 So a landscape approach is essentially managing complex landscapes in an integrated fashion and a holistic fashion, incorporating all of the different land uses within those landscapes into a single management process. The reason we need a landscape approach is because of the history of segregating functions within landscapes, whether it's a conservation concession, which will be a national park, community concession, which is a community forestry maybe, or logging concession. And even though they're all really interconnected socially and biophysically, they've been managed in isolation. And what we really need is a much more holistic approach to understand the interconnections between each of these different land uses, but also to capture the complexity of those land uses and make sure the management is integrated and simplified in a way that hasn't been done before. Although it's a very simple process in many respects, it's on the ground it's a very complicated thing to do. To get stakeholders in a room or in any forum who have very different views about what should happen in the landscape, to agree on a shared vision and a shared view of what should happen in that landscape is particularly challenging. I mean, just from our own perspective, building up our ten principles took eight years of consultation and many, many different institutions were involved and everybody's got a point of view, which is not often easy to be reconciled or shared. And so coming to consensus, and that's the real word about the landscape approach is achieving consensus in the landscape and achieving consensus between all the stakeholders. So in fact, win-win solutions in most tropical landscapes have proved to be somewhat elusive. And the real tenet, if you like, of integrated management of landscapes and the landscape approach is recognising for trade-offs and negotiating for trade-offs, so that all the stakeholders come to an agreement at which there are winners and losers, but that you win more and lose less, if you like, and that's really the fundamental behind the landscape approach. Things change daily, things change weekly, things change monthly, but you need to adapt to those changes and often projects are constrained by their project document, which says this is what we're going to do in a landscape and that's sort of followed, almost to rote, but you can't manage a complex landscape like that, you need to have that adaptability and the flexibility to change. The role of science, we inform, and we've come up with a whole series of principles and guidelines which enable the landscape approach to be implemented, it's only a framework. We can't take that forward, we've provided the research that's enabled that framework to be put in place, but it's now up to other institutions and other agencies to take those guidelines and principles forward, to implement the landscape approach for themselves. The places where things work on the ground, things are more effective, better outcomes are achieved, is where there are people talking to each other. Conservation organisations cannot work in a protected area alone without being cognisant of what's happening around them. The same for logging concessions for private sector, everybody needs to be talking to each other because everything interacts at the landscape scale and the take home message should be that only through partnerships can the landscape approach work.