The increase in the confidence in an economy generates more investment, which in turn leads to more production, more employment and increased welfare. In lending support to these claims the following empirical work can be cited as evidence: the World Bank study over the period 1964 to 1993 shows that economies with high institutional capability combined with good policies grew nearly eight times the rate of economies with low capability and bad 8 policies . The good governance is also essential for equitable distribution of income. High growth rates have an impact on poverty reduction by supplying more employment to the economy, but do not have direct effects on the redistribution of income. Indeed, good governance principles are the tools to redistribute income equitably, to produce policies for the provision of public health, infrastructure, education and other public goods and services either by directly government or by the private sector in a market, which is regulated and supervised by the government. Distinguished guests, However, in the vast literature on the subject, not all scholars think the same. There are some who disagree. They argue that the good governance is not a significant factor for economic growth and for an increase in the welfare of society. They challenge the findings of empirical studies by arguing that the existence of principles of good governance in a country is impossible to quantify and hence it is hard to compare it with quantitative aggregates in the economy, such as growth, poverty, etc.
Have financial institutions taken structural and technological efficient steps to improve their cyber defense? Is cyber-crime insurance effective and how is it pricing the risk? What type of public communication to we need to fight those new threats? We expect such important questions to be addressed in this context. Besides, overseers and supervisors should ensure that at an individual level, risk management is efficient. A normative framework has been established set up by European institutions to fight cybercrime and ensure the robustness of the financial markets (in particular through the adoption by the European Parliament of the Network Information Security directive); a BIS committee, the CPSS, is currently reflecting on cybersecurity for market infrastructures. Two prominent speakers will share their views on whether the existing regulatory framework provides sufficient guarantee against cybercrime. Lastly, as a central bank it is of utmost importance to make sure that the marketplace is resilient when facing cyber-threats. The purpose of the last roundtable should be to assess to what extent financial centers resilience should evolve under the influence of cybercrime threats: do increasing cross border interdependencies between financial centers (use of common market infrastructures, existence of international financial actors and cross border providers) call for an international approach? Should a multi-sectorial approach also be worth reflecting on as reliance on common service providers (such as telecoms) create a large community of interest when cyber-security is at stake?