 Our next session is the State of Climate Science and Policy. I will be moderating this session and will be joined by an esteemed panel of climate experts who were instrumental in the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report. Are we ready? Are we ready for them? We are. First, I would like to call on Dr. Francis X. Johnson, Senior Research Fellow and Climate Policy Lead at the Stockholm Environment Institute Asia Center. He has over 30 years of experience in interdisciplinary energy and climate analyses, capacity building and research focusing especially on biomass and land use in relation to climate and development goals. He was a lead author for the IPCC Special Report on Climate Change and Land and a member of the writing team of the IPCC AR6 Synthesis Report. Francis, please join me on stage. Next is Professor Edwin Aldrian. He is a Professor of Meteorology and Climatology at the Agency for Assessment and Application of Technology BPPT Indonesia. He teaches at the University of Indonesia and Bogor Agricultural Institute and Udiana University and then Pasar Bali. Currently, Prof Aldrian serves as IPCC Working Group One Vice Chair representing Indonesia and countries in the southwest Pacific region. He is active in promoting climate science nationally and internationally as part of the IPCC Outreach Program in South Asia and Southeast Asia. Prof Aldrian, please join us on stage. Next we have Professor Yung Yutri Surat. He's a Folk Professor of Forestry at Kaset Sart University in Bangkok, Thailand. He has been active in the area of biodiversity, landscape ecology, climate change and GIS for over 30 years and has been a frequent contributor to several international agencies. He is a Co-Chair of the Asia-Pacific Biodiversity Observation Network, Chair of Scientific Community for International Long-Term Ecological Network for East Asia and the Pacific Region. In addition, he was the Coordinating Lead Author of the IPCC AR6 Working Group Two. And lastly, we have Professor Joy Sheri Roy, who is currently the Founder Director of the Center on South and Southeast Asia Multidisciplinary Applied Research Network on Transforming Societies of Global South and the inaugural Magabandhu Chair Professor at Serd Asian Institute of Technology. She was in the IPCC 2007 Nobel Peace Prize-winning panel and continues as Coordinating Lead Author in Fifth and Sixth Assessment Cycles of Working Group Three of IPCC. Let's give them a round of applause. Give them the energy to start this day. So before I give the floor to Francis, I would like to ask for everyone's help to make sure that we are all on time. If you need to remind me that Charmaine, we want to ask questions, give me a wink. Also, we have our timekeeper on the side. Yeah, so everyone, I'm giving the floor to Francis to start this session. Yeah, thanks Charmaine. And I also like to thank all the participants, but also Dr. Sirchar for mentioning the Science Policy Interface, which is of course at the heart of the mission of the SEI and also the multi-level issues because we are working local, national, regional, global. And as you mentioned, the regional aspects are underutilized to a significant extent. So we will talk about that. We can, should I forward? Yeah, okay. So yeah, what I'd like to explain first of all is for those not familiar with the structure of the IPCC assessment is that this occurs over a very long period of time, about seven years in this case. And there are six reports and one synthesis report. And this involves the work of thousands of scientists from all over the world. So in 30 minutes, we cannot give you a summary of these thousands of pages. And I think it's 66,000 references or something like this. But so we will give selected findings and also our slides will have a lot of information, so we won't be able to cover everything in the slides. But these will be available after the event. So don't worry if something is unclear because there's a lot of information. So, and then just to mention that the IPCC assessments include the three working groups, which are the physical science, group one, group two is impacts, adaptation and vulnerability, group three is mitigation. And then there are special reports in this cycle. It was land, oceans, and 1.5, the impacts of 1.5C, okay. So first of all, I'd like to say is that it's unequivocal that human activities are responsible for global warming. So if you look at the slide on the left, this is the so called hockey stick slide, which shows the rapid increase in temperature in the past decades. And this has not been observed in more than 100,000 years, this type of temperature. On the right, it's clear that there's no statistical difference between observed warming and the human influenced warming. There are some other natural causes like volcanic activities and so forth. So it's important to realize that emissions have grown in almost all regions, but they're distributed very unevenly. The OECD countries, North America, Europe, and the other countries in Asia are responsible for the majority of emissions. And that's what you see on the left graph, the historical responsibility for climate change and the obligations that come with that. However, the current distribution of course is changing due to the patterns of development. And I'd like to draw your attention to the situation in Southeast Asia. The gray part of these graphs shows the emissions or CO2 associated with land use and land use change. And these are very significant in Southeast Asia. And so it's an important area to focus on, I think, in the coming years or decades. So what is the big challenge that we face globally? It's to limit warming to 1.5 or 2 degrees C. So some of you are familiar with this graph. But just to say that