guarantee schemes and recovery and resolution. g ) diversity in march 2019, the central bank published its third annual report on the levels of gender diversity of the most senior appointments in the irish financial services sector13. on both an absolute and comparative basis, there is a woeful lack of gender diversity at senior levels in the insurance sector. in insurance, 22 % of applications for approval for these most senior roles were for women, compared to 23 % in 2017. in other words, the insurance industry went backwards in 2018. applications for board positions increased to 36 % in 2018 in the banking sector with insurance stuck at 20 %. the analysis continues to show a pronounced gender imbalance at board level and in revenue generating roles. in the insurance sector, in revenue generating roles, the male to female ratio is currently 6 : 1 at directorship level ( 15 % female representation ). for risk management / control roles, the male to female ratio is 4 : 1 ( 20 % female representation ). 5 / 7 bis central bankers'speeches while some firms are starting to make progress, much more needs to be done to increase the diversity of experience, thought, background and attributes at senior levels to : reduce the likelihood of groupthink ; reduce overconfidence and improve decision - making ; enhance culture and improve risk management ; and increase the level of internal challenge in firms and reduce excessive resistance to external challenge. the future turning now to considering the future. thinking about our uncertain future and preparing for the opportunities and risks that it presents should be in the dna of insurance firms, but we are not seeing enough of this thinking. insurance is at the front line of so much of this uncertainty – be it climate change, technology disruption, or demographic changes. not only does the insurance industry need to adapt to these changes, but it can also shape the wider societal response to them. each of them could be the subject of speeches on their own, but in the interests of the limited time i have left, i will be brief. the insurance industry is materially exposed to climate change. physical risks will impact liabilities ( including the costs of claims ) and assets ; and transition risks could be extremely costly on the investment side. eiopa has calculated that 13 % or €1. 4trn of european insurers'assets are exposed to climate transition risk - i. e., the change in asset values that might occur in the shift to a low - carbon economy. but, this also presents

which in many cases continue to build on the assumption that the pre - crisis environment will return – are still a drag on the resilience of the financial system. thus, while finance - led growth might be intuitively appealing, pursuing it once again would seem to fit our definition of insanity above. 3. how much is enough? more finance is not a panacea nevertheless, policymakers are looking for solutions. unfortunately, some still think that more finance is a sound way to ignite investment and development. such a finance - led growth policy emerged as the dominant political strategy in the 1980s. that meant that financial deregulation was high on the agenda to foster financial development. and theory appeared to support this intuition, with studies showing that financial development corresponded strongly with economic growth. 4 but, while finance seemed to be conducive to economic growth in the early stages, it also had serious negative repercussions for the economy. we learned the hard way that more finance is not a panacea! for two reasons : first, more credit and finance tend to lead to more frequent and more severe financial crises. 5 excessive credit creation increases the fragility of the imf world economic outlook, update april 2016. see also mckinsey ( 2015 ), debt and ( not much ) deleveraging. r levine ( 2005 ), finance and growth : theory and evidence, in : handbook of economic growth. a turner ( 2015 ), between debt and the devil : money, credit, and fixing global finance, princeton university press. bis central bankers ’ speeches financial system and the likelihood of financial crises. and the bigger the mountain of debt, the more severe post - crisis recessions tend to be. 6 moreover, financial turmoil is not the sole possible outcome of excessive debt. the second reason why more finance is not a panacea is that leverage seems to hamper economic growth once it exceeds gdp levels of around 90 to 100 per cent. recent evidence reveals that there is indeed such a thing as too much finance. 7 financial depth starts having a negative effect on output growth once credit to the private sector reaches 100 per cent of gdp. most advanced countries exceeded this level prior to the financial crisis – and continue to do so. recent studies found even lower thresholds at which financial deepening unleashes negative effects. in a bank for international settlements working paper, cecchetti and kharoubi found that the effects of credit on gdp growth turn