 Good afternoon, everyone. It is my great pleasure to moderate this very interesting session on the global growth market outlook. And after the 10 years of the financial crisis, and IMF finally stopped downgrading the forecast for the global economy also for the emerging market. And so broadly, the prospect for the emerging market and global growth market seems to be very positive. But still, the situation in the different countries remain diverse quite a lot. And also the facing the daunting uncertainty down the road. So will they see a global growth market sustain their momentum in 2017? And beyond will be the core question we're going to answer in this session. So we have a great panel today. And before we start the discussion and debate, we're going to watch a very short video. Our colleague will help. IMF has estimated that economic growth in emerging markets and developing economies would rise to 4.6% in 2017 from 4.2% in 2016. However, the capital outflow floodgates from emerging markets has opened widely. According to IIF, in 2016, the net non-resident capital inflow in our emerging markets hit a new low since 2008, of $28 million US dollars and 90% decline from the average level between 2010 and 2014. In 2017, will the global economy continue to recover while embracing unprecedented uncertainty? Where will black swans be gathering? Where are the dark horses in global growth markets? Coming up next, ETSI Media Group joins guests of the World Economic Forum to discuss global growth markets outlook. You are watching CBN Forum. Great, welcome back. So we have a great panel today. And to my left, Praveen Gautam, the minister of the finance of South Africa. And next to him, Ms. Asani Bachelors. She is the founder and the chief executive officer of the rock Greek group of the United States. And next to her, Professor Liu Min Kang, he's the Distinguished Research Fellow in the Institute of the Global Economics of Finance. And also, he's a former president of the CBRC in China. So he's a real expert on China and emerging market. And next to him, Mr. Arif Nayuvi, he's the founder and the group chief executive of the Abirah Group of the United Arab Immigrants. And also, the last but not least, Professor Carmen Reinhart. And he's a very famous professor in the international economics and also in the emerging markets. We all know they are very famous, but this time it's different. So yeah, we have a great panel today. And we are trying to answer the very difficult question about the future of the global growth market. When we talk about global growth market, and we refer to emerging market developing countries, there may be some time frontier economies and maybe some low income countries. But mainly, we refer to the emerging market and the developing countries. So before we start the questions for these specific countries, I would like to ask you an overview question about your overall assessment for the global growth market, ranking from 1 to 10. 1 means very, very low growth, but very high risk. And 10 means a very high growth, but very low risk. So maybe you can give us the overall assessment for the global growth market. So the minister? I'm an optimist by nature, so six and a half. Six and a half, very high. And Asani? I'm pretty close. I like seven. Good, very good. And Professor Liu? Six. Six, a little lower. And Arif? So I'll combine both of them and go to seven and a half. 17 and a half. And Akana? Well, let me first put in perspective, 2010, 2011, with a boom in commodity prices and low interest rates, lots of capital inflows. That was not quite a 10, but close to a 10. Then in 2015, with commodity prices collapsing, the prospects of rising US rates, China slowing down, moved closer not to a one, but maybe a three. So I'm going to concur with the majority and say somewhere between six and seven. A little less a Boolean than you, but OK. Yeah, and six and seven I think is a quite remarkable number for the global growth market. But I think a lot of the uncertainty weighing on the growth in the global growth market. So one important thing is what will be the Fed's next move in 2017. So Asani and Carmen, you are a real expert on the United States, the financial markets experts. So what is your view on the Fed's move in 2017? Do you think how many hikes will Fed is going to have above more than three times or less than three times, so Carmen? I'm inclined to the less than three. For the following, there's two important domestic reasons why I think the rise in race is going to be very gradual and one international one. I think on the domestic side, a much more aggressive move than that would really drive the dollar higher still. And I think that would be a concern for what it would do to the current account, what it would do to growth, and it would be a drag in the US. Secondly, one can't forget that the US is highly indebted, public and private debt, and interest rate hikes are not the best friend of high debt. And third, I think that the global arena is one in which countries, well, central banks in Europe, the ECB, the Bank of England, Bank of Japan, the People's Bank of China are on easing mode. And I think that will also have some effect on having the rate normalization be more gradualist. Yeah, thank you. And Asani, what is your view on that? My view is that the Fed will probably increase every quarter. So that means really three moves this year. The reason for that is that labor markets have started tightening quite a bit in certain areas. So while in the US, while we have had sort of a slow growth in employment earlier on, now that we are seeing employment in certain areas get very hot in certain markets in certain regions in the US, there's already some impact in terms of wage inflation in those areas. Now, of course, there's huge disparity, because we also see underemployment and unemployment in certain other areas. But I think overall, when the Fed looks at things, my sense is that Mrs. Yellen will most likely start feeling that there's more likelihood of an upside risk to a downside risk. The other thing is that with