their responses over the past months. we will soon publish the results and the good practices we identified in the process. i ’ ll offer a sneak preview of them now. on the bright side, banks have started reflecting c & e risks in their current structures ; roughly half of them are adapting their governance arrangements accordingly. some banks have developed comprehensive dashboards for assessing c & e risks when granting credit, some are tightening their credit - granting criteria and others are measuring and disclosing the carbon emissions linked to their loan books. the gloomier side of things, though, is that the banks themselves deem 90 % of their practices to be only partially or not at all compliant with the ecb ’ s supervisory expectations. tellingly, the only banks that did not identify as being exposed to medium and long - term c & e risks were those which did not conduct a materiality assessment. this is all the more problematic when our benchmarking shows that a majority of banks said they were exposed to medium and long - term 1 / 5 bis central bankers'speeches c & e risks. we expected them to analyse how these risks can, or will, affect their different portfolios and products over the short, medium and long - term, considering various scenarios. given the nature of c & e risks, this forward - looking type of analysis should be elementary practice. but the vast majority have not done this analysis. concrete and important management tools and practices are lacking in this area. when looking for actions that go beyond a mere screening of the business environment, we found that about half of the banks under our direct supervision have few or no concrete actions planned to embed c & e risks in their business strategy. only a quarter of the institutions have set key indicators to monitor and steer the performance of their different business lines, portfolios and products with regard to, for example, green loan origination or their exposure to high - carbon sectors. and only a quarter of those extend these key performance indicators to more than 25 % of their portfolio. no more than a fifth of the banks under our direct supervision have set a key risk indicator for c & e risks in their risk appetite statement and only about a third of these have set a concrete limit on these indicators. there are also encouraging examples : many banks have started to proactively manage their transition risks and set goals for decarbonisation, net zero emissions or alignment. notably, a dozen banks have started measuring and monitoring the alignment of their

that, in setting monetary policy, we always try to develop a complete picture of the economy. this way, we do not unduly react to any single piece of information. in line with this, as we lead up to our next decision date of 11 july, we will be looking to put all of the pieces together into a complete picture. and we will present that picture in our monetary policy report update two days later. concluding thoughts this brings me to the end of my remarks. let me then summarize my key points. clarity about what monetary policy can, in fact, deliver is fundamental to our job as central bankers. experience in canada and around the world has taught us that preserving confidence in the value of money is the unique contribution that monetary policy can make to sustained economic performance and rising standards of living. our commitment is to keep inflation low, stable, and predictable. this is the best way for monetary policy to help output and employment remain strong, and to facilitate the adjustment of our economy to global forces.