 I think that the mitigation adaptation synergies discussion is a really important one again in the negotiations it's linked to the markets and non-markets discussion but it doesn't necessarily need to be if we're talking about scientific research. I think that there can be some really quality scientific research that builds on the research that's already there that can take that important discussion further. I think that it's problematic that mitigation and adaptation are continuously looked at through separate silos they're not separate. Someone said the other day which I agree with that mitigation is adaptation I mean why would we need to mitigate if we weren't adapting to something which is climate change so that's something that I would emphasise as being a really important and valuable area of research that I think an organisation like C4 can be contributing to the policy dialogue both at an international and at a national level. And from looking at the research myself I do see a lot of case studies undertaken at the national level that can then also inform the international policy dialogue. Mitigation and adaptation have traditionally been approached within the international policy space in separate contexts and so a good example of that is the Green Climate Fund for example has separate windows it has a mitigation window and an adaptation window. There's been a lot of emerging science over recent years which identifies the synergies that exist between mitigation and adaptation and in reality a lot of projects on the ground that predominantly mitigation projects do have adaptation outcomes, adaptation projects have mitigation outcomes and there are also trade-offs that exist in the context of mitigation and adaptation synergies and so there's been a lot of science that's come through on that over recent years now. An interesting discussion that's emerged recently within the UNFCCC is a discussion concerning an alternative approach to sustainable management of forests and so this is considered by some to be an alternative to Red Plus, considered by some to be an approach to the forest sector that can be broader than Red Plus and it looks specifically at mitigation and adaptation and this was a proposal that was put forward by Bolivia back in 2012 so it's moved through the negotiations to a point where there is very much more emphasis being placed on mitigation and adaptation synergistically that's flowed through to discussions within other components of the international policy discourse one of which is finance and so you can see within the results areas of the Green Climate Fund for example that there are adaptation areas that are linked to mitigation so there's going to be some consideration of some additional adaptation results areas that are specifically linked to mitigation. This is also flowed through to the Standing Committee on Finance in terms of their discussions because finance in the forest sector is relevant in both the mitigation and an adaptation context so it's an emerging discussion that's not yet reached any policy resolution within the UNFCCC at this stage some have called for additional scientific expert advice on the issue a lot of countries are a bit unsure as to what to do with the topic so it's an interesting topic. The Standing Committee as a part of the Warsaw Decision concerning REDD Plus was provided with a mandate to look at the coordination and cohesion of finance concerning forests so during 2014 the Standing Committee has been looking at what that means and what to do in terms of closely analysing the issue of finance for forests and so we're not just talking about finance for REDD Plus we're talking about mitigation and adaptation climate finance in a forest context and so during 2015 it looks highly likely that the Standing Committee will be placing quite a significant amount of emphasis on adaptation and mitigation markets and non-markets finance in the context of the forest sector.