the potential policies that President-Elect Trump has been talking about, again, there is a greater upside risk in terms of interest rates going up, because if we have the infrastructure, if we have the tax changes, if we have the growth impact of the policies, again, another reason for interest rates to go up faster. So that's where I would put my money. Yeah, Professor Liu Minkang, you also have been there, I guess. It depends how heavy the checks and balances facing Trump in implementation of his initiatives. Definitely, the U.S. economy may actually run hot into this year, and so if that happens, less checks and balances in the Congress and in many other organizations, then what we can see is that Fed automatically will give at least three times 25 basic points. It's a small step each time, 25, 25, 25. But if we face a lot of checks and balances saying that the current existing debt level is very high and if you want to have the deficit like 6 trillion U.S. dollars in 10 years, that means 6 billion U.S. dollars every year, then it could be ridiculous. So if he faces more checks and balances in fiscal policy implementing deficits and the infrastructure and the science force, I think two times twice this year will be witnessed. But anyway, the Fed two or three times 25 basic points like rate hike were not going to change the dynamics. The U.S. economy will definitely reach 2% plus gross this year. Yeah, I think that is associated with the monetary policy back to the normalization in the United States. Another very big issue is the dollar. Actually, the dollar has appreciated in the real effective terms since last August is 6%. And since the financial crisis, actually the dollar has appreciated about 40%. And the professor Reinhardt, Carmen, told us that the history taught us that every time when the dollar started appreciating journey, there's going to be some crisis in other places like in the Latin America and in Asia. So will this time different? How will the emerging market and global growth market be affected, impacted by the rising dollar? Carmen? I think there is a lot of variation depending on whether you have a lot of dollar debt or not. And so one of the challenges in many emerging markets has been that corporates have taken on in recent years while taking advantage of the low interest rate environment taken on much more dollar debt than we had seen up through the global financial crisis in some years afterwards. So for those countries, a strong dollar is not good news. For countries that are tied to the dollar, say, some of the oil producing countries where the desire is also to diversify the economy, being tied to an appreciating dollar is not conducive. So the net effect of the dollar strength, I would not say it's uniform across the board. Many Asian countries that do not have a lot of dollar debt would benefit from having a more competitive currency. So the trade channel is stronger. But it does, as I said, place those countries that have current account deficits that have lots of dollar debt at particular risk. Yeah. And Zia, Asani? I was just going to add, I completely agree with Professor Reinhardt. I think the only thing that I would add is that there is sort of the short-term impact and the longer-term impact. Because I think we're at early stages in terms of the interest rate hikes. And we could be in a situation where interest rates could get out of hand and go up a lot more beyond 2017. And in that case, I think the impact on emerging markets could be a lot more. In the short run, I think even the countries that have amassed a lot of dollar debt, if you remember a little while back, they had to deal with this. And I think for some of them, again, they have built reserves. They've slightly improved their macro policies so that they would be better placed in the course of 2017. But I'm much more concerned beyond 2017. Yeah. Minister Goten, what is your view on that? I think the South Africa are a little bit safe. A little bit safe. But I think what I hope so, the US is very big and they say whenever it sneezes, the rest of us catch a cold. But on the one hand, there's, if you like, the technical way of looking at things which we have here heard. But I think in the US, you're going to have the complexity of or contributed by the political economy as well. You have a Congress and an executive that has possibly a particular philosophical outlook. Let's put it politely. And a Fed that might have a slightly different philosophical outlook as well. And how one calculates the balance between the two and the interaction between the two as we get into six months and 12 months after this Friday might have interesting implications for the discussion that we've just had. The second is that the 2013 tapered tantrum certainly taught us about the interconnectedness of the emerging markets and the United States. A lesson that hasn't been forgotten and one that we need to be very mindful of. If emerging markets and developing countries are the major contributors to growth globally speaking, what happens in respect of growth in those countries matters to their global environment as well. And the Fed has shown, I think in the last two, two and a half years, a new kind of sensitivity to their decisions having particular kinds of negative impacts on emerging markets as well. And that's a factor we hope that won't be lost in the overall equation because US decisions are not contained within the US borders. They actually impact on the rest of the world and particularly on emerging markets as well. Over and above dollar denominated debt and so on. In the South African case, we have a 10% limit for foreign currency debt and we OK in that sense. But there are a number of countries on the African continent who borrowed during the low interest environment. And then you have the drop in the commodity prices, which have impacted upon their ability to repay the debt. And that began to have quite a negative impact on the fiscal situation. And they found themselves knocking at the doors of the World Bank or IMF and sometimes friendly