 Well, it's 3 o'clock in my time. So, good morning, good afternoon, and good evening to everyone who already joined us. Welcome to the webinar, Driving Agricultural Transition. My name is Gabriela Vider Kergerra. I'm from the Alliance Biodiversity Seattle, and it is my pleasure to be here today as your moderator. So, first thing first, I would like to start our meeting today, briefly introducing today's agenda. We will first start with an opening from the European Commission from GE4, followed by some brief introductory words as well from Marcella Quintero. We will then have a presentation from Ferguson-Clair on Scaling Agricology, followed by the two core parts, which are two panels. Starting with the first panel where the transitions project leads are going to present transitions, and then followed by a second panel where we will be joined by esteemed panelists, which will debate on what is needed to enable agricultural transitions in practice, but also how drivers, such as metrics, digit tools, incentives, and investments, be most effective to achieve large-scale change. We, after the two panels, we're going to have a question-and-answer space, so we encourage everyone who joined us to share their questions in the Q&A window. I'll share a bit more of the technical information shortly. And then to close today's webinar, we will have some closing remarks from Sara Salastano from EFAT. In terms of some technical aspects, as we always introduce in our webinars, this event will be recorded. We already started the recording. This would be used for public posting, but also to share with those who could not attend today's live. The chat function for today's webinar is disabled, as we would really like to encourage people to use the Q&A window. Sometimes the chat gets overcrowded and the questions get lost, so this is really to encourage and to get the most out of all questions and that we don't miss any of them. So we really want to ensure to capture all of these questions throughout today's webinar. Additionally, we will not be opening microphones today for the audience, so everyone has the same opportunity through the questions that you can post through the Q&A window. We therefore again encourage and welcome you to share your questions in the Q&A. We would appreciate or it would be best if you could indicate to whom you are sharing the question for. So we can then direct it to that person. Some of these questions are going to be answered through writing throughout the webinar. So also please keep in mind that you can thumb up the questions so they will go up in ranking. You can also comment on the questions as well in the Q&A window. So once again, please, we welcome you to share your questions and comment throughout the webinar as well through there. Questions can be posted in English and French and Spanish and English, sorry, and we will then direct them to our panelists. So now I would like to start with the webinar and I would like to introduce Guy Four, who's the senior policy officer in charge of research and innovation in the European Commission of the Directorate General International Partnership. He's one of Transitions European Commission is one of the Transitions donor. So I pass on the mic to you, Guy. Thank you very much. Hello everybody. First, I'm very happy to be there because it was a long process to get to the transition project and tracks. So it's a good news to start the project. First, I want to talk about the EU policy regarding the Green Deal, which is the main new policy for the European Union, and the farm to force strategy to address the food system transition transformation, aiming at reducing the use of external inputs to avoid contamination in intensive agriculture to limit contamination to limit waste of food and to increase circular economy and to increase nutrition issues. For us, for us, agroecology is part of the solution we can promote for achieving the farm to work strategy objectives. So it's quite important for us. We support at the International Partnership General Directorate. We support agroecology in different policy and different programs and in different projects. And as you are fully aware, it's not so easy to support such an approach in this context. When you have a lot of crisis and the last one with war in Ukraine, with a lot of push to try to limit some progress regarding this strategy. The second point we at the General Directorate impact, we really support research innovation, which is quite important to support agroecology to make sure agroecology can really achieve the expected outcomes and impact. So we need research innovation, but we want to strengthen research innovation based on some principles. The first one is to have research innovation able to address systemic issue and to really address complex problems with different entry points and not working on silo. The second principle is partnerships because innovation is a question of involving different type of stakeholders, farmers, farmers organization, NGO, private sector, public authority and for sure research. So the type of partnership which could take different forms, innovation platforms, living labs and so on is something very important as the transition project is aiming to strengthen too. And the last principle is based on how we can strengthen capacities of actors to innovate. Researchers and research organization but also other actors to be able to really address the challenges. So in this case, regarding our General Directorate General impact, we found research innovation projects through different mechanisms. The first one is the Desira initiative. We found around 80 projects in Latin America, Asia and Africa, many of them oriented to agroecology to support these food system transitions. We are working on new phase of Desira especially in Africa to address agroecological issue with research and other actors. And we also support research innovation through the CGIR. We are fully involved in the CGIR reform to strengthen more unified governance and to strengthen or to design and implement a more current scientific portfolio. And that transition is part of this effort to support this CGIR reform with renovated portfolio and ambitious objectives. Thank you. Thank you very much, Guy. I highly appreciate it. Appreciate it for you to be here. And I want to take advantage to welcome everyone who has just joined. We already started with the webinar. And now I would like to pass it on to Marcella Quintero who's the Associate Director of General Research Strategy and Innovation of the Alliance Biodiversity and SEAD. And she's also the lead of the agroecology initiative. Over to you, Marcella. Thank you, Gaby. And thank you everyone for joining this event. I'm very proud as well of doing the opening of this program as Guy said it has been a long journey to arrive to this point. The agroecological transition program is for building resilient and inclusive agricultural and food systems. And as noted by Guy, this program and by this program and others, there is a greater recognition that agroecological approaches are increasingly promoted as a means to promote sustainable development outcomes of food systems. So that means ensuring regenerative use of natural resources and ecosystem services while addressing the need for more socially equitable decision making. And I think this is, this is super important, especially in low and middle income countries. The agroecological specific program also knowledge that there are some limitations to do this transition at a faster speed. And then this program concentrates its efforts on supporting farmers in tackling some of these limitations. The second one is really in relation to metrics to assess agroecology and to assess the progress in that transition towards agroecology. The second one has to be with incentive and investment. And it is a greater recognition that agroecology needs more investment from different actors, not only public sector but also private sector. So the need for better tools that ensure that this transition is inclusive but also technically sound. So by saying this I will also, I would like to say that, and also make a recognition of the collective work that different organization has done to put this program together. Thank you for today, European Union for finding these, but also to EFAT who is the manager of this program. And then also thank you to C4ECRAF, the Alliance of Biiversity and Seattle as part of the Seattle Yard, the University of Bergman, who have put together this program and have made a big effort to make sure that is consistent with the challenges that we want to tackle. And also I would like to mention that this program is part of the agroecology TPP. I don't know if all of you are familiar with this agroecology TPP, but it is a transformative partnership platform on agroecology. It is also a collective effort of different actors to convene different efforts on agroecology and oriented to close the implementation and knowledge gap. I'm sure you are going to be listening also more about this agroecology TPP, but this is just to say that it's really quite a good momentum right now because many organizations are we are now convening and recognizing that there is a need for an agroecological transition so we are now aligning our efforts, towers, kind of contributing to a faster transition towards agroecology. So with this, Gaby, I would like then to officially open this event and thank you everyone that is connected today. Thank you very much Marcella and once I can thank you very much, Gaby. I think with this introductory remarks, we started a really good webinar stressing the key points of agroecology but that's done through this program. With this, I would like to pass on to the next point in our agenda and I would like to pass on the word to Fergus Sinclair, Chief Scientist of C4Ecraft who Marcella already shortly introduced and he's going to be speaking a bit about scaling agroecology. So over to you Fergus. Thank you. Can I get the first slide, Fabio. So I think that we're all, can you put it in presentation mode. Yeah, we're all