 Thank you for very interesting interventions. I feel it's a little bit titanic like our present situation though, and I don't think the conference or the interventions sufficiently recognize this. That is to say we recognize the progress that's been made, the SDGs, the reduced poverty, but we're living in a time with a disintegration of the international trading system, tremendous deaths in conflict and huge refugee movements, reversal of democracy and human rights in many parts of the world, mass migration and climate change, all which would threaten not just people but also even the planet. And the only real threat we've been talking about is robots, and of course I agree with that threat too. But I wonder what the panel feels, what wider should do in the light of this much more depressing scenario than we've really been recognizing? Thank you very much. So this was a question to all of you, you keep it in mind and you'll get back to it. Here we have one in front, we'll take a few questions, and please identify yourselves as well as to whom you are addressing the question, please. Thank you, Rolf van de Hoefen of the Institute of Social Studies. I also address my question to all members of the parliament, because I want to raise the issue with Rafi Menderdin and the issue of redistribution. Beno spoke about it and spoke about it, and David Malone also indirectly, because he spoke about the Sustainable Development Goals, and as you know, there is a number 10 goal which is reducing inequality. But if you see the history of the goal, it was a very checkered history, the original formulation to have a specific measure for inequality was refused, and in the end we got actually a very weak compromise that the poor segment of the population should grow faster than the medium. That is not really redistribution, and that was the outcome of a compromise. Now here comes my question, the proposals made by Beno and Anne of taxing capital, because that's what you actually want to do when you want to redistribute from the R, needs international coordination if one country is taxing capital and the other not, you cannot do it. So my question is, on the one hand we had this SDG dynamic, which not really counties could not compromise yet on redistributive measures. There very was a weak compromise, and on the other hand, one of the outcomes of this conference is that we really should do it. So one of the maybe task providers also, how can you create a more congenious atmosphere for international compromises and international agreements on redistribution? Thank you very much. Big questions to our panelists to answer. I think that there was a lady here in front, and then we can take a gentleman there in the middle, and then I'll give it to the panel to answer. Thank you very much, Stephanie Griffith Jones. I want to address my question to Beno and Lulu. He explained brilliantly the predicament that African countries today face, but it's a sort of tremendous feeling of deja vu, because we have all been there before in the emerging economies, in the poor countries, and even in the rich countries. So my question is sort of coming out a bit out of frustration. What can we do? Is it political economy? Is it technical discussions so that the mistakes are not exactly repeated though in different forms? And because in other fields of knowledge and science, people tend to learn. But in finance, we never seem to learn. Thank you very much. And there in the middle. Thank you. Rob Davies from Zimbabwe. The question I have affects everyone on the panel, but mainly directed to Ravi. There's been a lot of discussion, the question of robots and distribution of income. There have been suggestions about taxing capital from your co-panelists, and some discussion during the conference. I was slightly disappointed that the first time Kalamona was mentioned, and the work or the ideas of universal basic share rather than basic income was with Joe Stiglitz's presentation this morning. Given that he's one of your fellow signatories of the Stockholm statement, and I think I did a quick count. The nine of the 13 signatories have been at this conference. I just wonder what you think about the idea of universal basic share as a way of tackling that problem rather than universal basic income. Thank you very much. It looks like that I need to give a word to all the panelists in the first round. But I'll start with Beno, because there was a specific question addressed to you. I think the challenge on debt management along the lines that I tried to put forward may have to be addressed, I think, from two points of advantage. One, it's always a starting point on getting things right. And we shouldn't be waiting for doing debt sustainability analysis, which are done at points in time. You get a seal of approval. But we should continuously have a debt dynamics sort of assessment, which we can do on our own, just to make sure that when you are borrowing, you are borrowing with sustainability sort of conditions being very, very, very clear. But this is only for new debt. But I'm sure you were asking also, what do you do to fix what we have had so far? I think in one of the sessions, there was a conversation about looking also at the private sector balance sheets in relation to regulating also their own profile of debt. And one aspect should be currency mismatch. And this is something that can be done by regulators. But my advice to a couple of countries that I see actually now coming definitely into a major crisis. Unfortunately, one of them, I think, is already doing that. We borrowed fairly short. And we can make negotiations either for restructuring so that we do lengthen the maturity and give ourselves enough time, A, for those projects to start generating revenues, and B, to get and make sure that impact on exports is actually also forthcoming because that will resolve your foreign currency constraint. But apart from restructuring, I think restructuring can also be done maybe instead of waiting for another HIPPIC. This would be a good time for some of either IDA or IBRD type loans, which would be taken not to fund new investment, rather than to buy back this type of debt, which is short-term and mature. This is one way of restructuring and giving oneself also relief. This problem I'm talking about is real. And I think there are more than 10, 15 countries that are likely to get into