 So, my name is Paul Curry. I am a senior professional officer at ICLEE. We are a membership organization that helps local governments think about sustainability and implement sustainability projects. But this presentation and these themes will come out of my other hat, which is a PhD student at Stenbosch University with the Urban Modelling and Metabolism Assessment Research Team, UMAMA, cities as mothers, nurturers, resources, women as the people who make many decisions about resources in the household. So, it's quite rare to be at an event where I don't have to give my definition of urban metabolism. But my study has taken me into looking at what different types of urban metabolisms you see in cities. But I think it's good just to come back to a foundational question. Why are we analyzing metabolisms? And for us it's to identify high level, so the most impactful. I'm so happy with that. Can you leave it where it was? I want my title there. That's perfect. Thank you. High level leverage points to shape sustainable resource consumption. And our scope is very much focused on African cities. And when you talk about sustainable in an African context, you're speaking about equity first, about providing resources. So what does that mean when most of the dominant urban metabolism narrative is about resource efficiency? If you're providing resources to people, you are increasing the metabolism. So how do you do that in a resource efficient manner? I'd also like to provide a framing. I think the lesson from today is that we're very eager as South Africans to dive very quickly into the social political. And I think for our next workshop maybe that is something to dive straight into. We've touched a lot on industrial ecology. There are three ecologies that make up urban metabolism. Industrial ecology, what of cities, material flows, stocks, energy flows. We've noted political ecology. This is how society, technology and nature make each other. The relationship I have with my water tap determines my expectations to get water from that tap. My use of that tap shapes what the infrastructure needs to do to ensure that delivery. And so we make ourselves and lock into relationships with infrastructure systems. This is also where we must think about who is responsible for shaping urban metabolisms. So this is where our question of multi-level governance comes in, vertical and horizontal integration of governmental systems. And then finding something which hasn't, which has its own talk about urban metabolism that hasn't really been embedded in our larger point is urban ecology. And so this is understanding cities as complex socio-ecological systems. So the metaphor that I prefer as a metabolism is the ecosystem metaphor as opposed to an organism. And that's because it draws direct attention to relationships as the way you maneuver resource flows. This image is my problem statement for my PhD, which basically draws those three things out. So here you see the interface between nature and the built environment. It's our responsibility to look after nature to ensure that it continues to service us, that it continues to function in its own right. You see a strip of informal settlements. It's our responsibility, constitutional responsibility and legal mandate to upgrade the quality of life of citizens living there. And you also see them living next to a different typology of, sorry, a different typology, a different urban typology. So the third point is obviously throughout cities we consume resources differently. And this is an obvious point to make, but often not captured in the single quantifications of urban metabolism. This is a seven layer framework of urban metabolism suggested by Fernandez, who's a leading metabolic thinker. I quite like it because it also shows how far we've come. You've seen the posters around Cape Town. You've seen us talk about the abundant information that is here. To start with a very simple bulk mass balance, what is the city using in total? Doing an account to see what sectors are using it. Life cycle assessment to do large senses of what the impact of this is, and getting more and more detailed. So, unfortunately with 10 minutes I'm going to focus sectorially on water and on spatial and temporal realities. My PhD got derailed by the water crisis, so I can't share information on the nexus of water food energy and household level, which is what I'm focusing on. But this digression was quite interesting in terms of looking at the people and how they use water. So this is a visual representation of the table that Paul showed in his very first image, which is the water balance of Cape Town. A bit chopped off. But the message to convey here is that actually you can do quite a lot with very minimal data. This is where water comes from, which is mostly purchased from outside of the municipal boundaries. Water comes in and is treated and then comes into consumption. Our highest consuming sector is domestic sector, which is 60% of consumption or 40% of total input. Something which gets missed in a bulk balance like this is how people fit into that. So informal settlements is put up there, but if you divide that by our most recent population data it suggests that you're consuming about 38 liters per person per day in an informal dwelling, compared to 194 liters per person per day, which is an average domestic across income groups. The image isn't perfect in here, but the usefulness of visualizing it is it also draws attention to where you have accounting mishaps, so the yellow top reflects unequal accounting. The idea with something like this is you can see where you might start implementing. I'm sorry, my microphone's going on and off. Can you hear me like this? Is that okay? All right, so the first provocation to a lot of work is we can do a lot with minimal data and identify where high level interventions might be possible and choose where to start investigating with more detail, but we also need to invest in regularly collecting appropriate detail in a thorough reasonable state to make more technical and robust decision making. A lot of it already exists. We collect water data for billing, getting proper aggregation tools, but I think we've already spoken about political challenges between that. Considerations. The reason why it's valuable is it gets us to talk about this aggregated intelligence. This is what Cape Town looks like based on income on the left and density on the right. This is just residence. It shows us where