clear that that agroecology is a systemic response to interacting global challenges of climate change. Food systems leading to hunger, biodiversity loss and widespread land and water degradation which is an existential issue in that it undermines food systems. Next slide. And using the 13 principles of agroecology from the high level panel of experts of the Committee on World Food Security. Next slide. There is clearly a number of areas of action that that are needed we need to create a level playing field, so that agroecological approaches are being judged in a comparative way with other alternatives. We need to be able to embrace complexity because trying to farm more in harmony with nature means that you need to use more species you need to work with nature rather than forcing systems with chemicals. And that creates greater variability and is more knowledge intensive. And we need to enable integration both horizontally across sectors and vertically across scales. Next slide please. And in order to do that. The transitions program has a theory of change that relates the three key elements that Marcella has already mentioned. And those are the development of holistic metrics. Now these are metrics. Not of how agroecological something is but metrics for agricultural systems that allow us to evaluate in a broad sense bringing in what have been externalities previously in terms of the impact of agriculture on the environment and on social equity and other key aspects that the really important outcomes and really important ways in which we can judge whether one alternative is better than another. Then we've got a critical requirement for digital tools that help us to embrace complexity and provide advice and to be inclusive. And that's a real challenge because a lot of the development of digital agriculture has been around centralization of power and of control, but in an agroecological context we want to use that to empower farmers. And then there's of course this critical issue of public and private investment and appropriate business models inclusive business models that allow agroecological transitions to work and for producers and other value chain actors to gain, capture sufficient value and particularly close to the producers to make it all viable. And also there is the need for us to be addressing things at this whole system level and to be taking the social as much and cultural, as well as all of the other aspects into account next slide please. The way in which these key elements of the project interact are really quite strong, as you can imagine. So digital tools obviously use holistic metrics and provide data and test those metrics. Business models again, both use metrics and we need metrics that encompass those business impacts and of course digital tools can very much help advancing investment decisions. Next slide please. Marcela has already mentioned this project, this program sits within the transformative partnership platform, which is very much a bottom up program it connects global research institutions to local action. So the local action happens in a range of engagement landscapes around the world, and they drive then the priorities for international research and the TPP is growing very quickly. So in the year 2020, it began as a result of the CFS report, the HLP report on on agroecology and a number of other events in 2019, and was officially launched in 2021. The next slide please was instrumental in developing the coalition, the agroecology coalition, which came out of the UN food systems summit, which next slide please, which is essentially came from the group of friends of and the CFS and the TPP, pushing to get agroecology into the pre summit and then the coalition came out. Next slide please. It's a coalition of the willing, and I think that's really important to comprises 40 countries, including the European Union Commission, the African Union and Echo us. And it's got countries in Africa, the Americas, Asia, and Europe. And the key thing is, is, is being a coalition of the willing leading to action, because quite often within UN processes, things to slow down by whoever is the slowest, the most reluctant. And that's tended to water things down and we saw that between the recommendations in the HLP report and the final CFS recommendation, policy recommendations. What's great about the coalition is it's people who want to take agroecology forward doing so, and others can then follow from those examples so this represents a fantastic response policy interface for the transitions program with a load of countries really looking for guidance that this program can give that they will take up and take forward and scale up what transitions puts forward. Thank you. Thank you, Fergus, and thank you for this great overview of the transitions program, but also on the TPP and agroecology coalition. I want to remind people that each a that you can post questions on the Q&A, please refer to the name to whom you want to refer it, especially now that we enter the first panel. That great intervention from Fergus, I would like not to pass it on to the first panel when we're going to have three separate presentations regarding the transitions project so we're going to go in a bit more deeper to the overview Fergus just gave. I would first like to introduce Christina Lamana. She's a climate change decision scientist from C4 eCraft, and she will be giving us more information on the metrics. Thank you Christine. Great. Thanks, Gabby and good morning, everyone. Could we have the slides please. Great. So it's my pleasure to present to you an overview of first of the three projects underneath the transitions program on holistic metrics for agroecology. And you might be thinking, well, why an entire project on metrics? Well, metrics are really a value statement. Metrics give us information on what we consider to be important and are the currency that enables decision making. Currently, our metrics of agriculture and food systems tend to be narrowly focused on agricultural productivity, things like yield or profitability. This approach fails to capture the important impacts of agriculture on environmental, social and livelihood dimensions that we know are critical to both development and sustainability. Next, by developing holistic metrics of agricultural systems that account for these multiple impacts on things like biodiversity, nutrition, empowerment, connectivity, economic opportunities. We can really create a level playing field for agroecological approaches that address all of these dimensions and enable transitions to agroecology. So in short, we need to measure what matters. Next, the way the metrics project is doing this is through three main objectives. First is to develop and test a novel set of performance metrics for agriculture and food systems that allow this holistic approach, but are actually still practical to use in the field. Second is to develop guidance and training on the use of these holistic performance metrics for different types of decision makers and metrics users from project managers to national or subnational governments, businesses and donors. And finally, our third objective is to position holistic metrics to be able to inform management planning policy and investment decisions. Those decisions are currently only being made with a more narrow focus on agricultural productivity. Next, the way we're doing this is through a research and development approach. What this means is we're partnering with ongoing agroecological projects in an action research approach. We're going to be working in the eight countries that you see at the bottom of your screen across Asia, Africa and Latin America. The reason to do this is so that we can work in a diversity of contexts. Different farming systems, so different different crop types, livestock types, climates and agroecologies. These countries are also in different types of agroecological transitions, some from low input systems and agricultural agroecological intensification and others are more reconfiguring existing systems. And finally to work at different scales. Interventions in agroecology can happen at the plot level or at landscape level and system level. So we need to have metrics that can address all of these. Next. This to quickly introduce you to two of the projects that we're working in one in Kenya is a dry land restoration project, which is focused on improving low input low productivity agricultural systems through soil water management, agroforestry and also gender transformative approaches. Next. And in India will be partnering with the Andhra Pradesh community managed natural farming program, which is more reconfiguring higher input farming systems through diversification, minimum tillage and organic agriculture. This project is really a social mobilization, as well as being strongly supported by the state government. Next, the metrics project intends to produce three main outputs. The first is this novel suite of metrics that enables the assessment of agroecology at different scales and different contexts. Second is a database of metrics so that diverse users can develop and their own monitoring systems and approaches. Utilizing the suite of metrics that are available currently as well as novel ones that are developed in the project. And finally guidelines on the use of these metrics for diverse users and measurement goals from impact assessment to project management to system performance. Next, and go ahead next again. Some initial insights from the work we've been doing is that there are a lot of metrics available. But many of them are again focused on quantitative indicators that we can easily measure so things like productivity and soil health, whereas dimensions we know are critical to agroecology, such as connectivity equity empowerment participation are much less represented in the metrics that are available. Next. So I hope that I have convinced you that if we actually start to measure what matters within agriculture and food systems, the benefits of agroecology become clear, and we can enable transitions to agroecology