 Well, a very warm welcome everyone, thanks for coming to this session which is called Enabling Forest Landscapes to Score SDGs, Sustainable Development Goals. Now in my household, my boys, this part of the world is extremely popular in my house at the moment for a totally different reason, mainly because of the amazing footballers tending to be generated and the incredible goals scored by the likes of James Rodriguez. This is a different type of goals we're talking about today, Sustainable Development Goals. And this session is co-organized by IID and C4. And my name is Simon Village, I work for IID. And I'm going to be your moderator or the panelist moderator, but also a host, a host in inverted commas because this is designed to be a bit like a kind of a chat show, I suppose. We'll call it a chat show and see if it's a hit. If it's a hit, this chat show, it'll catch on, there'll be many more like it in Peru and elsewhere. I'd like to introduce to you our panel today. I'll start from nearest to me. Paula Caballero is Senior Director for the Environment and Natural Resources Global Practice at the World Bank. Before joining World Bank, she was Director for Economic, Social and Environmental Affairs in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Colombia. Many of you may know her from that time because she was, of course, a leading voice and negotiator in several international fora, including UNFCCC and also the POST 2015 framework. So we're privileged to have her here with us and share her views and respond to your views. Dr. Camilla Tullman is Director at the International Institute for Environment and Development and previously becoming Director ran the organization's drylands program. She's an economist by training and has worked mainly in dryland, Africa and agriculture, land, climate and livelihoods, mixing research, policy, analysis and advocacy. She's also the Chair of the Board of the International Centre for Agriculture Research in the dry areas. We're very, very privileged to have today his Excellency, Mr. Haru Prasejo, who is the head of the National Red Agency in Indonesia. His very responsibilities include chairing the Global Red Partnership and developing the National Framework and Climate Change mitigation and forestry agricultural sectors and natural resources. Previously, he served as Deputy of Planning and International Relations of the President's Special Delivery Unit for Development, Monitoring and Oversight and Secretary of the National Committee of the Post-2015 Development Agenda. Thank you for joining us. Dr. Peter Holmgren, many of you will know, if you don't, then there are some question marks. He's the Director General of CIFOR, Centre of International Forestry Research. Prior to CIFOR, and so is of course responsible for this great event, actually. Prior to CIFOR, he led the Climate, Energy and Tenure Division at the FAO and was also responsible in developing profile and coordination of FAO's climate change work and also contributions of FAO towards UNFCCC. So again, very diverse and relevant experience for today. And lastly but not least, we have Ms. Sonja Muria-Gonzales, who is the Director General for Environmental Research and Information at Peru's Ministry of Environment. She was previously Specialist in Desertification and Drought in the Director General for Climate Change, Desertification and Water Resources and has also participated in the United Nations Convention to come back to desertification. So thank you again, panelists, for joining us today. I'd also like to introduce Ayesha Constable, who's here at the front. She is my partner in crime in being moderator. She'll be moving around during the event because we intend whenever you have questions after the initial presentations, please put your hands up and she'll be moving around and helping to make sure you share your views and get engaged. And if there are also questions that arise through social media, she'll be picking those up and also relaying them to the panel. So just as a very, very brief background, 2015, as we know, is a very special year. A special year in the context of coming to an agreement on the post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals and also a new climate agreement. And as many of you know, of course, forests are central to both of those critical areas. It's important from the perspective of climate change mitigation, adaptation, resilience and of course the very relevant to a whole range of sustainable development outcomes. And yet we still see that incorporating forests and forest landscapes can be a challenge. Otherwise, we wouldn't be concerned about how to improve their management. The main objective of this session then is essentially how can the SDGs catalyze policy and practice that enables so-called goal scoring. The setting of goals is underway. How can they actually catalyze changes in policy, changes in practice in a transformative, universal and integrated manner. And we hope at the end of the session we'll have some very useful recommendations that can be taken forward in different ways to policy makers, negotiators involved in both practice, both arenas over the next year and beyond and particularly to feed into an outcome statement from this Global Landscapes Forum which can be relayed to UNFCCC. In terms of process, we're going to have a brief five minutes or so presentations from our panelists who will share their views and perspectives and then we'll have a focus on discussions. We've got four guiding questions which will help lead the discussions through and definitely an emphasis on all of you getting involved. So at any point in time during that if you have not necessarily questions but your perspective and experiences is what the panelists want to hear and they've expressly asked for that to please, no shyness, hands must go up and at the end we'll ask the panelists also to have a quick wrap up of concluding reflections. So there we are, that's enough for me. I'd like to now hand over to Paula please to come up and give her reflections. Good afternoon to everybody and many thanks to IED and other conveners and organizers of both the Global Landscapes Forum and this event. I've been asked to do a little bit of scene setting and I would first of all like to remind everybody here that the SDGs were not a done deal. We barely made it with the acceptance of the concept of the very, very, very last quarter of an hour in Rio and we barely were able to get agreement not just on the concept but on the way forward. So I think that what came out of UWork in July is actually quite miraculous. I don't think there's too many goals and targets. I think that it's the first time that an intergovernmental process produces metrics. The MDGs, as we all know, came from a very different source. So I think that what we need to do is really build upon that momentum that was achieved in New York. What we are seeing is that metrics are in both and what gets measured matters. But my concern and this was a concern that I voiced throughout the SDG process is that the metrics will bring us back into the silos and if you look at what was agreed the draft tax from July and the final tax in June, sorry, and the final tax in July you can really pick up is that a lot of the interlinkages that were there in June were negotiated out of the tax by July. So what I think is the real dividend of the landscapes context in terms of the SDGs is that it becomes a platform, it brings to the fore the fact that development is about interrelated and interlink issues with very complex tradeoffs and externalities that demand these joint approaches that we've been hearing about. So yes, the SDGs I think can be a tool but more importantly how can landscapes be a tool to help the SDGs not become back into being silos. So in the SDG process we proposed what we were calling the integrating approach and the example that I'd like to give was infant mortality and I used to point out that this target which was always slotted under health is not a health target. It also is a target about food security, on education, on gender, on economic growth, on inequality and that unless all those sectors understood and appropriated as their own this target we were never going to really break out of those silos. So the question there is how to effectively mainstream landscapes about both sectors and enablers as you proposed. I really would like to, as throughout my presentation please remember basically everything that Rachel