the euro and experience the benefits, as by central bank, government or european commission officials, or by politicians and their aides. the hkma view but let me say here that, insofar as the perception of the euro within the hong kong monetary authority ( hkma ) is concerned, it is clearly a supportive one. as i implied earlier, we have a keen interest in the euro and a quiet wish for its success. this should demonstrate to the world that a fixed exchange rate ( in your case more than a fixed rate - a unified currency ) vis - a - vis some or all of one ’ s trading partners is a viable option. there have been few other “ fixers ” since the bretton woods system broke down in the early 1970s. but hong kong since 1983 and other more recent currency board countries, such as argentina, bulgaria and estonia, have shown that fixing is a viable strategy. it may indeed even be superior, given the discipline it imposes and the salutary attention it focuses at the national level on structural efficiency and flexibility. of course it may not suit all, and the imf, for instance, continues mostly to espouse free floating in its prescriptions for individual countries. but the imf does acknowledge that options at the other extreme of the spectrum from free floating may be appropriate in some circumstances, and in its pronouncements the imf has given unflinching support to hong kong ’ s peg - as indeed it has to the euro. the success of the euro has further implications for the asian region. one lesson learned from the experience of the asian financial turmoil is that if we wish to reduce the vulnerability of the small and open emerging markets in asia to international finance we need, among other things, to build bigger markets. one way of achieving this, if not the only way, is to follow the example of euroland and go for some form of currency union. although the euroland type of pre - conditions for currency union are far from being satisfied in asia at present, with so much diversity and fragmentation in the geography, culture, stages of development and policies, this is an option that asia can ill afford to ignore in the long run. the experience of euroland operating with the euro is therefore something that should be watched in asia, and is being watched in the hkma, with keen, supportive interest. meanwhile, one way of reducing the short - term vulnerability of small and open markets in asia to the des

michelle w bowman : innovation and the evolving financial landscape speech by ms michelle w bowman, member of the board of governors of the federal reserve system, at the digital chamber dc blockchain summit 2024, washington dc, 15 may 2024. * * * i would like to thank the digital chamber for the invitation to share my perspectives on innovation in the financial system. 1 i welcome opportunities like this to engage in discussions that include both the public and private sector on this important topic. these conversations help inform my understanding of and expectations for how technology can enhance financial services in a manner that is consistent with operating in the highly regulated banking industry. today, i will share my views on evolving financial technology and the importance of ongoing, responsible innovation, including the roles of both the public and private sectors in shaping the future. in my role at the federal reserve, i view financial innovation through the lens of the central bank's responsibilities - issuing u. s. currency ; conducting monetary policy ; fostering a safe and efficient payment system ; maintaining financial stability ; promoting consumer protection ; and supervising and regulating financial institutions. regulators often espouse the benefits of innovation - innovation can lead to greater efficiency, and it can promote competition in the market, which can lower the cost and expand the availability of products and services to consumers and businesses. while regulators acknowledge these benefits, innovation is inevitably accompanied by risk. innovation can exacerbate traditional financial risks or introduce new risks that must be carefully understood and managed. and on a basic level, the " newness " of innovation often leads regulators to reflexively resist these changes, whether the change takes the form of new technology, new ways of delivering products and services, new financial infrastructure that underlies how the banking system works, and new relationships within the financial system and beyond. so how do regulators get comfortable with innovation? some attending today may answer that " they don't! " and i am sure that some here in the room have experienced this friction in trying to pursue innovation in a heavily regulated environment. in fairness, sometimes " no " is the correct regulatory response when innovation either does not solve an actual problem, or simply cannot be executed in a safe and sound manner and in compliance with applicable laws. but my goal today is to propose some building blocks that could help regulators get to " yes " more often, and potentially smooth the rough path to successful innovation in the banking system. understanding innovation as a first principle, i would offer " understanding " as a