 Well, thank you very much. It's a real pleasure to be here at a sustainable conference trying to make the state of the world better. And certainly our Climate Action Summit in San Francisco was a remarkable event. In the face of the abdication of Washington, we have the dedication of California and the Climate Action Summit, which brought together over 4,000 mayors, CEOs, governors, provincial leaders from all over the world, all the continents representing billions of people committed to the proposition that we can transform our economy, our culture, our way of life. The city is the word we often hear, but it masks the complexity and the difficulty of living a sustainable life. With 7.3 billion people on the planet, with more than a billion automobiles, with more than 94 billion gallons of gasoline burned every day, we have a challenge. We are not on a sustainable path. The state of the world in many respects is getting better for many people, but it is also getting worse for many people. Species are being extinguished, habitat is being destroyed, and we live in the shadow of nuclear annihilation at every moment. We're not talking about that today, but if we're talking about a better state of the world, we can never forget the fact that Russia has 7,000 nuclear weapons, more than a thousand of which can be set off in a matter of an hour, an hour and a half. America has the same. So both countries have weapons focused at each other, and both countries are committed to building even more flexible and usable weapons, real insanity. So I want to juxtapose sustainability with insanity. And we have eight other countries who are trying to emulate the superpowers. India and Pakistan, China is far behind, but they will catch up very quickly, and then we have the other nuclear powers. That's one problem, and it illustrates the dilemma of this wonderful thing called technology. If you look, if you graph it, and think of a graph with the curve of technological power, it's going up with a very steep curve. Now graph the development of wisdom, restraint and insight. That's flat. The curve of power is up, the curve of insight, wisdom and restraint is flat, and the gap is getting bigger and bigger, and that's where we live. That's where we are. You want to be sustainable? You've got to close that gap. We have to either curb our power or we have to develop our wisdom and exercise it. Now when it comes to climate change, it's not 14,000 nuclear warheads, it's a billion automobiles, it's power plants, it's houses, it's waste, it's stuff, it's plastic circulating all over the ocean. So turning that around is very possible. Yes, we have the knowledge, we have the information, but do we have the will? Do we have the imagination? And even World Economic Forum, we had a president, Bill Clinton, who said, it's the economy stupid. Well, I beg to disagree. It's the ecology. I won't say stupid because if you get that, you're very smart indeed. But the economy lives inside the ecology. The atmosphere above the soil below is not indestructible. It is subject to assault. And the most powerful assault in, I don't know how many, you'd have to go back to volcanic eruptions, meteor is landing on the planet. We are generating lots of impact. And so with all that power, now the leaders of the world have got to pull together, collaborate, honestly address where are we? Where are we headed? And can we get to a direction, a set of understandings that lead to a set of agreements? We're not there yet. In terms of the Paris Agreement, many countries are stalling, are pulling back. Poland, which is the next stop on the conference of the parties, a real risk that it will be a setback, not in advance as we try to realize the lofty goals of Paris. All the countries of the world all came together and said, we're going to live within nature, within the ecology, and we will shape our economy accordingly. We heard today from President Trump all about sovereignty. Well, let me tell you, as you all know, climate change does not recognize sovereignty. Climate change affects everybody. Big, small, rich, poor, Chinese, American, Russian, Europe, we're all in it together. We're in it together as one people. As President Kennedy said at the American University in 1963, we all breathe the same air. We all want the same thing for our grandchildren. And then he said, America will stop nuclear testing, and we will meet with the Russians to agree on a treaty to ban atmospheric testing. That was lofty rhetoric. It was a powerful example, and we're right there today. Only it's not about atmospheric testing. It's about nuclear proliferation. It's about a trillion dollars in weaponry that the rich countries of the world are indulging in. All the while, we have a billion people in serious poverty. We have an economy directed toward unsustainability. So great, we're here. We want to improve the state of the world. But wow, it's tough. It's hard. So all hands on deck. Let's not be complacent. Let's not say we're great. We are faced with daunting challenges with great powers. Can we wrestle those powers to the ground? Can we seize with our insight and our wisdom the power that mankind has created? That is our challenge. That's the state of the world. Let's make it better. Thank you. Wow. That was a powerful appeal, huh? Really, I think this Garner was really appealing also to a bit of common sense, but one gets a feeling that common sense isn't always that common these days. Let's use the last minutes here to sum up these two days. And we have Fekke Subbas Mahair, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Managing Board of Royal DSM, Ned Lenz. He also has seen Brukavit Tigabu, Chief Executive Officer and Creative Director for Viscid's Workshop. We met both of you during the summit in different roles. So Fekke, let's start with you. Powerful voice from the business sector. What is your main experience during this summit and takeaways? Thank you, Boghe, and thank you for being here at this summit. I think very important and compliments, first of all, to the World Economic Forum organizing this summit here during the UNGA, here during the New York Climate Week, and somewhat effort getting all the people together and making a further step. And that during your birthday, if I'm well informed. So short applause for Boghe. So I appreciate your tremendous commitment, also from you personally. I think what we do here is we convene power. We come here together with the