and more sustainable food systems. Thank you so much. Thank you very much, Christine. And with that great closure, it really resonates and as well it's exciting to hear about more action research approach and really defining metrics according to the context by taking into account different systems, but also skills. Well, kudos on that. Now I would like to pass it on to Leni Verlenberg, Food and Climate Specialist from the Alliance of Biodiversity and SEAT and the Gunt Institute. She will be introducing us a bit more on inclusive digital tools as part of the Transformer Transitions Program. Over to you, Leni. Thank you, Gabi. Lea have the slides please. Wonderful. Next slide. So while we live in an increasingly digital world, as Fergus said, small holders are being left behind, and digital resources and agriculture are for the most part not accessible and not relevant to small holders needs. Next slide please. So the inclusive digital tools project of agroecological transitions is focused on improving the inclusiveness of digital resources for small holders. By focusing on performance assessment and technical advisory tools that can help us scale up practices and testing specifically how small holders and scientists or extension agents can co-create farm practices for both agroecology and climate change. Next slide please. We're doing this through action research in Brazil and Vietnam, so we're going in deep and in two countries. And the idea that the main activity is to test this co-creation of innovations in the digital ecosystem. In Brazil, we're focused on the beef supply chain, very high emissions and many sustainability issues and in Vietnam on the rice supply chain, and the Alliance of Biodiversity and SEA together with their action partners are working in Brazil, while ERI is working with their action partners in Vietnam. And the action partners that we're working with are farm advisory organizations like Solida Rida in Brazil, or the, or Ricolto in Vietnam, as well as best practice platforms, tool developers, corporates, and local and national government. Next slide please. So I want to share with you three sets of findings, although this is our launch seminar we've actually started the project as early as January this year. And so we have a few results. And the first is a global review that we've done of digital tools with respect to agroecology and climate change, and to assess them according to 90 different indicators, especially as to how inclusive they are to what extent they include agroecology to what extent they include climate change and so on. So here are the results for the agroecology features. Across the 200 tools we found 44 that had any features related to agroecology as defined by these 12 indicators in the graph. And as you can see at the bottom of the graph, we have, as you would expect productivity income to be the indicator that is highest, but then interestingly co-creation and sharing of knowledge and efficiency and input reduction are the next two highest features that are in these 44 tools. But maybe more importantly, among the 44 tools, we didn't find large numbers of these principles so only about one third of the tools addressed more than four of the principles, right, so we don't have a lot of completeness of agroecology across the different tools. And about half of the tools included whole system design features such as integrated pest management or agroforestry. So we're doing okay on that score. About 25% had farmer driven content such as agro advisory videos recorded by farmers. So that seems, you know, somewhat reasonable but still on the low end. And then 43% so much better had two way communication techniques, allowing farmers to provide input into a tool, for example, or to a resource SMS voice calling or in app communication with some really interesting innovations for example, connecting the digital resource to a call center where farmers could ask for advice. Next slide please. The second set of results that I want to share is a review of principles that we did where we looked at 30 different documents different standards, different analyses different recommendations for farmer co-creation of practices. And we actually looked at inclusiveness generally. And what we found was that while there are many principles related to social inclusion and digital development, they're not very many around how farmers can be involved in practices in developing better practices. And so we tried to call from that lot larger list, five major principles that we thought were most relevant to farmer co-creation of practices, the first being engaged diverse farmers, and I should say they're two to four sub principles for all of these five principles but the first is, you know, can you engage with the maximum diversity of farmers relevant to your tool. How can you improve their access and afford it. How can you identify the tool to them. Third, how can you co create practices with farmers makes the tools acknowledge farmers context, allow farmers to co to co work on solutions and enable them to communicate both ways. So we use technology aptly. So, understanding the need for human intermediaries where possible or maybe not even using technology in some cases technology can also have downsides and finally managing data and tools responsibly. Next slide please. And the last set of results that I want to share. This is my final slide at the last one that I want to share is the regional digital ecosystems studies that we're doing in the two regions. Thank you. Thank you very much, Lini. I think there's some exciting questions coming in through the Q&A box on digital tools, but also some other really exciting questions on metrics as well. With this, I want to remind everyone to please go ahead and use the Q&A box to pose all your questions. Now I would like to introduce Jonathan Moksher. He's an agricultural economist decision and policy analysis in the decision and policy analysis research area of the Alliance of Biodiversity and Seattle. He will be now introducing us to incentives and investments over to you Jonathan. He is part of a larger team from the Alliance of Biodiversity Seattle and also International Waterman and Men's Institute. I'm presenting the project three, which is on private sector incentives and investment for climate change, resilience and environmental sustainability. And as we already know the food system is currently going through several crises. Climate change is one of the huge problems, environmental degradation, pollution. We also have post-COVID-19 era, which is affecting supply chains and increasing food prices across different parts of the world. We have conflicts, conflicts external and also internal, affecting prices of key inputs for producing food and also leading to increasing food prices. And all this sum up is what we see now in terms of the increasing number of people who are malnourished and also hunger in the world. All these changes as we see in terms of the crisis, which I call the three Cs plus hunger is affecting how we want to achieve the sustainable development goals. And if this is not checked, we are going to have major challenges. Agroecology represents a pride and shifts from the business as usual scenario that we have to transition to a more sustainable food system, which also helps to adapt to climate change and also ensure environmental sustainability. However, we also see that the private sector is currently aligning to sustainability principles and also to agroecology in a nutshell. But there is also growing concerns and some of these concerns is about the incentives and investment mechanisms of the private sector, the motivation and also transparency. So we have a double-edged sword now. As much as the private sector is engaging, we also see growing concerns. And sometimes this is labeled as just greenwashing, which creates the puzzle for us. We want to address this problem through four main objectives. Number one is to develop inclusive incentive structure for private sector and public sector stakeholders. Number two, leverage private and public sector investments to drive the transitions. Three, increase transparency and traceability in supply chains. And four, work with the local institutions and also build capacity and co-design solutions that are critical for the transitions to happen. We'll be working across three main value chains, landscapes across three different countries. So in Peru, we'll be looking into cocoa value chains or landscapes in Vietnam, rice landscapes, and then in Ethiopia with value chains. And this will be in partnership with key stakeholders within the countries. So far, in terms of unpacking the incentive mechanisms and structure, what we learned is that they are forming incentives and investment structures. Number one is the markets. And with the markets, we have price support, for example, playing a leading role and also market access. Credit access is minor when it comes to the market incentives. For the non-market incentives, we have mainly consumer acceptance and also providing of research funds. Revelation and finance incentives, we do have tax breaks and in some cases also direct payments and then voluntary standards, mainly on certification and sustainability. So looking at the analysis so far, we do have a lot of voluntary standards and also market ban less on non-market regulation and non-compliance. We see divergence between what's happening within the countries. And so for the private sector on the one hand, it's mainly focused on sustainability standards, voluntary standards, and also certification in terms of incentives and investment. But then on the community side, we see multi-actor innovation platforms, which is mainly focusing on cold design of activities or participatory guarantee systems which focuses on building of trusts, local networks and knowledge exchange. So we see a dichotomy between the incentive structures and the local structures that exist within the communities and what the private sector is offering. In order to scale agroecology, we need to find a way to match these two different