 Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to today's AGU panel discussion on the Science Policy Pairing Scheme. My name is Elias Grampas and I am managing the European Parliament Intergroup on Climate Change by Diversity and Sustainable Development, and I am delighted to be hosting this discussion on the Science Policy Pairing Scheme within the next 45 minutes or so. Before we kick off, I'd like to take the opportunity to thank AGU and specifically Chloe for taking the lead with regards to the organization of this session, enabling for us all to be together virtually, well, for 2021. So a little bit about the Intergroup, which is a platform for the European Parliament bringing together MEPs, so members of the European Parliament, from all political groups and parliamentary committees to find sustainable solutions to some of the greatest challenges of our times. This balanced forum for discussion at the same time allows for policymakers to listen, debate, and shape ideas and policies based on contributions from various stakeholders. That includes of course relevant experts, NGOs, the private sector alongside the research and academia communities in the presence of the EU institutions. As a result, this multi-stakeholder platform of dialogue aims to look into solutions and opportunities, addressing today's and tomorrow's environmental but also socio-economic challenges, such as ecosystem degradation, cleaners in transport, circular economy, biodiversity loss and climate change, but also growth and jobs. Could we ever pull that off without science? No. So as the science policy nexus is of significant meaning with regards to our work, I think we will all agree that it's perhaps now more important than ever. Regarding the news, we noticed that the United States has officially joined the Paris Agreement under the Biden administration and also on our side of the Atlantic. The European Union has also found a provisional agreement on its first ever climate law. So, importantly enough, the EU climate law includes the creation of a European Scientific Advisory Board to assess EU policy and monitor progress. So I sincerely think that the facts are there. Those are just two examples from the news, underlining what I think could be summarized as science's key role in policymaking being further strengthened. So as it should, if you're asking me, because no policy, no well-informed responsible policy could be established with the lack of its scientific component. Well, now at the same time, I cannot help but remember, I think it was a New Yorker cartoon, those lovely posts that come up high on your Instagram feed. And it showed the sketch of Donald Trump and his vice president, isolated on a desert island with water up to their necks, quoting, no worries, I'm tweeting that climate change is fake. So on this note, well, here we are today, all those believers in science for policy, and also policy for science I would like to add to explore more about the EU science policy pairing scheme, which is an annual activity coordinated by EU to help promote a culture of evidence informed policymaking and stronger science policy partnerships. In this session, we'll also feature presentations from Dr. Solmaz, Mohajer, and Mr. Nebihler, who have previously participated in the pairing scheme, alongside as well an interactive Q&A discussion with the audience. So please feel free to send us your questions in written via the chat box of the platform. Thank you very much for tuning in. If you have connected just now, we're about to start with remarks of Solmaz, who is an assistant professor at the University of Central Asia and Tajikistan. Although she is currently based in Germany at the University of Tübingen and the EU science policy pairing scheme participant back in 2019. Solmaz is also research links mountain building process and erosion to geologic hazards, and also explores how scientific data can be translated into useful information for at risk population, and also to inform policy. She is also the founder of the Parks Quake Project, a global initiative that brings geohazard science and safety into school classrooms. So without further ado, Solmaz, the floor is yours. So please take us through your work and your experience as well on this team. Great. Thank you. Yes. You can see my slides, right? Yes, very well. Okay, perfect. Yeah. Yeah, thanks for the introduction. Thank you, Chloe, also for organizing this session and for inviting me to this panel discussion. And thank you to the audience for being here. And I'm just going to take a few moments to describe my experiences with the EU science policy pairing scheme. So back in 2019, I had the opportunity to actually be part of this pairing scheme. What you're seeing here is basically me, the scientist being paired with a member of European Parliament from Finland, Miss Mia Petra Kumpala-Nathri, who is the policymaker. And I was invited to her office and I had a few days in Brussels and at the European Parliament to shadow her and her team and learn a little bit more about the policymaking process. What you're looking at here is me in her office and basically giving some of my input on the topic of the impact of sea level rise and climate change on the coastal communities of the Baltic Sea region. So this experience also brought me a number of other opportunities. And I wrote a blog about this so feel free to check out the