Connect with us

Economics

Lundin Mining Announces 2021 Production Guidance Achieved for All Metals; Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2021 Results to be Released February 17, 2022

 (TSX: LUN) (Nasdaq Stockholm: LUMI) Lundin Mining Corporation ("Lundin Mining" or the "Company") announces production results for the three and twelve months ended December 31, 2021 . The consolidated financial results for the year ended December 31,…

Published

on

 (TSX: LUN) (Nasdaq Stockholm: LUMI) Lundin Mining Corporation ("Lundin Mining" or the "Company") announces production results for the three and twelve months ended December 31, 2021 . The consolidated financial results for the year ended December 31, 2021 will be published on February 17, 2022 .

Highlights

  • Most recent 2021 annual production guidance was achieved for all metals. Production of 262,884 t of copper was above the midpoint of guidance and an increase of 14% over 2020. Zinc production of 143,797 t was above the midpoint of guidance and an increase over the prior year. Gold production of 167,000 oz exceeded annual guidance.
  • Candelaria copper production of 151,719 t achieved guidance and gold production of 91,000 oz exceeded guidance. Fourth quarter operations were particularly strong, producing 45,573 t of copper and 26,000 oz of gold, the most since the third quarter of 2017. With focus on operational practices, the positive trend of improvement in grade discrepancy continued progressively each month in the fourth quarter and averaged approximately 4%.
  • Chapada copper production of 52,019 t exceeded guidance and gold production of 76,000 oz achieved the top end of annual guidance. The state of Goiás and regions around Chapada have experienced greater than typical precipitation during the rainy season in 2022. Chapada is managing the rainfall well and continues to operate safely.
  • Eagle achieved strong and consistent operating performance again in 2021. Nickel production of 18,353 t and copper production of 18,419 t both achieved annual guidance.
  • Neves-Corvo copper production of 37,941 t achieved the top end of annual guidance and zinc production of 66,031 t was within 1kt of guidance. Fourth quarter operations were the strongest of the year. Construction of the Zinc Expansion Project (ZEP), to double current zinc production capacity and improve per unit operating cost, was substantially completed at the end of 2021 with the commencement of commissioning of the mine materials handling system and the expanded zinc processing plant.
  • Zinkgruvan production of 77,766 t of zinc exceeded annual production guidance.
  • Continuing the trend of annual improvement, Lundin Mining achieved a new best-ever Total Recordable Injury Frequency (TRIF) rate in 2021 with a rate of 0.54 per 200,000 person hours worked. This excellent safety result was realized during a year that saw an increase in our operational activities, particularly project related activities at the Neves-Corvo ZEP, and during a period of continuing stressors and distractions stemming from the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Summary of 2021 Production



Q4 2021

Production


Full Year 2021

Production


2021 Production

Guidance 1


Copper (t)













Candelaria (100% basis)

45,573


151,719


150,000

-

155,000



Chapada

14,870


52,019


48,000

-

50,000



Eagle

3,636


18,419


18,000

-

20,000



Neves-Corvo

12,100


37,941


36,000

-

38,000



Zinkgruvan

817


2,786


3,000

-

4,000



Total Copper

76,996


262,884


255,000

-

267,000
















Zinc (t)














Neves-Corvo

18,750


66,031


67,000

-

70,000



Zinkgruvan

18,080


77,766


73,000

-

76,000



Total Zinc

36,830


143,797


140,000

-

146,000












Gold (oz)










Candelaria (100% basis)

26,000


91,000


85,000

-

90,000



Chapada

20,000


76,000


73,000

-

76,000



Total Gold

46,000


167,000


158,000

-

166,000
















Nickel (t)














Eagle

4,101


18,353


18,000

-

20,000



Total Nickel

4,101


18,353


18,000

-

20,000


Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2021 Results Date

Results for the fourth quarter and full year ended December 31, 2021 will be published on Thursday February 17, 2022.

The Company will hold a telephone conference call and webcast at 08:00 ET , 14:00 CET on Friday February 18, 2022. Conference call details are provided below. Please call in 10 minutes before the conference starts.

Call-in number for the conference call ( North America ): +1 647 788 4922
Call-in number for the conference call (North America Toll Free): +1 877 223 4471
Call-in number for the conference call ( Sweden ): 02 00 123 522

To view the live webcast presentation, please log on using this direct link: https://onlinexperiences.com/Launch/QReg/ShowUUID=5FC47C1B-ED4D-4F01-B238-3CEBD68F4298 .

