Sharma Aarzoo
Department of Commerce and Management Studies, CCS University, PIN 250001, India.
Resour Policy. 2022 Sep;78:102923. doi: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2022.102923. Epub 2022 Aug 11.
The paper aims at studying the financialization of commodities during coronavirus pandemic, thereafter referred as COVID19 and comparing the same with global financial crisis, thereafter referred as GFC. The connectedness among energy commodities particularly after 2020 was found strong, the effect is medium in case of metals and least in case of agriculture commodities. The findings proved that the financialization of commodities during COVID 19 was much strong as compared to GFC. An investigation of comparative analysis of financialization in developed countries and developing countries is also made, which indicates that connectedness is strong in developed countries as compared to developing countries. The findings reveal the effects were less significant from 2010 to 2019. Gold has significant effect with stock market during COVID 19 and GFC period, marking it a safe haven asset during crisis. Overall, the findings cast doubt on the hedging properties of energy commodities. The finding also indicates the COVID 19 had a deeper impact as compared to GFC.
本文旨在研究新冠疫情期间（此后称为COVID-19）商品的金融化，并将其与全球金融危机（此后称为GFC）进行比较。研究发现，2020年之后能源商品之间的关联性很强，金属商品的关联性为中等，而农产品的关联性最弱。研究结果证明，与全球金融危机相比，COVID-19期间商品的金融化程度要强得多。本文还对发达国家和发展中国家商品金融化的比较分析进行了调查，结果表明，与发展中国家相比，发达国家的关联性更强。研究结果显示出，2010年至2019年期间影响较小。在COVID-19和全球金融危机期间，黄金与股票市场有显著关联，这使其在危机期间成为一种避险资产。总体而言，研究结果对能源商品的套期保值特性提出了质疑。研究结果还表明，与全球金融危机相比，COVID-19的影响更为深远。
