The return on the two asset classes is repre− sented by the fund’s benchmark indexes, measured in foreign currency, for the period June 2011 to May 2012. Sources: Statistics Norway and Norges Bank  Today, the fund is far larger than in 2011. As a result, return variations will have a greater impact. With the current size and composition of the fund, the same return as in 2011 would have resulted in a loss of almost NOK 1 000 billion, or close to 35 percent of mainland GDP. The fund has become important for the Norwegian economy. The fiscal rule links fiscal policy to the value of the fund. This year, 15 percent of general government spending is projected to be financed by transfers from the fund. Looking ahead, movements in global capital markets will be the main source of variation in the value of the fund, and at times in a negative direction. The actual stance of fiscal policy must allow for this uncertainty. The fund had several good years following the euro crisis. Markets turned around, and quickly the loss was more than reversed. We cannot take for granted that this will always be the case. Conclusion Let me conclude. The global economy finally appears to have fully recovered from the prolonged weakness that followed the financial crisis. Growth has also strengthened in Norway after the decline following the oil price collapse. The government’s solid financial position has been of considerable help.
When China, India and Eastern Europe joined the global market economy, the labour force of countries participating in world trade doubled.9  Norges Bank Economic perspectives 15 february 2018  The result is that workers in advanced economies face competition from new groups, which pushes down wage growth and affects the income distribution between labour and capital. Lower unionisation levels have also weakened workers’ bargaining power. Since 1980, unionisation in the OECD area has fallen from around 35 percent to below 20 percent. Low wage growth feeds through to prices for goods and services. Many firms also face competition from firms that have relocated production to lower-cost countries. In addition, online shopping reduces the advantage of physical proximity to customers, narrowing the scope for passing on higher costs to prices. Globalisation thus restrains the general rise in prices. Cheap imports from low-cost countries have long been an important source of low inflation in advanced economies. In Norway, prices for clothing and footwear have fallen by almost half over the past 20 years. The price effects of globalisation have not been exhausted. A rising number of low-cost countries are competing on the global stage. So far, global competition has had less influence on services prices than on goods prices (Chart 8). However, global trade in services has increased recently. This may lead to renewed downward pressure on prices. Chart 8 Goods and services inflation. Average annual change 2000 – 2017.