link that's shown here at the very top to learn a bit more about the details of this experience. But some of the main activities that I was engaged in, obviously the very first one was to provide scientific input to the member of parliament and also her team. So again, this was on climate change and the impact of it on the coastal communities of the Baltic Sea. And this was done through representation to her team, but also through an Q&A session, an interview session that I did with her. And this was, I think, broadcasted live for population in Finland to check out. So this was really great opportunity for I think the member of parliament to get an input of a scientist on some of the most crucial questions that the general public have regarding climate change. But also it was a very amazing opportunity for me to see how a scientist can actually be matched with a member of parliament and use scientific information in a way that is actually meaningful for policymaking process and also for the general public. In addition to being paired with the member of parliament, I was also able to attend a couple of parliamentary events, and one of them was focused on again the Baltic Sea region, and also the sustainable development goals, all the topics that I'm also particularly interested in. And the way these parliamentary events were selected was that I discussed it with a member of parliament and she basically based on my interest made a couple of recommendations and basically took me to some of the sessions that she was also facilitating on those couple of days that I was with her. But the very big part of this pairing scheme was the networking opportunity that happened both during my visit to the parliament, but also outside of the time that I spent in the parliament. I was able to actually met up with members from the European Research Committee, as well as the Emergency Response Coordination Center, which is also located in Brussels, and the latter, the Emergency Response Coordination Center, actually a lot of the work that they do, which includes responses to my professors. It's very close to my scientific research which focuses on natural hazards. So I was able to meet many scientists, as well as policymakers and practitioners that are working in the field that I'm also doing research in. And so this was a really great networking opportunity as well for me. So one of the top three lessons that I learned as part of the pairing scheme. The very first lesson was to be ready to help and make the statement but I'm not an expert really your last resort. I guess it's kind of easy to say that. But to be honest with you when I was told to give input scientific input on climate change impact on Baltic region. I was very nervous. This is the topic that is not very closely related to the research that I do. I had to really remember that I am still a scientist, and through all my trainings, I've been basically working on developing skills for evaluating scientific information critically and also being able to communicate that with a much broader audience, and using that as well as the network, including my colleagues at the university to really help me prepare how I was going to be useful really to the member of parliament on this very specific topic, even though I was not an expert. The second lesson that I learned is to really keep up the pace and be ready to work with very little information. So when I was asked to give my input on this very specific topic to the parliament. I had very little information to work with. I had exactly just the title of the topic and then I had to sort of figure out what are some of the most crucial information related to climate change impact for the Baltic Sea region and and take it from there. What I did was that I looked at the latest conference on this very specific topic, which happened to be a conference that took place in the same year in 2019, specifically on topics related to climate change impact for Baltic Sea region, and really browse through the impacts, all the scientific sessions and select a couple of information that I thought were most crucial, also reaching out to some of the experts that presented at that conference, and having their input before preparing my presentation at the parliament. And last but not least is that one lesson is to really, in order to capture, you know, the attention of policymakers. It's important to be able to tell a story or a good story, and everybody can connect to stories and policymakers are not excluded from that. And even if you don't have a story, or you're given a topic that you don't feel very close to or feel very, very intimate with. It's also okay to use someone else's story. So most of my research work actually takes place in Central Asia, very far from the Baltic Sea region. So I couldn't find that personal connection or a personal story with the Baltic Sea region, but a friend of mine, a very good friend of mine actually is from the Baltic Sea region. So I had to really tap into some of his stories and experiences with the Baltic Sea to make my input a little bit more personal when talking to the team of this member of parliament. So those are the top three lessons that I learned. And I just want to take a moment and finish this presentation with what followed next because I also think that's really important. So the pairing scheme was really a good opportunity for me to gain a few