 A very warm welcome to this discussion forum on new findings on the dynamics between force land use and food security jointly hosted by IUFRO, the International Union of Forest Research, organizations and CIFOR, the Center for International Forestry Research. Roman philosopher and writer Seneca once said that we do in fact not have too little time. It's just that we waste too much time. So you do have my assurance that this discussion forum will be an excellent investment of your precious time. My name is Alexander Buk. I'm the executive director of IUFRO, of the International Union of Forest Research organizations. Not all of you may be aware of IUFRO. It's the leading global network for forest science collaboration. The network brings together about 650 member organizations in virtually all corners of the world. These are universities, research institutions dealing in one way or the other with issues related with research related to forest trees. All together we do have member organizations in more than 120 countries uniting about 15,000 scientists. So that was the kind of advertisement for my own organization. IUFRO is a member of the collaborative partnership on forest which supports, as you know, the global landscapes forum. Ladies and gentlemen, the issue which we are going to discuss today I believe is a very relevant one. Faced with a likely population, a likely global population of over 9 billion by 2015, issues of food security and nutrition have now indeed very prominently entered both the scientific and the political agenda, especially in relation to the discussion on the post-2015 development agenda. As many of you will be aware, the United Nations Secretary-General has proposed a very ambitious goal to eliminate global hunger by 2025, the so-called zero hunger challenge. Of course, meeting this challenge is a complex undertaking and as any complex undertaking this requires good profound scientific knowledge. Against that background, a panel of scientific experts from around the world has been tasked by the collaborative partnership on forest with carrying out a comprehensive global scientific assessment of published scientific information about the role of forest and trees for food security and nutrition. And this event here actually gives some kind of a sneak preview of the findings that are emerging from that global study on the contribution of forest to food security and nutrition. At the discussion forum, you will learn about the scope of the assessments, the emerging key findings and I should say that the final report will be launched at the eleventh session of the United Nations Forum on Forests which will be held in May 2015 in New York at the UN Headquarters. First please allow me to briefly outline the program of the discussion forum. We will first have a brief introductory remarks by the newly appointed director of the United Nations Forum on Forests Secretariat, Mr. Manuel Sobral Filio, Manuel Averebó and welcome. We will then have three brief presentations by our leading panel members, followed by statements by three respondents and then it will be your turn, then we want to have an open discussion with the panelists and then you're free to direct your questions to the panelists and the respondents and also respond yourself to some of the information that will be presented at this forum. I should also mention that the results of our discussion will not get lost, they will be documented, they will be included in the report of the Global Landscapes Forum and for this purpose Dr. Valerie Capos who heads the Climate Change and Biodiversity Program at UNEPW CMC has kindly agreed to serve as a rapporteur of our session. Well, where are you? Over here. So Rayl will take good notes of our session. Without further ado, I would now like to invite Mr. Sobral Filio to provide opening remarks. Manuel, the floor is yours. Good afternoon to all of you. Alexander, thank you very much for the kind of invitation to briefly address this important group of people here, colleagues here in the panel. It's really an honor to be here with you today and I brought an institute in Iquitos. So we are here in the beautiful Lima, but we are still a bit far from the Amazon forest, but in any way it's very fitting that we are here. It's really an opportunity for me to take the floor and thank very much the C4 and the IUFU for taking the leadership, particularly IUFU on these global forest expert panel initiatives. We are in times that more informed decisions have to be taken. We are in a crucial time now where we are shaping the future of sustainable development issues and I think this panel has already done great work in a few subjects, including issues of social climate change adaptation, forest governance and forest biodiversity in our EDG. So the work of this panel is extremely important when we are now having scientific assessments of the highest quality to support the negotiations process internationally. We know that the thematic panels have addressed several crucial issues and they have to find their way into the high-level dialogues that the international community is going through right now. Science-based information is exactly what we need in this crucial time as the future of sustainable development issues is being shaped in the new SDGs, the post-2015 development agenda and also, and I would say it's more important for us, for the forest community, the future of the international arrangement on forests. In May, the members of the forum will meet in New York to decide its future and several options are on the table, including, including, it's not that, it's including illegally binding negotiations on illegally binding agreement on forests. It may not come, but we have an opportunity for negotiations when other important events are shaping the future, including the third international conference on finance and for development. So all of these events will need better informed decisions. We in the UNFF, as well as our partners in the CFEF, are working to ensure that forests are placed high on the development priorities of the post-2015 agenda. Forests have, in the process, of course, not been finalized yet, but that's at this stage where we are in draft SDGs have been agreed. Forests have been recognized as an integral part of the agenda, in particular under SDG-15 on terrestrial ecosystems, where sustainable management of forests is explicitly mentioned. Now, we all know that food security is, and will always be, part of the agenda, the post-2015 agenda. And the discussions on this latest assessment by the GFEP on the linkage in the interdependence of the forests is very timely. I think we have gone beyond the old times when agriculture was placed against forests. There's no social thing. In fact, just to end this brief intervention, I would like to recall Nancy and Kashmir saying, quoted by the then Director of General of FFAO, Jyuf in the Antalya World Forest Congress, I think it was 1997, I was there, but I'm getting old, so I don't really remember the year. And they say, loosely translated, reads that food will last as long as forests do. So with that, I thank you very much for your attention, and wish the forum success for discussion. Thank you. Thank you very much, Manuel, especially also for pointing out the relevance of this global study for the discussions on the sustainable development goals and the post-2015 development agenda. This is indeed one of the main intentions. Thank you very much. Thank you. Obrigado. So actually, I forgot to move on with the slides here. Here you have it, so here you have the list of the speakers. And without further ado, I would now like to introduce the first speaker, Dr. Christoph Wildburger. Christoph coordinates the Global Forest Expert Panel's initiative of the CPF on behalf of UPFRO, and he's now going to introduce the scope of the scientific assessment, and also present to you some of the emerging findings. Christoph, the floor is yours. Thank you very much, Alexander. I will briefly explain the background of the Global Forest Expert Panel on Forest Food Security, and then present the scope and some emerging findings of our assessment. The Global Forest Expert Panel's initiative was established by the Collaborative Participant Forest, as was already mentioned by Manuel and Alexander, and it is led by UPFRO. It's directed at the Science Policy Interface, and its mission is to support forest-related intergovernmental processes by producing scientific assessments on issues of high concern, emerging issues of high concern. The initiative establishes thematic panels for each of the topics. These panels produce assessment reports and feed the outcomes to reports into international policy processes. I just listed a few here, the United Nations Forum on Forest, the Convention on Parliamentary Diversity, the Climate Convention where we are now, and we are also informing the discussions on the Sustainable Development Goals and the BOSC 2015 Development Agenda. It's very important to mention that our assessments are independent, so the panel members work independently. They