Let me start first to thank the organizers for inviting us present our work. It's a pleasure to be here. This is joint work with Peerolivey Gonshaw, Verunika Penchilkova, and Nick Sender, and given the central bank affiliations, usually screen replacements. So let me of course start by stating the obvious by now that this shock is unprecedented in its complexity, unevenness, and severity. And I mean, at the start of the shock, and I think this is still the case to a certain extent, small firms, small businesses are especially at risk for failure for this shock. Why is that? Because this is not like financial crisis of 2008, 2009, 2010, but it is a shock to income, which is very even in terms of sectors and the firms. So you hit certain sectors and certain firms very hard in terms of basically lost revenue. So what happened since March 2020 is also tremendous government support, right? There was support implemented vaulting advanced economies and emerging markets to firms directly. So there was support to these firms, especially small businesses, many programs done for small businesses. And at the same time, of course, there was the colonialized stimulus, your standard macro policies, fiscal, and other students. So what we would like to do is basically, with this background, do several things actually, I'm going to present mostly the paper on the program, which is given this background, the COVID shock, and the support policies by governments, and the economy-wide fiscal monetary policy stimulus. What happened with the SME failures? Then I'm going to show a few results from our accompanying work with the same set of co-authors. One is looking at a future look 2021. Well, they're almost end of 2021, but of course, we wrote the paper beginning of the year. It's at AER papers and proceedings. The idea here is like we did so much support to save these firms in 2020. Do we have a time bomb in our hands in terms of zombie firms, wall of bankruptcies in 2021, 2022? So that's, I'm going to show a few results from that. And also we have a recent piece in the 2021, August 21 Jackson Hole Conference, taking a broader look at fiscal policy, not just policies to support some more firms, but broader fiscal policy and try to understand also its success, both in terms of firm failures and aggregate macro income. So some of the questions we ask in this research agenda, now we have been involved pretty much 18 months since the start of COVID is first and foremost, what is the impact of COVID on firm failures in a wide range of countries? What is the cost and effectiveness of government interventions aimed at saving firms? These policies, SME, small medium enterprise support policies, were they good, were they bad? Maybe they were good, they saved a lot of firms, but does this mean it's going to be a time bomb of failures in 2021 and maybe also 2022 once we start dialing back the support? And in general, is it the case that fiscal stimulus support added activity to demand? How big are fiscal policy flows globally? What happens in other countries? And also what are the implications for emerging markets of a two-speed recovery with global uneven vaccination? So let me try to get at most of these, if not all given the 30-minute presentation. Okay, the first thing I'm going to tell you is about the methodology, which is going to be extremely important if you want to understand the firm failures. First of all, this whole thing is about not having real-time data. Okay, so when we started in March, April, 2020, obviously there was no real-time data on firm bankruptcies and firm exits. And even though now we think there is, let me tell you there is still not real-time data. Why is that? Because first of all, when you think that the firm level, firms file these things with a two-year lag. So when you think in terms of firm exit in the sense of sense, it is going to be not before late 2022, we understand the full extent of the firm exit in 2020. That's number one. Number two, the bankruptcy filings, which is another way of looking out of this data, firm exit data, because you go and file bankruptcies, but bear in mind that these bankruptcies, filings and regulation differ a lot, a lot across countries. So it's not that straightforward that you will see every single firm exit in a bankruptcy filing. It's going to depend on the solvency, the good and all sorts of things. And here doing this shop, those were also stopped, basically, either because of congested courts or because of explicit regulation as happened in Germany that you are not allowed to file for bankruptcy. So the notion here stands from the fact that we just cannot measure in real time, but we do want to have an estimate of firm failures because that's of course going to help us to design the policy to save these firms. So we believe this is extremely important to provide a very simple model-based estimate for firm failures that is going to tell us something with a shock like COVID, what is going to happen in very short run in terms of firm failures. And the idea here is again to find that liquidity shortage, right? So if you think in a question like that, firms cash in hand plus the cash flow during COVID, then that is less than financial expenses. Based on the liquidity criteria, firm is going to be in trouble. So firm has to close this either through a bank by borrowing through credit markers or government has to close this gap, right? That's basically what we face in the spring of 2020. And the idea of our work is really how can we estimate this real-time cash flow during COVID, something that we don't know. So everything orange in the slide is basically what you need to be estimating using model and the data because you don't observe it. And our approach is exactly that, right? We are going to have a firm optimization model in the short run. And we are going to combine that with represent the firm-level financial data entering the poll, okay? So we observe firm-level financial data as of 2018, 2019 to a certain extent entering the COVID. So we combine those two letting firm minimize the cost of labor and materials given this COVID shock. And that's what is a COVID shock? COVID shock is going to be calibrated at very rich many of shocks, both at the four-digit sector level on supply and demand and also an aggregate demand shock. Because again, the whole thing with COVID is it is being a very uneven sector-level shock, different than our standard recession, different than our standard financial crisis. And that approach combining a firm minimization model firm-level financial data ex-empty COVID is going to give you an estimate equation like that. I'm going to go through details but you get the cash flow during COVID is by shocking the firm revenues entering the COVID with these COVID shocks and the firms cost of goods sold. And we are going to do everything in changes before and after COVID to eliminate some other costs like fixed costs and taxes that is not going to change because of COVID. Okay. So there's a rapidly growing literature here. I am missing a lot on this slide because I mean, unless you update this slide every week you will miss literature and the entire economics profession is working on COVID which is very good by the way. I mean, I think this is a very good development. Our contribution here is going to have basically model-based estimate, this is a structural model combining with firm-level data and other sector and aggregate data to get at the COVID shock because that's going to allow us to estimate heterogeneity in failure rates not only by firm, by sector and that will help us to quantify the effectiveness of the governments. Let me tell you about the methodology. So methodology is going to be, as I said, a simple model and then once we have this model we are going to introduce COVID shocks calibrated from the data. So basically it's a very simple setup. So firms are going to produce output. So firm is going to be denoted by I subscript and S is sector. So firms are going to produce output using, oops, I'm sorry, using idiocyclic productivity, capital, materials and effective labor. So A here orange, again, everything orange is going to be estimated so on the data that's going to be sector-level productivity shock due to most of us went home working and there's going to be some lower productivity with that. Demand is going to be standard as the CES demand function with sector firms within sector selling differentiated varieties, usual downward sloping demand. And here we are going to do everything in terms of hot culture. What does it mean? That basically we are going to do before or after COVID. So demand of firm product denominator is before COVID normal times and D prime is during COVID, COVID times. So D hat IS is going to be changing demand for firms products from normal to COVID times. And there's going to be the sectoral shifter and that's going to be actually can be positive or negative, right?  Online grocery shopping, that's going to go up. So that's going to be your size sectoral demand shifter and PD hat is going to be this aggregate demand shifter which is going to come from other day thing. The firm minimization problem is going to be stayed forward. Firms are going to produce to meet demand. This is a short-term model. First, we are going to keep the prices fixed and output is going to be basic all demand determined.  The whole thing here is, of course, you are going to be subject to labor supply constraints. Certain sectors are going to be limited due to lockdown and also due to the health shock itself. You don't have the health shock here, but we are going to calibrate the lockdowns and then labor is not constrained. You have your usual first order condition and labor is constrained. You are going to have this supply constraint problem in those sectors. So going back to the original equation I showed you, cash flow is going to be firm revenue minus firm cost. And then by using our first order condition from this firm minimization problem, we are going to write this cash flow during COVID minus cash flow before COVID green. We observed that when labor is not constrained, that's the first order condition and you don't have the constraint the second first order condition when labor is constrained, that's going to be the change in the cash flow. And then your business failure is going to be based on this liquidity criteria based on this cash flow during COVID, which is the original equation I showed you. So how are these orange things determined from the data? How do we take this model from data? Okay, for labor utilization constraint, basically all non-essential workers are going to be a syndrome worker. So we are going to separate firms essential and non-essential based on several data set and basically the feasibility of remote work is going to come from on a data set or explored further by Dingler and Neiman. Then we are going to adjust the productivity based on ACS data. So that's going to be a more ad hoc way of looking at it. We are just wherever remote working which sector is having, you know, these remote workers, we are just going to adjust product down by 20%. This is not an assumption that makes a lot of difference. We do a lot of robustness on this. The critical thing is going to be how we calibrate the demand and supply shots at the sector level, demand shot especially. So we are going to here rely on face-to-face interaction to capture the idea that your demand for restaurants go down, your demand for online groceries goes up. That's how we calibrate. And under demand shot, we are just going to keep the GDP growth forecast and the actual GDP depending on when we do 2020 or 2021 numbers. And all sectoral shots are going to be defined at the four-digit sector level and firm failures are going to be, of course, at the