 I think we will hear a diversity of perspectives on public, private, people, partnerships. And I'd like each of the panelists, and I will introduce you as we go through the discussion, I've asked them to provide their specific experience. And maybe from this diversity we can draw some commonalities and have an interesting discussion. Just to frame that discussion, I want to pick up on one line that I had in my opening address yesterday. The PPP, public, private, people, has become a very much used concept. And I said yesterday that maybe we should be more direct and say what it is all actually about. We could perhaps instead of public, private people, we could talk about politics, profits and participation. And in that sense think about how could these three PPPs benefit from collaboration. And obviously politics will benefit if progress is made to wider development goals that will help politics and politicians. Profits will probably be made if access by stakeholders to capital and markets are becoming fairer, more affordable and more long term. Participation will probably be widespread if human rights and tenure systems for example are respected, enforced and trusted. And how can we achieve that? So there are a lot of things at stake here and many different perspectives to bring into the ventures that we will hear more about. So I'd like to, without further ado, turn to the panel. And first I would like to ask Pak Putera Paltama who is the Director General of Sustainable Production Forest Management within the Indonesian Ministry of Environment and Forests. Can you please give us your perspective on these partnerships? Thank you, Peter, ladies and gentlemen, distinguished audience. In our case in Indonesia the public and private partnership is like automatic. And in recent days we are adding the third P, the people to the partnership. Why is it so? Because in Indonesia 99% of the forest land is owned by the states and it is stipulated in our basic constitution that it must be utilized for the highest welfare of the people. And in doing so also by regulation we invite private sector to do the business. And so in a sense it is a form of public and private partnership. In this case the government would set the regulation, the norm, the standards, the guidelines and the criteria and the private sector will undertake the management. Recently we are improving this partnership through the development what we name as forest management unit. So the entire forest of Indonesia is now divided into hundreds of forest management unit. This forest management unit will really represent the government in the management of forest. So we are shifting from previous approach in which the partnership was between the government who provide the license and the private who do the business. Now with this forest management unit approach the government will really, really together with the private sector to undertake the management. And so we are embarking to this new approach from simply in the past just issuing permits now doing the management together. We are also like I said extending the access of the people to the forest resource, so the third P. And this is especially in the utilization of the forest land for the production of food and fuel and also the utilization of forest service. So this is going to be a form of optimization of the utilization of forest land. And at the same time we perceive it's a good approach to solve the conflict, the new conflict with the people and by giving the people more address in the utilization of forest land. So in short the PPPP is not a new approach to us Indonesia but we are still improving it to increase the effectiveness toward achievement of sustainable forest management and increasing the welfare of the people. And we are convinced to answer the question raised by Chairman before that we are convinced that this is the approach that we are going to take and we believe going to be a good solution to our problem. Thanks Pak. Just to follow up immediately on your presentation, I was struck by using, you used the word automatic. And that's, it can be automatic in different ways I suppose but in this even if it has been automatic for a long time you also describe that it has evolved and that you are now much more direct about this partnership. So if you look at cars the automatic gearboxes have developed from very inefficient models. A long time ago to now you have seven gears and much higher fuel efficiency. Can you draw a parallel here? How much more automatic is it today and how much more accepted is it today compared to earlier? If we compare to the car as you take it, I think it's going the other way. In terms of cars you mentioned that we move from less effective to more effective, right? From the non-automatic to automatic but in this case, in our case in the partnership in the past it's automatic in terms that by regulation, by constitution we must, by definition we must cooperate with the private sector but only in terms of the government issuing the license and the private sector doing the business. Now it's not that simple anymore so because we are, the government will really get involved in the management through the management, forest management unit I mentioned and also the people. Both individuals or in cooperative or in groups will be really involved in the practice of the management so it's not getting more simple, simpler actually but we believe that will be a better way in order to achieve our ultimate goal. Great, thank you very much. Let me then turn to Brian Williams sitting in the next chair. Brian is the regional director for Asia for the wildlife works carbon and this will now be a different perspective and we look forward to hear what you have to say. Hello everyone. Thank you all. Thank you Peter for attending and I just wanted to first start off explaining