do not represent any institutions or organizations. They work in their personal capacity. It's always interdisciplinary work. All reports are peer-reviewed, and we will be scientifically sound in the whole process and transparent. Well, what we produce is peer-reviewed reports, as I've said already, but also policy briefs, which are summaries of key messages for policy makers to make it easier to grasp the key messages of our reports, because the full reports are also directed at a scientific community. So far, as Manelos has already mentioned, we have published three reports. The first one on adaptation of forests and people to climate change. The second one on international forest governance. The third one on the linkages between RED Plus and biodiversity. The new expert panel on forest food security was established about a year ago in December 2013 by the Collaborative Partnership on Forests, about 25 leading experts from around the world from various scientific disciplines joined the panel. We really tried to select them according to regional and cultural diversity and also keep a gender balance. I think especially referring to the topic food security nutrition, this is a very important task to get different views, even if it's all scientific work. Currently, the work is at a stage that we developed the first draft of our assessment. It went into peer-review already, and we are addressing peer-review comments now working on a final draft. And we just 10 days ago met and discussed conclusions the first time. So we are just at the stage of developing the conclusions. But we try to give you a first glimpse of what seems to be emerging from our work. Alexander has already mentioned that the report will be launched at UNIFF 11 in early May next year. I will try to explain the scope of our work on basis of a conceptual framework we have here. As you can see, first of all, the assessment is investigating the linkages between forest and tree-based systems and food security and nutrition. The whole assessment is a global assessment, but it has a slight focus, of course, on the areas of the world where hunger, malnutrition, and food security is a serious challenge. That's why you will see if you read it, that there is a slight focus on that. As you can see in our conceptual framework, we analyze the status of what we call the forest food system, all these interlinkages. We analyze the drivers, and we analyze response options. And we do analyze that at different scales, that landscape scale, the national scale, and the global scale. The first part of our assessment focuses on the direct and indirect roles of forest play for food security and nutrition at a multitude of different roles. And it also analyzes the different management and production systems and their role that ranges from manipulating forests to optimize the yield of certain wild foods, for example, to shifting cultivation, to agroforestry practices, and then also to single crop, tree crop practices. And we analyze all these different management approaches and related factors. That is the first part. And then the second part of our assessment focuses on environmental, economic, social, and political drivers in this system. And my colleagues will then refer to that in their presentations too. Their presentations will focus on the drivers and response options later on. And the response options are the third part of our assessment. We assess them, again, at different scales, the landscape scale, and also the macro scale, the global scale, referring to markets, to governance, and public policies, and so on. I think I should be brief with that, because otherwise I'm talking too long, and go on to some emerging findings, which are very general. I took some general findings that emerged from our discussion one week ago. And first of all, the scientific evidence, there is scientific evidence of increasing scientific evidence of the importance of forest and tree-based systems for dietary diversity and quality, especially through seasonal shortfalls. There is also scientific evidence that the income from non-timber forest products and agroforestry tree products provide significant benefits for national economies, as well as for livelihoods, and that especially for vulnerable smallholders in troubled countries. There's another finding based on scientific evidence that forest and food fuel make essential contributions to food security and nutrition. And this aspect is often underestimated by stakeholders and decision-makers. It's not surprising that we can confirm that the multitude of ecosystem services simultaneously supports forest food production, sustainability, and health. So that's, I mean, you could say that's common knowledge, but we can scientifically base that. And it's very important to state there we found a lot of knowledge gaps, so that means there is a gap in scientific knowledge on different aspects, for example, on dry forest ecosystems, on cultural approaches to foods and nutrition, and so on. And there is a lack of knowledge of stakeholders concerning forest food and nutrition, so foods from forest and their nutritional value. And there is also a very important outcome that which is also quite obvious, that the awareness of the importance of forest and food security and nutrition is very low, especially also in decision-making processes. That's a word cloud, and it's based, okay? I will brief now that that's just food for thought now. That's a word cloud produced on draft conclusions of the different chapters we produced so far. And that's just, we took out, of course, the obvious words like forest, food, landscape, and that's what comes out, and it's interesting. And I just referred to two words, the first is knowledge. So it's obvious that we need a lot of knowledge, both scientific knowledge we do not have yet, but also we need awareness and knowledge of decision-makers. And the second word is opportunities. It's also quite in like a large font, and I think our assessment will also show that forests will provide increasing opportunities to contribute to food security and nutrition, and I think my colleagues in their presentations will also refer to that later on. And I'm coming to a close. All information and all publications of the Global Forest Expert Battles may be found and can be downloaded at the IUFRO website. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Christoph. I noticed that in the word cloud, there were two words in both letters, women, woman, and relations, so I very much look forward also to hear more about the role of women in this particular issue. Relations, I think, is an important term because very often we think in sectors, and of course the landscape, especially transcends sectoral boundaries and the issue of food security is something that also clearly transcends the sectoral boundaries, so I look very much forward to the further presentations and discussions. Now, without further ado, I would like to introduce to you Terri Sunderland. Terri is a principal scientist with C-Force First and livelihoods program where he leads the research domain managing trade-offs between conservation and development at the landscape scale, and naturally he will focus on this landscape level in his presentation. Terri. Excellent. Good afternoon and thank you all for coming. I know there's a number of conflicting and competing events this afternoon, so we're grateful that you've come along to share our research and share your experiences too. So as Christoph has pointed out, he's provided a very nice overview of the framework of the chief head process and how the linkages between forest and food security are being elaborated through this process. And I'd like to sort of just take a little bit of a step back and provide some of the evidence that we're talking about. I'll have this here. And a little bit of background. We know that up to a billion people rely on forest products in some way for their livelihoods and to some degree. And recent research undertaken and coordinated by C-Force in the support of the poverty and urban network has shown that up to one-fifth of rural income can be derived from the urban. And this is a work that was published in a special issue of all development just recently, 14 papers related to the Penn project. Reben Aziz's work, Globally Looking at Bushmead, reaffirms the importance of bushmead for protein and health for many rural communities. And we also are aware that biodiversity plays a very important role for primary healthcare for most people, much of this, but biodiversity being forest biodiversity. And this now entering the sort of linkages between forests and farming systems. Up to 40% of global food production does come from diverse small-holder agriculture systems in multifunctional forest landscapes. And we know that there's a long tradition for managing forests of food. Think about Sweden agriculture, shifting agriculture, for example. Amzonia is a fabulous example of how forests have been manipulated and managed for agriculture over millennia. And something I'll talk about a little