The presentation slideshow will also be available in PDF format on the Lundin Mining website www.lundinmining.com before the conference call.

A replay of the telephone conference will be available after the completion of the call until March 18, 2022.

_____________________________________

1 Guidance as most recently disclosed in the Company's Management Discussion and Analysis for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2021.

Call-in numbers for the replay are ( North America ): +1 800 585 8367 or +1 416 621 4642

The passcode for the replay is: 8270928

A replay of the webcast will be available by clicking on the direct link above.

About Lundin Mining

Lundin Mining is a diversified Canadian base metals mining company with operations in Brazil , Chile , Portugal , Sweden and the United States of America , primarily producing copper, zinc, gold and nickel.

The information in this release is subject to the disclosure requirements of Lundin Mining under the EU Market Abuse Regulation. The information was submitted for publication, through the agency of the contact persons set out below on January 14, 2022 at 02:00 Eastern Time .

Cautionary Statement on Forward-Looking Information

Certain of the statements made and information contained herein is "forward-looking information" within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities laws. All statements other than statements of historical facts included in this document constitute forward-looking information, including but not limited to statements regarding the Company's plans, prospects and business strategies; the Company's guidance on the timing and amount of future production and its expectations regarding the results of operations; expected costs; permitting requirements and timelines; timing and possible outcome of pending litigation; the results of any Preliminary Economic Assessment, Feasibility Study, or Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimations, life of mine estimates, and mine and mine closure plans; anticipated market prices of metals, currency exchange rates, and interest rates; the development and implementation of the Company's Responsible Mining Management System; the Company's ability to comply with contractual and permitting or other regulatory requirements; anticipated exploration and development activities at the Company's projects; and the Company's integration of acquisitions and any anticipated benefits thereof. Words such as "believe", "expect", "anticipate", "contemplate", "target", "plan", "goal", "aim", "intend", "continue", "budget", "estimate", "may", "will", "can", "could", "should", "schedule" and similar expressions identify forward-looking statements.

Forward-looking information is necessarily based upon various estimates and assumptions including, without limitation, the expectations and beliefs of management, including that the Company can access financing, appropriate equipment and sufficient labor; assumed and future price of copper, nickel, zinc, gold and other metals; anticipated costs; ability to achieve goals; the prompt and effective integration of acquisitions; that the political environment in which the Company operates will continue to support the development and operation of mining projects; and assumptions related to the factors set forth below. While these factors and assumptions are considered reasonable by Lundin Mining as at the date of this document in light of management's experience and perception of current conditions and expected developments, these statements are inherently subject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties and contingencies. Known and unknown factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements and undue reliance should not be placed on such statements and information. Such factors include, but are not limited to: risks inherent in mining including but not limited to risks to the environment, industrial accidents, catastrophic equipment failures, unusual or unexpected geological formations or unstable ground conditions, and natural phenomena such as earthquakes, flooding or unusually severe weather; uninsurable risks; global financial conditions and inflation; changes in the Company's share price, and volatility in the equity markets in general; volatility and fluctuations in metal and commodity prices; the threat associated with outbreaks of viruses and infectious diseases, including the COVID-19 virus; changing taxation regimes; reliance on a single asset; delays or the inability to obtain, retain or comply with permits; risks related to negative publicity with respect to the Company or the mining industry in general; health and safety risks; exploration, development or mining results not being consistent with the Company's expectations; unavailable or inaccessible infrastructure and risks related to ageing infrastructure; actual ore mined and/or metal recoveries varying from Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimates, estimates of grade, tonnage, dilution, mine plans and metallurgical and other characteristics; risks associated with the estimation of Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves and the geology, grade and continuity of mineral deposits including but not limited to models relating thereto; ore processing efficiency; community and stakeholder opposition; information technology and cybersecurity risks; potential for the allegation of fraud and corruption involving the Company, its customers, suppliers or employees, or the allegation of improper or discriminatory employment practices, or human rights violations; regulatory investigations, enforcement, sanctions and/or related or other litigation; uncertain political and economic environments, including in Brazil and Chile ; risks associated with the structural stability of waste rock dumps or tailings storage facilities; estimates of future production and operations; estimates of operating, cash and all-in sustaining cost estimates; civil disruption in Chile ; the potential for and effects of labor disputes or other unanticipated difficulties with or shortages of labor or interruptions in production; risks related to the environmental regulation and environmental impact of the Company's operations and products and management thereof; exchange rate fluctuations; reliance on third parties and consultants in foreign jurisdictions; climate change; risks relating to attracting and retaining of highly skilled employees; compliance with environmental, health and safety laws; counterparty and credit risks and customer concentration; litigation; risks inherent in and/or associated with operating in foreign countries and emerging markets; risks related to mine closure activities and closed and historical sites; changes in laws, regulations or policies including but not limited to those related to mining regimes, permitting and approvals, environmental and tailings management, labor, trade relations, and transportation; internal controls; challenges or defects in title; the estimation of asset carrying values; historical environmental liabilities and ongoing reclamation obligations; the price and availability of key operating supplies or services; competition; indebtedness; compliance with foreign laws; existence of significant shareholders; liquidity risks and limited financial resources; funding requirements and availability of financing; enforcing legal rights in foreign jurisdictions; dilution; risks relating to dividends; risks associated with acquisitions and related integration efforts, including the ability to achieve anticipated benefits, unanticipated difficulties or expenditures relating to integration and diversion of management time on integration; activist shareholders and proxy solicitation matters; and other risks and uncertainties, including but not limited to those described in the "Risk and Uncertainties" section of the Annual Information Form and the "Managing Risks" section of the Company's MD&A for the year ended December 31, 2020 , which are available on SEDAR at www.sedar.com under the Company's profile. All of the forward-looking statements made in this document are qualified by these cautionary statements. Although the Company has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking information, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated, forecast or intended and readers are cautioned that the foregoing list is not exhaustive of all factors and assumptions which may have been used. Should one or more of these risks and uncertainties materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary materially from those described in forward-looking information. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that forward-looking information will prove to be accurate and forward-looking information is not a guarantee of future performance. Readers are advised not to place undue reliance on forward-looking information. The forward-looking information contained herein speaks only as of the date of this document. The Company disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise forward looking information or to explain any material difference between such and subsequent actual events, except as required by applicable law.

