Between 2012 and 2030, the increase in the working age population is estimated to average 0.05 per cent per year, which in effect amounts to stagnation. In all, this means that measures will need to be taken to boost the supply of labour in the years ahead. These could be achieved by reducing the numbers on sick leave and if fewer people were to take early retirement. The trend also implies greater demands on people to enter working life at an earlier age and on increased labour force participation among the elderly. Moreover, we currently have an unutilised labour force reserve in the form of our immigrant population. The employment rate among this group averages about 30 per cent lower than that of native Swedes. Measures to improve integration of immigrants into the labour market could make a positive contribution to the labour supply. For example, growth in the number of hours worked could be 0.4 percentage points higher per year up to 2008 if the Government’s target of halving sick leave were to be attained. Furthermore, if the labour reserve represented by our immigrant population were to be utilised, the number of hours worked could rise further. If this reserve were to be utilised to the same extent as native Swedes, the number of hours worked could rise an additional 0.1 percentage points. This would have a positive impact on potential growth.
Yet the climate risks we face have not subsided, far from it: if the climate transition is put off and carried out in a disorderly manner, the associated costs to our economies will be all the greater. The current context of uncertainty and volatility means that we should increase our vigilance regarding all risks, including those related to the climate, by making progress on the disclosure of climate-related information – which will become compulsory for European banks in 2023 under ESG Pillar 3 – and on how to operationalise transition plans and stress tests. On this latter issue, three European supervisory bodies will carry out an essential stress test in 2024 to assess in particular the transition risks to the entire financial sector linked to the implementation of the "fitfor-55" package. The idea that we could make a short-term trade-off between climate risks and economic and financial risks is misleading: the two are unfortunately increasing in parallel, and, in the longer term, the Russian crisis is yet another reason for us to accelerate our energy diversification and sovereignty through the use of non-fossil sources. What we need then, over the next two to three years, is to chart a "path of compatibility": if we are to be consistent, any measures to support non-fossil fuels, on the supply or demand side – the famous "price shields" – must remain targeted and temporary.