samchain/econo-pairs-v1 huggingface dataset:
Available indicators suggest that there has been a gradual recovery since mid-2015, which continued in the second half of 2016. A key factor here is improved business and household sentiment in the euro area and other advanced economies, which in turn creates a more favourable environment for the Swiss export industry. Overall, the signals from the economic indicators are consistent with our previous GDP growth forecast of around 1.5% for 2016 as a whole. Developments on the labour market support this view. Employment statistics show that the number of jobs in Switzerland grew in the third quarter, too. Up until November, the seasonally adjusted unemployment rate for this year was stable at 3.3%. The outlook for the coming year is cautiously optimistic. Over the course of 2017, export demand looks set to gradually strengthen further. For the export industry, this will mean better capacity utilisation and less pressure on margins. We are also expecting a gradual recovery on the labour market. Various surveys confirm this assessment. Together with our continued expansionary monetary policy, labour market developments should boost domestic demand. Private consumption, too, is likely to once again make a greater contribution to economic growth. Overall, as for 2016, the SNB expects GDP growth for 2017 to be roughly 1.5%. However, the Swiss economy will also face some major challenges in the coming year. Structural change continues to affect several important industries. Retailing is having to contend with changes both to distribution channels and the spending habits of households.

News conference  Berne, 15 December 2016 Thomas Jordan  Introductory remarks by Thomas Jordan  Ladies and gentlemen It is a pleasure for me to welcome you to the Swiss National Bank’s news conference. I will begin by explaining our monetary policy decision and our assessment of the economic situation. I will then hand over to Fritz Zurbrügg, who will speak about current developments in the area of financial stability and announce the dates for the release of the new 20-franc banknote. After that, Andréa Maechler will review the situation on the financial markets and discuss the impact of negative interest on the money and capital markets. Finally, we will – as ever – be pleased to take your questions. Monetary policy decision  Let me begin with our monetary policy decision and the inflation forecast. Our monetary policy remains expansionary and continues to be based on two elements: the negative interest rate and our willingness to intervene in the foreign exchange market. We are leaving interest on sight deposits at the SNB at –0.75% and the target range for the threemonth Libor will remain unchanged at between –1.25% and –0.25%. At the same time, we will remain active in the foreign exchange market as necessary, while taking the overall currency situation into consideration. The SNB’s expansionary monetary policy is aimed at stabilising price developments and supporting economic activity.
William C Dudley: The global implications of diverging monetary policy settings in advanced economies Panel remarks by Mr William C Dudley, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, at the Sixth High Level Conference on the International Monetary System: Monetary Policy Challenges in a Changing World, Zurich, Switzerland, 12 May 2015. *  *  *  It is a pleasure to have the opportunity to participate in today’s conference. In keeping with this session’s mandate, I will focus my remarks on the global implications of U.S. monetary policy normalization – paying particular attention to the potential implications for emerging market economies (EMEs). I put the focus here because these economies were greatly affected in 2013 during the so-called “taper tantrum” and many of these economies have been under stress from the weakness in global commodity prices. As always, what I have to say today reflects my own views and not necessarily those of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) or the Federal Reserve. But before I get to the implications for EMEs and what the Fed should do or not do to mitigate the impact, a few words on the timing of normalization. To be as direct as possible: I don’t know when this will occur. The timing of lift-off will depend on how the economic outlook evolves. Since the economic outlook is uncertain, this means the timing of liftoff must also be uncertain.

