 So, what I want to talk about is this notion of recovery for the Balkans, and wherever you look in the region you see economic problems, and indeed some of those are spilling over into social problems as well. In some cases, Bosnia and Herzegovina most recently, and basically the region has not really recovered from the impact of the global crisis five years ago. It's still starting to get out of it, and I've listed some of the problems here about the limited growth, the fiscal condition is very poor in those cases. The banking sectors, although they're stable, they're plagued by high levels of non-performing loans and this ugly word, deleveraging, which is ongoing. And indeed the whole reform process and business environment is lagging behind in this region, as exemplified in our transition report title stuck in transition. But our view, my view as I've propounded in this room a number of times, and I think the view of our bank is that medium term there is a lot of potential in this region, and indeed potential for entrepreneurs. So I'm chiming very much with that because it's optimistic vision for the medium and long term future. So what I'll do is just show you a few of the macro charts and then come back to some of these themes from the transition report. So just zipping through quickly, here you have our current growth forecast. So we have a breached country showing 2012, 2013 and our forecast for 2014. So it's really a story this year without going country by country. It's a story of pretty modest growth, typically one, two percent or so this year, well below the kind of potential the region has, well below the pre-crisis levels. Perhaps a word on Croatia since Africa has Croatia, we have the ambassador here also, and our current projection is one percent growth this year. But frankly looking at the most recent data, I think even that is a bit optimistic and I think even the government is expecting less than that. So when you're more optimistic than the government you really have to limit your forecast and think again. So we might be downgrading that forecast as the IMF have just done next round. So modest growth, high unemployment, you can see how the unemployment rates have changed since 2008, and they've reached really quite frightening levels I would say in a number of countries in the region, above 20 percent in Serbia, in Pennsylvania, Macedonia and worst of all in Kosovo. Now if you have a sort of Keynesian training you might think well the government can step in and spend more, but when you look at these fiscal deficits and how they have changed since pre-crisis period, you see that there really is no scope at all for expansion in fiscal policies. These countries, particularly Serbia and Albania, but also Croatia are running high deficits, and Croatia is now under this excessive deficit procedure, so they have to get the deficit down in the coming years. And public debt, again this is a percentage of GDP, and you can see the rise in all countries, and particularly sharp rises in Croatia, Montenegro, Serbia and Albania. So when public debt in countries like these is above 60 percent of GDP that really sets off alarm bells among investors and indeed anyone else who looks at the country. On the investment side foreign direct investment has dropped dramatically in some cases since the pre-crisis period. What I'm showing here is quite, the FDI can be quite lumpy from one year to another, so here we're taking the average of 2004 to 2008, which were the boom years, versus 2009 to 2012. So you can see a big drop here in Croatia, not a smaller drop in Serbia, but from a lower level, and Bulgaria and Romania sort of off the scale. These are really up here, pre-crisis, big FDI boom, post-crisis, it's fallen through the phone. Okay, now that's the kind of gloomy side, on the more positive side, I think any recoveries is bound to be export led in this region. And indeed you see, if you take year on year growth in exports, you see there has been quite a significant recovery post-crisis. There was a dip again in 2012, but in 2013 in most countries exports grew again. This has helped to bring down current account deficits, which were a very significant vulnerability in the pre-crisis periods. You see in Montenegro, current account deficit was about 40% of GDP back in 2007. It's still quite significant in Montenegro, but much less than before, and we've been having services now in a couple of countries like Croatia and Bulgaria. Now, all of which leads me to say that although you can see a lot of problems in the macro picture, broadly speaking the situation is stable. We have low inflation everywhere, we have banking systems that are stable, we have countries, all countries have significant levels of foreign reserves. The fiscal situations are being addressed, I believe, and it leads you then to look at the potential for convergence. So what I'm showing here, and this is from Eurostat data, this is GDP per capita, it's an index, so the index is 100 for the EU 28 average. I'll put the eurozone average here, it's about 110 I think. And you can see that in all countries except Croatia, GDP per capita, adjusted for purchasing power standards is less than half the EU average. So we know from economic theory and we know also from economic experience that poorer countries can and should grow faster than richer ones, provided of course the right conditions are in place. Now, what are going to be the growth drivers? Well, I think the EU accession process is of course a very important driver and I've just summarised here in the table, I'm sure you all know where countries stand and the process of the Croatia's accession last year was really a milestone for the region. So although this is a slow process, it is ongoing and it is something that still has strong support in the region. And of course once countries are in, then they have access to substantial EU cohesion funds, which we know are complicated to use and indeed if you look at utilisation rates in Romania and Romania especially and also Bulgaria, they are below expectations. But the hope is that now Croatia is in and that it can use these funds effectively. But it's not just about the external anchor of accession, but it's also about cooperation within the region. Let me show you this nice picture. From a few weeks ago we at the EBRD hosted a major conference on western Balkans plus Croatia. We had four or five hundred business people and investors attending, but crucially we also had all prime ministers of the region. You can see the Croatian Prime Minister, Mr Milanovic, but all the others. Think of how remarkable this would have been some years ago to have Serbian Prime Minister, Mr Dacic on the same stage as the Kosovo Prime Minister, Mr Pati. This by the way is EBRD, President of Sumitrakovatis. So I think there is really a recognition that regional cooperation is not something that has to be imposed from the outside, but is really in the interests of the countries themselves and I think your institute is a living example of that. And indeed Croatia, which is in some ways part of central Europe, but it's also got these links to southeastern Europe, is really a crucial country I think in this process for bridging these two regions. That's the broad microfeature. Let me now come to the transition report. I may say we're very proud of this year's report. I think we're always proud of our transition report. We put a lot of effort into it and care, but this year I know from presenting the report in a number of cases, including in Zagreb in January, it really resonates with people. They really engage with the messages of the report and the report is really a political economy one. It's about the link between politics and