real big trouble in not more than two, three years from now. So it's really an issue that needs to be dealt with. Just to follow up on Beno's point, I think to have instruments of that type, those instruments sort of exist for natural disasters. The deferred drawdown option of the World Bank, which is an IBRD instrument. But then we pushed for it to be IDA as well. So all the preconditions and all the work is done before the hurricane strikes, so to speak. You don't run around after its strike to say, oh, we've got to now find the money for a console. And it strikes me that it's amazing how often this refinancing issue appears suddenly on the horizon. And then we don't know what to do with it. So I think a DDO-type operation might be something which could be relevant for that, where the sum is approved and you specify a number of reasons for which it could be drawn down. And one of them could well be this drawdown thing. So anyway, that's a suggestion that I and others were working on. So actually, I agree with all the points that were made. So I have no sort of disagreement, really. On the universal basic share, universal basic income and so on, I think in the panel on poverty and inequality, I did say that that whole class of things could be a major topic for wider to be working on. Because we already saw, actually, just focusing, just on the UBI, the UBS, the UBI, the tremendous disagreements, even on the purely economic technical side of things. But then also in terms of this work, whether work requirement is a, and so on and so forth. So, and people have very strong positions on both sides. And I think that wider could be a place where that is done. And I think that could be both deliverable and fundable, is the wearing those sort of thing. And of course, I mean, I agree with Francis. I don't want to disagree. Maybe I was too busy rearranging the deck chairs, Francis, to notice the point. But again, I think I highlighted the labor-saving technical change. I think to say the robots are coming is too, actually, it's happening everywhere. It's happening in agriculture. It's happening everywhere. And I think that's a set of issues, okay? Some years ago, we were with Kamla Bain in Gujarat, and we were picking in the tobacco fields. And there's a particular time of the year when you have to pick a growth off the tobacco plant. Because then it grows bushly. Pilu cardinized is the local sort of name. And the big concern for Kamla Bain was that a new form of chemical had come, which you just sprayed, and the thing falls off by itself. In other words, she would not have the work. And this was 10 years ago, okay? So it's coming in agriculture, and it's not just robots, it's just this push that's coming. And I do believe that's of titanic proportions. So, but anyway, thank you. On inequality, I'm glad you pointed to the weakness of that goal because it illustrates the sort of fudge you get when 193 countries are negotiating with each other, each one having a blocking vote. So you tend to get fairly modest ambition. That being said, some of the other goals are better defined and more ambitious. But thank you for flagging that. Francis, I agree with you very strongly on one of the issues that you mentioned. On a couple of others, I think we may be in a temporarily worse situation than we necessarily will be in 10 years. The one I'm really worried about is climate change. Why? Because we all know what needs to be done now. The science is very conclusive. You have to be very determined to ignore evidence, to believe that urgent action isn't necessary today by the large industrial states at least and most others in solidarity with them. And the truth is, since everybody enjoyed the Paris conference and signing on to the Paris Accord so much, nothing much has happened in the negotiations, in the you went follow up on implementation. It's been painfully slow in progress. And so I think we have a really big problem there staring us in the face. And I'm very grateful to you for mentioning it. Also conflict and migration there. I think partly because Europe is at the center of a wave of migration resulting from conflict in part. There is a sense that the continent's being overwhelmed by these factors. Sitting a bit further away in Japan or Canada, say I'm being a Canadian. First of all, historically Europe has coped with migration much greater than the current waves of migration in the past. So there's a very strong element of political packaging manipulation and so on this time around. Secondly, I think many of the migrants from say Syria and Afghanistan were their countries to become a little bit more promising might well want to return. Indeed, given the rather inhospitable welcome of much of Europe, many of them are beginning to return. It's actually a rather sad reflection, it seems to me, on the values we pretend to hold. On conflict, unfortunately, Western powers seem drawn to the Middle East like a flame and I include that like moths to a flame. I include Afghanistan in the Middle East, although you can also of course include it in South Asia. It's the bridge between the two with Pakistan. And so if you think about it, Al-Qaeda incubated in Afghanistan, ISIS incubated in Iraq, those are not coincidences. We have something to do with that when I say we not necessarily we in this room, but the countries of many of those of us in this room. And our politicians seem remarkably impervious to learning any lessons from these misadventures, which the costs of which are being borne by the local inhabitants very largely, many of them today refugees and quasi-refugees. The strand of migrants from Africa, I think is in a different category. And there, I think everything we heard from you, Benno, is really, really relevant because there is going to be a lot more migration out of Africa unless employment creating growth in Africa takes hold more firmly. And the debt burden you mentioned, I think is very relevant, takes hold more firmly than it has so far. So I do separate the conflict of affected migration from the more economic migration. I sympathize with both, but the causes are rather different. And I'm very grateful to you for raising these issues. I'm also very grateful to you for raising the issue of climate change. I mean, I personally think that that is the single most important issue facing the planet today. As a researcher, I have shifted much