 anonymously that we will continue with these webinars today is the second time and it's CJR folks who will present now. I have to say that I'm not fully sure if we have one presenter or several but I would invite Indu to probably start right now do we need to Catherine the data forget forget anything so if you want to share your screen and go ahead please do so yeah sure hello everyone good afternoon or good morning wherever you are so today we are focusing on water inclusive water governance in Bangladesh so but to talk more on that we have today we have four different speakers it's only pointed out before so from divers different work packages of AMD project so the presentation will be started by Dr. Morani Sarkar from URI and then we have Dr. Rahman Salauddin and then and then I'll be coming in to briefly talk about water issues and then that would be followed by our partner Tosa Oxfam project so I'd like to welcome Dr. Morani Sarkar to briefly start with the presentation yeah thank you hi good morning good evening this is Mo from IRI so today we'll be talking on inclusive water governance in Bangladesh that deep food system so we'll be covered three key issues in this presentation so first one is what we did for 2022 on work package four in Bangladesh on policies and institutional analysis and primary research the second issue we'll discuss is the centrality of water governance in the south coastal delta region and finally we will provide a glimpse of how we are working toward the work package four at the end of initiative outcomes where our focus will be on the partnership and impact so as you know that Bangladesh is a kind of climate vulnerable country and 80% of Bangladesh topography are flat panes it's highly vulnerable to climate change and we are also facing large and growing populations dynamic changes in demography and and developments so Bangladesh experience everything that Asian mega-delta wants to address so it is the kind of perfect or imperfect delta challenge challenge locations and there is a real need to shift more inclusive resilient food production systems a lot of actors are engaged in exploring solutions how can MD leverage on this interventions we'll be looking at this issues so our practice four on the gender equitable inclusive delta systems we have revised our theory of change which is now already approved feel free to review this and our focus will be on partnerships and impacts how we can influence policies and choose of input governance and gender and social inclusion here is a glimpse of what we did into 2022 we did a baseline analysis we contacted three consultants and one local partners from policy and academic background the NGO here is CNRS this NGO has been working on the issue of inclusive food system governance including in the south coastal regions and Dr. Asabu Jamal one of our consultant he has been working on the government is for a long time actually one of the first comprehensive review on governance in Bangladesh is written by him so our focus was on the analyzing the key policies with the focus on the governance and gender inclusion gender and social inclusion and then complimenting this analysis with the case study research we have just submitted three deliverables from our practice for research report policy brief and published one journal article so we did a very in-depth review of the following policies as you can see and also some other policies we found and we found that very interesting findings and some of the findings are kind of insistent policy reforms across sector so if you look at this policy will find that Bangladesh lifestocks and fisheries policy have been have not been like a device for quite sometimes it is very old still and there are also fundamental policies because of lack of sectoral coordination there are financial and capacity challenges actually there are more insights and I cannot discuss here for the lack of time so what does inclusive governance means and how to measure this in relation to policies so for these our first item was to establish a framework to review the inclusive governance through a detailed review of literature through a review of context and very specific literatures we identify the seven dimensions to assess the inclusive governance let me give us some examples of what our finding shows but in the screens the left side shows our seven dimensions so regarding the presentation and participation we know that Bangladesh has really good policies and most of the policies make references to marginal farmers and women as a specific target groups and beneficiaries and also ensure their participation in the implementation of projects and programs however there is a lack of information on how this groups are involved in the planning or decision making process or how these interventions are reshaping for unequal gender norms and practices and cultures. For capacitance skills a recent meeting organized by Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council it was highlighted that the single most pressing challenge in Bangladesh is the gap between the research policy and extensions and our work because four will work on BRC and other organizations to unpick these challenges and explore the ways forward. In terms of access to natural resources, market systems, technology, finance it is not equal for all small holders or for the more marginal groups like landlays, women's. Some policies for example agricultural extension policy recognize these challenges but there is a still lack of consistency in addressing this on the grounds. So all of the investment projects in agriculture food system they provision for the credit credit and financial support to marginal groups. Our fisheries policy calls for compensating the fishermen for band periods by cash or in kind. We also have a gender budgeting that have been practiced for quite some years in Bangladesh. However there is hardly any information in the financial support received