Oil prices are forecast to average $65 a barrel over 2018, up from an average of $53 a barrel in 2017, on strong demand from consumers and restraint by oil producers, while metals prices are expected to rise 9 percent this year, also on a pickup in demand and supply constraints, the World Bank said on Tuesday.
Prices for energy commodities – which include oil, natural gas, and coal — are forecast to jump 20 percent in 2018, a 16 percentage point upward revision from October’s outlook, the World Bank said in its April Commodity Markets Outlook. The metals index is expected to rise as an 9 percent drop in iron ore prices is offset by increases in all base metals prices, led by nickel, which is forecast to rise 30 percent.
Agricultural commodities, including food commodities and raw materials, are anticipated to see a price rise of over 2 percent this year on diminished planting prospects. Weather disruptions are expected to be minimal.
“Accelerating global growth and rising demand are important factors behind broad-based price increases for most commodities and the forecast of higher commodities prices ahead,” said Shantayanan Devarajan, World Bank Senior Director for Development Economics and acting Chief Economist. “At the same time, policy actions currently under discussion add uncertainty to the outlook.”
Oil prices are expected to average $65/bbl over 2019 as well. Although prices are projected to decline from April 2018 levels, they should be supported by continued production restraint by OPEC and non-OPEC producers and strong demand. Upside risks to the forecast include constraints to U.S. shale oil output, geopolitical risks in several producing countries, and concerns the United States may not waive sanctions against Iran. Downside risks include weaker compliance with the oil producers’ agreement to restrain output or outright termination of the accord, rising output from Libya and Nigeria, and a quicker-than-expected rise in shale oil output.
“Oil prices have more than doubled since bottoming in early 2016, as the large overhang of inventories has been reduced significantly.” said John Baffes, Senior Economist and lead author of the Commodity Markets Outlook. “Strong oil demand and greater compliance by the OPEC and non-OPEC producers with their agreed output pledges helped tip the market into deficit.”
Upside risks to the metals price forecast include more robust global demand than expected. Supply could be held back by slow incorporation of new capacity, trade sanctions against metals exporters, and policy actions in China. Downside risks include slower-than-expected growth in major emerging markets, the restart of idle capacity, and an easing of pollution-related policies in China. Precious metals are expected to climb 3 percent this year in anticipation of U.S. interest rate increases and higher inflation expectations.
Grains and oils and meal prices are expected to rise in 2018, mostly due to lower planting intentions. The mild La Niña cycle that extended into the early part of the year only affected banana production in Central America and soybean production in Argentina and did not impact global markets for those crops substantially. The possible introduction by China of countervailing duties in response to U.S. tariff increases could impact the soybean market.
A special focus section examines the changed landscape for oil-exporting economies after the 2014 oil price collapse. The oil price plunge eroded oil-related revenues, forcing abrupt cuts in government spending that accentuated the slowdown in private sector activity in many regions. Income inequality and political instability also weakened the ability of some oil-exporting economies to weather low oil prices.
“Oil exporters with flexible currency regimes, relatively large fiscal buffers, and more diversified economies have fared better than others since the oil price collapse,” said Ayhan Kose, director of World Bank’s Development Economics Prospects Group. “However, most oil exporters still face significant fiscal challenges in the face of revenue prospects that have weakened since 2014.”
Capabilities fit is a winning formula for M&A: PwC’s “Doing the right deals” study
Ensuring there is a capabilities fit between buyer and target is key to delivering a high-performing deal, according to a new PwC study of 800 corporate acquisitions. . The study finds that capabilities-driven deals generated a significant annual total shareholder return (TSR) premium (equal to 14.2% points) over deals lacking a capabilities fit.
The “Doing the right deals” study looks at the 50 largest deals with publicly-listed buyers in each of 16 industries and evaluates the characteristics that delivered superior financial outcomes for the buyers, as measured by annual TSR.
A capability is defined as the specific combination of processes, tools, technologies, skills, and behaviours that allows the company to deliver unique value to its customers.
Two types of deals were found to outperform the market: capabilities enhancement deals – in which the buyer acquires a target for a capability it needs — and capabilities leverage deals – in which the buyer uses its capabilities to generate value from the target. These represent a true engine of value creation, delivering average annual TSR that was 3.3% points above local market indices. Deals without these characteristics – limited-fit deals – had an average annual TSR of -10.9% points compared to the local market indices.
While 73% of the largest 800 deals analysed sought to combine businesses that did fit from a capabilities perspective, 27% were limited-fit deals. The analysis shows that for every dollar spent on M&A, roughly 25 cents were spent on such limited-fit deals that in many cases destroyed shareholder value.
