In the pre-turmoil period, supervisory authorities were more concerned about overburdening institutions with reporting requirements than with enforcing adequate disclosure. As such, an ESRB established before the summer of 2007, but with access to the same information base as the one available to central banks at the time, might not have made substantially different systemic risk assessments. In addition to the importance of having a more comprehensive information base, the crisis has led to a significant revamping of research into systemic risk and to greater input into the formulation of related policy recommendations. As I just mentioned, in addition to improvements in macro stress-testing techniques and the early warning signal literature, more attention is being paid to contagion and spill-over models, especially for the banking sector, to macro-financial risk-based flow-of-funds approach using contingent claims analysis, and to research tools to support regulatory and supervisory policy recommendations. One area in which a pre-crisis ESRB could have made a difference is in the conduct of country-specific analysis. Generally, ECB financial stability assessments focus on the euro area as a whole and rarely make distinctions between euro area countries. They mainly consider the risks and vulnerabilities common to most euro area countries; there is little analysis, let alone formulation, of policy recommendations, at country level. While this helps to distil the elements of the analysis relevant to the euro zone, country-specific vulnerabilities might end up receiving insufficient attention. The ESRB will have a clear mandate to pursue country analysis and to provide countryspecific policy recommendations if deemed necessary.

Firstly, ASEAN has enabled SMEs in the region to gain access to a larger and more extensive marketplace. The realisation of ASEAN into an integrated economic community means that the potential benefits for SMEs in the region are no longer constrained by national borders. With easier cross-border flow of goods, services, capital and people, ASEAN offers significant market opportunities for SMEs. Given the large consumer base in ASEAN, SMEs can also utilise ASEAN as a platform to strengthen competitiveness before entering into the global market. Secondly, the lowering of regulatory barriers to trade within ASEAN has further increased the potential for SMEs. The standardisation of trade procedures, the removal of tariff and non-tariff barriers and the improvement of regulatory frameworks across the region has been an additional enabling factor. This will not only provide SMEs with a level playing field in conducting businesses across the region, but will also maximise the competitive advantage of the individual ASEAN economies. This is evidenced by the emergence of regional supply chains, where reductions in tariffs on imported raw materials have resulted in lower production costs, while the removal of tariffs on a wide range of finished products for export within ASEAN will also benefit SMEs that trade within the region. Thus, the lowering of tariffs within the region and the large regional market will provide an environment for SMEs to grow and achieve the production scale and efficiency required to compete in the global marketplace.