firm level. I'm going to show you now figures aggregating a little bit, otherwise it's going to be hard to see. So those four-digit sectoral demand and sectoral supply shot, I'm going to aggregate them to two-digit so you can see clearly. So on the left, I'm denoting the supply shots at the two-digit sector level on the right of demand shots and the color coding is that orange sector are essential sectors and the dark blue is not essential. And you see the pattern you expect to see, right? On the sectoral supply shots, obviously the sector that affected a lot from the lockdowns are going to have very steep sectoral supply shots up to 15 percentage points, like accommodation on food. This is like closed restaurant story, mining, entertainment, recreation on that as opposed to electricity and waste observing smaller sectoral supply shots. On the right, you see this relative shift in the demand, that side parameter for some sectors, demand is going to improve, they are going to be mostly essential sectors, other sectors that rely a lot of customer-oriented interactions, again, accommodation for the entertainment and recreation, they are going to face very severe sector-specific dimensions, okay? All right, why do we assume certain things? Let me tell you about that because some of these are going to be relaxed later. First is liquidity criteria. So we are going to decide firm is failing when that equation I showed you fails, meaning cash attack and cash flow become less than your expenses and then use them. That's a liquidity criteria, not a solvency criteria. Why do we do this? Because again, our focus is on SMEs, right? We are not going to be working with Galaxos and Clines, Amazon, Google's off the road. We are not working with lists of companies. This is all SMEs defined as firms less than 250 employee in Europe, less than 500 employee in US. So basically, a semi-accessive credit market is needed even in normal times, let alone a shop like COVID that hits the record area, okay? That's our main reason. Our second reason, of course, is a data requirement. Reason, insolvency is going to be extremely hard to define for these firms. These are private firms. They are not listed on the stock market. They don't have a market capitalization. They don't have topist queue. They don't have an equity that you can value at the market price. When you look at an equity number on the book, they report basically book values in the balance sheet, you see a negative. You really don't know what that exactly is. It's very hard to pin down a negative equity for these firms. So we are going to go with the equity criteria. In the first round of facts, we are going to test imperfectly, just prices output is demanded over the short term because we really would like to do these weekly estimations and see what happens the first couple of months of COVID where obviously prices are not going to adjust. Later, now we are 18 months out in the crisis and of course inflation is becoming a big concern. We are going to lack this assumption of Jacksonville paper. Again, we are doing a partial equipment exercise to estimate the first round effects. We think this exercise is something policymakers can use when they don't have the real-time data but they have to put together a program like PPP in an image. So that's how we see our exercise being valuable. Input-off with network is going to be important, of course, because especially when price adjustment starts, price adjustment in one sector is going to affect the other sector. We don't do it in the first round of estimates in our first paper, but then we are going to relax this by introducing a full-fledged, not only domestic but a global input-off with network in our Jacksonville paper. And the calibration of shocks, again, this is hard. I mean, in the original paper, we are just going to do a eight-week lockdown on everyone and that's going to give you the supply shock and the demand shock is going to come from this face-to-face interaction. Later, we are going to do it more realistic because obviously the path of the economy, the way GDP evolves is going to feed back here. So we are trying to use a lockdown of stringent data for works for Google mobility data to really try to separate supply and demand shocks at the sector level back. So I will tell you what happens to the baseline SME failure rates when you do all these relaxations in the Jacksonville paper and you see that actually there are going to be some differences but overall, not a big difference. So I will mention that when I come to that slide. Let me show you the baseline failure rate. So this table is going to give you added a SME failure rate in three columns, non-COVID failure rate, COVID failure rate and the change. We are going to focus on this change because that is going to help us a lot to subtract things that are not going to be changing with COVID and not COVID like tax, right? So, and there are two roles here. What are those? In the original estimates, we are going to use 17 countries and some of those countries has very high coverage, meaning we almost cover universe of SMEs. That's what the high coverage countries are. And again, here the assumption is no government intervention. You want to show you the failure rates in the absence of government intervention so we can evaluate the effectiveness of government intervention. And the lockdown is an eight week lockdown on everyone, we don't get into heterogeneity with these lockdown stringencies and different timings of lockdown and all that. So same timing, eight week because these are the 2020 estimates. And what I'm showing you is the two letter failure rate at the end of 2020, okay? So basically it says 18% of the firms would have failed without the policy relative to a normal time failure rate of 9%. So you are experiencing a nine percentage point increase in SME failure rates, okay? So that's quite a big number. And later I'm going to show you that actually policy was very effective in reducing this counterfactual that would have happened in the absence of policy. This added failure rate is going to mask a lot of heterogeneity across sectors and across countries. So let me show you the sector of heterogeneity. Again, we do this for digit but I'm going to show you this two digit version so you can see it visually clearly. I'm plotting the delta failure rate here from COVID to non-COVID on the Y axis and you see that nine percentage point increase is actually can be as high as 25 percentage point increase in a sector such as entertainment and recreation but that's the sector that is sitting a lot both through a negative supply and negative demand shock perspective. And it can be as low as an essential sector such as electives, two percentage point increase. Similarly, counterwide heterogeneity is immense. I'm going to show you some countries here to make this point. A country like Italy, the change again so the SME failure rate from non-COVID to COVID can be as high as 13 percentage point whereas a country like Czech Republic is only experienced an increase from non-COVID to COVID and SME failure rate of around five percentage point. Why is that? There are going to be two factors here. First, of course, the balance sheet, the firms enter the crisis. So Italian firms are going to enter the crisis with weaker balance sheets so they are going to run out of cash pretty quickly once they got hit by this COVID shock a shock of their cost and revenue. And also the sector composition of different economies, right? Depending on the weight of the economy in the sector that are heavily hit by COVID you are going to be affected. But this heterogeneity is going to be extremely important later on both sector and country when we think about the effect of the policies and also international support of the policies. Okay, let me now show you what happens to baseline failure rate when I allow the prices to react. So basically, when you experience this shock you can increase your prices to make up for the increase in cost and also you can cut down your labor and material demands. As a firm, you can fire people, you can increase your price. So you can do the regular thing you do when you experience that shock like COVID through the prices before we already allowed you to fire people and cut down on materials demand but we didn't let you to adjust the price. Now we're also going to let that in the context of an IO icon, okay? We are also going to put a full-fledged IO network there because obviously price in one sector is going to be affecting price in the other sector and demand in the other sector. And here we are, this is also going to help us to allow a real location of firm demand. What is that? So the firms are going to be exited. Our liquidity criterion is going to stay the same. If it is extension, we will still tell that firm is exiting once that firm is having this liquidity gap but demand of that firm product can be reallocated to survive, okay? So that's what we call extensive marginal reallocation of firms there. So then we allow all these actually very interesting with that nine percentage point failure rate I showed you doesn't change much. So our original very simple setup is actually a very good approximation even so basically it says you don't really need this type of extension for that average number. Of course there are a lot of reasons for that and it might have gone differently for a different set of countries. First of all, we are increasing our 17 countries to 27 countries here. That is going to allow us to do real life lockdowns. We are not going to do this eight week lockdown on everyone anymore. We are going to try to capture real life experience of countries with different lockdowns stringes in 2020. We are going to use now 18 advanced economies and nine emerging markets that will allow us to do a serious decomposition between advanced economies and emerging markets. Our previous sample in the original paper we only have two emerging markets. And again, these numbers are no government intervention cumulative rate at the end of 2020. So that nine percentage point increase in SME failure rate over all average 27 countries is there but there's a big difference between advanced economies and emerging markets, okay? Advanced economy, a failure rate increasing only around six percentage point from non-COVID to COVID in the absence of government intervention again, whereas emerging markets is increasing 12 percentage point. And the reason for that is the additional input output. Maybe without the input output input output network, we wouldn't have this difference because when you look at that global trade and production network data you see that emerging markets input source is very concentrated. So a shop like COVID trickling down through this networks all the supply chain by the next stories that we read about every day. That is something that is going to affect emerging markets more than advanced economies which is giving you a higher SME failure rates in the absence of government intervention. There's also a mechanism here that works against increasing failure rates and that's the extent of much, right? I told you that then the firm exits the demand for that form products is going to be reallocated among surviving firms. So that is helping surviving firms to a certain extent. So we have two forces here working against each other in terms of SME failure rates, IO network and the extensive market. Okay, but overall we are going to have this number that SME failure rate is going to be increased overall nine percentage point in the absence of government support. What happens with government support? Now, there has been many, many different programs. So if you look at this firm support through Yale there's over 500 programs in our countries and most of these focus