It is one thing to try to make global financial integration safer and to mitigate unwanted spillover effects – which might involve some retrenchment, as it did in this country and many others after the crisis – but it is another matter entirely to bring about a large-scale reversal of the global financial integration of recent decades. Most likely, such a reversal would seriously undermine real economic integration and the benefits associated with it. We are going to discuss these issues and others that pertain to the current state and future prospects of global economic integration. After Jaime’s keynote speech, we will have two sessions with substantive presentations and discussions on different aspects of the topic. This afternoon, we aim to take stock of recent trends in global and regional economic and financial integration, assess country responses to these trends, and discuss how the responses in turn affect the level of integration. This includes macroprudential and capital flow management measures. We will probably hear something about how the challenges have been addressed in this country. 2  Tomorrow we turn to the international monetary and financial system. Part of that discussion will aim at identifying potential reforms that would better allow individual countries and the global economy to reap the benefits of economic and financial integration and avoid the risks associated with it. We will then wrap up with a policy panel. Looking at the programme, I am particularly pleased to note the high level of the speakers.
At the same time, we know that competition may come at the expense of efficiency if it leads to a large number of services which are not coordinated. Maintaining a coordinated payment system while also ensuring a level of competition which can sustain and develop dynamics and innovation can be a difficult balancing act. As mentioned, it can be said that our experiences in Norway have been fairly good. In our view, coordination that promotes positive network effects should be encouraged. Competition considerations should primarily be safeguarded through objective and publicly known criteria for access to the network which makes it possible for new competitors to become established within the common infrastructure. How shall we assess new participants wishing to establish proprietary systems alongside the common infrastructure? This matter was discussed by the Banking Law Commission - which provided for the possibility of institutions other than banks and other financial undertakings to establish systems for payment services if licensed. The present bill does not address this question. It will be reverted to at a later time when the formulation of the regulation of institutions is addressed. Norges Bank has provided its view on these matters in earlier submissions to the Banking Law Commission’s fourth report. At that time, we supported the Commission’s proposal for opening for new participants in this area, by pointing out that such new systems for payment services will not be based on account agreements.