age in oecd countries, compared with 14 in 1950. 10 at the same time, public debt levels have surged in those countries from 56 % of gdp in 2007 to around 87 % today. 11 only higher potential growth can provide a lasting solution. so, clearly, to foster a dynamic global economy we need to resist protectionist urges. but to do so, we also need to identify how best to respond to protectionism. the role of multilateral cooperation in making openness sustainable much has been written over the past few years about the negative effects of free trade and the need to pay more attention to those who benefit less from it. the debate has typically focused on the extent to which welfare policies can be used to share the gains of trade more evenly. though this is a complex issue, 12 i have no doubt that making better use of public policies to support the more vulnerable members of society, not just financially but also through education and retraining, is a vital part of the equation. more work needs to be done in this area and it is important to learn from best policy practices. but the other key question is : how can we work together to make openness sustainable? what role can multilateral cooperation play towards this goal? this is the angle i would like to address today. its importance becomes clear when one thinks about the three main areas of concern that people have about open markets that i mentioned earlier. first, there is the concern about whether openness is fair – i. e. whether all are playing by the same rules and applying the same standards. this manifests itself in fears about currency manipulation by trading partners, dumping practices and lack of reciprocal market access. second, there is the concern about whether openness is safe – i. e. whether it exposes people to 2 / 7 bis central bankers'speeches harmful spillovers from abroad. this is perhaps most visible, at least for economists, in the case of cross - border capital flows13, but it also applies in areas such as agriculture and biotechnology. third, there is the concern about whether openness is equitable – that is, whether it disproportionately benefits some groups in society over others. though it is not straightforward to disentangle the effects of trade and technology on inequality – and they may in fact be linked14 – the perception that openness contributes to inequality has become more widespread. in each case, multilateral cooperation, leading to regulatory convergence, is a precon

take the same positions at the same time. such herding could then enforce current trends, creating bubbles or bursting them. and then there are threats of a more technical kind : cyber risks. cyber risks affect everyone – banks, fintechs and their customers. arguably, fintechs are more exposed to cyberattacks and data theft. their it platforms are small and interconnected, and they often use public cloud solutions and outsource data storage. that said, fintechs are digital natives and are very aware of the risks. ladies and gentlemen, it is hard to predict where the fintech journey will take us. it is obvious, however, that the train has left the station and is speeding up. customers want to extend their digital life to banking ; they want banking services anytime and anywhere. those who can satisfy their needs will become dominant players. there is a chance that fintechs will deeply transform the banking business. it is up to regulators and supervisors to ensure that this does not come at the cost of stability. the issue is, of course, that fintechs often operate outside the regulated banking sector. with that in mind, policymakers should follow the general principle of “ same business, same risks, same rules ”. that is important. as banking supervisors, we focus on risks related to banks. in that regard, we are working on a number of projects. take bank licences, for example. we see a rising number of applications related to fintechs. in response to this, we have teamed up with the national supervisors to work on a joint policy approach. it will ensure that applications are treated in the same manner across the entire euro area. risks that are specific to fintechs will be assessed appropriately and proportionately. we are also seeing more and more supervisors exploring and setting up mechanisms to facilitate the authorisation process for fintech banks. innovation hubs and sandboxes are two of the key words here. and we too are seeking to implement a euro area - wide hub for fintechs. we are also assessing the risks that might arise when banks or fintechs outsource data or even entire it systems. we already carried out some work in this regard ; in 2015, we did a cybercrime survey, which was a unique project at the global level. as a follow - up we implemented a data base to track and analyse cyber incidents in large euro area banks. and last but not least, concerning the