bit in a subsequent slide is work related to forest sustaining agricultural culture. What are the interactions at the ecosystem service level between forests and agricultural production systems? So moving on specifically to forest trees and food and nutritional security, the type of work that we're including in the chief review. We've traditionally had a longstanding understanding of the role of non-timber forest products. And there's a number of people in this room who I've worked with who have long histories of working with NTFPs as they are. And how NTFPs and multiple use forest management was gonna provide the conservation of forests in their entirety. And we also speculated that farming mosaics may promote more diverse diets that these small-holder farming systems with their diversity of products are more resilient to climate change, for example. But they are more diverse in terms of nutrition and dietary diversity as well. We have Henry and others here from aircraft focusing on agroforestry and farming systems, the interaction between trees on farms. This is extremely important. As I mentioned earlier, the ecosystem service is a forest and trees for agriculture. And again, I'll expand on that in a subsequent slide. Christoph mentioned the importance of fuel wood. And fuel wood cannot be underestimated without the ability to cook food. Most of it is unpalatable. It has a huge impact in terms of human health. The ability to boil water, for example. And I saw a recent estimate that 80% of wood fuel globally was actually used to sterilize water, whether that's true or not. But it would actually make a lot of sense. And work has also related to a lot of what we've done on non-terror forest products. Looking at the backup foods, the safety net function of tropical forests during lean times, particularly agriculture, or in times of climatic stress or other economic stress periods. So we wanted to test the hypothesis. What are the linkages really between forest food security and nutrition? There's a paper published this year in Global Environmental Change where you can find these findings. But basically, we took USID's demographic health survey nutrition data from 21 countries in Africa and overlaid that with remote sensing analysis. So I looked at basically the nutrition data and the tree cover data. And you see if there was a relationship between the two. Focusing primarily on child nutrition indicators. The software represented 93,000 children. You can see the metric there. Below the ages of five, in over 9,500 communities, as I say, in 21 different countries. So what is the relationship? Well, there is a very positive relationship between tree cover, dietary diversity and nutrition. And we find that fruit and vegetable consumption increases to a certain degree, up to about 45 to 50% of tree cover. The level of nutrition of dietary diversity is higher. That spatial segregation is very much characterized landscape management or the way we think of landscapes. Or there's this temporal segregation that different functions on the same unit. In fact, think of Sweden agriculture, for example, or slash and burn forestry. So those types of segregations are very much characterized the way we manage our tropical landscapes. But the one thing that's been highlighted by this GFET process is in many instances and when you think about the diversity of small water farmers they're able to integrate agriculture, forestry and other land uses in very small areas of land. We're talking about functional integration. The real multifunctionality that the kind of thing really does promote conservation. It promotes forestry conservation in particular, but also does not affect productivity of agricultural systems concerned. So we're talking about real multifunctionality. And that's, here we are, the Global Landscapes Forum talking about integrating land use function along those lines. So just to summarize, the key conclusions of the types of work that we've been doing as part of the GFET review is obviously the evidence is showing us that diverse forests and tree-based production systems do offer advantages over monocrops because of their adaptability and resilience to climate change in particular because of their diversity, because of the you don't put all your eggs into one basket if you like economically or environmentally. There are multitude of ecosystem services provided by forests and trees, which have an invaluable provision aspect for food production, but also for sustainability and environmental and human health. And human health, I think, is the next part of the chain that we need to start looking at. What are the relationships between forest, trees, dietary diversity, nutrition, and how it seems to be the next step? And we've seen recent outbreaks of Ebola, which have been linked in West Africa to deforestation. Again, evidence is scanty, but it's something that's worth investigating and looking at. And in fact, we had a meeting with USID in September and they wanted to focus basically on us reporting on the money that they give us related to food security and biodiversity. But 80% of the discussion was about the linkages between forestry and zoonosis, and particularly Ebola. So this is entering the sort of public consciousness and the donor consciousness, something we need to step up to the plate and think about how we research and integrate some of these things into the landscape scale. And I mentioned this issue of multifunctionality, combining food production, biodiversity conservation, and other land uses to achieve food and nutritional security by also maintaining the landscape functions that we're referring to. But there is a big caveat, and it's forests and trees alone are not going to provide the solution to global food security. But instead of being dismissed as they've done in the past, I think Christoph alluded to this very well, that forests and trees have never really been thought of even in terms of food security nutrition. The data and evidence suggest that they do play an important role. Not singularly, but as a potential strategy as part of a wider strategy for food security nutrition. And I think that the chief head review with its political connections, if you like, this sort of forward and be disseminated will be able to provide that linkage and I think influence the global agenda in that regard. Thanks very much for your time and I appreciate the panel invited me to speak. Thank you very much, Terry. I apologize, the room is extremely full. We do not have sufficient chairs. So hopefully by the time the final report will be launched in May, Dr. Sobral, we need to make sure that we have a room that is big enough to accommodate everybody. Really, thank you for your interest and for staying despite the fact that there are not sufficient chairs. I would now like to give the floor to Henry Neufeld. Henry actually heads the Climate Change Unit at ICRAF, the World Agroforestry Center. And he is also the ICRAF Fire Focusing Point for Sea Caves and now I have to look at my note because that's a rather long name. It's the research program, the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security. And not only that, he's also the focus point for FTA which is the CGIAR Research Program on forest trees and agroforestry. So many acronyms. Well, Henry, the floor is yours. Okay, thank you very much. Thank you for the invitation to speak here and to appreciate the opportunity to say a few words about what I have been doing in this Global Forest Expert Panel to which I was invited as somebody who works mainly on climate change in the context of agriculture and I thought this is not actually, not really the area I'm most familiar with and you will notice that my familiarity and my confidence in presenting areas around food security in forests is indirectly related to the number of words on my slides. Okay, so Terry was talking about the landscape scale and obviously everything integrates at the landscape scale. Farmers, forest dwellers, they all operate at that scale ultimately but beyond that scale, there are drivers and then there are response options and that is exactly the area that I was asked to lead a chapter on by all means and so this is the topic that I will try to refer to a little bit further and thank you, this slide here just shows the range of total reliance to no reliance on forest and tree-based agricultural systems and food security, isolated hunter, forest or gather communities on the far right and then small scale farmers somewhere in the middle, small scale subsistence farmers, consumers in urban areas, they essentially become totally unrelated to food security in forests but nevertheless we have to deal with the whole area because if we only focus on the forest communities, forest dwellers, we're missing out on the entire area of food production from trees and agricultural systems with trees in them from horticulture and orchards. We're missing out a large piece of the picture if we only focus on the forest per se and this whole G-FAP panel would miss, I think, the major part of the picture