on small firms but there are programs for all the firms. So we are going to work on three, focus on three. Why these three the most common across our 27 countries, we can get data on them through ECB and ESRB. So basically these are pandemic loans, grants, direct grants and wages, okay, rent and tax waivers. And then we are not looking at like furlough schemes, other unemployment benefits of that just focus on these three policies. Then we do that, the first result we find is policy support was affected. What do I mean by that? In the first column here I'm showing you again that increase in SME failure rates, nine percentage point overall, around six for advance and around 13 for emerging markets. First I'm going to do a hypothetical cost of saving these firms. What do I mean with that? I have a model so I can do a counter section where I go and surgically like a doctor using tweezers, save the firms that are, well actress, right, because I know who they are, I know the firms with the liquidity gap and I can just save them. If I can do that, that will cost me almost nothing, like 0.8% of GDP. So it's a targeted, it's a fully targeted bailout, it's extremely cheap, 0.1 in advance, for me is 1.5% GDP in emerging markets, very, very cheap. Now actual policy here, I'm looking at the actual funds disperse and remember three policies, the pandemic loans, grants and waivers, they cost around 4% of GDP, 6% of GDP in advance, 1.9% of GDP in emerging markets, and they are effective why I call this slide policy support was effective because that's failure rate of nine percentage point increase SME failure rate now is 4.2. Okay, so basically the policy support, these three policies cut the failure rate in half, you are actually in negative territory in advanced economy. So basically you are doing better under COVID than non-COVID, right? This is a minus failure rate. Why? Because fiscal support was tremendous in advanced economies. I mean, the difference is huge. I'm going to show you a figure in couple slides on this, but the fiscal support is just so large that you fully offset SME failures in advanced economies. This doesn't happen in emerging markets, but still instead of around 13 percentage point increase in failure rates, you only have nine percentage point increase, even your fiscal support in emerging markets in terms of pandemic loans, grants, and waivers is much less, only 1.9% of people, okay? So in that sense, policy support was effective. However, all this doesn't mean policy was efficient, right? Because it wasn't targeted because this was like wartime, muscle field. You cannot go and do what I did in the month. Like you cannot go and do like a surgeon, take a tweezer and pick all these firms and save them. You cannot do that in real life. And nobody did that. I mean, most of these programs put together in matters of peak. So it clearly, it's a poorly targeted policy. That's no surprise. The good news is the silver lining is, there's no notification. A lot of the worry with these poor targeted policies is like we are throwing this money on everyone. Oh my God, we are creating all these zombies. This is going to be horrible in terms of medium and long-term productivity. It's all over again, back to the world of financial crisis 2008, 2000. This doesn't happen. I mean, the policy was not targeted, obviously. You only save 36% of the firms at risk. So before in my exercise, I was saving 100% by medical surgery. Here, you only save 36% of actress firms, which is around half of the jobs at risk jobs, you say. So that's why you still have, of course, unemployment, but only 2% of the funds and 2% of the funds go to zombie firms. And how many firms you are saving are zombies. Only 13% of the firms at risk are zombies. Okay, so in that sense, this is good news. But does it mean it's going to be good news in 2021? Maybe 2020 fine, okay, but then you are creating constantly creating zombies by keeping these policies up in place. We actually don't find that either. So we find that, although you don't save everyone at risk and you are not targeting well, most of the firms you save with policy are actually viable. So it is not all of the case that you didn't do any zombification in 2020. There is also no future zombification. Again, here's future. We only come until the end of 2021. I mean, 2022, 2023, who knows? I mean, this tends to change, but so far, no features of zombification. Why is that? First of all, by the end of 2020, failure rates are increasing only by 2.6% per each point, relative to normal.  Because pandemic loans were like super good at super good terms over a very long time, mostly five years, and most of the time government is taking some risks. So even when you make firms pay some of it, still you are going to have only a 2.6% point increase in the bankruptcy rate. Some of the firms survive till the end of 2020 because you make them survive with policy. They're also surviving until 2021, okay? In that sense, they are viable firm and only 22% of the firms are zombies that survive because of you, because of the policy, and only 13 are failing by the end of 2020. So this is not, this 13% of zombies, this is not a wall of bankruptcy that have been written a lot in the news that will happen by the end of 2020. So maybe we don't find that. Okay, let me now say one thing in terms of the broader fiscal policy and the global implications, okay? So so far again, although I use many countries, I focus on countries' own policies in terms of pandemic loans, grants and waivers. Of course, fiscal policy was much broader than that. Tremendous fiscal stimulus. And that's going to have effect globally through what we call global production, okay? I showed you a result with the Domestic Outlet Purp but of course this network is global. This is actually from my other paper on vaccinations making the economic case for global vaccinations from January 2021 that shows how much advanced economies are going to lose by not vaccinating the poor countries and actually recovery is never going to be full without everybody's vaccinated. That's basically what we said in January 2021. And here we are pretty much observing that situation. And that's very clear once you look at this picture, right? So on the left here, I'm showing you a readable version.  You cannot see anything but with the most important links of trade between countries and this is color coded, darker blue is more open countries, lighter blue less open countries. And so the circle, the boxes around countries are going to give you the vaccine inequality across countries. The important thing is this right-hand side figure on the sectoral, which is going to be embedded on this. So what is going to happen to firm failures and what is going to happen in one sector shot is going to affect all the other sectors and all the other countries, okay? That's exactly why it is not that easy to get out of this supply bottleneck problem. And this sectoral figure, you see, it's not about being a tradable sector or non-tradable sector. So this is color coded, dark sectors are tradable, light sectors are non-tradable, but it doesn't matter given the links, right? Construction sector, we all heard the numbers, sort of wholesale and retail, they have so many links with other sectors in the economy in terms of buying and selling that even they don't directly trade themselves, they are going to be affecting other sectors and themselves being affected to this. We incorporate that in our model and we combine that with this inequality in fiscal policies, okay? So this is now fiscal spending percent of GDP overall. So it is not anymore only pandemic loans, waivers and grants, but from the NF tracker, how much fiscal spending countries did. And of course, advanced economies on average have like a very large 16% of GDP number, whereas emerging markets has like a bare five percent, okay? There's huge difference between these kind of, this is the fiscal space we have been talking about and advanced economies went with whatever it takes approach, they have large fiscal space, they can afford that. Emerging markets just don't have that type of luxury. All right, this is going to have implications in terms of not only your own domestic economy, fiscal policy effectiveness and saving firms, but also globally, right? So those numbers I just showed you, 15% of GDP and advanced economies and 5% in emerging markets, that's around 11% on average of GDP. And our model is going to tell you that that's going to raise output by 0.67. This is going to imply a very low multiply, right? So when we focus on transfers, like we know that with an MPC of 29, the textbook transfer multiplier, now we are focusing on transfers in fiscal policy, that's going, that has to be 0.4, okay? We are getting 0.06 multipliers. It's almost like fiscal policy is not effective. But this is a misleading way of looking at it actually, because this, what you expect based on a transfer based multiplier of 0.4, improving only the demand in the demand constant sectors. We have a lot of supply constant sectors because of the IO network, so, right? All the 31% of global GDPs in demand constant sector, that means you should expect this multiplier of 0.13. We get 0.06 much lower than that. Why? Because of this trickling down effect of price. We let prices take chance, but once you increase price in demand constant sector, that is going to have an impact on decreasing demand in the downstream supply constant sector and that effect is going to reduce your multiply 0.06. So this doesn't mean to be a pessimistic message, right? This is not saying fiscal policy is not effective. Of course fiscal policy was effective, but in a different way than you said, it did stimulate output to the extent it can in the demand constant sectors. But it also shifted employment through sectors, right? So this Canadian employment story that has been now being studied in many papers, fiscal policy helped that a lot by elevating spending toward demand constant sectors from supply constant sectors. And that helped you actually improve unemployment. So there's a very big decline in Canadian unemployment that is thanks to the fiscal policy. So here we are showing you a kind of a even broader role for fiscal policy under a shock like COVID where we do need to be thinking about different demand constant and supply constant sectors. What does it mean globally? It means globally also we are not going to have our standard fiscal lower story, right? The standard story is U.S. spends a lot. That's good for everyone because U.S. consumer spends a lot, U.S. consumer demand increase. That is very good for all the other countries to a trade channel. They are going to sell more to the U.S. consumers. Okay, we find that that happens only for Mexico and Canada, although very small, all other countries it is negative. It's negative to bloovers because here there's going to be these other assets coming from the supply and demand constant sectors and the do I own it. Okay, so it's not that straightforward just because U.S. did a lot of stimulus and U.S. consumer spending a lot, this is going to lift all the time. It's going to lift some types correct with the ones that you have close trade relationship but not all the time. In terms of unemployment though, it is a very good thing. So these unemployment forwards there, U.S. spending, I'm showing you only the effects of U.S. fiscal policy here, that is going to reduce unemployment everywhere, right? Because it's going to help a lot to shift this unemployment problem between sectors. Although the numbers are small, so both output floors and employment floors small but you would like to highlight the fact that output ones are actually wrong direction, right? So they are bigger than it, which doesn't happen with a standard shock in a