Nevertheless, phases of low or negative interest rates also present monetary policy challenges and have economic side-effects, which must not be ignored and which I would like to address in the third part of my speech. I will stress that expansionary monetary policy is no panacea for growth in advanced economies. Only structural reforms and adjustments in the real economy can create the conditions for a sustained recovery – and thus for a normalisation of monetary policy. Expansionary monetary policy can make these necessary adjustments easier, but it cannot replace them and must not delay them. Before talking about the mechanism of negative interest rates in Switzerland, I would first like to examine the international environment and explain why global interest rates today are so low. Page 2/16  Low rates as a global phenomenon The current very low interest rate level is the result of a global secular trend. Interest rates have not just been declining since the outbreak of the financial crisis, they have been falling steadily in recent decades. Chart 1 shows that nominal yields on government bonds with a remaining maturity of ten years in Switzerland, Germany and the US are more than 6 percentage points lower today than they were back in 1990. Nominal interest rates are currently at a record low worldwide. But it is important to distinguish between nominal interest rates and real interest rates, which are ultimately relevant for most economic decisions.
When foreign market participants assess the situation and risks for Sweden and Swedish financial institutions, they also take into account to a large degree what is happening in the other Nordic countries and in the Baltic countries. The global financial crisis has affected financial stability in Sweden, although financial institutions here have coped better than those in many other countries. At the end of 2008 and the beginning of 2009 there was considerable international uncertainty and the market was particularly sensitive to consequences for Swedish banks resulting from the crisis in the Baltic. There was thus good reason for the Riksbank to take measures to stabilise the situation among the major Swedish banks in accordance with its task "to promote a safe and efficient payment system”. As the problems of the Swedish banks concerned mainly lay in the Baltic region, there was even greater justification for aiming the measures at strengthening these countries and thereby the banks there. The costs of these measures would probably be much lower if the problem could be dealt with at source rather than waiting until it had spread to the parent banks in Sweden, for instance through a dead stop in the liquidity supply from international markets. When the Riksbank made an assessment of the resources required to manage a widespread Swedish bank crisis, we took into account the fact that the Swedish banks’ balance sheets nowadays amount in total to 3.7 times Sweden’s GDP (which can be compared to 1.2 times GDP during the bank crisis in the 1990s).