the orange part, which is the business as usual, is taking us to some place we would not like to be. And that is a warming of somewhere between 2.2 degrees and 3.4 or somewhere around that. And this is a very high level of warming, rather dangerous. So where we want to be is the green or preferably the blue. And that's going to require a really significant effort across all sectors. So what about investment? You're going to hear, I think, later today from some people working in the financial sectors. And I hope that they will bring their expertise to this issue. Because the amount of investment that's needed to reach our climate targets is, in many cases, in order of magnitude higher than what we have today. So if you look particularly at Southeast Asia, the range has been estimated to be somewhere between 6 times as much and 12 times as much investment is needed. So there really is a lot of investment is needed, how to mobilize this investment is critical. So to finish with some good news, because that was a lot of bad news, I know. To finish with some good news, the trends have been very positive in the renewable sectors, particularly photovoltaics. The costs came down faster than anyone realized. So if you look at the graph on the left, you see this rapid decline in the cost of PVs. And you see this exponential curve of adoption. Similarly, exponential curve with wind and also with passenger vehicles because of the drop in lithium ion batteries. So I would like to thank you for your attention and we'll turn it over to my colleagues here for the other dimensions of this presentation. Thanks. Good morning, everyone. It's very nice and welcome to be here. More of you, very important meeting. We would like to have my presentation. Oh, sorry. OK, as you know that Himalaya is the third polar of the world. This is not widely known, but this is the fact that Himalaya become the third polar of the world. Number one polar is Antarctica. It's the South Polar. Everybody know. Number two is not polar, but the Greenland because Greenland is located in overland. And that polar is the Himalaya. Himalaya is a mountain, many ice and cryosphere. And then the flow is going to the east, to the China, and to South Asia. And then the remaining goes to Mekong River in the South East Asia. So nobody ever believed it. This is our third polar. I believe this will be the last experience that we have. So rising temperature will mean that you will have more ice melting, the glacier melt, and so on like this. And this will increase the sea level rise. By the increase it is 3.6 millimeters per year. That is twice as far as the rise for the 20th century. And this is causing the impact on the issue in the Southeast Asia. And the sea level rise also very impacted, for example, the city in India, Bangladesh, and many other cities in the South East Asia, I think in the many Mekong major cities, like in Hanoi, like in Vietnam, and Thailand, Cambodia, and so on like this. So this climate impact is very much known and then very much affected. People live in this area. People live in this area. It's too much. I think number one in the world. You're facing China population, you're facing India population, and the Southeast Asia population. This means a billion of people. Like this schematic diagram showing to you the many challenges that we face in the future. This is, for example, I noted here, a several supplies of the land and then so on like this. And then sea level rise, flood, and social infrastructure upgrades of the system. So this is very much needed by us right now. OK. I'm sorry. It doesn't go, OK. OK, sorry. And then we have many, many, many activity in the Southeast Asia. For example, the Southeast Asia, I make this collaboration among the countries in Southeast Asia, Indonesia, Thailand, Philippines, Vietnam. We make a modeling with the domain of what happened in the Southeast Asia. Now the IPCC use our domain and then display to the public to the world. So this means that this is some going on regional simulation study for the Southeast Asia. And I think this is very much the news that we brought today that the climate driven by human is causing temperature and chemistry to the ocean. And then we have many things like, for example, the understanding of the Himalayas as the third pollan of the world. And then give the makeup river water of the water quality and so on with the increase of the sea level rise and so on. So we may have many study beginning today and then we may discuss in the afternoon what is what we can to strengthen global climate and modeling capacity of the region. Because for us, the modeling it is very, very much essential. And then we are going to understand what is going on with the system. OK, that's all. I think I believe I can leave to you. And thank you very much. OK, good morning. So I am very delighted to be with you this morning and to share my experience with you that I have involved in the AR6 working get to at the CLA. So since we have the limited time allocation for each speaker, seven to eight minutes each, so I would like to highlight the key fighting based on my experience in the forestry, biodiversity, and touch a little bit on the water and food related and the other content I think you can find in the report that Francis already mentioned in the previous presentation. So based on the meta-analysis, so you can see that in this picture. So thanks, congratulations to Indonesia. So you have the richest biodiversity in South Asia and Thailand ranks at the 20 of the world. And however, our biodiversity are declining based on the climate change impact. So it depends the level of the impact. It depends on the carbon emission. That will cause the problem of the biodiversity loss, the structural change, tree