 Around six weeks ago, a whole group of people, some of whom are in the room, met for four days in and around Palinkarai, and I just want to give you a little background about that process before we get underway. And to do that, I'm going to in a moment invite Gary Dunning, the Executive Director of the Forest Dialogue, with whom C4 partnered to explain the context of the food, fuel, fibre and forests dialogue. And then we'll hear from a number of people who were participants in that dialogue about their perspectives. Once we've done that, we'll move to the tables and have two short, intense bursts of discussion about experiences that we all have relevant to these issues. And we'll aim to wrap up a little ahead of schedule by seven o'clock. It's been a long day. We don't want to keep people waiting. But I've overlooked introducing myself, Maaf. I'm Peter Knosky. I'm the Deputy Director General for Science at C4. And it was my privilege to act as a coordinator for C4 in the collaboration with the Forest Dialogue. So let me introduce Gary Dunning, the Executive Director of the Forest Dialogue, to give you the global context for this initiative before we move to talk about our learning from Kalamantan. Thank you, Peter. Good afternoon, everybody. I'm happy to welcome you all on behalf of the Forest Dialogue to this afternoon's session. And again, to acknowledge and to say that we appreciate the collaboration that we've had with C4 in putting not only the Central Kalamantan Dialogue together, but also this afternoon's session. As Peter said, we're hoping that this session will be a little bit interactive, a little bit more of a discussion before we do that. There's a couple things by way of context and background that I'd like to share with you. So as Peter said, I'm the Executive Director of the Forest Dialogue. The Forest Dialogue is an organization that was started about 14 years ago. The idea behind the Forest Dialogue is to create a platform and process for stakeholders that care about forests to discuss the challenging issues, to build trust, to share information, and ultimately to help change some of the challenges that we see in the forest sector. We've been doing that for about the past 14 years, as I said, and we work on a variety of issues. As you all know, there's many different issues in the forest, and we have a process and a steering committee that helps us focus on the key issues and develop initiatives around those issues. We're going to talk about one of those issues today, and that is our Forest Food, Fuel, Fiber, and Forest Initiative. More information at all the tables. So if you're sitting in the back, eventually we're going to ask you to come to the tables, but there's more information on the Forest Dialogue at the tables. This is our brochure that talks about all the various initiatives, talks about how we do our work. Our work is, as the name suggests, based on interactive multi-stakeholder dialogue processes. And as Peter said, we bring people into the field to experience certain challenges, and then we talk through how we can help collaboratively work on those challenges in the field, but also internationally. The Forest Initiative grew out of the challenge that our steering committee identified of this, what we're calling the pressurized intersection of food, fuel, and fiber over the next 20 to 40 years. And it's that challenge about choosing which land use practices, which resources, which commodities, which livelihoods. That is the challenge that we have to face over the next 40 years. How do those decisions get made? How do we approach a more integrated landscape decision-making process? That's why the Forest Dialogue created the 4Fs Initiative. Basically, the initiative is comprised of these organizations, the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, C4, CCAFs, Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security, IED, which is the International Institute for Environment and Development, WWF, the FAO, and the World Bank. These are the partners that came together to help develop the focus of the 4Fs Initiative. And these three aspects of the initiative are what we came up with as a focus. The Engage, Explore, and Change. As you can see, that's kind of a central theme of the Forest Dialogue. By the Engage aspect, we mean to create and develop multi-stakeholder dialogue, dialogue processes, and that, again, essentially is what the Forest Dialogue does. So by creating these engagement processes, both internationally and locally, the Forest Dialogue is bringing these partners as well as others, many others, to the table to discuss these 4Fs issues. There's the Explorer aspect that's looking at creating a research agenda around the questions related to integrated landscape management. How do you do land use decision making? How do you optimize the process? C4 is obviously the lead partner in that, as is IED and some of the other partners that we've worked with. Finally, there's the Change phase, or the Change aspect of this. And ultimately, all these institutions are interested in the Change aspect as it relates to the 4F. And ultimately, we're looking at improving land use decision making on the ground. That is what this initiative is focused on. So what have we done so far? The Forest Dialogue has convened three international dialogues on the issue of 4Fs. The first one was what we call Scoping Dialogue, and that took place in Washington, D.C. in 2011. That was a group of about 30 experts coming together to talk with us about what are the key issues as we develop this initiative, what are the key aspects that we look at when we're in the field, what are the opportunities for change that we think we can work towards through a collaborative process. And then we held a Field Dialogue in Brazil in 2012 and a Field Dialogue in Indonesia in 2014. Actually, it was just last month, as Peter mentioned. In Brazil, we looked at a soy-based, soy and livestock-based landscape and how those decisions were being made about which commodities kind of took precedent in the landscape, which actors were a part of that process. So in a way, we're looking at what is the current situation, what are the current decision-making processes in place, who are the actors that are leading those processes, deconstructing that a bit, and then trying to understand how those processes