Where prices are concerned, 2004 was another year of stability despite the spectacular price rise of oil products. Inflation rose to 0.8% over the year as a whole, and peaked at 1.5% in November. The low inflation rate gave Swiss companies a further competitive advantage on the international marketplace. The dollar and the oil price as disruptive elements The foreign exchange and commodity markets experienced the most turbulence in 2004. The US dollar, which had been falling since 2001, accelerated towards the end of the year, when it hit a record low against the euro. Switzerland was affected in much the same way as the other European countries: the Swiss franc appreciated by about 7% against the US currency during the last three months of the year. This development has since improved somewhat. Despite the dollar's sharp drop over the last few months, its current exchange rate is still higher in real terms than it was in the mid-1990s. The current situation is particularly difficult, however, as a whole series of Asian currencies, including the Chinese renminbi, are pegged to the dollar. The greenback's fall has thus reinforced the competitiveness of numerous emerging markets versus the European economies. For us here in Switzerland it has been positive to note that the nose-diving dollar has not unleashed any speculation on the Swiss franc. The Swiss franc-euro exchange rate has remained remarkably stable at around CHF 1.55 per euro.
5  See also Siven, C-H. (1998) "Penningteori utan pengar – hundra år med Knut Wicksell", Ekonomisk Debatt 1998, year 26, no. 6. 6  Wicksell, 1898 [1936], p. 189. 7  See also Orphanides, A. (2207), "Taylor Rules", Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, January 2007. 16  BIS Review 41/2009  lending. In the same way as the policy rate can be expressed as a Taylor rule, it should be possible to express the banks’ capital adequacy requirement as a function of, for instance, the lending gap, or growth in lending in the economy and the output gap. Image 10: A ”Taylor rule” for capital adequacy  (  )  (  c t = c + α L Lt − L* + α Y Yt − Y  )  Here the capital adequacy requirement the banks are subject to depends on the development of total lending in relation to a long-term trend and economic activity. The idea is that the capital adequacy requirement will increase when lending increases too substantially, and will decrease when lending declines. In this way the banking system will be forced to build up capital reserves in good time, which can in turn be used to cover losses when times are hard. One creates a model that evens out cycles rather than reinforcing them. The current capital adequacy rules are sometimes accused of being procyclical.