standard model. Okay, final thing I want to say that I want to conclude is these two speed recovery. So we do know that there's two speed recovery. I mean, that's largely because of the unequal global vaccinations in the world. So what our global model is going to tell you that during this phenomena, because the private savings is going to decrease because now U.S. advanced consumers are spending but not emerging markets consumers, that's going to affect on a global interest rate. It's fiscal policy, global interest rates can rise as high as 5% where the trade deficit is going to deteriorate in advanced countries. It's going to, of course, improve in emerging markets by construction. Now the interesting finding here is output is good. Recovery is good, it's positive on advanced economies but not in emerging markets. Output is actually going to decline in emerging markets. That comes directly out of our model, global model with IO networks and this higher global rates. And the big story there is, there's of course the terms of trade effect but there's also this differential risk premium. So what we did is we update this result from my 2019 Jackson home paper with the idea that okay, if the global rates are going to rise and there's this inflationary concern, advanced economy central bank is going to start raising interest rates, especially Fed. And that, this figure basically shows you the effect of a US monetary policy surprise tightening on the risk premium across advanced economies in emerging markets. And originally I showed this result in my 2019 Jackson home paper with data coming till 2018 here. We update the data and show you the same result. Risk premium is going to increase a lot in emerging markets here on the right with a US monetary policy tightening but it's going to decline in advanced economies. What does it mean? Emerging markets are going to be in even worse shape because their external financing costs is going to skyrocket much more than advanced economies in the middle of a two-speed recovery. This goes back to what Ken Rogoff said this morning at his keynote. So there is going to be a very dire situation for emerging markets. They are already in bad shape. And once US monetary policy and ECB monetary policy start normalizing, this is going to get worse through this differential risk premium channel in emerging markets and advanced economies. Okay, let me conclude. So the takeaways from this broad research agenda is first and foremost, policies prevented from failures. These are the policies that are targeted for the firms. So government support policies to the firms and they didn't create zombies. So this is good news. They reduce bankruptcies, they didn't create zombies but there are funds wasted. Actually, most of the funds, 88% of the funds went to firms, strong firms who didn't need it, okay? So that means moving forward, we have to find some sort of a mechanism to claw back some of this money through excess profit tax and schemes of that sort. The same is not strong and they don't need additional support. So this is telling us we should actually be dialing these policies back. The multiplier from fiscal transfers now when I move to the broader transfer of fiscal policy, they are going to be small but that's because of supply concern and IO linkages just the nature of this shock. It doesn't mean fiscal policy was ineffective. It's not effective actually. Definitely help reducing from failures and also allocated employment from the sectors that didn't need to sectors that need, okay? So in that sense, it is very fiscal policy with play a very important role in this crisis. The cross-border swallows are limited though not to the extent that even emerging markets have small fiscal place, space, they couldn't spend much. That's okay because US spend much. That's not the case unfortunately with this shock. So everybody on its own in terms of the fiscal policy which is going to mean in the future that emerging markets are going to face difficult times unless we close this vaccination gap that their economies recover because the air fiscal packages are always going to be small and that's going to create this headphones for emerging markets and that's going to get worse with the rising global rates and risk. So in terms of the key message, key risk to manage. So the key message in terms of what is the risk we need to manage moving forward is the financial market path, okay? So there's something very important here. So we don't know this yet because we don't have this type of detailed data for every country, real time. But if you look at US regulatory Y-14 data and now there are several papers documenting this what happened during COVID in terms of credit market versus government, okay? Who is tapping the credit market and who is getting help from the government? Large firms are the ones that tap the credit markets.  You can go to a bank and close that. If you're a small firm, you cannot do that actually. And we shouldn't be surprised about that because small firms couldn't even do that. It wouldn't be the normal times. What happened with COVID and with this tremendous policy support is positive filled in for credit markets, for SNEs. But that's a very important result, right? In terms of moving forward, so we should still do fiscal tapering because fiscal policy did a job. More support is going to have this upward pressure on prices, rates, that is going to force monetary policy hands to increase rates. But we should taper fiscal, but monetary tapering has to be clear to communicate that slow because anything that is going to spook the financial markets, not only going to make life difficult for small firms who already didn't go there, but really basically survived because of the government, but that's going to make life for larger firms difficult. If there's some sort of financial market panic, then pretty much all firms are going to be in trouble and that's definitely a scenario you would like to avoid, not only in advanced economies, but also emerging markets because the implications for emerging markets are even going to be worse. Thank you very much.


So before we go to questions, and thanks very much, Lillian. I just introduced Martin McKee, who is the founder of Eco Hosts and a professor of public health here at the London School. And he will host the Q&A for this session. OK, thank you very much. Could I just ask all of the speakers maybe to come over here so that we can and the people who are watching us online can see you. And we've only got about 15 minutes for questions. So we're going to have to be relatively brief. So if anybody thinks that they want to give a presentation, sign up for the next one of these. Don't do it now. We want short questions of no more than 140 characters. But meanwhile, let's start and see if we get any questions online. If not, we'll take a couple of questions at once and then we'll put them to the panel. Who would like to start? And just wave at me. So gentlemen here, gentlemen here, and three men over here. There must be a few women in the audience as well. But we'll start here. Please sit first. Thank you. And if everyone could just say who they are as well. My name is Ali. I'm from Onrwa. One important challenge facing us, all the humanitarian justice in the ground is the coordination between them and the coordination with host countries and the coordination with other agencies. Because in many instances, the NCD patient is going to MSF, coming to Onrwa, taking medication and going to the Jordanian Ministry of Health clinics to take medication. He ended up with different protocols of management. He ended up with different regime of treatment. Another issue is the priority agenda. Each humanitarian organization has different agenda of work. And just to give an example, in such a humanitarian situation, many, many of the humanitarian agencies they focus on, they come to work on gender-based violence while the priority of the community, the priority of the refugees are to get food and to get shelter. OK, great. Gentleman there. And then if you pass the microphone back there. Yeah, my name is Kwaku and I work with International Medical Corps UK. A couple of questions. One to Helen and one to, is it Kiran? Yeah. So for Helen, did you see any, or did you look at the comparison between the funding for HIV and for NCDs? Bear in mind that, of course, HIV over the years have to define a very, very well-defined package. And whether, for example, if the NCD group come up with a similar package based on some of the practice we are talking about. OK, so NCD is quite broad. But especially within the humanitarian settings, if they can define, or if there's a definition of what NCDs to target or prioritize in certain contexts, would that help with the funding situation versus, let's say, HIV, which already has got a very clear, defined package? For Kiran. Keep the questions quite short. Yeah. For Kiran, South Sudan, I will. You mentioned you see children with diabetes ketosis, which prompted you to take into account. Can you give us the, let's say, the proportion of those? And what other NCDs you are seeing, but you are ignoring still, if that is still the case? OK, so it's a question about the burden of disease in South Sudan for Kiran. Yeah, versus other NCDs, because he touched on, I think, type of diabetes in children. And then you are acting your last point. You mentioned about guidelines that MSF is developing, guidelines for NCDs. Is this in collaboration with other groups, like the WHO or UNSIA? There's a group already trying to look at this. Is it in collaboration with those groups, or is something very specific to MSF? Oh, lovely. Thank you very much, gentlemen, over here. And then if other people can waive at me for the second round of questions, please. All right, thanks. I'm Dr. Jomar Khodonazarov, and I'm representing HelpHage International. My question to Ellen. It was a wonderful presentation. Thanks for that. And I think a lot to learn from that presentation. I think you well connected there in terms of sustainability, peer involvement, in terms of fixed dose combination, use gene expert, all of this make perfectly sense. Did you ever thought about addressing nutrition issue for those people? Or is that was big problem? That's my question. Thank you. OK, thank you very much. So a couple of questions, and maybe rather than there are some individual ones, but let's broaden it out a little bit. This issue of coordination, first of all, coordination, and also the issue of prioritization. Whose priorities? The development assistance organization, the community, reflections on that. Who would like to start off on that? Here and maybe. Or Pablo. Pablo. Ah, yeah. Hello? Yeah, I think that's why we are here. I mean, I think that that's one of the key things. I mean, we've been talking to each other, and we feel that there is a need of better coordination, in particular, I mean, guidelines, and I mean, there are different groups working. I think that is happening, but it's happening maybe too late. And that's part of the objective of this event. And hopefully, and that's what our aim is, is not just to do as impossible and forget about this, but from today, I mean, find ways to work in a better way and keep this communication. I don't know if, Slim, you have anything to say about the global coordination of different agencies in the region, because I think WHO, of course, has a key role on this. And I know you are working on that. So I don't know if, well, let me push you on that, Pablo, because you have another half that you wear as well. And one of the other ones, the World Heart Federation, and then somebody also mentioned the diabetes community, the International Diabetes Federation, for example. To what extent are they getting engaged in this