communities. We also see that largely at the farm level for Peru in cocoa supply chains. If we look at the heat diagram from the top to the down, we see statements 25 and 15 which confirms that they do care about the environment. But then when we come to the lower part, the red side, we do see statements 12 and 16, which shows that this is a major challenge within the countries. So three things are key. First, we need to bridge the incentives and investment gap. We need to build local capacity. We need to understand and unpack the private and public sector engagement sector. And we aim to impact at least 300 households across the different countries and work with local partners. This is the fantastic team behind our projects. And finally, in order to be able to drive the transition, we need all parties to be on board. The private and public sector will be key and coalition is critical. Thank you. Thank you very much, Jonathan. And again, thank you to Christine Leni as well for presenting these three projects as part of the transitions program. It is great and exciting to hear all the different components. I think it brings a lot of aspects that are pertinent to now and necessary to address a lot of the challenges we're facing globally. With this, I would like to close the first panel. Again, please use the Q&A window, although I do see that people are quite active. Thank you for that. And with that, I would like to pass on to our second panel with our esteemed guests. I would like now to present them. First, we have Vijay Kumar Talam. He's advisor to government of Andhra Pradesh for agricultural incorporation. He's in charge of the implementation of Andhra Pradesh Community Managed Natural Farming Program in India. Welcome, Vijay. I would also like to introduce Pete Van Asten. He's the head of the Sustainable Production Systems Coffee from Olaf Food Ingredients, in short, coffee. And lastly, I would like to introduce Patrice Jemen. He's a research on innovation and agriculture of the innovation unit of Seattle. First of all, welcome to all of you. It's a pleasure to have you here today. And I would like to discuss some questions with you around what is needed to enable agricultural transitions in practice. But also how can the different drivers really be most effective to achieve large scale change? And hopefully also getting to what are some of the next steps that we need to continue agricultural transition. I would first like to start with Vijay. I would like to know a bit more what is an example of an agricultural transition, the natural farming program has made at scale and what was the main driver behind this change. Please keep your replants short so we can cover all of the questions of this panel. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Andhra Pradesh is a state with 53 million population, has a long coastline and also a large semi-arid area. The motivation for us to go into agroecology or natural farming was the farmers distress on account of high input prices, frequent crop failures. And we started this program six years ago. It was a large scale pilot in 700 villages. We enrolled 40,000 farmers. But over the six years, we've been able to expand the program to cover now more than 600,000 farmers and we reached out to 4000 villages. That means a footprint of 27% villages and 10% farmers of the state. But in the villages that we are having the program, we cover around 60% farmers in these villages. So there is a journey of the farmers in moving from chemical or conventional agriculture to completely natural farming, zero chemical inputs. And we see huge impacts because we would not get farmers to join voluntarily if the impacts were not there. And please keep in mind that we do not provide any financial incentive during the transition and not do we assure farmers that they'll get some premium after the transition. But in terms of drivers, I would say the government support, government's ownership of the program gives us this, you know, size and scale and ability to convene the different departments. Also the financial resources are provided by government. But most important is the natural farming knowledge or agroecology knowledge is very close to the farmers own traditional practices very close to their heart. So therefore they're able to accept this change. But scaling would not have happened, but for the immense social capital of the women rural women self help group women's collectives. And the extension system that we followed, you know, farmer to farmer extension system. And then research, we have collaboration with C for a graph with me sit at with many organizations. So I believe research and participatory research with farmers is critical to to take this forward. And the final driver I believe is the partnership with farmers and other agencies. But what I strongly believe is that the, it's a behavioral change issue. So a lot of hand holding is required to enable farmers to move from the conventional agriculture to natural farming. So financial incentives may not have much role to play. It is the kind of support for behavior change. That is, in my opinion, very critical. Thank you. Thank you very much, Vijay just a follow up question on that. You mentioned that getting the farmers involved this is something challenging. And you also mentioned that one of the drivers is distress as well. So how has the natural farming program really use social movements to shift the impact scale and bring together or create this partnerships with with the farmers. Actually, the, the scale that we have achieved rests on the social movement. We started a program almost 20 years ago, I was fortunate to lead that program 20 years ago was to organize all rural women into collectives. So today in Andhra Pradesh, 8.3 million women in rural areas are organized into collectives into federations, and they have a beautiful governance system, beautiful planning system monitoring system. So, once an idea gets into the group, they're able to take this far. And you know role of women in agriculture is so important in India. So therefore, the distress is also felt very much by the women. So they're able to discuss it in their groups and look at natural farming as a great solution. So within the group, you know, if the leader we actually focus on the leaders, self help group leaders. So once a leader changes, he's able to convince other women, not only the women but the whole household has to be convinced because it's a lot of, you know, within the family kind of decision making that needs to be nudged to make this change happen. So, because they were organized so well, this transition process is reduced significantly. And among these people we pick up champion, you know, women farmers and also male farmers to take this process forward. So the social movement offers us a platform. It's also an engine to drive the program. And so it both means an end because after all they are the ones who have to benefit from this, and they are driving the program. So it's a but for the investment by the government in building this kind of a social platform. This scale won't have happened, because after all I started the program is a go and we already reached 10% and our vision is in the next 10 years. So in 2021, we should have all 6 million farmer families, transforming to an actual farm. So this rest very strongly on the 20 years plus investment in the social capital. So there is no shortcut. It's not, there's no magic formula that these things, you know, will happen. Thank you very much, BJ. I think from my personal point, it's really inspiring to hear about this. I think this stresses the importance of looking at scale at the local scale and see what's working as well. And also empowering farmers and creating this key partnerships. I think that's also a key part of agriculture. I think I want to join this aspect, the more of a local scale within with the research extension is no so I would like to go over to you patrice and ask you what are some of examples of an agricultural transition extension is to have supported in West Africa at scale and what was the main driver behind this change. Okay, thank you, Gabi. I'll give the, I'll mention the example of farmer managed natural regeneration, which is a form of agroforestry, very common in many salient countries like Niger, Mali or even Burkina Faso. So, so as I said, it's a form of agroforestry, consisting of keeping trees, some selecting species of trees in the farm for soil fertility, but also to, to feed cattle or even member of household. So this practice has been wet, it's widespread now in West Africa, and extension has contributed a lot to make this happen. The extension contributing to raising awareness of farmers, but also to helping them to address some technical or organizational challenges that was that we're appearing from the, I imagine from the implementation of this technique. So helping farmers to know to identify the, the tree species they would like to keep in the farm, but also to, to identify the right spacing because when you are having trees in the farm you still have to grow crops. So you need to know what is the right spacing to avoid competition between crops and, and, and shrubs or trees. The, the other aspect that is also good to mention is that here the extension as a pluralistic, this product form, where you have public extension NGOs, they were very active, but you also have a farmer to farmer extension that plays a very important, very important role to, to the spread of this, of this practice. Thank you very much, Patrice. I think your last point in terms that there is different types of extension is in its key. And in terms of that, I want to hear a bit more on how have extension is this different types of extension is perhaps from different points of views in West Africa use metrics, digital tools or engage private or public sector incentives and investments to achieve impact scale. Okay. So, so far extensions I've been using a matrix mostly for money to monitor processes, like the number of demonstration plot established the number of farmer rich. And