become faster. with the new service “ instant payment ”, funds will be available in the payee ’ s account within seconds, while interbank settlement does not take place until afterwards. but there is still a way to go – in this area, other countries have come further than norway. hopefully, payment services in norway will be even faster in the coming years. assessment of the norwegian financial infrastructure the financial crisis was a reminder that increasingly complex financial instruments and demanding technological solutions have increased risk in the financial infrastructure. in the within certain amounts. customers must still enter their pin code in connection with large payments. bis central bankers ’ speeches aftermath of the crisis, the international recommendations for the financial infrastructure have been tightened. 5 the new principles provide a comprehensive standard for the financial infrastructure across borders and across various systems. the purpose is to promote a robust and efficient financial infrastructure 6 that supports the stability of the global financial system. the new principles devote considerable attention to such areas as operational risk, derivate exposure and the use of central counterparties. norges bank oversees financial infrastructure and supervises interbank clearing and settlement systems. there are two systems that are licensed by norges bank to provide clearing or settlement : nics and dnb as a private settlement bank. for these systems, norges bank, as supervisory authority, may require that owners take corrective action for noncompliance with licence terms or the payment systems act. in collaboration with finanstilsynet, norges bank has recently conducted an assessment of important parts of the financial infrastructure in norway in accordance with the international principles. 7 the main conclusion is that the financial infrastructure in norway is robust and efficient. nevertheless there is a need for some improvements. in particular, two areas are emphasised : first, some of the systems have a deficient framework for monitoring and managing risk. such a framework is necessary for assessing risk and measures in aggregate. otherwise, one cannot be certain whether the measures implemented are appropriate. the framework should cover all aspects of operations, also the parts outsourced to other providers. this is an essential tool for controlling the overall risk in the system. it is not sufficient to indicate that an operating services provider has a separate risk management framework in place. the board of the owner company has ultimate responsibility. second, it is not always clear how operational risk is managed and controlled. if operational risk is not managed appropriately, there is a risk that operations are disrupted – and in the worst case come to a halt

let me turn to the issue of how to return to sustainable growth. reviving growth following recession and returning to sustainable growth are of course not one and the same. the latter will require comprehensive reforms – in both advanced and emerging countries. and again i see greater scope here for emes, particularly emerging asia, to lead the way back to sustainable growth. to be specific, emes contributed about 40 percent to world gdp growth during the globalization period of 1986 – 2007, compared to 27 percent for the preglobalization period of 1973 – 1985. more recently, emerging asia alone accounted for 50 percent of world gdp growth during 2006 – 11. and imf projections suggest that the growth contribution of emerging asia will continue at around 50 percent for the next five years. these are not surprising in that emes are well positioned to undertake high investment for growth along their catch - up process which is not yet completed. but this large contribution to global growth masks important risks to emes, in leading the return to sustainable growth. many emes rely heavily on external demand for growth, and therefore will face challenges going forward if advanced economies do not grow fast enough. over a longer horizon, the export - led growth strategies of large emes will be unsustainable, given their implications for the global imbalances. this suggests that emes need to rebalance their growth, toward a greater share driven by domestic demand. another risk facing emes is financial vulnerability. liberalization of their capital accounts has exposed these countries to the vagaries of financial shocks of external origin, while their underdeveloped domestic financial markets offer little scope for hedging. indeed, financial crises have often interrupted the otherwise steady growth trends of many emes. bis central bankers ’ speeches advanced countries of course also face significant risks to sustainable growth. their high and rising public debts undermine not only financial stability but also growth. evidence suggests that public debt above 85 – 90 percent of gdp tends to affect growth negatively. high longterm unemployment will lead to permanent losses of productive human capital. more recently, rising unemployment and income inequality have compromised social cohesion in these countries. last but not least, the euro area has and will remain vulnerable to growing structural imbalances between its core members and its periphery. based upon these observations, i would like to touch briefly now on several reform agenda that i believe could help us to return to sustainable growth. first, fiscal and financial regulatory reforms there is no question that fiscal