## Monetary Policy Communications and Financial Markets in India (excerpt from wpiea2022209-print-pdf)

## Source details

**Canonical URL:** [Monetary Policy Communications and Financial Markets in India (excerpt from wpiea2022209-print-pdf)](https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/wp/2022/english/wpiea2022209-print-pdf.pdf)

## Other formats

- [Markdown version](/-/media/files/publications/wp/2022/english/wpiea2022209-print-pdf.pdf.md)
- [Structured JSON version](/-/media/files/publications/wp/2022/english/wpiea2022209-print-pdf.pdf.json)

---

### I. Introduction
- Forward-looking monetary policy communication is a key element of flexible inflation targeting regimes.
- The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) implemented a flexible inflation targeting framework in 2016.
- Communication tools supporting the framework: monetary policy statements and minutes, press releases, and the governor’s press conference.
- RBI communication innovations:
  - October 2019: state-contingent forward guidance focused on reviving growth and providing state-contingent direction on the duration of accommodative monetary policy.
  - October 2020: time-based forward guidance committing to an accommodative stance “at least during the current financial year and into the next financial year.”
  - April 2021: return to state-contingent forward guidance and introduction of forward guidance on asset purchases.
- Empirical summary highlights:
  - Monetary policy surprises have a statistically significant impact on short- and long-term risk-free rates and corporate yields.
  - Monetary policy surprises have less impact on equity prices and foreign exchange rates.
  - Predictability of monetary policy improved during the FIT regime in India.
  - Monetary policy communication, including forward guidance, impacts longer-term yields for government securities.
  - Narrative intraday analysis (example: MPC decision on October 9, 2020) indicates specific forward guidance announcements reduced market uncertainty and guided longer-term interest rates.

### II. Literature and Theoretical Mechanisms
- Communication effects documented: central bank communication can meaningfully impact asset prices and enhance predictability of monetary policy decisions.
- Theoretical channels emphasized:
  - “Information effect” (Nakamura and Steinsson, 2018): monetary policy shocks convey information about economic fundamentals affecting long-run market expectations.
  - “Uncertainty channel” (Hansen, McMahon, and Tong, 2019): central bank communication affects market beliefs about long-term uncertainty.
- Evidence on forward guidance and asset purchases:
  - Forward guidance reduces uncertainty more when state-contingent or long-horizon.
  - Announcements of asset purchase programs lower market uncertainty, especially with implementation details.
  - Perceived policy target, timing, forward guidance, and QE influence short-, medium-, and long-term segments of the yield curve.
- Emerging markets and India-specific findings:
  - Communication innovations in other EMs reduced volatility and improved effectiveness.
  - India: institutional FIT framework largely successful in keeping headline inflation within target range; OIS rates are good predictors of policy direction.

### III. Monetary Policy Communication Framework in India
- Framework features since June 2016:
  - Medium-term inflation target: 4 percent with a 2 percent tolerance band.
  - MPC decisions published after every meeting; minutes released on the 14th day following the meeting with statements of each MPC member.
  - Monetary Policy Report published every six months, forecasting inflation for six to eighteen months from publication date.
  - If the inflation target is not met for three consecutive quarters, RBI must submit a report explaining reasons, remedial actions, and an estimate of when the inflation target will be met.
- Communication chronology and innovations (selected):
  - Aug 2019: 35 bps easing, maintain accommodative stance — NBFC shock, growth slowdown.
  - Oct 2019: “accommodative stance as long as necessary to revive growth” — state-contingent guidance.
  - Mar 2020: responses to Covid-19 (policy direction “ABOVE” to mitigate impact).
  - Oct 2020: explicit time-based forward guidance (“...this fiscal year and next...”).
  - April 2021: forward guidance on Government Securities Asset Purchase Program (timing and volume communicated); discontinuation communicated in October 2021.

