period from 2000 to 2007. by contrast, the past eight years yield 120, 000 hits. despite that recognition, macroprudential policy in europe was far from operational in 2011. indeed, when the european rules establishing a common legal basis for macroprudential instruments for banking came into effect in january 2014, ten member states still had not implemented them in primary national legislation. even where national authorities had been created, there was uncertainty over the right way to assess risks, which instruments to use and how to calibrate interventions. moreover, there was a real risk of inaction bias since the costs of macroprudential policy are visible and are felt immediately, but the benefits accrue over time and are difficult to quantify. 5 given this somewhat tentative start for macroprudential policy in europe, substantial progress 1 / 4 bis central bankers'speeches has been made over the past eight years. macroprudential authorities now exist in all but one member state. the gaps in our framework and knowledge have slowly been filled through research and experience. the esrb has played an integral part in this process. 6 the framework has also helped to counter the risk of inaction bias. national macroprudential authorities have mandates and legal tools to act. at the european level, the esrb also holds a mandate to monitor risks and vulnerabilities and has a number of legal instruments at its disposal. it can, for example, issue warnings if it has identified a significant risk to financial stability, as well as recommendations setting out remedial steps to be taken on an act - or - explain basis. national authorities have certainly demonstrated their willingness to use the tools at their disposal. most eu countries currently have at least one measure in place to address risks in the residential property sector and half have measures to tackle risks in commercial real estate. 12 member states have decided to impose a positive rate on the countercyclical buffer. 7 the esrb has likewise taken action. in 2016, it issued warnings to eight countries, drawing attention to medium - term vulnerabilities in the residential real estate sectors. in six of these countries, the esrb judges that the vulnerabilities have not been sufficiently addressed and on monday published recommendations setting out remedial action to be taken. 8 five further countries were issued with warnings. 9 areas for further progress in macroprudential policy yet the overall framework for macroprudential policy in europe remains incomplete. we need progress

- regulation are sufficient to ensure global welfare. we have seen that improvements are needed to preserve the safety of the global economic and financial system. these improvements concern rules of the game and procedures, but they also concern attitudes and underlying values. countries have to recognise the global impact of their policies and financial market players have to accept that the prime purpose of the financial sector is to serve the real economy. second, more than in the past, global governance must demonstrate a capacity to coordinate and decide extremely swiftly. a characteristic of the turbulences that intensified in september 2008 was the extreme rapidity in the succession of events as the crisis unfolded. the very high degree of interdependency between all economies calls for a much higher level of cooperation than in the past. third, the crisis has rightly accelerated the inclusion of emerging markets into the framework of global governance. but there are two reasons for this change. one is positive : the emerging economies are now economically and financially so important, and systemically so influential, that they must be fully involved in global governance. i hesitate to unveil the other reason that is not flattering for industrialised countries : they did not live up to their responsibilities prior to the crisis. now, the industrialised countries are called on to contribute to the stability and prosperity of the global economy within the new, more inclusive framework. looking ahead, we see that the global recovery has started to proceed at different speeds across regions, with a relatively modest recovery in advanced countries like the united states, japan and the euro area and a stronger expansion in the emerging economies. and yet, there is no time for complacency as recent tensions in financial markets have amply demonstrated. let me stress that it is important that the recovery should be measured in broader terms than the simple resumption of gdp growth and a return to sustainable fiscal positions : it means a full restoration of trust in our financial institutions ; it requires the healing of wounds inflicted by the irresponsible behaviour of some financial players on our societies and on the real economy ; and it requires renewed confidence that global governance is strong, broad and flexible enough to ensure global economic and financial stability and resilience in the future. thank you for your attention.