developing countries in order to get financial assistance of one kind or another. And I think that experience of the last 18 months or so needs to be borne in mind as we look at the interest rate issue as well. Yeah, thank you. And Arif, you are going to talk about the emerging market and also at the same time, the sub-Saharan countries? Finally. Sorry. No, what I mean is that we've been talking about emerging markets almost like a puppet on a string kind of context. What will happen with the US dollar and what will happen to our markets? The real reality is that we're talking about a large element of the world's population. And we're talking about a part of the world which, according to any estimate, whether it's the IMF, whether it's the World Bank, whether it's the big consultancies, 2 thirds of the world's GDP growth is going to come from these markets in the course of the next 10, 12 years. Approximately a billion people are going to move into the middle classes in these markets in the course of the next 12, 13 years. And more importantly, close to 70% of the global consumer spend in the world is going to come from these markets. So when we talk about things like consumer spend and GDP, we have to remember that the largest corporations in the world operate in these markets as well. So whether you're talking about Unilever, Coca-Cola, Kimberly Clark, Colgate, Palmolive, et cetera, and you disaggregate the income statements, you will find that the rate of growth in these markets for those companies is three to one compared to developed markets. So if you set that as the backdrop to our discussion, I'm a big believer in saying these broad statements like emerging markets are going to suffer because of interest rate hikes or X or Y or Z. I say let's try and disaggregate this issue because you asked a great question at the outset. You said, how do you rate them 1 to 10? I only said 7 and 1 half because I was embarrassed about getting more optimistic. But I can break it down, right? And I'll tell you how I'll break it down. The emerging markets, as you refer to them, in four buckets. Let's take the first bucket is China. China is a law unto itself. And we saw the Chinese president give great comfort to the world's population this morning. And we saw that what China does, it's effectively an ecosystem that for the last decade has been reliant on industrial activity and investment infrastructure, and now is moving towards a consumption economy. It's not an easy task, but they've taken that investment structure and infrastructure growth, and through the one belt, one road, they've translated it into 100 countries around the world. So let's look at China in isolation. It is the largest, if not the largest, the second largest economy in the world. And it's wrong to call it an emerging market. Then let's look at two other buckets together. The first is the countries that are commodity driven. These are directly linked to the US dollar because their commodity is priced in US dollar, and it would be wrong to consider them as anything other than in the thrall of the US dollar. Now, if you asked me about growth prospects there, I would say 3, 4, 5. Because that is not a clear story in terms of outcome. We have to be reliant on what's going to happen in commodity pricing and what's going to happen to alternative energy sources and the US dollar. So let's use them in a separate bucket. The third bucket that I would like you to think about is the consumption driven economies. There's about 45, 50 countries around the world which are entirely driven by consumer spending, by consumer opportunity, by more and more people coming into the middle classes. These are countries where the rate of growth and the opportunity through better governance is very prevalent. These are the eight and nine end of the spectrum. So I don't think it's right to look at it as one enormous bucket. And then my fourth category that I really feel it's important for this audience to think about and focus on is cities. In our markets, cities are beginning to become arguably more important than countries. And cities are reaching out to other cities in other countries as a means of cross collaboration. And you are beginning to see that as more and more people move into cities, it's affecting the rate of growth of economies as well. So you know that if Indonesia is growing at 4%, Jakarta is growing at 8%, if Istanbul is growing at 4%, then Turkey is definitely growing at 2%. So it's always double the rate of output and growth that the country is experiencing. That's what's driving the entire economy forward. So overall, I'm very optimistic about the prospects for emerging markets, global growth markets, as we call them, in the course of the next year, certainly, and in the next four or five years. It is driven by some very basic facts that you can't go away from. It is driven by the fact that consumption and infrastructure growth is happening there. Clean energy is becoming cheaper and cheaper. The biggest resource constraint is energy, and that's beginning to become more available. And where will be the headwinds? You are very optimistic, but where will be the headwinds? So the headwinds are always there. You were talking earlier when we were out there about the black swan, where will the black swan moment come from? I mean, the reality is we've proven over the last year, whichever way you look at it, whether it's Brexit or the US presidential election, the black swan can come from anywhere now. There is no country that is immune to the black swan moment, and there's no single event that you can say will drive things into disruption. There are always risks that are inherent in these markets. Political risk is always a very important issue. We are in a globalized world. Geopolitics is beginning to become more and more of a driver in the way opportunities are either constrained or let loose. And I think between currency, geopolitics, and just a, let's call it an inherent uncertainty around what is going to happen in the US that is slowing stuff up. But the flip side of that, since