if we only dressed the far right of this scale so that's what makes it complicated as well because we have to integrate so many things and many of the drivers that we're talking about are also responses and many of the things that we consider negative at one scale might be positive at the other scale and vice versa. So the two chapters that I will briefly talk about are the chapters four and six, three and five are chapters around landscape scales, drivers and responses, chapters four and six are the drivers and responses at macro scales, essentially. And we're looking here at a very simple framework to address these questions. We have social economic policy related and environmental drivers that affect land use and forest management and indirectly have to do with food security. We have very little evidence of direct evidence and I'm glad to say that Terri has found this evidence in his research studies, but from the literature, and this is a literature-based work, there is very little direct evidence of these drivers and food security in forest management. It's all, most of it is indirect evidence. Yes, so this is just a list of the, what we're dealing with in this chapter and I apologize for the many words, as I said. We're looking at social drivers in the forest and food security nexus. Here we have conflicts in around forests, how they interact with food security, poverty and inequality, how that addresses food security, demographic change, migration, urbanization and negrarian reform, they also address issues related to forests and the landscapes and how that change essentially addresses food security. We have economic drivers, income by capita, then we have absolute and relative food prices, they make a big difference because the prices that we are talking about are dependent on the people that they are able to buy and they are related to their total income and part of that income can come from forests and part of it can come from the markets. We're looking at policies and then changes at production system levels. We look at policy drivers affecting forests and food security systems, how changing contexts and forest governance play a role. We're looking at territorial and versus networked governance reforms and how they might differ in the ways that communities at smaller scales relate to forest and food security and then we have environmental drivers, climate change, one of them deforestation, forest transitions, looking at invasive species and water supply. That's basically the outline of chapter four and chapter six and then again I will go quickly through this. Here we try to address mainly response options based on examples that have worked in different places. It's not, we want to be as practical as possible. It's difficult to find examples but by showing examples that might be transferable to other areas and we show examples that have worked in some places, that might provide opportunities for others to replicate these examples under conditions that obviously have to be place-based and context-specific. So gender plays an important role in social, cultural response options. Dietary choices, education, behavioral change, they make a big part of how we can relate to sustaining forests more sustainably and then ultimately how they relate to food and nutritional security. Strengthening technology for improved food security. Technologies can play a huge role, let's just think about climate information systems as one tool that helps farmers and in landscapes manage their land better and that has consequences on food security. Mobilization for forest food security and justice. This is something that I perceive is very important. There are strong drivers, particularly from urban centers that demand from corporations that work in food that they improve their management practices and that can have positive effects on the retailers, on the providers of these services, the contractors, for instance. So there's possibilities at different scales outside of the forest to improve forest protection and food security at the same time. Market-related initiatives and innovations in the governance of food systems. This just talks, first of all, of a framework and there are some global initiatives to support responsible finance and investment. Here, there are examples that are driven by large corporations that have an interest in improving land management and forest food security. There are initiatives at smaller scales, collaboration between local and subnational governments and corporations working together through, let's say, these roundtables. These are opportunities that enable improved forest and food security management. The governance responses to enhance forest food security linkages. We have tenure and governance responses, decentralization and accountability responses, market regulation responses, access to information, knowledge and technology. All of these issues play important roles and they actually have very little to do with the forest themselves. They are outside of the forest. I know I'm running out of time here. And there are lots and lots of messages here so I don't want to spend too much time on the messages. These are initial messages. You will have the opportunities, I think, to look at these messages as they emerge further and we can talk about them and you can ask me about these messages during the session because I don't want to extend the time that I've been given. We have messages related to the drivers and we have a couple of messages related to the responses and I'll just leave it at this point right now so that we can take it up further. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Terry. Is it on? I think so. So ladies and gentlemen, these were the three presentations by the panel members. We now have three respondents. And by coincidence, it happened so that our three presenters happen to be male and our three respondents happen to be female. Overall, we do have a perfect gender balance if I neglect my role as a moderator. So let me briefly introduce our respondents to you. First, we have Natalia Cisneros. Natalia is the Vice President of the International Firstly Students Association, a partner network of IUFRO. She has been intimately involved in organizing the youth event here at the Global Landscapes Forum and most importantly, she's a young forester here from this beautiful country of Peru. Then we have Susan Bratz. Susan is team leader for Dryland Force, Agroforestry and Climate Change and she holds the position of Senior Forestry Officer at the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. And then last but not least, and I'm not sure if I have to really introduce her, we have Victoria Tauley-Cordpus. Wiki appeared already several times during this Global Landscapes Forum but nevertheless, I should mention for the good order that she is the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the former chair of the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues. Let me start with you, Natalia. You represent the youth, the next generation. Which aspects, what do you take from the presentation? Which aspects do you consider to be particularly relevant from the perspective of youth? And what are the key messages that you would like to convey to decision makers in this context? I would like to thank you for having youth involved in this session and for giving us the opportunity to be heard. For, well, usually the youth is seen as the future and I would like to point out that we don't really have to wait for the future to start acting, that the youth is also here today, in the present, so we can start acting and well, working on concrete actions in today. We've been, well, us at SIXA, we've been working along with partners such as IU Group, yes, of course, and other youth groups such as WIPART and, well, with SIPRA, same for example, to strengthen the youth role in landscapes and that's why we were involved in the organizing process for the youth session. And I think it's worthwhile to note that in the youth session yesterday, we could see that people are motivated, young people are motivated to participate, we even got over 770 applications to become either a facilitator or a moderator at the session yesterday and people were giving really valid ideas, engaging in conversations and being really energetic about what they were saying. So the ideas that we have are also valid, we should really have to wait for the future to start implementing them. And as for the questions, well now, one of the things that was mentioned yesterday that really caught my attention that actually was mentioned now again in chapter four was that there is an increasing migration, especially of young people, leaving the countryside or rural areas to go look for better opportunities in urban areas. And we should try focusing maybe on how to make rural areas more appealing, more attractive so that people want to return there so that the youth will want to return and actually live and work there and stop this increasing gap of differences that's between the two places. And one of the