Search results

This study aims to investigate the response of green investments of emerging countries to own-market uncertainty, oil-market uncertainty and COVID-19 effect/geo-political risks (GPRs), using the tail risks of corresponding markets as measures of uncertainty.

This study employs Westerlund and Narayan (2015) (WN)-type distributed lag model that simultaneously accounts for persistence, endogeneity and conditional heteroscedasticity, within a single model framework. The tail risks are obtained using conditional standard deviation of the residuals from an asymmetric autoregressive moving average – ARMA(1,1) – generalized autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity – GARCH(1,1) model framework with Gaussian innovation. For out-of-sample forecast evaluation, the study employs root mean square error (RMSE), and Clark and West (2007) (CW) test for pairwise comparison of nested models, under three forecast horizons; providing statistical justification for incorporating oil tail risks and COVID-19 effects or GPRs in the predictive model.

Green returns responds significantly to own-market uncertainty (mostly positively), oil-market uncertainty (mostly positively) as well as the COVID-19 effect (mostly negatively), with some evidence of hedging potential against uncertainties that are external to the green investments market. Also, incorporating external uncertainties improves the in-sample predictability and out-of-sample forecasts, and yields some economic gains.

This study contributes originally to the green market-uncertainty literature in four ways. First, it generates daily tail risks (a more realistic measure of uncertainty) for emerging countries’ green returns and global oil prices. Second, it employs WN-type distributed lag model that is well suited to account for conditional heteroscedasticity, endogeneity and persistence effects; which characterizes financial series. Third, it presents both in-sample predictability and out-of-sample forecast performances. Fourth, it provides the economic gains of incorporating own-market, oil-market and COVID-19 uncertainty.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the predictability of crude oil price and shale oil production, in a bid to examine the possibility of bi-directional causality.

The study adopts a recently developed predictability model by Westerlund and Narayan (2015), which accounts for persistence, endogeneity and heteroscedasticity. It also accounts for structural breaks in the predictive models.

The empirical results show that only a unidirectional causal relationship from crude oil price to shale oil production exists. This happens as crude oil price appears to be a good predictor of shale oil production; however, shale oil production does not serve as a good predictor for crude oil price. Accounting for structural break was found to improve the predictability and forecast accuracy of the predictive model. Our result is robust to choice of crude oil price benchmarks (West Texas Intermediate, Brent, Dubai Fateh and Refiners’ Acquisition Cost) and their denominations (real or nominal).

The result implies that crude oil price must be considered when predicting shale oil production. Meanwhile, the non-significance of shale of production in crude oil price predictive model provides information to potential analyst, researchers and countries predicting crude oil price that failure to account for the effect of shale oil production would not have significant impact on the forecast accuracy of their models.

The study contributes originally to the literature on crude oil price–shale oil production in four major ways. First, it applies a recently developed predictability method by Westerlund and Narayan (2015), which is more suitable for dealing with persistence, conditional heteroscedasticity and endogeneity in the predictors. Second, it investigates existence of reverse causality between crude oil price and shale oil production. Third, it examines the variation in the response and effect of four major crude oil price benchmarks. Fourth, it considers crude oil price in both real and nominal terms.