來源：格隆匯
作者：Mikko編譯
來源：智堡Wisburg
歐洲央行執委Benot Curé的演講稿件，譯者Mikko
譯者註：
如果你想了解美國貨幣市場與歐元區貨幣市場的差異性，以及近期貨幣市場利率跳升的原因，這篇譯文不容錯過。科雷用非常平實的語言解讀了美國和歐洲各自的問題，簡言之，美國的問題在於準備金集中度過高，都在大行手裡，所以雖然準備金總量很多，但是分布非常不均勻，旱的旱死澇的澇死。歐洲的問題在於準備金市場過於割裂，一些錢多的國家只在本國做生意，不肯把錢借給其他國家的對手方，所以德拉吉（作為一個義大利人）離任前推出了雙層利率體系，逼迫有錢的國家資金（德國）流向那些沒錢的國家（義大利）。理解歐洲央行的雙層體系或許有些困難，建議讀者多讀幾遍。科雷最終的建議就是無論集中度高的問題還是過於分散割裂的問題都要央行出手直接解決掉，開放資產負債表給更多的對手方甚至直接給非銀部門都是OK的。
Since the outbreak of the global financial crisis, central banks have injected a huge amount of liquidity into the financial system. The monetary policy assets on the Eurosystem’s consolidated balance sheet, for example, have expanded from around 0.5 trillion on the eve of the crisis in July 2008 to nearly 3.3 trillion at the end of September this year.
自全球金融危機爆發以來，各國央行向金融體系注入了大量流動性。以我們自身為例，歐元體系綜合資產負債表上的貨幣政策資產規模已經從2008年7月危機前夕的約0.5萬億歐元擴張至截止今年9月底的近3.3萬億歐元。
Not all of the expansion in central bank balance sheets reflects direct monetary policy actions, however. Part of it relates to regulatory factors, as I will explain shortly in more detail. And part of it relates to autonomous factors, such as the steady increase in the demand for banknotes.
然後，央行資產負債表的所有擴張並非反映的都是直接的貨幣政策行動。部分原因與監管因素有關，我將在稍後詳細就此進行說明。其中另一部分則與自發的內生性因素有關，例如對歐元現鈔需求的穩定增長。
Yet, changes in the way we operate and implement monetary policy – in our case, the fixed-rate full allotment at our main refinancing operations, (targeted) long-term refinancing operations and our asset purchase programme – have resulted in considerably more liquidity being injected into the financial system than is required by banks to meet their immediate liquidity needs.
確實，我們的貨幣政策操作和實施的方式發生了變化——例如，我們在主要再融資操作（MRO），定向長期再融資操作和資產購買計劃中採用了固定利率全額分配，這導致被注入到金融體系中的流動性大大增加，這部分流動性的增長並非是為銀行滿足其即時的流動性需求所需要的。
These excess liquidity holdings were first a sign of uncertainty and mistrust, and then of a dysfunctional money market. As a result, central bank operations substituted for market-based intermediation in times of crisis.
這些富餘的流動資金持有量首先是不確定性和不信任的標誌，此外則是貨幣市場失調的標誌。最終，在危機時期，中央銀行的操作取代了基於市場的中介活動。
Today, large excess reserve holdings are, by and large, a reflection of the accommodative monetary policy that central banks have conducted in recent years, and that many, including the ECB, are still conducting today in view of stubbornly low inflation rates. You can see this on my first slide. Excess liquidity increased as we rolled out our unconventional policy measures.
如今，（銀行）持有的大量超額準備金基本上反映了中央銀行近年來所採取的寬鬆的貨幣政策，且鑑於通貨膨脹率的持續低迷，包括歐洲央行在內的許多央行今天仍保持著寬鬆姿態。您可以在我的第一張幻燈片中看到，隨著我們推出非常規貨幣政策，富餘流動性水平相應地增加。
In this environment, an important – albeit by no means the only – role of excess liquidity is to firmly anchor short-term interest rates at the levels judged appropriate by policymakers. In the case of the euro area, this is currently the level of our deposit facility rate.