From one perspective, the unconventional nature of monetary policy around the world adds little that is fundamentally new to the challenges that face EMEs. Today’s monetary policies simply represent a way of easing that was necessitated by hitting the zero lower bound here and elsewhere. Central bankers have managed differences across countries in cyclical positions and policy stances many times in the past. This time should not be fundamentally different. But, from another perspective, we have less experience operating with unconventional monetary policy, we have been in this regime for a long time and this creates more potential uncertainties. These uncertainties put a premium on clear communication among central  BIS central bankers’ speeches  1  bankers as well as between central bankers and market participants. In my view, an important fact is that the large scale asset purchase programs undertaken in the United States and elsewhere have dramatically shrunk the size of bond risk premia globally. This new set of monetary policies affects financial asset prices in a different way compared to changes in short-term interest rates, and we should be humble regarding what we claim to understand about this distinction. Looking ahead, it seems likely that markets will remain focused on those vulnerabilities that they might have ignored prior to the taper tantrum in 2013. The greater premium on strong fundamentals, policy coherence and predictability will likely remain. Although we will undoubtedly experience further bumps in the road. I think we can remain generally optimistic about the prospects for adjustment.
According to an analysis conducted by Eurosif, through a quantitative survey and qualitative interviews of asset managers and owners operating in Europe, one of the most frequently mentioned challenges is a lack of data necessary to comply with European Union regulations. Some respondents commented that they currently use SFDR-related data merely for compliance reasons and do not consider them to be decision-useful information. However, the responses gathered during the qualitative interviews indicate that this view could change as the coverage and reliability of these data increase.6  6  See Eurosif (2023). Climate-related Data: The Investors’ Perspective. Report, May. 6  We have a new challenge to add to definitions and transparency, the previous ones I mentioned, namely, the quality of the information. Finally, we cannot forget that we are in a global world, and even more so insofar as sustainable finance and investments are concerned. Global definitions, disclosure requirements and information would contribute to the mobilisation of financial resources for projects that contribute to the transition to a net-zero economy. To the extent that definitions, disclosure requirements and information are local, the possibilities of facilitating a global shift towards projects that contribute to the transition to a net-zero economy will be smaller. Conclusion I have focused my address on green bonds and sustainability-linked bonds but I am aware that the family of sustainable instruments is growing. Indeed, I have not mentioned sustainable bonds, transition bonds, social bonds, blue bonds or bonds related to biodiversity. Each of them has its own challenges.

Richard W Fisher: Uncertainty matters (with reference to kinky monetary policy, two nickels and a dime) Remarks by Mr Richard W Fisher, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, before the Causes & Macroeconomic Consequences of Uncertainty Conference, Dallas, Texas, 3 October 2013. *  *  *  The views expressed by the author do not necessarily reflect official positions of the Federal Reserve System. The speaker is indebted to Dallas Fed Senior Vice President and Principal Policy Advisor Evan Koenig for his input in developing the themes articulated in this speech. Thank you, Evan [Koenig] It is a pleasure to share this platform with John Taylor. I first met John at a Carnegie Foundation seminar when he was Undersecretary of the Treasury; I have been among the legions of his admirers ever since. He is thoughtful, no-nonsense and, importantly, dedicated to making monetary policy work with maximum efficacy. We at the Dallas Fed are grateful that he chairs the advisory board of our Globalization and Monetary Policy Institute. And we all, as Americans, are grateful for his service and dedication to our country. Thank you, John, for being the good patriot and man that you are. Uncertainty matters Uncertainty matters. A lot. This won’t be a surprise to many of you. The first thing you are taught in any MBA program, be it at Stanford, where I earned my degree, or anywhere else, is that “business” is the process of managing under conditions of uncertainty.
The period 2015–2017 – inflation rises towards target again In 2014, monetary policy came to focus on rapidly returning inflation to target and anchoring inflation expectations. The repo rate was cut by 0.5 percentage points to 0.25 per cent in July and further to zero per cent in October. At the beginning of 2015, inflation was still very low and inflation expectations were developing in a worrying manner (see Figure 3). The repo rate was cut further in 2015 and early 2016 to -0.5 per cent. In addition, the Riksbank started purchasing government bonds on a large scale. The expansionary policy gradually started to have effect. Growth rose and employment increased. Inflation started to show a more-or-less rising trend in 2015 and again reached the inflation target in 2017. Inflation expectations also turned upwards and long-term expectations are now again anchored around the target (Figure 4). The conclusion from the period 2015–2017 that I would particularly like to emphasise is the following: (iii)  It may take a long time with a highly expansionary policy to bring inflation up – but it is possible. It could be claimed that neither is this conclusion particularly remarkable. It is the conclusion that comes to mind first, having observed monetary policy and the development of inflation in Sweden in recent years. But, in light of the current international debate, it is nevertheless important and worth bringing up.

