 We can't hear you yet, but we can see your screen. Can you see my screen? Yes, we can see your screen, and now we can hear you also. OK, can you please confirm whether you see my screen in slideshow mode? Not yet. Right now it just looks like the PowerPoint slides. Don't know why technology seemed not to be in my favor. So the only thing I can suggest, if you're seeing the PowerPoint screen, you might be able to click on the duplicate. That's what I did. Oh, now it works. This looks good. OK, perfect. It takes time, but yeah. So once again, thank you. Thank you for inviting me here. My presentation will give us the title, the only status about adaptation in Africa. And my talk draws on two set of work. We conducted a global review on adaptation research. And I want to give a bit of highlights showing what is the share of Africa. And then we also have another research on feasibility and effectiveness of adaptation research. So I combined those two pieces here. So I don't know how it's going to be structured, but please feel free to stop and ask questions when needed. Roughly my presentation will, as I said, the overview of adaptation research globally and what we have for Africa. And I can highlight some key knowledge gap. So if I may start with the overview of adaptation globally, we see that the Paris Agreement commits party to track climate adaptation progress. And we expect that the assessment of adaptation progress can facilitate the sharing of best practices so we learn from each other. It's also helpful to identify gaps and support prioritizations of adaptation finance and, of course, map evidence across regions and sectors. So then we can see where we still have gaps and what has happened in each region. Yeah, so the adaptations actually documented in the academic literature provide valuable information to track adaptation progress on the ground. So this is the process we follow with the GAMI database. So the GAMI, as I said, is standard for global adaptations methods. And it involves 126 researchers where we use matching learning methods to reveal 48,000 articles just to get a better picture of how adaptations research are distributed across geographical regions, what are the schools, and where are the gaps. So it's a kind of iterative process. It focuses mainly on empirical literature. So we don't consider theoretical papers on adaptation. That's not the issue. We want to have a kind of mapping of what adaptations approach is used where and what are the gaps. So we focus on empirical cases. We reflect on publications after era five. So it started considering the references from 2014. And the protocol drew on categorization and priorities outlined in the IPCC assessment, mainly the working group two. It includes human-assisted responses within natural systems. And it includes papers that were indexed. So we started reviewing the title abstract and keywords. And we only consider English written papers. So that might be a limit to this. In terms of some finding, I can highlight that academic studies report adaptations of responses across global regions. And then in terms of the global south, that's where we have the greatest numbers of adaptation papers. And the first series are from Asia, 35% of available references in Africa, 32%. We have a minority of publications focused on adaptation responses from Central and South America, 6%. And small Iceland states 2%. This is a kind of geographical distribution of the adaptation publications. In terms of content, sectoral distributions, here you can see clearly that food is food sectors. It's the main focus of the most coverage. And then we have poverty, livelihood, and sustainable things. It's the second one. And we have health. So this is the global perspectives. And then we can see how these sectors are distributed across the regions. Here I want to focus on Africa. And then you can see that we have in Africa, we have food and poverty as the main sectors of coverage. We have more or less the same pattern in Asia, where you see also food. And then here we understand food broadly, which includes agriculture, the nutrition, all the related aspects. And then we have also in Asia poverty. And health, of course to some extent, the health sector is the third one also in Africa. And then when you look at Europe, you don't have these kind of distributions. It's more balanced, not the same intensity, which shows or confirmed the evidence that developed countries mostly focus on other aspects, not really adaptation. So you can see mitigation maybe is a stress in developed countries. So we also look at the type of responses. And then we have four categories of responses. We have technological and infrastructures, institutional, nature, this, behavior, culture. So this is the global distribution. And when we look at Zoom in and then look at Africa, you can see again that you can see that behavior or cultural change is the first set of responses. Then we have the yellow, the nature base, of course, in different sectors, including forestry, agriculture. And we have the red, which is behavior, sorry, we have the green, which is a technological infrastructure. And the institutional is quite low where when you look at regions like Australia, Australia, Asia, you can see that institutional is at quite good positions. Again, it confirmed the evidence from literature, which says in Africa, the governance systems is relatively poor. So, yeah. And then we look at the hazards. And then you can see here the general, the global distribution of hazard across the regions. And then when we zoom in Africa, we see that in general climate change, we see that