a little bit about our company. So Wildlife Works Carbon is a Red Plus developer and we are one of the world's leading Red Plus development companies. We started our activities in Africa and we were the first company to have a VCS Red Plus methodology be verified and utilize that methodology in Kenya and produce the first Red Plus credits through VCS and we have sold the most Red Plus credits through the VCS mechanism to this point. And so from our perspective in the politics, profit and participation we come from the opposite end. So we started with participation. Our company was working for 10 years in the bush in Kenya. We do not have an office in Nairobi. Our office is in the bush and we started out originally as a company that produced t-shirts. We created an eco factory and the idea behind Wildlife Works was to, in order to protect wildlife, our concept was that you had to put the local people to work and if they had an alternative livelihood the local people would then go ahead and protect their resources. And with that, with the idea of Red Plus, we thought well this might be a very useful finance mechanism to make that happen, to make this happen and to scale it throughout the world. So we started with the people, working with the people and today our original project was 30,000 hectares between Savo East and Savo West National Parks in Kenya. And today it is up to 120,000 hectares and we have approximately 250 staff and of those staff there are only eight that are foreigners and everyone else is local. We support schools, we've supported a medical facility in the town close by and these are all through the not-profits. We still have not made profit off of that project to date. We've poured all that back in to operate the project and so we support those people. We now have, instead of just one factor, we have three factories now in the region so we have 150 people that are employed in those factories. And then we also help build schools and create water catchments. And in terms of working with the people, one of the reasons that I have not mentioned the political or working with the public at this point is all of this land where we did the first project is actually community-owned land. And so the ranches in the region, there's 35 ranches that we signed up to do our Red Plus project and they're all owned by the local villagers. Some of the ranches have up to 1,000 shareholders in the ranch and so the way that we structured the project was that the local landowners, all the community members got a share in our sales and then on top of that there's a broader community that was utilizing the landscape and so we created a trust fund that then gave funding to those local communities and in that sense the local communities decided what to do with that money and 80% of the funds went to bursaries from kindergarten up to university so it went to education, so we support education as well. And then the next thing that we did was we, well since we were in that region for so long and we had a connection with that region, we wanted to see if our model would work in a different place and so we developed a project in the Democratic Republic of Congo and this is where the politics comes into play. So we developed a, it was a former logging concession and we expanded our methodology and then again under VCS we developed a project in that area. In this case we were partnering with both the local communities, a local chief was one of our team members there and the government because the government owned that concession and at this point we worked with the government to create a emissions reductions or a subnational jurisdictional program under the FCPF and that program was just recently approved by the methodological, I mean the technical committee and the carbon fund within the FCPF and now we're going into negotiations for the IRPA. We've done, we started out with the people, we still haven't gotten there with the profits and now we're working and coordinating with the public and the government in that area and so we started at the bottom and moved up in our work. Great, thanks Brian. And I like this turning the order and perhaps if you have participation and then eventually profits, politics will follow and in fact it may have to follow because that's what will be the demand and interest. I wanted to pick up one question here and you say that the middle P, the profit P is not quite there yet and we all know the struggles with the emissions reductions, credits, etc. We all hope it will work but my question will be do you see your activities to expand into other revenue streams that would not be directly related to the emissions reductions maybe to develop value chains based on those community forests for example? At this point in both of the sites that we're working on we have not as a company we're very focused on protection and protecting extremely threatened landscapes so at this point we have not looked into moving up the value chain and if we do look into alternative livelihoods we look into local things that we might be able to do whether it's ecotourism, whether it's the factory that we created and so it's very site specific so we are looking into agroforestry however in DRC with cacao and potentially rubber as well in there so those are some things that we look at in each and now at the broader scale we definitely look at that as we're supporting the development as we wrote the ERPD for the FCPF we had to look at the landscape that our project is in so our project is about 220,000 hectares in the Democratic Republic of Congo and the jurisdiction in Mayan Dambe province is 12 million hectares so I think somebody mentioned yesterday that 3 million hectares is about the size of Vietnam so we're working in a province that's four times the size of Vietnam and that's just one province in the DRC