 We're very happy to be here. I'm gonna dive in because I have only 10 minutes to do this sharing and leave ample time for discussion. So I'd like to share a little bit about urban greenery in Singapore and do so from a nature futures perspective and hopefully bringing some concepts that can be applied to other cities as well. So Singapore is of course a very dense city similar to Hong Kong and you may know of Singapore's greenery and through some iconic projects. This is the gardens by the Bay on reclaimed lands of perhaps as an illustration of this being a city very land constrained. Another image that you may have seen and that we've seen in previous presentations actually is that of hotels and buildings downtown that are very in a very dense area but also very green. So a lot of innovation in Singapore is very much a place that gained international recognition in terms of the promoting urban greenery. But I'd like to share a slightly different way of thinking about these green cities and green in cities project through the lens of this nature future framework which is promoted by the integral governmental panel on biodiversity and ecosystem services. I'm assuming that most people would be familiar with this IPCC for ecosystem services and biodiversity. And what this framework does is essentially look at three different types of values that we related to nature and how urban greening projects may reflect one of these three values more particularly. So the first one is nature for nature and this is very much thinking about nature for nature's sake without anything to do with us humans. There's some more intrinsic values of nature. The second type of value is our perspective is nature for society and this is what a lot of us refer to as ecosystem services. This idea that nature provides benefits to people and the third one is slightly less straightforward but try and go beyond this idea of nature versus people by really thinking about how we live in synergy with nature and really trying to promote a culture whereby people feel like they are stewards of urban nature of the urban parks. And in doing so we understand that it's not about nature or us but the culture that is promoted for livability for sustainability is really intrinsically linked to our relationship with urban nature. So let me give you a few examples of projects in Singapore that illustrate these different types of values. For nature for nature we have of course a number of nature reserves and this one one of the most recent ones. So we will go to the north of Singapore and of course there's a recreational component to it but there are also areas that are not accessible to people and actually it's been protected for its high biodiversity including as a resting place for migratory birds going from all the way to Alaska to Australia and New Zealand. So these are not things that Singaporeans benefit from directly but very much reflecting a nature for nature's sake perspective. Another example would be about hornbills in Singapore which are birds well one of the conservation success stories in Singapore where they were initially they were extinct in the 19th century and then there were a number of initiatives promoting birding and nesting sites for these birds and now they're very much thriving population. The Echo Bridge is also a relatively recent example you may be familiar with the similar types of infrastructure in all the cities very important for biodiversity and connectivity between the different patches and again an infrastructure that is purely for nature in the sense that this is not accessible to humans. For the second type of value I mentioned these are the more traditional ecosystem services I don't know if I should say traditional but at least something that a number of presentations before me have highlighted all the benefits that are provided by nature to people. So very often when we think about mapping these ecosystems we can then map the ecosystem services and the typical result would be this this maps locating where these services are provided whether we talk about recreation, air quality, carbon sequestration and so on and so forth. And I'll talk a little bit more about this in the second half of my presentation. The third type of value I mentioned is slightly less straightforward but also very important when we get to consider implementation and challenges. And so as I mentioned the idea is to really think about nature as being part of the urban planning processes and part of our everyday life through promoting environmental education, grassroots initiatives and top-down government initiatives to promote urban gardening and really try and improve this or reconnect people with their urban nature. So that's essentially the first message of this presentation that in Singapore as in any city there are many motivations to mainstream urban greenery in urban planning. And through this framework that I just presented it's a way to think about why people may be willing to promote an urban greenery agenda and perhaps better understand some motivations or challenges through looking at these different perspectives. The second point I wanted to make was about ecosystem services mapping tools. Steve had asked me to highlight some of my experience with these mapping tools as a way to elicit these motivations and co-produce information. I know this is a lot of jargon but I'll try and explain what I mean by this. So one tool that I've used quite a lot in health development with the National Capital Project is called Invest. And as you can see it's a GIS tool that takes as inputs, land use, land cover maps as well as biophysical socioeconomic data and then produces some spatially explicit maps of ecosystem services. So this would produce the type of maps I showed earlier. And very importantly beyond the technical aspect of the tool it's really a useful way to then come back to scenarios so different types of land use, different types of policies to get everyone around the table to think about what does it mean to promote this or that ecosystem service or to push for search or search policy. So it's really an engagement tool as much as a technical and mapping tool. So as I mentioned these are the types of outputs actually these maps were not produced with Invest but there are other models in my lab we're starting to produce a number of this information for Singapore as well. But something I want to highlight is that mapping ecosystem services potential is is useful but then there's the whole demand side of things like whether people actually live and value these ecosystem services is another question. So we've talked about cooler cities or cleaner cities today if people think this is an important service and if they live in near by an area that can provide services only then the service is what we call realized meaning that it actually provide a benefit to people. The second aspect and application of these tools is that they are very useful for more design scale applications and this is only just beginning in Singapore because there's really a huge effort to to do to help urban planning agencies the urban redevelopment authority in Singapore to use these tools and make the metrics the maps they produce part of their own existing workflows and this is easier said than done. And the last point I'd like to add and I was really glad to see some emerging conversations around the sole action plan about inclusive cities is that these maps are also very useful to look at inequality in cities and this is something that many many cities around the world are looking at. So we're starting to look at how we can compute these environmental justice or injustice indicators and these tools are very useful to do so. And one last example I'll present is these maps that we produced for Paris case study last year and that essentially show that if you focus on green space access you would target and increase the greening projects in these yellow areas on this gif. If you want to reduce inequalities you would actually focus on these red areas meaning that if you take into account both access to green space and income as a very simple proxy for the ability for people to actually get substitutes for these services. So this is just a way to illustrate that this matter and you would not make the same policy decisions if you looked at one metric or the other. So if you'd like to learn a bit more about the investors there's a recent paper that we published with the additional case studies and that presents the philosophy of the invest model as well so feel free to take a look at this. And for now I'll just conclude by reminding you of the two main points for this presentation. The first one was that there are many motivations to mainstream urban greenery in urban planning so I presented the nature futures framework as a tool to help make sense of them and then this idea that ecosystem services mapping tools help elicit this motivation and they're really a useful tool to co-produce information with many different stakeholders to implement greenery projects. So with that I will hand it back up to Steve and happy to take any questions.