agenda? Well, maybe, Helen, you would like to comment on that. I think, I think, well, WHO isn't the one. Well, yeah, I mean, I'm also, I work at the World Heart Federation, and that's basically a federation for cardiovascular societies, and well, we have some cardiologists there, but I think that cardiologists are really, I mean, far away from this discussion. And we just came from the European Congress of Cardiology, 35,000 people. I don't think there was any presentation on these kind of topics, and they're discussing the latest, I don't know, stent and things for, and they're neglecting this issue. I mean, that's what I think we eventually need to work with them, but I think they're far away. I don't know, that's my feeling. Helen? Yeah, I mean, the issue of coordination comes up time and time again in the HIV world as well. I think it has to come from that international level to the Ministry of Health level. I mean, what we're still constantly seeing is different NGOs still reinventing the wheel and lack of leadership by ministries of health to bring those agencies together. And that's not to stifle innovation, but to make sure the base is clear agreement on what the basics should be and how those basics should be implemented. And I think that's where really in many of these countries in very, very difficult settings is how can we work with those ministries of health to bring some of these agencies together? Maybe I could ask Karen to pick up on that one because I was struck listening to your presentation that it was actually remarkably similar to ones that Pablo and I gave in Rome at the weekend at the European Study of Cardiology, except we used the words cardiovascular disease and you used the words HIV. And in fact, we were saying exactly the same thing. So can MSF do something?  Well, I'm a bit nervous to answer that because there's actually, I could see there's a current and former president of MSF in the room and I don't want to say anything wrong. In terms of collaboration coordination, it's true that we see our primary partnership generally as being with the community and the ministries of health in the countries we work. And in the past, we have sometimes been reticent about seeing opportunities in partnerships with other actors, international actors, UN actors and so forth. I think that working in NCDs, it forces us to look more broadly. It forces us to some extent think about health system issues where we've been a little bit cautious in the past because of our emergency mindset. I know that Philippa, for example, sits on groups with UNHCR or at least participates in discussions with Slim's group as well. So I think that we are starting to coordinate on that issue. Civil society, well, I think NCD Alliance didn't make it in the end so we do need to try and activate the activists a bit more. But at the same time in this room, as Pablo said, we have humanitarian actors, we have academics, UN agencies, and I think this is also a move in that direction. Maybe just to say about the guidelines in response to Quaker's question, the actual remit here was quite modest. It was to provide guidance to MSF field teams who actually had asked for this. And I think it was Tamam who actually did a survey across all MSF projects and found that this was something that was universally requested. Given that national guidelines were available seemed not to be implementable in these situations or where there were WHO-PEN guidelines that were too long to be read. So simplified guidance for NCD management in emergency settings was a very much a grassroots need within MSF. Now we are actually sharing those guidelines and starting to discuss with other actors about improving these guidelines and making them a little bit more generalizable. But even in relatively resource deprived situations, people do have access to mobile phones and things like that. So presumably these guidelines are now all in the form of apps, yes? Well, very soon. I'm not actually great with technology. I think I know there's someone in the audience who's been sending me WhatsApp messages to tell me to stop speaking. But yeah, MSF guidelines are starting to be available as apps. This NCD guideline is a draft and so that would be a precedent. Well, we have Google just up the road from us here. Martin. It also says that it leads to any philanthropic organizations. Can I just follow up with your question, W.H.F., because actually what I think is the role of cardiologists is to stay away, basically.  I mean, I don't think the solution for NCDs is not specialists. And that's part of the challenge because we need, unlike HIV work, and most of the specialists, I mean, eventually were in those settings. We are coming with specialists that come from Hancom countries and we cannot make those models applicable in these settings. And I think that's part of the challenge. We need to rethink that. And what we need is, as you've seen, for example, in Lebanon, if patients come with the latest, I don't know, anti-hypertensive, but actually we know that the important thing is to just lower black pressure. At least we want the cardiologists saying that's fine and not saying, no, you need the latest version and the most expensive. So I don't think we need the specialists to solve this, but at least not to interfere in the solution. Yeah, and maybe at a later stage today, because I know others like David Barron and others are speaking, we might talk about what we're trying to achieve, what level of blood pressure, what level of HBA1C, what level of whatever, which is another issue. So, Lillian, you haven't spoken yet. So any thoughts on this issue of coordination from your perspective and prioritization? Yeah, I think the NCDs in crisis group that UNHCR convinced, I think we started last year and we've been having a series of meetings trying to be on the same page in terms of treatment guidelines, in terms of how we manage NCDs in humanitarian crisis. And it includes a lot of the agencies that work in these settings. And one of the things we've come up with is trying to come up with a misplike document, like a minimum initial service package similar to the reproductive health one, that will be used as a guidance for programs that we all work in. So I think that's a good first step. Okay, great, thanks, Helen. There was a question for you about nutrition. Oh, yes. So in answer to your question, yes. We do think about nutrition. I mean, I think that now in the age of antiretroviral therapy, if these patients are assessed, if they fit into the standard nutrition recommendations for a nutrition intervention, they're very much treated according to the country's national guidelines. There's not a specific protocol because they're HIV positive. So, and definitely within the health education, and that's where, again, where I see this overlap with the on-communal disease, in terms of healthy lifestyle, healthy diet, all that stuff, again, should be integrated into the packet of patient education. Anybody here from the pharmaceutical industry? Okay, well, in their absence, because one of the things that was coming through a number of the presentations was, they may be watching anybody online from the pharmaceutical industry. Anybody want to admit it? This issue of medicines, you were talking about fixed-dose combination therapy for HIV, that's certainly been talked about for cardiovascular disease, the simplification of the procurement. Many of us know that classic slide of the pharmaceutical procurement in Kenya, which looks like an integrated circuit board, and the problems with stock outs that were mentioned in a number of the presentations. So, are we all coming together in a coordinated way to address this? Because it seems to me that these are practical solutions that would actually address some of the issues you're talking about. Who's doing that? Who's in charge? Who's leading the battle? MSF? We're talking about it. We're looking at WHO, I think. Yeah, so, WHO, shall we... I mean, how about getting the fixed-dose combination therapy for hypertension and essential drugs? I mean, that's something that actually, I should have mentioned, the World Health Organization is leading. We put together a group on the polypil that actually, Philippa, participated in representing MSF, and we are looking at that kind of thing. No, and we are working with WHO, with the people in Geneva, to put the polypil for secondary prevention in the lease of essential medicine. So, there is a group, and WHO is part of that group with regulators and also pharma companies. Great. Anything you'd like to add? Yeah, just to compliment to that, there has been already a proposal for the adjunction of fixed-dose combination therapy for secondary prevention that had been rejected last year to be added, actually, to the essential model list of WHO. And we are reconsidering now, again, there was a new proposal, probably, in preparation for the next round. So, this is something that is already, I mean, had been discussed. The committee, when they reviewed, I mean, the proposal thought that there had not enough backing of evidence, actually, to support this. This has been, I mean, a controversial discussion that we had, I mean, this year, again. But clearly, in the coming years, the fixed-dose combination will come again. If I may, just a one point about the coordination aspect. I think it's an important element, and sometimes we tend also to mix up everything. In emergency response situation, and I have colleagues also from WHO, emergency department, that might mean, people have a poor understanding of how also the response is mounted in support to member states. The member states are there when they can't actually cope. I mean, there is an international community that support them. There was a global health cluster. We work in clusters, and the health cluster lead is often WHO, when you have refugee situation, like in neighboring countries, the UNHCR are leading, and this is how actually things are organized. Most of the time, whether through Ministry of Health, mainstreaming, I mean, the services to them and the response, but also through implementing partners. Having that understanding, I think it's crucial to understand who is doing what where, which is one of the aspect that we are doing in the early response of an emergency is to map out who are the actors and stakeholders who should be involved. So I think the coordination, of course, I mean, the UN agencies most of the time do it, but of course, you have additional actors, like MSF, that work independently and provide actually a lot of support to member states at work, that we need to put in the equation. So I think having the understanding of the mode of operation of emergency response is key or so, because sometimes we tend to give a lot of criticism of what is happening in coordination, but I think to get things right, we need to understand who is operating and sometimes how or so the member state themselves decide, in Turkey, they have decided they need to themselves provide the support and not calling for international agency, I mean, as much as other countries. So I think this is a crucial difference to take into account. And of course, these things always get caught up in geopolitics. So the key message from that is that everybody should be talking to one another, which is rather good because we're almost time for lunch, which will be a great opportunity and if you haven't met other people sitting around you, you will of course find the opportunity to see how you can collaborate with them, not only over lunch, but later in the day. But before you break, we do close this session with thanking all of our speakers, of course, but then a final short video, which we're about to have. But anyway, thank you to all the speakers all the way. Thank you.


