 Good morning everyone. Welcome to this important morning meeting. Breakfast without food maybe, or at least a morning meeting. I think you all had breakfast hopefully before this, at least a cup of coffee. Some of you I was together with last night too, at dinner on nature and the climate. We're not going to spend this morning talking about why we have to take better care of nature and climate. I think we know why. I think the situation is not that great. Our planet is getting warmer and we also know that land is degrading and we also know that we are in a situation where we're losing biodiversity. So this has not to be about why, but about how. And you know that the World Economic Forum, as the International Organization for Public-Private Cooperation, we also try to mobilize the private sector for nature and climate. Nature positive and we also want a net-zero situation over time when it comes to climate. But it's now how are we going to meet those aspirations and we have taken many initiatives. I think you are aware of some of them. We have CO climate leaders, hundred and thirty companies that have committed to go net-zero by 2050, started in 2013. We also have the First Movers Coalition, 88 companies that have committed to the user purchasing power to create a green market, user procurement kind of leverage to change. So I could make this list even longer, one trillion trees, maybe some of you also have heard about. What we're trying to do today is to add to the public-private a third P philanthropy and philanthropy can catalyze a lot of new initiatives and if you think about it also that it can also be a way of mobilizing billions that again can mobilize trillions. Sometimes you really need seed capital, seed money. And today philanthropy is playing an increasingly important role in many aspects, not so much though unfortunately when it comes to climate and nature. Only 2% of what is committed in philanthropy annually goes to climate and less than 2% to nature. That's less than 4%. So 96% goes to other very important purposes and but I think we can do more in the field of nature and climate since it's an existential question for not only our children and grandchildren anymore, it is all these things are happening here and now. That's why we launched under the leadership of my colleague, Gimwe, I think you're somewhere here and a great team at the forum, this GAIA initiative. The GAIA initiative is not only our planet but it's also really a collaboration to amplify what pledging in philanthropy means for the planet. And for me this is a new initiative that we launched in Davos. We're following up now also in summer Davos that is very consequential. So I'm so happy that we have this group here today that will discuss this and we know also there's a huge opportunity to unlock more philanthropy in these areas in Asia. Philanthropy and private offices are growing very fast in this region and I know there are leaders that really care about both philanthropy, climate and nature in this region. So I think this can mean a big difference. So I'm very proud that we are heading this GAIA initiative and I'm also very proud that my colleagues at the World Economic Forum has been pushing through this and just in less than a year it's caught so much momentum. The fact that we are here proves that. So I think I'm not supposed to land that's also important because we have a great panel and we also have a great moderator so I'm gonna go and chair another panel about the geopolitics of the world. Maybe almost as challenging as climate and nature and maybe they're interconnected. I think it would be a good thing if for example the G2 could agree on really important measures both on climate and nature. But that's a different story. So thank you very much and good luck with the panel. Thank you. Hi everyone. Good to see you all. Thank you for setting the agenda. Very rightly said that this panel is about the how of climate change. So actionable. But before I get straight into introducing our brilliant panelists I want a quick note for the audience. Please engage with us. If you're if you're tweeting if you're engaging with us watching this live use hashtag AMC 23 and towards the end we'll keep the last 15 minutes for questions and answers. So it's a good time to stop thinking about your question. Make a note. And when we open the floor please be ready with your questions. So let me go straight into introducing our panelists to my left is Ma Jun. You wear many hats. You're the chairman of Green Finance Committee China Society for Finance and Banking. You're also the founder and president of Institute of Finance and Sustainability and former co-chair of G20 Sustainable Finance Working Group and co-chair of Stereco of Green Investment Principles for Belt and Road. And you're also a professor. So Dr. Ma looking forward to hearing your views. To the left of Dr. Ma is Siyoko Lim CEO of Philanthropy Asia Alliance. And we'll talk more about how you're involved with a domestic trust and the report as well later on. To your left is Joseph Luke Engai Chairman for Greater China McKinsey and Company. Welcome to the forum. To Joseph's left is Sabrina Peng Chief Sustainability Officer and Group. And to Sabrina's left and my right is his Excellency Pya Moshalinga Minister of Information and Technology Government of Namibia. Welcome to the forum. A quick introduction from me. My name is Prihash Ravastav. I am a journalist. I work with Business Insider Insider as you can see the logos and the UK Bureau of Chief being a journalist for about 15 years or so. So let's get straight to the point. The topic today is innovating for the planet. You all wear different hats. You all will be looking at this topic from very different lenses. So I want to go straight to the question of what does planet innovation mean to you. And I want to start with you Dr. Ma. Thank you very much. You hear me okay, right? It's really great to be part of this discussion. And I like to talk about this from the finance angle since I've been working in the finance field for 30 years. And I spent most of the past 10 years working on green finance, assemble finance, both in China and globally. Back 10 years ago when we were in China discussing the need for green financing, the focus was on pollution. Some of you in Beijing you may know that in one day in Beijing 2013 the PM 2.5 went up to 1,000. Most of you know PM 2.5. Some of you probably don't know. It's a measure of the density of air pollutants in cubic meter of air. And it's like 50 times higher than safe level. So that's the time when we started thinking about green financing. We need to put in a lot of money fixing air pollution, water pollution, land contamination. 