that we are receiving it timely or is it enough for them or the spend the spending purpose or is or that is given to them or whether the poor man and women receive such support or not. For the knowledge systems we observed there's policies, technology interventions are mostly top down. For example, in the national agricultural policy 2018 they identified that it is a key challenges for Bangladesh but still it is unclear how this approach to be realized or internalized in practice. For innovations a different project introduced many technology for farmers however in practice the acceptance and utilization constant by many factors. One of the factors could be the financial support, traditional cultural norms, mobility etc. So we also use the same seven criteria and undertake a gender and social inclusion analysis of the above mentioned policies. I'm not going through this because of lack of time. However for the JC framework there will be three categories from genderblind to gender transformative. So when a policy will be even no attention to gender, that means score is zero according to CGI gender impact assessment then that policy will be genderblind. When gender will be gender integrative when there will be score one and gender transformative for score two and this work is still under progress. So it's kind of a messy slice but just I will give it a bit of brief. So we also got some very excellent findings from our case studies in the fields in Shatkhira and one of the key points is the honor of policy directiveness. So national stream policy opted for postal land use zoning to resolve the conflict between the shrimp and rice farmers in the in that area. However it's been like eight years but still there is no sign of such land zoning. And the other finding is that we also know that women have significant contribution in food systems. Policies incorporate the gender focused farming practices but often it does not transfer into action in the fields. So there are also political bias, elite captures of the water resources. So we had a field visit in May and all work back is agreed that water is the key challenges in the border area and we have to really work on the water management issues. So to talk about more about this I would really like to call Dr. Salahuddin. Dr. Salahuddin, over to you. Okay, next slide please. Can you hear me? Yes, sir. Okay. So if we look at the history of water management in Bangladesh, we can in broad term we can divide it into three different pages. We can talk about three 1960s when there was a fort of constructing coastal embankment projects. From the phase of farmer managed water management in little localized infrastructure. So that after 1960s it was really the big investment on coastal embankments which was primarily managed by the government. But after 1970s, mid 1970s up to before 2000 actually there are a lot of small scale flood control and water management projects were constructed. And in that period actually the most of the small poll dates were constructed. And all together we have about 139 poll dates in the country. Most of them are smaller scale. And these are at this period of time projects like early implementation projects or system rehabilitation project. They introduced this concept of people's participation in planning and managing projects. But it was after 1990s that was more institutionalized under different projects called Ipsum or Blue Gold projects where they worked more on the people's participation. And also developed different rules and regulations which support this kind of people's participatory water management institutional approaches. But if we would like to evaluate those status that we would find actually these are more not related to the actual functioning of the administrations. It is quite remote from actual political institutions. So these are water management institutions but work quite remotely from the real local government institutions which was not the intention. So next slide please. So during the last one year we were having some joint visits and we also started doing some real activity in our selected poll dates under AMD. In those processes, in those experiences we found some of these findings and observations. So water management identified as the priority issue in any natural disaster management interventions coastal areas by all this year. In all meetings so far we attended that was identified as the number one issue that needs to be addressed if we want to make a breakthrough in agriculture or in natural resource management activities, research and development activities. And most even in the base folders we will find that there are conflicts and there are issues that needs to be addressed. And existing water management organizations, they admitted that they alone cannot actually solve those problems. They need something more to assist them to be able to address those issues. And officially organizations such as Water Development Board is the authority but they are still remote from the real issues at the local level. And non-form interest groups still they are controlling the major water structures and they decide actually when this particular structure will be open or used. And water management related local solutions alone has the potential to bring a major positive change in product productivity. This is something very revealing that was found again and again in most of the district level workshops that we attended recently for our mapping activity that repeatedly came again and again by actually raised by mostly by different agriculture extension officials that this problem alone can actually make a big difference if we can solve it. And agencies active in the folder years are responding with their own solutions independently. There are actually a lot of innovative actions reported by a different agency that they are trying to address this issue either independent independently or in association with some other critical organizations