Sep 29 2010

Price controls in the Chinese Petrol market – or why you may have to wait in line to fill your gas tank!

China rations diesel as record oil hits supplies | Markets | Reuters

In the fall of 2007 I was living in Shanghai, China. At the time, oil prices were hitting record levels world wide, leading to rising petrol prices for drivers in most places.  However, at the time,  I began witnesing an unusual site on my taxi rides into the city of Shanghai: as our taxi passed petrol station after petrol station, I observed dozens of blue trucks (the ubiquitous medium of transporting good from Shanghai’s factories to her ports) spilling out of gas station parking lots into the road, apparently queued, waiting for a spot at the pump. I had never seen such long lines at any of the petrol stations around Shanghai before, and I began to wonder as to the reasons for these crazy long lines!

Well, an article at the time helped solve the riddle of the long lines. As it turns out, there was a simple explanation rooted in the principles of supply and demand that any first semester AP or IB economics student would understand! The Chinese government had been forced to ration petrol (limiting the amount that a driver can buy at one go) due to the shortages resulting from the government’s price controls in the petrol market.

Truck drivers reported long queues at petrol stations along a national highway linking Fujian and Zhejiang provinces, with each truck getting 100 yuan ($13) worth of diesel, or around 20 litres, per visit at a state-run station and 40 litres at a private kiosk…

“What’s wrong with the oil market? Our drivers had to queue the whole night for only a small amount of fill, slowing the traffic by almost one day,” said Gao Meili, who manages a logistics company.

China is a major importer of oil. With an economy growing around 12% in 2007, much of the country’s growth depended on the availability of crude oil at reasonable prices, which China’s oil refining firms turn into diesel and petrol, needed to get Chinese manufactured products from factory to port and from port to overseas consumers.

The problem with the oil market in China, however, was that as “Chinese refiners cannot pass the souring crude costs on to consumers.” Oil is an input needed to make a finished product, diesel. As the price of oil rose in 2007 (it reached a record of $92 per barrel in October of that year), the resource costs to petrol and diesel producers also rose, shifting the supply of petrol and diesel to the left, putting upward pressure on the equilibrium price.   As a first semester AP or IB student knows, resource costs are a determinant of supply, and as oil (the main resource in the production of petrol and diesel) increased in price, the supply of these important commodities invariably decreased.

In a free market, a decrease in supply leads to an increase in price. Herein lies the answer to the riddle of the long lies at petrol stations in Shanghai: the Chinese petrol and diesel market is not a free market. The government plays an active role in controlling prices paid by consumers for the finished product refiners are producing, petrol fuel:

Beijing fears stoking already high inflation and rigidly caps pump fuel rates to shield users from a 50 percent rally in global oil so far this year.

As the costs to petrol and diesel producers rose in 2007, the government in Beijing took the side of consumers and forbade fuel producers from raising the price they charge consumers.  The Chinese government essentially imposed a price ceiling in the market for petrol. A price ceiling is a maximum price set by a government aimed at helping consumers by keeping essential commodities like fuel affordable. As we have learned this week in AP and IB Economics, price controls such as this end up hurting BOTH producers AND consumers, since they only lead to a dis-equilibrium in the market in which the quantity demanded for a product rises while the quantity supplied by firms falls. The shortage of petrol and diesel resulting from the government’s price control are the perfect explanation for the long lines of blue trucks and motor scooters at all the gas stations in Shanghai during October of 2007.

So why, exactly, does the government’s enforcement of a lower than equilibrium price result in such severe shortages that truck drivers are only allowed to pump 20 litres of petrol per visit and made to wait hours each time they need to refill? Below is a supply and demand diagram that illustrates the situation in the Chinese fuel market in 2007:

In the graph above, the supply of petrol has decreased due to the increasing cost of the main resource that goes into petrol, oil. This decrease in supply means petrol has become more scarce, and correspondingly the equilibrium price should rise. However, due to the government’s intervention in the petrol and diesel markets, the price was not allowed to rise and instead remained at the maximum price of Pc.

At the government-mandated maximum price of Pc, the quantity of fuel demanded by drivers far exceeds the quantity supplied by China’s petrol producers. The result is a shortage of petrol equal to Qd-Qs.