在這種環境中，富餘流動性的重要作用（儘管絕非唯一作用）是將短期利率牢牢地錨定在決策者認為合適的水平上。就歐元區而言，目前是我們的存款便利工具利率（DFR）。
And yet, recent events in the euro area and the United States have highlighted that the current ample excess liquidity levels may not guarantee that short-term interest rates will reflect policymakers』 desired levels at all times.
然而，最近歐元區和美國所發生的事件表明警示了我們，當前充足的富餘流動性水平可能無法保證短期利率始終反映決策者所期望的水平。
In the United States, short-term funding rates experienced severe upward pressure towards the end of September, which required the Federal Reserve to conduct additional liquidity-providing operations. In the euro area, the introduction of a two-tiered reserve remuneration system triggered expectations among market participants of some, albeit limited, upward pressure on overnight rates.
在美國，短期融資利率在9月底遭受了嚴重的上行壓力，這迫使美聯儲進行更多的流動性供應操作。在歐元區，引入兩級準備金利率的政策點燃了市場參與者的預期，也導致了一定的隔夜利率上升壓力。
In my remarks this morning I would like to use these two episodes as examples for explaining why managing liquidity conditions in the post-crisis environment has become more complex. In the United States, a prime reason behind the increased complexity relates to the highly uneven distribution of excess liquidity across individual banks. In the euro area, it relates to an uneven distribution across jurisdictions. And in both cases, it also relates to the growing role of intermediaries without access to central bank balance sheets.
在我今天的演講中，我想以這兩個事件為例來說明為什麼在危機後的環境中管理流動性狀況變得更加複雜。在美國，複雜性有所增加的背後主因與各個銀行之間的過度流動性分配高度不均衡有關。而在歐元區，這與各個司法管轄區的流動性分配不均衡有關。而在這兩種情況下，這都與（流動性的）中介機構的貨幣市場地位有所上升卻無法觸達中央銀行資產負債表的原因有關。
I will argue that this concentration of excess liquidity may ultimately require policymakers to tolerate central bank balance sheets that are larger than would be required to control short-term interest rates if liquidity was more evenly distributed. And I will argue that if there would be a need for policymakers to increase their control of short-term rates in an environment of excess liquidity, providing non-banks with access to central bank balance sheets is a powerful option
我將就此問題進行說明，富餘流動性的高度集中最終可能會迫使決策者忍受中央銀行的資產負債表的規模不得不要大於分配流動性更為均衡的控制短期利率所需的水平。如果決策者有必要在流動性富餘的環境中加強對短期利率的控制，那麼為非銀部門提供央行資產負債表的觸達權限是一個強有力的選擇。
銀行間富餘流動性的分配
Demand for central bank liquidity has increased considerably since the financial crisis. A number of liquidity regulations affecting banks, such as the net stable funding ratio and the liquidity coverage ratio (LCR), require banks to hold a sufficient quantity of high-quality liquid assets. Central bank reserves count as such high-quality liquid assets.
自金融危機以來，對中央銀行流動性（準備金）的需求已大大增加。許多影響銀行的流動性監管指標，例如淨穩定融資比率（NSFR）和流動性覆蓋率（LCR），都要求銀行持有足夠數量的高質量流動性資產（HQLA）。在中央銀行持有的準備金就是這種高質量的流動資產（之一）。
Naturally, the role of central bank reserves in meeting regulatory requirements depends on the availability of other high-quality liquid assets, such as government bills and bonds. In the euro area, the supply of such alternatives has declined notably over recent years, reflecting both crisis-related downgrades of sovereign issuer credit ratings and fiscal surpluses in some jurisdictions, including Germany.