more recently to, to make sure if to make sure that they are keeping the targets in terms of the diversity of the, of the farmer they are reaching in many interventions and we have a threshold or a target in terms of number of women that should be rich. Generally about 30, 30 person or even 40% in some recent projects, but also in terms of youth, how many youth we are reaching. But in terms of outcomes or monitoring outcomes, I think there is still a lot to be done in this, in this aspect. And there's one recent work that if you did recently, they develop a indicator framework for extension is this will be very useful in this particular context because extensions means are missing right tools to do the money on the digital tools. This is an area where things are changing very fast. So far, it tools were used mostly to for destination of information, like to give information about information for, or even to, to interact with farmers that are remotely explained to them how to do organic manual on all this. But what we are seeing now that's very interesting is that it's the applications are being used for learning for peer leaning to exchange amongst different, different farmers who are engaged in agriculture, like the WhatsApp groups involving many farmers or even extension is discussing about what experimentation they are conducting their own farm or new practices that they are developing. Thank you very much, Patrice. I think with that answer you've already referred to some of the questions that are right now in the Q&A window, especially on the different tools that are being used at the moment. But I would like to actually pass on to Pete and hear a bit more on the private sector side. What have been some of the agricultural, what are some of the examples of an agricultural transition off he has made at scale in food, coffee systems and what have been the main drivers behind this change? Yeah, thanks Gaby. And first of all, you know, really honored, you know, here to be able to contribute, of course, but also learn, you know, from passionate and knowledgeable colleagues like Vijay here and Patrice, really inspiring. So I think, you know, of course, I mean, how do you define an ecological transition? I was just, you know, scratching my head, you know, when I want to give an example. But I think, you know, some of the things that we have definitely changed quite strongly over the last years across the company, you know, globally across our supply chains. Whether that's cocoa, you know, in West Africa or coffee in Vietnam, you know, it wouldn't really matter. We really try to move away, you know, from blanket recommendations, for example, and also from standard demonstration plots. So I think Fergus, I know already 10 years ago, I think I heard him talking about options by context. And that's exactly what we are doing right. So we first want to understand the environment. Let's say, for example, I talk about coffee. If I want to basically, you know, have an agricultural transition in Brazil over coffee, then it's really, you know, about reducing the pesticide and fertiliser use, you know, the overuse in very intensively managed coffee systems, and try to think, you know, how to build in more biodiversity within the field, you know, enable to reduce pesticides, you know, improve nutrient recycling that's covered crops, you know, it's working with natural predators. And that would be, for example, the agroecological transition that we would try to instigate right in Brazil coffee. If I would go to East Congo on the slopes, you know, of, of the mountains near Kauzibiega National Park, you know, where we have the gorillas, then we've got a lot of erosion right and we have farmers that don't have money even for fertilizer. So it's really, you know, about erosion control, you know, gas burns, but that makes me think about, you know, small livestock that you can use the gas burns about nutrient recycling, et cetera. So, so what is an agroecological transition in Brazil coffee farmer is something very different from what that transition means right maybe in Congo. So that's the first thing is environment. And second thing that I think is you know, understanding of course the farmer and already the colleagues have talked about it. Also take much more of a stepwise approach. You know what we often have been doing in the past and I heard the word today as well demo plots, it's good but in the demo plots often we try to bring all the good technologies together right and get the highest yield. And then everybody comes and claps you know for the demo plot, but farmers if they would use these fertilizers for example or this high level of input, and they wouldn't have managed our canopies or rejuvenated their canopies or the plant density is right. So, in fact, in many cases, you know, you have to do what's the next level that step right for your economy intervention. And so really see that differently for different farmers for some farmers they might go for intensive production for some farmers it's really just about putting or rejuvenation right. What drives that within our company cost. First of all right, we do a lot of outreach to farmers which cost a lot of money. And we're a private sector company right so we need to have the volume we need to have the sustainability trades of that coffee or cocoa that we buy. And so you know we need to be as cost effective so that. But also customer demand right so now the sustainability trades of the product that we sell you know these attributes become increasingly important for our customers. So of course if we do a blanket approaches and we are not very efficient, then definitely you know that will give us you know, footprints for example that would not be attractive to our customers so I think. Yeah, these are the drivers. Thank you very much Pete I think you summarized in a very short answer what a transdisciplinary process is. And I think your question and how to define an, an agricultural transition pathway is a challenge or a question I think we most of us have. You said it right that we have to understand the environment in the context and yet again we go back to the scale and importance of the context to really define the next steps. But, again, also on the partnerships that DJ and the trees also stress not the importance of creating those partnerships. I think with that I want to ask you know from from from off from the perspective of offy how have you use metrics digital tools or gauge private or public sector incentives and investments to achieve some of this agriculture course sustainable agricultural impact that scale that you're mentioning. Now I mean we we capture quite a lot of data so first of all we have our own internal you know system to try to monitor farms. So we would revisit them every year you know then of course ask lots of questions. So that's called office all on farm information system. But then you know that's that's of course quite costly because you have to send the technicians do surveys you know observe in the field what practices have been adopted why not. You know with which farmer technologies have done that and why why others have done well and not. But then also there is the data which actually we increasingly want to rely on which is that is being collected by farmers right. So we have all of direct which is also you know an opportunity for direct procurement from farmers and so farmers also when they download these apps, they get information right around you know, so these two let's say data sources what comes from the farmer directly and what we capture goes into our sustainability platform which is called at source. There we have a digital footprint calculator around water around you know carbon, and with that of course we actually done you know, calculate the carbon footprints also of these of these products right. And that really you know is driving at the moment you know the investment there is a lot of CEOs you know of our, our customers right the companies that we sell to big chocolate coffee processes you know that you consume the products from they all have come out right with with quite massive statements around what they want to achieve in terms of carbon, in terms of region act for example as well. Because that means that we need to have those metrics. And using that of course, when we, when we get these metrics, it's also to try to increase of course that what I think Jonathan was mentioning the transparency and the traceability is becoming very important. And of course the confidence and in this data, and then subsequently right they can see okay, what part of their supply chain has what kind of footprint and what would be the best entry points to try to improve you know the attributes of the product that they want to buy from us right So, matrix and the transparency of those metrics and the traceability becomes very important in the way now how we engage with our customers and propose you know our products. Thank you very much Pete it's really interesting to hear more about in detail on what tools are that you use. And I think now I mean I would love to discuss more on some of this topics specifically but due to time limit I would like to go ahead and have some closing remarks from each of you. To understand what you think are the next steps needed to continue the agricultural transition so I'll start with you, Vijay, please keep it one minute. And please let us know what you think on this in terms of the perspective of natural forming program. For me the priority is to reach all the 6 million farmer households. So we are at 600,000. So we are at 10%. So how do I reach all farmers and how do we enable them to make this transition to a chemical free agriculture or horticulture. At the same time, where in the villages where we are already present, how do we ensure these villages become bio villages, so that all the benefits of agro ecology, and they then become the drivers for the next set of villages. So I have a long term priority but also have a immediate priority. The third priority for me is to see that this translates to greater