but yet to achieve a lot in the future. And considering these problem we actually planned for an action research activity in two folders in hostilities where we would like to understand the actual functioning and status of the water management organization that was formed principally by local projects and mobilizing suggestions opinions of the stakeholder towards improvement of the system. We would like to actually follow up on what exactly the local people want with the local extension or local partners want to be pursued through the system so that we can make a difference in improving the situation. So engagement at various levels we are aiming at where we will pursue those recommendations from the people to see how we can improve the governance through institutional improvement. And then we will try to engage with all possible actors because at the moment is the water development board is the responsible authority but in reality if we want to improve upon then we need all other directly indirectly involved organizations to be on board for discussions and persuasion. And we would like to also identify some best practices of institution practices and then in two folders we will find some opportunities to follow on some local initiatives in that process as the piloting so that we can better understand that how the we can improve upon. And we have obviously has intention to take it to the national level with the help of Bangladesh Community Systems Council. Thank you. Now it is to Indu please. Thank you so much Dr. Salautin. So we identified these key issues from our field and to dig into more further details of Bangladesh we did a very extensive literacy review. As you can see in the diagram we had a total of 41 documents that included published studies, plans, policies as well as a report from some of the key institutions. So when we did this review we did we did look into more inclusion aspect to look into environmental justice framework that says the environmental resources would be fairly distributed across different groups and across mainly we looked into three many categories recognition representation and redistribution so in the recognition we focused if they have equal respect or not whether the policies and institutional mechanisms include these populations women and marginalized populations are not. And by representation we mean to representation in decision making because in Bangladesh and our key agency that you know that if the grass root level is the water use water management group. So we looked into at the participation of these women into you know like this water management group to say whether they have equal say or not and about the redistribution we looked into the access to water whether they have equal share of access to water. However we also believe that this kind of dynamics are influenced by you know a lot of power dynamics across different levels. So to look into that we also applied the political ecology concept to see how different power imbalance affects you know like the recognition representation and redistribution of water states. So it's a very detailed report we can share the detail finding later but I just want to give a brief highlight. So as Dr. Saloutin mentioned before the water management in Bangladesh really tried to save two more decentralized approach in 1990s with the formulation of national water policy in 1999 and following guidelines for participatory water management and the guideline highlights that the executive committee membership of the water management groups you know the suit consists of 12 members and at least 30 percent should be women and other seats are also reserved for landless fishers and other groups. So but when we really look at the literature there are not a lot of literature there are a few literature that you know looked into this representation and they highlight it's there is really a disconnect in policy practice landscape. The women and landless especially they are represented very less especially like you know when you talk of the infancy position there is no any study that involved you know that reported the involvement for women. Other interesting finding is intersectionality even if it is women if they represent in this group they are mostly from the rich household or elite groups and that highlights that how you know like the gender of women intersects with other characteristics like the poor landless to really determine the access to water and one of the main barriers is also the structural barrier like somehow we say that the right to water is often considered as a right to land so those who have access to land are generally a part of the groups and and only one people is supposed to participate that automatically because excludes women because in most of the households women do not have land ownership. About the redistribution we had a similar report that there was unequal access to water and also the intersectionality worked a lot in redistribution also in the representation next piece. Okay so we try to look into barriers that affected these different aspects and you can see in the slide some of these barriers are also we found from our recent case studies that were done by consultants across both system not only limited to water system so we categorized this into two different groups the one is the power inequality as we looked into political economy we really looked at what are these power differences at a different level so the gender is there is as we already I already highlighted the physical resource ownership the ownership of land to oil or other physical systems also determine access to water and representation the political that is a very significant issue because also in the field we found that affinity to the locally elected people that actually determined the use of water for example using the canal water for aquaculture you know commercial farming you know like that were some of the examples the elite culture is