當然，中央銀行準備金在滿足監管要求方面的作用取決於其他高質量流動性資產的可獲得性，例如國債（短期和長期）。在歐元區，近年來，此類替代品（高質量流動性資產）的供應顯著下降，這反映了與危機相關的主權部分債券發行者信用評級下降以及包括德國在內的某些司法管轄區的財政盈餘。
As a result, ECB staff estimate that the introduction of the LCR increased demand for reserves in the euro area by up to 200 billion in a sample of systemically important euro area banks from mid-2015 to the end of 2016. On my next slide you can see that banks, especially those with low LCRs, are estimated to have significantly increased their demand for central bank reserves.
歐洲央行的工作人員估計，自2015年中期到2016年底，對具有系統重要性的歐元區銀行進行抽樣調查，引入LCR使歐元區的準備金需求最多增加2000億歐元。請看下一張幻燈片，據估算，對於那些LCR較低的銀行，他們對中央銀行準備金的需求大大增加。
It is certainly not the responsibility of central banks to help commercial banks meet their regulatory requirements. Banks should stand on their own feet when it comes to capital and liquidity. But the hoarding of central bank reserves for regulatory reasons becomes a matter of attention for policymakers insofar as it has the potential to adversely affect the transmission of monetary policy.
中央銀行當然無需對商業銀行達到監管要求負責。在資本和流動性這一問題上，銀行應該自力更生。但是，出於監管原因而貯藏起來的中央銀行準備金，已成為決策者應當注意的問題，因為它有可能對貨幣政策的傳導產生不利影響。
This provides the background to understand the recent events in the US money market.
這對我們了解美國貨幣市場近期所發生的事件提供了一個背景。
As you can see on my next slide, excess reserves – the grey shaded area – currently stand well above $1 trillion – an extraordinary amount from a historical perspective and a level that, according to survey evidence, market participants had expected to be sufficient to keep market rates tied to policy rates, even when accounting for regulatory demand.
正如您將在我的下一張幻燈片中所看到的那樣，銀行在美聯儲持有的超額準備金（灰色陰影區）目前遠高於1萬億美元，從歷史的角度來看，這麼大的規模實屬非同尋常，根據調查的結果顯示，市場參與者預計這麼大規模的準備金水平足以維持住市場利率與政策利率的掛鈎關係，即使考慮到監管需求也應是如此。
Nevertheless, and you can see this on the right-hand side more clearly, the secured overnight financing rate surged markedly towards the end of September, well above the Federal Reserve’s policy rates. Even the effective federal funds rate briefly exceeded its target range.
然而事與願違，有擔保的隔夜融資利率（SOFR）在9月底顯著飆升，遠高於美聯儲所設定的政策利率區間。您可以在右圖更清楚地看到這一點，甚至有效的聯邦基金利率（EFFR）也短暫超過了美聯儲的政策利率目標區間。
Such volatility is clearly undesirable from a monetary policy perspective. Short-term rates – and the relevant swap curves that are linked to them – are the key benchmark rates for the pricing of credit.
從貨幣政策的角度來看，這種波動顯然是不可取的。短期利率以及與之相關的掉期曲線是信用定價的關鍵基準利率。
The Federal Reserve therefore added more than $200 billion in additional overnight and 14-day repo operations and announced additional purchases of US Treasury bills at a pace of approximately $60 billion per month at least into the second quarter of 2020.
作為對此的回應，美聯儲增加了超過2000億美元的隔夜和14天期的回購操作，並宣布至少在2020年第二季度之前以每月約600億美元的速度購買美國短期國債。
These operations became necessary for a simple reason: because holdings of excess reserves in the US financial system are highly concentrated. You can see this on my next slide. According to data from the US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), 86% of excess reserves are held by just 1% of US banks. Four banks alone account for 40% of aggregate excess reserve holdings in the United States.
