heng swee keat : a more challenging global and domestic economic environment opening remarks by mr heng swee keat, managing director of the monetary authority of singapore, at the monetary authority of singapore ’ s annual report 2007 / 2008 press conference, singapore, 24 july 2008. * * * 1. there is heightened uncertainty in the global economy and financial markets. the us subprime mortgage crisis has led to financial turbulence that hit many american and european financial institutions, forcing them to recapitalize and tighten lending standards. these stresses in financial markets have been a drag on economic activity in the industrialized countries through various channels, including the adjustment in the housing market and wider credit spreads. 2. the pace of us economic growth is slowing, constrained by the ongoing credit crisis, the unprecedented fall in the housing markets across the country, and rising commodity prices. in europe and japan, business expectations and consumer confidence continue to weaken. in asia, growth has held up relatively well, helped in part by the robust expansion in china and india so far. nonetheless, rising inflation will impact the real earnings of households and corporates in the region, with a concomitant pullback in spending. overall, global growth is expected to fall to 2. 9 % this year from 3. 8 % in 2007. at the same time, inflation has emerged as a significant risk factor. slower growth, together with rising inflationary pressures, presents challenges for the global economy. 3. in singapore, economic activity is moderating. after 17 consecutive quarters of sequential expansion, the growth momentum has eased since the fourth quarter of 2007 as anticipated, to around the economy ’ s medium term potential. on average, gdp grew slightly over 4 % in the first half of this year, registering 6. 9 % in the first quarter and 1. 9 % in the second quarter of 2008. the weaker performance in q2 was due in part to a sharp decline in the output of the pharmaceutical sector, which can fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter because of company - specific production cycles. 4. in the coming months, activities which rely directly on g3 demand, such as electronics manufacturing, or are sentiment - driven like stockbroking, will be more adversely affected by the global headwinds. however, other industries including construction, marine and offshore engineering as well as financial intermediation services are expected to continue to provide support to gdp growth over the rest of 2008. our assessment for full -

andreas dombret : introductory statement - iif international capital markets and emerging markets roundtable introductory statement by dr andreas dombret, member of the executive board of the deutsche bundesbank, at the iif international capital markets and emerging markets roundtable, washington dc, 20 april 2018. * * * ladies and gentlemen ever since the ground - breaking work of solow in the fifties most policy makers and members of academia – especially in the advanced economies – have inclined to favour free capital flows. many crises later, the view has somewhat shifted, in particular, regarding emerging markets and developing countries, which is the group of countries that i will focus my remarks on. not only can capital flow reversals and in the extreme form sudden stops create significant costs in terms of output losses, financial instability and even political instability. but from all we know today it is surprisingly difficult to find empirical evidence of capital account liberalization being beneficial in terms of output gains, investment, productivity gains, or risk sharing for countries that have not progressed sufficiently far in their institutional development. much of the work on this has been carried out by the imf and indeed by maurice obstfeld himself, so maurice should correct me if i am wrong, but essentially liberalized capital flows should go hand in hand with functioning judicial systems including well enforced property rights, developed and well regulated financial systems as well as stability - oriented macroeconomic policies. there are even longer lists, but these seem to be the minimum requirements. so, given that these conditions are not always met fully, should countries resort to capital flow measures if faced with volatile flows? by the way, i am using the imf terminology of capital flow measures. these are basically capital controls plus those macroprudential measures that aim to limit financial stability risks arising from cross - border capital flows. i think we all agree that sound domestic policies should always be the first line of defence and that capital flow measures should not substitute for warranted macroeconomic or exchange rate adjustments. but it is also useful to state an obvious but often overlooked fact : unlike restrictions on the current account, the imposition of capital flow measures is not under the jurisdiction of the imf, thus, any country can basically adopt such controls as it deems necessary to regulate capital movements. however, capital flow policies are part of the funds surveillance and as such open to an assessment of their impact on the international monetary system. objectives of capital flow measures usually are to maintain monetary independence, to mitigate exchange