private sector, the public sector, NGO, scientists, et cetera, and that is all to the credits of the web, that's all to the credits of all of you. How I perceived it from the private sector strongly, purpose, sustainability, addressing those things is not the thing of giving back. It is a thing of responsibility. It builds further on what the governor said, those who have a lot of power, those who have a lot of impact, those who are obliged to have a strong feeling of responsibility, that responsibility has to go together. And I think that is what you see here, and how I experienced it. We work all here for the next generation. We work all here for think care that our children will also live happily, and if I look to the SDGs that I was involved in, especially in the last couple of days, everything which has to do with climate, how can we put a price on carbon, everything which has to do with addressing climate stronger from the business community to financial disclosure on what climate-related matters, all the things of setting targets and reducing emissions further, even asking the public sector to enforce that strong on us, or on food, on food, our food systems in the South, so-called, and in the West are broken. They are not good. And we ask ourselves, why are there indices, why are there a COP and a clear plan for climate, but not a clear plan by countries and businesses to make the food systems who are broken good again. And we discussed those things, and I think, I can give several examples, but I think we made tremendous progress on those things. In an era, I need to say also that on climate and on food, there's a lot to be done because we are not everywhere fully on track, and that was the hard reality also during those days, that we are not on track with all those things. But I personally believe there is not any challenge, there's not any global challenge which is too big for us to address as long as we work together, and that's what we tried to do here. Wow. Thank you. You've been such a champion, first on the millennium development goals, no on the sustainable development goals, and the GIS first, and then the SDGIS, and also on climate, you're also on the price of carbon. For your company, of course, you're chairman and CEO, but I was wondering, is there like full support of you taking this kind of global leadership, and have you seen a change there in the board? Is there no more understanding also for like a CEO taking this kind of leadership? And I guess that you attract, although a lot of young people may be based on this kind of enthusiasm. I appreciate your question very much. When I became CEO almost 12 years, 11 years ago, people said, what do you want to do to improve the world to make money? And I said, I will do both, and people knew me, and this is my narrative. And the financial community, but also my board, and also my people said, so what is it now, making money or improving the world? I said, I want to do both. No, no, no, but what is it now? I said, both. Okay, good. Then it's improving the world so we can forget your stock. I said, no, no, no, no, no. And I worked hard in the last 11 years to prove that that is not true. We tripled our share price financially. We did well, et cetera. So today I get the narrative of my board, of all the people, even of investors, like, okay, those two things can go together. And my response is, good, be here in this summit in 10 years from now. Those two things have to go, must go, will go together. And those companies who let those things not going together, I believe the millennials won't work for them. Millennials won't buy their products. They will miss the price on carbon. It will hit the bottom line. They missed the license to operate, and they were under two problems. So we went in a journey the last 10 years, but also the 10 years I had, I think. Wow. I can already see here there's a lot of people that wants to work for you, huh? They're quite talented, some of them. How are your two days been here? You, yesterday you were here as one of the social entrepreneur awardees, and... Yeah. So it's been, to be honest, a bit overwhelming at the same time, exciting. Because we heard so many problems. The world is facing huge problems from environment to not having the right education that prepare our children for the future to the big gap between gender, pay, and all that. But at the same time, I also learned so many good, well-tasted models that if we are actually ready for change and can take action, there are many proven models. And that's very exciting to me. So for me, I have three takeaways that I gathered in the last two days, and which is one, public-private partnership. And this is a very critical thing every country should apply. And the next one is incorporating local voice and believing in local solution. We can't really sit in the main city and design things. We have to go down to the ground and include local voice. And the third one is emerging technology with education. I feel like there are so many amazing technologies and innovations, but they're not integrated with education and I think bringing those together, especially for countries like us and emerging economies that will give us that leapfrogging to the future. So I feel like these three takeaways came strong to me. Thank you. Akim Stanner, administrator of UNDP, United Nations Development Program. And before the head of UNEP, United Nations Environmental Program, I think you come here with a lot of experience on sustainability, development, and environment. But if you look and the SDGs are very ambitious, do you feel that we have established a roadmap that will bring us towards meeting the SDGs currently? Do we have things in place to really achieve them as we did with the MDGs, but they were more narrow? No, we have like universal sustainable development goals, covering everything from climate to poverty eradication, to taking care of the oceans and biodiversity. Well, Bogu, thank you first of all for having me join you. I've been trying to get into Feig as a company for many years, so obviously there are some talents that don't get employed by him. So I chose the United Nations instead, right, Feig, and now... There's always a chance, sir. Now, I say this out of the deepest respect because we have been friends and really comrades in arms for a decade. You're matching ties even, I think, huh? Shades of yellow and green. But to answer your question, Bogu, I think coming from