mortality, and Wi-Fi increase, and carbon emission. So according to the analysis, more than, I think, 100,000 scientific literature. So we find that with 1.5 degree Celsius warming. So most likely we've lost, I think, about 14% of the biodiversity from today. With the 3 degree Celsius, so we may lost, I think, up to 40%. But if the temperature rising 5 degree Celsius in the next 80 years, so we lost more than 60% of the remaining biodiversity. And if you see the graph, so it's quite clear that the countries which are located in the low altitudes, including Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, this would be the high list of biodiversity loss in the future. I think the chair ready, Dr. Chung Ruck, already mentioned for a welcome remark in this morning. So beside that, the higher temperature and long drought will cause about the more dry risk zone. And that will increase the list of the forest fires in the future. It's already experienced in Australia, in Hawaii, and right now it's already occurred in Indonesia, the peace burning. So if the temperature rise 2 degree Celsius, so it's projected that the high risk of the forest fire will increase 35%. So if we have 4 degree Celsius in the future, so the high risk of the forest fire will increase up to 70% in the future. And in addition, we will have more differently of the forest fires. And forest fires cause the main problem also to cause the problem to the tree mortality, not only when the forest fire occur, but we have the consequence or the long term impact, at least I think five to 10 years. So how about the water? So the water is also related to the changes of the temperature and long drought season. So this is the, you can see the picture, that it will cause a lot of problem to the forest production and nutrition forest security. So with 2 degree warming, so even though we have the early adaptation measure, it's more likely that the measure will be not effective. If the temperature rise 3 or above 3 degree Celsius, so if you caught I think this answer for the full security, this party, particularly in Africa, in India, and a small island, if you follow the news, you can see that this year India stopped exporting rise to the world market. So according to my previous analysis in Macon region, so we predict that we've lost a lot of suitable rise production and if the population increase in the next 30 years, so the rise production will be not sufficient to provide food for the increasing population in the future. So what should we do in the future to save biodiversity? So this is the famous literature published in nature in a couple years ago. So we have to bring a curve, put more effort for biodiversity conservation, like the increasing protected area to 30%. However, if we increase protected area, we will lost the land for food production. So it will be the confrontation between development and conservation. And finally, the first private increase, so this one will be unavoidable. So the IPCC developing good tool, we review a lot of adaptation measures that have been taken and ongoing. So most of them focused on the expansion of protected area, intensity agriculture, smart agriculture, and changing the cropping calendar. So for the water and food related, so these are the popular measure to change the planting calendar. However, in addition also the water resources development. However, sometimes the construction of large scale of water resources development and management also have the consequence on the other impact, something like the inequality of the local livelihood. So they benefit people and the large people and also increase sirenity. For example, in the Bangladesh modem in the lower north of Thailand. How about the biodiversity? So a lot of countries, I think more than 140 countries have been committed inside the agreement of the Paris Agreement and biodiversity conservation. Last December, the Kunming and Montreal Global Biodiversity Work, or GBF, have the four goals and 23 targets. So one of the target is very important is the target number three, that they've encouraged the party member to a large protected area and conservation to 30% by 2030 or 30 by 30. And Thailand is already committed to expand and to revive the National Biodiversity Action Plan to achieve the 30% in the future. But not only in Thailand, but also working collaboratively with the neighboring country because the biodiversity like the wildlife landscape species will move from one country to the other country. So the biodiversity corridor is very important. And in addition, all the adaptation measures cannot prevent the future climate change and loss and damage, particularly endemic and eunuchs and endemic and threatened species and other. Because this one is very vulnerable in the future. So we have to be careful about the more adaptation and suitable adaptation to be taken in the right path. So that's all my presentation. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Sorry for the technicalities. Good morning, everybody. And you have heard that what the physical science has to say from Edwin, that how the climate change is going to change the physical parameters of the art system. And then you saw that if these physical parameters changes, then what the impact is going to be in terms of the human social impacts. So now what I'm going to share with you is in the working group three, what we try to say about how to mitigate the climate change. Because it is quite clear that we are not on track, despite all these talks and all these cooperation and commitments at the national level by the national determined contributions. So if we summarize very simply what does IPCC report talks about that how much reduction is needed and how much we have not yet done, which simply means that in the next six years, the globally, we need to reduce the CO2 emission by 48%, which is not a matter of joke. And in 14 years, we need to bring it down by 80%. And in 24 years, we need to bring it down by 99%. So this is the level of mitigation globally we need to achieve. It is no one single country's responsibility. It needs to be the responsibility of all the countries, those who are emitting greenhouse gases. But there is some good news which we could come up with by assessing the scientific reports, which is coming out all over the world from different scientists, that if we consider all our possible actions, which can be taken in the supply side, supply side sector, that means supply of energy and supply of goods and services and also the demand side, how as individuals, how as industries we need goods and services, then there are possibilities that we can actually reduce emissions if we look into the sectoral activities because the policy making happens at the sectoral level. Even if we take in each of the sectors, then at least we know by 2030 we can have our emission. So it shows that given all the technologies of the shelf, if deployed in different countries, in different sectors, we can still make our emissions half by 2030. So what we said is needed is possible if we put our actions in place. So for the first time, the IPCC report could show that in each sector, by all the time each country struggles thinking that, how can I get so much of money for investing in decarbonizing the electric supply sector? I'm just giving one example. But then this time, the IPCC report, we could say that, you need not only focus on the energy supply side decarbonization. If you look into the energy demand side decarbonization, that means if you make your homes more energy efficient and maybe more passive solar, passive houses, so there are different ways how you can make your products so that you can emit less greenhouse gases for each production. Also for each of our service that we consume, we can also reduce our emission. Just to give an example, when I live in AIT, Asian Institute of Technology, within the campus, I don't own a car. I don't need a car. I walk, and it's good for my health. And also, it's good for the planetary health. We heard in the morning, Professor said about the One Health concept. So we can actually contribute each one of us every day for reducing our demand for energy services also. So this is something very important, even if you just think of this room. We can raise the temperature one degree that will not harm our health. Actually, that will be beneficial for our health, but we can reduce, for one degree, rise in the temperature within the room for the air conditioning managing it, we can reduce one kilowatt hour of emission. So this is energy consumption and the related emission. So this is something which we are saying that if you look into each of the sectors, then these green lines, the whole bar shows that, the whole bar shows that, the whole white bar shows that how much reduction is needed by 2050. And then green one shows, if you do the demand side actions, that means small, small technologies in all the sectors, we can reduce 44% in food sector by making choice for sustainable, healthy diet. We can reduce emission in the food sector and then also by reducing the food waste and also in the land transport by using more of public transport, walking and cycling active transport. So that we can reduce 67% of the emission. And then, so this is all the numbers we are showing. And so we are saying that we can reduce the, and rest of it is what we need decarbonizing the supply of energy. So we are saying that it's not to worry that all the burden counts on the energy supply sector, but the demand side sector can also be, a lot of actions can be taken and that can help. And the other one, which want to say that what I told you now is about the global picture, but what is about the regional picture? We do not go country by country assessment in IPCC report, but based on the country by country assessment, we come to the global assessment. But what here, this is very important message for this whole region is that when we are saying that we can take action in the demand side, so we can reduce the burden on the supply side, but supply side decarbonization is masked. So how do we do that supply side decarbonization and what it means for this region? So if we look at this left hand side figure is shows that historically how different countries contributed to the cumulative emission. And in that it is true that Southeast Asia and Pacific has historically less responsibility, but going forward, we have to be very cautious what kind of infrastructure we are going to build. So this shows that the red one in the right hand side, the red ones in the right hand side figure is showing that what is the fossil fuel based or coal based power infrastructure exists in this region. And that is something already countries decided to bring it down to zero. So it means that if all the fossil fuel based facilities need to be stopped in this region as soon as possible, it means that there has to be a very high and transition will happen in the whole society, not only in terms of infrastructure, but also in terms of investment and also in terms of employment. So how do we do these justice in transition? So there has to be new businesses need to come up and we really need new infrastructure to build in this region. And from the morning I have been hearing that there needs need for cooperation and IPCC report make it very clear that in the whole region, if one country may not be able to decarbonize their energy supply sector, but if there is a regional greed, then the grid decarbonization can