bis central bankers ’ speeches policy struggles for promoting productivity given that productivity expansion is crucial for economic growth, its promotion constitutes a natural target for policy making. countries vary in terms of geography, cultural heritage, and other conditions that may affect economic efficiency differently. at the same time, in any nation, room for enhancing productivity growth can almost always be claimed. the pursuit of this objective faces significant challenges. while some are common to other policy decisions, the difficulties encountered here may be greater due to the following four reasons, at the least. first, there is no silver bullet for resolving the problem of productivity. the economic literature referred to and the discussions held in this conference make it clear that a number of elements may interact. second, there is no well - defined list of factors that could ensure high productivity growth in all cases. for example, economists know that reliable institutions, fully operating markets, and competition may provide incentives for investment, human capital accumulation, and productivity growth. however, many other policy decisions may also contribute to the same end, and their combination may vary. there is no recipe, let us say, based on some composite indicator, with which policy makers should try to maximize results. the best policy mix and the need for concrete institutions may depend on history and the initial conditions of specific countries. third, even if we had a clear - cut list of elements for productivity expansion, the relative importance of their components would hardly be undisputed. the consequence of this is that there is no roadmap that is obviously superior to alternative paths for economic reform. fourth, though a trajectory did exist that would dictate a preferable sequence of measures, democratic societies require some of these changes to be legislated. international experience demonstrates that political feasibility does not necessarily coincide with economic desirability. these four difficulties illustrate the fact that our understanding of productivity and our capacity to prescribe changes are necessarily limited, pointing towards the need for caution. perhaps in no other area, given its breadth, should economic advisers and policy makers exert a greater deal of judgment while, at the same time remaining humble. in any case, policy makers are expected to use all the information on hand, including the best estimates of theoretical models, to foment a favorable setting for productivity. sometimes, this may simply mean incrementally removing obstacles, thereby allowing private participants to strengthen the existing institutions that facilitate economic activity. 6 additionally, implementation of measures to fuel efficiency must not be considered in isolation. the

. this is not to say, however, that the subject of cbdcs and all the issues surrounding it should be disregarded. quite the contrary. the number and nature of the pending question marks underlines the relevance of continued efforts to satisfactorily understand this matter as well as its potential consequences, even more so in the context of a rapidly evolving environment where changing circumstances and new technological and market developments may warrant further action in this direction. in any event, while we have to be open and attentive to new technologies, it is also true that we need to be cautious in adopting them, especially when, as in the case of cbdcs, we are dealing with an issue with potential major implications and still many unknowns.