In conclusion, allow me to say that the Bank of Albania is in the process of perfecting the supervision regulatory framework, in the context of its cooperation with the European System of Central Banks. However, full and timely respect of legal and regulatory framework requirements on operational capitalisation and liquidity, as well as bank’s overall operational risk management methodology will continue to be an ongoing supervision priority. This process is oriented by the common objective to maintain banking and financial systems stability. The Bank of Albania remains committed to cooperate with the banking sector to achieve successfully this objective. As in previous years, the Bank of Albania will make the appropriate decisions to ensure that its fundamental objectives to maintain price and banking sector stability are constantly accomplished for the country’s stable growth in the long run. Thanking you for your valuable work, I wish you a New Year full of successes in your work and happiness in your families! Thank you! BIS central bankers’ speeches  3
Despite this, we expect manufacturing output to continue to expand because of improving domestic demand and foreign demand for U.S. manufactured exports. Yet, if this recovery follows the typical pattern for past recoveries, the prospect for growth in factory jobs will likely be weaker here than the rest of the nation. Longer term, the sector’s prospects are likely to be governed by a continuation of the trends I mentioned before in international trade, technology and consumption patterns. This means that output and wages will likely continue to rise, both nationally and regionally. However, the sector is unlikely to be a major source of job growth. Beyond the national trends that work against an expansion of factory jobs, the New York-New Jersey region faces ongoing competitive pressures as a location for manufacturing production. That competition comes from other regions of the country, as well as from abroad. One key to meeting these competitive challenges will be for the region to ensure that it develops and attracts a highly skilled workforce that can meet the needs of innovative and rapidly changing firms. IV. The Empire State Manufacturing Survey  In order to monitor conditions in the region, the New York Fed conducts a monthly survey of manufacturing firms in New York State, our Empire State Manufacturing Survey. Let me tell you a little about the survey and then review recent patterns. The survey is sent to a pool of about 200 manufacturing executives in a wide variety of industries across the state. About 100 responses are usually received.

For the survey’s main index – which is called the General Business Conditions Index – respondents report the change from the previous month in of overall conditions in their firm. To explain their answers, we also ask them to assess components of activity such as orders, shipments, inventories and employment. Respondents are also asked for their views on the likely direction of these indicators over the next six months. In addition, each month we ask supplementary questions on a topic of current interest. To share the information as quickly and broadly as possible, we post results on our public website on the 15th of each month or the next business day. In doing this survey, we join the four other Federal Reserve Banks that use a survey to monitor conditions in their manufacturing sectors. This morning I want to highlight the results of our July survey, which we released last Thursday. Our main index began to signal an upturn in the manufacturing sector in New York State last summer and, despite a brief dip last December, has given a consistently positive signal for a year now. Our July survey showed that conditions continue to improve, but at a slower pace than in previous months. In this month’s supplementary questions, we asked respondents about the importance of trade with various parts of the world to manufacturing activity in New York State. In general, respondents indicated that exports account for a growing share of their revenues.
In addition, bearing in mind the present composition of Spanish banks’ balance sheets, no major adverse impact is to be expected from the upcoming introduction into European legislation of the new limits on liquidity and leverage. It is true, however, that certain requirements could become somewhat more demanding, as a consequence of the harmonisation of the different national applications of the European legislation being undertaken by the SSM and which could affect, among other things, the implementation schedules for the Basel Accord. In any event, even assuming immediate and comprehensive application of Basel III, the capital ratios of Spain’s significant institutions would generally remain at relatively comfortable levels, although they would decline by more than the average for the institutions supervised by the SSM. It should also be noted that the work on the harmonisation of solvency ratios is not confined to the calculation of regulatory capital, but also includes measuring the total risks assumed (the so-called risk-weighted assets) on which the capital requirements are based. In this respect, Spanish banks are somewhat better prepared than other euro area peers for an increase in supervisory demands. Thus, according to the figures recently published by the Banco de España,2 Spain’s banks are among the group of institutions that apply the strictest criteria – owing to the lesser use of internal models and their higher conservative nature – to measure the risk-weighted assets used to calculate the solvency ratios.

