It would be remarkable if we reported all other circumstances surrounding the forecasts except the repo rate itself, which is the only one of these we take decisions on. Furthermore, it would not be wise to base our forecasts on the market’s forward rate curve in those cases in which our assessment of the repo rate – as at present – deviates from the forward rate curve. We are also careful to point out that the repo rate is a forecast and not a promise. However, our possibilities of steering interest rates further ahead on the repo rate path are highly limited. What we can do is to communicate our own assessment, which is also associated with great uncertainty. The statistics that have been reported after the most recent Monetary Policy Update indicate a stronger development in Sweden than we had expected. According to the National Accounts from September, GDP growth was more rapid in the second quarter of 2010 than was reported in August’s flash estimate. The Economic Tendency Survey and purchasing managers’ index for the manufacturing sector in September were positive and exceeded market expectations. According to the Labour Force Survey, unemployment fell in August by slightly more than we had expected. As regards international developments, however, the situation continues to be uncertain. Statistics and other information are occasionally above and occasionally below expectations. We will not present any new overall assessment of economic developments until after the next Monetary Policy Meeting on 25 October.
The negative gap at the recession’s lowest point in 2009 has been estimated at – 4 per cent by the European Commission and at – 7 per cent by the OECD. The GDP gaps of 2010 and 2011 according to both of these institutions can be disregarded, as their reports were compiled before the summer and, since then, GDP outcomes have been surprisingly high. In its latest report, the IMF reckons with a GDP gap of approximately 2.5 per cent for 2007, followed by a decrease to almost – 5 per cent in 2009 before reaching – 1.5 per cent in 2011. 8 (Figure 5. The GDP gap according to the Riksbank, the OECD, the IMF and the European Commission). All three organisations reckon that potential GDP has fallen in conjunction with the crisis. For example, the OECD estimates that potential GDP has decreased by an average of approximately 3 per cent for the countries in the OECD area, as a consequence of the crisis. Approximately two-thirds of this decrease is due to higher capital costs caused by the return to normal risk and interest rate levels after the abnormally low levels prevailing prior to the crisis, which is having a dampening effect on capital intensity. The remaining third is due to an increase in structural unemployment and a decrease in labour supply. As regards Sweden, the dampening effects of structural unemployment and falling labour supply are deemed to be below average, however.