這些貨幣政策操作必要性的原因很簡單：因為美國金融系統中超額準備金的持有是高度集中的。您可以在我的下一張幻燈片中看到。根據美國聯邦存款保險公司（FDIC）的數據，86％的超額準備金僅由1％的美國銀行持有。僅四家銀行就佔美國超額準備金總額的40％。
Whenever these intermediaries are reluctant, for regulatory or other reasons, to react to a shortage of liquidity elsewhere in the system – even in response to short-term shocks to the supply of and demand for liquidity – upward pressure on short-term rates becomes unavoidable.
但凡這些（貨幣市場的）中介機構（銀行）出於監管或其他原因不願對（金融）系統中其他地方出現的流動性短缺做出反應時，甚至哪怕只是為了應對流動性供求的短期衝擊，短期利率的上行壓力也不可避免。
In addition, liquidity may be increasingly supplied by intermediaries which do not have access to central bank refinancing – a point to which I will return to later in my remarks. All in all, it is fair to say that the supply of liquidity has become less elastic in recent years.
此外，無法獲得中央銀行再融資的中介機構可能提供了更多的流動性，我將在稍後的講話中再次回到這一點上。總而言之，可以說，近年來流動性供應的彈性減弱了。
Excess reserves are, however, much more concentrated in the United States compared with the euro area, despite the fact that there are almost twice as many banks in the United States than monetary financial institutions in the euro area. On this side of the Atlantic, the top 1% of banks hold less than 50% of excess liquidity.
但是，儘管美國的銀行數量幾乎是歐元區的貨幣金融機構（MFIs）的兩倍，但與歐元區相比，美國的過剩準備金集中度更高。在歐洲，前1％的銀行持有的過剩流動資金不到50％。
And on the right-hand side you can see that the ten largest banks in the euro area hold just a little more than a quarter of excess liquidity, compared with almost 70% in the United States.
在上圖的右側，您可以看到歐元區前十大銀行持有的超額流動性僅略高於25%，而在美國，這一比例接近70％。
At face value, the euro area’s more even distribution of liquidity suggests that it may be less likely to experience an episode of high interest rate volatility.
從表面上看，歐元區流動性的分布更為均勻，這表明我們不太可能經歷高利率波動。
但是有兩個特徵（其中一個特定於歐元區）值得我們保持謹慎。
富餘流動性的分配與兩級體系
The first feature relates to the distribution of excess liquidity within and across euro area jurisdictions.
第一個特徵涉及歐元區轄區內和跨歐元區轄區之間富餘流動性的分配。
On the left-hand side of my next slide you can see that banks』 excess liquidity is often much less evenly distributed than at the country level. In Italy, for example, the top ten banks together hold 80% of excess reserves – a concentration level that is, in fact, higher than in the United States. In France, the top 10 banks hold 70%.
在我的下一張幻燈片的左側，您可以看到，從各國的情況來看，銀行的富餘流動性分布情況要不平衡得多。例如，在義大利，排名前十位的銀行合計擁有超額準備金的80％——實際上，這一集中度高於美國。在法國，排名前十位的銀行則佔70％。
On the right-hand side you can see that excess liquidity holdings in the euro area are also highly concentrated in just a few countries.
在右側，您可以看到歐元區富餘的流動性資產也高度集中在少數幾個國家。
Such concentration levels are, in principle, of little concern to policymakers in the presence of a deep and active money market across the euro area – that is, as long as banks with excess liquidity holdings are willing and able to smooth liquidity shortages elsewhere in the system.
原則上，在整個歐元區存在活躍的貨幣市場的情況下，政策制定者幾乎無需擔心這種情況——也就是說，只要持有過多流動性的銀行願意並且能夠緩解歐元體系內其他地方的流動性短缺問題。
If there is fragmentation, however, then temporary spikes in interest rates are also possible in the euro area, despite the remarkable excess liquidity levels we are currently seeing.
但是，如果出現市場割裂的情況，儘管我們目前看到的富餘流動性水平很高，歐元區的利率也可能會短暫上衝。
In other words, in the euro area, compared to the United States, it is fragmentation rather than concentration that may make liquidity supply less elastic.