precipitation variables are flourishing. It's a major hazard. Again, more or less the same patterns, not the same kind of intensity with Asia. And you can see it's quite contrasting with other regions in Australia, Europe, or North America, or South America. I want to stress on the fact that this is not field work. It's literature based review. So it's really evidence that are articulated in the existing literature. And we're also interested in the GAMI work to look at actors responding to hazard who are involved in the responses. And you can see, globally, we have adaptation options that are more individuals at household level. And then we have government, local government, but also national governments, more or less in the same set of level of action. We have civil society as third. And then when we look at Africa, we can see that most adaptations responses are led by individual or are still at individual or household scale. We have local government and national government and to some extent, COO, which include NGEOs also leading some or driving some adaptation responses or promoting. And then it's slightly different when you look at the picture of other regions. Of course, we are more or less following the same pattern, which shows again that the global sub has more or less the same passions or same way of doing this. If you look at Asia and Africa, you can see again that most adaptation responses are individuals or at household level. Then we have local governments and national governments. When you look at Oceania or Europe and South America and North America, it's slightly different. We are also interested in the transformational change. You can see that the recurrent narrative today is that current adaptation path may not be enough to deal with climate change. And we need more transformational change. And when we look at how strong adaptations and options implemented across the globe are in stimulating this transformation, we can see that in Africa, you see where we have the, when it's a dark green, we have high. When we have light green, we have mediums. And then when we have, you can see the low. And if you look at the Africa boss, it's more or less low transformation, so which shows that the kind of responses we have here in Africa are not sufficient to stimulate a transformation compared to other regions where you see, for instance, North America. Or when you look at the South and Central America, you see that the contrast is there. And then we can have more or less the same pattern with Asia. So what we capture under this transformation, we have different contents. We have the depth, or scope, the speed, and the limits. That's what we frame, how we frame transformation. Now I'm going to zoom in on adaptation research in Africa. And then we can see that, I'm sorry, adaptations to climate change is one of the most urgent in development agenda for Africa. And choosing reliable or most feasible adaptations strategies require robust evidence mainly to inform policy makers to know what type of adaptation responses to adaptation path to follow. It's important for them to have convincing evidence. So we try to look at 24 adaptation options to assess the feasibility. The feasibility here was assessed through different dimensions, economic, environmental, institutional. And then we assess also the effectiveness. The effectiveness was the capacity of the action to reduce risk. Again, we use the existing literature. And for the selections of the 24 type of adaptation responses, we had stakeholder consultations asking different type of stakeholders what are the most appealing or the priority we can set for Africa in terms of adaptation responses. And here you can see a kind of mapping of adaptation responses, adaptation action reported in the literatures across regions of Africa. And we had different sectors, cities, water, ecosystem, health, poverty, and food. And if you see, I don't know how clear this is for you, but you can see that sustainable water management is the most cited options in the literature. And it's widely implemented. And we see that it's mainly used in East Africa, then followed by the resiliency in foster care. And the technologies, which is most referred again in East Africa. So this is a kind of mapping of adaptation options across Africa. Now we try to account the number of adaptation action recorded for each country's region and sectors. And you can see that food sectors for Africa is the dominant adaptations where we have the foster important adaptation actions followed by health, poverty, water, ecosystems, and cities. So this is this piece, this C-section shows how those options or sectoral options are distributed across the African regions. But yeah. And then this is the table showing how feasibility and effectiveness is clustered and operates in Africa. And I just want to highlight one example to show how we read this table. If you look at agroforestry, we see that agroforestry where you have this dark blue, agroforestry is effective in reducing climate risk. And in terms of feasibility, you can see that we have medium feasibility for economic sorry, you see for economic we have a medium for technological we have low for this option of agroforestry. And then we have also low for institutional, it's medium for social, cultural, and environmental. In terms of confidence, we can just this is a typical IPCC language. But yeah, what is the whole story behind this assessment? We are quite convinced that it's quite challenging for government to implement all adaptation options. Or sometimes where we see that this adaptation option work in one region, we assume