, market participants, and scholars — and give the public the means and the opportunity to provide meaningful feedback on our work. some steps are already underway. we established a new expectation that all fsb policy recommendations will be open for at least 60 days of public comment, instead of the shorter periods used in the past. we began a recent effort around the differences in regulatory environments and market conditions across jurisdictions — known as “ market fragmentation " — by convening key stakeholders and academics for a full - day workshop, which i hope will be the rule for future projects, not the exception. earlier this year, we released publicly the fsb work program for the first time. 3 this broad engagement is essential to understanding new developments that are relevant to financial stability. take, for example, the “ fintech ” trends i discussed in remarks last week, to which the fsb is dedicating significant attention. claims about fintech run the gamut from the utopian to the apocalyptic — yet the mantle of fintech covers a wide range of new business models, products, and trends. their contours and their impact also vary across national boundaries, from mobile wallets in kenya, to online mortgages in the united states, to money market funds founded by technology companies in china. understanding one of these new uses of technology is not the same as understanding all of them. identifying the risks and opportunities they pose requires context, information, and insight that can only come from a variety of stakeholders with experience developing, using, and monitoring them. i will continue to seek ways to invite and encourage engagement during my chairmanship, and to give the public a clearer and fuller view of fsb ’ s decisionmaking process. few efforts are closer to the heart of our collective work or to the accountability and trust that the fsb helps foster. vigilance trust and accountability are also prerequisites for the fsb to pursue its mission. the first prong of our mandate, now a decade old, is to “ assess vulnerabilities affecting the global financial system, and identify and review... the regulatory, supervisory, and related actions needed to address them.... " 4 the fsb ’ s primary role, and its principal contribution to international financial regulation, is to look forward — to see past the issues and practices of the day, and identify new vulnerabilities, long before they lead to widespread economic distress. the fsb ’ s standing committee on assessment of

, detailed work on emerging risks to financial stability. yet identifying those risks before a crisis means dealing in uncertainty, and making policy on evolving issues, where no one can claim complete expertise. to maintain that trust, we must be willing to make improvements when the evidence justifies it — to undertake rigorous analysis, before and after issuing new standards, and to follow that analysis where it leads. many post - crisis policies, including those aimed at the implicit subsidy for “ too - big - to - fail ” institutions, have been in place long enough to allow for evaluation. we can now begin to ask fundamental, critical questions : what have the effects of these reforms been, whether intended or unintended, salutary or adverse? have we successfully reduced or eliminated the problem? has there been a tradeoff, in the form of new, unintended risks or costs? as i have described elsewhere, the fsb is launching a global study with multinational policymakers to start answering these important questions as part of its broader effort to evaluate the effects of post - crisis reforms. we intend to bring analytical rigor to these questions, and we recognize that the academic community has undertaken much work in this area. as a result, we will draw extensively on academic advisors during all phases of the work we are undertaking. i also encourage other experts in this field to look closely to the consultative document that will be coming from the study next year. we welcome the input as we undertake the study of this signature issue from the crisis. the task of this project, like the task of the fsb itself, is to foster insight on the road ahead. the work of the fsb reflects the fact that, in a global financial system, we cannot see and address 3 / 4 bis central bankers'speeches emerging problems alone. working as allies and colleagues, we have bound up most of the wounds from the last financial crisis. to avoid reopening them — and returning to a fragmented international regime — we will have to recommit to collaboration, embrace insight where it emerges, and follow evidence where it leads. with broad engagement, rigorous vigilance, and committed analysis, the risks ahead of us can be less dangerous than the ones we left behind. 1 leaders ’ statement ( pdf ), the pittsburgh summit ( g20 ), september 24 – 25, 2009. 2 randal k. quarles, “ the financial stability board in 2019 ” ( speech at the joint conference of the european central bank