### IV. Event-study Methodology and Data
- Event windows:
  - Announcement dates: December 2019 to October 2020 for select policy announcements.
  - Broader regression/event analysis: MPC meeting days from October 2016 through April 2021.
- MPC meeting sample size:
  - Observations reported as 28 for regressions using OIS changes and target/path factors.
- Regression specification:
  - Δy_t = α + β Δx_t + γ z_t + ε_t
    - Δy_t: change in government security yields (various maturities), long-term (10-year) corporate bond yields, exchange rate, or stock market index on the day of announcements.
    - Δx_t: surprise component of monetary policy changes.
    - z_t: other policy announcements on the day of MPC meetings or major changes in macro/financial indicators globally.
- Three approaches to measure monetary policy surprises:
  1. Change in short-maturity OIS rates (1-month).
  2. Principal component analysis of OIS (1-month, 3-month, 6-month) and treasury securities (2-year, 5-year, 10-year) to extract unobserved factors; first two components explain about 94 percent of variation; factor rotation yields “target” and “path” factors.
  3. Survey-based surprises: Bloomberg survey within 24-hour window prior to MPC meeting; surprise = ex-post policy rate − analysts’ anticipated rate. Expression: Δi_t = (i_t − E_{t−1} i_t) + (E_{t−1} i_t − i_{t−1}) = Δi_t^u + Δi_t^a.
- Controls included: RBI forward guidance indicator, LTRO, asset purchase announcements, operation twists, changes in CRR and SLR, and external variables (ΔVIX, oil prices, US federal funds rate, US 10-year treasury yields).
- Data frequency: daily (end-business day); intra-day data used for illustrative events (e.g., October 9, 2020).

### V. Main Empirical Findings
- Correlation patterns:
  - Strong positive association between monetary policy surprises (Δ 1-month OIS) and government security and corporate yields across maturities.
  - Weaker/less evident association for exchange rate and stock prices.
- Responses using ΔOIS Rate as policy surprise (Tables 3a and 3b):
  - Table 3a (no other controls) — ΔOIS Rate coefficient estimates (robust SE in parentheses):
    - Three-month: 1.09*** (0.32)
    - One-year: 0.68*** (0.22)
    - Two-year: 0.65*** (0.14)
    - Five-year: 0.76*** (0.19)
    - Ten-year: 0.75*** (0.14)
    - Ten-year corporate: 0.65*** (0.17)
    - Exchange Rate: -0.00 (0.00)
    - Nifty Index: 0.03 (0.02)
    - Observations: 28; R-squared range: 0.00 to 0.58 across specifications.
  - Table 3b (with other controls) — ΔOIS Rate coefficient estimates:
    - Three-month: 0.89** (0.39)
    - One-year: 0.68*** (0.24)
    - Two-year: 0.63*** (0.14)
    - Five-year: 0.71*** (0.15)
    - Ten-year: 0.71*** (0.17)
    - Ten-year corporate: 0.78*** (0.20)
    - Exchange Rate: -0.00 (0.01)
    - Nifty Index: 0.02 (0.02)
    - Observations: 28; R-squared up to 0.77 in some specifications.
- Magnitude interpretation:
  - A one percent surprise tightening in the policy rate leads to a 109 basis point increase in the three-month yield (89 basis points when controlling for other announcements) and a 75 (71) basis point increase in the 10-year yield. Both estimates are highly statistically significant.
- Target and path factor results (Tables 4a and 4b):
  - Target factor (no other controls, Table 4a):
    - Three-month: 1.16*** (0.33)
    - One-year: 0.75*** (0.14)
    - Two-year: 0.66*** (0.05)
    - Five-year: 0.80*** (0.07)
    - Ten-year: 0.77*** (0.07)
    - Ten-year corporate: 0.67*** (0.12)
  - Path factor (no other controls, Table 4a):
    - Three-month: 0.72 (0.49) — not significant
    - One-year: 0.73*** (0.23)
    - Two-year: 0.73*** (0.06)
    - Five-year: 1.03*** (0.13)
    - Ten-year: 0.77*** (0.15)
    - Ten-year corporate: 0.72*** (0.22)
  - With other controls (Table 4b):
    - Target factor remains positive and significant across maturities (example coefficients: three-month 0.83** (0.30); ten-year 0.79*** (0.09)).
    - Path factor coefficients are positive and significant, often larger at longer maturities (example: five-year 0.88*** (0.12); ten-year 0.90*** (0.15)).
    - Observations: 28; R-squared up to 0.95 in some specifications.
  - Interpretation: target factor captures surprise in near-term policy rate (largest impact on three-month); path factor captures forward-looking communication and explains larger changes at longer maturities.
- Survey-based anticipated vs unanticipated changes (Tables 5a and 5b):
  - MP Surprise (unanticipated change) coefficients (Table 5a, no other controls):
    - Three-month: 0.50*** (0.10)
    - One-year: 0.44* (0.22)
    - Two-year: 0.37*** (0.09)
    - Five-year: 0.42*** (0.10)
    - Ten-year: 0.35*** (0.12)
    - Ten-year corporate: 0.46*** (0.15)
    - Exchange Rate: -0.00* (0.00)
    - Nifty Index: 0.02* (0.01)
  - With other controls (Table 5b), MP Surprise coefficients remain positive and significant across maturities (example: three-month 0.47*** (0.13); ten-year 0.38** (0.14)).
  - Anticipated Change coefficients are generally small and often not significant; some negative coefficients at longer maturities (example: ten-year -0.23** in Table 5a no-controls).
- Additional findings on policy tools:
  - Forward guidance from October 2020 and extended lending/term-funding facilities (LTRO/TLTRO) had significant effects particularly on the middle segment (2-year and 5-year bonds).
  - Operation twists had some impact on the term spread (change in spread between 10-year and 1-year yields).
  - Outright asset purchases had limited impact on government bond yields in this analysis.
- Intraday evidence (October 9, 2020 event):
  - Explicit time-based forward guidance appears to have resulted in a downward pivot of the OIS curve and a decline in 10-year government securities yields, interpreted as reduced uncertainty and a decline in risk-free rates in intraday observation with minimal concurrent policy changes.