換句話說，與美國相比，在歐元區，貨幣市場的割裂而不是集中可能使流動性供給的彈性降低。
The recent introduction of a two-tier reserve remuneration scheme for the excess reserves of euro area banks provides an interesting showcase for just how fragmented our money markets remain today. The scheme allows banks to deposit a pre-determined quantity of excess liquidity – their exemption allowances – at a rate higher than the deposit facility rate.
最近，歐洲央行針對歐元區銀行的超額準備金推出了兩級準備金利率的方案，這為我們當下的貨幣市場仍然處於割裂的情況提供了一個有趣的示例。該計劃允許銀行以高於存款便利工具利率的水平來存入預定數量的過剩流動資金（給銀行準備金提供的免於徵繳負利率的額度）。
To see the effect of the scheme on money markets, it is important to recall that exemption allowances are allocated as a multiple of banks』 reserve requirements.[5] This allocation scheme has led to some banks receiving allowances that are higher than their excess liquidity holdings.
為了了解該計劃對貨幣市場的影響，重要的是要記住，豁免額是銀行法定準備金的倍數。這種分配方案導致一些銀行的豁免額高於其超額流動資金的持有量。
Specifically, ECB staff calculations suggest that around one-third of exempt excess liquidity would need to be traded across banks for the system as a whole to benefit fully from the two-tier scheme. Most of this trading can take place within euro area jurisdictions, and often even within banking groups.
具體來說，歐洲央行工作人員的計算表明，整個系統需要從銀行之間交易約三分之一的豁免過剩流動性，才能從兩級計劃中充分受益。這種交易大部分可以在歐元區管轄範圍內進行，甚至經常在銀行集團內部進行。
But because of the uneven distribution of excess liquidity, ECB staff estimates that around 4% of exemption allowances, or around 30 billion, could only be filled if banks trade across borders.
但是由於富餘流動性的分配不均，歐洲央行工作人員估計，只有大約4％的豁免額（約300億歐元），可供銀行跨境間進行同業交易。
Such volumes are potentially large. For example, they are about the same size as the volumes currently underpinning the daily computation of the STR, and they amount to about 30% of the size of the current daily turnover in the secured money market.
這樣的交易量可能很大。例如，這與當前支撐STR（歐元短期利率）的日常計算的交易量大致相同，並且佔有擔保貨幣市場當前每日交易量的大約30％。
Yet, the impact on the STR, as you know, has been very limited. You can see this on the left-hand side of my next slide. Our analysis shows that this stability is not primarily the result of the statistical trimming procedure that is applied to the STR and that could potentially treat transactions at higher rates as outliers.
但正如您所知道的那樣，這對STR的影響非常有限。您可以在我的下一張幻燈片的左側看到這一點。我們的分析表明，這種穩定性主要不是應用於STR的統計調整程序的結果，並且可能會將較高利率的交易視為異常值。
It is rather a reflection of the remaining impediments to cross-border trading in the unsecured segment. You can see from the chart that trading volumes for the STR have hardly changed in response to the introduction of the two-tier system.
這恰恰反映了無抵押貨幣市場中跨境資金交易的剩餘障礙。從圖表中可以看出，引入了兩層系統以後，STR的交易量幾乎沒有變化。
Unsecured cross-border trading appears to remain limited to core countries even a decade after the outbreak of the global financial crisis. Indeed, on the right-hand side you can see that unsecured borrowing remains, by and large, domestic, particularly in countries where excess liquidity is high.
即使在全球金融危機爆發後的十年，無擔保的跨境流動性交易似乎仍然局限於核心國家。在上圖的右側您可以看到，無抵押借款總體上還是國內的機構之間主導，特別是在富餘流動性水平很高的國家。
Of course, current elevated excess liquidity levels remove incentives to money market trading more generally. But the muted response of unsecured market trading volumes to the introduction of the two-tier system suggests that we may still be facing a situation in which banks in some parts of the euro area may hold on to excess liquidity while those in other parts of the currency union may face a liquidity shortage.