you called me an optimist, the flip side of that is very definitely a very clear understanding that if the US imposes trade barriers, if the US goes towards protectionism, it is going to lead to a rise in South-South trade. You will see opportunities for Brazilian, South African, Indian, Chinese companies to start trading within our markets. You're going to see a greater opportunity coming up. And you can't break away from the fact that a million Indian kids are turning 18 every month. They're not going to sit back and say, OK, let's wait for Mr. Trump to decide what happens. They're going to want jobs. They're going to want consumption. They're going to want a better way of life. And they have to be provided that. Come in. Optimism notwithstanding the combination of a perspective of rising rates slowing or significantly slower growth in China than what we had in the previous decade. Commodity prices that have recovered somewhat, but not quite there. And the very real possibility that protectionism is on the rise, I would give me room for pause and to say that 2007 is a year of uncertainty. I think that unquestionably, I share your optimism that over the medium term, one looks at demographics and the sheer potential for rates of return emerging markets, I think, offer the pension funds are in dire need. The pension funds in advanced economies are in dire needs of rates of return, which will come, importantly, from emerging markets. But I do view the 2017 period as one of considerable risks. Even if the mean expectation is reasonably solid, I think there's a very big possible dispersion around that mean. A minister, Galton? I agree with Arif's optimism, but in addition to what the professor is saying, isn't this where for about forcing us all to rethink models of growth? So we can have the numbers that we're talking about, but the inclusivity cloud is actually hanging over all of us. And so my view is that through 1718, the pressure from citizens in different countries for inclusivity, for visible benefits to themselves and changing their lives, to a detectable reduction in inequality in each of our countries let alone across the globe, amongst the other factors that are playing themselves out, acts as an umbrella under which all of us will be performing our different roles. And we would be wise if we are to take a three- to five-year view to start investing a lot more energy in what an inclusive growth model will start looking like. And certainly in the developing countries, I mean, in South Africa, you still have a 25%, 26% unemployment, a large number of young people who are out of jobs that applies to the rest of the African continent as well. Our education and training systems need improvement, although they've done remarkably well for a young democracy like ours. But that story is a storyline that spreads across most emerging and developing countries as well. But it also, as we've seen through Brexit and the American elections, but the soon-to-come European elections as well, that citizens are getting a bit fed up with whatever form they experience marginalization as, both economic and social. And leadership, whether you're in business NGOs or in government or academia, is about being two steps ahead. And especially in our markets, right? And we've got to invest energy, resources, and intellectual capability in at least preparing for this future that we all call inclusive. But don't quite have a handle on what the particularities of that actually mean. Thank you. Asani? I completely agree with the minister. And I think the uncertainties are around the usual things. If you remember exactly a year ago when we were at the World Economic Forum, I think people thought one of the biggest risks is going to merger markets and within that China. And it was really interesting how things turned out to be very different. And if we take out the period post the Trump election, merger markets were the best markets. So I think uncertainty this year completely agreed is going to be even more than last year this time. But I think added to that is this cognizance that we do need to look at a different model for growth. And that while the growth over the last 20 years in growth economies has allowed billions of people to get out of poverty and join in with the rest of the population in the world, that same movement has also created biggest dispersion within populations. So now within populations that can compare themselves to each other, you have a bigger amount of disparity, which is what a lot of the studies have been showing. And technology, of course, it's another big topic of the World Economic Forum this year, is going to be a huge, huge differentiator between the growth economies. Those who are going to be early adapters and those who are going to get impacted and the economies that were very much built towards just manufacturing and low levels of labor input could over the next five to 10 years get hugely impacted. So I think we're moving into a very different period where technology, which has two aspects. One is access to information. And two is robotics and AI and how those impact employment will be the real decision makers. And before we go deeper about the technology and other related issues, let's talk a little bit about China, because all of you mentioned China. And I think Professor Liu will have the privilege to talk about China, because the President Xi Jinping told the whole world that China is going to grow at 6.7% this year. And also the IMF has just upgraded the growth prospect of China in 2017 and 2018. So Professor Liu, how would you look at China? Do you think China can maintain this good momentum in 2017 and 2018? Yes, I do. I totally agree with our President Xi mentioned this morning, because I do not care the speed China could reach 7% or 6%. It doesn't matter much. The key issue is the quality of the Chinese development. So we got to take care of that point, that is a key to success for a large country with a large population. And facing headwinds and tailwinds in globally this year. So what we see is that the strong