ways that we could do that would be maybe increasing job opportunities in the rural areas and giving more value to basic processes like food production, now that we're talking about food security. Because if we do this, then people will feel more identified to what, like they will feel proud of what's going on, they will feel motivated and if there's a cultural identification then people will want to protect and preserve what they have and they will not be looking for opportunities elsewhere. And another key issue that I would like to mention is what's also mentioned here about gender disparities and especially the role of young women in rural areas it's something that even I have lived through because once in university I was even told by a teacher what are you doing here you should be home taking care of your family and even though I live in the city in other countries it's even worse and especially in rural areas. So, well if males will usually tend to focus on the economic benefits of resources, well this woman will look at more of the social benefits of resources. So if we try to integrate both sides of the flow of this we can get a better use of the resources and I think that access to female education will be crucial for this because there's a lot of things that we could benefit from. And another thing that would be, well like key messages maybe to decision makers would be first of all recognition of informal education. Not only here for example in the GLF where it's international and where it's also maybe a bit more elite not everybody has access to this. Also try to have some informal education at local levels and also well youth is also you could say a marginal group along with other groups but for example here in the GLF this is the only session that has youth involved somehow besides the youth session. And if we're talking about landscapes and having different stakeholders then we should be taking more into account also for decision making processes. Not only like agriculture and forestry and different stakeholders like that but also people who look at the same issue maybe so having establishing vocal points and policy making processes like sciences and policy and decision making processes where we have people who are actively involved in these processes who can be spokespeople for the youth and at the same time who can translate these messages back to the youth so that it's understandable for them. And well at the youth session we try to have to involve also professionals along with the youth so that we can try to diminish the breach that's existing between both of us so that they could be our mentors they could help us find the way they could guide us, they could advise us so I think those would be it. Thank you. Yes, let's give her a big hand. Natalia, thank you very much for these important observations not only on the study itself but also for pointing out that this is basically the only session here which really includes youth involvement in the session itself so I think this is also an important lesson that can be learned to really involve youth in the dialogue about all these issues affecting landscape related aspects. Let me now turn to Susan Bratz. Susan, achieving food security is really at the heart of FAO's efforts and the conference on the contribution of Forest for Food Security and Nutrition that was hosted by FAO and organized by FAO last year really placed this topic very firmly on the political in a way also on the scientific agenda. Which aspects do you consider to be particularly relevant? Which aspects of the study against this background? Thank you Alexander. First to preface my comments just the fact that it exists I think is very important. There are two, I'll just read out two of the recommendations that were made in this international conference. One is creating incentives for greater collaboration between scientific disciplines, government sectors and rural institutions to synthesize scientific data and traditional knowledge on the role of forests and trees outside forests in food security and nutrition. And then the second is supporting efforts and investments to communicate knowledge on the role of trees and forests in food security and nutrition in accessible, compelling formats to key stakeholders. So basically this effort is meeting two of the recommendations gather and synthesize that scientific information and make it available in a policy relevant form. So thank you for moving forward on this. It's a hugely important topic. I'll just make a few comments based upon the presentation today. Presentations today. First it's really important to raise awareness of people about the role of forests and trees to food security and nutrition. Many people will say what do trees have to do with nutrition? You can't eat them. Or they think it goes only as far as forest foods. Now this international conference laid out a very simple scheme for visualizing the role of forests and trees and food security and nutrition. And it consists of four components. Food supply, so the availability of food, forest foods and tree products. The second one is accessibility to food. So the ability to purchase food that you can't actually produce yourself. And then the third is sustainability and it has to do with some of, I think Terry spoke about this, the sustainability of food systems and so the contribution of ecosystem services to food production systems. And the fourth category of support is use, food use. And that's mostly having to do with fuel wood and the use of fuel wood in cooking nutritional foods and also the water, cooking in clean water. So this is sort of the framework that FAO uses to analyze the roles of forests and food security. And I understand that this study uses that same framework which I think is a simple way to get across to people that it's about a whole range of different actions that have to be taken to address food security. And they're actions that are taken both on farm but also within the water landscape. We all know that farmers rely on forests and trees outside of the boundaries of the farm. And yet that's often invisible or at least underestimated by people who work in food systems. And so we actually see that in agricultural landscapes as trees and forests get more and more sparse or they start to disappear, that farmers start to incorporate trees into their farming systems. And so we get a diversity of agroforestry systems because the trees aren't available in the landscape. So this is evidence of the importance of trees to livelihoods, including food security. This has then implications on how we devise policies and how we deal with things like land tenure. And so the link is very important to make between the understanding of the importance of food forest and trees to food systems to then saying, what does that actually mean in terms of managing our land and making policies to encourage the elements of food security to be protected? And so that has to do, I think primarily with tenure systems and tenure of land, but also the tenure of use or the availability and access to use of resources. FAO did work, supported the Committee on Food Security to undertake the development of some tenure guidelines. So we call them the voluntary guidelines on tenure for agriculture, fisheries and forestry for food security. These lay out a whole range of best practice and guideline for tenure. There's a section on, well there's a whole range of section, one is on indigenous people and communal rights and I think we'll hear probably more from Vicki about that. But it lays out basically soft law that provides a basis for addressing tenure issues globally. This is hugely important because if people don't have access to the resources they will suffer in terms of food security. That brings me to the second point which I think is very important to bring out and it's appeared in some of the slides and it has to do with incentives. And how do we incentivize practices that will allow people to have access in use of forest and tree resources? We've seen in Niger probably many of you have heard the example in Merida Region in Niger where a simple change in government policy that allowed people access or rights to the trees on their lands that created a huge re-greening of Niger and so five million hectares were then replanted. This is a traditional agroforestry system, a parkland system and yet with the withdrawal of rights over those trees, trees started to disappear. And so creating that positive incentive in terms of tree tenure had tremendous impact quite quickly in terms of trees on the landscape. We also know that there are perverse incentives. There are in many countries there are government policies and rules and regulations against cutting, transport and sale of trees from agroforestry systems on farm. So farmers have no incentive to actually maintain and develop the agroforestry systems. And so both looking at positive incentives and then perverse incentives is very, very important to food security. And then just one last point and that's the gender and I'm glad that's