Minister Sri Alphonse Kannandanam, Honourable Minister for Agriculture Government of Kerala, Sri V.S. Sunil Kumar, Honourable Member of Parliament, Prof. K.V. Thomas, Honourable Member of Parliament, Prof. Richard Hay and Honourable MLA, Sri V.P. Sajindran. The integrated refinery expansion complex IREP has been constructed at an approximate cost of Rs 16,504 crore and it has transformed Kotshi refinery as the largest public sector refinery with world-class facilities. The dedication also marks a milestone of making eco-friendly barred state for fuels accessible not only to Kerala but to the whole of South India. This has paid way to BPCS foray into petrochemical and augmentation of RPG storage. Ladies and gentlemen, we are truly blessed by the presence of Sri Narendra Modi Ji, our Honourable Prime Minister, the much-worship leader of the masses and a well-respected global statesman who will dedicate these major facilities and initiate further development. Let's now welcome this great son of our country to our home state Kerala with a punnada, the traditional shawl of Kerala. I would request the Secretary, Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Dr. M.M. Kutty to do the honours. Welcome, Honourable Prime Minister, to the presence of our dignitaries with a punnada. As a mark of our respect and gratitude for gracing this occasion with this towering presence, let's also present a Memento to the Honourable Prime Minister, Chairman and Managing Director of BPCS, Sri D. Rajkumar will now present the Memento to the Honourable Prime Minister. We are indeed fortunate to have many distinguished dignitaries here to grace today's function. May I request the Chairman and Managing Director of BPCS to welcome the Honourable Governor of Kerala, Justice Sri P. Sadashivam. Happy Welcome, Sir. The Honourable Chief Minister of Kerala, Sri P. Narayavijan. Kerala Tinde Priyankarnaya Mukhamundri, Sri P. Narayavijan. Sri Dharmendra Pradham, the Honourable Union Minister of Kerala. Sri Dharmendra Pradham, the Honourable Union Minister for Petroleum and Natural Gas and Minister for Skill Development and Entrepreneurship. Sri Dharmendra Pradham, Honourable Union Minister of State for Tourism with independent charge Sri Alphonse Kannandanam. Our own Nathu Garnaya Bhomanavata Kedramandri, Sri Alphonse Kannandanam. Honourable Member of Parliament of Hernogulam Constituency and former Union Minister, Prof. K. Thomaizizia. Happy Welcome, Sir. Honourable Member of Parliament, Sri Alphonse Kannandanam. Honourable Member of Parliament of Hernogulam Constituency and former Union Minister, Prof. K. Thomaizia. Happy Welcome, Sir. Honourable Member of Parliament, Sri Richard Hei. Prof. Richard Hei. And finally Honourable Emily of Kunatanad Constituency, Sri B. P. Sajinrin. Thank you, Sir. May now request Sri Dharmendra Pradham, the Dynamic Minister for Petroleum and Natural Gas and Minister for Skill Development and Entrepreneurship. To welcome the dignitaries and your guest gathering. Namaskaram. The most popular leader of the country. Honourable Prime Minister, Sri Narendra Modiji. Honourable Governor, Justice, Peace, Sadashivam. Honourable Chief Minister, Sri Pinaray Vijayanji. Honourable Union Minister for Tourism, my friend Alphonse. Honourable Member of Parliament, Prof. K. V. Thomaizji. Honourable Member of Parliament, Prof. Richard Hei. Honourable Emily, Sri B. P. Sajinranji. Senior Officials of Minister of Petroleum. BPCL, IOSHL, Government of Kerala. Family members of BPCL, Employees of Kochi Refinery. Friends from media, ladies and gentlemen. Today is a historic occasion when we have Honourable Prime Minister with us to dedicate the nation, the integrated refinery expansion project of Kochi Refinery and mounted storage vessels of IOSHL LPG bottling plant in Kochi. Today Honourable Prime Minister will also lay the foundation stone of petrochemical complex in Kochi Refinery and the skilled development institute at Ethunumur. I welcome and express my gratitude to Honourable Prime Minister Sri Narendra Modiji for embracing the occasion. I also welcome the other dignitaries on the dance. Beginning with a modest capacity of only 2.5 million metric ton per annum. The Kochi Refinery after expansion with a production capacity of 15.5 million metric ton per annum has become the largest public sector refinery in India. It was an effort to meet the growing energy needs especially of South India and also to make environment friendly out of wells. The expansion project was completed in time during which indirect employment was provided to more than 20,000 people. Permanent direct and indirect employment for about 500 people has been created after commissioning of the units. Today Honourable Prime Minister is also laying the foundation stone of petrochemical complex. BPCL is strategically entering the petrochemical sector to reduce dependency of country on import of petrochemicals which is used to produce a wide range of daily use articles as paints, printing inks, automatic parts, diapers, cosmetics, pharmaceutical etc. The total investment for those petrochemical project is approximately 16,400 crore. I understand this will reduce the import to extend 13,000 crore per year which is quite substantial. Field stock available from BPCL for production of other value added products will lead to establishment of uncillary unit which will give boost to local economy and generate substantial employment in the state of Kerala. Honourable Prime Minister is also dedicating to nation, the Indian Oil Corporation mounted storage facility at its bottling plant. The salvage storage includes three boolards of 1200 metric tons each and was set up at a total cost of around 52 crores. BPCL along with other oil companies has promoted as a skilled development institute at Kochi to provide vocational training to youth and enhance their employability and entrepreneurship for oil and gas sector and other industries. First campus was set up at Incale Business Park, Angamali with all modern facilities in 36,500 square foot area. The second campus is to be set up at 8 acre of Lees land at Government ITA campus at Etunmaro, Kottian District, the State of Heart World Class Institute will scale 1000 students every year in 20 different trades in a built-up area of one lakh square foot and is expected to come in by mid 2020. Honourable Prime Minister will lay the foundation stone of this institute. Friends, Kochi has now emerged an important hub for petroleum infrastructure. We have LNG terminal in Kochi which can cater to the need of natural gas for the State of Kerala and Karnataka whilst connecting pipelines are laid down. It has now a world class refinery petroleum sector skilled development institute and LNG academy with petrochemical complex coming up in Kochi. It will give a quantum jump to the hydrocarbon portfolio of the city and the State of Kerala. Eight districts are being connected with city gas infrastructure in Kerala and three more districts will be connected very soon. Friends, Honourable Prime Minister has always given importance to the energy sector given its linkage to development and elevation of poverty. He has defined four pillars of energy foundation for India. Energy access, energy efficiency, energy sustainability and energy security. Under his guidance we are promoting alternative fuels like ethanol, compressed bio gas, coal to gas and many more similar initiatives. In last four and half years we have made attempt to make infrastructure to develop India as a refining and petrochemical hub of the world. I am happy that within this large converse Kochi will remain a bright spot. Thank you friends. Thank you very much sir. We have with us today the Honourable Chief Minister of Kerala Shreya Pinarayi Vijayan under who is the Steward leadership, the State of Kerala is moving on the path towards the same growth. May now invite the Honourable Chief Minister to deliver his address. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. the honourable Prime Minister will now dedicate the integrated refinery expansion complex to the nation. May request the other dignitaries to please join the honourable Prime Minister. The honourable Prime Minister will now press the button, unveiling the plaque. The honourable Prime Minister will now press the button, unveiling the plaque. The honourable Prime Minister will now dedicate the integrated refinery expansion complex to the nation. The honourable Prime Minister will now dedicate the integrated refinery expansion complex to the nation. The dedication of the mounted tide LPG storage vessel or Indian oil corporation at its Kochi bottling plant. Let me request the honourable Prime Minister to press the button and dedicate the facility LPG storage vessel of Indian oil corporation at its Kochi bottling plant. The second facility is now being inaugurated by the honourable Prime Minister. This is enhanced the capacity to 4,350 metric tonnes and will benefit lakhs of households across seven districts of Kerala. Ladies and gentlemen, the honourable Prime Minister will now lay the foundation stone of the proposed Bharat Petroleum's Petrochemical Complex at Kochi refinery. I would once again request the honourable Prime Minister to press the button. This make in India initiative is expected to go on stream by 2022 and will result in reduction of imports and considerable saving of foreign exchange. Foundation stone of the proposed Bharat Petroleum's Petrochemical Complex. And now, the honourable Prime Minister will remotely lay the foundation stone for a skilled development institute at Aitumanur Kottium. The institute, promoted by BPCL along with other oil companies, aims at providing vocational training to the youth and enhance their employability and entrepreneurship in oil and gas industry. The honourable Prime Minister will now address. Governor Justice P Sathasivam, Chief Minister Sri Pindarai Vijayan Ji, my colleague in Union Government Sri Dharmendra Pradhan Ji, Sri Alfonsi, MP Sri K. B. Thomas, MP Professor Richard Hay, MLA Sri B. P. Sajindaran, Kochi Ele Sahodari Sahodaran Mare, L. R. Komante Namaskaram. I am happy to be here at Kochi, the King of Arabian Sea, the Blue Sea, the backwaters, the Great Perrier River, the Greenery all around. And its dynamic people make Kochi indeed a queen among the cities. It was from here that the greatest Indian sage, Adi Shankara, embarked on his epic journey across India to protect the Indian civilization and unify the country. Today is a historic day when the largest industrial unit of Kerala is entering in next phase of development. It is indeed a proud moment, not just for Kerala, but also for the entire nation. Bharat Petroleum Cochin Refinery has played a critical role in popularizing the clean fuel LPG among masses in Kerala and neighboring states for more than 50 years. I recall my childhood when I had seen many mothers struggling with the firewood storm in the kitchen. Ever since I had always thought of improving their situation and providing healthy teachings to the mothers and sisters of India. The Ujwala scheme of the government of India is a way to realize the dream. I am happy that since May 2016, nearly 6 crore LPG connections have been provided to the poorest of the poor in our country under Ujwala Ayuzhana. Friends, more than 23 crore LPG consumers have joined the Pahal scheme. Pahal has helped in identifying ghost accounts, multiple accounts and inactive accounts. Pahal has entered into the Guinness Book of World Records as the largest direct benefit transfer scheme in the world. Over 1 crore customers have given up LPG subsidy under Give It Up Initiative. By doubling the LPG production with the help of recent expansion, Cochin Refinery is making a great contribution toward Ujwala. To overcome environment pollution, the government of India is promoting the use of environment friendly transport fuel, that is CNG, by expanding the coverage of city gas distribution network in the country. After the successful completion of 10th CGD bidding round, more than 400 districts of the country will be connected for providing pipe gas supply. The national grid or Pranamanti Urjaganga has also been created to have a gas-based economy and enhance the share of gas in the energy basket. The government has thought of developing additional 15,000 km of gas pipeline network to cut down on import of crude oil. Government has taken decisive steps towards reducing imports by 10% and saving precious foreign exchange. To this end, the second generation ethanol through lignocellulose route has been adopted by oil PSU for establishing 12 2G ethanol plants in 11 states. Six MOs have already been signed in this direction. The Indian refinery industry has done well in establishing itself as a major player globally. India, which is second largest oil refinery in Asia, is emerging as a refinery hub