 I'm working in CFO for the Forest and Governance Program, which means I'm mainly interested in all the governance issues around mitigation and adaptation. So what is happening in a policy arena of adaptation and mitigation. And this interest is focused on what are the mechanisms, what are the actors, who is playing political processes, who is doing decisions. And I'm working, I would say I'm working on the politics of red and the politics of adaptation. And politics doesn't limit itself to politics at the national level, but also politics of the local level. Our mission at CFO is to identify cases which are telling enough stories that we understand processes. So our key to understanding is in fact comparison. And that means we are working with local case studies, we are working with national case studies. And what we try to do is trying to get out of these kind of cases, individual cases, with individual actors, with individual decision making processes, with specific interests and with specific corridors for negotiation for the involved in those kind of decision making. What we try to do is getting out the key message and what does it mean for the global process? What does it mean for other national processes? What does it mean for other places where local decision making is happening under such and such conditions? So we try to find out what are the success stories. So where did decision making under challenging climate work and where did it not work? So in the adaptation arena we are working for quite some years now on adaptation issues in a global comparative way. But in mitigation we are starting, we are involved, CFO is involved in a global comparative research on red. And this global comparative research is built by four different blocks. And the first three are the scientific ones, the fourth is the communication one. And the first component for red is about national policy strategies and national policy decision making, which means how those red strategies are being formulated by whom and what is driving these actors of getting engaged there. And beside this first policy, this component on national policy processes, we have a second component which is working on demonstration sites and understanding how red is happening on the ground. So what are the outcomes of this national decision making which we will analyze in component one. The third component is about monitoring and verification and reporting basically. And the fourth one is, so this is all what we as scientists can learn, how do we tell it to the broader public or to specific target groups. So how do we transform our knowledge what we as scientists can gain that it is understandable for others. So how science can be a broker. And I think this is the main reason why we are doing this kind of work because we need to understand what is driving actors. We need to understand how you can do it. We need to understand what kind of options are on the table to inform policy making. And if you want to achieve an evidence based policy making, we have to provide on the one hand the evidence and on the other hand we have also to provide the right language and we have to be in time. And this is what C4 is driving right now. Presenting in time needed knowledge about options in red decision making. Excellent question I would say. The question is always how you set up such a research design. So what we need is a research design which allows us to take out lessons and which allows for comparison. And that means we have for example one way of find types of different countries you can then later compare in their performance in terms of red. One way to do so is to see where they are on the forest transition curve. So in what stage is there forest? Is the forest like for example in Cameroon still facing high deforestation rates? Or is it already like it is the case in Vietnam for example on a way where the forest cover is augmenting? So if you have those kind of very broad types or other categories like is this country in a process of decentralization? At which level is the transfer of power and resources taking place? If you take those kind of categories you can build different types of country groups and between those kind of groups you can try to identify patterns. But you also can try to identify with just to give an example as a method you can try to do qualitative comparative analysis and try to identify different factors which are similar in one group of countries and not similar in another group. And this will help you to identify what is in fact responsible, what kind of governance factor or governance related factor is responsible for this and this policy output or policy outcome. The broader aim of red policies and this has also something to do with the mission of C4 and other global donors for example in the arena is we want to achieve an equitable, efficient and effective red. So if this is the objective of what red should be, it should be effective, it should be efficient, it should be equitable then the question is how can we achieve such a red and what is responsible, what are the factors responsible for not red not being equitable for example. And since the actors involved in decision making and their agendas which are driving those kind of actors are very important in explaining what will be the final decision in a red arena, you need to understand what is driving otherwise you cannot evaluate your outcomes, policy outcomes or policy outputs. And if you have a specific policy saying red should be in our country, red is done like this and this and this, then you can explain why this country has decided so by understanding the dynamics and the policy arena, but at the same time you can also analyse the content of this policy. If your objective is to achieve an equitable, efficient and effective red and you have a policy which is promising to fulfil these kind of quality criteria, the next question would be why it doesn't happen on the ground. And then again the question is okay, who is involved in it that this policy became so weak, why this policy is not enforced and your qualitative comparison of different countries should allow you to identify what kind of factors are responsible for successful enforcement implementation. What kind of factors in a specific actor constellation are responsible for the integration of equitable issues, equity issues in the red agenda and in the formulation of the red policy. For me it is important that the work as a researcher I am doing is not ending up in a library, in the form of a book, but it might support evidence based decision making. So it's my responsibility as a researcher to find those kinds of evidence, but at the same time also it's my pleasure as a researcher to contribute to global processes and to local processes. And the second reason why I really enjoy my work is one day I'm sitting in Wagadugu. I'm arriving in Wagadugu. I'm driving to a place which is called Gawa, far away. And there I'm sitting on carpets and discussing with people about what is changing their life and they will for sure not talk about climate change and they will for sure not talk about the national adaptation program or for the national mitigation plan. What they will talk about is their daily realities. But two days later I find myself for example in a place like Copenhagen where I can bring those kind of information to a level of decision making which is suffering quite often of lack of knowledge of local levels.