available and the relevance of the topic for the specific institution. all members can suggest topics, each member can contribute to developing methodologies, results and methodological approaches as well as resulting insights are shared. relevant policy and research questions are defined in a process that combines topdown and bottom - up elements. after identifying a relevant policy issue through a 2 / 10 bis - central bankers'speeches membership survey, the network jointly specifies appropriate empirical models, country teams implement that common methodology for their country - specific data sets, and output is combined using a meta - type analysis. 2 additionally, country teams can conduct variants of the common methodology to explore questions that are of interest for their jurisdiction. based on this approach, the full richness of the country - level datasets can be exploited to identify cross - country or idiosyncratic observations and, at the same time, facilitate drawing more general lessons. country - level studies receive feedback from a network of peers with expertise in research and policy - making. the overall approach of the ibrn shares some similarities with initiatives of the imf, ecb and the bis that aim at bringing together results from explorations of different micro - level datasets to show the landscape of experiences across countries before drawing conclusive messages. 3 on the policy side, the ibrn has made direct contributions to policy debates. results of ibrn work are regularly published in blog columns such as voxeu and liberty street economics of the new york fed. several workshops have been conducted back - toback and jointly with the imf, cebra, or the bis. ibrn work has been discussed in fsb, cgfs, bcbs, imf venues. finally, ibrn - type analytical approach have been applied for advancing work of the bank for international settlements ( bis ) asia on understanding the effects of macroprudential policies ( cantu et al 2020a ), and by the bis consultative council of the americas in analysis of macroprudential policy and interactions with monetary policy stance, using credit registry data ( cantu et al 2020b, gambacorta et al 2017 / 2021 ( check references ). the consequences of prudential and monetary policy changes for international spillovers, as countries emerged from the sharp pandemic period contraction, was a featured article in the banque de france financial stability review ( 2021 ). the financial stability board ( fsb ) has established a framework for post - implementation evaluation of the effects of the g20

particularly served us well in designing appropriate policy responses, especially during the pandemic. we believe in two - way communication for informed policy decisions. with this objective, we hold detailed interactions with analysts, economists, researchers, banks, academic bodies and research institutions, trade and industry associations, and several others. we have followed this approach not only for the much - publicised monetary policy actions but also for other policies. we also recognise that communication needs to be backed by commensurate actions to build credibility and instil wider confidence in our policies. we explain the rationale of our actions in the best traditions of accountability and transparency, the hallmark of a modern market - based approach to monetary policy making. 16. as part of our monetary policy, we have actively used communication through a variety of tools – the mpc resolutions and minutes, my exhaustive post - policy statements together with statement on developmental and regulatory measures, press conferences, speeches by me and my colleagues, and our other publications, especially the biannual monetary policy report ( mpr ) – to anchor expectations. our policies, especially the relative emphasis on inflation and growth are always based on an objective assessment of all relevant factors ; and we make it a point to communicate our policy decisions, including through interactions with the media, to facilitate clarity in understanding. during 2019 when we embarked upon a cycle of rate cuts and change of stance from ‘ calibrated tightening ’ to ‘ neutral ’ and then to ‘ accommodative ’, the accompanying communications were unambiguous. on various occasions, we had stated “ it is vital to act decisively and in a timely manner ” to support growth ; “ to boost aggregate demand, and in particular, private investment activity ” ; and similar other pronouncements to provide market guidance. 17. with the declaration of covid - 19 as a pandemic in march 2020, communication became more challenging as we had only digital interface with media and market participants while at the same time we had to undertake several emergency conventional and unconventional measures as the crisis unfolded. the governor ’ s statement of march 27, 2020 highlighted that the outbreak of the pandemic warranted not only an advancement of the date of mpc meeting, but it also merited “ a sizeable reduction of 75 basis points in the policy repo rate ” which was “ intended to ( i ) mitigate the negative effects of the virus ; ( ii ) revive growth ; and above all, ( iii