 I'm now going to invite all the presenters to please come up. There's some crazy button you can hit that makes this a black screen. I don't know what it is, so I'll try to deal with that in a moment. I'm going to open the floor to questions, but I did want to remind you of a couple of things as you're thinking about questions to ask. One is that there's a proposal for an SEI initiative on inclusive energy transition. So do these presentations give some evidence that that will be a compelling and useful frame? And then also that some projects specifically asked for advice because they're in the planning stages. But please, yes, we have one here. So we need to record. Hi, Michael Lazarus. Thank you, thank you Oliver for spending time with the question of inclusiveness. That's sort of the mystery I word here. How does it work? And I want to be slightly provocative and ask the question, is it possible to be too inclusive too soon? And I asked that question and referenced your example of PVMTI versus the IFC project. You have a PV technology which isn't quite mature, delivery mechanisms aren't quite well developed, costs are very high. And with all these projects we've heard about, I guess it's a question for everybody on the panel if they want to chime in on. Given that a lot of folks we work with can become rather donor and intervention weary at times, is there a point in sort of the innovation and development of an idea or a technology where one should be more or less inclusive? Thank you, you got that? Because I'm going to get a few more questions. Yes, actually Michael, right next to you. Yeah, power cleveness here. Following on from that question to you as well Oliver. Another sort of lens on the inclusiveness, a very different lens that you get from sort of practitioners in the field trying to build solar home businesses is the issue of business models. And so some would say that the reason that the first program failed and the second one succeeded was that one had a business model that worked, the other one didn't. I just want to inject it as a very different perspective on potentially the same issue and see if we can widen the discussion of inclusiveness to include this set of stakeholders as well and I think that would strengthen our thinking about it. Questions on the far side. You'll get your exercise. Thanks. And then after three questions we'll answer those and then keep going. Thank you very much for the opportunity to ask another question. A general question aimed at the panel as a whole and that is we're talking about transformational change here. So what theory or theories of change are you using to give a model against which you can do your research? And to what extent are you thinking about critical assumptions in change and ways of testing some of those assumptions because it's not all going to be rosy and I think understanding some of the unintended consequences could be very important. Thank you. Thank you. So can I ask the presenters Oliver, you've got a couple of questions. So maybe you start and then for the last question I'll see who wants to respond. Okay. Thank you for those lovely questions. Michael, can you be too inclusive too soon? I think this for me is a really important question and maybe the sort of next step in this kind of research agenda. I think it may be that when you're thinking about certain types of change or certain types of innovation, technology, diffusion might be on a kind of national grid scale then you might not have to be so inclusive in certain ways as you would with others in some of the decision making. But yeah it's difficult to answer because this case is very much about household energy and this really needs to be you really need to explore sort of local users, consumers of the technology, their needs, you do need to be inclusive in that sense and I guess if we broaden this out then we may find that you want to be inclusive in certain ways at certain times so a bit of a poor answer in a way but this is I guess because this is a very initial sort of research project. Indeed the PV case comes from my friend colleague Rob Byrne who's done very much for many years a history of innovation of PV in Kenya so we're kind of taking that field research and his analysis and using it to explore this particular issue but moving forward we need to think more strategically about what cases we might actually explore and how we might go in a bit more deeply. Per, thanks very much for your point I think it's interesting to, the idea of business models is a bit of a buzzword as is inclusiveness indeed and I think thinking about that approach could be useful especially in bringing that to the private sector community and so I take that on board as well. Thank you very much and then does anyone want to address the question of, please. Yeah I would like to address the question of inclusiveness if there are time when it can be too early with another question is when would that time be? When would a time be that inclusiveness is not interesting? I cannot think of one time when it's not worth having inclusiveness. I cannot think of it. Inclusiveness is a process and as all processes this takes time and unless you actually understand that and understand that things will take time even if you launch an idea, if you go to a meeting and launch an idea in the meeting you can actually kill a good idea by immediate reactions. You need to do consultations before, you need to inform, you need to build momentum for it so there are different ways of including at different stages in the process but there is no point in the world we live today. I cannot see a time when inclusiveness is not an issue and I see when looking in Indonesia where actually the policymakers at national level are extremely aware of the need to actually really anchor the decisions they make at national level, at the regional level because they know it will not work unless they do that. And you should do that, of course the projects have different connotations. If you look at, we have seen the example from Africa here, they come and they take land very quickly because we want to do large plantations of palm oil or whatever and one of the sometimes people put, I have been in many presentations where people put as a problem that people have very small properties in Africa and it gives me a break, Europe is full of small properties. The average of a farm in Italy is 7 hectares. It has not been a problem for actually developing a sector in Europe. It's not so different as we think, it's just a question that if you have, this is the structure you have if you start from that structure and that's what we are trying to do in the Indonesia project we start from what is there, the way the sugar plantations are organized the way that the people are thinking of how to organize the renewable energy technologies and the renewable energy policies for the country the way it is and then we build from there because this is already