of including a standing chapter that describes our view of a number of current stability issues of a more political nature is interesting. one advantage is that it would give us a reason to jointly develop an overall view on issues of this nature a couple of times a year. today this is done on an ad hoc basis, in connection with responses to submissions or in connection with some form of reasoning in the financial stability reports. however, a change of this type requires considerable additional work for those working on the analyses and would also take up more of the executive board ’ s time than at present. it therefore needs to be considered in the light of other commitments. there are other areas of the assessment where i am more undecided. one of the recommendations was that we should regularly take into account other operators in the infrastructure than the banks and institutions. i agree that it is important to look further afield, not just in obvious places, when trying to identify threats and shocks. we should most probably take some steps in this direction. however, there are also risks entailed in this suggestion. one strength of our method of working has been the concentration on central, systemically - important issues. if we broaden our commitments we may be forced to give up some of this depth, and what we publish may be more difficult to grasp. some of the recommendations concerned international connections in the stability work. increased international surveillance is one of their recommendations that we are happy to follow. the integration of financial systems is increasing all the time and requires that we raise our gaze to take in the world around us. we already have this aim, but much remains to be done. another aspect of internationalisation that is emphasised concerns crisis management. we are encouraged to continue with our crisis management exercises, but to carry them out together with our european colleagues. this is an important issue that we discussed in more depth in the financial stability report published a year ago. we observed then that an integrated financial market has positive effects on the economy as a whole, but that it entails challenges for those of us who oversee the system. as the banking systems in different countries become more dependent on one another, the contagion risks will increase further. given this, it is important to identify what roles are played by the different authorities. who should bear the main responsibility if one of nordea ’ s finnish branch offices were to suffer problems - we or our colleagues in finland? conclusion let me round off with a hope that i have been

##w played a key role in post - war reconstruction efforts. it must have been a daunting challenge – getting the german economy back on its feet after the devastation of war. but that is exactly what it achieved. and more. through a spirit of cooperation, through a willingness to take on massive responsibility and through ensuring funds were channeled to where they needed to go, ultimately, paving the way for the country to recover and emerge as one of the world ’ s leading industrial states. today another wind of change is blowing. and though the challenges we face today are equally daunting, i am certain that once more we can overcome them. and that once again we will show to the world that the financial sector can be a force for good. we ’ ve come a long way. in 1992, the leaders of the world took a first step by signing the un convention on climate change. that is over a quarter of a century ago. 25 years in which many more steps have been taken, leading up to the paris agreement of 2015. the good news is that momentum is building. and not a moment too soon. in 1992, there was little consensus on the catastrophic effects of rising temperatures. we did not yet know that in 2017, air pollution would cause the deaths of almost 5 million people. we did not yet know that in 2018, 62 million people would be affected by extreme weather events and over 2 million would be displaced because of it. and we did not know that by now, we would be risking our homes, our jobs and eventually even our lives if we don ’ t drastically change how we live. world leaders took the first step in acknowledging climate - related risks. and it seems that investors and financial institutions are now on the same page. in 1992, the words “ climate change ” popped up in only 69 bloomberg articles. by comparison : last year, it appeared in over 22, 000 bloomberg articles. also, in 1992, seminars like this didn ’ t cover climate - related issues. this is of course not only true for climate change : “ low interest rates ” weren ’ t really a hot topic then either : with the german bund yield at 8 %. but the difference between these two subjects is that interest rates go up and down over time, while the temperature keeps rising. the world has already warmed by about 1 degree celsius since pre - industrial times, due to human activity. drastic efforts are needed to reduce carbon emissions now. otherwise, it