current account deficit in the months to come. another noteworthy development are rising oil prices from some 10 us - dollar per barrel in the late 90ies, to some 80 us - dollar today. at first, rising oil prices led to a significant worsening of trade balances for energy importers, and to considerable trade balance improvements for oil exporters, which were perceived as a mainly cyclical development. in the meantime, high oil prices are perceived as a rather structural and probably lasting event, which is going to allow oil exporters to spend more of their energy - related income on imports, thereby ameliorating global imbalances. finally, let me also touch upon the euro area. for several years the euro area ’ s balance of payments has been broadly balanced. nevertheless, the euro area has to contribute to and prepare for the orderly resolution of the global imbalances. why? because ultimately, the – at least in the longer term – necessary rebalancing of the imbalances will be accompanied by significant shifts of productive factors from and to tradedand non - traded sectors, respectively shifting resources between export orientated - and domestic demand orientated sectors. in particular, this will hold true for countries with large current account imbalances, but also for the euro area, as there are significant current account imbalances within our region. as you would expect, flexible and productive economies with sound and well structured public finances certainly will cope better with these challenges. albeit important structural reforms in europe have been implemented already, much remains to be done in order to improve potential growth, thereby reducing growth differentials lastingly. we have to respond with policies designed to use opportunities of globalization, particularly to increase productivity and competitiveness, while minimizing unavoidable adjustment costs. the right answer to globalization and international competition is therefore to continue and intensify the lisbon process already mentioned. there is no doubt that globalization has worked well for the people of europe. after nearly nine years of experience, economic and monetary union has proven to be europe ’ s most forceful strategic response to global economic change. however, we have to concede that big changes rarely only create winners. in many eu countries, regrettably, people are critical and see little benefit from globalization. there has been an undue proliferation of fears that increased import competition from low - wage countries would put too much pressure on domestic producers and workers and that economic activity would allegedly be relocated abroad. sometimes, these concerns have

first have a look at the achievements of monetary easing. ii. the achievements of bold monetary easing chart 3 shows developments in employment and the unemployment rate. although it has been widely said that the only employment that has been growing is non - regular employment, the share of part - time employees in the total number of employees actually peaked in 2017. 2 moreover, the unemployment rate has fallen substantially. the chart shows that the unemployment rate at the end of the 1990s stood at 5 percent, while japan's structural unemployment rate in the 2000s was said to be around 3. 5 percent. 3 some had argued that a structural unemployment rate of 3. 5 percent implies that monetary policy measures that would reduce unemployment below this level would stir inflation and give rise to a speculative bubble and should therefore be avoided. 4 however, the unemployment rate currently stands at 2. 8 percent, and there is no inflation or a bubble. thus, if we understand the argument that japan's structural unemployment rate is around 3. 5 percent as implying that a drop in unemployment below this rate would give rise to inflation, this was incorrect. 5 according to the labour force survey by the ministry of internal affairs and communications, the share of non - regular employees peaked in 2014. the following publications suggested that the structural unemployment rate was in the range of about 3. 0 - 3. 5 percent using unemployment - vacancy analysis : ( 1 ) analysis of the labour economy 2015 by the ministry of health, labour and welfare ; ( 2 ) annual report on the japanese economy and public finance 2015 ( summary ) by the cabinet office ; and ( 3 ) outlook for economic activity and prices by the bank of japan. shirai has argued that " japan is not suffering from a shortage of demand. looking at the unemployment rate and the capital utilization rate, there is almost no slack " ( translated by the bank of japan ). see noguchi asahi and shirai sayuri, " herikopta mane no shotai : gekitotsu taidan " [ the true meaning of helicopter money : a heated debate ], shukan ekonomisuto, august 2, 2016. for instance, hayakawa argues that " although the rate of wage increases is still low, it has started to gradually rise since the unemployment rate reached 3. 5 percent. this suggests that the relationship that the structural employment rate [UNK] the natural unemployment rate [UNK] 3. 5 percent generally chart 3 improvement in labor market conditions introduction of qqe ( april 2013 ) million number