### VI. Interpretation, Policy Implications, and Recommendations
- Interpretation:
  - Monetary policy communication, including forward guidance, conveys important information about the future direction of monetary policy and influences longer-term yields.
  - The target factor chiefly affects short-term yields; the path factor conveys forward-looking information and affects longer-term yields more strongly.
  - Exchange rate and stock market responses to monetary policy surprises are generally not statistically significant at conventional confidence levels in this sample.
- Policy implications and recommendations:
  - For communication to be useful as an independent policy tool, it must be consistent and credible with the overall macroeconomic context.
  - RBI communication should provide guidance on the likely path of policy normalization, including:
    - Durable liquidity.
    - The relative sequencing of phased absorption of excess liquidity and future policy rate actions.
  - Consistent communication of any change in the policy reaction function as the recovery strengthens can help guide market expectations, especially amid:
    - Elevated global and domestic inflationary pressures.
    - The expected tightening in monetary policy in the advanced economies.

*Source: Box 1. Evolution of Monetary Policy Framework and Communication, wpiea2022209-print-pdf.*

### References .............................................................................................................

### wpiea2022209-print-pdf - References

### I. Introduction
- Forward-looking monetary policy communication is a key element of flexible inflation targeting regimes.
- The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) implemented a flexible inflation targeting framework in 2016.
- The flexible inflation targeting framework is supported by communication tools: monetary policy statements and minutes, press releases, and the governor’s press conference.
- RBI innovations in communication:
  - October 2019: introduced forward guidance focused on reviving growth and providing state-contingent direction on the duration of accommodative monetary policy.
  - October 2020: introduced time-based forward guidance, committing to an accommodative stance “at least during the current financial year and into the next financial year.”
  - April 2021: returned to state-contingent forward guidance and introduced forward guidance on asset purchases.
- Empirical findings summarized in the paper:
  - Monetary policy surprises have a statistically significant impact on both short- and long-term risk-free rates and corporate yields.
  - Monetary policy surprises have less impact on equity prices and foreign exchange rates.
  - Predictability of monetary policy improved during the FIT regime in India.
  - Monetary policy communication, including forward guidance, impacts longer-term yields for government securities.
  - Narrative intraday analysis indicates specific forward guidance announcements reduced market uncertainty and guided longer-term interest rates (example: MPC decision on October 9, 2020 and the Governor’s statement contributed to a decline in 10-year rates on the same day).
- Key empirical question posed: Does communication have a quantitatively significant impact on financial markets in India, and how can this impact be measured?