sort out this problem. And which means that the geopolitically there needs to be more cooperation in the region. And that has to be worked out. So it just not the technology, I'll just take one more minute. I mean, it just not the technology, but also the geopolitics which has a very important role to play and the sociologies and economies have a role to play and how do we do this? But we also need to understand that there are several suggestions to decarbonize by the carbon dioxide removal, which says that emit now and do remove it later, but this is going to be an uncertain technology and the country should not be lining up behind that. So really what is important is that how we can decarbonize the whole system from the very beginning so that we do not, I mean, later on live with many stranded assets in the different countries and the companies. And what it says is just to give one example that globally what it means that more electrification of the all sectors will happen. So how electricity sector can be decarbonized is a major challenge and which one of the scenarios which IPCC report is saying is feasible, but then it means now we need to take technological and policy level actions to achieve this. So what it simply means is that how to maintain the employment and decarbonize at the same time, many countries have already started their national just transition commissions or task force and that is really, really helping. And many countries have actually over the past 10 years have been able to keep their growth possible with low energy and low emission. So the IPCC report gives the hope that it is possible. The examples are there. It's not that anyone can say that, how do we do it? It's already there existing so the countries can learn from each other. And they are really the international corporations comes in. And I know I have taken long time. Thank you very much. Thank you so much to our panel. Is everyone okay? That wasn't at all very good news. But now we have some time to ask our panel a few questions. But before I open the floor for questions from the audience, I have a few questions myself. I wonder if I can, can I, yes. Can I sit here? Is it okay? So that it feels just a bit more friendly. Yes. Okay. Since my first question is for Professor Aldrian since you're sitting next to me. All of that we've seen in the past 20 minutes are really important climate science findings. But now, you know, they're all, they're all very, they're quite complex for some people, some of us here, including myself. So my question is, what advice can you as a climate scientist give to policymakers in the region who want to think long-term and develop systems to manage these climate risks? Yeah. Thank you for your question. I think I'm very sorry that I'm not very satisfied with the APCC report. Actually, the discussion about the third polar is not very much covered in the APCC report IR6. I don't know why. I think because one of the problem because so many European mandate in this report. Maybe this is not European. This is Himalaya located in Asia. So not many cover in the Asian region. But this must be covered, I think, because, lastly, impact on the people living in the surrounding in the South Asia, in the China, and the Southeast Asia, especially the one who received MECO. So in the future, I myself, coming from Indonesia, we have a very small issue on the ice in the tropics in the Papua, Indonesia. But it is too small. And then I don't think it will be last, maybe one, two decades more. So we just accept this idea. But because the ice, I think will be melted and then will be gone forever. But for Himalaya, this is very big issue, I think. This is the issue that cover many, like, billion people, maybe around maybe two, three billion people, huh? India, India, yeah. Okay, so this is very much impacted on the biodiversity and so on like this. So if we cover this area and then study the impact, I believe this is very much important for the future generation. Thank you, Professor Aldria. And now that zero in on adaptation, Professor Trisura, this question is for you. How can policymakers coordinate regionally and prioritize integrative adaptation strategies that avoid maladaptation and build resilience? Thank you very much for your question. So if we see right now the climate change, that is related to the policy level and the biodiversity science, but both agreement or the levels three are quite separately. So first, I think we need the synergy between the climate change and biodiversity and working together. And secondly, I think at the regional levels, either in the GMS or ASEAN, I think the mechanism already impressed. For science, we have the MRC and a lot of academic research institute, such as the SEI and the MRC. And also the Minister of Environment of Asia have signed a lot of agreement. For example, the biodiversity conservation, the health pollution problem since 2000 and the loss map had been proposed in 2021. But however, the actual implementation on the ground is not visualized. So we need more collaboration. So what I'm thinking in the short term, if you see it in the ASEAN, we have 10 countries. In the Terrain country, we have a different capacity. So the most important one that we can do in the short term is the capacity building to train the officer and the stakeholder in the poor capacity building. And secondly, share the lesson, either the failure or the success project implementation like the IPCC, but IPCC is quite bad at the global level. So we can scale down to the regional level, share the success and the failure of the project. And for the long term, I think there are a lot of development in the country. For example, the dam construction, but the problem not cross the problem and benefit not only