Kite said in the preceding session because this really builds upon that vision that she outlined both in terms of the perspective of what the bank can offer and in terms of what the platform for engagement is. So let me say in this specific context that obviously the necessary starting point are the targets that specifically focus on forests or terrestrial ecosystems but the key there is for us, the constituency here to ensure that those outside of this room, outside of this forum understand those terrestrial or those forest targets to be central to the development. We're still hearing even three days ago I was with a very high-ranking person from a developing country and they were still having that false dichotomy of development versus. So that is one of our first entry points and one of our first needs and it sounds really obvious to all the converted sitting here but it isn't a point that we have to make again and again. And getting those line ministries getting not just the minister of proverbial minister of finance but I would like to say the proverbial minister of foreign affairs because there are the guys that are negotiating over there to understand the role and responsibility in delivering these targets and why they're important is important, it's key. And there we need to really build together and work on concepts such as natural capital accounting and going beyond GDP. And here I'd just like to have a little advert at the bank. I'm looking for partners who are working on these issues so please come, please let's talk. We need to build together a coalition. We need to build together the evidence for that natural capital accounting. I also would like to say that in the negotiations this division is very much there. A single head of delegation really knows in depth and maybe I'm overstating but not by much, Red, Lulu CF or agriculture. There's the agriculture person in the delegation who deals with that issue and the red specialist in each delegation and they talk amongst themselves but the issues are never brought to a higher level. So that mainstreaming has to be both in UNFCC and in post-2015 and in each government. So where do we need to also go from here beyond that obvious step which seems obvious but is still necessary. And I would say that I really congratulate IED on the paper they presented in the matrix. We actually had gone through exactly that same exercise. I came up with about 57 targets that are either directly or indirectly very relevant to the landscapes agenda. And I would say that we need to do two things. We need to demonstrate the relevance, as I was saying, of the landscapes approach but we also need to demonstrate why a landscape approach is fundamental to the full delivery, to the full implementation of these targets. Landscapes in other words should become a prism both for the negotiations at UNFCCC and for the post-2015 agenda. That should be our goal. Let me speak here to two modalities for achieving that. The first one that I will mention is entry points and I'm going to give you, I could have picked others but I'll talk about five very basic entry points where we need to make that case. The first has to do with economic models. There's a lot of targets that relate to things like sustaining per capita economic growth or 8.2 on promoting the higher level of productivity of economies. But when we talk about economic growth are we really bringing to the fore the fact that growth needs energy and water and biomass? So we need to bring that into the negotiations. When we talk about the productivity of economies what kind of economic model are we talking about? Is there a single economic model? How do we make sure that the ecosystem services, the resources that underpin those economies are brought to the fore and are included not just here but for the longer term? How do we ensure that when people talk about jobs and the big thing right now is to generate jobs, jobs, jobs we're also talking not just about jobs but perhaps about employment, about livelihoods not just about creating jobs which is usually focused on an urban setting but about maintaining and preserving jobs which is more focused on livelihoods. We talk about in target 17.5 of investment promotion regimes for LDCs again. Are those investment promotions looking for example at big agribusiness or mining or are we starting to help and to identify how to manage the trade-offs and the competing land uses? Are we making sure that growth today does not sacrifice growth tomorrow? So that would be one of the examples. Another very good example is governance. I would say that forest issues enable us to address broader governance issues related for example to women's roles to corruption, to access to information small holders are both generators and users of information and very much tied to all the movement of big data legal identity, secure ownership and what that means to how natural resources are managed. A third item would be private sector there was a lot of discussion about that and very good points made by both Rachel and Peter so I won't go there but I would say that for example that target on PPPs is not going we need to make sure it doesn't just focus on PPPs for municipal sanitation infrastructure forests, fisheries all these natural resource areas are essentially public-private partnerships. How do we get to understand that and to unpack this so that when we talk about PPPs in the context of both 2015 we are talking about natural resource management. How about to make sure that that includes the indigenous communities indigenous peoples and other communities who account for fully 30% of the forest in developing countries. Another key issue with stability and security I would posit that natural resources are at the essence and at the core of maintaining social coherence and economic stability over the long return. We've seen the food riots questions around food security but it goes even more to the essence of that. If you look at for example the point that target 16.4 on illicit financial flows and organized crime how do we make sure that the rosewood crisis or elephant poaching is also a part of that conversation that when we talk about that lost revenue you're not only talking about lost revenue from the usual suspect sectors but the natural resource management and not just the non-renewables are on the table and are being discussed. And finally in terms of those five issues I would also like to point out that we also need to look at natural infrastructure both natural infrastructures as a standalone but also blended natural physical infrastructure that can result in big savings in terms for example of hydropower and making sure that it's embedded really in the landscape approach so that you're building dams and not stranded assets over the medium term. And I'd like here to just to finalize this first point about the entry points to finish with a reference to the Inner Niger Delta. The Inner Niger Delta is basically a natural reservoir it is a reservoir that happened to be built by Mother Nature but right now there's discussions about further upstream dams that could really affect the flooding dynamics of that Inner Niger Delta because it's not understood to see as natural infrastructure it's just something that's there where focusing is on how we can have lots of irrigation further upstream. Unless we balance those trade-offs by excluding what is a natural asset that is equivalent to a built reservoir and on which 40% of the livestock of Mali and of many of the other of the Sahel region depends on during the dry months. We all know of the very difficult security situation in northern Mali so I would posit that when you look at the Inner Niger Delta it's not just natural infrastructure it's a security asset. So we have to learn to look at assets in the landscape in a very different way and that's the kind of perspective and understanding we have to bring to the SDGs. It's not just mainstreaming in terms of seeing taking off which targets are important for us it's how we change how the very targets are understood in terms of landscapes. The second point I want to make I'll be very sure is about indicators. During the SDG process we posited the idea of a dashboard in order to deal with the differentiation because you need to deal with the different realities of countries along the development spectrum. What I'm positing now is that we need to think about the same thing at the sub-national level because we're all talking