當然，當前較高的富餘流動性水平抹除了貨幣市場交易的誘因。但是，無擔保資金市場的交易量對引入兩層體系的反應冷淡，這表明我們可能仍面臨著這樣一種情況，即歐元區某些地區的銀行可能會保持富餘的流動性，而歐元區其他地區的銀行則可能面臨流動性短缺。
Where we have initially seen a more pronounced reaction of rates to the introduction of the two-tier system, however, is in the secured market, in which the use of collateral and central clearing can mitigate counterparty risks. You can see this on the left-hand side of my next slide, which shows repo rates for banks located in different countries.
在引入兩級體系以後，我們反而在有擔保市場中看到了更為顯著的利率反應，在有擔保交易中，可以使用抵押品進行擔保，中央清算方則可以緩解對手方風險。您可以在我的下一張幻燈片的左側看到，圖中顯示了位於不同國家的銀行的回購利率。
The chart suggests, for example, that Italian banks with unused allowances increased their demand for cash in the Italian repo market, which has led to a notable – albeit temporary – increase in repo rates. Arbitrage opportunities caused other banks to increase their lending, however, which gradually mitigated this upward pressure.
例如，該圖表表明，手中有未使用準備金免徵額的義大利銀行增加了其在義大利回購市場中對現金的需求，這導致回購利率顯著（儘管是暫時的）上升。套利機會導致其他銀行增加了資金融出，這逐漸緩解了這種利率上升的壓力。
The observed movements in rates are broadly consistent with recent changes in cross-border flows in excess liquidity. You can see this on the right-hand side. On the first day of operation of the two-tier system we observed a considerable redistribution of excess liquidity, often away from liquidity-flush countries such as Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands and towards countries with unused allowances, such as Italy.
觀察到的利率變動與富餘流動性的跨境流動最新變化所表現出來的大致一致。您可以在右圖看到。在兩層體系運作的第一天，我們觀察到大量富餘流動性的重新分配，通常是從流動性充裕的國家（例如比利時，德國和荷蘭）轉移到未使用豁免額的國家（例如義大利）。
On my next slide you can see banks』 progress in making full use of the exempt tier. For comparison, the blue bars show the theoretical allocation of allowances before the start of the scheme. The chart shows that the Italian banking system as a whole is almost fully benefiting from the allocated allowances, also in response to the re-distribution of excess liquidity towards the Italian banking system.
在我的下一張幻燈片中，您可以看到銀行在充分利用豁免層方面的進展。為了進行比較，藍色條顯示了方案開始之前的豁免額水平的理論分配。該圖顯示，義大利的整個銀行系統幾乎都從分配的豁免額中充分受益，這也是對富餘的流動性向義大利的銀行系統進行重新分配的反應。
But in some countries, particularly in smaller peripheral jurisdictions, which I have grouped together here, but also in Germany, there still seem to be some remaining impediments that stop banks from making full use of the scheme.
但是在一些國家，特別是在我在該圖中綜合在一起的較小的外圍國家中，以及在德國，似乎仍然存在一些障礙，阻礙了銀行充分利用該計劃。
跨部門富餘流動性的分布
So, provided banks have sufficient collateral, secured interbank lending has been able to at least partly offset the remaining constraints in unsecured cross-border lending. This was the first feature I alluded to.
因此，只要銀行有足夠的抵押品，有擔保的銀行間同業拆借就能至少部分抵消無擔保跨境流動性借貸中的剩餘限制。這是我提到的第一個特徵。
The second feature that warrants caution relates to the distribution of liquidity across sectors, including holdings outside the euro area.
需要保持謹慎的第二個特徵涉及部門之間的流動性分配，包括歐元區以外的持有量。
The implications of this feature can be best appreciated when looking more closely at the trades underlying the STR. You can see this on the left-hand side of my next slide.