Alastair Rimmer, Global Deals Strategy Leader, PwC UK said: “Our analysis confirms that deals where the buyer is focused on enhancing its own capabilities or leveraging its capabilities to improve the target can result in a substantial TSR premium. Whether a deal creates value depends less on whether it is aimed at consolidation, diversification or entering new markets. What matters is whether there is a solid capabilities rationale between the buyer and the target.”
Capabilities fit delivers shareholder value across industries
The capabilities premium was found to be positive across all of the 16 industries studied. The share of capabilities-driven deals was highest in pharma & life sciences (92%), an industry where deals often combine one company’s innovation capabilities with another’s strength in distribution. Other leading industries in capabilities fit deals were health services and telecommunications (both with 90% capabilities-driven deals) and automotive (86%). Limited fit deals were found to be most prevalent in the oil & gas industry (62%), where asset acquisition can play an important role in addition to capabilities fit.
The analysis shows that the stated strategic intent of a deal, as defined in corporate announcements and regulatory filings, has little to no impact on value creation. Whether a deal fits or not depends less on stated goals of consolidation, diversification or entering new markets. What matters is whether there is a capabilities fit between the buyer and the target. Deals aiming for geographic expansion notably stood out as performing less well than others, largely because many of them (34%) were limited-fit deals.
The M&A playing field has shifted due to COVID-19
More than ever, companies must be clear in defining which capabilities they can leverage to succeed, and which capabilities gaps they need to fill.
Hein Marais, Global Value Creation Leader, PwC UK added: “Deal rationales have shifted in a COVID context, reflecting the heightened need for new and different capabilities if an enterprise is to generate value and create sustained outcomes. The need to move quickly increases the pressure to do deals at pace – and thereby the risk of failing to evaluate capabilities fit with enough care. Ensuring such capabilities fit, however, dramatically increases the chances of your deal creating value.”
Companies may be overlooking the riskiest cyber threats of all
A majority of companies don’t have a handle on their third-party cyber risks – risks obscured by the complexity of their business relationships and vendor/supplier networks. This is the finding of the PwC 2022 Global Digital Trust Insights Survey. The survey of 3,600 CEOs and other C-suite executives globally found that 60% have less than a thorough understanding of the risk of data breaches through third parties, while 20% have little or no understanding at all of these risks.
The findings are a red flag in an environment where 60% of the C-suite respondents anticipate an increase in cyber crime in 2022. They also reflect the challenges organizations face in building trust in their data — making sure it is accurate, verified and secure, so customers and other stakeholders can trust that their information will be protected.
Notably, 56% of respondents say their organizations expect a rise in breaches via their software supply chain, yet only 34% have formally assessed their enterprise’s exposure to this risk. Similarly, 58% expect a jump in attacks on their cloud services, but only 37% profess to have an understanding of cloud risks based on formal assessments.
Sean Joyce, Global & US Cybersecurity & Privacy Leader, PwC United States said: “Organizations can be vulnerable to an attack even when their own cyber defenses are good; a sophisticated attacker searches for the weakest link – sometimes through the organization’s suppliers. Gaining visibility and managing your organization’s web of third-party relationships and dependencies is a must. Yet, in our research, fewer than half of respondents say they have responded to the escalating threats that complex business ecosystems pose.”
Asked how their companies are minimizing third-party risks, the most common answers were auditing or verifying their suppliers’ compliance (46%), sharing information with third parties or helping them in some other way to improve their cyber stance (42%), and addressing cost- or time-related challenges to cyber resilience (40%). But a majority have not refined their third-party criteria (58%), not rewritten contracts (60%), nor increased the rigor of their due diligence (62%) to identify third-party threats.
Simplifying the way to cybersecurity
Nearly three quarters of respondents said the complexity of their organization poses “concerning” cyber and privacy risks. Data governance and data infrastructure (77% each) ranked highest among areas of unnecessary and avoidable complexity.
Simplification is a challenge, but there is ample evidence that it is worthwhile. While three in 10 respondents overall said their organizations had streamlined operations over the past two years, the “most improved” in our survey (the top 10% in cyber outcomes) were five times more likely to have streamlined operations enterprise-wide. These top 10% organizations are also 10 times more likely to have implemented formal data trust practices and 11 times more likely to have a high level of understanding of third party cyber and privacy risks.
CEO engagement can make a difference
Executive and CEO respondents differ on how much the support the CEO provides on cyber, with CEOs seeing themselves as more involved in, and supportive of, setting and achieving cyber goals than their teams do. But there is no disagreement that proactive CEO engagement in setting and achieving cyber goals makes a difference. Executives in the “most improved” group, reporting the most progress in cybersecurity outcomes, were 12x more likely to have broad and deep support on cyber from their CEOs. Most executives also believe that educating CEOs and boards so they can better fulfill their cyber responsibilities is the most important act for realizing a more secure digital society by 2030.
