system. the exchanges where cryptos are bought and sold are where the ‘ new ’ and the ‘ old ’ financial systems overlap, and where we will focus our supervisory efforts. conclusion you still have a full schedule ahead, and i ’ d like to have some time at the end for questions, so now i ’ ll conclude. i have tried to highlight some possible benefits of dlt and blockchain for the financial system. the technology is nascent, yet there are several interesting use cases that signify its potential. central banks are keeping a close eye on new developments, and many of them are experimenting themselves. they also do this to assess and monitor risks stemming from new technologies. we should be especially vigilant about developments in cryptos. while they, too, could represent opportunities, there are considerable risks both for individual investors and in time, possibly the financial system at large. an appropriate regulatory response should be formulated, commensurate with these risks. central banks and regulators need to find the right balance between seizing the benefits of technological innovation on one hand, and coping with possible new risks on the other. for us, blockchain ’ s evolution in the financial system is ultimately a balancing act.

- block approach. this allows countries to use its common global baseline – and also be able to build on that baseline to develop national approaches to suit individual circumstances and priorities. this will provide jurisdictions with the flexibility to be more ambitious and go further or faster if they wish. at the same time, the common baseline will allow interoperability of approaches. disclosures are important for investors ’ financial decision - making but have wider importance too. they will provide necessary information on the progress being made by firms towards the transition, which is important to investors, but also to a wider set of stakeholders. such disclosures must provide the information needed to assess the credibility of private sector commitment and action. the second building block is data. firm - level disclosures are essential, but are not the only data we g y need. we also need macro - level data to help us determine which sectors of the economy are most at risk. we need government data. for example, on the policy plans to curb emissions and their effects. we need data on underlying climate risks, for instance on the frequency and severity of extreme weather events. finally, to fully understand the systemic perspective, we will also need data to assess the degree to which climate - related risks might be transferred, amplified or mitigated by different financial sectors. such data provide the raw material for the third building block of the fsb roadmap – vulnerabilities analysis. to examine vulnerabilities from a long - term, forward - looking perspective, it is critical to further develop scenario analysis, making use of the common ngfs climate scenarios. at the same time, we need to devise simpler indicators that can help identify the build - up of vulnerabilities. this is a key part of the fsb ’ s work on integrating climate - related risks into its broader financial stability surveillance framework. improving our vulnerabilities analysis, in turn, forms the basis for the final block of our roadmap – regulatory and supervisory practices and tools. sectoral standard - setters are doing important work already, by developing tools in their individual sectors. the fsb ’ s contribution is to help bind this work together by promoting consistency and effectiveness of approaches across sectors and countries. in april, we issued a consultation report on supervisory and regulatory approaches to climate - related risks. this report takes a cross - sector, cross - border perspective. it sets out high level recommendations on regulatory and supervisory data. here the issb ’ s