 So it's really a pleasure for me to be here, and I'd like to take this opportunity to congratulate the organizers for a very timely conference. We all know that we are facing unprecedented levels of migration at the moment and that migration is dominating the global policy agenda. So extremely timely conference. To the first question that Rachel you posed about what insights does research offer for policy. The first reaction that I had when I was reading that question was to think about the context that we are operating on at the moment. We are in a context of economic austerity in many countries in the world, in a context where the general public is quite anxious about migration issues and where migration is being highly politicized and used very often by political parties to serve other purposes. So I would think that the first contribution that research can make is to provide evidence so that migration policies are not influenced by perceptions or emotions but are really informed by facts. This is in itself a huge agenda, but I think it would be a very important contribution of research. I'm speaking from the point of view of a practitioner and someone who has as a core mandate working for the international organization for migration the role to support policy makers. So I'm sure the colleagues who are researchers will have a different perspective. So let me speak more to the last question that you had. How can research influence policy? I think we have now reached a point where we all agree that evidence-based policymaking is a superior form of policymaking and we've done a lot of advocacy with our counterparts about that. But the question that remains is that are we always offering sufficient evidence for them to have evidence-based policymaking? And I think sometimes we do have a lot of constraints and a lot of gaps when it comes to knowledge about some of the recent migration challenges that we are facing. And actually we had yesterday we kicked off the process to create a new migration profile for Ghana. So we had a lot of stakeholders and the Center for Migration Study is our consultant on this work. We're in Prampram which is just outside of Accra to start the process for this migration profile. And we were already talking during the very first session about some of the knowledge gaps that we have. And at the end of my short contribution I would offer some of the research gaps that I think for Ghana would be very useful to bridge because that would contribute to our programmatic response. So one recommendation, the first recommendation that I would say in how we can make sure that research is facilitating the work of policymakers would be to give them a more prominent role in offering their advice and their needs about the research that they would need. So involving the policymakers from the beginning, from the start of the research life cycle and having that discussion with them about the kind of research that they need. And I wonder how often we do create platforms for dialogues like that. And in order for them to communicate their needs I think it's important to understand who they are. If you're trying to understand who the policymakers, the migration policymakers are in Ghana I'm sure the first thing you'll be thinking who is hosting, who is owning the migration policy in Ghana. And you will first learn that it's the Ministry of Interior. But that's not the only key stakeholder in policymaking for Ghana and there are many of them. You have the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, you have the Ministry of Gender that is responsible for everything that is related to trafficking. You have environment, you have the Ministry of Employment that is looking at labor exploitation. So you have a whole range of stakeholders that are constantly making policy when it comes to migration and you really need to know all of them to be able to influence them better. And I think it takes time to gather that intelligence about who are the people that you need to influence but that would be time that is an energy that is really well spent. And as I was saying before, including policymakers into research projects from the beginning, having them in research steering committees for example, having them provide feedback from the very beginning instead of just looking at how to share information with them when the research is over would really facilitate the uptake of the research results. Another thing that for us as practitioners would be very useful is rapid reaction research. So we have a new trend, we have a new issue and we partner with researchers to really get more information about what is going on. I'll give you an example. We have this new trend in Ghana which is that women are going to the middle east to work as domestic workers. And we have a lot of linkages with trafficking, a lot of them are coming with horrendous stories as you can imagine. And because this is new, we have some knee-jerk reactions that are coming from all quarters. We are trying to coordinate actors but we're still missing a lot of information in terms of the corridors, what exactly is happening, what are the actors. And this is research that we would love to have immediate insight into things. So I would say that you have the long-term research that is very important and has a place but if we could have short-term reactive research when we have a new challenge, when we discover a new trend that would help us inform our programmatic response and the policymaking that goes with that. And then of course one aspect that I think we talk a lot about is about communicating research and we had a very good example of partnership around that recently with the DECMA project. There was a presentation on the DECMA project this afternoon. It's about migration and climate change and actually what the DECMA project did was to support IOM in organizing a capacity building workshop for policymakers in Ghana on migration and climate change. So the research project has not concluded, the results are not there yet but we've already built the capacity of the policymakers to understand the link between migration and climate change. And they now know about DECMA, they now have the basic level of understanding about what is at stake and when the results of DECMA come, they will be more ready to use that to inform their policymaking and I think they're actually now even demanding that information rather than waiting for the information to be given. And one thing that is useful there is also to package the information in a way that is easily accessible to us non-researchers. I have to say that I was sitting in one of the presentations this afternoon and I was really struggling. And I think sometimes eliminating some level of details in the briefings does help for us non-researchers. I think it's basic but it's important to say it sometimes. And then to close the entire circle of policymaking research could also give some critical assessments of policy and how it's reaching the impact or if it's creating adverse results. For example, we know that restrictive migration policies do not necessarily reach the objective that they are set to achieve but having the backup of research and the evidence of research to show that they're not reaching the objectives very often but that they are creating negative consequences is something that can also influence policy change. But I have to say that policymaking and policy change is very slow. It's a slow process so I think we need to be persistent, we need to be patient but I do think that the connection there and the point has been well made and well taken that we do need evidence from research to influence policymaking. So in terms of research gaps, very selfishly if I can share some of the things that I would like to know that I think can help me in my job in supporting policymakers and practitioners in Ghana to respond to some of the migration challenges that we have at the moment. The first one would be to really be able to understand the shift in patterns, understand new corridors, new destination countries. As I was saying before, we know that some countries in eastern Africa have been going to the Middle East for domestic work for many years. What is happening in Ghana is new for the country and we really need research to understand more what is going on. Programmatic response has started but it would be even better with more information. Then in terms of irregular migration, we've done some field assessments and we know that there are many different reasons why people decide to risk their lives to migrate, why people would go through the desert on those boats that we see on TV and wonder why people would go on the boats and risk their lives. And we know that it's a mix of social status, the social status that comes with migration. If you have migrated or you have a migrant in your family, you have a higher social status in the communities. We know that the migrants, they bring back the cars, they build the houses and there is this social aspect of migration. Then there's also the aspect of the livelihood. People will tell us, I will not stay if I can't make a living. It would be interesting to understand how these two elements play on the decision to migrate irregularly and how our interventions, when do we reach a tipping point where the people would think that the risks of migrating irregularly are more than the potential at home? When do we get there? I think that would really inform our programmatic response. The same for the decision to return. We know that there's a massive push at the moment and a lot of interest to return failed asylum seekers to their countries of origin. So what goes into the decision to return? What are the key influencing factors beyond just understanding how someone can take the decision after seeing a flyer or poster? And what is the impact of returnees and returns on the person, on the families and on the communities? I think we really need to know more about this considering that we're going to scale up quite drastically the number of returns in the months and years to come. And then lastly, as part of the whole discussions about the root causes of migration and it was one of the pillars of the Valletta Summit was the idea of having legal channels of migration. If you're telling people that they should not migrate irregularly and they should use the legal channels, there should be legal channels. And for a lot of the people that we are working with in poor communities, in rural Ghana, there's no legal channel. They simply do not exist because they're very often open to business people and students. So connecting the information that we have about changes in demography in developed countries and the need for labor and the need for supply of labor in certain sectors can support us in our advocacy for the creation of legal channels of migration. Although we always have this impression that migrants come and steal jobs, research shows us that it's not the case and research also shows that there are some sectors that have a shortage of workers. So connecting those two things to advocate for more legal channels of migration would be very useful. I would stop there and then I look forward to the rich discussion that I'm sure will follow. Thank you very much.