in the location of the country that it implemented, but also the problem across the country. So the trans-lub, trans-battery, strategic environmental assessment, or the trans-solarly EIA should be implemented and what you call informed the neighboring country. And for the health problem in the forest, so this one also important. So without the regional collaboration, I think we cannot solve this problem within the one country. So we need more collaboration and action on the government and the local people as Dr. Sorosai mentioned this morning. Thank you. Thank you, Professor Trisorat. Now we go into mitigation, Professor Joy. My question is how can we ensure that in the Mekong and Southeast Asian region, climate mitigation is integrated into broader development goals to ensure a just inequitable transition? Yeah, this is a very good question. And actually in the IPCC report, we said that what are the synergies between the mitigation actions and the sustainable development goals? Because for most of these countries, priority is sustainable development goal or the development goal. So we tried to see that even if someone pursues the sustainable development goal, then how the climate action can also be served and the vice versa, right? If you take a climate mitigation action, then how can it help in sustainable development goals so that the countries can have one action and then just to give an example, suppose you change the building rules in such a way or make the set point of these air conditioners at a particular comfortable, healthy level, then we have seen that not only helps in mitigation, but also helps in achieving multiple sustainable development goals. So we said that both in 1.5 report and the six assessment report that what we need to look at is the different mitigation actions, prioritize them, they are there already in the report and which says that how they help in advancing sustainable development goal as well as there are some trade-offs, right? So suppose as I said, if you shut down a coal fire plant, then you will lose the employment of many people. So how do you change that? So, as this report says, what we need is like what he said, the capacity building, it should be the re-skilling and retraining of the people so that you make this shift, you see that how in say 10% of the employment needs to be changed, then that's the goal and you do the retraining and the re-capacity building. Thank you so much. And lastly, Dr. Johnson, how do we promote and prioritize sustainable land management practices that mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, enhance carbon sequestration and increase resilience for climate change impacts? Yeah, thanks, Charmaine. I think there has been a tendency on the mitigation side of climate to emphasize the phase out of fossil fuels in favor of renewables. And as we discussed earlier, the barriers for this are have been disappearing fast. The cost is very competitive. There are all kinds of opportunities. The financing is improving. There are still a need for improving financing in the global south, of course, which is always a little bit more challenging. But there really is no excuse on the energy side, we might say. And in addition to that, as Professor Gerashry noted, the demand side, a lot of these are well known and just take some effort, basically, a little bit of effort and so this, but yet here we have the land sectors which have not come as far. And why is that, actually? And you might say that what happens with the land sectors unlike energy and industry that, oh, suddenly you have to deal with people, you know? People don't live in factories and power plants, they live on the land. And what has been discovered as this takes more time and more effort. So there has been a tendency not to take the actions that are needed in the land sectors, many of which also contribute to improved health, both human health, but also the health of animals in the livestock sector and air pollution issues and so forth. So here we have these opportunities to combine climate benefits with health benefits and lifestyle benefits, quality of life issues in the land sectors. And that also normally contributes very much to adaptation. So this is an opportunity to go from seeing people as an obstacle to empowering people and making them part of the solution. And this is what we need in the land sectors in a big way and Southeast Asia, I think is a great example. So thank you. Thank you so much. Okay, I think we have a few short minutes for questions for our panel. So the floor is open. If you have questions, we have mics around at the back. There is one at the back with Rajesh. Sure, Professor Chisarai. Yes, please. Maybe the question first. Yes, the question from the gentleman. We are coming to you, sir. Okay, it's the mic working. Okay, there we go. Hi, my name is Tyra Kettleson. I think that was a really fascinating panel. Ms. Charme, you mentioned that the panel was bearers of bad news. I actually think there was some very good news in what was being discussed. And it's probably something that is sitting underneath the surface of the discussion around climate change. I think it's what the IPCC has done is perhaps one of our biggest scientific achievements in kind of modern times, not because of the tens of thousands of pages that the authors have worked meticulously on, but because they've taken that complexity of the whole Earth system and being able to kind of condense all of that into one target, 1.5 degrees Celsius. Taking all of that complexity and making it into something simple like that is the basis of the science to policy strength of what the IPCC is doing. And it gives every sector, as Professor Joyashree has shown, gives every sector a target that we all