that other whole just now, what strikes me and often does when I step out of that, that when leaders come to the United Nations and we ourselves, when we look at the world, we have a tendency to describe the world in terms of challenges and risks and things that are going wrong. And therefore, you know, that proverbial, the glass is half empty. And then you step into a world of technology, of entrepreneurship, of opportunity, financial markets, and the world is full of, you know, startups and opportunities and success stories. So just a simple example of your own life story, Feig. I mean, how one can disprove the sort of intuitive prejudice that sometimes is there. And what is striking to me is that, you know, both realities are true. But what is actually happening, that's where the SDGs come in, is that we are entering to an age where actually it's not a glass half full or half empty, it's an entirely different glass that we're confronting, just to use a slightly limping analogy. And the reason why I say this is that the SDGs are a framework to try and understand how we handle complexity. The century where with singular solutions you could solve an entire sort of developmental or economic pathway for a nation question is largely gone. And much of what is being discussed in that hall next door right now is about how things that are happening beyond our national jurisdiction might actually impact on what happens in our own communities and countries. Whether it is, you know, pandemics, whether it is migrants, whether it's economic and financial insecurity, wars, I could go on. And I think people are often tempted to look at the SDGs as some sort of magic formula. No, they are the most intelligent way of trying to create a framework that allows us all to look at the future and understand quite how complex the challenge of acting will be. And here comes an additional element that I think is increasingly entering into our horizons, and that is the transformative nature of technology. We are living through a period of time where we are still unable to even comprehend quite what is going to happen by 2030, digital economy, automation, AI. And we are talking about dimensions of change that are difficult to comprehend. Nobody really knows right now exactly how they will unfold. They may turn out to be the great nirvana, or they may turn out to be the great divider. But in the UNDP context, or in the United Nations context, looking at global development, what is also fascinating is that for the first time in history, that impact of technology will have a degree of simultaneity. It will happen everywhere at the same time. It doesn't matter whether you are the United States of America, you have the highest per GDP capita, a capita per GDP, or whether you are Rwanda or you are Somalia. You are embedded in a global world where this technology shift is going to create curves of this dimension. And into that, the SDGs are indeed at the moment our best bet to be able to work with one another in managing these extraordinary opportunities and challenges. Do you think that 4IR, with everything from artificial intelligence to blockchain, precision medicine and all this, do you think these are also a key to leapfrog and solve some of the monumental challenges that we are faced with? Totally. I mean, you know, if you just think that we carry this thing in our pockets today, I mean, it knows everything we do. And it allows us to do things that we wouldn't have dreamt of being able to do sitting somewhere in Central Park or in the middle of, I don't know, the Sahel region. So technology is a great jumping board and allows us to leapfrog. But let's think for a moment. What's happening to us right now in the political sphere is that a lot of people have leapfrogged, and then there is the other half, the other 10%, the other 90% who are left behind. And this notion of inequality, I think, is one that has to be understood alongside the opportunity of technology. I attended yesterday the Broadband Commission. I mean, we have passed the 50-50 moment, actually connecting people in the world 50%, which is extraordinary. I mean, we should really be, you know, playing drums and celebrating the success. But meanwhile, the 50% are charging ahead. There are 50% who haven't even got access to Broadband, never mind in Africa, three quarters of the population, access to electricity. And here comes AI, here comes automation. Before we know it, we have a great dividing moment that we have to manage. And I think whether it's consultancy companies, whether it's the World Economic Forum, the United Nations Development Program, the Secretary General's, you know, task force on digital finance, we all have to learn to start working far more closely together because it's the only way we can come to even begin to understand what is not 100 years from now, even 15 years from now. And that will define, I think, our capacity to not just function as a global economy, but actually function as a global community of maybe 9 billion people. No, I think this is very relevant. And you know with the C4IR Center that the World Economic Forum has set up in San Francisco. For example, oceans is an important and integrated part of this. I think some of the ocean problems is so interlinked where we can also have these technologies supporting in solving some of those issues. Fekia, I saw you were eager to comment. Yeah, thanks for that. I would totally agree with my good friend, Achim, of obviously both. On the global challenges we have and the huge amount of opportunities we have, entrepreneurship technologies. But I would like to add an angle. Globalization brought prosperity for billions of people in the world. Technologies and new green technologies brings prosperity for billions in the world. But if you work in the center of the United States in a coal mine, maybe then you perceive not the prosperity that globalization and new technologies brought for yourself. And for me, the answer is not to put a fence around those people and protect them. For me, the answer would be to transition also with them to the new era. And that means that we, I totally agree with Achim, but I add the angle that we need to make globalization. That we need to make the opportunities of new technologies more inclusive for all. And if we do not do that, we get political tensions and political distinction in a way that we don't like that. I'm not talking about the US or the US only. I'm talking