so we have to now figure out in how to through all the participation of these three different you know the politics, profit and participation and we have to look at that and look at the whole landscape and how do we make that happen and that's a very difficult task, that's our next task Great thanks Brian Next I would like to turn to Pak Darsono Hartona who is the CEO of PT RIMBA and I believe we will now have a third different perspective on the PPP benefits please I just want to follow up the point that Pak Putra mentioned I think in Indonesia you know it's very clear the regulation as a you know government is the one who give the concession because they own the land to a company and I think you know the land is utilized for the goods of the people that's very clear from our constitution that's what's being said but I think from you know I want to just share my experience so what I truly think that this PPP can work so for example you know just I know some of you probably listened to me yesterday we are protecting about 150,000 hectares of peatland in Central Kalimantan so we have done a participatory mapping exercise you know five years ago and we have created about basically we have a boundary that is agreed among communities and villagers and the companies you know which is in the peripheral of where our concessions are but this area is still considered to be state-owned land because all lands are state-owned so the participation of the people side what we can work is we can actually start you know looking into what are the activities that they can do in this area and then we will actually give a certain theotennial rights to the people so what we'll do is as a company what we're going to look for for the next few years is to actually encourage and even you know help these communities to get either a community forestry license you know some kind of that that needs help to PAPUTRA so I think our our where usually typically in Indonesia a private sector will only look at their own concession and their own concession only work on their concession but we believe that we have to work outside our concession because our business like I mentioned yesterday is in conservation so in order for us to conserve this area we have to work with the people even outside our conservation area because they can be the agent of deforestation to begin with so by doing that you know basically we can work together with the communities we propose to PAPUTRA in terms of this are the area that we wanted to be a community forest land a community land that they can they manage themselves so in a way we also help them in terms of putting the governance system you know so the PPP what I mentioned the new PPP that is coming is actually having private sector engage more with the participation whereas before a lot of companies are not looking because they are strictly bounded by the concession rights from the government and by the government to the private sector so I also want to mention that while we started seven years ago in the conservation business now we are looking into the production side of it so while Brian mentioned all these things that he is trying to do we actually have identified all these potential production in the what we call the dub buffer area for communities and then you know there comes maybe some body basically rice cultivation fisheries even some coconut sugar potential in our area there is a potential of employing up to 24,000 people so my company will look into this as a stream of income possibly we will be an honest broker because at the end we want this to channel to community as much as possible but this can be an income generation for us as well but it's not going to be meaningful because the idea is we want to capture we want to have a business plan for the conservation side you know and we want to pass the production side to communities because they are the one who are protecting this area so these are the things that evolve over time when I said seven years ago our business plan is always about conservation we are looking into the production you know basically we imply the protection production side and slowly and we can only do that as we understand more and more the potential in that area where the communities have rights and how to work together with communities and when we get trust from communities so that's how things are so we started from I mean the companies are thinking about profit but we believe in participation and then later on the politics like you mentioned Peter will follow because at the end it's about proving to the government that if a company can do that together with communities this is probably one of the few models that they have to go forward great thank you now being based in Indonesia we kind of follow these things as well and I'd like to follow up with two questions here which I think you might have some insights in one is that as we've studied the how the concessions operate and how the issues around land use change and deforestation and also fires are evolving we all know that some of these many of these communities actually live inside the concessions and under more or less agreed arrangements so my question is my first question is whether this is also included in your approach or if you're mainly looking outside the concessions for these arrangements my second question is could it be seen that you're expanding beyond the concession for your businesses to answer your first question is I think fortunately our concession we don't have any community living inside the concession but that doesn't mean that we have no obligation to do things in the community but I think what we have also identified in terms of the participation mapping exercise that we have there's an overlap where they are actually you know they don't live there but they're doing something in that