share, we all collectively work towards, and we all work out, okay, in our sub-sector, here's what energy or land use or whatever it can do to achieve that. So that's a fantastic news story coming out of the IPCC process. But my question relates to resilience more broadly than climate change. This region, the Mekong, is facing a whole range of environmental drivers, arguably more important for the Mekong than the CO2 emissions, as we've seen from the level of emissions. Where is our effort to put together all of this complexity, all of this understanding of the other drivers and the changes that we're experiencing to come up with simple targets for all of these other drivers that we are facing in the region? I think there's a process of the IPCC has something to share for us in terms of resilience more broadly in the Mekong. And I wonder if any of the IPCC authors who are involved in the process can comment on that. Let me take the first cut that. Actually, it shows, I'm just giving one example, right? Say we talk about the air pollution in the cities and IPCC report clearly shows that the air pollution, solution to air pollution and the climate change have the same drivers. So if you address the air pollution, if you do not want to prioritize the climate change, still you will be doing the same effect with the climate change. So this is one thing. So you can look at your local problems but also other thing which has been shown by Edwin that if your water flow is reducing over time due to the loss of the glaciers, then your water availability will be changing and water quality will be changing. So you need to be planning for your water management from now itself, right? So, and water is a very local issue, very close to heart issue. And also in the agriculture sector, we have shown that how you provide the irrigation through different technologies. Just to give an example, the demand side again is that you change your flooded irrigation to sprinkler irrigation or to the drip irrigation. Your irrigation water changes and your energy and resource gets saved. So we are saying in IPCC report that how you can dematerialize, how you reduce your material use and also energy and that can help in managing the climate change better. Yeah. Okay, very briefly, we have another question. Yes. So based on your question, I think for the original issue, we are facing now is the land conversion for the bioenergy plantation, like the oil palm, the sugar cane, and they have the consequence on the fire and has a pollution, okay? So during the political campaign before the general election, because it's a journey, we hold the seminar and invite the political member party to mention what are their major to solve this problem. So on party this all agree that the bioeconomy or the VCG to change from the catch crop plantation to the forest plantation. So this one can solve the problem not only for the forest fire, but also the promote to the livelihood of the local people and change the climate change. We already signed the MOU with the Soviet government to promote the wood city because if the people use more wood from such a government, so we can keep the carbon in the press in the forest plantation a lot of them the catch crop and also carbon can stop in the furniture and so on. So this one is something like the case study or the toolkit that should be promoted and change the people perception that we use wood, we destroy the forest, but in fact it's not. Is it the one approach that we can moving toward to the next field of carbon? We mentioned. Okay, thank you. Our next question, sir, please. Good morning to everybody. I'm back to sing from Institute of Policy and Management at Hanoi National Institute of Hanoi. I have two questions. The first question is related to something that already raised before this. How can we make use of the information prepared by the IPVC report because I might say was one of the lead author of the IPVC strike report and to this process, one of my concern is how can we make use of huge knowledge created to make it more useful to other user, for example, for the community? Is there any chance for any other player to make this kind of contribution, to make this result, is it more easy understood and can be useful for the community? That's my first question. My second question is, if we talk about climate change and we talk a lot about the carbonization, carbon market and anything around this course, one thing we have not really discussed about the climate justice. That's I think that how much we can be paid certain attention to what is happening at locally, at the community who are facing day-to-day impact of this. How can we work closely with those who are most vulnerable to work with them day-to-day and how can we contribute to this kind of debate? This is my true question I should try to raise. Thank you. Yeah, we were gonna briefly take communication and Professor Joashri, the climate justice part and then the other professors can compliment. I think on communication, it has become a very big challenge because with each assessment, it's more material, more complex and how to communicate it. But there are a lot of communication professionals that have joined this effort. It's one of the reasons we have our artists today to think of another way to communicate the issues because it is a dense amount of information and even among the authors themselves, everyone has their specialty so no single person can understand it all anyway. So to have a diversity of actors and to be able to communicate also in shorter, simple messages, but we cannot lose the key goals in all of this because there's no escaping the physical science. The physical science doesn't care that we don't understand. So... And just to give you