When the European Central Bank started to move the policy interest rate below zero, there was basically no empirical evidence and also very little theoretical guidance on what would have happened to the economy.

In monetary policy, it is almost a law of nature that there exists a zero lower bound. So theory predicts that either monetary policy is ineffective or even recessionary. In my work that has been co-authored with Carl Altavilla and Lorenzo Bourlone at the European Central Bank and Sara

Holt at the Bank of Ireland, we are basically the first to question empirically the existence of a zero lower bound. In fact, the sound banks in the euro area have been passing through negative policy

rates on their corporate depositors, and we find that these stimulated investment in the euro area. The overall fixed assets of the euro area would have increased 13 percent more if also the other banks were sound.

So we think that our work is very important for the actual practice of monetary policy because it enlightens how monetary policy is benefiting the euro economy and provides guidance also for policymakers that will have to make harder choices in the future.

So for us, academics, of course, is one of the greatest achievements to be able to influence policy with our research.

But it's also important that our research is relevant. And at this conference and in my numerous visits at the European Central Bank, I get a lot of ideas on what is more relevant to study in my new research project.

And the conference is a great example.