might be able to be improved. That was in Brazil. I'll note that all the tables have these USB sticks on them, and if you don't, we'll make sure you have some. There's one table, it doesn't. On here are the reports from these dialogues. You can read more in much more detail about what our findings were. We're going to spend most of our time today, all of our time really today, looking at Indonesia. But those other reports, you can access those. In Indonesia, we were looking at a palm oil-dominated landscape in central Kalimantan, but also the effects of mining and rubber and red in land use decision-making processes and how those were affected and impacted decisions that were made. The next location for our international dialogue on forests will be in Finland. In Finland, we're going to be looking at bioenergy as the lead driver of land use decision-making of commodity-driven development in Finland, and that'll be next month, sorry, in September. So, again, we're going to focus much more on specific findings in Indonesia, and Peter is going to pick that up in a minute. But I just wanted this last slide just to give you an idea of some of the major findings or general issue topics that we are focusing in now after the two dialogues. Some of this, I think those of you that work kind of in the landscape context, I think this will make a lot of sense to you and things that you're seeing as well. First and foremost, of course, when you talk about integrated landscape approach, private sector is key in that process. Having a private sector fully engaged but engaged at a table that have other stakeholders there as well is absolutely essential. Enabling conditions need to be in place for a successful kind of integrated landscape approach. In this particular case, enabling conditions such as capital for small, medium-sized enterprises, participatory decision-making processes in place, public policies that are conducive to these kinds of engagement and participatory approach. All the actors in the supply chain need to be part of this process as well. So, although you may be talking about a specific landscape, that landscape impacts, and there's a lot of actors that impact that landscape, so all the actors all the way from production to consumption need to be engaged in this process. And finally, we need to, particularly those of us in the forest sector, this is a very important and very challenging, big challenge for us, and that is to work outside of the sector and particularly to work with our colleagues in the agriculture sector. That is for us in this process and in the development of the Forest Initiative, that's probably been one of our biggest challenges. You find that the dialogue process that we've become used to in the forest sector is not necessarily present in the ag sector, so bringing them into this process in a way where they can fully engage, feel comfortable, and trust the process has been a bit of a challenge for us. So reaching across sectors is something that we need to do and are working on. And finally, let me say that our Forest Initiative is evolving into a, we don't really have a firm focus title, but a more integrated landscapes model, and for us what that means, the forest dialogue historically has gone to countries and dialogue and work with local stakeholders and then went on to the next country, and local stakeholders sometimes pick up those dialogues and continue them. We have examples of that in Brazil. We're hoping that similar processes will take root here in Indonesia. But one of the things that this initiative, the Forest Initiative, the Forest Initiative is considering is creating more of a permanent platform, a longer term kind of platform in specific landscapes where over time we can build the knowledge and build a platform where it's integrated learning and the partners can work collaboratively in specific locations. But that is in the process now of development, and I won't go much further than that. So with that, Peter, that's the overview and context for the Forest. And any of the information that you want will be on the Forest Dialogs website, of course, the forex information on the USP drives and please follow us on the Twitter or the social media. Thanks, Gary. For those who've just come in, welcome. Thanks for joining us. That was Gary Gunning, Executive Director of the Forest Dialog. I'm going to hand so you can click it, please. I also want to introduce our team away, sitting over here, also from the Forest Dialogs in the second period at Yale University. So if you have questions about what the Forest Dialog would do, you can click Gary or Jouting, or you can come and say hello to them face-to-face and they'll respond. They're here for both days. I'm Peter Konoski, one of the Deputy Directors at C4 and I'm moderating this afternoon's session. What I'd like to do now is stand out of your way so you can see the screen and just give you a little brief background about the Field Dialog that Sena here has participated in in Central Kalaman Tan six weeks ago. Can I go a few slides on? Thanks. So Gary's talked about the objectives for the Forest process generally and so we refined a version of those for the Kalaman Tan Field Dialog. I think what you can see on the screen there about linking the way that the agriculture, forestry and other land use sectors in Kalaman Tan mining and particular thinking was one central element of what we were doing. We were trying to understand how governments and communities and businesses in Central Kalaman Tan were responding to those challenges and opportunities. Central Kalaman Tan, as you know, is a Red Plus pilot province. It's had a history of large-scale development over the last 20 years and also has a strong history of Indigenous and local rights. We were looking to learn about what of that experience we could take forward in the Central Kalaman Tan context but also what experience we could transfer elsewhere and then part of our commitment in this dialogue that we were privileged to participate in was to bring the learning to this larger forum of forest Asia but also into other fora and processes such as the Global Landscape Forum in December. The process was co-chaired by five people. We've used already Pat Juggal, the Dean of Agriculture at Palankarai University. He's the only co-chair who could be here. Peter Holmgren, the