points of China is that China's government nowadays is well-focused upon our shortcomings in our economic development. So it's overcapacity. And the leverage ratio is too high, especially in the corporate side and the local governments. And also if you check the inventory, and the banks are long, the money too much, much too much in the inventory. The stockings over there, that's on demand. So that is the way it's said. The government have detailed planning to de-stocking, de-leveraging, and the reduce of the overcapacity. So I think the quality will be improved in China this year and next year. And also China is very careful, is very carefully pushing its monetary policy plus fiscal policies. And they fully understood the tools in the torpedo. Yes, we do have some. But it can only buy time. Buy time for what? Buy time for real and deep solar structural reform. So that is something. It's a very difficult issue in the mission ahead. But we have to do that. It's a must, like SOE reform, like how we can build up the rule of law to protect the property rights, especially intellectual property rights from the private sectors and foreign investment companies and protect their interests. And how we can enhance our transparency, better our communication skills to deliver the messages and let ourselves more works acceptable by the whole world. So all these things, we need time. So we use the monetary policy and fiscal policy only by time. This is not the goal. Any country, if you rely on fiscal policy and monetary policy to cure your disease or sicknesses, no way. So the key is the structural reform. Yeah, so coming back to the point, I'm not so optimistic talking about the straining US dollars, the negative impact upon the new emerging markets. Two caveats I got to add on. Every asset in today's world, just like 10 years ago, they're heavily interconnected and they're interlocking with each other. Still they are, OK? And the people working in the market with heavy regulations coming from Basel and from everywhere, yes, we can see conspicuous improvement in terms of fundamentals. But people working in that areas always have very short memories, OK? And the rating agencies are always far away behind the curve. Yeah, it is. So if the US dollar is strengthened like this way, how far it can go? It can go very far. In my eyes, if the checks and balances domestic facing Trump is less than what happened. History never repeats itself. But it often lines. We still remember the vividing. In 1994 to 1995, when the rate hikes 7 times 25, 50, 75, 50, 75 basis points, then a trickle of the crisis in Mexico. One year later, for less than two years, Asian financial crisis broke out. And another time, it's year 2004, two year 2006, from June to June. In two years, Ellen Scram said, OK, I will learn the lessons from last time. I will only move with small, tiny steps forward, each time 25 basis points. How many times? 17 times in running. So the main lesson. It trickles off the whole group of financial crisis. So the main lesson here is that the emerging markets' currency will be affected by the dollar. Not only the currency issue. Let's talk about little. Currency issue, actually, is not currency issue proper. It's a game of confidence. So the professor at Luming County is a homeowner in your emerging markets. Let me complete that. But before that, that's talk a little bit on the UN, on the R&B. That could be realistic. Can I ask you another question about the R&B? Because we know that the UN has depreciated about 6% last year. And also, there's a lot of debate on the Chinese. The manipulations of Chinese currency, all right? Maybe, yes, or maybe no. So how do you look at the? So-called. So do you think that the R&B should be labeled as the currency manipulator? No. Of course not. The reason why? Because since we entered the SDR basket in IMF, the PBOC successfully launched the formula, or the foreign change rate nourishment. So we had the bidding and offer system. Then the foreign day, we opened the market with the formula and the three baskets for small and tiny adjustments. So it's still a management floating system. So we never manipulate that. We couldn't do that. Nobody can do that, OK? To manipulate your currency and keep it stable as-at first. First thing first. Have you any talk about your currency? No. You can never have a scientific talk in your mind. The central bank is saying that is what we need, OK? And the second, can you hold? That means you've got to have the big cushion. So the foreign change reserve, we lost almost $900 billion, your dollars, within 30 months. It's very difficult to maintain the stability of the debt. So a comment you have- So I don't think it's a manipulation of the currency in China, but- It's a fixed exchange rate or a semi-fixed. So unfortunately, I think the term manipulation has been used loosely. What China had, if you look at historical president, there's many. It had a fixed exchange rate for an extended period of time. Now it's moved to a semi-fixed. But what concerns me about the Chinese exchange rate right now is not so much currency manipulation. It's about the inconsistency of monetary policy. You have a classical- You need or you want expensive monetary policy to stimulate the economy for the corporates to have credit, but you need tighter policy to avoid the depreciation that is to rapid. No, no, no. We have only three missions. So that tension, that tension between having a central bank that acts of lender of last resort and helps in the provision of credit and maintaining a semi-fixed exchange rate, that usually, historically at least, has ended with letting the exchange rate go and letting the domestic objective of credit provision and helping the banks win the day. So that leads me to the conclusion that I think substantial depreciation in the Rememby may very well still under way, irrespective of who is president in the United States. Because the pace at which China has been losing reserves is something that cannot be sterilized. You cannot continue to act as... This last conversation has proved my