Advertisement

Abstract

Energy security is placed at risk by exogenous supply shocks, in particular political crises and conflicts that disrupt resource extraction and transportation. In this paper, a computational model of the security of international crude oil supplies is described, and its output analyzed. The model consists of country agents, linked geographically and by a data-derived oil trade network. Countries stochastically experience crises, with probabilities and durations drawn randomly from data-fitted distributions. The effect of these crises on secure oil supplies is measured globally and by country, and the effect of conflict contagion and spare production capacity are also estimated. The model indicates that Russia, Eastern Europe, and much of the Global South are at the greatest risk of supply shocks, while American producers are at greatest risk of demand shocks. It estimates that conflict contagion decreases energy security slightly, while spare capacity has minimal effect.

Keywords

Demand Shock Energy Security International Energy Agency Supply Shock Spare Capacity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    International Energy Agency: Topic: Energy security (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yergin, D.: Ensuring energy security. Foreign Affairs 85(2), 69–82 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wu, G., Liu, L.C., Wei, Y.M.: Comparison of china’s oil import risk: Results based on portfolio theory and a diversification index approach. Energy Policy 37(9), 3557–3565 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jewell, J.: International Energy Agency: The IEA model of short-term energy security. Technical report, International Energy Agency (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stirling, A.: Multicriteria diversity analysis: A novel heuristic framework for appraising energy portfolios. Energy Policy 38(4), 1622–1634 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Skea, J.: Valuing diversity in energy supply. Energy Policy 38(7), 3608–3621 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jacobson, M.Z.: Review of solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security. Energy & Environmental Science 2(2), 148–173 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cederman, L.E.: Emergent Actors in World Politics. Princeton University Press (1997)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Geller, A.: The use of complexity-based models in international relations: a technical overview and discussion of prospects and challenges. Cambridge Review of International Affairs 24(1), 63–80 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hamilton, J.D.: What is an oil shock? Journal of Econometrics 113(2), 363–398 (2003)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kilian, L.: Exogenous oil supply shocks: How big are they and how much do they matter for the U.S. economy? Review of Economics and Statistics 90(2), 216–240 (2008)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    United Nations Statistical Division: COMTRADE (2013)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    United States Energy Information Administration: Countries (2013)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Natural Resources Canada: Energy sector demand and consumption (January 2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    United States Energy Information Administration: How much of the oil produced in the United States is consumed in the United States? (March 2013)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mohamedi, F.: Iran primer: The oil and gas industry. Technical report, United States Institute of Peace (December 2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rasmi, A.: The risks of Saudi oil consumption. The Daily Star Newspaper - Lebanon (June 2013)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mearns, E.: Oil watch - OPEC crude oil production (November 2012)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Daya, A.: Saudi Arabia can raise output 25% if needed, Naimi says (March 2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Economist Intelligence Unit: Social unrest. Technical report (2013)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Goldstone, J.A.: Political Instability Task Force: A global forecasting model of political instability. Political Instability Task Force (2005)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cioffi-Revilla, C., Midlarsky, M.I.: Power laws, scaling, and fractals in the most lethal international and civil wars. In: Diehl, P.F. (ed.) The Scourge of War: New Extensions on an Old Problem (2004)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Themnr, L., Wallensteen, P.: Armed conflicts, 1946-2012. Journal of Peace Research 50(4), 509–521 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hendrix, C.S., Salehyan, I.: Social conflict in Africa database (SCAD) (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Masad
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computational Social ScienceGeorge Mason UniversityFairfaxUSA

Personalised recommendations