with refining more than its demand. The country's refinery capacity is currently more than 247 mmTPA. I take this opportunity to congratulate all for the timely completion of IREP. Last but not the least, I recognize the work of all those laborers who worked day and night during construction. I am told that at the peak of the project, over 20,000 laborers were working at the site. In many states, they are the real heroes of this project. The integrated refinery expansion project was also a strategic move of Bharat petroleum to diversify into non-fuel sector. My friends, petrochemicals are a grade of chemicals which we do not speak much about, but they exist invisibly and touch many aspects of our daily life. This includes building materials, plastic and paints, footwear, clothing and other fabrics or automotive parts, cosmetic and medicines. However, most of these chemicals are imported from other countries. It is our endeavor to see that these petrochemicals are manufactured in India itself. I am happy that using the capability of Kochi refinery to produce properly after the execution of IREP, BP sale has gone ahead with putting up three world scale plants to manufacture acrylic acid. Acrylic and also alcohol under making India. This list of petrochemicals will find a use in paints, ink, coating, detergent and in many other articles. Now BP sale is starting the construction of a petrochemical complex where it would produce polyols that find a use in forms of fiber, footwear, cosmetic and medicines. I am sure by all these many ancillary industries would come to Kochi. I hope the petrochemical park planned by state government would become operational soon and leverage the business opportunities provided by the petrochemical venture of BP sale. I am happy to note that BP sale along with other PSU has set up a skilled development institute for scaling and developing employable youth. I am delighted to lay the foundation stone of the second campus of the institute at Atmanur near the holy Mahadev temple. I am also glad to note that Indian oil cooperation has put out the mounted storage facility at this Kochi bottling plant around 10 km from here at a cost of Rs. 50 crores. This will enhance LPG storage capacity and also reduce road movement of LPG tankers. It is heartening to note that last August when Kerala was passing through the bus plot in 100 years BP sale Kochi refinery was kept running against all odds. I understand that many employees stayed in the refinery to ensure continuous production of petrol, diesel and LPG. This helped the rescue vehicles and helicopters to continue relief and rescue operations smoothly. I urge BP sale Kochi this refinery to keep up the spirit of hard work, social commitment and innovation as it moves towards its next phase of development. We are proud of Kochi refinery's contribution towards nation building but now we have greater expectations. I wish that Kochi refinery leads a patrochemical revolution in southern India and support the growing needs of a new India. Thank you. Thank you very much. All of us present here kindly accept our heartfelt gratitude for attending this function and making it truly memorable with your graceful presence and eloquent speech. A big thank you from the bottom of our hearts. Let's also thank the other dignitaries on the days, the Honorable Ghana, the Honorable Chief Minister, Honorable Union Minister for Petroleum and Natural Gas, Honorable Union Minister of State for Tourism, Honorable MPs and Honorable Emily. We thank the dignitaries of the state, our other esteemed guests, our well-wishers and the public for making this function a grand success. Ladies and gentlemen kindly remain seated until the dignitaries leave the day.


Hi everybody. Thank you all for coming to the talk today or listening virtually on our virtual platforms. My name is Carol Smith and I'm a Program Manager in the open source programs office at Microsoft. I'm here today because I'd like to talk to you about what we call business reviewers in the enterprise compliance space. I will not be leaving time for questions at the end because this talk is only 25 minutes and we've got to talk right after it. But I will be available on Slack and in the chat channels afterwards if you have questions. I'll be here at the conference walking around if you'd like to see me later to ask questions. And I can always be emailed at carolus at microsoft.com or my Twitter handle is at fosseygirl without the I. So what do you think about when you hear the words open source? Maybe community, speed of development, innovation. I'm sure a lot of the speakers today have mentioned a few of these words here at the conference. But maybe you or maybe people in your organization hear open source and they also think risk or maybe security questions, something in that space. So how you and your organization think about risk and open source probably determines a lot about how you also think about your internal compliance systems that are handling your open source use and your open source development at your organization. And maybe your organization thinks open source is very risky. And so it has centralized all of the decision making about open source software development into one organization. Maybe it's called the open source programs office at your organization. Maybe you are the person who is making all of the decisions about the open source use for your developers at your entire company. Maybe you were hired to make those decisions and handle those approvals and rejections. So how you handle and how your organization thinks about open source is an important part of what compliance probably looks like at your organization.  And the onus is left on the developers to decide whether or not a particular development scenario with a particular piece of open source is allowed or rejected. Or maybe you have a patchwork of systems. Maybe you have a bunch of teams or departments that are all handling open source in different ways and no one's talking to each other. So this is all a reflection of how you think about risk and how your organization thinks about risk. Or whether it is thinking about open source and risk at all or just maybe burying its head in a little bit in the sand. So what I'd like to talk to you about today could be what might be a change in philosophy for your organization and how you think about risk in your open source organization. And I'd like to talk about moving to a model that focuses firstly on automation around your internal compliance systems. But also much more importantly focuses on applying your most important resource your people your humans who are going your colleagues who are going to apply judgment to the open source that you are using in your organization. To be able to be thoughtful and make the best decisions on behalf of your organization as they can and do it in a coherent and thoughtful process. So this is a bit of a change in philosophy to a model that says let the computers take care of most of the decisions about our open source. So let automation handle many parts of the open source process for our developers and let humans apply judgment to the most important things that we think need to be overseen or need oversight or need review for whatever reason that makes sense to your organization. This is also a model that moves away from the sort of all or nothing idea so all open source has to be approved or no open source is allowed at our organization. Or all open source is centralized to this one body and this one decision maker and much to a much more nuanced process where you as an organization have understood. What things are important to you what licenses what usage scenarios you want to prioritize what things you are able to enable the developers. To just use in any given scenario and to disperse these decisions across the organization and allow many different people in the organization to be responsible for the decisions that are going to make sense for their departments and their teams. So I think everyone in this room is probably somewhere in a different place on your open source journey maybe you are already somewhere along this path to automation and distributed business decisions. Or maybe you are just starting out with those policy documents written by your legal team that I mentioned before. Wherever you are what I'd like to do today is talk to you a little bit about Microsoft's journey and how we've evolved our thinking in this space and share some of the things that that we've learned along the way. And some of these are changes and an evolution that I've overseen so I'd like to tell you a little bit more about those. So the first part of this process and this is a huge piece of the puzzle and I'm actually not going to talk very much about it at all. Is having an internal compliance system in place in your organization that detects and affords your understanding of all of the open source that your developers are using across the organization. This is a key piece of the first step in this process and a key piece of the puzzle and there are a lot of different and complimentary options and pieces of software that are in this space. So you may already be evaluating or having conversations about some of these pieces of software and I would encourage you to continue to have those conversations about moving to an automated internal compliance system and model. Having a proper accounting of all of the open source that your developers are using anywhere in your organization is a really key and important first step in the process. Microsoft has its own internal compliance system that that we use. But regardless the important thing is that it needs to be a system that enables you to make business decisions based on the open source that you're aware that you're using and the information about that open source that you're then getting. The next piece of the puzzle is having good data about that open source that you've now allocated for. So you needed a proper accounting of all of the open source that your developers are pulling in and building on every day every minute that your business is in motion. But you also need to have good data about that open source and you need to have trust in that data. So it's not just a matter of knowing that I have open source component X. It's also knowing that I for sure know that this is MIT or I for sure know that the source location for this component lives here. And if for whatever reason you you or your decision makers don't feel confidence in that data for whatever reason. Maybe you are not quite sure if that thing actually is MIT or there are gaps in your information for whatever reason. And you're not going to be able to make good business decisions based on that information.  So it's very important not only that you have the proper accounting for the open source that your developers are are using but also that you know what those things are. So Microsoft depends on a project called clearly defined that provides all of the data about all of the open source that we use in our own internal compliance systems. If you are evaluating data sources for your internal compliance system somewhere in your open source journey I can encourage you to look into clearly defined. It is publicly available. It's free. It's open source. And it has a large community of people who are working on maintaining and keeping all of the data very high quality. Microsoft depends on it and thinks it's a very useful and worthwhile tool for this trustworthy data that I've been talking about. But again no matter what data source you're using whether that data source is integrated with your internal compliance system whatever that is. Again it's very important that you and your colleagues and the decision makers have very high trust in the system because you're going to base all of your businesses decisions on that information. So once you have an automated internal compliance system in place and you have very good data about the open source that all of your developers are using across your organization. Now you can start to make good business decisions about that open source and you can base these decisions on hierarchies of information and on decision trees based on licenses and usage scenarios for that open source. So for example let's say that you know for sure that these five components that developer X in department Y is using are all Mozilla public license. You know this for sure because you have high quality data about the open source your developers are using and you feel very confident that you know that information. Now your internal compliance system can start to apply business logic based on that information and start to make decisions that are based on your own organization's feelings about things that are licensed MPL. Do you for example want to enable