the people of Cape Town are. People from the local Cape Town will recognize the strip of the N2, I can't show the pointer, sort of the N2, where our formal sentiments are based. We see income based very much on the west and northern parts of the both environment, lower and lower middle, and density is based in those lower income areas with the informal sentiments with a few at the north, east and southeast. If we then look at a metabolic perspective, this is water and access, which we would count as having a tap in your yard or your house. Cape Town lowers to 100% access, which is true, otherwise we'd have many water based deaths. But this is a question of whether we consider walking through an informal cell beyond 200 yards to get water, the same quality of access. To the west and north, we have high access and where the informal sentiments are of lower access. This would suggest that you can invest in improved service delivery options in those locations where it's hiding. If you look at aggregate consumption, the dense areas where the more people or where most water is consumed, so as those areas grow, you're going to think about what types of infrastructures we can use for water treatment, water supply to support those areas. Yet when you look at the capital consumption, you're seeing that those areas of low capital consumption, so demands of management mechanisms aren't necessarily the first protocol in those to be focused around the periphery. I'm running quite quickly because I want to go to the next one. But this image is on the wall over there, close to inspection a bit later. This is if we disaggregate over time. So this is a diagram of the water crisis which shows the blue oscillation of our down levels going down and down. This is contrary to a lot of urban aggregate discourse which is talking about what's going on in Cattain, which is the slow increase in population that will, in which demand will overtake supply. Here, we just lost our supply. 3P is an awful rainfall, and it gives us this amazing vignette, first hop, of how you can very quickly change water metabolism. So we've led to be harder from 1.1 billion litres per day to 500 feet of target, which we get in April. And that would be the pipeline. What is interesting to me here is the discourse that was going on. So from five large news outlets, where the water in Cattain brought up discussions of service delivery priorities, here is where, based on our lower down levels, people talking about drought, particularly related to El Nino, and around, as this was saying, around beginning mid-part of 2016, the water crisis came in. And this is escalating in more discussion about it until here is where the disaster plan was released in October 2017. Here is where day zero becomes almost utter certainty, made it clear that day zero is going to happen, and made it clear that day zero is not going to happen anymore. So what's really interesting is seeing those these are parallel, these are not causations. There's a lot of studies to work out what actually caused people to reduce their use. All of the supply side interventions were too late. So all of this is demand side shaken. Quite a bit from technical reductions, water pressure, throttling, some water meters, which is a much criticised approach, a ton of water meters, a lot of meters. But I think it's undeniable that there was a massive social intervention component, so financial disincentives, positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement. And this is where you've got a lot of the questions of big key, mayor demanding people to do stuff, and little key, your neighbours demanding you, sorry, big key politics, small keys, small politics, some demanding change. So the lesson from that is that malleable is actually quite malleable under the right circumstances. We have the metabolism in two years, it took more than eight, 12. So again, crisis is a unique situation. I think the time we're spending this is up there, but if we make the two and look at time and space, I took the suburbs of Cape Town and categorised them by income and density profile, and then looked, and this is based, all of this is actually based open data from Cape Town. So that was another meta conversation about quality of that, which I'm going to now apply for as a pedigree to see our friends very low. This shows different income category groups, suburbs by total water consumption and by per capita consumption. And the three things to draw out from here is that actually everyone in Cape Town, or every type of person individual is excluded, reduce their consumption. That's quite a powerful message. Leslie pointed on using data as method busters, I think is really valuable. So everyone reduced their consumption despite aspersions that the rich weren't reducing the quality of their consumption. I would suggest or posit that people who experience the largest paradigm shift with a higher income group who switch from consumption to try to reach these 50 litre areas. But the question is whether you can legitimately expect people who are consuming 38 litres a day to reduce and whether we should be pushing that as a message. That's an important consideration for the final observation, which is the green line, which is middle of income meaning density, suburbs of the most important aggregate water metabolism. They change their consumption behalffully to each, and that's 1.7 million people who have changed their consumption. So if you want to talk about aggregate impact, they're the people to engage with. But then the question about who in that group are using a sufficient level of water arrangement. So to me all of this is very interesting, and I think this is more of a reflection on the reasoning for today, which is over the top is very intuitive, but currently for my opinion, very misaligned with how urban decisions are made and how urban planning takes place. So how does the city think about how to choose projects? How do they think about financing? How do private sector organisations, societal projects, are feasible? So this is more of a critique, but it's also a call to draw in those expertise to start contributing under this plan. We have the tools, we have the global interest and inheritance sustainability, so how can we help align these with municipal functions or business interests? And then we're going to leave it to Jack to talk about how we've been thinking about municipal and citizen responsibility towards shaping resources. Thanks.