OPEC Explained: How the Oil Cartel Works

The Cartel That Shapes the World#

In October 1973, the Arab members of OPEC announced an oil embargo against countries supporting Israel in the Yom Kippur War. Within months, oil prices quadrupled. Gas lines stretched for blocks. The global economy plunged into recession. For the first time, Americans and Europeans confronted a reality that would shape geopolitics for decades: a handful of countries in the Middle East could hold the industrialized world hostage.

Half a century later, OPEC remains the most influential force in global oil markets—and one of the most misunderstood. The cartel has evolved through cycles of dominance and decline, through internal feuds and external challenges, through wars and revolutions. Understanding how OPEC works is essential for anyone trying to make sense of oil prices, energy security, and the political economy of the Persian Gulf.

What OPEC Actually Is#

The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries began modestly. Founded in Baghdad in 1960 by Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela, OPEC was originally a defensive alliance against Western oil companies that had dominated production for decades. The founding members wanted to coordinate policies, prevent price cuts imposed by companies, and assert greater control over their own resources.

Today's membership has shifted considerably. The cartel includes thirteen nations: Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, the UAE, Venezuela, Nigeria, Libya, Algeria, Angola, Congo, Equatorial Guinea, and Gabon. Some original members have left; others have joined and departed multiple times. What unites them is significant oil production and a shared interest in managing supply to influence prices.

Since 2016, OPEC has coordinated with ten additional producers led by Russia, forming the OPEC+ alliance. This expanded group controls roughly 40% of global oil production—enough to move markets, though not enough to dictate prices unilaterally.

How Decisions Get Made#

OPEC operates by consensus, which sounds more collaborative than it actually is. In practice, Saudi Arabia dominates. The Kingdom produces more oil than any other member, holds the world's largest spare production capacity, and serves as the cartel's de facto central bank—cutting production when others cheat their quotas, and unleashing floods of oil when members need disciplining.

The decision-making process centers on ministerial conferences, typically held twice yearly in Vienna, where member countries send their oil ministers to negotiate. The meetings follow a predictable pattern. Technical committees assess market conditions. Ministers haggle over quotas. Saudi Arabia's position usually prevails, modified at the margins to maintain the appearance of collective decision-making.

Each member receives a production quota based on a combination of historical output, proven reserves, and political negotiations. These quotas are supposed to constrain supply, supporting prices at levels that fund government budgets without destroying demand. The gap between theory and practice, however, is where OPEC's dysfunction becomes evident.

The Cheating Problem#

OPEC has no enforcement mechanism. Unlike a government that can punish lawbreakers, the cartel relies entirely on voluntary compliance. Members agree to production limits, then frequently exceed them when prices are high and the temptation to sell additional barrels becomes irresistible.

The incentive structure virtually guarantees cheating. When OPEC cuts production to raise prices, each member benefits from higher prices regardless of whether they personally cut. But each member also gains by quietly producing above quota, capturing market share at the inflated price. If everyone cheats, prices collapse—but for any individual member, cheating while others comply is the dominant strategy.

This dynamic explains OPEC's cycles of discipline and disarray. When prices are low and budgets are stressed, members have strong incentives to comply with cuts—survival depends on higher prices. When prices are high and budgets are flush, the incentive to cheat intensifies—there's money on the table, and rivals might grab it first.

Satellite monitoring has made cheating harder to hide. Analysts can track tanker loadings, refinery throughput, and storage levels with increasing precision. But transparency hasn't eliminated the problem—it's just made the cheating more brazen and the recriminations more public.

What OPEC Wants#

The cartel's stated goals are straightforward: stabilize markets, ensure adequate supplies, and provide fair returns to producing countries. The unstated goal is simpler: maximize revenue for member governments without triggering so much demand destruction that revenues fall.

This creates a delicate balancing act. Prices that are too high encourage conservation, substitute fuels, and investment in competing production. The 1970s price spikes that made OPEC seem invincible also triggered efficiency improvements that permanently reduced oil intensity in developed economies and unlocked production in the North Sea, Alaska, and Mexico that eroded OPEC's market share for decades.

Prices that are too low, meanwhile, devastate member budgets. Most OPEC countries depend on oil revenues for the majority of government spending. When prices crash, schools close, subsidies get cut, and political stability frays. The Arab Spring uprisings that swept the Middle East in 2011 were fueled partly by economic grievances that low oil prices had exacerbated.

OPEC's sweet spot—the price range that maximizes long-term revenue—has shifted over time. In recent years, most analysts place it somewhere between $70 and $90 per barrel. High enough to fund national budgets; low enough to avoid demand destruction and competing supply surges.

The Rise and Limits of Power#

OPEC's influence has waxed and waned dramatically over its six decades.

The 1970s represented peak power. OPEC controlled over half of global production and nearly all of the world's spare capacity. The 1973 embargo and 1979 Iranian Revolution price spikes demonstrated that the cartel could reshape the global economy virtually at will. Importing countries scrambled to reduce dependence, but alternatives took years to develop.