of my energy towards exploring these areas. And in particular, the intersection of emerging market challenges and environmental challenges is one that researchers have done less on. There's been a lot of work in the developed world on the effects of an environment much less in emerging markets. And it's a very challenging. So for example, I just, I've been working on a paper for years now looking at the effects of India's Supreme Court action plans on firm behavior in India. The Supreme Court of India has passed law after law after law as have the states. And from what I can tell from my research, it has had no impact or very little impact except on the largest firms on their behavior in terms of pollution abatement or a reduction in the use of coal, et cetera, et cetera. I think it's a really important issue as the next dean of Berkeley's business school. Probably the first thing I will do is try to find a way for all those students, most of whom end up in Silicon Valley, to shift their focus towards issues of water, which California is facing, issues of wildfires, issues of natural disasters, which is really affecting not just California, but the world. Having said all that, however, I'm not sure that wider should be addressing these issues given its limited capacity and funding because this is an issue which is being addressed, perhaps not adequately and certainly politically. It's a disaster all over the world. There's an entire group at the World Bank, both within research and outside of research, devoted to the environment and climate change. The OECD has a group. I mean, so many people are working on that. In contrast, there are other issues that are perhaps less important, but which a lot of global think tanks are not so much looking at and where I think wider is more open-minded. So let me just mention two of them if I may. One issue that has received very mixed reviews in the last three days is this issue of regionalism. With the advent of right-wing political parties and the change in the political climate, global trade, the growth of global trade has stopped. If you look at the data, aggregate global trade is stalled. The growth in global trade as a share of GDP has stalled. And many countries and regions are turning to regionalism as a solution. I think this deserves some further thought. John Page is sitting in the middle of the room. He was my first employer when I got to the World Bank and the first thing John asked me to do in 19, you probably don't even remember this, John. The first thing John made me do as a young professional was get on a plane during hurricane season and go to every member of the CARICOM community which is the regional integration community in the Caribbean. So off I went to Trinidad and St. Lucia and Jamaica and Guyana and it would have been fun if it wasn't September, October, right? And one of the things one quickly discovers working on CARICOM is that it has some benefits but it also had some very significant costs for the members of the community because typically the common external tariff that was being chosen was not the lowest among the members. It was typically the highest, right? And so I really think that a lot more given that the world community is moving increasingly towards regionalism, I think that that's something that really deserves some careful thought in order to promote trade creation, not trade diversion. I think there are a lot of other things that could be addressed. How to design preferences in industrial countries to maximize the gains for emerging markets? The fact that the least developed countries in the world only account for 1% of global trade and yet they are on track to account for at least 15% of global population in a short period. But these are really important issues. The fact that the agenda in the global trade discussion has moved to what's called trade facilitation yet there are very few researchers whom we respect who have actually worked on the topic of trade facilitation. So that's a whole issue. I should say that the issue that Ravi brought up is also near and dear to my heart. So Gary Fields and I were talking about this earlier today. I was in a very prominent conversation at CUNY. Is Janet Gornick here? Is she still here? She may have left. I was in a conversation with Paul Krugman, David Otter, Brad DeLong, myself, and Eduardo Porter of the New York Times earlier. And I brought up this very idea from Atkinson's book and paper, I brought up some of his ideas of which one of the most interesting to me is the concept that technological change is endogenous and we could affect the path of technology by promoting labor using instead of labor saving technological change. And by the way, this is an idea that was also picked up by Bill Gates of Microsoft, the same idea. So I brought up this idea and I have never received such negative reactions in the part of my fellow panelists. David Otter just kind of fell out of his seat and said, what are you talking about? Are you against technology? So I think it's that kind of response that suggests to me that this is not necessarily gonna be picked up by the mainstream, whereas the issue of environmental challenges are being picked up. So I would encourage wider to address those kinds of issues. Thank you, Anne. Now, I would give a floor to one question that would be addressed to each of the panelists so that they can wrap up each of them in one minute their key message. Thank you so much. I highly appreciate. I'm Thaddeus from Ethiopia. And first of all, I'd like to thank UNWider for such a great opportunity for such a broad gathering and where we had knowledge sharing and as well as so delicious food, what we had. So thank you so much. It's a great opportunity for some of, I mean, maybe high profile scientists may have large opportunity, but those of in the medium level may not have such opportunity. So thank you so much. That is the first one. The second one issue of data usage. I hope I heard in the first day UNWider has gathered large amount of data which is available in the stock. So I don't know exactly that is open for access because data is only productive when it's used by different large number of researchers. So maybe that is a question. The third one, which I haven't seen adequately addressed is the issue of use and employment. In most cases in Africa, in many developing countries, one of burning