skills, and actually gave me the confidence to apply for other policy related activities and to be honest with you the pairing scheme was really the very first hands on policy related activity that I had done. So it really gave me the confidence and also showed me that I am interested and I would like to go a little bit deeper into this field. So shortly following that, right before the pandemic in January I was able to actually go to Florence in Italy for school called evidence for policy school which focus on disaster risk management. And this school was organized by the European Commission's joint research center, bringing many Europeans in the field of science policy and also practitioners to basically connect with one another and to learn how we can use scientific information scientific data to inform policy. Very recently, as recently as about a month ago I joined the voices for science this is an American Geophysical Union program. It has two tracks communication track and a policy track. I applied for the policy track, which is a 12 months program that trains scientists who are interested in entering the policy making process, but also gives them a lot of the opportunity to actually come in direct contact with American policymakers, and this year for the first time, voices for science opened their selection of people for this program to those based in Europe as well. And I hear that they're going to continue doing that for the coming year so maybe this is also another opportunity to look for. So I'm going to take that information here and I would be more than happy to get in touch with you or you getting touched with me. And if you have any questions later outside of this session, I would be more than happy to help you with that. Thank you so much. Thank you very much so much for such an interesting presentation of your experience which, to be honest, sounds like an extremely interesting but also highly recommended experience for scientists joining our session today so quite seamlessly I would like to take that transition to our next speaker. Mr and a be here. I'm very happy to introduce you to miss Bichler who holds a bachelor degree in geography and the masters degree in cartography and J information from the University of Vienna. In addition to her studies miss Bichler also worked in the field of satellites based land monitoring, completed an internship at ESA in Italy, and also a traineeship at the JRC once again in Italy. Rene was also. No, sorry, Rene currently is working as a PhD student at the German Aerospace Center, the LR in the field of air pollution monitoring from space, and further as a assistant at the Department of atmospheric remote sensing at the University of Augsburg so I think it's an intervention we're all very much looking forward to so I'm happy to hear more from you. Thank you very much for the opportunity and a nice introduction. So yeah I had a very different experience than some of us. My pairing scheme was a little bit short noticed. Because of the corona pandemic more or less and we decided to make it virtual science policy pairing scheme. I was a member of Maria Spiracchi and her team. And I just thought I could give you a little bit an overview what Maria Spiracchi is working on which group she is a member of and yeah what were my tasks at the pairing scheme. So, yeah, as I was introduced before I have a bachelor degree in geography and a master in cartography and J information so I have no political policy background more or less and I'm at the moment with an air pollution and how it relates with the economy and environmental health. But these are points that we brief politicians in Germany about this topic so it was a good, the policy pairing scheme was a good opportunity for me to to get in touch with politicians. And Maria Spiracchi is a group of the European People's Party, also known as EPP, and she is a vice chair of the delegation for relations with the People's Republic of China. She's a member of the Committee on the Environment Public Health and Food Safety. Also the Committee on Industry Research and Energy and the Special Committee on Beading Cancer. So, her topics were very diverse also my work. We had in the virtual science policy pairing scheme, three meetings, one with Maria Spiracchi herself and two with her team, where we discuss different topics. I joined a committee meeting on beating cancer. I was also part or involved in a session hosted by Maria Spiracchi herself about the sustainable mobility and powering the action of climate change. Then I joined plenary sessions on the EU global strategy on COVID-19 vaccinations and other plenary sessions about different topics. And I also read through a research that was requested by the NVE Committee about air pollution and COVID-19. So the team was really trying to also put my research background a little bit in the pairing scheme. And another thing was that we received questions from journalists, they were quite difficult to answer for me to be honest. And yeah, I think what was very interesting is how diverse the topics are that they work on. So one day we had a topic about cancer and the next day we talked about electric vehicles and batteries and the important rule of hydrogen and on the next day we talked about the COVID-19 problems. So a lot of things where I don't really have background and as someone has already said before, you have to deal with topics where you don't know so much about it and you have to be able to find answers or try to find answers in a very short time. But keep in mind that you'll be part of a team, you're not alone and you can ask people and they are very helpful and the team itself was super nice. And yeah, so this was everything from my experience from this virtual science place pairing scheme. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you very much Renee. It's very interesting to see that you had an equally great opportunity, regardless of the current situation of the pandemic and the impact of COVID. And I would say also a very relevant experience with regards to your background and research work as well. So, at this stage, I would like to let you know that while organizers would be delighted to welcome also the participating NDP's offices live feedback as well via their participation to today's session unfortunately due to agenda limitations we couldn't secure the participation of colleagues. I have to say that this is a very busy planner week in the European Parliament, but I'm very positive that we'll be even more successful next year so Meanwhile, following bilateral discussions with both offices. I'm a pick on plan matrix but also MEP Maria Spiraki's offices, I'm very happy to extend their kind feedback and their positive as well as highly valuable experience from the from the scheme so perhaps on this note, we can kickstart our short panel session for today with Solmaz and Renee. And perhaps with Solmaz. And I do have some questions but just as I see that Chloe has sent a message to the to the chat box. I would also like to invite our audience as well to send us your questions via the platform so we can also pick some from there and address to to our set of speakers for today so Solmaz, I know that it's been around perhaps two years since we we met in person with Chloe as well at the Brussels office of the European Parliament intergroup and I think it was then that you met also with the MEP and Could you please describe us a day with within the pairing scheme. What a day looks like. Yeah, gosh. So, from what I remember is that yeah you show up at the entrance of the Parliament and a member of her team showed up and basically took me around, gave me a very brief tour of the place and sort of getting familiar with, you know, where some of the most important things are, and then going directly to the MEP's office being introduced there to everyone in the office. But, I mean, as, as you know, policymakers are, they have to be in so many sessions and oftentimes they're running from one session to another. So the first session even is not finished you know they come and give their, then, you know their their two cents or their presentation and then they have to run to another session. So, the very first day I remember that I was just really running around from one session to another, and really being amazed how difficult yet exciting this kind of this kind of job is for a policy maker. You know, just being from the outside and looking at it, you know from the outside that, yes, you need to be in different places and you have different roles, sometimes a policy maker is presenting you know at a session sometimes they're attending. And, and during those times maybe they have a brief moment in their office and then, you know, your schedule, perhaps at one of these brief moments I was scheduled you know, to talk to the member of Parliament and giving my input. But a day in the Parliament, yeah, what I remember just going from one session to another, and also feeling really privileged to be in, in some such in some sessions that when you see policy making taking place live. You know, we often look at the news and you know we listen to the radio and most of the time we hear the result of a decision, or that maybe a decision is being discussed but being able to sit in a session and see people how they vote, or how much time they have or opportunities they have to stand up and share their voice on many different topics so one of the sessions was a foreign affairs session and that was really interesting for me to see how the floor is actually given to many of the participants to basically share their concerns and how those concerns actually are taken into account to form a policy or an action that will be introduced later. So, being able to see that live was certainly a very good experience for me. So, for highlighting that and specifically it's from a personal point of view as well a very fascinating experience to be part of all those processes the decision making process in the institutions and I would say in Brussels overall to see how, how decisions are actually being shaped before the news become the news. So, just on this note I'd like to turn to René, who was participating in the pairing scheme earlier this year. I know that this year's version was impacted by COVID, yet IGU managed to put together an excellent organization so René, how would you comment perhaps on the challenges and opportunities of the pandemic to the pairing scheme? I know that perhaps due to COVID the timeline of this opportunity was extended to more than a week, as I guess was the case for Solmaz, but happy to hear more from you from an insider's point of view. Yeah, the pairing scheme was for around two weeks. One problem that we faced when we coordinated the pairing scheme was that I have a full-time