SOURCE Lundin Mining Corporation

View original content to download multimedia: http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/January2022/14/c0481.html

News Provided by Canada Newswire via QuoteMedia

Read More

Continue Reading

Economics

Job Seekers More Likely to Apply to Companies That Prioritize Diversity, Equity & Inclusion, Survey Shows

Job Seekers More Likely to Apply to Companies That Prioritize Diversity, Equity & Inclusion, Survey Shows
PR Newswire
TROY, Mich., May 18, 2022

National survey reveals Americans expect employers to remove discriminatory hiring practices
TROY, M…

Published

on

Job Seekers More Likely to Apply to Companies That Prioritize Diversity, Equity & Inclusion, Survey Shows

PR Newswire

National survey reveals Americans expect employers to remove discriminatory hiring practices

TROY, Mich., May 18, 2022 /PRNewswire/ -- Nearly three in four Americans say they are more likely to seek employment with companies that are committed to breaking down discriminatory hiring practices, according to an annual survey conducted by staffing and workforce solutions provider Kelly.

Kelly today revealed the findings from its annual Equity@Work survey that show Americans want companies to provide greater access to work for underemployed talent groups including job seekers with criminal backgrounds, those on the autism spectrum, veterans, older workers, and women. More than 4 in 5 (83%) agree employers should do more to remove barriers that keep job seekers in these talent groups from being hired or promoted.

"Companies are in desperate need of skilled talent. At the same time, millions of qualified job seekers face significant barriers to employment," says Kelly Vice President and Equity@Work Program Manager Pam Sands. "It's time employers provide fairer access to work for these talent groups. Our survey results indicate it will have a positive impact on their ability to identify skilled workers across the board."

Nearly 33% of working-age Americans have a criminal offense on their record that often disqualifies them from finding employment. The unemployment rate among adults on the autism spectrum is around 85%. Veterans without four-year degrees often struggle to find civilian employment. Older job seekers can find it challenging to transition careers and there are nearly two million fewer women in the labor force due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Kelly, which places 350,000 job seekers every year, launched its Equity@Work initiative in 2020 to remove systemic employment barriers for these Americans. Its survey of 1,020 adults in the U.S. shows companies can benefit from hiring policies that embrace these talent groups:

  • 76% of Americans say they are more likely to support businesses committed to breaking down barriers to work.