### II. Literature (key points)
- Central bank communication can meaningfully impact asset prices and enhance predictability of monetary policy decisions (Blinder et al. 2008; Boukus and Rosenberg 2006; Carvalho, Hsu, and Nechio 2016; Gürkaynak, Sack, and Swanson 2005).
- Theoretical insights:
  - Nakamura and Steinsson (2018): “the information effect” — monetary policy shocks transmit information about economic fundamentals affecting long-run market expectations.
  - Hansen, McMahon, and Tong (2019): central bank communication affects market beliefs about long-term uncertainty (“uncertainty channel”).
- Evidence on forward guidance and asset purchases:
  - Coenen et al. (2018): announcements of asset purchase programs lower market uncertainty, especially when accompanied by implementation details.
  - Forward guidance reduces uncertainty more effectively when it is state-contingent or provides guidance about a long horizon.
  - Altavilla et al. (2019): perceived policy target, timing, forward guidance, and QE influence short-, medium-, and long-term segments of the yield curve.
  - Gürkaynak, Sack, and Swanson (2005) and Brand, Buncic, and Turunen (2010): central bank communication can lead to substantial revisions in expectations and affect longer-maturity interest rates.
- Emerging markets evidence:
  - McMahon, Schipke, and Li (2018): People’s Bank of China communication innovations reduced volatility and improved policy effectiveness.
  - Pescatori (2018) on Chile: high and increasing predictability of policy decisions; surprises significantly affect the medium and long end of the yield curve; forward guidance shifts the entire yield curve while surprise actions tilt the short end.
  - Ahokpossi et al. (2020) on Indonesia: monetary policy surprises significantly impact money market rates up to one-month maturities but not bond market or exchange rate; press releases/reports do not have a significant impact on market rates.
- India-specific studies:
  - Patnaik and Pandey (2020): institutional framework supporting inflation targeting has been largely successful in keeping headline inflation within the target range.
  - Mathur and Sengupta (2020): RBI’s communication became linguistically complex on average since adoption of inflation targeting; length of statements decreased and readability improved recently; lengthier statements associated with higher volatility in equity and currency markets, but not bond markets.
  - Lakdawala and Sengupta (2021): bond and stock markets react strongly to monetary policy shocks with heterogeneity across regimes and governors; some evidence of conventional transmission to prices.
  - RBI (2021a): overnight interest rate swap (OIS) rates in India are good predictors of the direction of monetary policy, if not the exact timing.

### III. Monetary Policy Communication Framework in India
- Framework evolution and features since adoption of flexible inflation targeting in 2016:
  - Medium-term inflation target: 4 percent with a 2 percent tolerance band.
  - MPC decisions are published after every meeting; minutes released on the 14th day following the meeting and include the statement of each MPC member.
  - Monetary Policy Report published every six months, forecasting inflation for a period between six to eighteen months from publication date.
  - If the inflation target is not met for three consecutive quarters, RBI must submit a report providing reasons, propose remedial actions, and estimate when the inflation target is meant to be met.
- Communication tools supporting the framework: governor’s addresses and statements after each MPC meeting, other press releases, governor’s press conferences.
- Evidence that communication improved credibility and predictability:
  - Cross-country evidence suggests implementation of flexible inflation targeting contributed to improvements in monetary policy credibility in India, reflected in lower frequency of monetary policy surprises since 2016.
  - Note: increase in size of surprises in recent years (2016-21) captures the pandemic-related easing in the context of increased certainty.