your developers to always use things that are MPL and just auto approve it because you have very good trust in all the open source that's licensed under MPL. Or for example do you not trust things that are licensed MPL and you want to send those for extra review for whatever reason that makes sense to your to your business. So this is an important next step in your evolution is having those conversations and understanding how to delineate between those two things. Microsoft of course has its own source sources of business logic based on licenses and usage scenarios as well. But I would encourage you to think of these decisions and this delineation between licenses and business and business and licenses and usage scenarios. Sorry base like a family budget. So for example you might have a monthly expenditure in your budget for biking gear because it's very important to your family that you always spend monthly money on biking gear. And my family might have a monthly expenditure for say lint chocolate because it's very important to my family that we buy lint chocolate every month. And neither of us is right or wrong in having a line item for biking gear or chocolate in our budget. But we as a family have had a discussion about what's important to us and what we think we want to prioritize in our monthly budget. But because we can only spend the money and our resources on so many things in any given month. And so I'd encourage you to also think about these automated decisions this business logic around licenses and usage scenarios in the same way that you would a family budget. I'd also encourage you to think of having the conversations within your organization about what's important to you like having a conversation about a family budget. So it might be a lengthy process. It might be a lot of conversations but you're going to need to come to consensus as an organization about how do you feel about things that are BSD to licensed. Do you want those to be auto approved and be sure that you have come to a consensus as an organization about how you feel about those things. This might be an involved process for you and for your organization because there may be people like your son who feels like you should have a much larger monthly budget for chocolate. Who disagrees with your daughter who thinks that you should have a much larger monthly budget for biking gear. And in the same way you may have people in your organization who feel a particular license is particularly risky where other people don't. So maybe part of your job if you work in that space or you're in the open source programs office might be enabling and empowering having those conversations and coming to consensus about what those are. So now you've got your system in place. You have high quality data and you have trust in that data and you've come to decisions about what things are important to you in terms of licenses and use scenarios. So you've got this bucket of licenses that are called MIT and those always get auto approved whenever an open source developer within your company wants to use any of those things. And you have this other bucket of things called BSD and you want those to go to particular review every single time anyone in your organization wants to use something that's BSD to licensed. Okay, so now you get to make as a business the decision to apply a lot more human judgment and human resources and human time on looking at those things that are the really important decisions. The things that you as an organization have decided we really want the extra review and the extra application of judgment to these particular things and you can start to focus your power on that. This also is going to save you time and money because I hope that as you're having these conversations you're going to discover that there may be lots of things that before in a model where all open source studies used at this company needs to be approved or denied now you might have a large bucket of things that just get auto approved because your organization has decided that those things are not as risky to it. So you're probably going to end up finding out that only a fraction of all of the open source that your company is using or all of the open source that your developers are pulling in on any given day is actually needs review and oversight and judgment applied to it. So now if you're farther along in your open source journey, I'd like to again suggest what another what might be a philosophical change for your company. So if you have developers everywhere in your organization who are building on open source software. I'd also like to suggest that you also are taking on all of the risks and responsibilities and benefits of that open source use across your organization as well. So if you have developers in lots of different parts of your company who are interested in building on an innovating using open source software, which I hope that they are. Your executives and your decision makers should also feel like they are all equally invested in the responsibilities and the benefits and the costs and the risks of using that open source anywhere in their organization wherever that developer might be. And so a bit of a philosophical change might be for your decision makers to start to invest in the people who are going to do these reviews and apply this judgment to these scenarios where you think your open source use is going to need extra review for whatever reason that makes sense to your business. And again, keep in mind if you've decided that there's this whole bucket of things that gets auto approved or is transparent to the developer and they can just use in any scenario. Now we're just talking about applying people power to a very small fraction. And so hopefully this is this eases the conversation with your decision makers a little more because you're not talking about a huge burdensome amount of time for any one person to spend doing these reviews. And you're distributing those decisions and those reviews across your organization. So now we get to what Microsoft calls business reviewers. This is how we refer to the people that we have empowered to do these reviews for the open source that we have determined needs extra review and extra judgment applied to it for whatever reason. And part of Microsoft's open source journey has been re-envisioning how we think about these people and how they're chosen and how they're regarded. So it used to be that even with our own automated systems that handled our internal compliance and we had very good data as well. And we had had the conversations and made the decisions about what things needed extra review and extra judgment applied to them. But it used to be the case that we gave those reviews to people based on organizational chain. So for example, developer X in department Y wants to use this open source thing that we think needs extra review. It probably goes to developer X's manager's manager. And we just hadn't spent time focused on thinking about these people and the importance of their role as business reviewers in our organization quite a lot. So what we learned is that often these were not the people who were best positioned to make the decisions for these reviews. So for example, my manager's manager might not even know that I as an open source as a developer and building on open source. And whenever a review gets to her desk, she might not know why she's being asked to review this thing. And often these were people who just simply didn't feel quite qualified to make these kinds of decisions on behalf of the organization. And also did I mention we hadn't trained them on how to actually do these reviews? So there was some room for improvement in the process. So what I ended up doing is re-envisioning a bit about how we thought about these business reviewers in our own organization. And what we realized is business reviewers are absolutely crucial to this process. We were thinking about the open source compliance systems that we had in place much more around the automation and the data, which are both important, important components, but not around these people who were doing our reviews. And so what we wanted to do is actually put a formal program in place that would assist these reviewers and support them in this process. So the first thing we did is we looked in our old internal compliance system and we found all of the corporate vice presidents from across Microsoft, who in the last six months had had any developer anywhere in their organization who had submitted a request to use any piece of open source that had ever required a review. And then I did the old-fashioned thing, which is I emailed them and let them know that we wanted them to participate in a new program. Who were to choose business reviewers for their organization to do these open source reviews. So these are business reviewers who are specifically chosen by these corporate vice presidents. And then we would inform these business reviewers about their roles and their importance in this process and in the organization. And then we would give them training about the philosophy behind our reviews, as well as literally how to do a review, which was an important and missing step of the process. And then finally, we would provide recognition for their participation in the program and reinforce the fact that these are actually people who are making important decisions on behalf of our business. And we understood that this was time and energy as well as expertise that they were giving to this process. So I oversaw the process change to build this whole system. And once the corporate vice presidents had nominated their business reviewers, we then emailed the business reviewers who had been nominated and let them know that it was very important that they participate in this program and let them know about the importance of the larger business reviewer program as well. And we let them know the process. So we were going to start to give them training and then we were going to start to send reviews to them to make on behalf of our business. The training was another key piece of this whole process. So we built a training module in our internal training systems that actually provided the full picture for these business reviewers of their roles and responsibilities in this process. So it gave them the philosophy about why we were having them do these business reviews. It reminded them of the fact that open source is an incredibly key part of our development workflow and our innovation. And that also we as an organization had particular scenarios, particular licenses, particular kinds of open source that we wanted to have these people apply good judgment to. And then we also made the training a gate for becoming a business reviewer formally. So even if you had been nominated by a CVP to be a business reviewer for your organization, you were still asked to complete the training before you started to actually receive the reviews. So we made sure that you would receive the training. And did I mention we also included how to do a review in the training? So then we solved that gap. And then finally, as part of this program, we also provided provide recognition. Internally, these folks are referred to as deputies in our internal systems because they are deputized to make these decisions on behalf of the organization. So they're recognized in that way internally. And they're thought of as an important and integral part of the process. And we also have a badging system in our internal profiles that gives them recognition. And again, we wanted to acknowledge that this is not something perfunctory that they are doing. This is an important and key role. Finally, finally, we also realized that the business reviewers might potentially have questions or need support around the process. So we gave them access to an existing internal community of open source advocates that we called the Champs, who were people from across our organization, across focus areas, across seniority levels, who were already advocates for open source. And so when business reviewers had questions or needed support in their business reviews for whatever reason, they had access to this internal community of Champs as well. So providing the support to the business reviewers themselves was also important in recognizing their important role. So finally, I would just say maybe give it a try. Microsoft benefited hugely from re-envisioning and rethinking how we thought about business reviewers. And your organization might benefit from that as well, no matter where you are in your open source journey. So like I said, I will not be taking questions, but you're always welcome to email me at carolessatmicrosoft.com. And I'm at Fosse Girl Without the Eye on Twitter. And thank you very much for coming. I really appreciate it.