come up in a couple slides and also the last set of comments. And we know that women have the primary responsibility in many places for food collection, for us, and food preparation, also agroforestry systems. And so there's a huge body of knowledge and expertise in women for that contribute to food security. And yet there's what we call a gender gap in food security which is women don't have then as much in many places as much of a place in the discussions on land use planning on forest management. They don't have access to credit. There may be men are often those that go out and do the marketing. And so although a lot of the knowledge is held within the women in the household, then that knowledge is often not allowed to be fully expressed that would then lead to economic improvement of the household. So I'll stop there. So thank you very much, Susan, especially also for pointing out the importance of supportive policy and governance frameworks. If I'm correct, Clist of the Penals always include a very truly interdisciplinary team of scientists including political scientists. So it's important to have that scientific expertise on board of these expert panels. Wiki, let me now turn to you. One of the findings of the emerging findings of the study is that many forest-related food systems are based primarily on traditional knowledge. For you as an indigenous leader, what are the main messages from this study to be conveyed to policy and decision makers? Okay, well, maybe before I make the recommendations, I just want to make some of a few comments on the findings that were presented. I really appreciate very much this report because it does, it will reinforce a lot of the issues that we have been raising before the global community but also at the national level. I just wanted to highlight, I think even the title of forest food security and land use I think does not capture the entirety of the thing because I think land rights basically is really the right in tenure rights to land and also to trees. It's really very important and I think the findings will also show that in the remaining studies already that shows the connection between respecting human rights, in particular land rights and rights to culture in relation to sustaining forests and ensuring better contributions of the forest to the problems we have. I also like the stress on multifunctionality because again that is the thing that we have been fighting for even within the red negotiations and that's why we have put some references in the text on the need to really look at the multifunctional uses, the multifunctionality of forests. And that is really where all these issues about non-carbon benefits will come in which unfortunately several governments don't appreciate very much but we think that's really crucial if we are talking of forest because we cannot talk about forests in a singular use whether carbon or monoculture. We really need to look at it in its multifunctionality. I also like the point about drivers. The way that it's done, the political drivers, the economic drivers and all that because again that is something that we need to address in the policy arena. How do we address with all these different drivers that we are seeing? I just wanted to say that before I move to the recommendations. So you know this point that you made about of course food security which is so important. We all know that many of the food, a big part of the wild food that is found in the forest is really the part that is being used by many people in particular indigenous peoples. That's really what's happening. I live in my community which is forest and we always go to the forest for mushrooms, bees, honey, whatever you have. And now of course I can see in different communities. But it's also the issue of culture and spirituality. I just came from Paraguay and I met with the Guarani who are people who really rely on the forest. They have, the forest is their temple and that is where they do all the religious and spiritual rituals. And the forest is gone. So their whole identities and their culture and their religion is totally undermined because the forest has disappeared. And they told me that of course the forest is also our market. That's where we get all our food and everything. So I think that tells us exactly why that kind of relationship between forests, identity, culture and spirituality is also so crucial. So I hope that can even be further reinforced in the report. No, so I just wanted also to comment that in the youth study which we've presented, maybe it's not a complete thing, but I haven't seen any reference to indigenous peoples at all. And I hope there will really be reference. If you talk about forests and wild foods, it's really a lot of those are amongst us. But even for instance, the pastoralists in Africa, even if they don't, because of course they are going to the dry lands, but they do have forests. I mean, there is drought in the dry lands and all that. They bring the cattle to the forest and that is what protects the cattle which is basically provided with the food and the dairy. So that kind of relationship also has to be looked into because the forests are not just really, I mean, it's also for those who don't necessarily rely on forests, but for their livelihoods, that is what's important. So in terms of recommendation, I just have really one. This study I hope can be used to really bolster the advocacy points that we are doing within the climate change negotiations, but also in the post-2015 process, we put up the work that we indigenous peoples and other NGOs have done. There is a reference there on Latin, you're on food security as well. And I think we need to develop some indicators that will help measure that kind of how is that being addressed so that when they make reports for the post-20, how are they implementing this? They will have references to those and that will be important in terms of the study and the continuing monitoring. And finally, in my organization before I even became the rapporteur, one of the main things we're doing is community participatory monitoring and information systems, which also looks at all the, how is the traditional knowledge, the customary governance over forests, how are these being undermined? And I like it that you also mentioned about the changing forest governance. When the customary governance over forests gets lost, then that's where you will really lose a lot of those forests. Thank you very much. Very much, Vicky. Thank you also for pointing out the importance of the findings of the study, actually finding their way to the policy forward. And this is, in my view, the one of the strength of these global forest expert panels. They are an initiative of the Collaborative Partnership on Forests, which brings together 14 international organizations and agencies with amended, the Global Mended on Forests. And actually we are lucky to have with us the chair of the CPF, the Assistant Director General of the FAO Eduardo Rojas Briales. So Eduardo will make sure that the findings will be taken up by all 14 CPF members, right? Ladies and gentlemen, but now it's actually your turn. We do have a bit of time for questions, for discussion, so who wants to break the ice? Yes, I can see your hand back there. Oh, yes, the mic is coming. The lady back there in the third but last row on the right hand side, yes. And if you could please briefly introduce yourself and then she'll have the issue. Hi, I'm Muriel Saragussi from Brazil from Manaus and I want to point two very important and key roles of the forest for food security. One, it's a carbon sink. It's helping us to avoid going to four degrees. Two degrees, we know we already are there. And the second one is that the forest produce water. And without water, there is no agriculture. There is no production. And the systems, I particularly study a lot the Amazon. The Amazon forest is key for all the food production in the rest of South America down there and not in the Indian region. But all the Brazil produce Argentina Paraguay is depending on the Amazon forest water. So if we don't take this in account, we will be missing a huge point. So thank you very much for pointing out these two very important indirect contributions of forest to food security. I suggest that we take a few more questions before I give it back to the panel. Yes, first back there and then over here. First in the last row, the gentleman and then the lady with the red jacket. My name is Jorge Chavez-Tafur. I work with the Texas Foundation in the Netherlands. I would like to thank all panelists for all the issues that you have raised and highlighted. I was just wondering if the issue of food sovereignty is not also relevant and necessary to point out. Yes, thank you very much. I suggest that we also take the other question. Perhaps you could pass the microphone on to the lady here in the second row in the front. Thank you. So I guess that's the assumption, right? That forest provide food security. But as Beacon mentioned, forest are being degraded. There's lots of different activities. So