  • 72% say they are more likely to seek employment with companies committed to eliminating these barriers.

  • 80% say employers should value the relevant skills military veterans have acquired and factor them into hiring decisions.

  • 71% say they are more likely to support businesses that make employment opportunities available to individuals on the autism spectrum.

  • 70% say employers should eliminate or reduce blanket-bans that automatically reject job seekers who have minor, non-violent offenses on their criminal record.

  • 62% agree that women forced out of the workforce due to the pandemic face reduced earning potential and advancement opportunities when they return to work.

  • More than half of Americans (52%) say Baby Boomers face issues of ageism at work.

"The message is loud and clear: Americans expect companies to do better," Sands says. "Recruiting from these underrepresented talent groups is not just the right thing to do, it's good business."

For full survey results and information on Kelly's Equity@Work initiative, visit EquityAtWork.com.  

Equity@Work Survey Methodology
The survey was conducted online by Atomik Research. 1,020 adults in the U.S. completed the survey between Feb. 15 and 21, 2022. The overall margin of error fell within +/- 3 percentage points with a confidence interval of 95%. Researchers implemented sample quotas based on gender identity, geographical regions, age groups and ethnicity to reflect similar statistically representative ratios based on U.S. Census reports.

About Kelly®
Kelly (Nasdaq: KELYA) (Nasdaq: KELYB) connects talented people to companies in need of their skills in areas including Science, Engineering, Education, Office, Contact Center, Light Industrial, and more. We're always thinking about what's next in the evolving world of work, and we help people ditch the script on old ways of thinking and embrace the value of all workstyles in the workplace. We directly employ nearly 350,000 people around the world and connect thousands more with work through our global network of talent suppliers and partners in our outsourcing and consulting practice. Visit kellyservices.com and let us help with what's next for you. Follow Kelly on LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube.

Media Contact
Christian Taske
248-561-8823
christian.taske@kellyservices.com

View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/job-seekers-more-likely-to-apply-to-companies-that-prioritize-diversity-equity--inclusion-survey-shows-301550042.html

SOURCE Kelly Services, Inc.

Read More

Continue Reading

Spread & Containment

Shortage of workers threatens UK recovery – here’s why and what to do about it

The nation has very low unemployment figures, but that masks a complex labour market.

Published

on

For the first time since records began, there are more job vacancies in the UK than unemployed people, according to the latest monthly labour market figures. This has been driven mainly by a near-fourfold surge in job vacancies to around 1.3 million since the summer of 2020, when economic activity was allowed to resume at the end of the first COVID lockdown.

Record vacancies might seem like a good thing in terms of maintaining low unemployment. But employers across all sectors of the economy are struggling to fill vacancies, which limits economic recovery. So what explains all these vacancies, and what can be done about them?

First of all, the spectacular rise in job vacancies goes far beyond a pre-pandemic “bounce back”. Although the biggest shortages are in hospitality, there have been substantial rises across most sectors. All are above pre-pandemic levels.

Job vacancies and unemployment (thousands)

Office for National Statistics (2020), Vacancy Survey and Labour Force Survey

Demand for labour (that’s all employment plus vacancies) has recovered to almost exactly its pre-pandemic level. But the data indicates that the increase in vacancies is not due to a surge in demand for labour, but because the labour force is shrinking: it dropped by 1.6% or 561,000 between the first quarters (Jan-March) of 2020 and 2022, which is greater than the increase in job vacancies over the same period (492,000).

Notably, people’s reasons for being economically inactive have changed over the past couple of years. Following the first COVID lockdown, the large drop in labour supply among 16-64s (those of working age) was mainly driven by rises in long-term sickness (139,000) and early retirement (70,000).

Reasons for economic inactivity over time, 16-64 year olds

Chart showing why 16-64s are economically inactive over time
Note: the chart shows quarterly rolling years. Author calculations of ONS Annual Population Survey, accessed via Nomis

The drop in the workforce also masks a considerable churn within it, which may be adding to employers’ difficulties in recruiting staff. During the first lockdown, the number of EU workers fell by some 300,000. This has partially recovered, as you can see in the chart below, but there are still around 100,000 fewer than at the start of the pandemic.

Yet this has been more than offset by continued long-term growth in the number of non-EU foreign-born workers in the UK, increasing by some 170,000 since the start of the pandemic. Brexit, in other words, in tandem with the pandemic, has been a source of churn in the labour market.