In my opinion, there were essentially four such shortcomings: i) the markedly excessive size of the financial sector, which took the form of an accelerated expansion in lending in a low interest rate setting, ii) excessive exposure to the real estate sector, which underwent an BIS central bankers’ speeches  1  unsustainable boom, iii) an insufficient own funds base to meet the risks assumed, and iv), lastly, appreciable weaknesses in corporate governance, management and risk control systems in a relevant segment of the sector. The reforms since undertaken should indeed be understood as a set of actions whose aim was to redress these singular weaknesses of our financial system. 3. The measures taken  What was done to combat these shortcomings? I believe the measures taken may be grouped into four central issues. i)  Balance sheet clean-up  Firstly, it was necessary to facilitate the clean-up of bank balance sheets and, in particular, to reduce exposure to the real estate sector, which was weighing on banks’ solvency. This was mainly achieved through two types of measures. On one hand, further to two decree-laws and various supervisory initiatives, the already-demanding provisioning requirements were increased, particularly for the most sensitive exposures. And on the other, Sareb (the asset management company for assets arising from bank restructuring) was created, and all banks that received public assistance were obliged to transfer their real estate assets, whether impaired or not, to this company.
Mainly: •  Proprietary versus public information  •  Principles versus Rules  •  Consistency of Accounting Standards and the New Basel Accord  Finally, I will review the present status of the Accord, the significant progress made in our last meeting in Madrid and I will outline the next steps in its rapid finalisation, as well as our plans for keeping it fit for the future. Basel II: a new, comprehensive approach to achieve greater financial stability To begin, I would like to re-emphasise the importance of market discipline to banking supervision, especially in a rapidly changing environment. Supervisors seek improvements in the public’s access to information on a bank’s condition precisely to bolster the ability of rating agencies, of business counterparties, and even of investors or depositors to evaluate the profile of a bank’s risks and the quality of its controls. Yet as safety and soundness regulators, we wish to fortify the stability and resilience of the financial system. In our view this goal requires not just greater transparency, but also  BIS Review 47/2003  1  significant advances in the state of the art of risk management and adequate capital when unexpected losses materialise. For the first time, the Capital Accord will include not only explicit economic incentives expressed in the minimum capital requirements but also implicit incentives built into the processes for supervisory review and market disclosure.

This past summer alone, for example, the Committee received over 200 public comments on the proposals set out in our third consultative paper, or “CP3” as we call it. The third pillar attracted a degree of controversy among many banks mainly in earlier drafts of the rules, but thanks to the very positive discussions that the Committee had with the industry and with accounting standards-setting bodies, all the pillars of CP3 now enjoy broad support. This brings me to the next part of my address, in which I’ll cover the key concerns that arose during consultations. Proprietary versus public information Certainly, an early concern about the market discipline component of the New Accord was that the required disclosures appeared to go far beyond what banks traditionally reported publicly. In some institutions’ opinion, the Committee was seeking to require the disclosure of information previously considered confidential. While the Committee is mindful of the concern that some information should remain private, we believe that concepts of public versus proprietary information require some reflection. In order to determine whether information should be disclosed, consideration should also be given to end-users’ needs. For example, in order for shareholders, creditors, and counterparties to appreciate the risks of their own exposures to a bank, they must understand that bank’s appetite for risk and its approach to, and methodologies for, managing risk.
Financial stability risks remain sources of concern in periods ahead, and this is an opportune time for businesses to review and restructure their capital and financing structure to enhance their resilience to the world that will become more volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous. More volatile financial flows The second area of vulnerability comes from international fund flows, which have become more volatile especially for small open economies. Following a decade of unconventional monetary policies, there has been a shift in the structure of foreign exchange markets as well as the nature of capital flows into emerging markets. These flows could lead to two-way volatility in exchange rate and asset prices. With the prospect that low interest rates and excess liquidity will not be over soon, the volatile nature of exchange rate and asset prices will only keep increasing. While we might be able to influence some domestic factors, exchange rate movements in the world with excess liquidity are often driven by external factors that are beyond our control. It is therefore important that we all do our parts to increase our resilience against exchange rate volatility and reduce its impact on the Thai economy. Let me remind everyone that foreign exchange hedging needs to be a regular business practice. Concluding remarks Ladies and gentlemen, The Thai economy is facing significant adjustments: demographic change, climate change, changes in value chain, digital transformation, and global excess liquidity with high leverage. We were more or less aware of these trends since the Global  9  Financial Crisis.

Amidst many critical transitions, the speed of these changes, and a number of structural issues that we are facing, what has got us here will definitely not get us where we want to be in the future. Indeed, we will not know with certainty what the Thai economy will look like in 2025, but we know the major trends that will have significant implications for the 1  future landscape in which we operate. Today, I will highlight five major trends: demographic change, climate change, changes in value chains, digital transformation, and global excess liquidity with historically high leverage. These trends will have big implications for Thailand. While most people would think of these trends as threats to existing business models, they are indeed business opportunities for those who look ahead and get ready for them. 1. Demographic Change The first trend I’d like to highlight is demographic change. Thailand is aging and is aging fast. We were the third Asian country to become an aging society, and by 2035 we will be the first developing country to become a hyperaged society by the definition of the World Health Organization—meaning 20 percent of the population will be over the age of 65. This change will have implications on at least two fronts, both very important to the business sector: labor force, and consumer spending. Impacts on labor force Let me first start with implications on the labor force. The Thai labor force has already passed its peak in 2013 and will only keep declining.