When it is not possible to use fiscal policy to stimulate domestic demand, it is tempting to put one’s hope in exports. Countries will then be unwilling to allow exchange rates to take a direction that will lead to poorer competitiveness for them. One consequence of my assessment of foreign policy rates is that the main scenario’s repo rate path entails a greater interest rate differential in relation to other countries than was assumed in the Riksbank’s forecast. In the most recent monetary policy decision, the gap between the main scenario’s forecast of foreign policy rates and the forecast I preferred was certainly significantly narrower than it was during the autumn of 2010 – but, even so, it still concerned a difference of more than 50 basis points towards the end of the forecast horizon (see Figure 6). This could mean that the krona will appreciate more than the forecast suggests. To illustrate the effects that lower international interest rates would have on Swedish monetary policy if the actual interest rates were to be adjusted completely towards the Riksbank’s repo rate path, I would like to show you an analysis included in the minutes of the most recent monetary policy meeting.
It is more extensive than the FOMC’s as it will cover, among many things, structural change; climate change; financial stability; and the effects of digitalization. The Eurosystem will take its time, as the Fed did, to consider the different alternatives. What professional economists find theoretically appealing may not be either easily applicable or comprehensible to the general public. What financial markets expect in the short run is not always consistent with long-term economic objectives. But let me try today to share some preliminary thoughts on four key questions: 1. Is there such a difference between a dual mandate and the ECB’s twotiered mandate? 2. How could we clarify the inflation objective? 3. What about the “second pillar” of the ECB and is there a link with the socalled “secondary” objectives? 4. Last but not least, how can we improve communication with the general public and economic actors? My aim obviously is not to give you conclusive answers to these four questions but to highlight important elements of the debate. The Fed’s conclusions are a significant part of it but one shouldn’t assume that the ECB will simply follow suit. Other contributions – such as the ECB Listens exercise, our academic roundtables, Sintra or the current review of the Bank of Canada – are also important and differences are not always where expected. Page 4 sur 10  1. Is there such a difference in mandates?