about Europe and other countries as well, where we see the same. So this transition for me has to go together with inclusiveness for all. Thank you. Burkdavit in Ethiopia where you operate, you reach I think 5 million children every week. And that wouldn't have been possible without modern technology. How do you see technology can influence education and giving children opportunities in the future? Because I think you can reach children also in remote areas that you could just dream about reaching with high quality education in a different way. Yeah, I mean, it's obvious that we benefit from technology, but just on the point just raised, when we are catching up with television and radio, if the world is handling AI and different high technology, then we still are doing that catch up that will never actually catch up. So the question is, how do we think about this world becoming a one home? So that we have that deep empathy for each other that we share those resource and more mindful way, because if we are just saying, yes, technology is helpful, but again, leaving most of the people in the world behind. I don't see it being that helpful. So I think it comes down to again, humanity, connection and empathy so that we actually build a more sustainable world. Akim, we are coming to a close. We are supposed to be on Swiss time here, so we are now 10 minutes almost over time. But I would like to just look at this in a little bit of a historic context. Akim, you had at the IUCN, then you were with UNAP and now you are with the UNDP. UNDP has a big role when it comes to the STGs. When you go to bed and reflect, I guess, on the STGs, because I think you, I know you feel very passionate about this. What are the main challenges now to make the STGs really take off? With the MDGs, we really saw a lot of momentum being created. These are more, it's more complex because they're universal. But are we on the way to really, are we moving in the right direction? Or are we just sugarcoating this? Because when the CO2 emissions should have gone down, they're going up. So there are some indicators that are not moving in the right direction. Are you optimistic about it? And are we really willing to take the necessary steps to make this happen? Well, let me just say, I think we have every reason to be fascinated by how quickly something that was negotiated by 193 countries. I just remember this, never mind a local council or the board of a company. We actually managed in two years to negotiate 17 sustainable development goals that brought a degree of integration between the economic, the social and the environmental that we have never had before. And we agreed that they must be universal because what happens in America matters as much to the future of China or to Ethiopia or to Brazil as what happens in Germany or in South Africa. And I think that is an extraordinary statement. I don't think it's an accident. It happened in 2015, yes. We are now in 2018 and a lot of things have happened. But leaders understood at that moment that we needed a different paradigm under which the way we work together to address these issues would be better understood. And I think the SDGs are not something that the person in the street will come up to you and recite the 17 goals. This is not my yardstick, but it is empowering. And I often use the analogy that you need an operating system on which you can run your apps. The SDGs are the operating system. They are the stuff that the engineers put together. But go to Medellin where the mayor will tell you that he actually uses the SDGs to get local people involved in doing things that have never been done before in his town. So in that sense, I think I am fascinated by how quickly they're moving, how they're also attractive to the private sector and the financial sector. I think many companies initially are just really pleased to see that they can relate what they do to one or two or more of the goals. The most sophisticated ones, and particularly the financial market players, are increasingly using the SDGs as a way of looking and understanding future markets. And I think that is the interesting unifying element of it. I personally, and if my bosses were here, they would really kick me in the shin. I'm less worried about the reporting on the indicators and targets to the general assembly. I think the SDGs are a tool. They're a powerful platform, an operating system that we need to learn to use. I end by saying I'm losing a little bit of my optimism, not because I think it can't be done. I'm just worried that we're running out of time. And time is our biggest enemy right now. And time is what we're losing. And we're seeing it right here again in New York. And it's tragic because it's actually an opportunity lost to act what you can act and to believe in the ability to act together before you begin to fight each other because the other side didn't act. That's actually the prospect that we are staring at when we listen to these general assembly debates. And I think this is where the private sector is critical right now and has to step up. And my respect to all of those, like Fike and others, who actually take responsibility to say, look, we are part of that public dialogue. And we can't let political opportunism and short termism define what are, in the sense of last resort options that we are actually dealing with right now. So optimism with a slight element of panic. Thank you. Thank you to a great panel. Also use this opportunity to thank my colleagues. For all the hard work you put into making this sustainable development impact summit happening, especially to Dominique, Terri Herr, Lee, that is in charge of the programming. I feel, of course, I'm not objective, but I feel we had two amazing, very practical days. And we brought private sector together with governments and civil society. And it has been an accelerator. It has been 100 different projects being launched. It's very practical. And we come a bit closer to meet the sustainable development goals. And it has been so successful that we, I'm also happy to announce that we will meet the same place next year for two days to continue having this impact. And also we will continue to collaborate, hopefully, with Conrad Hilton Foundation. And their support has been so important for us. So thank you to panel. Thank you to all the distinguished participants. Thank you to my colleagues that have worked 24-7 to make this happen. So thank you. Thank you.