ibrn. technological improvements and better availability of micro - data may help relaxing the constraints initially faced by the ibrn. a lot of innovative work is going in central banks and organizations such as the bis. this could be an opportunity to improve the micro - data infrastructure for both, policy and research. one advance in the literature is through the use of credit registry data. several members of the ibrn already have access to high - quality credit registry data, which could be explored in cross - country settings and contribute significantly to the causal identification of policy effects. once investments are made into using this type of data, and potentially linking credit registry data to other information about specific firms, an even broader set of issues about the consequences of shocks for the real economy can be explored. new initiatives have been started which are linked to the ibrn and could potentially provide scope for synergies. inexda, which is short for the international network for exchanging experience on statistical handling of granular data, is one of them. it is an international cooperative project enabling an exchange of experiences in the statistical handling of granular data for research purposes. it covers issues such as the accessibility of data and metadata, techniques for the statistical analysis of granular data, procedures for the confidentiality and security of data, and methods of output control. the ibrn is committed to meeting its core objectives, and building on the strength of its accomplishments over the past decade. the membership is its biggest asset, and together the ibrn is looking forward to informing the many issues that can only be addressed by combining insights from studies conducted around the world. 4 references angeloni, ignazio, anil k. kashyap, benoit mojon, and daniele terlizzese, 2003, " monetary transmission in the euro area : does the interest rate channel explain all? ", nber working paper no. 9984. buch, claudia m. and linda s. goldberg, 2015. " international banking and liquidity risk transmission : lessons from across countries ", imf economic review 63 : 377410, november. buch, claudia m. and linda s. goldberg, 2017. " cross - border prudential policy spillovers : how much? how important? evidence from the international banking research network ", international journal of central banking 48 : 505 - 558. 8 / 10 bis - central bankers'speeches buch, claudia m. and linda s. goldberg, 2020.

financial regulatory reforms, and implementation of this framework has used tools similar to those developed in the ibrn. 4 in terms of content, the ibrn has operated at the intersection between the macroeconomic, macro - finance, and banking literature. it has conducted seven research initiatives, and most results have already been submitted to and published in academic journals : 5 international banking : integration or fragmentation? ( 2020 - 2022 ) complexity in international banking : patterns and implications for risk ( 20182021 ) ( journal of banking and finance 2022 ) the interaction between macroprudential policy and monetary policy ( 2018 - 19 ) ( review of international economics 2020 ) the international transmission of monetary policy : financial linkages and domestic policy responses ( 2016 - 17 ) ( journal of international money and finance 2019 ) cross - border prudential policy spillovers : how much? how important? ( 2014 - 16 ) ( international journal of central banking 2017 ) international banking and liquidity risk transmission : lessons from across countries ( 2013 ) ( imf economic review 2015 ) 3 / 10 bis - central bankers'speeches 2 lessons from the ibrn for cross - country policy evaluation ten years of analytical work conducted by the ibrn allow drawing a number of lessons for cross - country policy evaluation. this first set of lessons is related to substance – how do we need to set up policy evaluations in order to fully reflect the relevant adjustment dynamics and causal effects? work conducted in the ibrn provides some answers : 1. effects of policy measures may not show up at the aggregate level or for the average bank, but disaggregation shows heterogeneous effects across banks. it is not uncommon for country teams in the ibrn to find no impact of policy measures at an aggregate level or for the average bank. yet, this may mask relevant heterogeneous impacts at a more disaggregated level. heterogeneity can be an intended outcome of many policy measures : there can be " winners " and " losers " of regulatory changes, market shares are likely to be reallocated across institutions, and heterogeneous responses to the same policy may in fact be a stabilizing feature. take the example of a tightening of capital requirements that has the objective of increasing resilience in the financial system to adverse shocks. its intended objective would be to shift lending activity away from capital - constrained towards better capitalized banks. the impact on aggregate lending and on the average bank may be small