The government’s intention for keeping petrol prices low is clear: to make consumers happy and keep the costs of transportation among China’s manufacturers low so as to not risk a slow-down in economic growth in China. However, the net effect of the price controls is a loss of total welfare in the petrol market. Notice the colored areas in the graph above. These represent the effect on welfare (consumer and producer surplus) of the price control.

  • The total areas of the green, orange and grey shapes represent the total amount of consumer and producer surplus in the petrol market assuming there were NO price controls. At a price of Pe, the quantity demanded and the quantity supplied are equal (at Qe) and the consumer surplus and producer surplus are maximized. The market is efficient at a price of Pe. Neither shortages nor surpluses of petrol exist.
  • However, at a price of Pc (the maximum price set by the government), the amount of petrol actually produced and consumed in the market is only Qs. Clearly, those who are able to buy petrol are better off, because they paid a lower price than they would have to without the price ceiling. But notice that there is a huge shortage of fuel now; many people who are willing and able to buy petrol at Pc simply cannot get the quantity they demand, because firms are simply not producing enough!
  • The total consumer surplus changes to the area below the demand curve and above Pc, but only out to Qs. The green area represents the consumer surplus after the price control. It is not at all obvious whether or not consumers are actually better off with the price ceiling.
  • The total producer surplus clearly shrinks to the orange triangle below Pc and above the supply curve. Petrol producers are definitely worse off due to the government’s action.
  • So how is the market as a whole affected? The black triangle represents the net welfare loss of the government’s price control. Notice that with a price of Pe, the black triangle would be added to consumer and producer surplus, but with a disequilibrium in the market at Pc, the black triangle is welfare lost to society.

Price controls by government’s clearly have an intended purpose of helping either consumers (in the case of a maximum price or price ceiling) or producers (in the case of a minimum price or price floor).  But the effect is always predictable from an economist’s perspective. A price set by a government above or below the equilibrium price will always lead to either a shortage or a surplus of the product in question. In addition, there will always be a loss of total welfare resulting from price controls, meaning that society as a whole is worse off than it would be without government intervention.

Discussion Questions:

  1. Why has the supply of petrol decreased?
  2. With a fall in supply of a commodity like petrol, does the demand change, or the quantity demanded? What is the difference?
  3. Define “consumer surplus” and “producer surplus”. Why does a government’s control of prices reduce the total welfare of consumers and producers in a market like petrol?
  4. How would a government subsidy to petrol producers provide a more desirable solution to the high oil prices than the maximum price described in this post? In your notes, sketch a new market diagram for petrol and show the effects on supply, demand, price and quantity of a government subsidy to petrol producers. Does a subsidy create a loss of welfare? Why or why not?

About the author:  Jason Welker teaches International Baccalaureate and Advanced Placement Economics at Zurich International School in Switzerland. In addition to publishing various online resources for economics students and teachers, Jason developed the online version of the Economics course for the IB and is has authored two Economics textbooks: Pearson Baccalaureate’s Economics for the IB Diploma and REA’s AP Macroeconomics Crash Course. Jason is a native of the Pacific Northwest of the United States, and is a passionate adventurer, who considers himself a skier / mountain biker who teaches Economics in his free time. He and his wife keep a ski chalet in the mountains of Northern Idaho, which now that they live in the Swiss Alps gets far too little use. Read more posts by this author

58 responses so far

58 Responses to “Price controls in the Chinese Petrol market – or why you may have to wait in line to fill your gas tank!”

  1. Charles Roberton 15 Nov 2011 at 3:29 pm

    Well, the Chinese government is a quite controlling government and controls much of the Chinese economy. Sometimes this can be positive and sometimes it can be negative. As everyone knows, oil prices fluctuate quite a lot, which means that when the oil prices hit the ceiling, it was only a matter of time before the price decreases again. The Chinese government, in this case, deliberately created a shortage of supply for consumers, however no one ever said that the producers didn't keep that supply. It is possible that the Chinese government tried protecting the producers instead if the consumers. Obviously the consumers where unhappy because of a shortage of oil by only being able to buy a certain amount every time they were entering a gas station. This would mean that less people would be driving during the period of time where the government created the shortage. Therefore, producers then could last longer with a certain amount of oil and could limit the oil income into China by a substantial amount whilst the price was ski high. As soon as the price would decrease, China would most likely start its normal income "routine" again. Again, this is just an unproved hypothesis of the situation .

