma­ry shock comes from energy.

More generally, what lessons can be drawn from 2022 ?

There is a posi­tive side : we have been able to adapt to the ener­gy shock. On the nega­tive side, inter­na­tio­nal rela­tions are not going to nor­ma­lise. We are coming out of this sequence with a much lar­ger public debt, we have mobi­li­sed a lot of resources to com­pen­sate for the ener­gy shock. And impli­cit­ly, it is these mobi­li­sed resources that would have been use­ful to faci­li­tate the envi­ron­men­tal tran­si­tion and to sub­si­dise the consump­tion of fos­sil fuels. This is the other nega­tive lega­cy of the sequence : we are lea­ving with fewer resources for the envi­ron­men­tal transition.

With the war in Ukraine continuing, is the geopolitical risk still as great ?

When the new state of the world becomes a cer­tain­ty, the “uncer­tain­ty” argu­ment disap­pears. Spon­ta­neous­ly, some inter­na­tio­nal trade flows will renor­ma­lise, others will remain per­ma­nent­ly hal­ted. The 0.5 points of GDP will not be 100% lost, but not 100% reco­ve­red either. Fur­ther­more, we are seeing ten­sions rise bet­ween the Uni­ted States and Chi­na, which may have a dif­ferent quan­ti­ta­tive impact on the scale of world pro­duc­tion, which was very much orien­ted towards Asia. There may be a much more mas­sive recon­fi­gu­ra­tion if these ten­sions per­sist. That’s ano­ther uncer­tain­ty that could impact the deci­sions of mul­ti­na­tio­nal com­pa­nies in a fair­ly long-las­ting way.

Sirine Azouaoui 

Support accurate information rooted in the scientific method.

Donate