Director-General of C4, had hoped to be here but is understandably caught up in a different meeting right now so he sends his apologies. Malaga Navina from Mozambique, who heads an NGO there. Parvi, I can't do it. Parvi, who's got a Finnish surname and I won't... Thank you. Finnish speakers from UPM, the large forestry company and Matua Sirat from the World Agroforestry Centre. They were the co-chairs for our process. Next slide, please. So as I've said, we had 70 participants about half of whom came from outside Indonesia. The other half were from Kalaman Tan and elsewhere in Indonesia. We spent two days in the field visiting a range of sites to illustrate different issues and we spent two days indoors in intense dialogue. There are a number of background papers. There are copies of some of those on the tables. There are copies on the memory stick and there are downloads from the forest dialogue website. There's also what's called in the forest dialogue process the co-chairs summary. You have a draft copy of that. This draft for a number of reasons. I left Pack Jagoel's name off it, my apologies, and because the co-chairs have yet to sign it off. But it'll give you a very good idea of the discussions we had and the conclusions we came to. So to the next slide, please. One click at a time. Okay, thanks. The outcomes of the dialogue were summarised by the co-chairs in six key messages. And at one level these messages are, I think, no surprise to any of us who are engaged in thinking about landscapes and sustainable development. But at another level, the fact that they emerged from learning in the field I think underlines their importance. So the first of those was that we can only make the trade-offs that we have to make in a particular landscape, in a particular social and economic context in that context. We have to understand the context very clearly. Next. We also have to engage with the core social issues of recognising Indigenous and local rights, of recognising rights to improvement of livelihoods, in recognising rights and interests over governance at the appropriate level. All of those considerations underpin truly sustainable development. Next. As Gary has just mentioned, as this summit more generally acknowledges, the private sector has to be part of the solution, not part of the problem. The dialogue between all actors, including the private sector, actors has to be real and meaningful and respectful. Next. Correspondingly, there is a very significant role for small holders and for small to medium enterprises complementing that of the corporate scale private sector. One of the speakers in this morning's panel discussion spoke, I think, very clearly about this, the military role of the corporate investor, corporate business and that of small holders and small to medium enterprises. Both are critically important. Next, please. All of what we're seeking to achieve can only be achieved where we have good governance. Like any country, Indonesia is a complicated country in terms of governance with a whole specific set of challenges occasioned by its political history, its political system, the nature of society here, just as any country is. And so that context has also to be understood and engaged with. Next. And finally, the group felt that there was evidence in Central Kalimantan that the impacts on environment and on livelihoods of particular development options had not really been thought through as fully as it might need to be. And again, we heard one of the speakers in this morning's panel reflect on that, reflect on the short-termism that we often see in decision-making versus the consideration of the impacts over the longer term. So that's a very short summary of four days of discussion and obviously a very high-level summary. Let me move on from that to invite a group of colleagues who were participants in the dialogue to share briefly, very briefly, their key learnings from that. The order you see here is not necessarily the order that they're going to speak in. So Sky Glende from the Climate Policy Institute. Desi Kusumaladi. Desi made it into the room. Desi, there you are. Thanks. Patera Patama from the Ministry of Forestry. Sitarapati from the Ministry of Industry. Eddie. Pakadi Subahani. Pak. Who represents local community groups in Kalamantan and Pakjagayasarum from Palankarai University. So let me invite Ibu Sittra to come and have the microphone. Ibu Sittra. Thank you. First of all, I would like to introduce myself. My name is Sitarapati. I represent Agro Industry, Ministry of Industry. I would like to thank SIFOR for the wonderful sharing experience for the food, fuel, fiber and forest dialogue. One of, I think the biggest issue is for me as a represent of the government is how to have information across the sectors. Not only in the national level, but also in the local level. So we have the regulation as Putra mentioned in Palankarai, we have the one map policy and one map policy is really important. So if all the stakeholders, not only the government, but also the private sectors and also the academic from like Pajago and friends from I think we still have a better future of how to use our land, not only in Kalimantan also all around Indonesia. I think that the one thing that I remember the most from the dialogue that we have here in Palankarai we have a lot of people here. Thank you. Thank you. Yes. Thank you. Hello. Good afternoon. Thank you very much, Peter. I am Desi Kusumadewee representing the around table of sustainable palm oil. This is multi stakeholders non for profit association production and use of sustainable palm oil. As Gary mentioned earlier, it is important to engage all the actors along the supply chain. So the RSPO membership also comes from the palm oil supply chains, from the oil palm growers right up to the consumer goods manufacturers, retailers, palm oil processors and traders, as well as banks and NGOs, environmental and NGOs. The RSPO has developed a standard for sustainable palm oil productions and I'm very happy to share with you that Indonesia has been the largest producer of RSPO certified palm oil in the world at the moment. So my brief reflections from the field visit in Palangkaraya, I think it was a very good experience. It was very nice, you know, being far away from the hustle and bustle of Jakarta. I have to thank my secretary-general