hypothesis that China should be looked at in isolation, coming with you. So I said, do you agree? We have no motives, and it's not necessary for us to use depreciated currency to boost our exports. Of course. China's exports with the key issue is the quality of our exports and the competitive advantages. So that is something we stick to. And second, you can never tell the central banks every while. You got to kill three birds with one stone, OK? So we keep the autonomy of our monetary policy at first. And second, we got to stabilize the economy as usual. And then you got to think about, if possible, you open your capital account and let your currency internationalization... internationalized. So we will, to certain degrees, to enhance capital controls and to slow it down a little bit about internationalization of the Rememby to maintain the first, the go and the second. Yeah, Asani? I was going to say that sort of is a really big issue because, first of all, the issue of Chinese currency has been on the agenda of the US Treasury, what's in Secretary Rubin and then Larry Summers. And, you know, so it's not a new subject of dialogue between the two countries. I remember going to China multiple times and talking to the leadership. And I think the issue of currency and how it's viewed has been very much on everyone's minds. But I think I agree with really everything that has been said because China really does have multiple objectives. So, for example, the fact that the Chinese currency is not part of the STR has had some impact. The fact that maybe China may want or may not want Chinese Rememby to become a reserve currency over the long time will have some impact on this. The fact that, as Professor Reinhard mentioned, the fact that there have been this huge outflows of Rememby and of Chinese people who are investing in abroad, but also taking their assets abroad. And the fact that the central bank has had to intervene so many times and use up its reserves has had a major impact on that huge size of the reserves. And last but not least, we've talked about the uncertainties, particularly this year. Exports from China will be impacted by so many different factors. And imports into China will be impacted by so many factors. Frankly, the euro has depreciated by a lot over the last few years, almost 25% of its value. The British pound has depreciated. So it's not Chinese currency versus US dollar, but it's really across all these other countries and other growth economies that we should look at. And I think while Chinese leadership may have certain views of what they would like the Rememby to do, they may not have all the control elements to control it. And so it will be an interesting thing to watch. So the minister, you know a lot about China. So what are your suggestions for China to deal with the currency issue? Because according to the central parity deciding mechanism now, when the United States dollar is going to appreciate, then the R&B will tend to be a depreciate. It's kind of a decision-making process. It's a market mechanism. But China needs to maintain the R&B a little bit stable because when the R&B continue to depreciate, the confidence will be lost. So it's kind of dilemma for the policymaker in China. What is your suggestion for them? I mean, no position to make any suggestion to China. They in a separate bucket as was explained earlier on. But what we can say is that over the last five or six years, there have been two dynamics. The one is China attempting and quite successfully now with the achievement of the inclusion of their currency in the SDR to become a global currency. Let's put it that way. And the next ambition clearly, as the economy overtakes the US, is whether it could become either parallel or sole reserve currency five, 10 years from now. So that's the one dynamic. The other is that, since the Great Recession, the issue of currency wars have often been linked to geopolitical factors. And I think, again, if we look at this contextually, it's not just a technical issue that we're talking about. It's about who has what influence, what kind of influence President Xi mentioned today. And that perhaps is the third factor that we still require reform of the global governance institutions, whether it be their financial institutions or otherwise. And that generally, emerging markets and developing countries have a minimal voice. What we've seen, although the last three or four years, is that the bigger emerging markets have a lot more leverage in some of these institutions. And then the middle income countries, like ourselves, are watching patiently, but in an interested way to see how these dynamics play themselves out. Because what it does is to then create the bucket phenomenon, which is that within this growth market scenario, you have the bigger economies separating themselves from the smaller economies. And that, I think, creates its own dynamics as well. Because all of us want to grow. All of us want some stability in the globe. And all of us want to be competitive in this environment as well. So if there's any advice or recommendation, it is that China, as the president said today, needs to remain a champion of the emerging markets and ensure that in the global fora, its voice is not a voice for itself, but it's also a voice for the emerging and developing countries so that they can have greater influence over some of these decisions. But finally, we've got to make global governance work. And it worked well from 2009 to about 2013 or so through the G20. It's fallen into a deficit situation more recently. And one of our concerns should be in a year of uncertainty, which could lead into many more years of uncertainty, where are we going to get the cohesiveness that is required at a leadership level? How are we going to get concerted action as we got in 2009 onwards globally speaking as well to create a better growth environment and to capitalize on the kind of contribution that emerging markets are making to global growth as well within that kind of context? So that remains, I think, an important imponderable