a real possibility. today we live the 107th day of war in ukraine. this russian war, combined with the still troublesome aftermath of the pandemic, not only added pressures to price evolution in the short term, but also might have implications for long - term structural developments that drive neutral rate. now is the time to discuss how the main findings of the ecb strategy review were altered by this war. might these recent shocks change the decades - long trend of declining neutral rate? in my view, these shocks will most probably not fundamentally reverse this trend. there are some questionable aspects, however, regarding productivity, potential growth and how they change with globalization. allow me to elaborate. potential output growth has been significantly negatively impacted by the global financial crisis and has not fully recovered since. the recent shocks – the covid pandemic and the russian war – might further depress potential growth. we probably must get used to shorter and less - profitable global value chains, extension of bottlenecks and never - ending supply shocks. the most pressing issue for central bankers today therefore is how to react to these global supply shocks. it seems that these shocks are emerging constantly and have become more persistent. it seems inevitable that global trade and supply chains will undergo some structural changes. foreign trade relations in future may be increasingly shaped by resilience and risk management considerations. we also live through times of elevated uncertainty - both in the financial markets and in the private sector – and this uncertainty might not go away easily. for european economies, we are likely moving towards less trade with non - democratic or geopolitically more risky countries and a goal for greater independence in the production of essential goods, such as pharmaceuticals, military equipment, and high - technology goods. at the same time, we should avoid protectionism, aiming for an “ open strategic autonomy ”. such a diversification of trade flows and reorientation of suppliers of sensitive or critical products towards producers within the eu and other geopolitically less risky countries – the so - called regionalization and “ friend - shoring ” - would enhance the resilience of european economies to global geopolitical or pandemic - like shocks. at the same time, an evolution in this direction would likely increase production costs and suppress profitability and productivity growth in normal times due to reduced use of global comparative advantages. at the same time, there are structural factors that push back against the effects of retreating globalization. i believe that the nextgeneration

for greening the financial system ( ngfs ), aimed at scaling up green finance. climate change, including related risks that are not correctly priced by the markets, will also be considered in the ongoing european central bank ’ s ( ecb ) monetary policy strategy review. dear colleagues, to conclude, investment today is as important as ever. first, it can help repair, i. e. restore growth in the short - to - medium term. and second, it is needed to prepare for the long game. i therefore look forward to the upcoming discussions and presentations, including on the latest eib investment survey and its key findings for lithuania. thank you. 1 marco francini, moderator, head of regional eib groups office for the baltic states, european investment bank. 2 thomas ostros, vice - president of the eib. 3 / 3 bis central bankers'speeches