that it can also work elsewhere. And without this assessment, you can just replicate without considering the context. And this kind of a way is showing the need to provide a strong robust evidence to policy mechanism so that they can be aware of what would be the effort of those actions, mainly in the national adaptation plan. So that's why we thought it could be part of this assessment. It is quite new, and it attracts a lot of attention in the Adaptation Future Conference that is coming in October. And I know that this will get a huge echo there. So the feasibility assessment helps to also assess the complexity in adaptation practices. And we clearly see that adaptations option might show low feasibility in a region, but it's still being deserved for community. Because the assessment, of course, I should also mention that this assessment was literature-based. And what we are trying to do now is how we move from the literature to the practice. We engage the community to also validate the literature-based assessment and to see how, because there are many things that may not be captured in the literature. And we clearly also see that context is a key consideration regarding the feasibility of options. It's important, as I said, it's not because one option to work in a region that it should work elsewhere. So in terms of gap in both knowledge and practice, concerning adaptation feasibility and effectiveness is still there in many, in many cases for Africa. And we think that the gap could be actually to different factors. The locally specific evidence are limited. We didn't, we only use the literature to assess this. We don't engage the community and get their perspectives. So this is what we are trying now to do. In complete temporal and spatial data, and data availability is something quite serious challenge for Africa. We only use literature available. We are not sure that we have a good coverage. So that can be a limitation. And a consistent monitoring and metric for measuring adaptation outcomes and effectiveness. I say that it's quite a recent this approach. It needs more energy to improve the methodology, but make sure that it has a good coverage. So ladies and gentlemen, that's what I wanted to share and bring the flavor of adaptation responses from Africa. We try to show the gap between global patterns and Africa's design. And what we see as the most feasible and effective options in Africa. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Edmond. Very interesting talk there. I wonder if there are any questions in the room to get us started. Yeah, I see that there's some in the chat here as well. So while I skim this, Edmond, I wonder if you could say a word. You said this very explicitly. But of course, your approach was looking at English language articles. So when you showed the map of Africa, unsurprisingly, places with large English populations showed up a little bit higher, like Kenya, Nigeria, Ghana. So I wonder if you see that as a follow-up study or if this remains kind of a blind spot in the IPCC approach, considering the original drafts of IPCC are written in English. Wait, we lost your audio. There you go. Sorry, yeah, I should be OK now. We are aware that just limiting to English literature can be restricted. And we offer just a method, and we expect that it can be used across different regions for more, how we say, more disaggregated assessment. So the language is a major barrier. And we also consider only published a weight. We didn't capture the great literature, or as I said, the community perspective. Now, as I mentioned, what we are trying to do is how we make these more community drivers, so led by community members. And of course, using available references. But try to cross check or validate the outcome with communities and the local decision makers. And again, this assessment was done at the scale of Africa. It didn't, the whole scale, to see how it happened, what will be the patterns at country's level. And even at the country, at a subnational level. And this can make a difference. And we expect that this will be taken off and be used across skills. And of course, across languages and communities. Thank you. There's a question in the room here, but I just want to read quickly the chat question from Vincent. He was asking if there are kind of more, or if you could share some more thoughts on the complexities of certain adaptations and if that affects the feasibility of those adaptations. And maybe while we're on that topic, I'll just add one more element there, which is that I noticed that many of the adaptation options were targeted at individuals and households. And whether that as a fundamental approach is more or less feasible, if you have any comments on that. Just to note, Vincent also mentions things like political will and finance. Yeah, so, Toto, for the reason why some adaptation measures have many complexity. Because contrast matter and adaptations is really depending on people's expectation and people's aspirations, sometimes people believe. One typical example is water management. Where the assessment clearly showed that the sustainable water management can be effective in reducing risk and we see that I want to highlight the case of some countries in Africa where during the 80s, small scale or large scale irrigation was promoted to support agriculture. But it didn't make any significant change because first the maintenance of those infrastructures beyond the control of communities, they don't have the capacity. It was run by the states for some years, but after that they left it to the community. And most of those irrigation infrastructures