example, after fourth assessment report, what we did was, depending on the regional need, we worked with the authors and the local, I mean, many, many groups where we came up with small booklets, say just highlighting very important ones, say for building sector, what needs to be done for transport sector, said 10 points. So that was like what is happening now, say SEI and Australian government are collaborating and some Chulalankar University can participate and then they can prepare these booklets and which can be in Thai language also and that will be very useful. This was done and these are there in the repository of the IPCC reports. You can just take a look at that. And in terms of climate justice, I mean, what I feel is that while, I mean, authoring the report, what we lack sometime is the local case studies from these developing countries. And I have seen that, say for example, in this South Asian, Southeast Asian region, spatially, there are many local language case studies, but there needs to be translated to English and go there, right? So what I feel can be done is that as a policy level, that more authors need to be nominated to the IPCC process. And that's the climate change focal point can do that. So that's from the academic institution that lobbying can happen and it's not a tough thing that can happen. And the other one, which we saw on the ground is that if you integrate the local information into the scientific information, then climate justice works better. Just to give an example, because right now, I'm working on the sufficiency economy of Thailand. And I'm looking into the whole history and because there is a whole discourse in the IPCC level that whether we can have like what we have efficiency policy, can we have a sufficiency policy? And I was looking into growth of this whole knowledge with one of my Thai student. And I'm amazed there is so much to know and which can go to the global level. So these are our responsibilities, how we can take this information for global dissemination also. So the justice comes if you really have the knowledge built better and stronger on the local knowledge. Thank you very much. Thank you. And our final question, please. Thank you. I'm Peg Day from the summoner. Thank you very much for the point that Professor Roy just mentioned because it fit into the question that I would like to ask and also touching on what Dr. Aldrin said at the beginning with regards to the representation in the production of the IPCC because yesterday we spend the whole day talking about co-production. So the question that I would like to put to the panel is can you go a little bit deeper by what you mean by representation in the production of this IPCC report? Is it because of the lack of representative of the scientists that are actually coming from the region? Or it's a matter of just not having the data in order to actually be analyzed and looked at and actually make the findings more representative because as a researcher in the region, a lot of the time we have the difficulty of actually getting access to the data either because it doesn't exist or it's too expensive to actually get the data. There might be means to get the data but it just we cannot pay for that. Is that what you mean by representation in the production of the IPCC report or is it like something deeper that we didn't know? Okay, I think as a part of IPCC I may answer your question. As you know that from previous question that the bigger representative you are in the IPCC, the more message you get through into the global level. I think this is true. For example, we have working group four actually from the inventory. Inventory is the mechanism to calculate how much carbon you save, how much carbon you save and then make it into business. For example, you can put in the dollar account. The more you have a representative in this working group, the more your country can do something. For example, you can do to save banana in this country but this banana is different from Southeast Asia, different from the African from the South American. So you must have the local knowledge what is the banana can conserve carbon on this case. So the more you have the representative there, the more you have your message going through. This is what message I today give to you that the Macau River community does not get the email as the third polar message into global action. So you must put more people working on this design and then put in the IPCC. That's the only way you can do it. Okay, thank you so much. Okay. One information which might be useful for all of you that the seventh assessment report is going to start, right? And if you go to the IPCC website, you will see that any individual can participate in the IPCC process in four ways. One is you can be the coordinating lead author, you can be the lead author, you can be a contributing author. Just to, I mean, put your spatial knowledge, one paragraph to that. So the other one is that you can be the reviewer of the report and when you are reviewing because IPCC sends it out for public review. So one, it comes as a public review, you can comment in any part and say that, okay, this means that the Thailand, this good practice is not at all represented in the report. And I'm suggesting these studies to be included in the review and that will be taken up because IPCC has to address to each and every comment. So I would say that more active participation from everybody to the IPCC website, through the IPCC website to improve the report, to get it better represented. Everybody has a scope to contribute there. So please use your power to influence IPCC report. Thank you so much. And with that, I would like to thank our panel for this very insightful discussion. Thank you everyone.