another and economic so based on the poverty that's played a role if we look at the institutional response so it's it's very complicated as Dr. Salah has been mentioned also like because there are almost 30 different agencies to look at the department or minister different agencies that are involved in water and if you look at the water policy for example it is still focused on the engineering perspective overlooking the governance and power dynamics there are a lack of implementation guideline because there are so many different agencies in but however the clear roles and responsibilities really it's not distance in the existing guideline the other was the fragmentation that is also related to a lack of guideline and which institutions with 2 watt and there are some trade-offs the centralized management I would say because it is great that the guideline for participatory water management really highlighted decentralization giving ownership and power to the local bodies however a lot of project that are implemented in a project basis and the involvement of local institution is not yet a formal involvement and the capacity is a way found that is not any adequate in terms of financial resources human resource and some structural issues across different sectors and there are also a few studies that talked about lack of institutional accountability and transparency so with these different challenges in mind what we plan to do we really wanted to partner with the existing partner because if you recall there was my colleague more presented by the end of 2025 our UI outcome for work package 4 is that policies and strategies of at least three government or development partners are informed by co-design this practice so we really are developing this cool transdisciplinary approach to empower increase the participation of these different groups and as well as to strengthen the local institution to meet the needs of water so this will contribute to the outcome of AMD project as well as the Transboundary Rivers of South Desertosa project that is implemented by Oxpand so we will use the same framework on the political ecology and the environmental justice so but to provide a brief overview of the Trousa project I'd like to request my colleague Moina from Oxpand over to you Moina and could I request maybe that you keep your presentation to about five minutes so that we have enough time for discussion yes thank you so actually Transboundary Rivers of South Asia started back at 2017 with the aim of trying to develop an inclusive and collaborative Transboundary River governance system because those rivers we were focusing on had no boundary actually and it was implemented in Bangladesh India Nepal and Myanmar so we also try to bring the CSOs local CSOs and river relevant private sectors in the same platform of community so that community voice gets more emphasis while taking a decision regarding the river governance and to connect these different stakeholders we engaged youth which was found actually and very effective way to way of report building even when COVID hit back back in 2020 so one of the major tool was for Trousa for is Nodi boy talk or in English you can see river meeting to which we we did our the community parent community about their rights and access on the river and try to understand their issues and concerns and also from knowing from that we try to build their capacity to pin down those issues and how to address those of or at least to know the process of persuasion inclusion or influence mainly to the government and private sectors and we witnessed how communities especially women and youth took initiative to reduce the conflict of common food resources like fishing ban period sad mining these type of sensitive issues and through the whole process we also learned a lot which we will see in the next slide actually so for next slide please so you can see that the left side photo shows a bamboo structure this is an indigenous knowledge we've got to know at Brahmaputra river basin from the riparian people so bamboos grows there in a huge amount and the brahmaputra as Brahmaputra river in itself is a highly erosion prone area so people there had an innovative years ago and this bundle and those bamboos to develop this structure to protect their housing assets from the river erosion so this is actually I mean at least one-tenth of cost of the what government implement to protect the river bank like the concrete concrete made infrastructures or embedments and usually like and there women actually took the lead to promote these promote these knowledge and our practice and work by joining with the man also and we also tried to look into the human cost for the conservation and human cost for any businesses business cases like as you know hillshire fish is a renaissance species throughout the south asia and it is a actually geographical indicator for Bangladesh so government of Bangladesh have number of policies and regulations for to conserve the hillshire but we did not find any evidence of including the fisher folks who actually catch fishes like in the decision making regarding those policies and practices so we had a network of 60 youth who participated in a study to show the impact of fish conservation through citizen science approach and we found like how fisher folks are not getting any proper safety needs social safety needs or any proper compensation during the bank periods and as I already have said that women or women leadership was built through TROSA project in the river ecosystem and we had developed a module through our to our learning and experience in the project and we did receive a very positive and courageous response from the community women of community next slide please so having learning and the experience from the TROSA phase one now the TROSA phase two has been implemented in Bangladesh India and Nepal and now we are more focused on the climate resilience of the riparian people so there are four