consumption of natural farming foods by the farmers and by the landless farm workers. So we are looking again at the women's groups, the collectives, farmers organizations to drive this consumption so that requires some processing at the village level, local markets. So it's not just for sale. It's for local consumption. So we want to bring out in this context, the link between good food and health, health of the health and nutrition integrity of the farmers and their households. I have many more but then I think I'll stop here. Thank you Vijay. Over to you Patrice. Yeah, for me I see three things that are very complementary. The first one is the strategic orientation and objective. I think a session should now focus more on sustainability that on productivity. The most important is not to raise yields or income, but really to achieve sustainability, which means that having a more systemic approach and working also on achieving social and environmental outcomes for farmers. So for me this is the first thing moving from productivity to sustainability. The second thing to do is to make sure that extension system and staff are capacitated. The third thing is they have the understanding of what agroecology is. We saw in the presentations the 13 principles, but what does this 13 principle means in practical for an extension staff. What is connectivity? We need to give them the capacity and the tools and the approaches to really deal with the so. The tools and tools and methods and tools are very key. And lastly, it is targeting. If you really want to achieve agroecology to put it at scale, it means we need to involve more women and youth. Not only so far we have been just considering them in terms of numbers, in terms of their 30% or 40%, but we need to really consider their specific needs. We don't consider the specific needs of women and youth. It will be very difficult to put agroecology at scale. Thank you. Thank you very much, Patrice. And again, Vijay, I think great points on that also on how to make these principles more applicable to the context. Again, the name of context now, but now I would like to hear from you, Pete, to already close the second panel. Thanks, Gaby. So I think, you know, on next step from the private sector perspective, you know, I think we need to keep it super simple when you actually listen to this presentations, right, and people are like, wow, so complex. That is the social dimension, of course, you know, there is, and they're all very valid points, right, but if you want to engage with the private sector, you have to keep it super simple sometimes, you know, so I think it's important that we make very good, you know, examples of what it means and there are sometimes of course we can dive into that complexity. I think when I was hearing Christine, you know, about metrics and novel metrics, I thought, oh, it's good, you know, on the other hand, not too many databases, not too many novel metrics, right, how can we use existing metrics and methods to capture these metrics, right, because the moment that you say to everybody, go and collect more data than you know just because it kills the process sometimes from the private sector side right so I think that last point and actually as well for data collection right or using the private sector. I think it's important to try to create some alignment or maybe to use sometimes existing waves or this words you know now here we talk about agriculture I know you've all heard about a lot about regenerative agriculture and some people have said yeah but that doesn't have the social dimension, others, you know, like Unilever even have a lot of livelihoods and social dimensions in region ag rights so I'm sitting here as private sector, and I'm hearing region ag region ag regenerative agriculture. And now I'm sitting with a group largely know composed of scientists and people that are more in the public side, and they talk about ecological transition, and I'm saying like as a private sector. Why don't you basically ride that wave right use it and come VJ I really love your examples right show also what is the link between you know the social capital and the improvement, the quality of the food as well right as you make these transitions, so that the consumers in the end you know, actually sees the benefits or I think that's the farm to for communication right so I feel that there are a lot of good elements that you have. You basically wants to use the private sector money and energy and drivers, you probably have to somehow see how to filter some of the complexity and and and ride the wave you know of of a regenerative agriculture of carbon footprints you know and carbon footprint reductions, because I think that's where you probably be able to leverage more private sector capital and harness more of those partnerships so yeah that's my reflection. Thank you very much. I think, and again, thank you to Patrice and VJ I think there have been a lot of key points mentioned here again. I would love to have a lot more time to discuss each of this points, but unfortunately we have to move over to our Q&A questions. So once again, thank you very much. It's enriching here the different perspectives. Now, we would like to open the space for the Q&A questions. I just want to give a small remark. We know there's many questions going on Q&A which is exciting to see the involvement and and the discussions going on. But given the time limitation we will not be able to address all of the questions today. But for those that we will not be able to address today, the team will go over them and answer them in writing after the event so you will receive an email notification with this. Now to the Q&A, I would like to first start to reverting back to panel one. So I think there was a big question for all of the topics and I think it also pertaining to panel two but I would like to revert this to Leni that you mentioned the co-creation process of knowledge. So how do you define co-creation of knowledge? How can a co-creation be introduced as part of metrics prioritization but also in the identification of digital tools needed and the development of themselves? Yeah, thank you very much. We have two ways of thinking about co-creation. The first is we define first the mini ecosystem of the advisor and the farmer and the science or research community. And then we look at the flows of information in that mini digital ecosystem in terms of to what extent is the farmer's context being recognized to what extent are farmers adapting information that they find in these systems. And then the last is to what extent it's being validated by both the scientist and the farmer. And then we're looking at also the relevance. So first is to what extent this information is flowing. And then the second is the relevance of the practices to farmers' contexts. We have a series of indicators also that we used for the assessment of the digital tools and we're publishing that database by the way next week. And so you can see the indicators that we used when we publish it and we'll make sure that's sent to all participants. Thank you. Thank you very much, Leni. And I think a follow up question would be that you mentioned that you already did a study. So the audience was wondering what kinds of tools that you use in the group you presented. It would be great to see the exploration of how to include the digital tools here. Right. So, I said we looked at 200 different tools. Those were all publicly available tools on the internet and we looked at what was relevant to technical assistance and performance assessment specifically and then from that the 44 tools that were practical. Some examples were one was the Melissa Chatbot that provides agroclimatic forecasts for farms. Another is digital greens community videos where farmers are videoing best practices and then sharing that digitally. And the third is Cubic A, which provides a hotline in local languages for farmers to get technical assistance. Thank you very much, Leni. And I would like to now refer to Christine. There was a question on what are some ways that we can make sure that farmers see benefits from the expansion of metrics. Yeah, great question, Gabby, and to the audience for asking that one. I think farmers metrics, the ways that farmers evaluate and assess the viability of different practices is one of the key elements we actually want to bring into the metrics project to make sure that how a farmer would assess success of a country is actually captured and fed back to decision makers, whether they're individual land managers, or whether it's say government or project managers at other levels, so that the metrics that really matter to farmers are also the ones that are being captured in different data collection efforts and as key performance indicators of food systems. Thank you very much, Christine. And I think this kind of connects to another question, which your closing statement of your presentation which is the importance of measuring what matters in agricultural system is one side of the issue. Are you working with conventional systems to make some measurements to evidence their negative impacts and have comparison. And we are so within the within all of the projects that we'll be working in one of the key things we need to be able to do is is assess the impact of different agroecological approaches or different farming systems. And so we'll be working both with, I would say, I grew more agroecological and less agroecological farms within all of those systems. We don't always have comparisons of conventional and agroecological, especially when, say in African farming systems which I'm more familiar with, you often have a spectrum of farming systems going on at any one time. And it's not so much that one is agroecological and one is not. It's that there are different types and extensive agroecological practices happening at in different farming systems. So we're working with metrics to both be able to assess. Yes, sort of more conventional and more agroecological farms, but also the spectrum of actual farming diversity that we see in