, singapore, thailand, and taiwan. the share of asia - 9 ’ s gdp in purchasing power parity terms has grown from 11. 4 % in 1990 to 20. 6 % in 2005. to put this in perspective, this exceeds the eu ’ s ppp share of world gdp of 18. 8 %, japan ’ s share of 6. 7 %, and is very close to the united states 20. 7 % share of world gdp in 2005. but i am not here today to overwhelm you with facts and figures! today i would like to discuss one of the most important drivers of this phenomenal growth – and that is, international trade. i believe that asia - 9 ’ s experience of growth, or more specifically, intra - regional trade and production, can provide an interesting case study for our south asian counterparts. the emergence of the asia - 9 economies to bring this perspective even closer to home to this audience, let us look at these developments from india ’ s perspective. traditionally, india ’ s trading partners have been the g3 countries, with the us, the eu and japan accounting for 52 % of india ’ s total trade with the world in 1990. at that time, india ’ s trade with asia - 9 accounted for only 8. 3 % of india ’ s total trade. fifteen years later, the structure has changed remarkably. the share of trade with the g3 countries, in terms of india ’ s total trade, has fallen to 33. 9 %. during the same period of time, india ’ s trade with asia - 9 has risen from 8. 3 % to 23. 3 % - an almost three - fold rise. from the perspective of asia - 9 themselves, intra - regional trade among themselves has risen from 29. 1 % of their total trade in 1990 to 41. 4 % in 2005. more striking, the share of intra - regional trade among the asia - 9 economies has outgrown the share of their trade with the g3 countries over the same period, which has in fact fallen from 52. 6 % to 39. 2 %. in terms of growth, trade among asia - 9 economies has grown at an average 23 % in the past 3 years, exceeding the average 17 % growth in trade with g3 countries. what message can we draw from these developments? i think that for the asia - 9 economies, increased trade - linkages and cross - border investment have resulted in a “ symbiotic ”

of the riksbank's employees worked directly with monetary policy and financial stability when we began this journey ( even fewer if we include all those who worked with the manufacture of cash in our companies ) ; today, more than one third of our employees work in these policy fields. traditional operational duties for a central bank like cash management, payment system, asset management and statistics still occupy a significant share of our workforce, but they are not dominating the organization like they used to. managing independent and self - financed institutions, we must find ways to constantly put the pressure of efficiency on the organisation ourselves. we do not have the “ time to market ” pressure that private companies have. this raises questions that in my opinion have appeared far too seldom on our agendas ; questions about management, about setting objectives and managing resources, about internal control and, not least, questions about governance. how should we lead the operations of a central bank? generally, a central bank may learn from any type of successful organisation, we are not that different. but we face a special challenge. our governance model has often been created to arrive at a well - founded monetary - policy decision. such a decision benefits from a careful process with a wide - ranging discussion of different scenarios that finally results in a collective decision - making discussion in ( in our case ) a group of six. this is a structure that has worked well for our policy decisions, but few organisations voluntarily choose a collective of six individuals for the operational management of its activities. our challenge has thus been to draw a clear line between the structure for making policy decisions and that for other decisions. at the riksbank, this has entailed relieving the executive board of responsibility for day - to - day management and transferring this responsibility to a lower level in the line organisation. this has been – and still is – easier said than done and requires constant attention. it also demands discipline on the part of those at the top of the organisational chart. nevertheless, this has been important in not burdening those at the top with micro - management tasks and in ensuring that no decisionmaker has an information advantage ahead of a policy decision. a final reflection regarding internal matters ( following the perspectives of what we should do and how we should do it ) is in fact where? our playing field is increasingly stretching beyond national borders, above all in the case of stability work in an open economy with cross - border banking operations. in the central bank of the past, international work