outcomes which will bring the bring our goal to like our goal to strengthen the like improved cooperation in governing share water resources strengthening resilience to climate change of the riparian communities in the transplantary GBM river basin and our focus is on here of women access and rights of the river resources also so in short this is from my side so thank you thank you very much to all four presenters for this very informative talk we have now about 20 minutes for discussion uh I suggest people who have questions just raise their hands and then can ask their questions I see that there were was some activity in the chat but I think these questions have been answered already um maybe I can make the start and I have to apologize for a very ignorant question but so in the talk to me as a non-insider it remains still very abstract what the what the problem is and how this what the ideas are to solve this so for example it was mentioned there's conflict within the poll does can you give maybe examples of what is a conflict that currently exists and how that would be resolved through more inclusive water governance shall I take this well please yes okay yeah yeah I mean for a small scale of water development projects where we expect that I mean poll days so where we expect that there will be a an embankment encircled covering an area and then all the major canals will have some sort of water control devices which is constructed on the on the main canals and then there would be a lot of other smaller devices like for irrigation or for water drainage but the mostly conflicts happens with the big structures where you need to decide which is the right time to open a gate for irrigation water or draining water so if this decision is made by a person which has interest in in fishing or if he's a you know tail ender or a head ender then they there will be conflicts with other people so and if it will be it will be a complicated problem in a conflict if the decision maker is a non-farmer while deciding for many hundred farmer households so he will only you know be concerned about his issue perhaps is to you know leasing the main canal for fishing so he will not bother about when farmers are really crying for draining the water or wants to take the water from the river for irrigation so that kind of conflict but it is complicated because there are many levels of you know water management concerns it it can be from the main canal it can be from the secondary canals it can be from the tertiary canals so depending on the crop depending on the season depending on the time for water you know demand it will be okay thanks yeah that makes it a bit more relatable for me thank you Katharine thank you for giving me opportunity to ask a question um yes i did i did indeed react in the in the chat and that was on policies that were or were not included in the analysis and because i think that there is a lot of information in there which may or may not be in the report so please do share the report to me i would really like to look at it and i have a question related to to the the concept that you use because on the one hand in asia mega deltas you look from a food system perspective and in this study i hear the term water system and so somehow you have linked the food system perspective with the water system and there i think it's very interesting to hear a bit more from the designers of the study how they see that because i think in the water study and in institutions in water management you will have water level of kind of field level you have pool their level then you have a kind of divisional level or kind of subcatchment level and national level so at some moment the boundaries of the water system which are normally hydrological are going to interfere with the boundaries of the institutional level and that also links somehow to food systems and the example of the the trosa program i think is very interesting because they are also interacting at different scale levels and with different sets of stakeholders but anyway my first question was how conceptually the food system and the water system are linked if you have some idea about that okay so can i thank you so much that's a very you know good question we also had this kind of dilemma you know like because we were exploring the challenges that are you know within the food system and looking only from food production perspective but really as my colleague more said when we went to the field we found that most of the challenges like most of the people they highlighted water as a key issue so because we are also focusing on the smallholder farmers and there has been a lot of historical trends in Bangladesh for example if we look at the 1990s there is a lot of investment for stream farming and during that phase a lot of smallholder farmers the land were captured for stream farming if we look at the political perspective and that affected these people's food system you know like and some of them were even laborers so there have been the trends like these smallholders they are largely affected and the water plays a crucial role like production and of course all this value chain if we look at the work package one like also the work package two like food consumption nutrition perspective so we see there is very much clear connection especially to look at the inclusion aspect because there has been a lot of conflicts also that has affected food system as doctors allowed to say in terms of inclusion for example stream farming versus rice farming or east versus core also at the international transboundary level so that has been the water also because of Bangladesh being in that as a lower sweeper in country the problem of water has been so much in a persistently affecting food system so that is the reason why we highlighted maybe my colleague want to add that but in the case study that we proposed there are a lot of different skills as you identified and we for now we plan for some