 We've covered a lot of ground already on some of the policy implications of the work, but let me speak briefly to one of the key questions that we felt we needed to try to answer and then to a new approach that we think would be productive in thinking about the industrialization challenge in Africa. The first question we thought we needed to try to answer was, was the consequence of the last 30 years in Africa due to bad policy or bad luck? And the answer turns out to be a little bit of both. When Africa finally cleared the structural adjustment period in about 2000, the world had changed. The nature of global change, trade had changed, we were now in a world of trade and tasks. China had become the dominant exporter in the world economy. We were no longer competing with the industrial north, we were competing with China. And the legacy of structural adjustment and the fiscal restraints placed on countries had resulted in a widening gap in terms of what I think of as the basics, infrastructure education skills between Africa and Asia. The country studies point very clearly to the fact that in the 1970s and 1980s, countries like Vietnam and Cambodia were very similar in terms of their infrastructure endowments and their human skills to those African countries that we studied. By the time you get to 2000, those gaps are wide and they're growing and they continue to grow. So bad luck was certainly a part of the problem, but bad policy was also a part of the problem. And there, and I see Justin sitting out here and I suspect he would smile and agree with me, as a 28-year veteran of the World Bank, we've got to lay some of the blame at the door of the aid industry, as there's Richard Kerry as well. Of the three things that we've talked about here, you'll notice that none of them are high points on the aid agenda for Africa. Not much on spatial industrial policies, not much on export promotion and not much on building firm capabilities. So where have we focused for the last 15 years on the investment climate? It's important. It's the basics. It's infrastructure. It's skills. And it's institutions and regulations. But if we drill down on the agenda of the World Bank and bilateral donors, what we find is the emphasis has been on institutions and regulations. Infrastructure as a share of OECD DAC lending for the past 25 years has been going down. They finally spiked a little bit after the Blair's conference in 2007-2008, but essentially of Lord Stern's original investment climate agenda, we've chosen to focus on only one and on the easy one and probably on the most misguided of all three. We've never approached the question of what to do about these other three drivers of industrial location, and we haven't encouraged African governments to experiment and try to deal with that. And again, when we looked at the country case studies, what we find is a very stark difference between countries such as Cambodia, Vietnam, looking toward their neighbors in East Asia and picking up a sort of integrated strategy, not always well thought through, not always well articulated, but very much by imitation, experimentation, and replication. Something that paralleled the experience of Japan, of Korea, of China, of other leading sort of flying geese, if you will. So what does that mean, I think, then, from the point of view of policy? The first thing is, again, I think more by intuition than by analytical rigor, there was a sense in Asia, and I think there's a sense coming out of this research, that these three drivers, these four drivers, really are fundamentally interrelated, which means that if you do very well on one and you don't do anything about the other three, you're very likely not to succeed. So that brings us to an active government, as Ernest Ayate was saying. You have to have a strategy. You need to know where you're going, and you need to address some of all three. If you fail to do so, then you're likely to achieve building infrastructure, building ports and having no exports, building special economic zones, and not being able to track the firms that you need because you haven't pursued the foreign direct investment agenda. I could go on for about 20 minutes on the interdependencies that exist, but I think the key point is quite simply that you can't do one without the other. What that means from the point of view of thinking about a new industrialization for strategy for Africa is maybe when we think about it as an investment climate plus strategy, in which we don't ignore the investment climate by any means. We deal with the basics, but we rebalance the strategy. And then we begin to address in a systematic way these other issues. Now, my old friend and former bus callist, Omidava, would remind me at this moment that Africa is not a country, and that's absolutely right. But we think there are two reasons to think about a strategy that integrates the capabilities agenda, the exports agenda, and the spatial industrial policy agenda with the investment climate agenda as appealing to a large range of countries, in particular, once we extend the definition of industry to things like tradeable services, tourism, agro industry, horticultural crops, and so forth. So we think it's fairly broadly applicable, but obviously needs to be tailor made to the country context. And in this context, let me then just list three things that seem to me to be missing. One is a re-emphasis on getting the investment rates up in infrastructure, getting investments rates up in higher level skills and basic education. We have an opportunity, I guess next week, to put together a new set of social development goals that include those two items on the agenda, and significantly it was the African governments that got that on the table, I think. In addition to that, clearly one has to begin to think about export and push type policies, an integrated set of strategies and policies for the promotion of non-traditional exports that extend beyond just trade liberalization, has to go somewhat further beyond that. Integrated with this is the use of special economic zones, quite clearly a success in Asia, as Carol said, not much of a success in Africa. So one gets to think, why is that so? In part because of poor implementation, I think in part because of lack of attention by the traditional donor community, though recently beginning to rectify itself. And finally to me the most intriguing part of this, and I think the part that we have begun to feel is really new, and that's this field of firm capabilities. It's kind of odd to sort of say it's new because if you go to a management school, people in management schools have been talking about this for years, management matters, but I think we have a deeper appreciation from the research about the fact that working practices, material practices, tacit knowledge, are as important as technology transfers. And particularly in low income settings, perhaps more important than technology transfers. Those capabilities can be derived from exporting, they can be derived from management training, they can be derived from foreign investment, but as John was pointing out, what's really important is that they then are extended into other domestic producers through interactions between firms. What that means is, again, you have to do these three things together. An export push, a new attention to industrial policies and special economic zones, and policies to encourage foreign direct investment and management training. Let me just end with a puzzle. The technologies for achieving a number of these things, the institutional technologies, if you will, a good foreign investment promotion agency, a well-functioning special economic zone. An export push policy are pretty well known. And they're not unknown to African policy makers. But somehow they don't seem to work as well in Africa as they do in Asia or indeed in the Caribbean and in Latin America. So it left us with a bit of a question which is, why is that so? Is there a political economy reason that underlies this? Or is it quite simply that leadership really matters and perhaps the leadership of African countries haven't yet embraced this kind of a strategic approach to industrialization? So let me just leave you with that question as part of what is another appeal for we need to understand more than we certainly do today.