anchored, this is already inclusive. That's how they are thinking. I heard the words today from SIDA saying that you have to understand where people are, what they actually, what their problems are how they frame their problems. If you understand how they frame their problems then you can go and talk to them from the perspective and that's inclusiveness. Regarding the last question that was asked, it's awesome applause for you. Regarding the last question that was asked, does anyone want to talk about how you're conceptualizing change? So what's your theory of change? Maybe I should answer that from my perspective. The way I've kind of framed it is coming from the socio-technical transitions approach so this is how I don't want to go too much in depth but in terms of how you kind of have technologies and how society is kind of arranged around those certain technological and societal kind of configurations where you think about how new technologies then come into being how there's kind of innovation processes that support certain pathways and not others and also you mentioned kind of the unintended consequences of that of course is the danger of locking to specific pathways at the expense of others and that's something that there are people working on looking at well if we choose these certain pathways, support these certain technologies is that the right way to go? How do we maintain kind of diversity? How do we open up and not just lock down certain socio-technical configurations? So that's the kind of theoretical perspective I'm coming from and then asking within that then how do you give a voice to the marginalized in society because typically if you don't give them a voice the pathways that we will move along will be dominated by those who have a voice, those who are more influential who's often the vested interests. Okay, thank you. Does anyone else want to address that question before we open it? Yeah. I think it's very important to understand that there have to be champions in the process of change and this can be the same ones that might be apparently the losers in the process if you actually understand in which ways you can trigger the possibility for them being winners. My favorite example is ethanol in Sweden where there was a lot of support for the ethanol development and yet it came to a dead end. I do think it can survive but it depends on a number of things but one of the main issues is that there was no industry that was really a winner in that game. We see a different situation today in the biogas because suddenly there has been a joint interest on the gas side and there are people seeing industries that saw the opportunity of winning. So understanding how actually people can be champions and winners in the process of change I think is very important to actually gather that inclusiveness that is necessary and then we in the context of poverty we talk very much about inclusiveness of the poor but I mean inclusiveness also of the entrepreneurs in that context is extremely important because they are the champions that can actually push, they are the winners in that context and you have to actually identify those potential winners. Okay, I was going to take more questions and Charlie's got his hand up. Roger's got his hand up and I'm not sure who that is but there's another hand. It's actually time for the coffee break but I really like to, can we get short responses to these? So we'll do Charlie, Roger, unidentified. I'll try and keep this brief. I just wanted to react to what you were saying Sumida about can there ever be a case for not having inclusive energy transition and I think that maybe there's a slight sort of people talking across purposes slightly and I think that we would all agree that inclusive development is absolute necessity but I think maybe slightly the issue that I'm confronting here is do I like the overall term inclusive energy transition? So I think where you might say is it too soon might be the question of are we asking the poorest members of society to take on the burden of experimenting with new technologies that are not economic in the rich world yet and I think that maybe that's maybe what Michael was also hinting at. So I think yes, you want to have inclusiveness in development but is that the same thing as wanting inclusive energy transitions? So when most people talk about energy transitions they're talking about, how do we transition to societies using very different energy technologies, whether it's nukes or wind or solar and so maybe it's just kind of a question of putting the two terms together is causing us some problems. Sorry that's been long. Okay, yeah, so then around to Roger. Yeah, and I think we only have time for you to give frowny faces or smiley faces to, okay. Okay, Roger Kaspas in Clark University in the United States. This is actually, this may be in tune with what our chair is looking for because it's a question that I would like to table and take up again at the end of the two days rather than immediately. And the question is I sat here through the first session this morning listening to how solutions oriented research is so important for SEI and I've heard a whole range of different kinds of efforts going on and I'm sitting here wondering, has anybody done a report card on how this looks in terms of solution achieving kinds of work and whatever that report card has to say can we take that component of what is needed to get to a higher level and convert that into a broad general analysis that SEI ought to be working on in the next several years. Thank you and then we have one more question at the back and I'll just say quickly as the microphone's going up that I think we've made some strides in monitoring and evaluation and reflecting on what we're doing but we got a long way to go but I think we've definitely improved on it. Mattias Goldman from Think Tank Forest, people tell me to shut up because it's coffee time. So my question is just very simple and it's basically directed to Caroline. I was excited to hear that you might get more poverty alleviation when making biofuels from crops rather than making cooking oil or other stuff. So I was just excited to hear some of the main reasons for that. Thank you. Yes, so some of these are hypotheses we are testing so we still don't know but what we are going to compare is for instance where biofuel is produced targeting local energy as a form of energy for cooking for local households does it lead to better poverty alleviation impacts compared to where the households engage in biofuel production for the transport sector so where they get direct benefit versus indirect. So we don't have the outcome yet. So at the moment we are testing. The other question on solution. No, we can't do that. Okay, so thank you very much. Let's thank the panel. One more second. Wednesday 11 to 1230 there will be a meeting on this topic discussing it as a possible new initiative. No room yet but keep posted. Okay, thanks.