2014 when I joined the central bank of the PBOC we estimated that we need like a 4 trillion RMB per year for treating the pollution problem. And then later on we created a green financial system in China including in 2016 we had this green finance guideline which I helped put together in China. So since then really green finance exploded in China. We started with a couple of trillion RMB back 10 years ago. Now it's 25 trillion RMB outstanding green loans. And China is now becoming by far the largest green lending market. And also in 2016 we created this green bond market. We are now the second largest green bond market. And we have 1,000 green funds which are really equity investments into green projects. So the starting point of the pollution and last few years it came to climate change because our president committed to you know 2060 carbon neutrality. And then we estimated how much money we need. It's 16 trillion RMB per year. It's no longer four. It's 16. And we need you know much more money than before to deal with climate you know included the sustainability agenda. And so far I think we probably only meet half of that demand from the financial sector and the other half are still sort of missing. And we need to build a more complete more efficient green financial system to mobilize private capital including from the banking system asset managers insurance and so on. The four pillars that we constructed in the green financial system which are still evolving are number one we need standards. We need clear definition of what green activities are otherwise it will be greenwashing. Number two we need the reporting standards so that the issuers or the fundraisers will tell the market you know the banks and asset managers what exactly we are doing in terms of delivering environmental benefits. Tell us how much carbon you are reducing. And certainly we need a whole range of financial products to meet diverse you know demands from different kinds of green activities renewables you know solid waste, electric vehicles, batteries, decarbonization of steels. They all require different kind of financing package and financing products. And finally we have to put together a set of incentives to make a lot of these green projects or transition projects bankable. A lot of these projects are not bankable for the moment. They look good you know the general environmental benefits are not profit making that's why private sector are not willing to join but we need to create incentives so that in the first few years they become bankable. And when private sector come into the sector and they become large enough they'll be bankable by themselves. The good example is China and now the largest renewable investor, largest EV investor and the exporter, largest battery producers and exporter. So all these are successive stories of the passing incentive that we're putting and now they become mature and they can do even you know without subsidies. Globally the same thing and I think annually we need a 4.5 trillion US dollar for climate action. Of course China being part of it and the financing is becoming even more challenging because a lot of developing country emerging markets still doesn't have that green financial system in place. They need taxonomy, they need disclosure, they need products, they need incentives and I think one of the efforts we should be making is to help you know many other developing country emerging market economies to build their green financial system going forward. That's great. I will come back to you on the 16 trillion point but I want to go to CLK first. Can you what does planet innovation mean to you? Well I'd like to talk a bit about the philanthropy Asia Alliance and this is an alliance that was announced last September at the philanthropy Asia summit in Singapore. So that was our soft launch, our formal launch is this September at the next edition of the summit. What the alliance is is a coalition for change. So it is a group of donors, our members, of programme partners and of knowledge experts and the idea really is to catalyse multi sector partnerships by leveraging the pooled resources, expertise and capabilities from all of these people, our entire community of members to come together as a force for good, to tackle urgent climate and other humanity challenges with Asia as a focus. So global alliance, Asian focus and to kick things off we had Tomasic trust coming in as a member together with others such as the Gates Foundation, the Dalio Philanthropies, Ray Dalio, Lee Karshing Foundation and others. So it is really the global philanthropies, philanthropists, family offices, foundations, corporates coming together to provide the funds for action, collaboration for action along with our programme partners to execute. Our three anchor mandates are climate and nature as well as education and health because there are many intersections with across these mandates. Our mission really is the four P's, planet, people, peace and progress, underpinned by the fifth