  2. Sahelion 16 Nov 2011 at 9:44 pm

    Chuck,

    If I understand correctly what you're saying, I think I could agree with you, at first. I think you're saying that the government could intentionally announce that there is a shortage of oil, when there isn't, just so they are able to ration oil and set the price themselves. This way, the price for the consumers always remains constant, and even if the prices of oil fluctuates in other countries, it doesn't change the price of the oil they buy, just how much they are rationed. In this case, the government has to sacrifice a lot, since there is a large amount of dead-weight loss produced. At first, I thought it sounded like an excellent idea, but then the more I considered it, I thought about how there are immense shortages, which is extremely inefficient, and also people are not being rewarded by oil based on how much they are willing to pay, but where they are in the line to the tank station, which is not really fair. So, even though putting a price ceiling sounds like a good idea, I think it is too inefficient, and in the long run will hurt all stakeholders.

  3. Carl Krasson 17 Nov 2011 at 9:38 am

    1. Why has the supply of petrol decreased?

    The supply of petrol has decreased due to the rising production costs and the not changing price consumers pay for it. It has become less lucrative to produce oil and export it to China, compared to Europe for example.

    2. With a fall in supply of a commodity like petrol, does the demand change, or the quantity demanded? What is the difference?

    Quantity demanded changes.

    3. Define “consumer surplus” and “producer surplus”. Why does a government’s control of prices reduce the total welfare of consumers and producers in a market like petrol?

    CS and PS are basically the happiness of the consumers/producers. The consumers have to pay less, but the producers have higher prices therefore its not a win/win situation.

    4. How would a government subsidy to petrol producers provide a more desirable solution to the high oil prices than the maeximum price described in this post? In your notes, sketch a new market diagram for petrol and show the effects on supply, demand, price and quantity of a government subsidy to petrol producers. Does a subsidy create a loss of welfare? Why or why not?

    A subsidy does create a loss in welfare, because of the allocation of tax payer money. It’s a opportunity cost for the government as that subsidy money could have been spent on education or infrastructure

  4. Charles Roberton 17 Nov 2011 at 10:49 am

    Saheli,

    Sorry, i might not have explained myself well. What i was saying was that the Chinese government might have tried to make the effect of the increase of international oil prices less bad for their citizens by intentionally decreasing supply. By doing this, the supply would decrease and less people would drive on the road. This way, China could dramatically decrease the import of oil until the oil prices decrease again. They tried to keep the most supply possible in order to have to buy a minimal amount of oil during that time. This way, the country could survive off current oil supplies until the prices would decrease. But yes, it doesn’t change the price of the oil they buy, just how much they are rationed. The fact that industrial drivers have a shortage of oil is greatly inefficient, however if this was actually the case, the Chinese government thought that it would cost them much less to act this way. However, the article said that transportation of goods was delayed by about 24 hours. This is greatly expensive as well. So whether which is more or less expensive for the country determines it's efficiency. i really hope that made sense.

  5. Mr. Welkeron 18 Nov 2011 at 12:07 am

    Chuck,

    Interesting thoughts. I don't think the Chinese government's intentions or actions are quite as sophisticated as you suggest them to be. This is a case of a straighforward price control, meant to make petrol more affordable to Chinese households and firms who need it to drive their cars and trucks. China's government is always worried about unhappy citizens, and is afraid that inflation caused by high oil prices will lead to protests or riots around the country. To prevent this, they must appear to be doing something to keep petrol cheap, and therefore there is a legal price ceiling for petrol.

    The producers suffer, but probably end up selling lots of petrol on the black market anyway. Consumers can't complain that the government isn't trying to help them, however, so are less likely to express anger at the government through protests or riots.

    Make sense? Mr. Welker

  6. Charles Roberton 21 Nov 2011 at 3:42 pm

    Yes it does 🙂 thank you

  7. Mireille Pyburnon 21 Jan 2012 at 7:00 pm

    Magnificent goods from you, man. I’ve understand your stuff previous to and you’re just extremely

  8. […] and distribute sufficient gasoline to meet domestic demand. Chinese price controls have caused fuel rationing and shortages in the past. The United States created the Federal Energy Administration in 1974 after the OPEC oil […]