*IMF Working Papers — Monetary Policy and Financial Markets in India (excerpt).*

### Box 1. Evolution of Monetary Policy Framework and Communication

### Box 1. Evolution of Monetary Policy Framework and Communication

### Evolution of the monetary policy framework and communication
- Initial focus: expanding access and availability of credit for development; 1970s: inflationary pressures led to price controls by the Government and selective credit controls and moral suasion by the Reserve Bank (Das, 2022).
- 1980s: rule-based monetary targeting framework adopted — reserve money as operating target and broad money as intermediate target.
- Late 1990s: monetary targeting came under pressure after trade and financial sector reforms and growing financial integration and innovation.
- 1998: Reserve Bank of India (RBI) adopted a multiple indicators approach, shifting emphasis to interest rates (price of credit) over quantity of credit.
  - Communication challenge: the multiple indicators approach did not provide a clearly defined nominal anchor.
- 2014: RBI Expert Committee recommended headline inflation as nominal anchor.
- June 2016: formal adoption of flexible inflation targeting; communication focused on this streamlined objective.
  - RBI referred to the tolerance band of "4 ± 2 percent" as the tolerance band.
  - Amended Act: “the primary objective of monetary policy is to maintain price stability while keeping in mind the objective of growth”.
- Text analysis (Mathur and Sengupta, 2020): during the multiple indicators period words like financial market, credit featured more prominently; during flexible inflation targeting, words inflation, price, growth featured more prominently.

### Forward guidance and communication innovations (2019–2021)
- October 2019: introduction of state-contingent forward guidance: “an accommodative stance as long as it is necessary to revive growth, while ensuring that inflation remains within the target.”
  - Context: nonbanking financial company stress of 2019 and pre-COVID-19 growth slowdown; preceded by a series of policy rate cuts in 2019.
- March and May 2020: two policy rate cuts and introduction of extended lending and term-funding facilities, asset purchases and operation twist programs.
- October 2020: forward guidance recalibrated to both state- and time-contingent setting, including commitment to keep inflation within the target; explicit time-based guidance phrasing: “…this fiscal year and next…”.
- April 2021: return to state-contingent setting and additional forward guidance on asset purchase program.
- RBI communicated timing and volume of Government Securities Asset Purchase Program in April 2021 and its discontinuation in October 2021.
- Table 1 (selected items summarized from source): chronology of MPC statements and context (examples)
  - Aug 2019: 35 bps easing, maintain the accommodative stance — NBFC shock, growth slowdown.
  - Oct 2019: accommodative stance as long as necessary to revive growth — continued growth slowdown and inflation expected to remain below target.
  - Mar 2020: ‘ABOVE’ and mitigate the impact of Covid-19 on the economy.
  - Oct 2020: explicit time-based forward guidance (“...this fiscal year and next...”) — addressing market uncertainty about duration.

### Event-study methodology and data
- Event window: announcement dates from December 2019 to October 2020 for select policy announcements; broader regression/event analysis uses MPC meeting days from October 2016 through April 2021 (see Table 2 listing MPC decisions).
- MPC meeting sample: observations reported as 28 for regressions using OIS changes and target/path factors.
- Regression specification (equation (1)):
  - Δy_t = α + β Δx_t + γ z_t + ε_t
    - Δy_t: change in government security yields (various maturities), long-term (10-year) corporate bond yields, exchange rate, or stock market index on the day of announcements.
    - Δx_t: surprise component of monetary policy changes.
    - z_t: other policy announcements from the RBI on the day of MPC meetings, or other major changes in macro or financial market indicators globally.
- Three approaches to measure monetary policy surprises:
  1. Change in short-maturity OIS rates (1-month).
  2. Principal component analysis of OIS (1-month, 3-month, 6-month) and treasury securities (2-year, 5-year, 10-year) to extract unobserved factors; first two components explain about 94 percent of variation; factor rotation yields “target” and “path” factors (target ≈ surprise changes in current policy rate; path ≈ moves in interest rate expectations over longer term).
  3. Survey-based surprises: Bloomberg survey of market analysts within 24-hour window prior to MPC meeting; surprise = ex-post policy rate − analysts’ anticipated rate. Expression used: Δi_t = (i_t − E_{t−1} i_t) + (E_{t−1} i_t − i_{t−1}) = Δi_t^u + Δi_t^a.
- Controls included to address omitted variable bias: RBI forward guidance indicator, LTRO, asset purchase announcements, operation twists, changes in CRR and SLR (continuous where applicable), and external variables (ΔVIX, oil prices, US federal funds rate, US 10-year treasury yields).
- Data frequency: daily (end-business day); intra-day data used where available for illustrative events (e.g., October 9, 2020).