location so in that area we actually have even have a MOU of collaboration I think because by by by the factor in terms of the law we are not allowed to cut the trees and they communities don't want to cut trees as well so we have to identify what are the non-timber product coming up from that area you know and then we can actually do a sustained whether it's agroforestry or certain things around that area so those are the things that we look into so in terms of overlap so the good thing is our map is done prior to we get the concession so we can actually take a look at it carefully if there's an overlap we will do some collaboration secondly I think it's the fact is it's not about expansion I personally think this has nothing to do with expansion this is something to do with doing the right thing for the business because we all know that you know if you only look at our concession area and then just follow the rule of just taking things in our concession area this very field area is going to be a threat to the concession so as a project developer or as a private sector we have to start thinking beyond the concession area the key is how can we do this transparently there's you know making sure that this is not about land grabbing and try to do something so therefore I think we need that political participation of the government as well because if you look at last year a lot of the I'm reading a lot of these articles saying about the forest fire a lot of the forest fire actually not coming from concession it might be coming from peripheral so these are the things that we have to look so as a company doing this especially in the conservation we really have to look at our risk as well you know we cannot just say that all you know all this is we're obligated to protect this area then we do this alone because we all know that the outside area can be a threat to us the good thing about it is Paputra the government see that as well the government see that as well and the government is also supporting the idea with the understanding that we have to work together community have to work together with private sector and you know private sector and community also have to work together with government so I think just like when Paputra says automatic but I think we have to move to better transparency better governance system therefore the whole idea of technically what the company is doing is actually to do a FMU to do a forest management unit properly if you have a good governance system in place so great thank you very much I will now turn to Paul Tragidjo who is vice chair of Kerry Swiss based in New York and I have a feeling that we will have a focus on the middle P in this presentation Paul please thank you very much Peter and it's a pleasure to be sitting up here again today and I commend and appreciate the well crafted follow on from the discussion yesterday and in answer to the question posed by our moderator can it be a solution PPP whatever it stands for the answer from my seat is a resounding yes why why is it a natural follow on from a discussion yesterday for those of you who were not here here's the 30 second recap I talked about the massive need that must be filled in one degree or another by the private sector capital markets of the space I talked about the way that we get there is through measurable return through scale through risk adjusted return through liquidity and through the ability of investors to understand what they're getting into and establishing tradable instruments they will then participate if those goals those massive goals which I acknowledge are complex are aspirational what we're talking about today is certainly possible and I'd like to use opportunity to take two examples not within the sector we're talking today but within the PPP sector to illustrate the diversity of their application and the possibility of harnessing the complexity of these three P's and to illustrate that the in the recipe of success in any one given transaction we may have PPP, a low P and incipient P and I think that's important to remember that there is no one recipe the two things that I'd like to talk about are opposite ends of the scale one is something called social impact bonds and in this I think that I really would commend those of you who are interested in this space to take a look at a publication which was published this two weeks ago by an organization called Social Finance called Social Impact Social Impact Bonds the early years from that you will see that as a result of partnerships between the private sector, between government actors focused on return for social outcomes there is a market, it is complex and if we take the starting point of that market as 2010 and today that report would indicate there have been 60 projects undertaken from 15, 15 countries for a total of $200 million of which 22 of those projects have reported performance data and 12 have made improvements based on the outcomes that have been measured the fields that they have covered have been criminal justice homelessness, child welfare and education now the sector is not uncontroversial and the sector at the moment is not large but the body of participation with some successes and some failures is proving that at the most granular level of social need the techniques of the capital markets can be used now let's go to the other end of the spectrum and instead of talking about $200 million over five years let's talk about $5 billion let's talk about scale, let's talk about aggregation and I'm going to for that I'm going to move to and it may not be necessarily defined as a PPP but let's not get too hung up on definitions here, let's focus on the practicalities some of you may be familiar with GAVI the global vaccine alliance which is an international organization of public and private sectors who have a shared goal, a