I think maybe we're looking at a change in paradigm of the forest providing a good nutrition. So my question is for the gentleman from Seafloor. So I won't like to know if the ecosystems that you look at for forest cover were equivalent because that's one thing that I guess will make a difference if you have different ecosystems and you have areas that are naturally more forest covered than others. They might be providing much more food security than other regions. And then what will be the access of those communities to markets? Thank you very much for these questions. Yes, let's take one more and then we will ask the panel to actually respond to the questions. Bueno, quería preguntarle si es posible que puedan recomendar a que los sistemas educativos en las zonas de las poblaciones indígenas no sean impositivas de manera o sea tal como pasen, por ejemplo, en los países de Latinoamérica. El sistema educativo emplea la lógica cartesiana que, lógicamente, está invalidado por epistemólogos que tratan la complejidad climática y, además, que los pueblos indígenas, por ejemplo, la Imara, de la cual yo procedo, han soportado y han superado diferentes cambios climáticos o diferentes complejidades climáticas en sus más de 10,000 años como cultura. Entonces, nosotros nos podrán considerar que somos pobres porque no tenemos sistema de agua alcantarillado, pero sí que tenemos una calidad de agua. Vivimos, tomamos agua de manantial, directo. Y nosotros tenemos una agroecología que es mucho más holístico, entre la cual, por ejemplo, nuestro sistema alimentario comprende más de siete subsistemas. Entonces, en nuestros jóvenes, en nuestros niños, podrían aprender y podrían, inclusive, no enzón de imponer tampoco, más bien, podíamos compartir con el resto del mundo y podríamos, de repente, generar modelos y sistemas mucho más sostenibles y deberíamos ser mucho más, digamos, dialogantes con ello y no simplemente decir que la educación de la manera como está o la inversión, que siempre escucho, que hay que invertir en esto, que hay que invertir en esto, pero la inversión, eso se habla desde hace más de 20, 30 años. Por ejemplo, para mantenerlo vos, que se ofrece $5 por tonelada, por metro cúbico y, pues, nos sabemos, somos conscientes que el sistema financiero internacional genera utilidades, segundo a segundo, millones. Y esas son, pues, muy, es un juego humano, pero muy irracional, muy loco. Gracias. Thank you very much. So you pointed out in your intervention the importance of also taking into due account traditional knowledge in these kind of scientific endeavors, but of course, also in the decision making processes and also in decisions about investment and so on. In my view, this is a very important observation. I can share with you that IUFRO actually had an interdisciplinary task force on traditional first related knowledge, which really tried to elaborate on the point to bring together the traditional knowledge and to combine it with educational systems. So a very valid point. Now I give it back to the panel. Who actually wants to take the lead in responding to some of the questions? Any volunteers? The questions were not directed specifically to any one of you, I believe. Please, Christoph. I think it works, Christoph. Does it work? Yes. Well, a few questions were directed towards the scope of our assessment and if certain aspects are included or not. I start with the role of forest as CO2 sink and as water resource. And of course, I mean, we are aware of that. And the study includes a rather large sub-chapter on different ecosystem services. Forest providing, including as carbon sink and as resource and for water. And also as guaranteeing water quality and quantity. The second question was if we address food sorority, we do. I didn't refer to that. I mean, we try to address food and nutritional system as a whole, like also addressing food sorority, access to food, food stability, seasonality, all these aspects I didn't mention them. There was not enough time for that. And there was also mentioning of nutritional knowledge. We do have, we see traditional knowledge as well as aspects of indigenous peoples as cross-sexual issues for all our assessment and we do address them throughout the assessment. The same we do with gender issues. We do have even a gender team, they get care of that. I think that was the part of questions that refer to the scope of our assessment. Terry, yes, please. Yes, of course you pass on. There is a working microphone, yes. I just want to respond to the question from the lady in the red jacket. It's a very good question. Essentially, when you take these data-rich research projects, it's very difficult to understand the nuances sometimes. And what we're struggling with, as I said when I gave the presentation, is the nature of the tree cover we're talking about that contributes to food nutritional security. So I don't think, it seems that the evidence suggests that it's not high forest, it's not air-insured, protected areas of the hunter-gatherers. It seems to be the forest farm interface where we're having small holders who are reliant on the calories produced in their farms to a certain degree for their diets. But supplementary materials, leafy vegetables in particular, forest fruits which are seasonal, which contribute to the nutrition value of that particular system. So we have, at the moment, six PhD students working in six different countries of the 21 that we sampled, looking at that very nature of that relationship. What are the conditionalities of the relationships between the forest and tree cover? And as you saw from the slide, the tree cover relationship, nutrition, the relationship rather, drops off around 50% tree cover. So I suspect we're talking about that farm, forest interface farms, trees on farms, but we need to be sure of that before we go any further down that road. But let me just say, we did a very similar, in fact, the same analysis for Indonesia, which has a completely different rarer system. And you know what we found? Exactly the same relationships between tree cover and nutrition and dietary diversity. And if you look over your shoulder, there's a chap with his arms folded, Patrice Lavone. He was a long-term C4 colleague and did some excellent work looking at the nutrition transition when people move out of the forest into urban areas. And this is happening a lot in Indonesia with oil palm and other demographic and land change patterns. And essentially, when people make that nutrition transition, they have access to funds, and they buy, this is not your wording, they buy crap, basically. And they live on terrible diets. So it's not a case of keeping people poor, but it'd be cognizant of the fact that the bottom members of the society that are in close proximity to forests and trees have better diets than those that make that transition that don't. And I think that's a very important aspect of this food nutrition nexus. And it's a very complicated one. So we need to get right before the policy messages that we're talking about are coming out. Henry, would you also like to elaborate on some of these points? Yes, I think I'd like to elaborate a little bit more on the issue that were raised by Natalia and also Susan and Vicky to the extent where they refer to regulatory frameworks, tenure, and women. I think these are very closely related. Regulatory frameworks can be ways in which we can improve forest food security, nutritional security, and that particularly helps women and other vulnerable groups if they are directed to smaller farmers, family farmers, and these groups and include the youth. And what I think is really a good way of, for me, this is something like a vision, if you will. And it has to do with what was also connected to the distance to markets and access to markets and the urban centers as providers of a demand for sustainable, more sustainable food and food products that can be nutritious and that often come from trees and that this demand as cities and urban areas become more affluent can be a strong driver of rural change to a more positive rural change that includes agricultural and forest interfaces and that would then also address these issues of food security. So that's sort of as a way of framing it that the urban centers can become the areas that pull because there is a demand for the change in the rural areas and that this can ultimately lead a transformation of the entire landscaping because we can only look at the forest, we have to look at the forest agricultural interface. And just one comment because it was mentioned that the Amazon is a carbon sink. I mean, I fully appreciate that the Amazon and other tropical rainforests are absolutely essential as drivers of, fortunately, they are not in net carbon sinks. They are actually, because they are in balance unless they're being deforested is growing, they are not carbon sinks. Sorry to say that at the large scale. Thank you, Harry. Ladies and gentlemen, technically speaking, we have now run out of time although I believe that the closing plenary starts at six o'clock. So I'm wondering if