the real economy is reaching the real economy fairly reluctantly overall and at different speed levels across euro area countries. following its objective of safeguarding price stability, the ecb had to activate a variety of non - standard measures to improve the transmission of its accommodative monetary policy stance. however, we are still operating in a difficult bis central bankers ’ speeches environment and fragmentation of financing conditions across the euro area is one of the most prevalent problems. so let me finish with some key messages that, i think, characterise the policy landscape in the time to come : 1. monetary policy has helped to prevent economic outcomes to be even worse than what we see today. monetary policy accommodation is needed to keep prices in line with the ecb ’ s definition of price stability. 2. the ecb has not run out of ammunition. we can employ more tools and measures whenever they will be needed. 3. but monetary policy has limits : it is not effective when it comes to structural issues and we should keep in mind the challenges that arise from keeping interest rates too low for too long. therefore we should not forget about the responsibilities of other policy areas : 1. a properly designed banking union is essential to restore financial integration and to support a new steady state where bank balance sheets will be fit for lending 2. fiscal consolidation is required to spur and maintain confidence of consumers and investors 3. structural reforms are key to bring euro area economies back on a sustainable growth path. for the ecb, the different crisis modes required various modifications in our tool box of monetary policy instruments. but our objective of price stability remained time - invariant. it has served as an anchor of stability in the euro area during the crisis ; it is helping the transition to a new steady state of a better - integrated euro area economy ; and it will certainly remain our guiding principle in the future. thank you for your attention. bis central bankers ’ speeches

have surged. digitalisation has advanced on a massive scale in areas like education and medicine to reduce human interaction and increase resilience. in the united states, only 11 % of consumers used telemedicine in 2019, but that number has increased to 46 % with the pandemic, and 76 % are interested in using it going forward6. this presents a possible future of higher productivity growth, less carbon - intensive lifestyles and more democratised access to essential services. but there is also a transitional challenge. in a more digital, post - pandemic economy, people will still visit shops and consume in - person services, stay in hotels and travel for business or pleasure, but possibly on a smaller scale than before. sectors such as accommodation, food services and transportation could be lastingly affected. in the euro area, these sectors have been responsible for almost one fifth of the jobs created since 2013. so not only do we need to protect old jobs, we also need to create new ones that reflect the new patterns of demand after the pandemic. and since this takes time and may require some adjustment – as we do not yet know exactly where demand will be focused – we need to create the conditions for experimentation and innovation today. the key is to empower young firms. in the united states, new firms represent only 10 % of all firms in a given year but are responsible for almost 30 % of productivity growth7. new firms are also the engine of job growth : on average, firms up to five years old account for only one - fifth of employment, but are responsible for almost half of the jobs created8. firm creation has slowed in europe, however. in italy, for example, there have been 37, 000 fewer failed companies in the first half of this year compared with the same period last year, and 52, 000 fewer companies created. there is no contradiction between continuing to support the economy and encouraging its transformation. for new and innovative firms to grow, they need macroeconomic policies that support demand, because when uncertainty is too high a “ wait - and - see ” attitude stops the most productive firms from expanding9. they also need microeconomic policies that encourage firm entry and exit and the reallocation of resources across the economy. for example, the negative effects of onerous business conditions – like poor contract enforcement and lengthy bankruptcy procedures – are much stronger for new firms than for incumbent ones10. this is the direction in which policy ultimately has to move :