complex goal of equal access to new and underused vaccines for children living in the poorest countries in the world now GAVI it is known is funded by government donors the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation as well as a very innovative funding facility we call IFIM in the trade we call IFIM the international finance facility for immunization now in very short description what that has done is to take the commitments of nine donor countries which incidentally include Australia amongst others who have pledged $6.5 billion to GAVI over 23 years fantastic but the money is needed now so through some of the techniques of financial engineering which I talked about yesterday that long term commitment has through the agency of IFIM managed by the World Bank Treasury created a financial instrument of bond and gone to the bond market and in five years has raised $5 billion in international funding from investors in the international markets so that the long term commitments can be turned into short term action by accessing investors in the regular way capital markets who look for market return and a social impact and I mean investors from all around the world so to your question Howard I absolutely believe that we certainly can find solutions in the PPP world but think about the possibility there's two very concrete examples of how we can make that success a reality Thanks Paul and it's really encouraging to hear from directly from you that the money is there and if the interesting opportunity for investment is there too then there will be a possible match now the question then becomes of course what will make it interesting in other words are the agendas that we are pursuing in this conference and many other conferences in many policies in negotiations how do we make them attractive to those investors that are outside of this space To make these first of all we have to acknowledge in the PPP world there is a much wider if you will complex or much wider range of outcomes and problems that are attacked in what I was referring to as the capital markets world and so I think the mix can be different but there's some commonalities to the mix and the commonalities are the same as those that I discussed yesterday Peter it's the ability to demonstrate to investors that the outcomes are measurable it is the ability to demonstrate to investors that you are transparent to disclose the risk adjusted for the return and I believe that using whether it's I've used the world of local government multilateral and other governmental sources as helpful in the structuring of an instrument that they can be tailored to very specific pockets of demand small and large but without that measurement without that ability for a transparent look through structure then it doesn't get off the ground Thank you Paul, that's a clear message Finally I would like to introduce who is the CEO of the Heart of Borneo initiative working out of the Ministry of Primary Resources and Tourism here in Brunei. Before I hand you the floor let me also say that following Mahmood's presentation and maybe I have a question for you too the floor so that we use the maximum time available for questions from all of you so please prepare your questions while you listen to the final presentation by Mahmood, please Thank you Moderates So very thankful to Moderates because he arranged the seat very near to the potential funders for our forest so I will talk different perspective in national context so I will refer the successful story based on our achievement ok so as everybody has visited Brunei you have seen that the forest cover that we have still in pristine stage so this is our successful BPPP to answer your question so this is the measure of output that we have to showcase to the international passage point here that we still have the forest in the pristine stage so why we have actually why we achieve this of course three reasons first thing I would like to focus here is the importance of national leadership national leadership led by this majestic government, this majesty so in 1990 we have produced national forest policy in advance of the global agenda of climate change in that policy very clear environmental protection we have to protect forest for the sake of environment so it's very clear we are quite aware of the global agenda of climate change so that's very important so how this in Brunei I drive the PPPP or I can call it multi-sectors basis so because of national leadership we have to work together to support this policy introduced by the government of this majesty so we have to together now to my personal views forest is not a single sector anymore it's not belong to a single sector in national context because forest give benefit to everybody everybody in Brunei Salam no matter which sectors they come from so they need forest for them to support national agenda of development so this is very important so forest is a multi-sectors, multi-sectors issue now so we have to work together from agency, different agency from the government sectors NGOs we have to work together to protect our natural asset at this moment so this is biological landscape infrastructure we have to maintain because to me correcting environmental damage is costly we learn from other countries so we have to protect the forest in order to protect our environment or climate change issues so that's second thing third one I would like to highlight here is national issue is not only a national issue it's become global issue that's why we have to work together with our neighbors Malaysia Indonesia because Brunei is very small although we are very small but our contribution to climate change is very significant we have 76% of land area covered by the forest this is our big commitment to the world that we have to protect this forest even though we are travelling to