The 1980s and 1990s saw decline. Conservation reduced demand in developed countries. New production from non-OPEC sources—the North Sea, Alaska, Mexico, Russia after the Soviet collapse—added supply. OPEC's market share fell below 30%. Internal disputes, particularly between Saudi Arabia and its rivals, led to price wars and market chaos.

The 2000s brought resurgence. Rapid growth in China and emerging markets outpaced new supply. OPEC production cuts tightened markets. Prices surged toward $150 per barrel in 2008 before crashing in the financial crisis and recovering to triple-digit levels by 2011.

Then came shale.

The Shale Challenge#

American shale production fundamentally changed OPEC's strategic calculations. Unlike conventional oil projects that take years to develop, shale wells can be drilled in weeks and brought online in months. When prices rise, shale production surges; when they fall, it retreats. This responsiveness creates a ceiling on how high OPEC can push prices—and a floor on how low prices can go before American production shuts in.

OPEC's initial response was confrontational. In late 2014, faced with rising shale output eating into market share, Saudi Arabia convinced the cartel to maintain production despite falling prices. The strategy was explicit: flood the market, crash prices, and drive high-cost American producers into bankruptcy.

It didn't work as planned. Prices did crash—from over $100 to below $30 per barrel. Some shale companies did go bankrupt. But the survivors got more efficient, reducing break-even costs dramatically. And when prices recovered, shale bounced back stronger than ever. The price war hurt OPEC members at least as much as it hurt American producers.

The 2020 COVID crisis produced an even more dramatic confrontation. When Russia refused to join OPEC production cuts as pandemic lockdowns destroyed demand, Saudi Arabia retaliated by flooding markets. WTI futures briefly traded negative—an unprecedented event that demonstrated the limits of all parties' market power. Eventually, a massive coordinated cut stabilized markets, but the episode showed that neither OPEC nor Russia nor American shale can unilaterally control prices.

What the Future Holds#

OPEC faces an existential question: how to manage decline without accelerating it.

High prices that maximize short-term revenue also accelerate the energy transition. Every dollar increase in oil prices makes electric vehicles more attractive, efficiency investments more profitable, and political support for climate policy stronger. OPEC's own analysts acknowledge that peak oil demand may arrive within the next decade or two—and that high prices could pull that peak forward.

Low prices preserve demand but devastate budgets. Most OPEC countries have failed to diversify their economies despite decades of rhetoric about doing so. When oil revenues fall, governments face impossible choices between cutting services, drawing down reserves, or borrowing against future production.

The internal tensions are intensifying. Saudi Arabia, with its relatively low production costs and massive reserves, can survive lower prices longer than most members. Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, and Venezuela all need higher prices to balance their budgets. The UAE has invested heavily in renewable energy and economic diversification. Different members have different time horizons and different risk tolerances.

Meanwhile, the OPEC+ alliance with Russia has proven fragile. Russia's interests don't always align with Gulf producers. The Ukraine war has scrambled relationships, with Western sanctions creating new complications for Russian participation in coordinated supply management.

What It Means for Canada#

Canada isn't part of OPEC, but OPEC's decisions shape Canadian prosperity in profound ways.

When OPEC cuts production and prices rise, Canadian producers benefit from higher revenues—but Canadian consumers pay more for gasoline and heating fuel. When OPEC floods markets and prices crash, Alberta's economy suffers while Central Canadian consumers enjoy cheaper energy.

More fundamentally, OPEC's existence makes the case for Canadian oil development stronger. The world's dependence on a cartel of often hostile or unstable regimes creates energy security risks that Canadian production can help mitigate. Every barrel of Canadian oil that reaches global markets is a barrel that doesn't have to come from Russia, Iran, or Venezuela.

Canada's challenge is that it lacks the market power to influence prices on its own. Canadian production is large by global standards but modest compared to OPEC+ output. What Canada can control is whether to develop its resources efficiently, whether to build infrastructure that accesses global markets, and whether to capture fair value from production that will happen regardless of what Canadian policy chooses.

Understanding OPEC helps clarify why those choices matter. In a world where a handful of countries can conspire to manipulate the price of the world's most important commodity, having friendly, stable, democratic suppliers isn't just nice to have—it's a strategic imperative.

---

Key Takeaways#

OPEC is a cartel of thirteen oil-producing nations, led by Saudi Arabia, that coordinates production to influence global prices. The expanded OPEC+ alliance with Russia controls roughly 40% of world production—enough to move markets but not dictate outcomes. Internal enforcement is weak, and members frequently cheat on quotas when prices are high. American shale production has constrained OPEC's pricing power by providing responsive supply that surges when prices rise and retreats when they fall. OPEC faces strategic dilemmas: high prices accelerate the energy transition and competing supply, while low prices devastate member budgets. Canada benefits from OPEC's existence as a reminder that stable, democratic oil suppliers are strategically valuable—but only if Canada chooses to develop its resources and build the infrastructure to reach global markets.