job and it was a little bit short notice so I couldn't take, I had to work normally with my 40 hours a week and try to do the pairing scheme as well. So this was a little bit troubling also, but the team were super nice and we had our meetings and we tried to set up sessions that I could join or they explained me also where I can find the plenary sessions or the committee meetings where Marius Baraki was joining it or when she hosted a meeting by herself, how to do that. So it was, they were very nice and everything was, yeah, we tried to make it happen. What else? So normally we had our meetings around noon. We all were in our home office, some of the team were in Greece, some were in Brussels. And yeah, then we talked about which session I could join. I joined the session and I listened to it and we talked about it a little bit and yeah, more or less that was it from the virtual part, but this was also because I had my job as well. Thank you very much for your, for your feedback Renee. I just noticed that we do have received a question from the Q&A's box. I'll just read it out loud. It says, I might have missed it during the presentation but can you choose the MEP you'll be working with during a pairing scheme. On this note, perhaps I can reply to part of the question and then I'll leave it to Chloe for the end of the session to just also provide you some further information regarding the pairing scheme in the future and how we plan to move forward for the remaining part of the year and then looking ahead for 2022. So just on this note, I'll take my moderator hat off and I'll reply as an EP Intergroup Secretariat. So indeed, the MEP's selection, it's very much linked to MEP's agendas and availabilities. So, with regards to those two pairing schemes we hosted back in 2019 and beginning of the year, we opted for the two co-chairs of the European Parliament Intergroup, Ms. Kumpila Natri that Sormans paired with is a member of SND, the Socialist and Democrats Political Group in the European Parliament and MEP from Finland and with regards to this year's scheme, I had the opportunity to work with MEP, Ms. Maria Spiraki coming from EPP and Greece, so different political groups, different regions as well of Europe, so I hope this was also diverse with regards to the opportunities addressed. My question perhaps to both Solbaz and René, I'd be very interested in learning what was actually the most fascinating, the most interesting part of the experience, looking back. Yeah, shall I start? Okay. The most interesting part was how diverse their work was, because as a scientist I'm really focused on one topic and trying to be a specialist and was one thing and to understand everything. And then I had to deal every day with something different and to understand or realize that I don't have so much knowledge as I thought I have and that the questions that received from a journalist, for example, were quite difficult to answer. It was specifically about the European Green Deal and how it impacts the economic, yeah, in Greece, and I do a little bit of economy in my research, but this was a very detailed questions and took quite a long time to understand that. And so I was very surprised how much knowledge they must gain in a very short time and how stressful it can be. And yeah, I think this was, I was not expecting it. And what I learned from it was that from a scientist's perspective, I will keep in mind that when I have to prepare my work or present my work to them, that this is not the only thing that they have to deal with and how I present my information. And yeah, understand a little bit better what they have to work with. And I think this is also very much linked at the same time with the two lessons learned. The key takeaway message is of Solmaz within the IGU blog post as well because Solmaz was mentioning there should be a lack of hesitation from the scientist's point of view. I have noted here, your message is be ready to help but also keep up the pace with the European Parliament and how it functions. So René, would you like to perhaps further comment on your most interesting part of the experience? Yeah, so what I really liked is when they also tried to put my research background into into their work so that I could a little bit more have a conversation with them or bring my input. There was something that I really appreciated and what I also liked is when I had troubles with answering the questions. At some point I sent them an email and I said, this is quite difficult to answer and I think I cannot manage this in time and they just were very nice and said, it's okay, we didn't expect you to answer all these questions, just give it a shot and we just wanted to let you know what we are working with. So yeah, I didn't have the pressure to really bring some important input as Solmaz did so I had not the pressure to give a briefing or something. So open communication as well, I think comes as a key takeaway message as well from scientists to scientists who want to be involved in policy making Solmaz, anything else to add? Just yeah, one thing which resonates a lot with what Renee said that it's really a learning experience and maybe one should also look at it as a learning experience so in this context, you know, with the climate change topic and the questions that I had received, I remember that I had a couple of coffee sessions with a colleague of mine next door