當更仔細地研究STR的基礎交易時，可以最好地理解此特徵的含義。您可以在我的下一張幻燈片的左側看到這一點。
Today, almost 60% of STR transactions are with euro area non-banks – typically, asset managers, pension funds, insurance companies or corporate treasurers – and most of the remainder is accounted for by non-euro area entities. Just 3% of trades are currently between euro area banks.
如今，STR交易中將近60％是與歐元區的非銀行機構（通常是資產管理公司，養老基金，保險公司或公司司庫）進行的，其餘大部分由非歐元區實體承擔。目前只有3％的交易是在歐元區銀行之間進行的。
In other words, the significant accumulation of excess liquidity in the euro area banking sector in response to the non-standard monetary policy measures implies that the overwhelming share of money market transactions currently take place between entities that have access to the deposit facility and those that do not.
換句話說，由於採取了非常規貨幣政策措施，歐元區銀行部門積累了大量富餘流動性，而貨幣市場交易的很大一部分份額是在那些沒有存款便利工具使用權的機構與擁有該工具使用權的機構之間進行的。
As a result, STR borrowing rates often reflect the rates charged by euro area banks on deposits by entities without access to the ECB deposit facility. You can see this on the right-hand side.
結果，STR歐元的借款利率通常反映了歐元區的銀行對無法獲得歐洲央行存款便利工具的實體的存款所收取的利率，請看右圖。
Non-bank and non-euro area entities are prepared to pay rates below the deposit facility rate, and below the rates offered by those with access to the facility, for two main reasons. First, because internal risk management rules restrict their choice of counterparties to those with the lowest credit risk. And, second, because alternative safe investments, such as short-term government bonds, are often even more costly.
非銀行和非歐元區實體所支付的利率低於存款便利工具利率，也低於能夠獲得存款便利工具的實體所支付的利率，這有兩個主要原因所致。首先，因為內部風險管理規則將其交易對手的選擇限制在信用風險最低的交易對手中。其次，因為替代性的安全投資，例如短期政府債券，往往成本更高。
The changeover from EONIA to the STR made visible the pricing impact of differences in who can hold central bank reserves. This also means that the STR is a better and more transparent indicator of prevailing market conditions than EONIA, as it helps deliver a more comprehensive picture of the interactive effects of our actions and policy framework.
從EONIA到STR的轉換使得誰可以擁有中央銀行準備金（觸達權）的差異對價格的影響非常明顯。這也意味著，與EONIA相比，STR是反應當前市場狀況的更好，更透明的指標，因為它有助於更全面地了解我們的行動和政策框架的互動影響。
But it also implies a possible risk that the STR might be less under our control than EONIA was. Changes in the STR are essentially a function of three main factors: the level of ECB policy rates, the level of excess liquidity and the distribution of this excess liquidity across sectors.
但這也暗示了可能存在的風險，我們對STR的控制力可能比起EONIA來更弱。STR的變化本質上是三個主要因素的函數：歐洲央行政策利率水平，富餘流動性水平以及這些流動性在各個部門之間的分布。
All else being equal, a decline in the demand for liquidity services by non-banks – for example, due to a sudden increase in risk aversion – might lead to upward pressure on the STR at the same level of excess liquidity. Also, a decline in excess liquidity can be expected to lead to faster upward pressure for STR, even in the absence of changes in policy rates.
在所有其他條件相同的情況下，對非銀流動性服務的需求下降（如風險厭惡的突然增加），可能導致在流動性過剩水平相同的情況下，STR的壓力增大。此外，即使政策利率沒有變化，富餘流動性的減少也可能導致STR的上升壓力更快。
It is these factors that may be a cause of concern in the current context of interest rate volatility. But I would not be overly worried today for three main reasons.