P of partnerships. And really as Dr Ma was saying, where the private sector is unwilling or unable to step in yet, that's where philanthropy, the small but mighty P can come in to catalyse, to provide the catalytic first loss capital that's required to test solutions, solutions that aren't bankable yet. And that's where philanthropy can come in to then test them and once they become bankable and investable, then you can crowd in funding from the public and private sectors. And why Asia? Because this is a great time. On the one hand, if you look at the sheer scale and development profile of Asia, we have 60% of the world's population. We have nearly half of global GDP residing in Asia. And I've read that in the next few years or so, $5 trillion of wealth is going to pass from the current generation to the next generation. So there's tremendous opportunity and challenges. On the other hand, Asia is responsible for about half of global carbon emissions. So if we can harness all this collective resolve to come together as a force for good, we can go a long way. Asia can go a long way to solving global challenges. Thank you. Joseph? Well, first of all, I love the fact that we're bringing philanthropy into the discussion. I do think that we need more innovation in this area because I think in the past, I think that people are too focused on trade-offs. It's either sustainability or it's growth or it's emerging markets or it's going to be the trade-off between developed markets. And I think that the power, and we've been talking a little bit around the power of and. The world needs growth. The world needs sustainability. The world also needs inclusion. And somehow you got to put these all together because when we're too siloed in our own thinking, what happens if we talk past each other? So I do think that innovation is very important because we need to bring a little bit more of this joint aspiration and community together. Otherwise, I think that we'll always be into our own little conferences and silos and nothing will ever get done. And I love the fact that we're now bringing public-private philanthropic and partnership together. These are the four pieces with your five pieces. I think that it will really work because I do think that now maybe there needs to be a more cross-boundary, cross-discipline convener and maybe philanthropic forces can be part of that initiative. But I do think that if I think about the more short-term challenges, I come back to China when you're sitting here. We are now 50% of actually renewable capacity. We're at this stage, some of the world's leading, whether it's EVs or whether I think the opportunity is massive. But on the other hand, I think if the short-term force on the corporates right now is margin compression, trying to survive, trying to figure out what the next few years are. And I think that we've got to somehow bring together all these forces at work and think about what's the agenda and how do we use innovation to perhaps bring back a little bit more of the action and less of a talk into the equation. Yeah, that's very interesting. Sabrina, you're a Chief Sustainability Officer. What's your take? Well, how do you view planet innovation? So first of all, today I think bring the philanthropy part into this PPP. I think it's a great idea. But I also want to add another PPP, maybe the fourth PPP, people, because and actually owns Alipay. Alipay is one of the most popular lifestyle APP in China. Almost everyone in China, they have Alipay APP, using that for payment for utility bills, paying for taking taxi for shopping for everything. So six years ago, we come up with the idea how to engage all the audience, all the people, users, they really get awareness of the environment, of the planet, and also change the awareness to real actions. Because I think a lot of people they have the awareness, but huge gap between the awareness to real actions. So because we have the platform of the users authorization, so we invented a mini app called and forest. So actually basically it's encouraging everybody to take real actions every day. Like you take public transportation instead of driving your own cars, or you go to grocery store, you do not ask for a plastic bag, you carry your own bag, etc. A lot of activities every day. We happy to see up to six years more than 650 million users participating in this. I think this is a huge angle for the people side to join this PPP. So another PPP. So because I think this is a huge power from the normal people side. They participate in this big plan. That will be the real innovation. Yeah, in my understanding. That's great. Adding another PPP people that's very interesting. Minister, you represent the government. You're from the government. When you hear these views, what do you think? What does planet innovation mean to you? Thank you very much. Yeah, at this time in point, yeah, planet innovation include quite a number of areas, a number of sectors, and a number of industries to start with. But more importantly, is to start with our people, particularly the young generation. Who are the future? For them to understand planet innovation. First, we must start with public education among our youth. We start with education making it part of the school curriculum, particularly at the secondary school level. A number of schools are adopting programs whereby they bring to the awareness of the learners the importance of issues like climate change. Now, when they are trained, for example, to become entrepreneurs, then they should now start looking at the new innovations in terms of supply chain. For example, what are the new innovations that are required? Whether in terms of incremental innovation to build on what they are currently having, whether in terms of disruptive innovation to start changing new way of doing things in order to trade. Now, there