who is a climate scientist and I basically asked him to sit down with me and help me understand some of the reports that were highlighted by other research scientists on the Baltic Sea region and there were plots and figures there that I couldn't completely understand and I wanted to make sure that I understand them well enough that I can translate it in a meaningful way to a policymaker. And so this was, this brought me closer to my own scientific community network of scientists that are near me and basically even with the interview questions that I were asked to do at the European Parliament, I remember some of the interview questions were really difficult. So for instance, one question was, because this interview was being broadcasted in Finland. One question was, many Finnish people may say that well, you know, climate warming or climate change is actually quite nice because we get sunnier days, you know, the temperatures are better. We have longer summers perhaps. What is your message as a scientist to people who think like that. And it may seem like a very easy question to answer but in fact it was very difficult because you have to also be very sensitive of the community that comes up with that question. You don't want to alienate them but you also want to make sure that the latest scientific information is shared in the most meaningful way. And even for a question like that, I remember I had to pick up the phone, maybe a couple of hours before the interview and get my colleague back on the phone again and says, look, this is my answer, you know, is this sensitive enough? Is this good enough? So I guess the learning experience was that yes, expect that you're going to learn a lot, but as I think one of you mentioned that this is, you're not alone. You have your colleagues, you have the scientists, even those scientists may not be your colleagues next door, even the EGU community, you can reach out to the EGU community and I have hardly written an email to a scientist and never getting a response from them. You will get some form of response one way or another, at least from most scientists. So I think as a scientist getting into policymaking, you should remember that you have this army of people behind you that most of the time they're ready to help you. And Solmaz, I just noticed that we have received another question in the Q&A's box and that's, were you at any point afraid of making mistakes? Yes, all the time. So I was afraid of making mistakes, but that fear was not so much that it wouldn't, that it would paralyze me. It would make me nervous. So honestly, I was not 100% comfortable about this. First, it was my first science policy experience and second, it was a topic, a scientific topic that I was not very familiar with. So being nervous and also being a little bit afraid of making mistakes is totally natural. And so that's part of the process. But again, you have to remember that what you can do to manage that fear. And for me, one way to manage it is to inform myself and inform myself rather quickly. So that's why I reached out to the very first person, the closest person I could reach out to. And as I was talking to my colleague, I was also trying to reach out to other scientists that know more than I do about this particular region. And also telling those scientists that, look, I have been put into this situation where I've been asked to give my two cents on this particular topic with policymakers. And I want to know what is the most important scientific discovery that you think is so relevant to the coastal communities of the Baltic Sea region. And then what they tell me I would translate that. So I was kind of like this bridge between the climatologists working in this region and the policymakers who are interested in solving societal problems. So if I could try to sum up your your replies almost that would be that fear indeed existed, but they didn't act as a bottleneck but rather as an enabling factor a motivating factor. That's a very inspiring message. Renee, any points of views on the same question as well. Yeah, I had, I was afraid to when I first read the questions from the journalist, so I was overwhelmed and couldn't answer them. And I think I also got a little bit lost in the details to answer questions and to find scientific publications about it to prove my answer. And why I came to this conclusion. And as a point I realized, okay, this is not working. I should step a little bit. Yeah, one step back and have a, keep the big picture in mind, write down some, some bullet points. And I also communicated it with the team that what my troubles were, and that I tried to answer the questions and I also got in touch with colleagues from my period, yeah, from my past experiences at the JRC for example and asked colleagues there who work a little bit more with policy makers and this kind of things but yes, I was afraid to make mistakes with my answers. But the team will read through your things that you provide to them and they will make the final decision what to do with it so just give it a shot. In regards to lessons learned, I have mapped Solmaz's key messages, summed up as be ready to help, keep up the pace. Remember the positive value of storytelling as well. Solmaz that was mentioned within your EGU blog post as well, but also some key takeaways of today's discussion it's quite important as well to have open communication with the