about implementation. Implementation at the sub-national level faces very different challenges and very different contexts particularly for very large countries perhaps like in Indonesia of the world but also in a country like Columbia and sometimes in even smaller landmasses you have a great deal of complexity and changes. So how can we really start to unpack this at the level of sub-national indicators so that this SDG agenda becomes relevant to those who are going to be doing the implementation. So those I think are two basic key entry points to answer to the questions that I've been asked. I would just finish by saying that metrics should really spur economies, our economies, our societies to find solutions that stop seeing climate, resilient and smart development as a zero-sum game which is still how very much see it. It should incentivize two things greater coherence on red Luluseev and agriculture under UNFCCC and it should position landscapes as the organizing function or one of the organizing functions if you will of the post-15 process. From the bank group I can say that we're ready and willing to leverage our technical and operational expertise on the ground our global knowledge and our financial support. We see a very promising atmosphere out there where countries and partners are lining up. We see financing coming in. GCF is starting to be capitalized. We see commitments on the forest investment program and other funds. The New York Declaration attests to a growing commitment not just on governments but more importantly private sector and with this we can now go to scale in the time frames that are necessary. But let us not remember, forget that and I don't want to be negative here that we're really starting, we're looking at a two or three degree world. We're looking at changing consumption patterns in an emerging global middle class that has needs and expectations that will not really be, that don't easily fit into planetary resources. So, and we have demographics, we have a really accelerating competition for land and resources. So the time frames and the scale are really of the essence. I hope that we are able to carbonize the actions that's needed because in my darker moments I do sometimes wonder if the essence really doesn't stand for survival. I think there's more hope than that but we should really bear that in mind. So I look forward to working with you and for me the fact that there's a form that there's so many people at this form is a ground for hope and a grounds for thinking that we can turn things around as fast as they need to be working together. So thank you and thank you again. Thank you Paula. We'll go straight on. Thank you Connor. Well good afternoon. Thank you. I'm delighted to be sharing a panel with so many distinguished colleagues. I think that Paula set the scene very well for us in terms of the urgency and the scale of the challenge. For us we've found the design and negotiation of the SDGs as a wonderful global learning process really for all involved. The broad range of interests and actors feeding into the process have made very evident have been made very evident by the large number of goals and targets which have come forth. Some people say we should really go for a much smaller number of targets but it seems to me that the high complexity of the real world in which we live really gives good grounds for us living with the 17 goals that have come from the open work of the process. As Simon mentioned my own background is in the drylands and I was very glad that Paula raised the particular problem of the Inner Niger Delta in Mali which is an example of a fantastic bit of natural infrastructure which is now very much threatened by a series of big dams. Dryland areas are essentially a series of landscapes of farmland and grazing within which scattered trees have got huge value acting as windbreaks to stem erosion offering fodder shade to livestock who manure the land they're a source of fruit leaves for source wood for fuel and they also serve to pump drawing up through their roots nutrients deep in the soil for use at the surface and what's invisible below ground the rooting system is as important as what you see above ground and in light fashion the enabling conditions that support better forest management rights institutions values regulations while invisible are hugely important to getting local benefits from trees and woodland so trees for me are very much emblematic of sustainable development they span past and future generations they generate multiple benefits they contribute to both public and private goods they need care, investment and nurturing if they are to deliver on promise so forest landscapes need to find a central place in the STG process goals and targets it's important that forests be highly visible both in one goal and also integrated across the full set of STGs and their targets and we've seen the open working group generate much positive progress for forests there's strong mention of forests within goal 15 inclusion of restoration of forestation within target 15.2 a focus on incentives and financing within 15 themes sustainable management of water within goal 6 includes restoration of forest land within target 6.6 and local community participation in 6B reflecting the need for integrated water resource management within local landscapes equal control is included alongside rights access and ownership of land in targets 1.4 and 5A and indigenous peoples get explicit recognition within targets 2.3 and 4.5 so a lot of progress made but always some gaps some key issues missing and some room for greater clarity on targets for me one missing element relates to recognizing the very uneven power exerted by different interests so for example forest and farm producer organizations urgently need strengthening so that they can better voice and represent their interests collective action as far as producers and marketers makes a big difference for forest SMEs and really helps them gain a stronger voice and acquire market power another missing issue is integrated in inclusive land use planning which has to be at the heart of local landscape management and how trees fit within this both these issues strengthening of producer organizations and integrated inclusive land use planning have been raised among the top priorities for forests by stakeholder consultation and the workshop here in Lima last month we also see the need for strong commitment to tackle drivers of deforestation building on the New York declaration on forests during climate week last September if the SDGs are to be transformative we must tackle also the systemic barriers to building a better enabling environment which have to do with power and whose voice counts first as Rachel was reminding us in the previous session it means a firm commitment to social justice and good governance especially to the rule of law and access to justice it means recognizing local rights to control, own and access land and forests second better market access requires support for small and medium size enterprise their produce organizations intermediary services and also means to hold the private sector to account third further work is needed on metrics such as finding ways to trap and report changes in land and forest management plus simple clear measures for valuing forest ecosystem services and I can certainly point you to a whole number of groups including ourselves working on natural capital accounts turning finally to implementation the energy generated by the SDG process has meant there are high aspirations for what this process might achieve but implementation runs up against many challenges particularly the highly diverse context in which people and trees actually live the limited capacity to put policy into practice and the power dynamics which mean that poor people find it difficult to get their rights respected and their interests represented IIUD's work with partners clearly shows this diversity of context between different regions LDC perspectives are particularly important to understand because of often high dependence on forests and natural resources for livelihoods as well as state revenue and export earnings a module approach can be useful to try and build on these local nuances and identify opportunities for policy coherence and sustainable trade-offs and we have a paper on this available on IIUD's website if you want to go in more detail on that for us at IIUD we've done a lot of work on environmental mainstreaming which tries to break down false boundaries which we've erected between disciplines and administrative functions but for us the integration of different elements seems to be much easier the closer to the ground you go at global level we seem to engage in a lot of arcane debate on how the different roles relate to each other but it becomes much more tangible once you're down to local municipality so I see a landscape approach as offering the ideal framework for delivering many of the SDGs so my final plea is let's try and avoid over-engineering the SDGs from top down by trying to nail down all the detail let's rather try and evolve power and decision-making to local landscape level through recognizing rights to own, control and access land and forests from this you can then build a bottom-up learning process that anchors the SDGs in those who can benefit most from their delivery It's excellent seeing you I repeat Thank you Simon So afternoon ladies and gentlemen it's an honor and a pleasure for me it's afternoon to speak to you Indonesia is a maybe very unique country in the sense of when we start talking about Red Plus my president was also asked by the secretary channel to be the co-chair of the high-level panel for 2015 development agenda so while I was the secretary of the task force to create the strategy as well as the institution to do the reduction of emission from deforestation and forest degradation I was also the secretary for the committee that was set up to support the president for the post-2015 development agenda so I get a little bit confused which is which talking about SDGs talking about post-2000 development agenda talking about forest and landscape so my comment here ladies and gentlemen may not be too structured but my understanding while trying to understand the two streams at the same time is that if we define reduction of emission from deforestation and forest degradation in its complete terms it's talking about developing countries REDD in developing countries which means that inherently REDD is a development program because if it's not development program that is not getting into the developing country why should it only be in the developing country now having said that looking through and walking through the process of getting into the post-2015 development agenda and looking into the result of the high-level planning and comparing that with the result of the not done yet open working group we'll see that there are some progress and there are some problem and the way I see it is that REDD is actually the convergence of the issue of development which is very much triggered which is very much influenced by the SDGs and climate change and forest and landscape in my opinion ladies and gentlemen is the living theater of the convergence of these two issues now we are talking about the living theater of that it means that those issues of climate change and the SDGs needs to be seen and interacting within the landscape so how do you relate these two when we are talking about the SDGs and when I was in that process I noticed several things the first one is that this is actually a continuum a movement from MDG into the SDG don't miss that if you are talking about this is a disruption thing totally different then we miss a lot of our lessons including how to score goals because we are talking about scoring goals right how to score goals in MDGs are we achieving the goals of MDGs are we measuring it right is the goal post there clear and everybody is hitting the same time in the same directions or is it something that is unclear when you say half the poverty and we achieve that target achieve that goal but that is because of China is doing very well and the sub Saharan Africa they are not doing that well so is that achieving a goal is that scoring a goal there is a question mark will we repeat that problem when we are getting into the SDG are we scoring the right goals are we having the right statistic are we having the right methodology and also governance system to make that goal real achieving of that goal something that is actually achieving what was the objective of that that's number one number two what I learned there is that this movement is talking about poverty in a very different way you are talking about a multiple dimension property multi dimensional poverty is not only income poverty and because of that when you try to achieve the eradication of poverty as in the SDG thing again what is it that you are talking about income poverty health access poverty livelihood poverty happiness poverty happiness poverty I can do it on a very long list of what is this multi dimensional poverty so achieving the goal on that poverty line is something that is going to be another complexity and calculation the third thing that was emphasized during this open working group and before is about the global partnership the MDG number eight was never really be successful right so when you are talking about that the global partnership is very important to achieve here now if you are talking about SDG forest and landscape is global partnership in play when you are talking about making that forest and landscape really produce is the amount of forest in Indonesia good for the world or is it good for Indonesia or is it different or is it the same then you are talking about how global partnership define what needs to be done moving forward the third the other thing that is coming out from that is the means of implementation means of implementation on the MDG was not very strong now the means of implementation for SDG needs to be triple quadruple in terms of strength which means governance is very important which means that the ability the system and the budget of countries needs to be directed toward the right directions from that when you are talking about forest and you are talking about landscapes at the end of the day if poverty eradication is the objective is the right of the people part of the poverty if the people is having a poverty because their right is not acknowledged now we need to also address the forest dwelling people right for land right for livelihood right for health, right for everything else and so you are talking about what will be the benefit that we are getting or we are achieving we are trying to achieve when we have the sustainable development goals matching with the problem of the climate change into the landscape and the forest as the living theater I will say I don't agree with the statement co-benefit co-benefit is a parallel benefit I will make use of the term interdependent benefit because the benefit on one end will be affecting the other benefit on the other end so you can have a series of benefit if you have this benefit better that this benefit create another benefit at the same time if in the beginning you are talking about interdependent benefits I will ask later on that it should be an inter-supportant benefit this benefit support that other benefit not just parallel not just joint but it is actually a living connection of benefits and the last one that I will say here I think the overworking group is not done the SDG is not done yet when we are doing something on only by inter-government process it's only half of the process ladies and gentlemen we are focusing for inter-community processes where government is just one community if you have the government is one community the scientist another community the community community is another community and the private sector is another community and everyone is thinking as the inter-community process then we will have the real sustainable development goals the real climate change we are seeing actions and at the same time also knowing that the living theater is not only going to be a theater for the show of climate change versus sustainable development but it is actually the theater that is alive and it's life is getting better because of the combination of the two it's an issue that us the human species in a way that is not very just sectoral government as a sector a scientist sector or the private sector as a sector it has to be inter-community ladies and gentlemen goal scoring is not easy MBG experiences shows that we are not that good we may be a lot of tic-tac-ing very good on that but when you are talking about goal scoring we want to match the model and messy thank you very much very lively presentation Peter please thanks thank you I think one of the first questions you have for this session was how has forest approached integrated solutions and I thought hard about that and I thought even harder about that I couldn't really find out any good examples but it's obvious that we need to formulate that so let me first say that about a year ago I was deeply engaged in a debate between the forestry institutions and the debate was whether how, not whether how can we make one of the goals to be about forests and I was a crater because I said I don't think we should have a golden forest I think that would be bad it would only lead to the same situation with the MDGs where forest was tucked in under environment and the only measure was the area of the forest and that's it instead I've argued that we must take this opportunity to redefine forestry to contribute across the sustainable development goals and I think we're getting closer to that particularly if we think about the landscapes approach but there is a lot of traditional thinking many forestry institutions are still arguing for a specific forest agenda specific forest targets etc. I think we need to think hard about how can we integrate this forest agenda into the broader development agenda it is beginning to happen but it hasn't happened yet I think the IID work in this field has been extremely useful and I encourage you all to read their findings I want to focus this very brief talk on indicators because the discussion is now leaning towards how can we measure progress without ending up in the hundreds of obscure indicators that we've seen in so many different development efforts so we really need some smart indicators that can help us forward if you think about it there is only really one indicator out there that is commonly used and understood by everyone it's PTP money and one of the preparation questions consigned before the session was if anyone disagreed with the previous people I said I would be lost but I don't want to disagree but I want to compliment something that Paula said because Paula you put a lot of emphasis on natural resources accounting this is an extremely important way to go it's really at the national accounting level absolutely important that we internalize the natural resources in the economic decisions but let's not think that this is something we can apply everywhere in all situations because it's a very complicated process and it's not always that it is practical or even ethical to bring everything into a GDP plus calculation for landscapes at the local level we will probably always have to consider several dimensions of values the economy is of course a big part of it but it's not all of it that's not a disagreement it's more a compliment to what Paula said now to discuss the landscape approach one of the key factors we've seen and as some have said already this could be a bridge an interface to the STG it's a way to an analytical framework to move towards the STG ambition but in doing that we need a small set of measurable that tells us whether we're going in the right direction or not and this is not so trivial because we want to be able to study progress at a very local level and we also want to be able to study progress at a national level preferably they should be connected somehow we also want to have a reasonably standardized approach like GDP is more or less the same everywhere it is the same everywhere but then we have this diversity of landscapes it's impossible to define exactly something that is good in one landscape is also good in a different landscape how can we shape these smart indicators if we really move forward we're suggesting four indicators still challenging everyone I see to say whether it's good enough or if we need to think harder four measures and these measures are all scalable they can be widely understood I appreciate it I can explain it to my teenage years I can explain it to a politician that has to work they can be monitored at reasonable costs and very important something we'll come back to it can work for the finance community so four measures one is improved livelihoods and it's pretty much about income it's not only about income but income is a pretty good proxy for improved livelihoods two, sustained ecosystem services we can design ecosystem services and propose that biomass content per hectare in the landscape is a pretty good proxy yes it doesn't exactly measure biodiversity yes it doesn't exactly measure water conditions it doesn't exactly measure the productivity of the soils but as a proxy it's pretty good three, resource efficiency and that's more straightforward it has to do a lot with how much energy we use for producing things from the land well it's greenhouse gas emissions per produced unit and four, and this is the one that we are often concerned with the delivery of food and non-food products we need to make sure that we have the right the right supply levels four measures everybody can see that they are relevant possibly we can agree that they are encompassing and maybe we can agree that they can be measured in the way this does not say that these are the indicators but this could be a framework an analytical framework to start with when we go towards the landscape approach we could for example say that if all of these four indicators are stable or improving then we are good that brings me to my final point if we want as I said in here earlier if we want to infuse the the large scale finance community to start investing in sustainable land use to provide access to capital for small holders that is affordable and long term and fair then those fund managers need to have something to hold on to something that is more tangible than a political decision on carbon credits or whatever and that tangible measure could be a proof of moving in the sustainability direction through four indicators like this that can be applied geographically anyway and that is important too because if we are talking about large scale large scale finance engagement then we cannot talk about one counter at a time or one crop at a time or one one climate zone at a time we need to talk globally and then we need to find out how we can measure progress across all these situations and still be standardized so that the finance people can use them in their models and in their analysis on both profitable and sustainable investments forest and STDs is in reality the same as landscape and STDs we don't have to make a very big distinction between the two but we need to focus on forest because we are off the forest for the intersection for indicators thank you very much Peter last week I asked very early afternoon good afternoon for me it is a challenge after having had these brilliant interventions to be able to contribute with the notes that I have prepared but basically our participation has to do with telling all of you that our country had an important meeting on November 17th and 18th about this topic about the focus or an integral approach that is related to the whole process of elaboration of the objectives of sustainable development and how the topic will be presented in the post-2015 agenda I will briefly tell you that during the 17th and 18th we have representatives from all regions of the world here in Peru and Lima there are many researchers representatives of governments also from the following societies that we meet to do precisely this workshop dedicated to the topic of the objectives of sustainable development and how the topic of forests should be incorporated not only in focus in a specific objective but in a transversal way I think the goal of the workshop was fulfilled we found a document synthesis with the main contributions of the development of this method of focus or transversal approach that we hope to finish before the end of February with the revisions and the contributions of the participants but mainly of the results of this work we can share that four important themes were defined to address the theme of forests in relation to the ODS one of them is about the mitigation of climate change resilience and adaptation the other has to do with employment opportunities related to forests management access to water and energy in relation to these important ecosystems and also the protection of biodiversity and then we defined this methodology of the transversal focus of this more integral and modular approach some themes about the basis of which we must implement the goals and one of them had to do with the political bases of this process the theme of governance the theme of governance based on respect for the law transparency and access to information access to participation decision making management of these ecosystems and therefore achieving the environmental justice also the need to define goals regarding guaranteeing the rights to the land and natural resources and the fair distribution of the benefits and the utilization of these resources Paula mentioned that in this more normative and political base they should be addressed and we agree with them themes are delicate like environmental crimes like the issue of gender or the issue of corruption the issue of guaranteeing rights of transparency and access to information this was also present in the definition of these political bases then we defined in group that it was important to relate the issue of mechanisms the issue of mechanisms of the fair and responsible market the market access and promotion of the diversification of the productive process needs to be told with specific goals and the support of small companies and production organizations sustainable and responsible practices by the private sector a strong component of the discussion was based precisely on the management of forest and private companies the promotion of employment of small companies the articulation of the large extractors of the forest with the small organizations also of producers then we addressed how this approach of landscape effective management of natural resources was necessary to relate forest and ODS we defined that sustainable management of forests and natural resources should also have some goals that agricultural systems and sustainable food production also in the same way consider the integrated management of the sidereal resources and then the use of soils this integral management of soils that should also be implemented the generation of methodologies and mechanisms of implementation also once defined in the networks they spoke of incentives of the development of research of science and of technological transfer the issue of strengthening of institutional capacities and precisely this synergy and coordination between agencies and organizations of international cooperation with the state organizations and also the evaluation of ecosystem services I think that after having heard these important interventions I would have to say that throughout the discussion of the workshop was very present the issue that raised Paul about infrastructure how is that all these issues if required of a strong development of the countries in promotion and implementation of alternative energies and the use of these called natural activities in the case of our country how to plan the obtaining of energy based on electrical energy is fundamental too all these elements that I have shared with you are essential and precisely make note of the forests in the definition of sustainable development it is fundamental what we also realized in the work was the relationship of the theme of forests very close to the objective 15 of the list of these 17 that the group has given to us which is referred to the terrestrial ecosystems and also the multiple links of the forests around the 17 objectives and on these links all these all these enabling conditions precisely to to have only indicators the objectives implementing in the terrain is that I can comment that our country already has a very high commitment defined a very big goal with respect to the theme of forestry until 2021 we are sure to have a zero deforestation until that year and only we are going to achieve definitely by avoiding the known externalities in the case of our country but also in critical critical of deforestation they have to do with the fight to the illegal mining and also with a non-planned agricultural expansion let's remember that Peru is a territory really arrester we have the territory certainly vast but also very diverse that goes from these arid areas that have also shared going through mountains and then the Amazonian which is undoubtedly a challenge to deal with this also focus of the landscape finally I can share that Peru has some advances that it knows that it has to give clear signs in this in this stage where we are anti-tron this is such an important world conference and that it has achieved a very important institutional strengthening with the creation of the National Forest Service CERFOR and also with a national strategy proposal about climate change forest that is currently through a national committee looking for those proposals to be consensual with all the actors with the majority of actors that can be involved in their approval also we have with national systems information that already includes network platforms to support their concrete implementation and with the recent ecosystem services law all of these instruments closely related they all have complexity but if they allow us to say that we would be walking taking care of the biodiversity we would also be walking with mechanisms of financing oriented to sustainable development and that the management and property of the forests then have a very concrete contribution to this sustainable development so anxious after determining the process of consultation we hope that this document the discussion that as well said is still an open process we still need to take some steps ahead but I think that for our country the most important is that already going to implementation or definition of goals has to be done in consequence with the main elements with what we already have I have seen here in the panel a very good complementarity from a political from an economic and ecosystem approach that without a doubt we have to remember that not because we produce more plans and programs we will be on board a theme but that what will have success we being aware of all the instruments that we have we can go to implementation of the local state in an organized way and we can channel resources in an organized way in our country there are countless procedures protocols, strategies plans but that already this process of more global goals will allow us to walk all those initiatives for a much more concrete implementation the Peruvian commitment is there we thank you for allowing us to this important meeting and product of that discussion that was of several regions of the world we can contribute to the importance of the voice theme in this process of building sustainable development especially this agenda after 2015 Thank you Thank you Sonia and apologies for not calling you by your right name at the beginning very good so those are very rich presentations and I think I would also like to use often to thank the Peruvian government two weeks ago which was a very successful event in many regards to taking on this concept of an integrated look at bringing in forests into the SDGs so thank you for that now let's go to our guiding questions we have limited time left so can I have the slides please we're going to start with the first question which will come up in a moment I'm sure which is about so we have we've heard from the panelists that there have been some quite positive progress made by the open working group so we've heard about some of the positive progress that's been made in terms of incorporating forests some differences in opinion as to whether forests should be featured explicitly whether it's the other integrated aspects that are necessary from the landscape perspective there's been some positive progress but what else is now needed up until September this is what I'd like us to focus on we're in a critical period where I suppose one could say perhaps if we were to lie low having seen these positive achievements could forests then forest and forest landscapes disappear off the agenda particularly prominent item this cop as it was in the past could it possibly lose a bit of focus so what kind of action is now needed so I'd like to throw this out to the audience to start with please if anyone has views to share so I'm Mia Crawford from the Swedish Ministry for World Affairs and I'm actually here in Lima to negotiate land use issues including red even though we haven't we haven't had much of a success in that issue but I also have a hand in the discussion on the SDGs from the Swedish side and I also want to take on the opportunity to challenge some of the panelists since this was also a quest from the beginning so first of all I'd like to thank both C4 and IID for all of your work over the last year I think a lot of the papers that you have produced on the SDGs and the whole notion of the landscape ideas is really trickling into these SDG negotiations and I'm not sure if you have seen the SDGs Synthesis report it was launched two days ago and paragraph 74 puts landscape in the centre so and I don't know have you are you all familiar with this paragraph otherwise I could read out some of the extract from it well it's under prosperity to grow a strong inclusive economy and there it reads that sustainable approaches to landscape management including agriculture and forestry industrialisation access to energy and water and sanitation are key drivers of sustainable production and consumption job creation as well as sustainable and equitable growth long centres they deliver sustainable management resources and tackle climate change so I think this is a very good foundation to build on so leaning on to what is now needed is really to make sure that this kind of language stays on in the further process but so I do want to challenge you a little bit there that you do see the linkages from the climate negotiations the estuaries at least some of us who are involved in these processes what else is needed I really think the there's a lot of work needed on the indicators so I'd like to really thank Peter for bringing that up however I do see that a lot of the indicators that you mentioned are perhaps more what I would see as the top targets under that kind of goal that I just read out so one other message from me to take on and maybe for you to respond is it would be good to see in their gender equality and then more of the land rights and long term forest tenure issues and would be that we need to also think and build on existing data and indicators not to reinvent the wheel thank you thank you very much would you like to add on please other panel members please feel free to chip in we have all the microphones on please at the front if I can just come in very quickly on that I think on the issue of metrics you have to ask yourself who are the rail land users who are the decision makers in relation to that land and you need to map metrics and tools that give those land users the capacity to measure, monitor act in relation to what these metrics are telling them so for me if this and control are being vested in local land users you need to build on how they look at how they manage how they monitor changes in the status of that land and see that as being the real focus of your life or investment it's useful to have some higher level metrics that government can aggregate compare with other parts of the country compare with other countries but actually what you need are practical tools for the rail land users they're not with all due respect people in ministries in the capital city they're the people on the ground and therefore I mean what we've found useful in some of the work that we've been doing in Northern Kenya is seeing how you can marry local people's knowledge and understanding patterns of land use and change with satellite images that they become actually extremely adept at using how you can combine that local knowledge with certain satellite imagery in a way that gives those local people greater capacity to understand and act on I think this is very interesting when you're talking about I agree with you in terms of the land user needs to have the right metrics for that but the spectrum of complexity is very wide like the case in Indonesia the right of the what you call the cultural people, the indigenous people in the past the group is not acknowledged by the government because it's being informal it needs to be formalized first understood and then the boundary of the right of the land be established that the right needs to be put in place in the first place and then they will be asked to do that measurement of how the land is being used on the other extreme there are companies that have 3 million hectares of land as a license to them how they use that land how they can measure that in terms of getting into the sustainable use is a different kind again in the middle you have the forest management unit of the government that will need to address as well in a different way so I think when we are talking about sustainable development goals the universal goals and local target needs to be put in place such that the metrics is actually appropriate but can be aggregated into something that is universally moving towards sustainability so how to do that is the complex things and I think even that should be a goal that the government and organization needs to develop the mechanism and the measurement that will make the achievement of the goal possible without that I think it will be very difficult to do that well in reality the participation of your intervention I respect how to rethink the fact of establishing or taking some indicators or strategies that we already implement in our countries and of which the governments have the responsibility to take into account and monitor only in the river conventions when the countries do the so-called national reports we already have to make these reports with indicators and clear goals according to the methodology of each convention this is complicated at the level of management of a government let's imagine more local but also there are other considerations we commented that there are cultural considerations our country for example is a country multicultural to focus on a topic like the management of the forest is a dialogue even between culture between western culture we have mainly in the cities and how dialogue with language communication has to be carried out to manage the territory environmental conflict is growing with respect to how we agree on the management of resources it's very complicated we trust that there should be a focus from above but also from below in a dialogue interface and this dialogue interface I think the process of construction and development of sustainable development is the best opportunity our country currently has a national commission of multi sectors that are carrying the dialogue of the ODS construction to other places they are not only fighting memes they are not fighting other actions or international authorities that also have to intervene and local actors too I think there are elements not only with an environmental or a very economic impact but with considerations anthropological and sociological that we have to incorporate not only to take into account the convention of climate change but also to take into account internally in the country the importance of all these processes and I think many consider with me is that they have been put on the table they are already in the agenda for our country to make such an important meeting as it is meant that our most important decision makers give a look also at how important the management of natural resources and Latin America too so it is important that we address this dialogue and we need more tools to define in what way we are going to monitor this discussion Thanks Sonja there is a few more hands we have to agree that maybe maybe we are just going to focus on this and probably just one other question in the time available before we go to another question I just want to emphasize what do negotiators need to think about particularly in this period of the run up and I think some of the discussion now is probably edging on what happens there after at local levels in terms of interpretation but there are also considerations on indicators which may have to happen in the up to September 2015 I wonder that question then over to you Peter I heard through the various presentations I think two of them mentioned the importance of land use planning is one of the kind of fundamental not fundamental construct but one of the important ingredients the importance of inclusive integrated I think was mentioned but land use planning is one of the key tools and yet this is one thing that is totally absent from the SDG framework as it stands there are other issues as well others can also pick out other issues that are missing how does one deal with these missing issues how do you deal with them without opening up the entire SDG framework as it's now proposed to totally unpacking and destroying maybe some of the good work that's already been done how does one achieve this I'll just say very quickly that from where I'm sitting now I have all I can say is that it isn't in the governmental process and the bank doesn't have a view about where that process is going but the sense is that what came out of June as I said before is pretty good it's good enough to go and if we keep trying to open and tinker it and try to make it a little bit better and a little bit more perfect the perfect becomes the enemy of the good I think the focus has to be on implementation and some of the questions that were coming up are at two levels at one level is how do we already get geared up for implementation and in that sense the bank is ready to go to hit the ground to support countries in whatever they want to do now to start to unpack these targets to start to work on that a separate issue which is very much linked to that and I think speaks to the feedback between that conversation that we were just having about indicators how as we actually hit the ground running and start to work on implementation what comes out of that in terms of how that can inform the negotiation process the next step is definitely going to be looking at indicators I hope that it will not be a fully a process as was done for the targets because my hope is that we could actually end up with there won't be a correlation between the number of targets and the number of indicators and the less indicators the indicators are really smart and the indicators are really integrative so I think that that would be the key issue and it partens a lot to what I was saying before about using landscapes as a prism so that we can change how those indicators are formulated or viewed and that is part of the work that we could do specifically in terms of that question but in parallel to that we're going to have to start working on implementation on the ground and what we need to do is create that virtuous cycle going forward so that there is some kind of an adaptive management or a cycle that feeds what we're learning back into it and there's other governance mechanisms that came out of Rio I'm not sure how effective quite honestly they will be in that but I think it's up to governments, up to parties up to private sector to other stakeholders to have that vetting process or that review process to see how robust it really is in practice Peter very quickly now I will first answer to your second question what do we do with what's missing I would actually turn that question around and say who decides what's missing because that's the kind of question that has led to the proliferation of all sorts of different targets and indicators in the past because everybody wants their indicator in there so if you ask the question what's missing I suggest we ask we ask it somewhat isn't it to get a more constructive discussion going on that and that connects to my comment to the first question which is on the screen what specific action is needed I would say reality check I was in a previous life responsible for the forest indicator to the MVDs and I participated in those sorts of meetings in the UN Statistic Division with people from all sorts of agencies in the inter-governmental system it's of course a good and necessary exercise as such but it was pretty sad to see how little connection there was between that work and what was going on as well so I hope we're not repeating that now and I hope that we can make a reality check and figure out what do we really need to know what is really important to me and that just because we have seven windows and I don't know how many targets that doesn't mean that we need even more indicators I would say in the future eight to ten indicators and that would be good communication I think we have to be aware that the moment is already in the inter-governmental stage the contributions that we can make as countries have to channel from our delegation to Genoa York and in Genoa York we have a number different associations of countries because we work with blockage so I think what to do until September is to make each country develop internal consulting mechanisms so that their national positions really reflect what is expected to be done with this monitoring and the definition of the objectives in it so it is important to know at what stage of the period we are in in what way the civil society the academic organization the international cooperation should be channeling their structures in different themes I think the great contribution of this process is and I think it has been the environmental dimension of sustainable development is more balanced with respect to the economic focus and the social focus I think this is the great achievement of this process of definition of that and of this agenda Thank you Sonya We are needing to wrap up because most of our panelists need to go on to another session and you do as well I have a quick comment please Do you have somebody? And then maybe one or two panelists can have a response Hello, I am Andres Hildebrand from the Ministry of Environment I would like to congratulate all of you for your quite interesting presentations I have a question about red actually and it has to do with the fact that what I find sometimes difficult with SDGs is how is to link too strongly rights, people's rights to implementation of climate change policies based on scientific evidence I'll speak about red and the conflict between local level and national level there seems to be like two groups in red the ones who favorize, the ones who support a strong national component to supervise the results of red and then the other ones who actually are more focused on communities and say well communities should be able to manage themselves should be able to empower themselves and so forth that's ok, but red is also about money and according to any basic principle of check and balances if there is money and profit involved how is the people who are going to make the profit also responsible of evaluating the results so I find for me that's one of the big problems with red and also you could say there is some sort of contradiction between equity and profit and efficiency within red and the thing is how can you solve this issue if you are claiming that the right of a community to supervise is a basic right of empowerment and so forth well there is a contradiction with a national level who should control actually and make coherent data I mean if you have many local examples many local methods how do you actually integrate that into your national contributions because you need coherent metrics within a country and if it's within a region even better so that will be my remark, thank you very much Thank you, does anyone want to respond to that? I hear you, I want to interview you I think it's very interesting questions because the other question that comes into that is that what and how are we going to use the SDGs are we going to go through each of this 17 goals so many targets and try to measure and get very tired in measuring or are we going to do the actions and I'll put here the red as one of the driver that will be put and be done and when it is done look into the check into that sustainable development goals does it go against those elements and how we do that in Indonesia we said that in Indonesia red is beyond carbon and more than forest so the indicators that we are using in terms of operation on the ground is basically not only emission reduction but also equitable economic well-being of the people of the people that is sports dwelling so basically your development needs to be more equitable than before and then the third is ecological sustainability so if a district in the red performance is only good in emission reduction, no score if there is not emission reduction and also the social equity but the ecological balance is affected is bad no score so basically you can start getting the money from emissions but also from livelihood from new way of getting the income and then you do that and score the jurisdiction based on that and only reward when the balance is okay so we set with each of the district a balanced scorecard and that scorecard is what is going to be implemented it's not easy but it's the right thing now if we do that already and we match to the sustainable development goals, does it mean the eradication of poverty does it mean this and that and then we can say yes it scores correct I think I'm trying to answer your red questions in the SDG context Thank you very much for her, you brought it around a nice circle highlighting the holistic look at the sets of benefits and what red needs to deliver as well as the SDGs we're totally out of time I'd like to thank again the panelists and give them one last round of applause please Thank you