Archive for May 11th, 2010

h1

Derivatives markets, storage and price volatility

May 11, 2010

Michael Giberson

I found this discussion of spot oil prices, futures prices, and commodity storage to be insightful:

[R]ecent evidence suggests that the combination of derivative prices and storage stabilized rather than destabilized the oil markets.

Indeed, during the run up in oil prices at the beginning of 2008 the spot price for oil was considerably higher than the futures price for delivery in 12 months, providing an incentive to reduce storage.   By taking oil out of storage and putting more supply on the market, the spot price increase was dampened.  Then at the end of 2008 as spot prices for oil were crashing, futures prices stayed above spot prices, creating an incentive to store oil, softening the collapse.

If anything, the volatility in the oil markets over this period of time was caused by a lack of storage capacity that has not grown nearly as fast as the overall oil market.  So if policymakers are serious about dampening volatility, they should encourage the growth in storage capacity.  What does this have to do with derivatives markets?  An active derivatives market makes investments in storage facilities more attractive, because it reduces the risks associated with storing commodities.  Hence, policy initiatives to dampen speculation and hedging in derivatives markets are likely to make storage less attractive, which will in turn, increase rather than decrease the volatility of the actual physical commodity prices.

I wonder how this idea would translate into electric power markets and grid-connected energy storage?

h1

When stories compete with statistics for attention, stories win

May 11, 2010

Michael Giberson

Everyone loves a good story, it seems.  Maybe too much.  Three U-Mass researchers have detailed the overwhelming influence of anecdotal information in decision making, even less-than-adequate anecdotes presented alongside directly relevant and authoritative statistical information.  The research also looks at two strategies that mitigate some of the influence of anecdotal bias, priming a more “scientific” outlook and encouraging counterargument.

The paper is “Stories vs. Statistics: The Impact of Anecdotal Data on Accounting Decision Making.” The abstract:

Prior research in psychology and communications suggests that decision makers are biased by anecdotal data, even in the presence of more informative statistical data. A bias for anecdotal data can have significant implications for accounting decision making since judgments are often made when both statistical and anecdotal data are present. We conduct experiments in two different accounting contexts (i.e., managerial accounting and auditing) to investigate whether accounting decision makers are unduly influenced by anecdotal data in the presence of superior, and contradictory, statistical data. Our results suggest that accounting decision makers ignored or underweighted statistical data in favor of anecdotal data, leading to suboptimal decisions. In addition, we investigate whether two decision aids, judgment orientation and counterargument, help to mitigate the effects of this anecdotal bias. The results indicate that both decision aids can reduce the influence of anecdotal data in accounting decision contexts. The implications of these results for decision making in accounting and auditing are discussed.

The one thing that might make the study more persuasive would be if they supplemented their detailed statistical results with a good story or two containing “real world” examples of anecdotal bias.

VIA the Cognitive Social Science eJournal, Vol. 2, No. 24.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 41 other followers