Abstract
There is an unresolved debate about the potential effects of financial speculation on food prices and price volatility. Germany’s largest financial institution and leading global investment bank recently decided to continue investing in agricultural commodities, stating that there is little empirical evidence to support the notion that the growth of agricultural-based financial products has caused price increases or volatility. The statement is supported by a recently published literature review, which concludes that financial speculation does not have an adverse effect on the functioning of the agricultural commodities market. As public health professionals concerned with global food insecurity, we have appraised the methodological quality of the review using a validated and reliable appraisal tool. The appraisal revealed major shortcomings in the methodological quality of the review. These were particularly related to intransparencies in the search strategy and in the selection/presentation of studies and findings; the neglect of the possibility of publication bias; a lack of objective or rigorous criteria for assessing the scientific quality of included studies and for the formulation of conclusions. Based on the results of our appraisal, we conclude that it is not justified to reject the hypothesis that financial speculation might have adverse effects on food prices/price volatility. We hope to initiate reflections about scientific standards beyond the boundaries of disciplines and call for high quality, rigorous systematic reviews on the effects of financial speculation on food prices or price volatility.
Highlights
Germany’s largest financial institution and leading global investment bank continues investing in agricultural commodities [1], stating that “there is little empirical evidence to support the notion that the growth of agricultural-based financial products has caused price increases or volatility” [2]
As public health professionals concerned with global food insecurity, we have followed the increasingly controversial public debates and read the review [3] invoked by the scientists as proof of ‘no evidence’ for a relationship between speculations and food prices or price volatility
The rationale for using the AMSTAR guideline instead of the one tailored for the field of economics was that: (i) AMSTAR has been rigorously validated; (ii) the MetaAnalysis of Economics Research Network’ (MAER) guideline does not provide an overall summary score and puts an emphasis on meta-analyses and pooling techniques; (iii) despite the overlap of the MAER standards with some of the AMSTAR principles, we felt more comfortable using a ‘lens’ from our own research background to make a judgement about a study from a different field
Summary
Germany’s largest financial institution and leading global investment bank continues investing in agricultural commodities [1], stating that “there is little empirical evidence to support the notion that the growth of agricultural-based financial products has caused price increases or volatility” [2]. Letter to the Federal President of Germany, the lead authors of the review [3], supported by 40 German scientists and agricultural economists, have called for a more differentiated discussion about the potential effects of financial speculations and actively advocated against the regulation of agricultural markets. Building their arguments mainly upon the cited review [3], they expressed their concern that arguments which are scientifically not supportable had been invoked by CSOs. Building their arguments mainly upon the cited review [3], they expressed their concern that arguments which are scientifically not supportable had been invoked by CSOs These debates take place in a national context, any policy implications drawn from such conclusions might have global consequences
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