support the economy there should be other way to support the economy by by having this forest intake there are so many ways now we have a new strategy because forest no longer for logging this is to protect our biodiversity so the value of biodiversity itself is more than what we have at the moment from timber we learn from other countries US especially they make use of biological resources for the bio industry that cost billions of dollars so this is our new strategy headed by our new minister it's not here so this is our new strategy to promote how can forest support our economic growth by having this biological resources intake by providing habitat forest forest as habitat and also marine as habitat of biological resources that we have at the moment that this is the future industry is set for Brunei and Osala to support our national economic growth so that's very important so I think that's a very brief that I would like to write at this stage but I want to hear from the floor so before that I have a very short question for you and I really like your perspective that the forest really contributes to all the sectors and I think that's a perspective we share and very much from from see for we share that perspective too and that the value proposition from the forest is evolving all the time that we see new values new revenues in fact that can be derived from the forest this is important too so my question and you don't have to answer it but it's a question how big part of that overall revenue is the carbon how big how what is the proportion of that overall revenue that is represented by carbon carbon storage well this is a new business strategy that we have to explore in the future because as I mentioned by our minister yesterday in the keynote speech this is something that we have to explore in the future because carbon that we are very confident that our forest content more than what we have in terms of hydrocarbon yeah so the carbon that we have we look with FAO fraud so the most updated data that we get from FAO is our forest content 120 carbon biomass per hectares so this is very significant substantive amount of carbon that we can trade with other countries so this is one of the economic benefit that we have to concept our forest protect our forest for the sake of future without destroying our forest we can also we can also benefit from other industry thank you very much I'd like now to turn to the floor and see if we have any questions please step up to the microphones and introduce yourselves who would like to start thank you for our panelist first question I would like to pose to the wildlife birds you mentioned that your contribution is focusing on the community based on and also the concession that the land belong to the government and I wonder whether you have any other aspect for the country who do not have any concession and the government own how you decide to contribute for your for your investment and for example for reforestation whether you plan for that and how is your beneficiary plan because your stakeholder is the worst how to come up to the point that all stakeholders agree on your beneficiaries and the second question to the gentleman from the I think the you said it's very good future for the partnership government and private but they we look at the whole picture of the contribution 20% emission comparing to the global emission how to come partnership with the government and private to invest because all country have their own target to reduce the emission that 20% contributes from the red plus how you decide to fill the gap and the proportion of the good not only by private sector investment and so that will ensure the end-brunter integrity will captures and they private sector is very complex but how expected how you involve on that and also during negotiation also the whole picture that the pressure that would like each country have their own domestic and domestic greenhouse gas emission but when we sector how to come up with the optimum contribution that we can come to the point that we could see the global image a greenhouse gas 20% reduction thank you. Okay great I'll let you think for a minute on that and see if we have some more questions in this first round. We have those questions as well. Hi good morning my name is I'm from Brunei. I'm the owner of from the water village. I have a question to one of the question is basically wood or timber so how much of the wood or timber is actually towards the water village people can we educate the water village people how to cut down on recycle up cycle of all this wood and are there anything special that we can do with the water village in terms of wood could be in the sense of awareness. My second question would be to Brian. Brian I love the idea of how you actually build a community in the forest unfortunately in the water. How can I bring the idea what you have in the forest into the water village considering that we still are using wood. Thank you. Great thank you so much. We had one more question from the back and then we'll turn to the panel again. Thank you. I'm Hasvi from the partnership Indonesia. I have two points. The first one is we have limited in numbers of champions in developing the public-private partnership or community company partnership. Like for example in Indonesia we have limited numbers like what explains by RIMBA or some initiative developed by APP but we have limited numbers so it is very important that the government as the policy maker and the private sector who have concessions to work more intensive. Like for governments to make like evaluations and also to distribute the lessons and best practices in developing these partnerships. It is very important that co-operations between the government and concessions will impact to develop these schemes. The second suggestion that in our experience