Assessments of the sustainable rate of unemployment can be made and discussed in an open debate within and outside the central bank, with internal and external economists who are specialists in the field of labour market research using micro and macro methods. A major advantage in this context is that Sweden has a tradition of outstanding labour market research at universities and research and evaluation institutes. It will also be simple and transparent to perform sensitivity analyses in the form of various assumptions about the sustainable rate of unemployment. If different members of the Executive Board of the Riksbank make different assessments of the sustainable rate of unemployment, they can simply and clearly explain how this affects their decisions. It is of course inappropriate for the central bank itself to calculate the price index that is used to assess the attainment of the inflation target, and it is a major advantage if this index is calculated by another, independent organisation or authority, like Statistics Sweden in Sweden’s case. For the same reason, it is inappropriate for the central bank to have a monopoly on calculating the normal level for the measure of resource utilisation used to evaluate target attainment. In practice it is impossible for outsiders (and most people at the Riksbank, including the members of the Executive Board) to verify and assess the calculations of potential production and hours worked that are performed. It is very difficult to determine whether the measures are reasonable and reliable.
Climate risk is a real threat: financial institutions should have the conviction to want to understand the environmental risks in their portfolios and to mitigate these risks. It is imperative that financial institutions step up efforts to collect the data that are necessary to mitigate their physical and transition risks as soon as possible. Second, financial institutions need greater clarity on the ESG data they need. The Network for Greening the Financial System (NGFS) has recently published a progress report on bridging data gaps. MAS agrees with the recommended approach, which is to first identify the stakeholders and 2/3  BIS central bankers' speeches  use cases, and then define the metrics and data requirements. In the absence of a use case driven approach, technology will remain a solution looking for a problem to solve. In Singapore, MAS is working with our financial institutions, solutions and data partners to pilot some use cases so that we can collectively learn, adapt, and grow in our ability to define the right metrics for ESG measurement. MAS has launched, together with the industry, Project Greenprint – a technology platform to support the green finance ecosystem. The project will identify use cases where technology can help to mobilise capital for green projects, monitor commitments to emissions reductions, and quantify the impact of abatement efforts. We look forward to collaborating with more international financial institutions and solution providers in this effort. Third, we need to develop methodologies to translate raw data into quantifiable assessments of climate-related risks.