for sending me to Palangkaraya for four days. It was very fruitful and for me I think it was a new lesson learned because then we also received perspectives from other sectors because probably my focus of work mainly on palm oil. So I think being with people from other sectors really opened up my mind that this is indeed what's called complex issues, this for fees. And palm oil I think is only one small part of this what's called full broad context of the issues. So I take it, I took it positively but also I think it was a scary moment to me because my group, we went, visited this fisherman village and we went there using this boat, small boat. And what scared me was because I couldn't swim. So it was a scary moment but the rest of it is really very fruitful. So that is my brief reflection. Thank you very much. Thank you Ibu Dezi. You can see it made a very strong impression but we did issue Ibu Dezi with a life jacket. Pak Putera, could I invite you please Pak Putera from the Ministry of Horority. Thank you Dezi. Thank you very much Peter. My name is Putera Pertama. As introduced I'm representing Ministry of Horority and I was one of the participants in Palangkaraya but unfortunately only for a half day I missed the field trip so I could swim though. I missed that field trip and missed most part of the discussion but for us from the government what's more important is to get the six conclusions presented by Peter and I'm going to comment on a few maybe not all of the conclusions. Actually of those six points of conclusion the government cannot agree more. We fully agree on those points and actually those points were not out of sight so far from the government view. I mean we are fully aware of those points and in fact to some extent we already engage on the issues and actually we also integrate already in our policymaking and some actions too. So it is true that the objective of forestry development should not should not ever be isolated from the other sectors objective. In the past maybe to some extent to a lot of extent we did that but now we begin to see our paradigm toward putting forestry objectives as part of the building blocks together with the other sectors objective to attain our welfare. So that's why we develop our national forestry plans by inflowing and taking into account consideration from other sectors and according to our national plans in 2030 our forest is planned not to be 130 million hectares anymore. So we plan to reduce our forest land into 112 million hectares meaning about 18 million hectares to be allocated for other sectors including for the plantation, infrastructure and other and of the remaining 112 hectares it will also include about six million hectares for small scale in the small scale plantation. So that's about the first I think the first point. I would like to comment also on the point about the providing access to the people to capital providing capital access to people. It's really not a new it's not a brand new issue for us even in this very year the government is ready with can you remind me the number well about this this very 500 billion Indonesian rubyats is ready for the small scale industry small scale plantation with a very low interest rate it's a very soft loan and with nine years grace period so it's that it's available the capital is available for that. Also decades ago actually we have a program called Cook does it's also similar to that and billions of rubyats dispersed for the people community but that program was failed in the sense that none of those money paid back to the government. So they're all gone but maybe it's not a failure if you consider those who got the money already improved their likelihood by getting that capital sorry. But right now in the what we call BLU program it's not not that many people very interested to get the money so meaning that maybe it's not it's not really correct that the lack of access to capital is the problem. I believe I believe most of the problem more of problem is the lack of human capacity and in doing business because capital is there but not not so many people like to be interested to get it although with a very low interest and not that rigid requirement to get it is very easy just just establish a cooperative a small cooperative that can get the money. So on another issue I cannot memorize the six point maybe one of it on handling the social problem yeah we also 100% agree that the handling correctly handling the social problem is the critical side for achieving sustainable forest management and we are doing uh several things on that uh at the present the one I recall is we have a government minister regulation on how handling partnership bridging between large scale enterprises small scale and the government government it's a government minister regulation number 39 in this year so meaning uh with that uh regulation actually we would like to find win-win solution with for any any problems related to land conflict mostly so again we cannot agree more and thank you very much for giving me a chance to respond on that. Thank you Peter. Thank you very much. I'll ask like a next pack Oban representing the community based forest management system working group and other local interests in Central Kalamantan to come to speak um but Oban will speak in Bahasa. Thank you and I'll ask Neil Franklin from Damata who collaborated with us in the development of the field dialogue to act as a translator so we'll have uh uh Oban will speak in Bahasa uh a paragraph at a time and Neil will will has kindly offered to translate. Thank you Pat. So apologies in advance but Oban yeah my translation is not great and to everybody else so my name is Pat Oban from Paangkaraya I've been working since 2000 the year 2000 in Paangkaraya and the translation of your institute back institution yeah uh one of our main focuses right now is to help with the mapping of community interests in forest lands uh In fact, it is also necessary to save the area of the community that is located in the forest area, in the forest area that can be converted and in the APL. That is the most important thing for us, and that must be done for the future. So one of our main focus is right now to summarize a little there, is in community interests on areas of forest land designated for conversion, or forested lands outside the forest estate in multi-use