the rules and the benefits for the local community are very important in developing the public-private partnership. In some cases we found that when the government and the private sector have co-operations and then the local community only get very not significant impacts. They only are engaged as the laborer and no schemes for their benefit as the community. So it is very important to put the local community as the party, one important party in developing the public-private partnership. Thank you. Thank you very much. I think we will have comments from the whole panel. But I suggest Brian that you start. You have two questions directed to you. Thank you for those questions. In terms of reforestation, we do do reforestation within our project sites, but we do not try to get credit for those reforestations. So we don't do reforestation centered projects. We focus on reducing emissions from deforestation. So to answer that question is we do reforestation of degraded areas within the project sites. It is one way that we work with reforestation, however we don't do just reforestation projects. In terms of benefit sharing, we develop the benefit sharing with the communities and with all the partners involved in the project. So if the stakeholder is a government entity, then we work with the government to decide what is fair. And we try to bring all of the stakeholders to the table at first before we ever start the project and invest a dollar. We determine exactly how the benefits will be shared and outline that first. So that's how we develop an inclusive benefit sharing plan, and we do not move forward until we have that in place. So we do that first. I think there was one other question about the water village. I think it depends, I don't know the water village, I'm sorry, I don't know the specifics. You can do, there is now a methodology through VCS to produce carbon credits in mangroves and wetlands. So you could bring this concept that we've developed the Red Plus concept to a coastal area or along a river, a riparian area would be another area that you could do it in as well. And a project is a project. So as long as you have a way to pay for the operations, in this case we're using carbon finance by the sale of carbon credits, so that would be a way you could bring that to the water village. Great, thank you. There was a question for you, Paul, on the global emissions. I love that question, thank you very much. And you'll forgive me if I give somewhat of what might seem as a philosophical answer but I do think this is of practical importance. You asked essentially about the role of the market in deciding choices. Well I think that we all, I try what I do day to day, I believe in the power of the markets for good, but the markets are not elected representatives of the people or communities. The markets to some extent can drive the consequences of policy, can influence policy, can inform policy. But in the context of private public partnerships I do believe it's the markets jobs to inform of possibilities of outcome, to inform of potential pros and cons of the way in which policies are made. But at the level of talking about, I do believe that the responsibilities of certain actors are more directly aligned with deciding the basis than the markets driving the conclusions of the elected representatives of the communities. I do think, and I certainly don't absolve the markets or markets participants from entering into the debate, for standing up and be counted about assessing possibilities and assessing practical outcomes in the markets of certain decisions. But at its fundamental root, the responsibility for allocation of global goods remains with the global democracies. Thank you, Paul. We'll turn to Marmord. You had a question related to Wood I believe. Okay, thank you for the question. I'm very proud the question come from Brunei. So I left the question as well, like yourself. Okay, as I mentioned earlier, forest is belong to everybody in Brunei As-Salaam. It's a multi-stakeholder's benefit. So once the benefits goes to everybody, so it's our responsibility to work together to protect our forest. So one of the benefit of having this forest of course the community itself from Water Village, because Brunei is established by having Water Village the east of the Venice. Venice of the east, sorry. So we have to protect the culture. We have to protect the tradition of the people living near the forest. We have the provisions in our law under section 52, rules 19 and above. There is a provision to protect the native right to take forest produce. So perhaps this is the honour that we give to all people living in the forest that they have the right to practice their tradition, their culture by having the forest. So they have the right to take the forest produce, but on domestic basis, not commercial. So that's very important. So on the recycle, I think I'm an expert in recycle. Of course I'm trying to promote substitution of wood. Now we have so many steel for wood trust. So this is a very good improvement to substitute use of wood to reduce the pressure on the wood to source our wood timber from the forest itself. So to me it's a good improvement that we have to substitute certain component of the wood in the construction to have a steel or whatever. So this is a very good development that really supporting our conservation protection of the forest resources. So we don't rely 100% to the forest for the sake of infrastructure or whatever. So if you want, if the native people want to provide forest product, they have to apply. They have to apply to the certain agencies in our ministry of primary resources in tourism. So they have the right, but we have to monitor by giving them license. So that's a simple answer for you. Is that really, I'll say a question. Thank you. Thank you. I just wanted to say that