Sean Joyce concluded: “Our survey shows that the most advanced organizations see cybersecurity as more than defense and controls, but as a means to drive sustained business outcomes and build trust with their customers. As leaders of organizations, CEOs set the tone for focusing their cyber teams on bigger-picture, growth-related objectives rather than narrower, short-term expectations.”
Are we on track to meet the SDG9 industry-related targets by 2030?
A new report published by the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), Statistical Indicators of Inclusive and Sustainable Industrialization, looks at the progress made towards achieving the industry-related targets of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 9 of the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The report is primarily based on the SDG9 indicators related to inclusive and sustainable industrialization, for which UNIDO is designated as a custodian agency, showing the patterns of the recent changes in different country groups.
Six years after the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its 17 SDGs, there has been increasing demand for information on whether the SDG targets could be reached, and what actions should governments take to accelerate progress. The UNIDO report introduces two new tools developed by UNIDO to help countries measuring performance and progress towards SDG9 industry-related targets: the SDG9 Industry Index and SDG9 progress and outlook indicators. The SDG9 Industry Index benchmarks countries’ performance on SDG-9 targets over 2000-2018 for 131 economies. In addition, the report develops two measures to answer the main questions:
- Progress: how much progress has been made since 2000?
- Outlook: how likely is it that the target will be achieved by 2030?
The global COVID-19 pandemic has inevitably had a negative toll on the progress towards reaching the SDG9 indicators, but the extent of the long-term impact remains to be seen. Industrialized countries continue to dominate global manufacturing industry, but their relative share has gradually declined over the past decade. In 2010, industrialized economies made up 60.3% of global production, which has decreased to 50.5% in 2020. China has been the largest manufacturer, now accounting for 31.7% of global production. This is a trend that has been reinforced by the pandemic.
Progress for the least developed countries (LDCs), at the heart of the 2030 Agenda, is a different story. While economic theory and countries’ experiences across the world have established that industrialization is an engine of sustainable growth, progress among LDCs remains very diverse. Asian LDCs are poised to double their share of manufacturing in GDP and thus meet SDG target 9.2, but African LDCs have stagnated.
SDG9 Industry Index
The SDG-9 Industry Index, consisting of five dimensions, covers three targets and five indicators and assigns a final score to countries. In 2018, the top ten consisted of exclusively industrialized economies, with Taiwan, Province of China, Ireland, Switzerland, the Republic of Korea and Germany making up the top five. In general, industrialized economies perform best in all dimensions of the Index.
The countries at the bottom of the ranking are LDCs, in particular those located in sub-Saharan Africa. Although some African countries have been displaying impressive growth rates, growth has been driven by an extended commodity boom and foreign capital inflows, while industrialization and structural transformation have stagnated. Additionally, substantial data is lacking for a significant amount of the countries. In the SDG9 Industry Index, only 24 out of 54 African countries are included, from which only eight are LDCs. It is clear that national statistics offices need strengthening, as data availability helps countries formulate, review and evaluate their development plans and programmes.
A Peep into Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan’s Tricky Relations with Afghan Taliban
To understand the interesting relationship between the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), also known as Pakistani Taliban, and the Afghan Taliban, one...
Act Urgently to Preserve Biodiversity for Sustainable Future — ADB President
The world must act urgently to preserve ecosystems and biodiversity for the sake of a sustainable future and prosperity, Asian...
Stockholm+50: Accelerate action towards a healthy and prosperous planet for all
The United Nations General Assembly agreed on the way forward for plans to host an international meeting at the highest...
Is Myanmar an ethical minefield for multinational corporations?
Business at a crossroads Political reforms in Myanmar started in November 2010 followed by the release of the opposition leader,...
Logistics giant commits to Gothenburg Green City Zone
DB Schenker is collaborating with Business Region Göteborg to scale up electric freight transport as part of the Gothenburg Green...
Early signs of collective progress as banks work to implement the Principles for Responsible Banking
A new report summarising the progress made by banks who have signed the Principles for Responsible Banking finds that signatories...
Focus on the recovery from the pandemic at the 19th EU Regions Week
The annual European Week of Regions and Cities has shown how the EU and national and regional governments can support...
Economy4 days ago
There Is No Business, Like Small Business: New Strategy
Africa4 days ago
Wagner: Putin’s secret weapon on the way to Mali?
South Asia4 days ago
The Taliban-Afghanistan Dilemmas
Americas3 days ago
The U.S. Might Finally Be Ready to Back Down, to Avoid WW III
Finance4 days ago
Why Traders Should Never Miss Forex Trading Investment Opportunities
Americas3 days ago
How The West Subdue Us: An Approach of Colonial and Development Discourse
Green Planet4 days ago
Let’s play the squid game: but we play for our planet this time
Russia4 days ago
The Emerging “Eastern Axis” and the Future of JCPOA