development areas. And that's where the main focus of work is right now. So while others on the trip during the dialogue enjoy themselves and there's lots of positive things, at least from the perspective of local interests and community interest groups, perhaps at times frustrating when all the issues were covered, particularly issues relating to oil palm and community, small-holder agriculture in forested areas, and conflicts related to that. But at the end of yesterday's meeting, there was also a lot of positive things. In fact, how to see the initiative of the community, the government in the village, to save the remaining forest areas in the surrounding areas, how to make the initiative to save the forest, and also to save the surrounding areas of forest production in the village. On the positive side, we did see examples of activities related to community forests and forest managed by communities mixed with food crops, other small-holder livelihood models related to small-scale locally-based community forestry. At the moment, the project is being converted into a community forest, because the investment in reducing their activities in the forest, in the forest and in the forest in the village, but the biggest project for us is the area where the community forest production is located, which is located in HPEGA and in KPL. And that is the initiative of the project in 2010. The job is to identify the remaining communities in this area, and try to contribute to the implementation of the plan of the forestry and the province. To identify these areas where communities are using utilized forest lands for their livelihoods for agriculture. I think the main focus for the work in the future is that we must pay more attention to these areas of forest land and conversion of forest in areas outside of the forestry state, which are currently utilized for livelihoods and for food by communities. For my apologies, I make a mistake in translation. Thank you very much. We have two more speakers that we're going to move to a short, small group discussion. The ultimate speaker, Pakjaga, our co-chair and field dialogue artist, I miss you here because I haven't seen my daughter. Okay, thank you. Sorry about this time. As Sarah is requested by the forest dialogue group, I have to respond to the six key conclusions of the TFB in Phang Kharaya. So, according to the six key conclusions from the TFB in Phang Kharaya six weeks ago, I would like to respond some points. First, in terms of the forest conclusion, in terms of the development of business opportunity for small holder and SM enterprise in sustainable landscape, in Central Kalimantan our local people feel that economic development, which use the resources for forest conservation, for example plantation and mining, only gives small benefit to them. So, everything from university perspective, they have to help the local people to get better benefit from their involvement in the development. Now, we have a partnership between the University of Phang Kharaya and the CPI. Sky will explain the details later. CPI Internet Policy Initiatives to provide technical assistance to support Central Kalimantan government on land use and green grow species. We call the Initiative Production and Protection Initiative. From this collaboration, CPI has been established a center of excellence in University of Phang Kharaya with strong and local technical capacity that can support the government of Central Kalimantan on land use species. We named the center of the center as PILA. PILA is Phang Kharaya Institute for Land and Agriculture Research, which the tech line is supporting sustainable development. So PILA is supporting. We conduct some research focus, namely land uses, including natural ecosystem and other current and planned land list, Central Kalimantan. There's social economics and business model and fiscal flow. You can see in the leaflet in front of you. And we should ensure land use for industry. Regarding the business model for small solar, in terms of a fourth conclusion, we also conduct an analysis to developing a business model that supports Central Kalimantan green grow plan focused on investment in sustainable and high productivity of Phang Kharaya. So through this collaboration between Phang Kharaya and CPI, we want to know the business model that appropriate in Central Kalimantan which engage small solar and local people in Central Kalimantan, especially in rural business. The second response comment from our point of view is in socialism. In Central Kalimantan context, in terms of socialism, to realizing sustainable development objective that give better impact to local people, indigenous people and small government, we should ensure land level for indigenous people and small government. As we know in Central Kalimantan, our government has issued a regulation about customary land rights that give authority to their customary leader to issue customary land title. This policy had a subcontracting ground because there is no criteria for deciding whether land customary land as customary, customary land or not. So I think that this issue need to be addressed in this dialogue how to recognize the customary land, how to resolve the land deductions and how to ensure development. That's it for the comments from me and the details. Thank you. Last speaker, who has that swap because she's very precise, Skye Glende from Climate Policy Institute. Thanks, Gary. I don't think I need to explain too much more details but we work together in Central Kalimantan. So as Peter said, my name is Skye Glende from Climate Policy Institute. For those of you who are not familiar with our organization, we are an analysis advisory group that works with government and local knowledge partners like this park in key countries around the world on main use and energy policies but with a particular focus on the economics behind transitioning from land use to more sustainable systems. So I think there's three points that I just wanted to emphasize that for me were important themes of the dialogue and also of our work here in Indonesia. I think the first is that as we think about frameworks for sustainable land use or landscapes. From CPI's perspective, it's very important that the models that we develop to implement this on the ground deliver growth in the rural economy. So including to increasing