are not used because people, they don't have the capacity to manage them. So again, it's really about this context, about the needs, about the capacity of people. So that is clearly showing the complexity of adaptation. Elsewhere, large scale irrigation can be a solution because people are used to it. People have a kind of knowledge, they have expectations that this should not be copied, pasted elsewhere and taken for granted. It's needed to be contextualized. It needed to be, I would say embedded in the context. So that's what I can say here. And the political wheel, it's also very important. I used to tease my IPCC colleagues saying that, well, as a researcher, we are done when we offer evidence from the IPCC week. But I think it's not the end of this battle because we need to break this, a break the message in a way that it can be accessible for policy makers. It's need also to be packed or re-packed in the way that it needs, they need. Politics always is not always a research wheel. It's not the same kind of path. And we can see what happened in the approval process, where policy makers, they have the higher agenda, they have the interest, and sometimes they want things to be like they see. So yeah, those are all part of the complexity. We can present evidence showing that, wow, this is something policy makers need to know. And it's not packed in the way that it's accessible to them. They can also hate the goal or hate the aspiration or hate the interest. So this is a really a field of challenge arena. Yeah, I'm gonna note, we're gonna take one last question in the room and then we have to break. But I'll note that there's a question from Laura in the chat and earlier a question from Ramesh Singh that is addressed to Benjamin and myself. So please, even when we break in the room, if you could just take a minute and reply in the chat, that would be very wonderful. Last question in the room, please. And please say for Edmund, your name and institution. Okay, thank you so much, Edmund, for the very nice presentation. My name is Julie and I'm from the Philippines. My question is actually just to also touch on the literature that you mentioned earlier. Because I wonder on how the literature on the adaptations that are being done on the community level that are not being published or not being forwarded in the literature that are being assessed in the IPCC reports. I wonder if how these literature should be forwarded into the community so that it will be able to be integrated into the IPCC assessment. And aside from just being published, or is there a way like IPCC also distills or filters this literature? Thank you, Julie. Well, the IPCC has a kind of, I would say rules. IPCC only consider published work in the assessments. How IPCC evidence can be communicated to local, to community. This is where we need the media to support IPCC work type of communications in different style, different language, but also different type of forms. And how we can capture value community knowledge. This is another, I would say, set of challenge. How we can, we do use great literature but to a very limited extent. And because we want to provide, I mean the IPCC want to provide a robust evidence which assume that it goes through review process and the great literature is not always under that one. But now with this feasibility and assessment and effectiveness assessment, what we are trying to do at this stage, and we are writing a couple of proposals around that says how we move from literature of these to community led process. So we are going to use the same type of formats in terms of the six dimensions as I mentioned, institutional, economic, environmental. And in each community, we want to see how they frame institutions, how they frame technology, how they frame environmental. So we use those indicators to assess the adaptations responses. So then it's really a kind of local embeddedness assessment. And that shows the value because we know that adaptation is also very context specific. So we expect that doing that can help to have something more reliable, something that is solid at least for a specific community and can be used locally. Because if we offer something that is only literature things or it may not help at community level, it may not help at even country level because it's decontextualized. Thank you, Edmond. Sorry, Julie, that's what I can say. I hope you're happy with that. Thank you, Edmond. So I think we have to break in the room. I do just want to say the last thing for Julie also is that there is a process by which in the review process, first of all, you can read early drafts and suggest literature through the review process that should also be assessed. And then once the scoping meetings happen, there are usually chapter outlines with at least several bullets and you can find the names of the coordinating lead authors. So if you have a very important paper that you think needs to be assessed, you can contact those authors, but I'll also say as a former CLA, our job is not to make everybody happy as much as to find that unique piece of literature that helps. Do you want to add? Yes, there are also very good ways to publish a perspective paper in that case if you think one topic is super important because that would be taken into account in the assessment. All right, so let's break and we're gonna, I know we're a couple minutes late here, but I think Yaro is in the room, right? So we can, yeah. So we're gonna probably get started. Let's do like a 12 minute break. So we will be back here at 11.10 at the latest. What? All right, 11.15 with permission of the speaker. Thank you.