with other peoples instruments. the potential fight for competencies among different institutional bodies might undermine the effectiveness of the macro prudential approach. concluding remarks : challenges remain, opportunities emerge the financial crisis has traumatized the global financial system. the huge losses of many major financial institutions and negative feedback loops from the real economy in the aftermath of the financial crisis have triggered changing market structures. in addition, global competition between financial centers has intensified. imf : macroprudential policy : an organizing framework, march 2011. bis central bankers ’ speeches in response to the crisis, the world has moved into a new stage of international regulation and supervision of financial markets. the new rules – many of which have not been implemented yet – start to bite already, due to the tightening of capital requirements and a more homogeneous regulatory framework which pose challenges in particular to smaller financial centers. but this changing environment implies also opportunities to improve their relative positions. in order to do so the provision of convincing conditions is of the essence. local factors gain weight, e. g. a well - educated workforce in an open and flexible labour market and excellent infrastructure. the respective governments should comply with robust public finance in line with a stability - oriented monetary policy. smart regulation – at national, regional and global level – and a stable legal and institutional framework are a prerequisite for success. global standards are needed to ensure a level playing field. at the same time, it is crucial that international financial centers of systemic importance have a voice in the international standard setting, so these can benefit from their wealth of experience and competence in supervision based on the proximity and high interaction with the supervised entities. bis central bankers ’ speeches

). 3 ). we therefore revised down our forecast slightly in the short term. in 2008 we envisaged a gradual recover in productivity. after that, our assessment was that productivity growth would develop roughly in line with the trend rate of increase. several factors indicate that the long - term rate of increase in productivity will remain relatively high, although it will not be as high as during the years at the beginning of the 2000s. globalisation is one such factor, and will probably continue to be a driving force behind productivity for a long time to come. integration within the eu is deepening. the countries in eastern and central europe who have moved away from planned economies have many years of rapid development ahead of them before they catch up with western europe. the international competition in the product and labour markets and the financial integration process will thus continue to increase during the foreseeable future. the deregulation implemented in sweden in the 1990s in the communication and transport sector has probably already had its main impact on productivity. there is of course still scope for reforms to increase competition further and thereby also productivity. 14 but without such new initiatives the deregulation will probably not contribute as much to future growth. investments in it will probably fuel productivity for a long time. earlier experiences show that major development phases, such as electricity and the combustion engine, affected productivity growth over several decades. 15 as yet we know very little about the delayed effects on productivity from earlier it investments and reorganisations. hopefully, the productivity project i mentioned earlier will increase this knowledge. all in all, the indications are that long - term productivity growth will be slightly lower than in the past 10 - 15 years. the riksbank ’ s assessment is that the long - term rate of increase in productivity in the economy as a whole has fallen slightly to 2. 25 per cent a year. this is lower than during the period 1995 - 2006, when productivity growth was on average 2. 6 per cent a year, but slightly higher than the level of around 2 per cent a year that applies if the 1980s are included. the riksbank ’ s assessment is well in line with what, for instance, the national institute of economic research has assumed regarding long - term productivity growth in the economy. 16 in conclusion, let me briefly summarise my main message today. the rapid increase in productivity growth is an important explanation for the earlier low inflation. over the past year there has been a decline in productivity growth. this is assessed to be