productivity in important commodities like palm oil. Without delivering economic growth, we really don't think the change and shift towards sustainability will occur because governments, business and communities might be able to afford more sustainable land products that reach the conservation of natural property. So that's number one. Number two is that to actually deliver on these landscapes we really think that a coalition of actors is necessary and I think Gary highlighted this in his overview of the first dialogue as well that really it takes different roles of governments, business and communities to deliver on an integrated landscape. So it's actually looking at the strengths of those different actors and what the right roles for them are to play in managing the landscape sustainably. And for us I think that actually makes a jurisdictional approach a very important approach in Indonesia because a jurisdiction like a district is a level where government can really take a role and deliver on policy. Business can perform at scale and it also includes communities and small homes like the private sector. I think there's a parallel session on jurisdictional approaches there as well. And I think the third point for us is that we've thought of that. These models, framework, solutions to the land use challenges are really locally owned. So CPI is not out here determining the best approach for Indonesia but we're partnering with people like Pak Dogao who do the local context much better and supporting him to establish a sense of excellence. Supporting local researchers to analyse the challenges in those four areas, the land use, social business and fiscal challenges to try to design together that integrated model. I think one reflection I had specifically on the discussion we had in Central Cali, my son was that throughout the field trips and it ended up, it came unrepeatedly that a lot of actors in government, business and communities are really finding a challenge to deliver on I guess the expanding number of standards that there are related to sustainability development. And I think something important that could come out of the dialogue for us Asian people broadly and ongoing conversation between people in this group is how do we really streamline some of those standards and identify the right roles of government, business and communities in simplifying the sustainability issues. So how do we draw on the strength of things like RSPO, ISPO, there's red plus safeguards, HDB, HDS how do we actually determine what should happen at the different levels of those actors within the jurisdiction and come up with an integrated landscape approach which I think is what we're discussing in the forest model. And I was also asked to comment on what our commitments are going forward and I think that's part of the dialogue that will be happening in the next part of the session. And so I guess from CPR's perspective really our commitment is to support and strengthen local institutions like Pat Doga mentioned that have been established in Central Polymontan and to look for other local platforms and I guess aside from just doing the research and analysis which really will provide the evidence base for developing these new frameworks I think a very important component of our cooperation in Central Polymontan is its very action oriented. So we work with Pat Doga and the team at CULA to understand the current situation by doing these analysis but then Pat Doga is also the chair of a working group that the government has established that sits above that centre of excellence that working group includes academics like Pat Doga but the key government ministries it also includes important community organisations from the DIA council important industry representatives from Gapke and also CSO partners and that really is important to stay for the forum that the university can provide advice options for going forward and that working group of stakeholders really has the knowledge to develop local informed solutions to actually carry out and implement this model on the ground so for us it's not just about doing the research but having that platform that we can actually take action together through this new step. So I think that's all. Thank you very much Sky and thanks to all of us we go to the next slide please so to all of those panelists thank you for those perspectives we're now going to move to a stage of the session which is interactive we're going to invite you to participate in a discussion around one of the six topics these are the six topics they're on the table everybody should be able to have a copy of the matrix and in the columns of the matrix we have as Sky has alluded to the three areas of commitment that the Forest Age summit is seeking to catalyse commitment to priority research topics commitment to investments in sustainable development and commitments to dialogue to reconcile the different perspectives and priorities of different interest groups so next slide please we're being adaptive as the Forest Dialogue has to be we're going to finish by seven so although the guidelines say two priority topics I think we're going at a time for one to do justice to it so what we're asking you to do is to self associate with the topic of your choice and did I get to the next slide forget that because we'll come back to it in a minute okay so you just heard from Sky so if you're interested in addressing core social issues Sky come and join Sky at this time Gary you've heard from if you're interested in talking about engagement in the private sector come and join Gary over at this point if you're interested in better governance Takapatera man of government is going to facilitate that discussion please come and join him business opportunities for small holders which we've just heard a lot about Dominic welcome thanks you'll have to find a different table maybe the one back a bit okay so Dominic you haven't heard from Dominic here he is in the red shirt he'll be leading that group and I'm here and I'll find a spot down in that corner for anybody who'd like to talk about impacts of production systems if you are more comfortable so these groups will be in English not in Australian and not in Bahasa but in English if you're more comfortable speaking in Bahasa that's fine form a group in the middle and have that conversation