in many of the places where we work. Thank you very much, Christine. And we were talking beforehand about digital tools and I wanted to go over to Patrice to go more into the context. Many of the speakers today have talked about the importance of digital tools for scaling up agroecology. You mentioned it from the perspective of the extensionists. So the question is how successful are we so far making use of available digital resources, especially the former to former agroecological agroecology videos. Yeah, I think this is an area where that is progressing very fast. We don't yet have enough data enough an assessment on how far how efficient is it or how sustainable that could be, but we consider it's very promising. From what we are doing within the framework of the project called ACOTAP, which is strengthening extension and advisory services for to facilitate agroecology transition. I think that farmers are using videos to share their experiences to share what they are doing. We are also supporting them to, to exchange more whole platforms like WhatsApp and all this, but we don't yet have enough data to know how efficient this is. You see that this is an area. This is what we are doing for the videos or for the WhatsApp groups is really thinning a gap because you know farmers then learn more by what they see that what they heard. So when they see what the other farmers is doing for a video, they can learn more and they can also exchange or maybe even produce their own video to send this is how I'm doing in my own farm. So we are doing that way, but in my own context this is the way I'm doing so we are trying to promote that so it is still not presently ongoing in Benin where we are monitoring that and maybe by the end of next year we should have some good data to share. But for the time being we don't have enough data to find a conclusion on that. Thank you very much Patrice and now I want to jump to another topic and I think this is a very interesting one and I might revert it to UVJ because you mentioned behavioral change as part of the nature farming program. So how do you measure behavior change when it comes to attitude change towards agricultural farming. What have you seen in terms of from the perspective of the natural farming program. This is the most important aspect because for 50, 60 years farmers have been told that if you don't use chemicals you can't raise the crops. Whereas in the natural farming paradigm we are advocating that you don't need to use any chemicals whatsoever. So that journey and that's the reason why I mentioned the role of a champion farmer, a farmer who has already made the journey. So this farmer we support them with digital tools. So we are not very sure digital tools on their own will do the work but a champion farmer plus digital tools really accelerates the behavior change. And so we have a several levels of monitoring first the farmers groups themselves monitor the changes in their own behavior. And that's one of the you know performance measurements for the extension agent as to how many farmers in her group or his group have made the transition. How many have given up completely given up chemicals how many have given up partially and what have they learned from this and our idea is that the transition process should be without any losses to the farmers. So we find that the cost reduction is very significant. And once their practices improve in a season or two they also get higher yields. So that's a very good signal for the transition that a their costs are coming down. B their yields are going up they will use less water we are finding about 50% reduction in water usage. The soil has improved biodiversity has improved. I think there are many metrics which farmers themselves use to drive the transition it's not just what we are capturing. It is, you know, the decision making of individual farmers, they have their own methodology for taking these decisions, and we should respect that. As long as we are, you know, we see that the movement is in the positive direction. It is through a lot of discussions. In fact, very difficult, you know, the husband may want to practice conventional agriculture the wife wants to do natural farming. So, there is a first of all, a discussion within the household, which is again facilitated by the champion farmer. They will change, you know, because it's all in the mind, and also conditioned by the family by the neighbors. So it's very difficult to break out of this 5060 years of indoctrination. And you know, the media is full of conventional advertisements for conventional agriculture, the agriculture scientists, the agriculture department. So they're all advocating the same they all saying the more. If you ask any of the agriculture scientists what kind of food they would like to eat, they would prefer to eat the food grown by a natural farmer. So, there's a lot of contradictions in society which is actually having this kind of negative impact on the transformation. So behavior change is not just at the farmer level, behavior change at the researchers levels, agriculture research, agriculture, you know, government functionaries, universities. So there's a change required at every level. And in my opinion it's an iterative process, you know, when farmers change and they're able to influence other farmers that also influences the bigger system. So my own approach is an iterative approach. Thank you, Vijay. I think that's a very good answer and a very detailed in terms of that and I think it's great to hear it from from already a program that is in place and it's working on ground. And I think in terms of behavioral change, there is a topic in terms of metric adoption. And I think there's a question from a dear colleague of mine, which asks what do you call an agricultural adoption use at the level of a given farm. And is it 100% use on a farmer realistic or relevant target considering diversity of farmers objectives. It would be great to hear from both UV in terms of the more on the ground perspective and perhaps Christine, you can add on that afterwards. We have a graduation process, Gabriela. So we, our first point of graduation is that the entire farm is chemical free. That's a very important landmark. Then, you know, whether trees crop biodiversity is being added. So whether the land equivalent ratios are going up, that means is the farmer able to get more or cropping intensity is going up. So it's not, you know, zero to one, not binary. And then different farmers after a certain stage also have multiple pathways. There are farmers who go into having trees, other farmers get into livestock others who get into dairy. So it's entirely up to them. But for us, the most important indicator is whether farmers have got rid of chemicals. For us that is the, the, what shall we say, the basic acceptable level of graduation. Beyond that of course it is a bonus. Over to you. Thank you, Vijay patrice perhaps you want to add in, in terms of your experience. Okay, the question is about the coexistence of natural farming and conventional farming. Adoption of the ecological metrics. Do you see it in terms of the extensions point to be. I think they are, they are two or three levels of about the matrix they are the first level is with farmers. How do we conduct a joint process where farmer recognize itself and use the matrix to make sure that we are in the right track that we are really doing things that are that are useful for the for the first month for the farmers. The first level, the second level is between the extension is and the manager of the extension organization, because you cannot access an extension with who is doing, who is promoting our ecology with the same criteria, you will use to assess an extension for the same conventional farming. So you need to adopt the matrix about to follow or to support the work the extension guys is doing. And then lastly, it's about the policy decision makers during several workshops workshops you organize here. You always ask, yes, you, you mentioned that agriculture is is good but why should we invest in our ecology. Why should we invest, is it not something from is it not is not a term that top down approach. Is it not something coming from the north and pushing us to do it. What, what are the reasons we should promote it here. So we think, I think we really need to come up with some strong. We need to come up with some strong educators to demonstrate to the decision makers that yes, is, is, is worth to support agriculture and this can help to contribute to the livelihood sustainability of farmers. So, so far, they are not yet a lot of me fix that can help us to address that question, but we are working to develop some in the framework of the project we are implementing now. I just wanted to jump in saying that resiliency is turning out to be a very good motivator. We have had the very heavy rainfall, and then we find that our farmers fields are intact and neighboring farmers fields are completely damaged. Or the farmers national farming is able to withstand droughts. So the shocks, the ability to withstand shocks we are seeing as a very big motivation. And from the women's point of view the fact that the food is more healthy nutritious. So there are multiple drivers of this and multiple levels of metrics. So if I can one last point just two seconds. I will say that in many places in West Africa. There are a lot of farming practices that are almost already agricultural, like land plowing or not using plow. There are many practices that are very close to agriculture. Now, the, the, the, the, what we need to do is to convince the actors or farmers, but also the show record that these practices are valid that they are virtuous because some are seeing some super policy some others are seeing these practices are something that is just for for people who don't have enough means to, to, to procure inputs or fertiliser or treatment. We need to visit. There's a need of change of mindset, because West Africa agriculture is basically very close to our ecology. Now is to convince people that there are a lot of benefits