approach that where we focus on the advocacy level at the community level starting with the advocacy but also looking at the institutional level so further we are still finalizing the because we plan for a CS science society approach and we will the way of the study that we design is we will really identify the problems in detail and co-create these solutions with the stakeholders at the ground so for now that is how we plan to intervene in the case study I hope that does verify the question Catherine no it doesn't but maybe it's beyond it maybe it's beyond the the the discussion today but maybe into maybe we can follow this up also outside the delta talks and I understand that your focus is on the smallholder farmers I recognize very much the points that you mentioned also about stream farmers etc but but still the smallholder farmers are also included in the food system as producers as well as that they are in their own right also consumers but in the food system consumers from the city play a much more important role and and well I see the message of Deepak coming in so I stop talking at this moment we can talk about it later yeah okay sure thank you so much yeah that's okay so I keep that discussion going afterwards please because I also saw that there was still a bit of misunderstanding and and yeah not well aligned thinking Sanjeev has a question all right thanks Oli I just wanted to really highlight and this is based on work that immediately um about seven eight years ago in the folders looking at water governance and one of the things that Indu mentioned just now but I just wanted to really highlight it is the the the tug-of-war that emerged between shrimp farming and cultivators the reason I bring it up is because it has implications for the entire sort of local water system and the and the way that the folders are supposed to actually function so we the point is to introduce a slightly sort of systems perspective here in terms of placing the different actors in this particular analysis what was found was the sort of the the the ascendance or the other emphasis given on shrimp farming the the the impacts of salinity salinity on you know cultivable land but also the fact that the infrastructure being mismanaged meant that the the holders had no drainage so so I just wanted to introduce these these sort of biophysical characteristics that that seemed at that time to characterize the governance situation there and just wanted to work whether some of the presenters wanted to reflect on that respond thank you sorry reflect on what in particular can you point that out again the the relationship between the drivers of the the the waterscape there in relation to the um food production systems and the actors how does that how does that fit or what are the implications of the mismanagement of the entire polar system for different different food producers okay so what's yeah what's the kind of the challenge the what's what impact has the current mismanagement on food for producers I think I can try to answer this because I was attending the ongoing CS map workshops in six districts so it appeared again and again as an adaptation approach from this problem of water management that if we can you know operate all those structures well and if we can ensure that all the canals uh and uh secondary tertiary also the if they're re excavated well if that drainage and irrigation is controlled uh in a in a nicer way than most of the problem of irrigation and drainage will be solved so that we don't really need any big intervention of new technologies or you know adjustment to the popping system but with only single interventions of good water management we can solve perhaps 50 of the problems that is what most of the DAE officials have uh you know shared with us in most most of the workshops so that can actually make a big difference thank you I think Catherine has some intervention I saw something in the chat going on but maybe we can bring that to the attention of everyone okay well I there was a message to give other people also opportunity to ask questions so but what I reacted was to um is about the the the management if we call management mismanagement then it's because we have an opinion on what is good management and I think it's good to be explicit about that and I think that good management is different for different groups of users um I think that's uh that's a good point kind of to to get more into detail about I think the other remark of DIPA is an important one that and I think maybe DIPA you come in and you kind of say something about it we um of the first one or the second one maybe I'll start with the second so that you know what we find is that implementing stakeholders at at various levels Catherine that you pointed out I don't have the capacity or incentive and the the institutions don't have the finances and the resources to capacitate them or to provide them more incentive for more equitable water sharing and access and this seems like a very real challenge which is also evolving in different ways like the lack of transfer translation of research and policy to extension is one angle of it as well so you know I think it's really important to pay attention to these issues and and how how can we do it and you know just technically bringing these stakeholders into workshops you know which so many people have been doing is not really changing anything yeah I think that's a good good thing to point out and in that sense it is remarkable that in uh for instance the policies um a lot of the policies in the past would be limited to a specific ministry so this policy was done by this ministry and then the other ministries were well maybe involved in lip service but not really in implementation and the question is whether in more recent policies that has changed and also in the sense that what you say that's the the implementing stakeholders um uh to to have them involved in water sharing and in access to water are