I really appreciate the use of wood in this building. So I really hope that we can find ways to combine both the use of wood and the protection of forest. That will be the best of all solutions, I think. There were a couple of comments and questions related more to the government and concessions. I don't know if Pak Putra or Pak Darsone would like to comment on that. Well, probably the question relates to me as the encouragement from past be on the importance of intensifying our PEP partnership and also to make sure not to let the most important people to be less significant. I think we are the government really working on that. And actually by regulation we require companies to promote cooperation with the people and actually we ask companies to provide 20% of their land for the access, for the cooperation with the people. And it's by regulation, it's required like that. So that's to make sure that the people will be the subject of the partnership, not just the object. And all in all we plan to have 12.7 million hectares of forest land will be allocated for the access of the people under this, our new current government. And in the field there's already some examples taking place like in Lampung where the new real conflict is very difficult to solve. And we were able to facilitate cooperation between company and the people. Win-win partnership in which the people will utilize the land which is licensed to the company but then the company will buy the product from the land. So it's a good cooperation. Also in terms of producing energy in East Nusratangara we are approaching an output we are expecting from that. And also of course in Kalimantan there is an industrial timber company also having a good partnership with the local people in which the local people becoming like the plasm of the company. So we are working really to have this PPP to work in our country. Thank you. Thank you Pak. I just want to add basically the point that has been made. I think the key is you know if we're talking about benefit sharing all these issues like I mentioned about putting the community forestry in our buffer. I think once you have a good governance as well as transparency so you can actually see for example what we envision is this buffer area if assuming that the carbon market eventually come and all this revenue are coming we will be happy to actually promote and help the communities to be a community based carbon credit projects and then they can sell credit so they will entitle to the credits they will have all the benefit that comes with it. So I think all this issue of benefit sharing can be resolved if we have a good governance and a transparency from all parties. So you have to remind the community that this is there has to be accountability. This is I mean in order for us to save and conserve forest you know all parties have to be involved. But you know we have to make sure that there is accountability and in the meantime we also are providing solution. The key is providing solution to communities as an alternative livelihood if they want to cutting the trees or burn the plants and burn. So I think I'm very excited that the current government are really very open minded like for example Paputra and his staff we've been working together in terms of designing something that we do the collaboration as a community as part of the center piece of the puzzle that we need to solve. Great thanks. We have if there is a burning question from the audience I think we can take one more before we wrap up the session. Did I see a hand? Yes. There is a microphone over there. Please go ahead. The last question for this session. Thank you. Thank you. I'm from Ministry of Environment and Forestry so I actually am under Paputra. Can you please speak a bit closer to the microphone? Okay. My comment is that we talk about the community as if they are all weak people and good people and in fact in the in reality there are all kinds of community elements there that are people who have powerful people out there and I think in this discussion we need to also take them into account of how to deal with that issue. So I wonder how it works in Africa as well as in Asia dealing with all sorts of community because I imagine the benefit sharing is not very easy when I understand in Africa with the trade, the illegal trade of wildlife products for example also similar case in Asia. I think we need to take that into account. Thank you. Thank you. Any comments on this? Thank you for that comment and that brings us to the closure of this session. Let me just say one word before I thank the panel. I think it's interesting and I don't want to end with a totally conciliatory comment here. I think we should keep some of the tensions that we all experience and work on them. And I find it intriguing that we have representatives of each P here. We have two representatives of governments which is obviously the politics. We have Brian who I would say represents mainly the participation, coming from the participation end at least. And we have two representatives that would be the middle P, the profit making piece. But what I find intriguing is that although you come from these ends and all of you see the need and the requirements to emphasize the other two piece and that's what I think we should take from this discussion that although we have specific interests on the panel, they've all emphasized the other interests and the need for and the dependencies between these parameters. We haven't solved this yet and there are another thing to take from this panel that there's a diversity of solutions. There's no silver bullets. These are complex issues and we need to embrace that complexity and allow for diversity to be there. By that I would like to thank the panel for this session and hope that we're almost on time. So let's give a hand to the panel.