### Main empirical findings (event-study and regressions)
- Correlation patterns (Figure 7): strong positive association between monetary policy surprises (Δ 1-month OIS) and government security and corporate yields across maturities; weaker/less evident association for exchange rate and stock prices.
- Responses using ΔOIS Rate as policy surprise (Table 3a, no other controls; Table 3b, with controls):
  - Table 3a (no other controls):
    - ΔOIS Rate coefficient estimates (columns):
      - Three-month: 1.09*** (robust SE 0.32)
      - One-year: 0.68*** (0.22)
      - Two-year: 0.65*** (0.14)
      - Five-year: 0.76*** (0.19)
      - Ten-year: 0.75*** (0.14)
      - Ten-year corporate: 0.65*** (0.17)
      - Exchange Rate: -0.00 (0.00)
      - Nifty Index: 0.03 (0.02)
    - Observations: 28; R-squared range: 0.00 to 0.58 across specifications.
  - Table 3b (with other controls):
    - ΔOIS Rate coefficient estimates:
      - Three-month: 0.89** (0.39)
      - One-year: 0.68*** (0.24)
      - Two-year: 0.63*** (0.14)
      - Five-year: 0.71*** (0.15)
      - Ten-year: 0.71*** (0.17)
      - Ten-year corporate: 0.78*** (0.20)
      - Exchange Rate: -0.00 (0.01)
      - Nifty Index: 0.02 (0.02)
    - Observations: 28; R-squared up to 0.77 in some specs.
- Magnitude interpretation (from reduced-form results narrative):
  - On average, a one percent surprise tightening in the policy rate leads to a 109 basis point increase in the three-month yield (89 basis points when controlling for other announcements) and a 75 (71) basis point increase in the 10-year yield. Both estimates are highly statistically significant.
- Target and path factor results (Tables 4a and 4b):
  - Target factor (no other controls, Table 4a):
    - Three-month: 1.16*** (0.33)
    - One-year: 0.75*** (0.14)
    - Two-year: 0.66*** (0.05)
    - Five-year: 0.80*** (0.07)
    - Ten-year: 0.77*** (0.07)
    - Ten-year corporate: 0.67*** (0.12)
  - Path factor (no other controls, Table 4a):
    - Three-month: 0.72 (0.49) — not significant
    - One-year: 0.73*** (0.23)
    - Two-year: 0.73*** (0.06)
    - Five-year: 1.03*** (0.13)
    - Ten-year: 0.77*** (0.15)
    - Ten-year corporate: 0.72*** (0.22)
  - With other controls (Table 4b):
    - Target factor coefficients remain positive and significant across maturities (e.g., three-month 0.83** (0.30); ten-year 0.79*** (0.09)).
    - Path factor coefficients also positive and significant, often larger at longer maturities (e.g., five-year 0.88*** (0.12); ten-year 0.90*** (0.15)).
    - Observations: 28; R-squared up to 0.95 in some specifications — suggesting the two-factor model largely explains variation in yields.
  - Interpretation: target factor captures surprise in near-term policy rate (largest impact on three-month); path factor captures forward-looking communication and explains larger changes at longer maturities.
- Survey-based anticipated vs unanticipated changes (Tables 5a and 5b):
  - MP Surprise (unanticipated change) coefficients (Table 5a, no other controls):
    - Three-month: 0.50*** (0.10)
    - One-year: 0.44* (0.22)
    - Two-year: 0.37*** (0.09)
    - Five-year: 0.42*** (0.10)
    - Ten-year: 0.35*** (0.12)
    - Ten-year corporate: 0.46*** (0.15)
    - Exchange Rate: -0.00* (0.00)
    - Nifty Index: 0.02* (0.01)
  - With other controls (Table 5b), MP Surprise coefficients remain positive and significant across maturities (e.g., three-month 0.47*** (0.13); ten-year 0.38** (0.14)).
  - Anticipated Change coefficients are generally small and often not significant; some negative coefficients at longer maturities (e.g., ten-year -0.23** in Table 5a no-controls).
- Additional findings on policy tools:
  - Forward guidance from October 2020 and extended lending/term-funding facilities (LTRO/TLTRO) had significant effects particularly on the middle segment (2-year and 5-year bonds).
  - Operation twists had some impact on the term spread (change in spread between 10-year and 1-year yields).
  - Outright asset purchases had limited impact on government bond yields in this analysis.
- Intraday evidence (October 9, 2020 event):
  - October 9, 2020 explicit time-based forward guidance appears to have resulted in a downward pivot of the OIS curve and a decline in 10-year government securities yields — interpreted as reduced uncertainty and a decline in risk-free rates in intraday observation with minimal concurrent policy changes.