there examples of where that happened and then what was that made it happen and if it does not happen um I I do think we need to think about what governance structures could be to to make it happen and it's indeed very interesting to see the example of Trosa what they have done I also think the example of uh IUCN um was very interesting a number of years ago on the hill Shafish the research in the trans boundary area but I I think in the this particular case what is very remarkable is that for a long time also CGR was very much separating the agriculture research from the water research and that's the very interesting thing of this asia mega deltas that you have both sides at the table and how can we then look at the things so that we can make it connected to each other so that's what I'm kind of looking after but I see other hands also me too I saw Feros having his hand up uh yeah can you hear me yes we can yeah um yeah but Catherine already mentioned it I was going to say like okay for example of cooperation to work I know in folder 22 people actually manage their water systems so that the seller could not get in and they could do agriculture so that was kind of successful so there are examples but like as in the presentations the presenters said like the structures are maintained by BWDB they're more focused on water but the users are like either agriculture or fishermen then there is no an integrated structure to maintain an operation of these structures of the folders where the end users can influence how these structures are maintained and it's not only like the shrimp cultures or rice cultures in some areas the rice cultures the field is used for multiple purposes as well so and one season they do rice culture in the next they might do fish culture there as well and I've seen that when I was in the field as well so I think uh yeah indeed a integrated approach is needed where like the end users can influence the structural operations of this building thank you um does anyone want to respond on this issue or raise a different question also possible yeah yeah what was interesting in some of the districts that see that there are agencies such as Bangladesh agriculture development or BADC corporation they are now coming as a very significant agency who are trying to you know reescape at canals inside folders or trying to solve some of the drainage problems which has been actually appreciated by all other actors like DAE especially and in some folders we have also seen the DAE people are talking about you know the interventions very positive intervention from the administration for instance the deputy commissioner of the district if because they they are the authority who actually take the if the lease out to the fisher community so in those people are very powerful in the system if they together can come up with good recommendation that how we can make all these existing rules and regulations into something effective so in maybe we will you know here in as recommendations in our workshop that we need as the existing the legal tools that we have in our hand into something different which will actually be more conducive in the future so actually we are expecting real life recommendations from as bottom as possible like the farmer groups or older water management groups or to the uposila interactions or at the district level so we're expecting all those good advices recommendations can then be transformed into some policy recommendations which can help us ultimately to make some reformation and who is supposed to provide these recommendations these recommendations we are expecting from in the folder level we would like to include the water management organizations farmers and local extension officers in the FGD process they will have set up recommendation then we can interact at the uposila level where all the government actors can come together and look at the recommendations coming from the grassroots and and so as to the other levels at the district and national level okay so i think the challenge will be how to translate all these recommendations and something actionable yes potentially also something that can be applied on a wider scale than one folder where they may be coming from i have to say i'm sorry that we have to leave this discussion here so there was there were some open points that katarine wanted to bring up after this meeting please do so send an email i would say for the next webinar let's try to limit really the presentation to 20 minutes if possible so that we have really sufficient time for in-depth discussion because you know we always say we take a discussion up later and then it gets somehow lost so it would be good to really make most use of this hour that we will have in four weeks from now i just checked my calendar i will not be able to participate because i will be at the world water week maybe i see some of you there i would then hand it to katarine to nominate or find a presenter from bacheningen for this webinar and for weeks communicate with mel and i send on that and and i hope we have a discussion as good as we had today yes i just to interrupt you quickly because we have one minute left thank you very much i will find an other speaker most likely on our case study in vietnam so that will be interesting and also i just like to mention that we some of my colleagues were in Rome for the food summit stop taking moment and have been saying water there as well because in a lot of the food system plans of the different countries water is not mentioned so we are pushing for that and yes i will follow up with the presenters of today and Deepa who also mentioned very important points in the chat so yes we will follow up so thank you all very much for organizing this and looking forward to meet you again and thanks again to the presenters for this elaborate presentations very interesting thank you thank you also from my side and see you very soon have a good day bye bye thank you thank you