 So, right now, there are various estimates that say between 200 and 500 million people could be plunged into extreme poverty as a result of the global health pandemic that we are living through. I find it curious that so many millions of people could be plunged into extreme poverty because what that says is that our metrics before was not adequate, right? The fact that people who converged from living on an existence of $1 a day to say $3 a day, that is not adequate in terms of resilience, right? And that people were already precarious and already made vulnerable because of the global architecture and because of what we have counted and not counted when it comes to progress. The opportunity now is to be able to go back to the drawing board and revisit these metrics that we use to say that the world is on a sustainable path because, clearly, the fact that so many people were just had no kind of social safety net whatsoever to withstand the shock of the not just the crisis as it pertains to COVID, but also the fallout of the crisis, the economic crisis that followed. And so what this means is that we need to go beyond what I call the zero mentality, right? This idea that the minimum threshold is good enough because, ultimately, that doesn't provide the kind of resilience that communities, particularly the most vulnerable and marginalized communities, need in order to live a life of dignity and a life that is able to withstand these very shocks that we are talking through. We think about policy and talk about policymaking tends to compartmentalize issues, right? So we think about gender issues as being separate from climate and we think about climate as being separate from health and we think about health as being separate from the economy, right? And so I think the invitation that's embedded in this moment is really calling upon policymakers and activists to really think about what does an integrated policy landscape look like, right? So how do we, because we know that people don't live single issue lives. People embody a multiplicity of experiences and the fact that we don't account for that in our discourse means that people will fall through the cracks, right? The fact that we've not made the connection between racial inequality and racial injustice and those that are most affected by COVID means that there is a gap there in the policymaking process, right? So I think one of the ways that we're able to bridge the gap between social justice and international development is really to do that work of excavation. I think the second thing is that we cannot underestimate the importance of representation, representation matters. And so when it comes to the decision making process, where the agenda of climate is being shaped, we need to ensure that the representatives in those rooms look like the communities that we are advocating on behalf of. I think the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development really offers us a guideline, a roadmap to be able to ensure that all societies are able to rise equally. And so this is why the indivisibility of these bills becomes so incredibly important.