### Conclusion (excerpted implications)
- The RBI’s monetary policy communication evolved markedly after adoption of flexible inflation targeting in June 2016.
- Forward guidance innovations since October 2019, and especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, became central to monetary policy communication.
- Empirical evidence indicates:
  - Monetary policy surprises (measured via OIS changes, target/path factors, or survey-based surprises) significantly affect government and corporate yields across maturities.
  - The target factor chiefly affects short-term yields; the path factor conveys forward-looking information and affects longer-term yields more strongly.
  - Exchange rate and stock market responses to monetary policy surprises are generally not statistically significant at conventional confidence levels in this sample.
  - Specific unconventional tools (forward guidance, LTRO/TLTRO, operation twists) had measurable effects on parts of the yield curve, with operation twists influencing term spreads.

*Source: Box 1. Evolution of Monetary Policy Framework and Communication, wpiea2022209-print-pdf.*

### 2016. This includes a set of communication tools, including monetary policy statements and minutes, press

### Monetary Policy Communications and Financial Markets in India

### Key findings
- Forward guidance announcements in India influenced asset prices and have facilitated a reduction in financial market uncertainty amid increased inflationary pressures.
- Quantitatively, the announcement impacts of asset purchases in India are estimated to be broadly in line with those in other emerging markets.
- The relationship between monetary policy surprises and yields for government and corporate securities across all maturities are positive and statistically significant in India.
- Monetary policy surprises are less strongly related to exchange rate and equity prices, broadly in line with what is observed in other emerging markets.
- Monetary policy communication, including forward guidance, impacts longer-term yields for government securities, consistent with the interpretation that monetary policy communication conveys important information about the future direction of monetary policy.
- Narrative analysis of intraday data suggests specific forward guidance announcements facilitated a reduction in market uncertainty and helped guide longer-term interest rates.

### Quantitative and empirical evidence
- Announcement impacts of asset purchases in India: estimated to be broadly in line with those in other emerging markets (no numeric magnitudes provided in source text).
- Relationship between monetary policy surprises and yields:
  - Positive and statistically significant for government and corporate securities across all maturities in India.
  - Weaker for exchange rate and equity prices.
- Case evidence:
  - The RBI’s decision on October 9, 2020 and the governor’s statement on forward guidance was more specific about the duration of the RBI’s accommodative stance, contributing to a decline in 10-year rates on the same day.

### Interpretation and mechanisms
- Forward guidance likely played a key role in moderating uncertainty and supporting some asset prices during the pandemic period.
- Monetary policy communication affects market expectations about the likely path of policy interest rates and the future direction of monetary policy, thereby influencing longer-term yields.
- The effectiveness of forward guidance in moderating long-term rates is influenced by:
  - Overall liquidity conditions.
  - Inflation expectations.
  - Accumulated monetary policy credibility.

### Policy implications and recommendations
- For communication to be useful as an independent policy tool, it has to be consistent and credible with the overall macroeconomic context.
- RBI monetary policy communication has an important role in providing guidance on the likely path of policy normalization, including:
  - Durable liquidity.
  - The relative sequencing of phased absorption of excess liquidity and future policy rate actions.
- Consistent communication of any change in the policy reaction function as the recovery strengthens can help guide market expectations, especially amid:
  - Elevated global and domestic inflationary pressures.
  - The expected tightening in monetary policy in the advanced economies.

*Monetary Policy Communications and Financial Markets in India — Working Paper No. WP/2022/209*

---


_Source: https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/wp/2022/english/wpiea2022209-print-pdf.pdf_