在當前利率波動的情況下，可能正是這些因素引起了人們的關注。但是由於三個主要原因，我現在還不會太擔心。
First, we are a long way from expecting any reductions in excess liquidity in the euro area. In fact, as of November, the ECB’s renewed net asset purchases of 20 billion per month will further increase excess liquidity.
首先，我們距離歐元區富餘流動性的減少還有很長的路要走。事實上，在11月，歐洲央行每月重啟資產淨購買，規模為200億歐元/月，這將進一步增加富餘流動性。
The Governing Council is committed to continue net purchases for as long as necessary to reinforce the accommodative impact of our policy rates, and to end shortly before we start raising the key ECB interest rates, which in turn will depend on inflation robustly converging towards our aim. Even beyond the end our net purchases, we will continue reinvesting the principal payments from maturing securities for an extended period of time, which will keep excess liquidity abundant.
歐洲央行理事會致力於在必要的情況下繼續進行淨購買，以加強我們政策利率的寬鬆影響，並在我們開始提高關鍵歐洲央行利率之前不久終結，這反過來將取決於通貨膨脹向我們目標收斂的強度。甚至在淨購買期結束之後，我們將繼續將到期證券的本金再投資持續較長時間，這將使富餘的流動性保持充裕。
Second, the experience of the Federal Reserve has highlighted that policymakers have the tools to respond quickly and efficiently to signs of market volatility. In particular, central banks always have the option to broaden access to the liability side of their balance sheet to a wider set of financial intermediaries, which would automatically make it easier to control rates
其次，美聯儲的經驗表明，決策者擁有快速有效地應對市場動蕩跡象的工具。特別是，中央銀行始終可以選擇將其資產負債表的負債方觸達權擴大到更多的金融中介機構，這將自然的使利率控制變得更加容易。
And, third, the remarkable stability of the EONIA-STR spread over the past two years or so suggests that regulatory costs related to the leverage ratio, and competition between banks to offer liquidity storage services to entities without access to the deposit facility, are strong inertial forces that help mitigate large and abrupt swings in the STR, in both directions.
第三，過去兩年左右的時間裡，EONIA-STR的利差所表現出的顯著穩定性表明，與槓桿率有關的監管成本，以及銀行之間為無法使用存款便利工具的實體提供流動性存儲服務的競爭。這種強大的內生性力量可幫助緩解STR的較大幅度且突然的雙向波動。
結論
All this means, and with this I would like to conclude, that large aggregate excess liquidity levels are no insurance that central banks will always find it easy to steer short-term interest rates.
綜上所述，總體上大幅度的富餘流動性並非中央銀行總能簡單控制短期利率的保證。
Liquidity supply may have become less elastic in both the euro area and the United States, for different reasons though: in the United States because of concentration among banks, in the euro area because of fragmentation across countries, and in both cases because of the growing role of intermediaries without access to central bank balance sheets. This calls for central banks to err on the side of caution and leave a sufficient buffer in the financial system with a view to forestalling risks of unwarranted upward pressure on short-term interest rates.
出於不同的原因，歐元區和美國的流動性供給彈性可能減弱了：在美國，由於銀行之間的集中度問題；在歐元區，由於國家之間的分化問題；以及在兩種情況下，無法觸達中央銀行資產負債表的中介機構變得更重要的因素。這就要求各國央行要更為審慎，並在金融體系中留出足夠的緩衝空間，以期防止出現不必要的短期利率上行壓力的風險。
The launch of the STR has been a welcome step in providing a more complete picture of the actual borrowing conditions facing euro area banks. If policymakers in the future consider the impact of changes in excess liquidity on the level of the STR to be less desirable, they could consider expanding access to the liability side of central bank balance sheets to other actors in financial markets.
歐元STR的推出是可喜的一步，可以更全面地了解歐元區銀行面臨的實際借貸狀況。如果政策制定者將來認為富餘流動性變化對STR的影響不那麼理想，他們可以考慮將中央銀行資產負債表的負債方的觸達權擴大到金融市場的其他參與者。
Thank you.
謝謝。