Against this background, Norges Bank defined company behaviour towards the authorities regarding environmental and climate issues as a focus area for active ownership as early as in 2006. In recent years, interest in responsible investment, and not least climate risk management, has increased among investors. Investor activity can be divided into two main categories: working with the companies in the investment portfolio or changing the composition of the portfolio. The GPFG does both. We draw up expectations for portfolio companies, engage them in dialogue and exercise our voting rights. The composition of our investment portfolio also differs somewhat from the broad market index. The Bank’s responsible investment work is concentrated on three pillars. The first pillar, which we like to refer to as "setting standards", consists of our support for 5/7  BIS central bankers' speeches  common international standards and the published expectations drawn up for all the companies in the portfolio. The Bank’s expectations with regard to companies' climate change-related work were first published in 2009. If we and other investors are to understand our own exposure to climate risk, we will need adequate company reporting. To quote Bank of England Governor Mark Carney: "In order to watch we must be able to see".4 To ensure consistency across markets, disclosures should comply with a common international standard. This would also contribute to raising the bar for all companies. I have already mentioned the TCFD recommendations. The GPFG supports this work. The second pillar of the GPFG’s responsible investment management is exercising ownership.

Some time ago, when we had more rigid exchange rate systems, less adapted to cope with external shocks, when confronted with tighter external financial conditions, we needed to fight against the depreciation of currency to avoid destabilizing balance sheet and inflationary effects. We had to tighten monetary policy to reduce the speed of private capital outflows and sold massive amounts of foreign reserves to contain the depreciation of the currency. Most experiences ended badly. Final remarks The changes we are seeing in the world economy are part of the development that comes in the footsteps of the global financial crisis. The time has come for the recovery of developed economies, and therefore, the extraordinary monetary stimulus packages they brought about in the past must be withdrawn. By historical standards, the global financial conditions we faced in the past few years were very good, but we knew that sooner or later they would end. This is a healthy development. What is important is where this new situation will find us, as economies that managed to keep strong fundamentals and prevented macroeconomic imbalances from building up, or on the opposite lane. How costly a moving toward a “more normal” world will be for each of our countries will depend on how wisely we have administered our economies during the good times. In Chile, the policy framework that has been in place during the recent decades, has given us more tools to help the economy to accommodate the effects of changes in the external environment.