policy makers I would also add to invest on building an open communication channel with policy makers I was just interesting enough I was reading an article the other day about the evaluation of the possible means of interacting with politicians in the, well, post COVID times now so picking up was as you perhaps would expect the first choice, the most prominent choice the most impactful option for scientists who want to be involved with policy makers, and then you also had of course, sending emails inviting to events I think also those are very worthy opportunities to explore and perhaps some input for scientists joining us today to keep in mind. I have also noted what Rene mentioned as well as having quickly some plan Bs in place in case Plan A doesn't work. And then, as Solmaz underlined as well to also activate your network of scientists or fellow scientists because it's very fascinating to see that actually the whole community is united. And Solmaz in the case of the pairing scheme back in 2019 you very well mentioned that you're able to reach out to your community to fellow scientists to also kindly assist you with regards to some of the tasks. Prior to wrapping up, maybe we can take one or two more questions. Is there any other advice Solmaz and Rene perhaps to the ones that we've already mentioned that you'd like to add and provide scientists with for new scientists who want to engage with policy makers, anything else perhaps that we've left unaddressed. Maybe something really basic, but I think for the participants who are in this session you're doing the right thing just by being in this session, because you're already connecting yourself with a number of people who are working at the science policy interface, and we automatically become part of that network of people that you could later rely on or tap into. And the reason I got really interested in the pairing scheme it was, it wasn't that it came out of nowhere that suddenly I realized that this is something I want to apply for, but actually over several years of attending EGU policy sessions. I started to slowly discover that this is a field that I'm interested in, and I can pick up skills along the way that would prepare me one day for actually coming into contact directly with a policy maker, and be able to provide my input. For me it was actually a long process of several years of coming to EGU, and I was always attending you know the scientific sessions, but I slowly also started adding sessions that are not in my division and are not really considered you know scientific session. And through these sessions I discovered my joy for doing or getting involved with science policy making, but also gaining some basic skills, so that when it come to applying for the pairing scheme. I knew for sure that I really wanted to do this if I had if I if I'm given the opportunity. And then after that you just continue doing maybe other activities that takes you to a different level. And at any point you may discover that this is not something that you want to do but at least you tried it and you know. So I guess my, my advice would be if you think you're interested in science policy which I think you are. Just give it a try attend a couple of more sessions. Look for opportunities you can get involved in build your network and really discover for yourself, if this is something you want to do before trying to go a little bit deeper into it. So if I if I can attempt to sum up once again your key messages almost this is about the pairing scheme being a highly valued strongly recommended and from my point of view from from the pinter group secretariat point of view. Happy to also hereby confirm very impactful opportunity as well from policy makers point of view. René, turning to you any key takeaway messages as well from your side. Maybe if you want to prepare a little bit. And there are also some online courses what you can join with. Yeah, where you can get a little bit an insight and get familiar with the international policy system, or Chloe also send me the science for policy handbook for example it's a PDF it's online so if you're interested and you feel you want to inform me a little bit before you can read through the document it's very well structured and written. And yeah I think it's almost mentioned everything and yeah, the plenary sessions from the EU parliament are publicly available so you can go on the website and have a look on it and join some sessions. You can also do some research on the member of the polyamans and what committees are they are a member of and inform yourself a little bit about it. So, if you want to prepare yourself a little bit. Thank you very much, René for highlighting that I'll just quickly add my email address as well to the chat box for interested attendees as well to kind of reach out although I understand that Chloe is the most relevant person with regards to the science policy scheme on behalf of VGQ. I'm adding quickly my email to the chat box here and I think perhaps we can wrap up today's sessions well I think it's fair to say that we have unanimously come to agree on the need to bring scientific expertise and knowledge from different clinical areas to ongoing policy making initiatives and processes to support where informed decisions by policy and I honestly believe that this is something we just cannot afford to miss at this stage we need strong science for policy