that we've got to continue to look at. And the prospects are gloomy if one looks at the environment today because geopolitics has become an important factor, far more important today than even three years ago in some of these fora. And therefore, much more difficult to get coherent and united action from amongst the diversity of countries that are represented in many of these fora as well. Yeah. I think it's now time for us to open the floor to receive questions from our audience. Please identify who you are. And if you have any questions, please go ahead. No question? No comments. Yeah. So we'll go back to our panel discussion. Yeah, please. On the China, this red flag on the pollution and very strict rules to control the environmental side, what is moving very strong in our view, how do you see that can impact the growth of China or what you expect to become in the next months or years? That's a good question, yes. And China noticed this is a serious issue. So we're hand in hand with the US and many other countries. We signed the Paris Agreement. So we will be firmly abide by the agreement and we set our goals and to fight against the pollution, not only in the air but in the water and in the earth and many others. So this is the overall planning to reduce the emissions. And starting from this year, China will wage a new mechanism. That's a carbon exchange system and use the market mechanism to use the cap system and then people can trade and you got to pay something for extra emissions. And I think in the near future, every province and every like state in this large country, we have the specific goals to reduce the pollution and industries. And we have achieved a lot of things. And the first thing is that, first of its kind in China history, we have specific goals. That means we got to reduce 1 billion tons of coal mining capacity. And also we got to reduce 200 million tons still every year. That's the capacity. Then we longer the list and including a grass-making shipbuilding and chemical industries and the power industries as well. So the list will be longer and longer in the future. So we have set up the goals. And fortunately, the sense of the rebalance of our economy is stronger. And the more and the more people will have their benchmark much higher. And so that philosophy and the logistics will be applied in the projects that we are going to take along the Belt and Road as well. Thank you, Asani. I was going to add, as you well know, China spending over 100 billion a year over the next few years. So that's the largest investment India, by comparison, is trying to also increase. And that's only like in the tens of billions versus the hundreds billion that China is talking about. And I think just like with technology, clean energy will be a differentiator among the growth economies. So that gives both an impetus to growth, a differentiator, and really a way that China will also employ. I think the employment impact in China will be about 13 million people a year. So this will be very huge. And I think the other interesting thing, in the context of what we discussed also, is there has been a lot of discussion in the US about increasing call production and putting call workers back to work. The question is, who's going to buy that call? Because as we heard, China will not be buying that new additional call. And in the US, there's a lot of emissions controls. And probably that call will not get solved there. So question mark. Yeah, thank you. I think the gentleman there has a question. It seems to me that Mr. Trump has one objective that is not talked about here, which is to fight extremism in the world. And by fighting extremism, there is going to be a backlash among those extremists. And that could manifest itself in terrorists' activities. How much of that represents a headwind for the global economy? So Artif? So I think what the minister referred to earlier about geopolitics playing a much bigger role today than it ever has done before is really at the heart of the question that you're asking. Because terrorism and all its manifestations are a function of a small group of extremely disgruntled and marginalized people expressing their will on the rest of us. So is it going to go away anytime soon? I think that until we start looking at more collaborative systems, it's not going to go away. And so this is a reality that's come to stay. And in the last 30 years, we went from a bipolar world in which we had Russia and the US into a unipolar world, into a multipolar world. And now we're in a world where non-state actors are beginning to operate and define a large element of how the global agenda is either hindered, hijacked, or enabled to grow. It's not going to go away anytime soon. I think we need to take a fresh look. It's not my expertise, or I don't think it's anybody here's expertise to talk about security issues. But I think that it is going to impact growth certainly in some markets. But it goes back to my original hypothesis that you can't look at all of these markets as one umbrella. You have to break it down. You have to bifurcate. And unfortunately, there are large areas within the Middle East which are impossible to invest in or focus on delivering development into whilst they remain subject to either terrorist activity or non-state action. But there are other parts of the world, which is why we came here. We came here to talk about global growth markets. And we came here to talk about the opportunity that is inherent in those markets. And we talked about the optimism. And then we talked a lot about a single state, which is China. But you know, Asane touched upon and the minister touched upon a very important point, which is technology and the enabling role of technology. And I think that I know that you asked a specific question when I'm now going into a different area. But I do feel it's important for this audience to hear and understand that the biggest beneficiaries of technological change that is happening in Silicon Valley and elsewhere in the world are actually these emerging markets. Because they don't