in Bahasa and we'll hear from your discussion in the reporting back can you go back a slide please okay so forget about the second session there we don't have time for the second session what we have time for is 20 minutes sharply focused discussion on the topic of your choice so back to the last slide okay so have a look at that could I have the facilitators stand up and migrate to their respective area of the room so I'm going to migrate down the back corner Neil I'll leave you out excuse me Neil Franklin who you've heard from already forests and forestry in the wider context so you're going to go just to the left there am I nailed okay excuse me okay so please join that group we'll have a short discussion for 20 minutes a brief reporting back and we'll finish by seven so private sector Gary Dunning here forestry in the wider context Neil Franklin over there Government, Governance Pakpatera here commercial issues guy over there small holders Dominic and production systems will be me and I'll go down the back corner near the technical section research would happen without committing to who might do it is in the work of definition on things like small holders and SMEs is one important point that came out here was we heard earlier somebody say to what extent can the SMEs and small holders complement the private sector which we thought was a bit weird because of course small holders are the private sector the largest private sector in Indonesia is actually small holders so it's a massive great private sector that already so this idea that it needs to be forced into complementing something else I think is the wrong language so we're looking at the way how do we define properly our terms here what we're talking about and questions and preconceptions that already exist about small holders and about the SMEs sector as well so that was one important point and on investment sure there's money around as we've heard from government through the Bayer and other sources of money but how can we connect that down to small holders when we know there are so many difficulties in creating these layers of creating social capital improving capacity making that work so that in itself means it's not just an investor you need a constellation you need a combination of investors combined with other actors that are working together in order to release this particular sector and even in government our colleague here from the Ministry of Forestry you know the interest of talking across sectors within government for instance with the Ministry of Finance who have an interest in this area then how could we find a way of releasing the Bayer and managing it in a way that was using real evidence to see how that could work on the ground and so there's some facilitation at that level so what we know is that there's certainly lots of appetite for investment there's money sitting in these various areas but actually how you can then release it down to a small holder level is a non-trivial task it's an extremely complicated one so we didn't necessarily follow matrix in the traditional TFD way we forged our own path and what we looked at really was a simplification of the question which is how do you engage the private sector what are the biggest challenges how do you address that we had a rich discussion it was good I would distill it out into three key points about three key actions that you need to effectively engage the private sector one is the neutral convener or convener that is trusted by private sector actors so you need to have the right the right people the right people not only at the table but the people asking to bring them at the table one of the biggest motivators so what is the motivator that usually brings the private sector to the table and that is managing risk or looking for opportunity depending on how you look at it so private sector is motivating you still have social evening sessions at CityQuest right now you have a social session which is divided by an SCF theory it is taking place in the government another one so managing risk and that is one of the key things you know somebody else might create the risk but we can provide the opportunity or we can help manage that risk and a sub point of that was who are the organizations, individuals firms that the private sector will turn to in that process of helping managing risk and that is key and third point is related to the second point which is there has to be a strong business case the business case has to be developed you have to speak the language of the private sector to be able to engage with them so those are the key points that we have thank you thank you Peter I would like to start with two challenges first I am not a good facilitator being from the government I am more used to being facilitated rather than facilitated second we didn't hear your instruction very well so we focus only on one issue instead of two or three so the issue is on creating more effective coordinated government across its levels of government and different sectors so the discussion was very very good on research we identified that we need research on land use of course actually many research have been done but the problem is there is a gap between research output and policy making so it's a problem of communication and also there is a need to find a new way of dialogue in order to facilitate cross sectoral stakeholders in this case we think that what has been done in Kalpalangkariya by CPI were replicating in other part of the country and there is also a need for research on regulations because in Indonesia there are many regulations on each level of government and most of them are some of them contradict each other so we need the research to harmonize that regulations on investment we think in order to have a better coordination and coordination across sector and across levels what we need to invest is actually time, energy and to some extent also infrastructure on communication we need to convene multi-sectoral and multi-agency meeting dialogues in order to have a better coordination so that's the investment we need actually in Indonesia there is a nice system already for coordination which we call the mus rendbang system we start from village rendbang up to the national rendbang but somehow the system it doesn't work very well but there is a good example actually in the old days