is constantly that way. And to see how to improve how to improve it because so far, even if it's this close to our ecology is not yet able to fit the people to fit the demands in terms of food in terms of environment. So there is a need to some innovations to improve it to improve the performance. That's what I wanted to add. Thank you very much Patrice. I think Patrice and Vijay you've mentioned a lot of key points. So, we're going to move to another question over to Pete. There is a question for you specifically on what kinds of opportunities are there to collaborate on the use of that source. I know that it's a tool available for purchase but do you have opportunities to work on research partnership work for our ecology or do you have opportunities with NGO or local national governments. Yeah, no definitely and we have that already you know in some landscapes for example in some areas we work together with with public you know institutions and geos or researchers right in which we case we can also share the data but of course, when it comes to we don't we don't necessarily want all your competitors to immediately access that information also right but that hasn't stopped is actually from collaborating with with with with other partners, but they should just reach out to us and then say hey, in this context I'm hearing that you are working with these kind of farmers. This would be my interest. Would there be a way right to collaborate together and then definitely we would find an opportunity right to if we find a common interest and a common objective. It would absolutely be possible to to share data. We'd have to sign and the things we are absolutely not there to only know keep it for ourselves. I know this statement was earlier there are digital tools are there to basically feed the big corporates maybe you know bring it central but not bring it to the farmer. We definitely want to have it a two way system right but obviously, as a private sector you know you have to, you, you have to be fair you know or think carefully about what you can share and when you can share but we definitely open to that. Thank you very much Pete and unfortunately I have to close the Q&A space because we've run a bit over time. But I want to thank everyone on the questions there are some still questions left to answer very important ones and very interesting ones so we're going to revert on this answers via email. And I want to thank also all participants who share their questions in the Q&A window were very interesting and I think engaging in terms of the discussion. And once again, thanking esteemed panelists from panel tool. Thank you very much for your participation and your points of view. It was very interesting to hear from each one of you and also thinking panel one for giving a more deeper overview of the transitions program. Now I want to revert to closing remarks to Sarah Savastano, the Director of Research and Impact Assessment Division from EFAT. Over to you Sarah. Thank you very much Gabriela. Thank you to all the participants. I connected a little bit before 3pm I'm in Brussels today. It's 3pm it's 9.30 a thing from the official time of the meeting. There were more than 170 maybe even 190 participants which was really exceptional success so congratulations to the organizer. And I was very, very much pleased to hear the end of the presentation before and also the Q&A and understand how important is the concept of behavioral change into innovation technology and agricultural transition and why it is important and the question that was made before to Vigil and Vigil like very much your answer. After we've been preaching for so long to use chemical or the right combination of chemical fertilizer and now we are telling them to change behavior and so this will create confusion in the message. So this is true. At the same time I want to say a few words maybe those are things that everybody think but think more seriously and maybe we can understand how to do change differently. Behavioral change is something relevant not only in agricultural transition but also in nutrition problems and also on gender issue because to change something it really requires time and it is not because we have all decided now that we are investing in an agricultural transition that this will happen because it requires the combination of effort between demand and supply, the producer but also the techniques that are available and it's very difficult. And as well as in nutrition to ensure food security and have nutritional change I mean you really need to change behavior to have improvement in nutrition and making sure that you're going to reach food security. Not only you need behavioral change within the family but this change that happens within the family and the dynamics between you know men and women have to be also accepted by the society so this has to take place with a change in social and social norm. And therefore it's extremely challenging and I want to make the last comparison and then I'm going to move to the official closing remark. Alfie diet and on Alfie diet. How long is it taking to people also in developing countries to switch from junk food to Alfie food which is also what is you know the results of the of the selfie, getting rid of junk food that allow in the second half of the 19th century to also give job to women because it was because women didn't have to spend their time cooking and they were using a process food that you know development took place and now we're saying back to people you have to cook and spend your time cooking at home which is by the way something that in Italy most of the family happens but it happened it is happening less and less. And so you know there, there are many things but now I hope that this technical transition will stimulate more and more conversation around this area, especially in agriculture sector, because when there is an innovation innovation at least bring into agriculture sector. We have to move and follow innovation and to use research to make sure that innovative innovative technologies in agriculture can be adopted and then scale out. So thank you to all the participants for for for the time that you spent in this. In this meeting in the era of never ending meeting and I really would like in my closing remark to stress the importance of this program for if. In the last few years has if it has developed an agricultural strategy and became a strategic partner of the European Commission for the implementation of the program with the CGR and other partners. Transitions program provides if I have with an opportunity to harness research and technology to contribute to the agroecology agenda in line with the mandate of the European Commission. The transition to agroecology is a process that requires time but the innovation deployed by the CGR, such as digital tool or listed matrices and public private partnership new approaches have a great potential to accelerate this transformation and to create value for farmers national research centers university development practitioner policy makers consumer organization and the private sector. If I wish us to establish collaboration between transition program and if a project in target countries in Asia, Africa, Latin America to promote knowledge exchange and technology update across programs from transitions if that seeks to derive practical knowledge and how to integrate agroecological metrics and methods in the trust ability and transparency block chain based food supply chain tools. Testing and integrating metrics into the transparency and trust ability tools to allow user to visualize suppliers in a map interface show stakeholders action in relevant networks and value chain. Promoting transparency and trust ability for the adoption certification and labeling environmental impact tracking food product trust ability, adapting sustainability practices to local condition identifying a set of metrics to be included in blockchain based technology, evaluating the evidence for the benefit of improved incentives and inclusive use of digital tools for farmers to support innovation, public policy goals, investment and the scalability of benefit. Transitions feature a program that capitalized on spill over the fact combining solutions to all such challenges, such as agriculture productivity, nutrition and climate smart solutions with digital innovation and new approaches in private sector engagement to inform agroecology policymaking. The inter linkage and joint activities between projects make the program more valuable than the sum of its part, thanks to the synergies and pooled utilization of the knowledge and evidence produced by the single projects. Thanks to the policy oriented nature of the program and the close linkages with the transformative partnership platform. AFAD wishes to receive food transition based wonder pin advocacy and inform policy makers and donors about the environmental and social benefit of agricultural approaches. To conclude, I would like to thank the CGIR for arranging such a stimulating webinar and hope they will be showcasing their work to increase awareness on the challenges and successes of agroecological transition. Thank you again, Sarah. Thank you very much for that great closing. I want to thank you for for being here today and Sarah Salastano director of the research and impact assessment division from EFAD, EFAD as the managing donor of the transitions program. With this, I want to close today's webinar. I think it was interesting. I hope it was interesting for everyone. As Sarah mentioned, we had over 150 participants and we had over 100 participants throughout the whole webinar. I think the discussions and the Q&A were super engaging and interesting and I think I agree a lot with Sarah on agricultural transitions being an opportunity to push a lot of the conversations. We've been having around agriculture. So thank you everyone. Thank you for everyone who participated from panel one, but also from panel two. And with this, I wish everyone a good rest of the morning, afternoon, or evening depending on your time zone.