have the baggage of multiple systems and generations of technology before. They're starting from a clean slate. Africa has gone from 1G to 4G. And what that means is if you stop for a second and think, 80% of the average household's income is spent either in education, health care, food, and housing, 80%. Today's technology and today's technological disruption could well bring that number down to 50%, 40%. Imagine the enormous amount of household consumption that is going to be released and income is going to be allowed to spend on so many other activities, lifestyles, and attitudes will change. So optimist, optimist number one. And without any hesitation, with the disruption caused by terrorist action, with the nonsense caused by manipulation of either currencies or interest rate hikes, with all the negativity you can throw at it, the reality is profound, which is the consumer is king and the consumer will drive opportunity in these markets in a fairly unrestricted basis over the course of the next decade. Yeah, so I think that we start with the optimism. Then we turn a little bit passing, mistake a little bit, then we move back to the optimism. So it's the best time for us to wrap up. And so I would like to wrap up by asking the panel a final question. Where is the opportunities, in your view, in the global gross market? And how could policy makers see these opportunities? So Professor Reinhardt. I'm going to talk about a risk. Opportunities. And this is related to the last question. I think one type of risk we really haven't addressed in this panel is we hear a lot about the return of populism and the advanced economies. We've seen Brexit. We've seen the presidential election in the United States. And we are concerned about the forthcoming elections in Europe potentially yielding. By the way, do you think Chancellor Merkel will win? And will Lady Lapai will win? The point that I'm making is that in an environment in which populism is on the rise in advanced economies, we really haven't talked about the possibility that this could be a contagious phenomenon. And that some of the political risks that emerging markets face, especially in the worst scenario in which trade barriers and the like win the day, would be moving away from open market economies to retrenching into populism and retrenching into policy reversals. I bring this up because during the 1980s, which was a very tough decade for many emerging markets, we saw a lot of policy reversals. So the counterpart to the question you posed to me is, what should policymakers avoid? Or what should investors be concerned about? And that would be policy reversals. Yeah, thank you. Artif, opportunities, very quickly. So exactly what you refer to as a risk is, I think, an opportunity. And I think it's very important to realize that the same populism that you refer to as a risk, I say it is an opportunity and a clarion call for governments in emerging markets to respect the fact that people, populations, are beginning to manifest their views in a very coherent manner. And they need to reform their systems in order to get more and more people on site with them. There are many countries in our markets which are very singular, party-driven, that are very dogmatic in their views. This is the opportunity. This is the year for all of that to change and more inclusion to be developed and evolved. And in that, I agree with the minister completely that this is, for the first time, on a global basis an opportunity for all of us to look for a better outcome. Yeah, thank you. Professor Liu, opportunities? Opportunities as a conspicuous. The first thing is that, if you look at the business fundamentals of the global growth markets, they're much, much better than before in year 2007 and year 2008. It's different. And regulation is better, perhaps. And fossil-free is helpful. And also, we have a lot of stabilizations, the cushions to do that, like the creation of cocos. The debentures could be converted into capital in the market. Such a thing has happened. And 81, and also, the worldwide information change among the regulators and central bankers are much, much better than before. This is the first thing. The second opportunity is that, definitely, US economic growth is the renewed engine of the growth of the whole world market. So it's the biggest opportunities. Yes. And the third is commodity price stability could be helpful to the commodity of export countries in the global growth markets as well. So a lot of opportunities. So, Asani, what is your final word? I will just read, I think, the potential of technology and having more access to the web, which improves education, health, and jumpstarts a lot of the growth economies in a way that they could not have done over the last 10 years could be quite important, and really the opportunity to, as they are growing so fast and improving their infrastructure to invest in clean and sustainable investments in those areas. So those two areas, I think, would be very important and very exciting. Yeah, thank you. Minister Goten. Three things. I think the growth markets, as we call them today, are humanity's future. They're the future in terms of helping first world pension funds, for example, to get better returns, to actually solve some of the food security problems. And there's a whole list in relation to them. So the greater the opportunity to recognize that we are living in an integrated world, notwithstanding the current phase of protectionism. The second is investing energy in this inclusive growth model, so that we move the center of gravity of this debate to inclusion of citizens, greater respect for them, and benefits being directly attributed to them. And then areas like infrastructure, sustainable development, and developing human beings through better health systems, education systems with the use of technology, so that these countries can move up the value chain as well. Yeah, thank you very much. Please join me with a big applause for thanking our great panelists. Thank you. And I hope you enjoy the rest of the winter doubles. Thank you.