Change in non UK-born workforce 2019-21

Chart showing what has happened to non-UK nationals working in UK over time
Note: although likely to be indicative of trends, non-UK residents may be underestimated due to the Annual Population Survey/Labour Force Survey shifting from face-to-face to online data collection during the pandemic. Data is currently subject to review and may be revised. Authors' calculations of ONS (2022) Labour Force Survey

The geographic dimension

Until now, little has been known about where this sharp rise in vacancies has been happening, which is an important question if the government is to be able to address geographical imbalances in the economy through its “levelling up” policy.

To help remedy this, we have been studying comprehensive online job vacancy data obtained under a special research agreement with the Urban Big Data Centre at the University of Glasgow to use data scraped from the Adzuna job vacancy search engine. Our data analysis is not yet published in the academic literature, but it provides an early indication of the overall pattern.

The rise in the rate of job vacancies appears remarkably uneven across local authority districts in Great Britain. The two maps below show the change from before the pandemic in February 2020 (on the left) to July 2021 (on the right), the most recent month for which we have been able to compute data. This is likely to still be indicative of the most recent geographic pattern.

Vacancies growth between February 2020 and July 2021

GB maps showing job vacancies by council district
Authors’ calculations based on Adzuna vacancy data (Adzuna. Economic and Social Research Council. Adzuna Data, 2022 [data collection]. University of Glasgow - Urban Big Data Centre), ONS Business Register and employer survey and ONS local authority boundaries

It shows huge increases in vacancies in relatively few districts, while most others show either modest increases or falls. The highest rates are particularly found in remoter rural areas, particularly in the south-west and north-west of England, and in parts of inner London.

Many of these districts are dependent on foreign labour, particularly for agriculture in rural areas, and hospitality and other sectors in London. Again, this may be a sign of the effect of Brexit and the pandemic choking off the growth in the number of EU workers.

What can’t be denied is that the employment market has been restructured in several major inter-related ways in a relatively short period, not only with Brexit but also thanks to rapid increases in remote online working, disruption to global supply-chains and COVID-related ill health.

It would make sense for these factors to produce “mismatches” between the skills and locations of workers and vacancies. For example, many job seekers have skills in declining occupations, such as skilled manual work. Our own analysis backs this up, since we see more job seekers than vacancies in some former industrial towns, particularly in the West Midlands and northern England – exactly the opposite problem to some inner London boroughs and rural districts.

What should be done

Places across the UK where job vacancies are concentrated are likely to experience sharp economic contractions if they are unable to attract more workers soon. Yet the areas that have experienced drops or weak growth in vacancies compared to before the pandemic are also a concern, as they may have been hit harder by issues like global supply chains and the pandemic and may not have enough jobs to go around.

Policies to combat Britain’s labour shortage must therefore be geographically targeted. Areas in need of more jobs, particularly higher-paying jobs, often require long-term investment in infrastructure and skills.

But to help areas in need of more workers, there will need to be creative solutions such as employers offering attractive packages including training and flexible working, and local and national authorities ensuring adequate local availability of affordable housing.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Read More

Continue Reading

Spread & Containment

Global Supply Chain Pressure Index: May 2022 Update

Supply chain disruptions continue to be a major challenge as the world economy recovers from the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, recent developments related…

Published

on

Supply chain disruptions continue to be a major challenge as the world economy recovers from the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, recent developments related to geopolitics and the pandemic (particularly in China) could put further strains on global supply chains. In a January post, we first presented the Global Supply Chain Pressure Index (GSCPI), a parsimonious global measure designed to capture supply chain disruptions using a range of indicators. We revisited our index in March, and today we are launching the GSCPI as a standalone product, with new readings to be published each month. In this post, we review GSCPI readings through April 2022 and briefly discuss the drivers of recent moves in the index.

More Stress on Supply Chains

The chart below provides an update of the GSCPI through April; readers can find a link to the updated data series on our new product page. Between December 2021 and March 2022, the index registered an easing of global supply chain pressures, though they remained at very high levels historically. However, the April 2022 reading suggests a worsening of conditions as renewed strains emerge in global supply chains.

April Data Indicate Worsening of Supply Chain Pressures

Sources: Bureau of Labor Statistics; Harper Petersen Holding GmbH; Baltic Exchange; IHS Markit; Institute for Supply Management; Haver Analytics; Bloomberg L.P.; authors’ calculations.

