catching - up process, both in europe as a whole and on a global level, as we cannot afford the persistence or even widening of the existing gaps between poor and rich countries. moreover, a balanced and consistent policy - mix will be of crucial importance also for the transition countries in their catching - up and integration efforts. in that respect, i am glad that this conference provides an excellent opportunity to review the policy challenges the transition economies face in the most important fields of economic policy. … let me briefly touch these fields, which range from microeconomic reforms over macroeconomic policies to integration policies. firstly, structural reforms are the key to long - term success. existing productive capacities have to be reshaped, and new ones have to be built, above all in the service sector. in particular, financial services, which were practically non - existent when transition started a decade ago, have to be strengthened further. developing structures and institutions of financial intermediation is the prerequisite for ensuring the high level of productive real investment necessary for high real gdp growth. more broadly, structural convergence is a conditio sine qua non for successful transition and it is an indispensable basis for sustainable macroeconomic stability. secondly, in the field of macroeconomic policies, i would like to underline the importance of formulating and implementing stability - oriented, sustainable and consistent fiscal and monetary policies. to keep the accession process manageable even now that the union is negotiating with a comparatively large number of countries, it will be essential to key the pace of negotiations as objectively as possible to the further progress of the candidate countries toward fulfilling the conditions for eu membership. this involves two aspects : first, the speed of enlargement must not compromise its quality, and second, differences between the countries in the two former groups of candidates must be taken into consideration if there is a factual reason to do so. an overly ambitious approach which is not adequately underpinned by developments in the real economy may lead to losses in credibility or even turn out to be counterproductive to stability and to the long - term catching - up process. from my point of view, it is clear that adequately designed stability - oriented policies facilitate structural change. in that way, prudent efforts towards stabilization and structural change can reinforce each other and will foster the catching - up process. … turning to monetary policy, i am convinced that a sound stance and conduct can best be achieved if the central bank is fully independent. central bank

– and probably always will be, to some extent. continuous efforts are therefore needed to bridge existing regulatory gaps, e. g. as regards the resolution of large multinational banks, and – equally important – to address future regulatory challenges arising from ongoing financial innovation. of course, the interaction between finance and growth depends on the time dimension. in the long run, financial deepening still helps growth. this finding has not been altered by the experience of the financial crisis. the positive impact of further financial deepening, however, may be smaller than we still thought a few years ago, and it may be much more conditional on the regulatory framework and the overall policy compound. this is an empirical question, and it is certainly important to revisit this debate. even more crucial, however, is our understanding of short - to medium - term developments. within the short - to medium - term horizon, the relation between finance and growth has become much more uncertain, given the risk that finance adds to or even causes boom - bust developments which can ( and often do ) entail substantial welfare costs. both the it revolution and global financial integration – or financial globalization if you prefer – have added to financial sector dynamics and thus reinforced the impact financial developments can have on the real economy. against this background, the ceei 2013 focuses on the following questions : • have we changed the way we think about the finance - growth nexus? how do we measure the financial cycle and its impact on sustainable output and cyclical fluctuations? in other words : how do we assess whether financial deepening and thus the level of economic output is sustainable? • what is the “ nature ” of real estate bubbles, and why should we care about their procyclical interactions with finance and economic activity? • what are the lessons to be drawn for economic policy? how should we deal with the financial cycle on the national, the european and the global level – both with regard to financial upturns and downturns? do we have to rethink our policy rules? • at the current juncture, how should we overcome the legacies of the crisis ( and improve the resolution and / or recovery of nonperforming loans ) and how should we lay the foundations for a better handling of future boom episodes? is the necessary policy toolkit already in place? what do we know and what do we still need to know bis central bankers ’ speeches about the functioning and the effectiveness of our new policy instruments, like e. g.