amount to just under 13½ % of gdp in 2010, while business investment will be about 9 %. over the period 1980 - 2009, total investment averaged 22 % of gdp, while business investment averaged 13 % of gdp. this year ’ s total investment ratio is the lowest since world war ii. the ratio of business investment to gdp has been lower than in 2010, however : in 1945, in 1993 - 1995, and in 2009. even in 2013, at the end of the forecast horizon, investment will be only about 18 % of gdp, which is below the 20 % needed to maintain 3 % output growth in the long run. this development in the level of investment is not inconsistent with the experience of other countries with a high pre - crisis investment ratio. nonetheless, it is cause for some concern, and it is important to ensure that these will be “ only forecasts ”, for nothing is inevitable in such matters. in speeches i have given in the recent past, i have emphasised that, although the interest rate level has certainly affected the investment level, it is probably far from being the most important determinant, particularly with interest rates as low as they are right now. i think other factors are much more influential, such as post - crisis risk aversion, uncertainty about demand and operating environment, reduced access to foreign credit, and impaired corporate balance sheets. these hurdles must be overcome, and they are one of the reasons that it is so important that progress be made in corporate debt restructuring. but let us now turn to monetary policy. the central bank ’ s interest rates have been lowered significantly over a short period of time, mostly because inflation has subsided rapidly and inflation expectations have followed suit. interest rates had to fall accordingly in order to prevent the real interest rate from rising, which would have been quite unfortunate given the spare capacity in the economy. for the same reason, attempts have been made to lower real interest rates without jeopardising exchange rate stability and the inflation target. as i mentioned earlier, central bank interest rates are at an all - time low. nonetheless, the monetary policy committee is of the opinion that there is still some room for further rate cuts if the krona remains stable and inflation continues to subside as forecast. the mpc emphasises, however, that the upcoming removal of capital controls creates uncertainty about just how much room there is to reduce interest rates. the breakeven inflation rate on government bonds, as measured by the central bank,

institutions that have only recently begun the essential step of ensuring that their management information systems are sufficiently detailed to support a robust analysis of bank concentration, and identifying where more work on stress testing is needed. funds management has also been an area that has received a renewed supervisory focus at banks of all sizes. as depositors and other funds providers have become more sensitive to bank risk, many banks have reinforced their contingency funding plans and developed sophisticated systems to more closely track their sources and uses of funds. these steps are particularly important for banks facing weaker asset quality. see robin prager and john d. wolken, ( 2008 ). " the evolving relationship between community banks and small businesses : evidence from the surveys of small business finances, " federal reserve board finance and economics discussion series 2008 - 60. conclusion the differences in the business models of systemically important financial firms and community banks are obvious. yet the financial crisis and ensuing recession have revealed deficiencies in risk management in institutions of both types. changes in competitive environments require banks to respond with changes in their business strategies. but the financial crisis has also revealed the importance of banks adopting risk - management strategies appropriate to these strategic changes, and of bank regulatory agencies adapting their supervisory models to both these kinds of changes in financial institutions. the characteristics of the financial services industry have changed enormously in the last 30 years. along with the nature of the regulatory regime that will be effective, the key aim of prudential regulation remains what it has always been – to encourage the efficient allocation of capital to productive uses while protecting the system from the defects and excesses that are inherent in financial markets. as we recover from the crisis and the recession, we will likely be entering a new era in which systemic risk regulation assumes much greater importance for supervisors. but the role of bank management, and of risk management at banks, will also remain what it has always been – to allow these institutions to play an effective intermediating role in a safe and sound fashion.