policies ’ effect on their communities and daily lives, it became a potent vehicle for us to better connect with the people our policies are meant to benefit. although many people across the system were involved in making fed listens the success it was, i would be more than remiss if i did not single out ellen meade for her indefatigable contributions and attention to detail and organization that were essential to pulling the whole thing off. a report on the fed listens series is available on the board ’ s web site. 16 the second pillar of our review, a research conference hosted by the federal reserve bank of chicago, brought together some of the world ’ s leading academic experts in monetary economics to present bespoke papers on a range of topics central to the review. these papers and the robust discussion at the conference that they stimulated were an important input to the review process. the proceedings of the chicago conference are available as a special january 2020 issue of the international journal of central banking. 17 the third important pillar of the review is a collection of 13 memos prepared by system staff and discussed by the committee at a number of fomc meetings over the past 18 months. these memos were commissioned by a system steering committee that see board of governors ( 2020 ). this special issue, which includes five of the seven papers presented at the research conference, is available on the journal ’ s website at https : / / www. ijcb. org / journal / ijcb2002. htm. the conference program, conference drafts, presentations, and video recordings of the sessions can be found on the board ’ s website at https : / / www. federalreserve. gov / conferences / conference - monetary - policy - strategy - toolscommunications - 20190605. htm. - 9included jeff fuhrer, marc giannoni, and david altig, with extensive input from trevor reeve. thomas laubach chaired the steering committee, and i must note that we simply would not be here today discussing this significant evolution of our framework without thomas and the insights, inspiration, and good judgement that he brought to the project and the review process. a collection of the staff memos prepared for the review is now available on the board ’ s website. 18 a new economic landscape compels a framework rethink as i mentioned earlier, the committee devoted five consecutive fomc meetings between july 2019 and january 2020 to presentations by the

market infrastructures. here, as in other international contexts, our aims are to promote the financial stability of the united states and fair competitive conditions for u. s. financial institutions. other implementation issues as noted in the preceding discussion, even where there is broad international consensus to adopt a particular regulatory approach, there can be discrete issues raised as countries implement that approach in the context of their own legal, financial, and political systems. this circumstance is hardly unique to the area of financial regulation ; it is familiar to anyone who has worked on virtually any regulatory issues that affect international trade and investment. there are also some elements of the dodd - frank act that are unlikely to be pursued internationally in any comparable form. these areas of u. s. - only regulatory reform can present particular challenges in implementation, both in terms of the potential impact that they may have on the ability of u. s. financial institutions to compete abroad and the extent to which they may affect the activities of foreign financial institutions in u. s. markets and with u. s. counterparties. in these instances of regulatory reforms being pursued only in the united states, there are not likely to be obvious answers to the resulting international complexities. for example, there has been considerable recent attention paid to the international aspects of section 619 of the dodd - frank act, more commonly known as the “ volcker rule. ” concerns have been expressed about the volcker rule ’ s potential international implications in three principal areas. first, because the volcker rule applies to the worldwide operations of u. s. banking entities, but only to the u. s. - connected operations of foreign banks, concerns have been raised regarding the relative competitiveness of u. s. firms that have significant operations in overseas markets. second, and conversely, because the volcker rule also applies to the activities of foreign banks unless such activities are “ solely outside the united states, ” several foreign banks and their supervisors have expressed concern regarding the potential extraterritorial impact that those restrictions may have on trading or fund activity of foreign banks that has both u. s. and non - u. s. characteristics. third, because the volcker rule includes a statutory exemption for proprietary trading in u. s. government debt securities, but not in foreign sovereign debt securities, several constituencies have raised concerns regarding this asymmetry. in each of these areas, u. s. regulators will need to carefully consider the concerns that have been raised and the broader international implications of the