economics. It's about how reforms, democracy and economic growth all go together. It's about the role of institutions in driving growth and it's also about the importance of education and the importance of inclusion and promoting equality of opportunity. These are the main themes. Now, conscious of time, I'm not going to give you a summary of the whole report, but I want to take just a few charts from the report to take what I think are the most important points for this region. One is about the importance of the economic institutions and what drives them. This is a colorful chart which shows country by country some different measures of economic institutions. They're mostly World Bank measures. We've used the World Bank's global governance indicators. These are things like rule of law, control of corruption, government effectiveness, regulatory quality. We've also used the World Bank's doing business scores. We have our own indicators as well, the EBRD transition indicators, which are another measure of the quality of institutions and also the challenges ahead. The details are in the report, how we calculate these and normalize them, but basically the higher up you are, the better your institutions. You can see that the southeast European countries are mostly here in the middle. There's a lag behind the central European countries. Here's Croatia here and then further down, Romania and Bulgaria, Montenegro and then down all the way to Albania here. The question we ask in the report is what determines economic institutions? How can you explain this big variation between the likes of Estonia here and Turkmenistan over here? There's a menu of possible explanations and we ran some quite sophisticated econometric tests in that. I won't go into any of the details, but just to say that among these possibilities for explaining why some countries have good institutions and some bad, the one that really dominates is trade and financial sector openness. So the more open countries are to trade and foreign investment and capital movements, the better the quality of their institutions. This is something that is fairly robust to different ways of estimating and controlling for different factors and so on. Now when it comes to the EU accession countries, one thing we found that was very interesting and I wanted to show it here is that if you look at progress and reforms, which we measure by the annual change in the world governments indicators that I had on the previous chart, you can see that for the accession countries, these are the countries that are in now that join the transition countries, the reforms really are at their peak in the three years prior to accession. So that's all very good. Of course what then happens once countries join is that the reforms tend to fall off after that. Okay, now we have a chapter and I think for Africa and others this is perhaps the most interesting one. It's on education and human capital more generally. And what we argue in this chapter is, firstly the importance of education as a driver of growth and as a driver of reforms, but also as a way of keeping people in the country and avoiding this problem of brain drain. And what we argue is that actually if you compare the transition countries and the advanced countries, there's not that much difference, not too dramatic a difference between the quality of education at the primary and secondary level between the two regions. So it's really at the tertiary level that the differences are most marked. And here we have a various measurements of this. The two I'm showing here are the number of science and engineering doctorates just for the population, obviously, for transition versus advanced countries and the number of patents granted. This is World Intellectual Property Organization, which you can barely see in the charts here for the transition countries relative to the advance. The report really emphasises the importance of focusing on third level education. And then I come finally to this point about something that is new for us in the transition portrait about economic inclusion. And here I mean inclusion of opportunity. Now this I think is the most interesting part of my presentation and also of the report, but it takes a little bit of explaining. What we did in this chart is we wanted to measure inequality of opportunity and the way we do this, to simplify a little bit, but the way we do it is as follows. We have a big survey across country of individuals. It's called the Life and Transition Survey and I've spoken about it in this room before. We've carried it out twice, once in 2006 and once in 2010. And we interview about 1,000 people in every country. And from that survey we can get some kind of measure of how wealthy people are. And we measure that by the amount of assets they have. So some people are very asset rich and some people are asset poor. Now what this chart is doing is trying to explain how much of that variation in each country between the rich can be explained by just a few factors that are given to you at birth that you can do nothing about. So whether you were born in an urban or rural area at the level of your father's education, the level of your mother's education and whether one of your parents was a member of the Communist Party. So these are things that you can do nothing about, but it turns out that in some countries, just by running a simple econometric regression, they have a lot of explanatory power for the differences in wealth within a country, particularly in Croatia and particularly in pretty much all the other ex-Ukoslav countries, as well as a few countries further east like Georgia and Tajikistan. That I think is very interesting finding and I think part of the explanation comes from this last chart I will show. In the same survey we asked people what is the most important factor for a success in life? So there's a little menu of options. One is hard work and effort, another is the level of education, another is criminal activities, but there's one option which is political connections. Now what percentage of people in each country said political connections are the most important? Well, in Macedonia, almost half people said that's the most important thing. Then followed by Serbia, 43%, then Croatia, about 42%, Bosnia, about 35%, Kosovo, similar, Montenegro. It's absolutely remarkable, I think. We have Slovakia and then Slovenia, so Slovakia is sort of destroying the perfect symmetry of this character of having all excuse Slovakia dominating, but I think it's a very striking finding that the importance of connections, vese in the local language, in people's perceptions of how to get on in life, and it's a striking illustration of the inequality of opportunity in this region. We know from various, many academic studies, that any quality of opportunity that's hired tends to hold back the country's development. Okay, so just lastly, a few lessons for the accession countries, so those countries that are in the process of trying to give them to the EU are not, and I think the first one is maybe the most important, one about the need for reforms to take place now and not wait until three years before accession. Because we know, even under optimistic scenarios for Serbia or Montenegro, and never mind the others, accession is going to be much more than three years from now. And the other points I think are also, I think, self-evident from the analysis and the need for openness to train investment, the need for a better business environment, the need to address inadequacies in education and inequality of opportunity. And in this region, I think, the need also for greater regional cooperation, because that's where some of the big benefits can come from. Okay, thank you very much.