policy makers need your valuable input and they need it now more than ever. In the end the science policy nexus will not work unless we invest all of our energy in making it and I'm very happy that Solmaz, René and Chloe are so successful in doing so. When it comes to also tips on how to best engage with policy makers, tips for scientists involved in policy making. I couldn't agree more with our set of speakers of today perhaps another point worth stressing is to try to build an open communication channel and deep engagement with policy makers taking advantage of every opportunity out there and I think this is where the great success of the science policy pairing scheme lies so. Once again thank you very much for joining us today. A big thanks to Solmaz and René but also to Chloe and the HGU community for the outstanding organization. It's been a real pleasure having this event with you today. So I really hope to see you again next year. On this note very happy to provide the floor back to Chloe for her wrap up of today's sessions as I also think there's some important thing for that Chloe has to share. Thank you so much Elias and I must say like this pairing scheme also wouldn't happen without your help so before we do close the session today I just want to give some some information about the next pairing scheme which will hopefully happen towards the end of this year. So this pairing scheme has only happened twice so far it's happened both with Solmaz and René and we're hoping to have it a third time this year. The entire time it's happened it has been a learning experience for us at the HGU as well. So I mean obviously this year was a very different situation with René and she did a fantastic job at jumping in relatively last minute as she mentioned. And also experiencing that sort of online pairing to see how that went. And of course this brings its own challenges as René mentioned you know she wasn't able to stop working for two weeks to partake in the pairing scheme. So we are really hoping to be able to do this later this year so that it can be in person in the parliament once again. And for this reason we haven't started the process of the pairing yet I mean going back to the earlier question of how do we pick the MEPs. So as Elias mentioned both MEPs are actually co-chairs of his intergroup and that's sort of where the initial selection came came from but there's a lot of MEPs that are actually involved with the intergroup. And a lot of these MEPs are part of the intergroup for one reason is that they really appreciate science. So it makes it quite an easy selection and we do go through these MEPs and I will go through these MEPs again this year and sort of pick a top 10 and work with Elias on that as well to make sure we get an MEP that is a good fit. So before we we release the pairing scheme before we advertise it online we will actually contact this MEP and select the MEP so that we can put them alongside the advertisement we make so you know who you will be paired with if you're selected. And the MEP also helps with the selection of the scientists as well so it's a very involved integrated system that we've created that actually think works quite well. So if you are interested in getting more information about this pairing scheme as it progresses I assume again it's very difficult to know with COVID but I assume it will happen around November this year. Let's keep our fingers crossed. Do keep an eye out for that you can also join the EGU's database of expertise. And if you join this database it'll actually receive a monthly newsletter from me and that'll have not only things like the pairing scheme in it but it will also have things different science policy opportunities that you might like to get involved with different online sessions or as Renee said there are different trainings that you can attend that aren't necessarily from the EGU but from other institutions as well so just all the opportunities that are out there that exists for scientists to engage that I think might be interesting for our members. So I do recommend you join that to get the updates I'll also obviously be advertising it through the EGU's website as well. And again probably around November. So we'll have to see how COVID goes but that would be the hope. Other than that I would really, really like to thank Ilias for moderating this whole session and introducing the pairing scheme so nicely and of course, Somers and Renee as well. So that's all from me, I'll hand back over to Ilias for any final words, I guess. I couldn't sum up the discussion in a better fashion. I'm also on behalf of the Secretariat of the Intergroup, very much looking forward to building on this collaboration and seeing what we can best achieve jointly in with regards to the pairing scheme for 2021 for later in the year. And then also for 2022 onwards I guess that a lot of a lot of this materialization is very much linked with situations that's out of our hands so we're doing our best to adapt with COVID the situation there and very happy that for this year as well EGU was so successful in providing this opportunity to scientists so on this note very happy to continue working on the science policy nexus it's been among the key priorities of this intergroup since its first establishment in 1994. So it's honestly a great pleasure to be working with Chloe, Solmaz and Renee and more scientists now looking ahead.