where it worked meaning something must be done on that NGO involvement is very instrumental in order to make more participation from civil society and also we need to make sure formal representative of stakeholders on its most rendbang to the needs of the stakeholders and with regard to dialogue we need dialogues to identify the needs of local people and complicate those needs to different level of governments and we also need to develop on strategic issue from on different levels of governments we need to we actually have a system also when I think minister we have other institutions to facilitate that but we have forum does if somebody recall but we need to review the lies so I think that's what we got from our big asset thank you very much Peter thank you Pak for somebody who doesn't facilitate very often you follow the instructions exactly and run a lot of information out of your table so I think you've got another calling as a facilitator if you would like Skye embarrassed because I didn't facilitate anywhere in New York as well I don't think I'll try to briefly summarize our group was focused on discussing the core social issues to create enabling conditions for maintaining friendships and so I think there are two broad focal areas of our discussion on the issue the first really comes back to so what social conflicts are there between communities and companies working in Central Kalimantan how progressed is the processes underway to award indigenous rights in Central Kalimantan so that they're actually clearly recognized and demarcated and I think also relating to land ownership was an element of land use planning so ensuring that land not only recognized social community issues but was actually allocated to the right uses which made the way the internet system works makes different ownership categories applicable if it's under the right spatial planning allocation I think the other side of issues we had a good discussion on the role of in the communities in Central Kalimantan so in terms of access to job markets or benefits that they were receiving from different enterprises being carried out in the province and I think identified the need for further investigation into that area and building that into any further action and policies more broadly also just the issue of benefit sharing for communities and the need to further address that in policies going forward and then I think the third point was really I guess coming back to basic fundamental social engagement but really in Central Kalimantan there's been a lot of historic challenges in terms of engaging communities in new enterprises as they were developed so not only in terms of engaging them in the business structures that are put in place but in the research and analytical investment and dialogue processes going forward that's a key consideration so I think there are the three topic areas that we covered but given the institutions around the table we didn't necessarily have people researching, investing or conducting and then Samson in the last group thanks Samson Our group set out to look at the environment to impact of different product existence but we quickly found out from the rich audience in the table that we couldn't really talk about that without looking at land tenure rights and secure land tenure for both local and concentration holders so we had a few examples from the table from the German Development Corporation representative and some researchers and some people from the National Park University and we got to hear that this ongoing conflict with many of these concessions as well as local communities on access to economic products as well as non-economic products so the NTFP and there is an ongoing conflict that has been going on for years and there are different underlying issues that relate to both research investment and dialogue so our group we wanted to come out with three points each for the research investment and we came up with two points and the main point regarding research is how to do a kind of comparative study on the CO2 profiles of land use change regarding local communities production systems and land use change from land use change from concession holders those are the main research point we came up on the research and we found in the dialogue phase there needs to be some kind of institutionalized conflict resolution between local and concession holders and we were debating based on the diversity of the audience can this be done by the National Park Street can this be done by local NGOs or local organizations and so on and so forth and our third point which kind of relates to investment but it's not an investment investment issue is before any of this research and conflict dialogue can take place for sustainable development there needs to be some kind of secure general rights especially for local people thank you everybody, thank you that brings this session to a close we've proposed more or less right on the time we promised to didn't achieve our aspiration of finishing early but as some of you commented this actually takes a little while to warm up I'd like to thank our panelists who contributed their learning from the four days of field dialogue I'd like to thank you all as participants in this mini-dialogue for contributing your time at the end of a long day and your ideas we'll capture those as best we can we'll take them back to the meeting tomorrow and we'll incorporate them into the next stage of the 4x dialogue stream as part of our learning from engagement in Indonesia so I thank you for your commitment of time and energy and we'll do our best to ensure that we adjust to that carrying it forward with that I think I can, on behalf of C4 and the Forest Dialogue and our other partners down at our CPI University of Pankaraya the Government of Central Tomantan thank you again look forward to continue being engaged in these very important issues and say Sunat Malam more or less there are still two sessions running for those of you who've got energy one on genetic resources and one for youth which just qualifies some of us but others of you have qualified so if you have energy and you'd like to participate in yet another session please feel free to do so otherwise I look forward to seeing you back for day 2 of the Sunat tomorrow thanks again and please join me in thanking us all for your participation