the organizers give us a few more minutes if there are some pressing questions and I see one hand back there. So this question and another one, is there perhaps one other or these two? Let's take these three questions and then I'm afraid we will have to end because certainly we would not want to miss the closing plenary. So we start with the gentleman on the very left hand side in the back of the room. Thank you. I work in a research organization with maybe a hundred forest researchers and probably 700 agronomic researchers. So when as a forester I say, okay, forests are good for food security. They say, come on, you're a small player. We are the agronomists. We feed the planet. So whatever you say is excuses to save your forest somehow. But then I have arguments. So one argument you didn't mention here this afternoon is in some cases, forest produce food which you cannot replace by agriculture. And I give you an example in Congo Basin, for example. We have figures that probably bush meat would provide four million tons per year as proteins. But now I have figures from my colleague working in Brazil. He's working in the cattle industry and he says Brazil would produce probably 10 million tons beef per year but they export two million tons which is half of what Congo Basin eats from bush meat. Which means that there is absolutely no way today or in between the next 10 or 20 years to provide any alternative to the food coming from natural forests today in Congo Basin. There is no substitution, no alternative. You have to live with it. So this is one consideration I would want to add to what was said that try to find those food chain of questions I would say coming from forest that cannot be replaced. There are on what people made their living on. They should be evaluated in terms of quantity, in terms of earning money and so. Thank you, very important observation. Let us continue right away with the lady sitting next to you. So there seems to be cluster of people who want to ask questions in this corner of the room. Please. Okay, my name is Miriam Ross from the University of Amsterdam. My question refers to the first presentation where a call was made for more research on the relationship between forest and food security. And then I wonder what kind of research. We have done a lot of research on forest products and what it provides to food security and dietary diethosities. So I wonder what else do we want to know? Thank you. Very important aspect. And I think there was one last question also there in the back. Yes, please. My name is Lodrik Sachtotropenbos international. Well, you gave some exciting insights in the positive relation between forest and food security but there are also negative relations. And I was wondering whether those aspects were also included when you can say something about the quantitative aspects of it. Yes, thank you. All very good points. I would ask the respondents to be very brief with the responses. That includes, or actually the panelists, that includes the panel members and the respondents. So please feel free to respond. But please not more than one minute because we really need to bring this session to a close. So a case of there was this more general question about our research that related to these issues. Perhaps you could again explain the principle of chief how it works because I think that answers the question. Don, okay. I'm not sure if I fully got your question because it was quite loud. But I guess it's about what kind of scientific information we do assess. I mean, we do assess existing scientific information. We do not do our own research. Of course, some of our panel members do have already done research or a lot of them on different aspects of forest and for security. And our assessment is based on existing and available scientific information. And what we try is to assess and synthesize this information and conclude the most important aspects and summarize them in key messages. So that's the approach we do have. Yes, oh, yes, sorry, yeah. I did it, sorry, I didn't get it. Yeah, we found out that, we found a lot of gaps, actually. And then the scientific information. I mean, for example, starting from aspects of a role of different forest ecosystems for food security, we do not have a lot of information on dry forests, for example, we do not have a lot of information on some socioeconomic aspects, cultural aspects. For example, I think there is lacking information on quantitative information on income of small scale holders. There is, as far as I remember now, there is a lack of data on cultural aspect of nutrition. I do not know all that by heart now. We will have one, at least one subject of our three paragraphs just on knowledge gaps in our conclusions. We just started to draft them, I have to say. So it's just in discussion now. So the one minute, that was a rather long minute, but the thing is the report will be published in May and then we will be able to read the knowledge gaps that always form part of these reports. Then we had these questions about the food systems and the food chains that cannot be substituted, the forest-based food chains that cannot be substituted by any other ways. Who wants to respond to that question quickly? I think that's a very, for me, that's something good to hear because then that justifies further the need to really protect these systems. That can only happen within the context and if this report is going to come up with such a conclusion, it will definitely be something that will strengthen the advocacy for these kinds of issues. So I hope that kind of observation can really be reflected in your report. Thank you, Rikki. Susan, you would also like to add. Just, you raised the point of nutrition and I think that's really important. That we don't look at forests so much for absolute number of calories. We look at forests often as a source of diverse vitamins, minerals and that is a big distinction that you can't always get what you need from on farm through a small number of crops. And so whether you're taking a diverse system and making, let's say, a home garden that's very diverse and then you get the diversity built into your plot or whether you actually have to go outside and collect those things that add diversity, important diversity for nutrition, that's the other way to do it. But I think making the distinction between food and calories and nutrition is a really important one to make in looking at how you treat forest and tree resources. Thank you, Susan. And finally, we had this question about whether it's all just positive or whether there is also perhaps a negative aspect of promoting food security, forest and trees for food security and nutrition. So are there some kind of red lights that we should be aware of? Does the study give any evidence for this? Can I answer a positive, Terry? I mean, I... That was a brief answer. I wanted to address both the issue that sort of links Miriam's question and Alan's question. Researchable topics. We talk about sustainable intensification. We talk about land sparing, land sharing, all these horrible buzzwords that are crept into the whole landscape approach discourse. More research needs to be done. What integration of forest and agriculture actually represents on the ground? I think that's a fundamental one. And another one for me, I see that NTFPs, bushmeat, there's two sides of the triangle and I see fish as the other one. Inland waterways and fisheries are incredibly important in terms of forest. And I think that if you're talking about substituting bushmeat, the protein value of fish is extremely important in all the forest basins of the world. And it's a big, big gap in terms of our research knowledge. The negatives. Roderick, I didn't quite understand what you meant by the negatives. Okay, that's actually a good point. That's come out in our systematic review looking at forest versus agriculture. And I didn't put the negatives up there for obvious reasons. From C4 as a global landscape. But you're right. There are some negative correlations between proximity of forest and trees to certain crops, yes. So, thank you very much. Now we really need to bring this session to a close. Let us give a very big hand to our presenters and to our respondents. I would just like to very briefly acknowledge also the support by our donors for these projects. These are the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland, the United States Forest Service, and the Austrian Federal Ministry for Agriculture, Forest, Environment, and Water Management. And then, something about UFO. Actually, I came from the UFO World Congress almost directly here. And one decision that was taken at the UFO World Congress was that the next Congress will be held in 2019 in the beautiful city of Curitiba in Brazil. So the big UFO World Congress will come to this continent. And although it will take place only five years from now, I nevertheless all want to cordially invite you to attend that Congress. With that, I thank you very much and wish you a remaining nice and enjoyable rest of the Landscapes Forum.