Note: Index is scaled by its standard deviation.

Methodology

Before analyzing this recent pickup in supply chain pressures, we remind readers that the GSCPI is based on two sets of data. Global transportation costs are measured by using data on ocean shipping costs, for we which we employ data from the Baltic Dry Index (BDI) and the Harpex index, as well as BLS airfreight cost indices for freight flights between Asia, Europe, and the United States. We also use supply chain-related components  of Purchase Manager Index (PMI) surveys—“delivery times,” “backlogs,” and “purchased stocks”—for manufacturing firms across seven interconnected economies: China, the euro area, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Before combining these data within the GSCPI by means of principal component analysis, we strip out demand effects from the underlying series by projecting the PMI supply chain components on the “new orders” components of the corresponding PMI surveys and, in a similar vein, projecting the global transportation cost measures onto GDP-weighted “new orders” and “inputs purchased” components across the seven PMI surveys.

Sources of Pressure

So, what are the drivers behind recent moves in the GSCPI? The charts below illustrate how each of the underlying variables contributed to the overall change in the GSCPI in the last two months. Each column represents the contribution, in standard deviations, of each component of our index to the overall change in the index during a given period. In the first chart, we examine February-March 2022. We note that the lessening of supply chain pressures over this period was widespread across the various components, which indicated a welcome reduction in global supply chain disruptions. Most of the series in our data set declined over this period; the U.K. “backlog” component worsened and the U.S. “purchased stocks” component increased marginally.

Widespread Improvements Seen across Components in March 2022

Sources: Bureau of Labor Statistics; Harper Petersen Holding GmbH; Baltic Exchange; IHS Markit; Institute for Supply Management; Haver Analytics; Bloomberg L.P.; authors’ calculations.

In the chart below, we focus on the contributions of the underlying components of the GSCPI from March to April 2022.

Global Supply Chain Pressures Worsen in April 2022

Sources: Bureau of Labor Statistics; Harper Petersen Holding GmbH; Baltic Exchange; IHS Markit; Institute for Supply Management; Haver Analytics; Bloomberg L.P.; authors’ calculations.

As the chart indicates, the worsening of global supply chain pressures in April was predominantly driven by the Chinese “delivery times” component, the increase in airfreight costs from the United States to Asia, and the euro area “delivery times” component, as other components have eased over the month. These developments could be associated with the stringent COVID-19-related lockdown measures adopted in China, as well as the consequences of the Ukraine-Russia conflict for supply chains in Europe.

Finally, as we noted in our previous post and discuss on our product page, recent GSCPI readings are subject to revision. The chart below compares the current GSCPI release with the previous three releases, showing that revisions can have an impact up to a year back in time. The chart indicates that, based on the current vintage of the GSCPI, the decrease in global supply chain pressures through April occurred at a slighter faster pace than previous GSCPI estimates had suggested.

Revised and Realized Data Can Alter Previous Supply Chain Pressure Readings

Sources: Bureau of Labor Statistics; Harper Petersen Holding GmbH; Baltic Exchange; IHS Markit; Institute for Supply Management; Haver Analytics; Bloomberg L.P.; authors’ calculations.

Note: Index is scaled by its standard deviation.

Conclusions

In this post, we provide an update of the GSCPI through April 2022. This estimate suggests that the moderation we have observed in recent months has been partially reversed, as lockdown measures in China and geopolitical developments are putting further strains on delivery times and transportation costs in China and the euro area. Forthcoming readings will be particularly interesting as we assess the potential for these developments to further heighten global supply chain pressures.

Chart Data

Gianluca Benigno is the head of International Studies in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s Research and Statistics Group.

Julian di Giovanni is head of Climate Risk Studies in the Bank’s Research and Statistics Group.

Jan J.J. Groen is an economic research advisor in the Bank’s Research and Statistics Group.

Adam Noble is a senior research analyst in the Bank’s Research and Statistics Group.

How to cite this post:
Gianluca Benigno, Julian Di Giovanni, Jan Groen, and Adam Noble, “Global Supply Chain Pressure Index: May 2022 Update,” Federal Reserve Bank of New York Liberty Street Economics, May 18, 2022, https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2022/05/global-supply-chain-pressure-index-may-2022-update/.


Disclaimer
The views expressed in this post are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York or the Federal Reserve System. Any errors or omissions are the responsibility of the authors.

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending