 Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. As you probably all can hear by my accent, I'm not originally from Cork, where Food for Health Island is actually located. I have been living in six different countries, and I have integrated some outside-in perspectives into my presentation, actually from a German living now in Ireland since roughly two years, with conviction, passion, and pleasure. That's what I'm going to talk about. What's on the global food industry? Some very specific aspects of global megatrends. Secondly, what is innovation, and why is it necessary? And thirdly, I'm going to talk about how to innovate in Ireland and what could be a model for success. If you look at the value-added agriculture in percentage of GDP, you see a very strong decline over the years. The yellow line is India, 1970, around 40% going down to something like 25% in 2000. You see Ireland, which in 1970 had something like 17%, going down to roughly 5%, and then you see France and also the US. Then you see the black line, which is actually the volume of agricultural output, and you see that that increased from 1970 from roughly 200 million tons to almost a billion by 2000. So what's the conclusion? Agriculture volume has dramatically increased during the last 40 years, but value has decreased. If you look at the average food expenditure of a family over the year, you see the following trend. In 1950, an American family spent roughly 28% of their income on food products. Now in 2009, it's 13%. In the UK, it was 31%, now 10%. In Ireland, in 1950, an average family spent something like 38% on food. Now it's only 13%. If you look at the right side, you see the correlation between GDP per capita and, again, the income in percentage spent on an average family, and you see that there's a very strong correlation between the rich countries and the expenditure on food and the poorer companies and expenditure on food. So basically, we can say that in developed countries, food has actually become very cheap. Profit margins of milk, that's a rough scheme, and of course, there will always be exception, but basically what it says is, the farmer sells the milk for roughly 30%. It goes to the production companies, you add production, packaging, logistics. The company sell it then for roughly 52 to 65 cents to the distribution centers of the big supermarket chains. There, you add the logistic cost, it's going to be sold to the supermarkets for 60 to 78 cents, roughly. And then there in the supermarkets, of course, you add the logistics, you add the cost of maintaining the supermarket, the staff and so on, and that, of course, and then you come to roughly a price of a liter of milk in Ireland of 1 euro 14. Now you might say, well, there's not much room for profit. Now look at this, in the Netherlands, the same liter of milk costs 75 cents, and in Germany, it's around about 79 cents. So you might say then, as we heard, well, the global demand will increase over the years and that will also increase the price of milk, but at the same time, we know, of course, that the milk quota will bring more volumes to the market and there are expectations that India will become the biggest milk-producing country in the world within the next three to five years. So not only the demand will increase, also the global offer will increase, and it basically means that there is very little money to earn on dairy commodities. So the conclusion for the first part for me is food has become very cheap, relatively. Agri-commodities will remain under strong price pressure in the future. Global demand is probably increasing, but so will also the global offer. Commodity products will not deliver high margins, not today and nor in the future. The only way out is actually to add value to food through innovation. Now, if we talk about innovation, what are we talking about? Now, the section here right now is about innovation for quality, productivity, and sustainability, and that's all very important, but there are much more factors that play a role in innovation. Now, look at that example, milk-actimal. Actimal is probably the most successful function food products or innovative product that you find on the global food market. What it basically means is not only quality, productivity, sustainability, but especially the functional benefit of this product is innovative because it adds immunity, it adds resistance as a benefit to the proposition that the customer is buying. It has a specific recipe, a specific taste that has been checked and tested with many consumers in many sessions. The price strategy, the marketing strategy, the packaging is innovative. Imagine Actimal in a one-liter tetra box would not have had the same success. And then the business model, of course, in which part of the value chain do you extract actually the money? The question then always is, does innovation actually pay off? Is it worth while investing millions in research and innovation? Now, just look at some examples here. We have here Actimal. If you calculate the 100 milliliter part up to a liter, you pay roughly 4.40 Euro that was actually the Netherlands two years ago. And what is Actimal? Actimal is nothing else than a drink yogurt with probiotic bacteria. Now, if you compare a liter drink yogurt in the Netherlands again, you pay 84 cents. So you pay actually five times more for a product like Actimal, but you're not buying Actimal because it is a drink yogurt. You buy it because it offers immunity. It offers resistance. It offers protection against flu. Same example, cholesterol. If you look at Proactive, you calculate that to a liter price, roughly 7 Euro. Again, if you compare that to a normal yogurt product, it's roughly 90 cents per liter. So you pay seven times more for a benefit that apparently is very relevant for consumers, which is this helps you to reduce cholesterol. Look at weight management. That's one of my favorites here because you see the price of a normal muesli bar. If you calculate the price to a kilo, it's roughly 9 Euro. If you take weight watchers or slim fast, so a slim fast, you come to roughly 28 Euro per kilo. And I can tell you the normal muesli bar tastes much better than the slim fast one. But people pay three times more because of the specific benefit. Or look at the product from Campina, a zio fat yogurt, one Euro 15 per liter, and then a product which contains a satiety ingredient, five or six times more the price for a specific benefit. Now you might say, well, that's maybe in foreign countries. In Ireland, we are not so keen on innovation, but you also have that in Ireland. We have, for example, a standard juice versus a multivitamin juice. You have standard bread against the bread which contains specific fibers for heart health. Or look, the normal dairy gold, and then you have proactive. So consumers are willing to pay for benefits that are relevant for them. There's a but, but there are many failures, probably more failures in the functional foods arena than successes. And there's a statement from Science Direct stating, in some product categories, the failure rate among new product introductions is as high as 90%. Now we're learning and we understand why that is the case. Very often some of these products have used several messages, several benefits that the consumers don't understand. Sometimes they have used the wrong carrier. You cannot transmit a health benefit with red meat or with chicken or with chocolate. That doesn't work. Sometimes, again, the packaging was not the right one for an innovative product. Sometimes if you are the fifth supplier coming with Omega-3 added to the product, there is no innovation anymore. So we have learned. But then the question is, are the big food companies still interested in innovation then? If there are so many failures, would they still invest? Now look at Nestle Health Science. Nestle is investing now a billion Swiss francs, that's roughly 760 million Euro, in fundamental research in the health areas that are at the borderline between food and farmer. And of course, you can expect that Nestle finally wants to earn money with that investment. But it's definitely not a two-year return or payback on return target in this case. But this is much more a horizon of 10 to 20 years. And of course Nestle is a customer of all our Irish dairy ingredient companies. And I think it's actually a very nice example to spend roughly 1.5% of your total yearly turnover on blue sky research with a horizon of 10 to 20 years of payback. Maybe that's also an example for the Irish food companies. So my conclusion for innovation, innovation allows higher value, higher prices and higher margins. There are many failures in the market, but we need to continuously learn and try again. Big blue chip food companies are heavily investing in food innovation. So that means although expensive, difficult and long-term, innovation is the name of the game. So how do we innovate in Ireland? Well, there's a very simple message. Just work together. That sounds very simple. It is in practice very difficult, but I will show you now why I believe that that is crucial and why we can actually make that work and happen. First, there are some advantage factors in Ireland. And I think the first one is the quality of Irish milk. I could of course now cite a lot of numbers around the microbial cell count in the milk. I could talk about the carbon footprint, but at the end, I think the real benchmark for me is this investment of Danone in Ireland, 50 million to expand the capacity by triplicate, because at the end, infant formula, and Tom has already mentioned that, is the most delicate food product that you can think of. And I've been working in the infant formula in the industry for 10 years. If you just have a little quality problem, if there's a recall, or if there's even a baby dying from one of your products, your market share's halved into weeks and you need decades to recover, if at all. So you can imagine that there probably have been a many factors that have influenced the decision of Danone to invest in Ireland, but if the quality of the milk as a starting point hadn't been absolutely excellent, they wouldn't even have started the thinking process. Second, the quality of the Irish science. You see here an overview of the best universities of the world, and there's roughly 5,000 universities. You see the first five ones, and then you see that there are six Irish universities amongst the 10% best universities of the world. Now imagine Ireland Inc. Which ranking could we achieve if Irish universities were counted together? Which is not such a strange thought for four million inhabitants here. What I find a bit sad though is that a lot of our most talented scientists are actually leaving the country in order to find work in the food industry outside Ireland. I talked actually last week to one of the leading professors of the University of California, Davis, who always gets some of the most talented PhD students on postdocs from Ireland, and I asked him, so why do you get all these fantastic people? And his answer was, well, you have the talents, we have the opportunities. That's actually sad. The third is the advantage factor, I believe, is the global network of the Irish dairy industry. We have the four companies that are also in the organization of FHI, Glumbier, Carrier, Carberry, and Dairy Gold. We have made an analysis with their salespeople. Together these companies reach 100% of the top 300 global food companies in the world. We have the Irish Dairy Board, we have seen that exports to over 80 countries in the world, and we have many, many dairy, small, and medium-sized enterprises here in Ireland that again have a global outreach. So basically, we are able to sell innovation and science to the global food industry. And now the fourth factor is, of course, my favorite one, because it's all about Food for Health Ireland, and I think really that that is an advantage factor, and it may not sound very modest, but it is a unique model in the global food industry, and I think I have to give credits to the four companies that are part of Food for Health Ireland, which again is Dairy Gold, Carberry, Carrier, and Glumbier, and also four universities, which is the University Campus in Cork, it is the University Campus in Dublin, Chargers, Moor Park, and the University of Limerick, and also Enterprise Ireland as the funding body for Food for Health Ireland. Now what is Food for Health Ireland? Now it's actually a partnership between these four public research organizations and the Irish food industry, represented by these four dairy companies. Food for Health Ireland is funded by Enterprise Ireland and the industry partners together. Our total budget is roughly 22.5 million, and it's very important here that Enterprise Ireland is roughly financing 83% of Food for Health Ireland, and the other 17% are coming from these four companies, and that is actually a very important success factor because this investment in cash into FHI of course appears in the P&L of these four dairy companies. So John Maloney is always asking his staff, his team, what am I getting back for my investment actually? I, by the way, think that that's probably one of the best deals he made in his career. 100% science for just 5% investment, I think is a very good deal. In any case, it creates commitment, interest, and engagement of the company in the research program. It is an industry-led research agenda because we all together have identified the Health Pillars Food for Health Ireland is working on. We are doing research and science and marketing and selling in the areas of infant formula, metabolic health, infection and immunity, and healthy aging, which are the key societal concerns in the world. We have a dairy base, so what we are doing is we look into milk, we decompose milk into its constituents and try to understand what are the health benefits of all these components that you can find in milk. And we have, through these four industry partners, a very strong market position that allows us to scale up, manufacture, and sell also these ingredients to the global market. So in one sentence, it's one center aimed at developing, manufacturing, selling, and marketing functional food products to improve people's health and wellness. So one comment we very often hear is then four competitors working together, how does that actually work? These four companies are competitors in the global market. That's true. And we are talking here about pre-competitive research. And that's very important because the research projects that we are doing that can cost millions in order to develop a new product. None of these companies would have done alone because the scope, the timeline, the resources required for that are just not possible. So world-class research requires collaboration and that is perfectly possible amongst competitors, again in a pre-competitive state. There's very clear rules within Food for Ireland when companies have access to the research results. So that's a clear process that describes when the center results of FHI are made available to the companies. And then all the four companies have access to the research results, which means imagine we are developing a new ingredient for satiety or diabetes. All these four companies then can take that ingredient and sell it in their respective markets or product combinations. So for example, one company might sell this ingredient as a dietary supplement in the US. Another company might say, well, I sell that in a yogurt product in Europe. The third company might say, good, I sell that in a juice product in Asia. So there are many possibilities to then sell the science because the global food market is so incredibly big. And there's a lot of advantages, of course, for the customers because they have access to world-class research, you could call it, than Ireland Inc. There's an intensified partnering from the very start with these four companies. And of course, there's efficient scale-up of new ingredients from the very start. So it's not like you go to university, they develop an ingredient, it comes to your company and then you start from scratch again because you have to upscale it and you have to integrate that into your food products. We do all that in parallel. So what's the success factor for cooperation between the universities and the industry? The problem first of all is that the development of a new ingredient from scratch to market entry can take between five and seven years. So that's the yellow line you see on the top. Now the food ingredient company's innovation horizon for very good reasons is much, much shorter. It's maybe one or two years because there's constant pressure on these companies to deliver quarterly results. So how to bridge that gap? How can we bring the benefit of new products then to these companies that have that horizon? And I think that's very important to mention that the public sector here plays a very important role because the public sector should initiate that dialogue, start the funding, help and support. Then secondly, what we found out is that it's very important to translate and use the competencies of the universities to existing products of the companies in the meantime, which we call the low-hanging fruits. And the third is actually the continuous dialogue and learning process, which is very beneficial in itself already. So I come to my final conclusion slide. Ireland is very well positioned for innovation in the food area. Bringing all elements together is crucial. And FHI, Food for Ireland, may be a role model. The public sector does have an important role in initiating innovation in the food industry. And sometimes here then, here in Ireland, that we are in crisis and we don't have that same self-confidence than other countries or companies. And some of our best scientists have to leave the country. But at the end, I think there is no excuse. I fully believe that Ireland is able to do it. So Ireland can do it. And I think there is a very good future for all of us if we all work together. Thank you. Thank you, Jens.