development issue is use and employment. And it's like a leading fire in the dry grass because nowadays most of political issues or rests are mainly emanate from those use and employment related issues. So maybe I don't know in the future whether UNWider could take these issues as critical because it has valuable development implication for future development. So these are few comments I have. Thank you so much. Thank you very much. Now I don't think that the panel is responsible for the good food. So this one is something you are not responding. I think that that goes to the wider team and the caterer. Data and youth, these two issues maybe. Let me just say that at least my understanding is that the data that Wider has is publicly available, easily downloadable and so on. So just send an email to Fin and then after that to Kunal. And I think that really is one of the major contributions that Wider makes to capacity building and knowledge, the free access of data. All the papers that are published by Wider and so on are all available free access to be downloaded. On the youth issue again, the reason why I like the labor saving technical change type issue is because so many things can be brought under it in a systematic way. So there's one type of displacement which is the 40 year old steel worker. Or the 40 year old car worker in South Africa whose job has been taken away. The notion that you're going to make that 40 year old steel worker computer programmer by retraining and so on is fanciful. And this person is going to be with us for the next 40 years, okay? So that set of issues I think is an important one. But then the youth issue is of course that since on the demographic end we have a youth coming up, it's the same issue. In some sense, if those jobs are not there, how are we going to find an employer that you'd. So I think that frames things in my view anyway quite well without going into the detail of the issue which I think is very important. Thank you, David, please. On youth unemployment, I don't have an economist's answer for you. But I happen to live in Japan where there's a curious phenomenon of virtually full employment if you look at the statistics. In fact, most countries would find the statistics very enviable. But at the same time, quite a large number of young people including large numbers of young men who are very disaffected by the job opportunities available. They basically aren't interested in the jobs available for them. They either feel they can't access or they can't access the high quality jobs and they aren't willing to settle indefinitely for glorified internships and traineeships and so on. And this is the generation of young people some of whom have become so-called shut-ins in their parents' homes. Now, I think what this reveals is there's a way, in a sense, in a number of societies, a mismatch between how individuals are educated, the types of jobs that are available, the sorts of policies governments want to adopt to pretend there isn't a problem, so endless traineeships and internships and so on get underwritten. But actually, I think in the industrialized world, there is a growing mismatch between high quality jobs available and young people graduating from high school, from college, from university and so on. And so this is an issue that requires real attention in the industrialized world. For, I think, reasons Beno was alluding to and we've heard a lot about in the conference, in Africa it's a huge issue of where employment is going to be created for the very large numbers of young people that are anticipated to be joining the current African population. And in Latin America, also it's both a supply of jobs and a quality of jobs for younger people with higher aspirations that one senses often fuels tension in some of the Latin American countries. Thank you very much for the question. And I'm not sure is answer. Thank you, Anne. Yes, I just want to echo the other panelists point that the issue of youth unemployment is a really important one. I personally don't have much to say on that except in the context of globalization, what we're seeing is that basically people have a very hard time even within countries moving to where the jobs are. And so, for example, one sees that in a country like Brazil people are left unemployed by the trade reforms for years even though if they were able to move, that wouldn't happen. Michigan has never quite recovered from globalization in the United States. So we're seeing within not just across countries it's difficult to move but within countries. And I think this issue of people being able to move or being provided with support to move is something that needs to be addressed. Thank you, Ben. Yeah, maybe just to echo exactly what others have said. You know, amazingly, I was looking at the data and I thought maybe the majority of the youth in the world are from Africa and it is not the case. It is actually from Asia. And we only overtake, we only overtake Asia in 2018. In 2050 we'll almost be at par, almost be at par. And the supply of youth for the rest of the world actually will be from those two regions. So if we don't fix that problem you have to fix the migration problem. You can't have it both ways. And I think it's not just the issue of retraining them and making sure that they have the capabilities. Fortunately, the work that we are doing for a commission is called Pathways for Prosperity Commission on Technology and Inclusive Development. And we are issuing our first two reports next month on October 4th, it's hosted in Oxford. We actually look at platforms for matching skills and jobs, platforms that actually address, these are digital platforms that address and reduce such costs. Part of the mismatch is really an issue of flow of information. It's not all just because the skills are not relevant. And in some of these countries that aspect alone could solve probably about 20 to 30% of the problem. And then the rest would be structural in terms of the mismatch in terms of the actual skills. So I think it is a problem worth really paying attention to but it should be done in the context that Ravi actually already raised. Thank you very much, Beno. And I can see that I am not keeping my part of the deal to Fin and we are a little bit running out of time. So very much thank you for the panelists. And I would like all of you to join for a round of applause.