 Thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to talk this morning on the aspects around this conference with the very exciting items of climate change. I've been asked to say a few words about the challenge we have within a development agency like Donita with respect to addressing climate change issues within our ODA deliveries and especially examples on where we lack more knowledge and more research. I will start with a few overall observations and then I'll try to put forward a few concrete examples or cases of activities we've been doing that hopefully also will enlighten a little some of the research challenges we believe are within this field. Within the two aspects of climate change interventions, mitigation and adaptation, from our point of view is very much a question about energy and how to enter a low carbon development path. We talk of green energy production, energy efficiency, energy conservation and increased input of renewable into a countries energy mix. There are on these aspects several important research needs not at least the economic modeling of various approaches to the green energy transition. I think one of the big challenges trying to put forward the issues of green growth. We believe that climate adaptation is a more you might say diverse theme and in fact overlapping with many aspects of conventional ODA interventions like building resilience in local communities, disaster risk management, improved natural resource management, smarter agriculture etc. This is all aspects we often deal with in ODA programs for general livelihood improvement and poverty reduction, aspects we also touch upon in emergency assistance dealing with various aspects of natural resources natural disasters. These situations in fact may often mirror the worst case scenario with respect to impact of climate change such as storm floods, droughts, torrential rains and so on. One general challenge for practical adaptation is to deal with the often high short term fluctuations within the long term trends of climate change. Climate change is not a linear function over time but a progressive process with a high degree of annual unpredictability and fluctuations. This uncertainty makes it difficult to design timely and appropriate adaptation measures and prioritize related investments in developing countries in general lacking resources. But I think the good news is that predictions and climate models are improving and scientific efforts to continue these improvements are in themselves of significant importance. So this is no doubt a research issue that should have high attention. Really better extrapolation of climate data on regional and local level to support improved climate change scenarios must be given high priority. This not only concerns the meteorological aspects but as much the modeling of consequences, the impact of climate change on processes in the society. In many geographical areas, areas classified as arid or semi-arid lands, degraded mountain areas, vulnerable coastal zones, the frequency of abnormal weather conditions are now so high that communities basically is in a permanent situation of emergency. They do not have the time to rehabilitate between extreme weather conditions. These marginalized areas often host the most poor communities with scarce resources and the lowest resilience. Again climate change impacts are a toll and burden for the poorest. In such cases one may argue that the best adaptation will be economic development, the basic of poverty-era education, build the wealth of communities to be able to invest into adaptation measures and resilience. In reality it is as it was said by Miko, it is difficult to separate climate mitigation and adaptation. Any national and local climate change action plan will have to address both aspects and not at least the linkage between the two. The later we reduce greenhouse gases, the stronger the need for adaptation and the higher the cost for the society. One big challenge in this equation is that climate change impacts from greenhouse gas emissions comes with a delay. Peak impacts from today greenhouse gas emissions will not hit us before in 40, 50 years. This delay is a huge challenge and called for improved forecasting and modeling of climate change impacts to support not at least political awareness and action. In this context it is vital further to uncover and model the economic consequence of climate change. To further document the famous notion of Nicola Stearn, the cost of no action. We need to get the economics right on impacts and cost of climate change. Let me give you an example, a concrete example on this issue. We have for many years been supporting and being a partner to the government of Kenya on environment and climate change. We have during the last decade assisted in building institutions and environmental policies and regulations and embarked in 07 on a major process for our national climate change strategy preparing Kenya for the future but also to some extent for the COP 15 2009 Copenhagen. It was a very cumbersome process with a lot of technical facilitation, consultation, capacity development, analytical work, you may say the usual stuff. But looking back, one piece of work made the difference in the political awareness of climate change in Kenya as I see it. We co-financed in fact with DFID, a so-called mini-stern for Kenya, projecting the economic consequences of expected climate change in the country. Data were not perfect at all. But bringing the global climate change issue down on national and regional level and putting the cost into the argumentation opened the eye of the Kenyan politicians and fostered to some extent immediate awareness and concern for the impact of climate change on development plans in the country within agriculture, hydro power production and so on. Another example just to illustrate the complexity. Our environmental program in Indonesia has also for the last decade been instrumental in supporting considerations on transforming this more developed country into a low carbon or at least a greener development path. We have supported various works on introducing environmental economic instruments like environmental taxes and incentives. But we have also realized that we have been up against major structural barriers like fuel subsidies that are still existing and that is hampering efforts to promote energy efficiency, conservation and renewable energy entrance into the Indonesian energy mix. There is simply here and now little economic incentives for prioritizing these interventions due to this artificial low fossil fuel price. Again there is a strong need for more sound analytical work to make the case on the long term of the economic benefits from transforming the Indonesian energy mix or system into a more sustainable path and redirecting existing subsidies to support this process. As some of you may know the attempt to remove fuel subsidies in Indonesia some years ago was completely unsuccessful due to the social consequences that were riots in the street of Jakarta. And I think this is a good example that pure economic considerations do not always make reformed fly in the real world. Indonesia is also a good example on a country like many others where global climate change funds have difficulties in reaching local impact. The efforts to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, the so-called Red Plus illustrates the challenges that meets the noble global intention to finance climate change actions. Basically due to lack of local capacity, local mapping and local planning it is in reality very difficult to make Red Plus an instrument in Indonesia. To this comes significant challenges with respect to issues like land tenure, rights to resources, consideration on indigenous peoples, and even the necessary measurement verification and reporting system, the so-called MVR, to apply Red as a payment for ecosystem service system. This is again an example where lack of knowledge in reality is a significant bottleneck for action. And again this calls for more research and analytical work. I guess I could continue with more examples on the necessity we see for scientific knowledge and evidence to support the practical efforts to combat climate change in developing countries. I will also again stress that these research needs to a large extent overlap with important knowledge lacking to meet the objective of poverty reduction and sustainable fair growth. And hereby links climate change action strongly to development assistance. You may say the so-called mainstream issue. Let me end with three specific areas that may inform the research agenda on climate change seen from our point of view in relation to ODAs in the near future in the coming years. We need better projections of impacts of climate change and weather conditions and especially better regional and local resolution of models and predictions. We need improved data on this. Based on these improved projections, we need continuous efforts to improve analysis of economic consequence of climate change, impact on production, agriculture, agriculture, et cetera, infrastructure investments, provision of ecosystem services and so on. Bringing this down on local level, design analytical work to the context of individual countries is very important. But again, still applying some kind of comparable methodology. And lastly, we need more multidisciplinary research on setting the framework for local climate change intervention. We need more knowledge and research to bring global funds down to local impact. Thank you very much.