is where we should now put our money. The land profits should come in, putting in money in these programs that are aimed at orienting our youth towards shaping the way of doing businesses for the better future. Very interesting. Some really interesting themes emerging here. I can see public education need to invest more. We need to bring people in. Working in silos. Going back to you, what you said about this gap as well, the 16 trillion RMB that's needed. I think the end goal here is to achieve planetary targets. There are a lot of innovation that's happening. There is so much money going into climate tech. Is that a drop in the ocean? Is there more to be done? Is there more innovation? When you talk about this gap, do you think there is a role that philanthropy can play in plugging that gap? I want to start with you. Definitely. In China, when we started thinking about green finance, we were talking about the financial sector, private sector, we have to mobilize 90% of the green money. The government only accounts for about 10%. Now, the same thing I think for most countries, for climate, for nature, only 10% can be really mobilized within the government budgetary system and the rest have to come from private sector. But private sector, the majority of them are actually money sort of oriented. They need to look for profits and at least for the banks, they need to get the principal back. So there's a lot of barriers to their entry into the green space, especially in the early stage of a lot of these green projects. That's why I think incentives are important. And early on, I mentioned a couple of government incentives. In China, we have the central bank putting in facilities called decarbonization facility that offers a funding cost of only 1.75%, which is much lower than market. So that's sort of an inducement to the banks, commercial banks, to participate. It's like blended financing, I give you cheap money and you do it jointly with me. And the local governments in China are also doing this, using their fiscal money to subsidize the green loans and to guarantee green loans to de-risk these projects. And it's been doing very well in one of the places in China called Huzhou. It's one of the pilot region for green finance. They were doing this for the past six years. Every year, they could generate 40% growth on average green financing and really contributing massively to the development of green economy. Now, how do we bring philanthropy into this space? I think philanthropy can mimic the government in offering such incentives, for example, de-risking. If you offer, you know, whether it's partial or full, you know, loss guarantee, then you can crowd in probably 50 times, even 100 times, or probably sector money. And the second thing you can do is to subsidize the additional cost of being recognized as a green, for example, in Hong Kong, the government actually subsidized the green verification of green bonds. It's a small amount of money, but it actually induces a lot more money. I think leverage could be 100 times. Singapore probably doing the same thing, right? A couple of places are doing that. And I'm sure philanthropy can do very much the same thing, to, you know, leverage and crowding much bigger, you know, size of private sector money. The other thing I think philanthropy probably can play an even bigger role is capacity building. As I mentioned earlier, we need a lot of capacity in developing country emerging markets to turn their green financial system, the financial system into greener one. And that capacity requires, you know, training, for example, gum officials, regulators, the banks, asset managers, the third party, service providers such as verifiers. And this training, you know, takes up maybe only 0.1% of the entire system of finance budget. But it's so critical because without people, you cannot implement it. Mark Kani used to say, hey, let's mobilize $1 trillion for climate action emerging markets. And my question is that, where do we get this 10,000 people to implement these projects? That's really the bottleneck. So a small amount of money, you know, a few million dollars training, maybe, you know, 100,000 people in emerging markets will be the key, really, to break this bottleneck. And the philanthropy can do that in a big way. Yeah. Joseph, do you want to jump in on that? Sure. Look, you know, I think, you know, the gap in terms of the financing gap is such so large that, you know, I don't think that philanthropy will plug that gap, right, in terms of the raw amount of money. But I think what, you know, philanthropic organization should really think about is the unique positioning in this whole equation, right? If I think about what they can do, and it's unique, I think the first one, I think is the convening power, right? I do think right now, and pulling in the P from the question, I think can convene across, you know, national lines, they can convene across, you know, corporate lines, they can convene across different domains. And I do think that that convening power, that platform is actually very important. The second one, I think is as a accelerator, right, as Dr. Marj has said, I think that there are certain things that maybe everyone can afford that million, they'll feel million, but being a lot more focused and being the first one to spot the opportunity, being more passionate, more mission driven, I think that there's a accelerator effect that philanthropic organizations can actually do. Another thing, the last one is really around inspiration, right? I think for a lot of corporates, right there, right now, you know, so, you know, again, into the own world of, you know, survival and margins and everything else is that I think we need someone to provide that extra inspiration that, you know, helps us to, you know, think more positively, right, about many things in the world. And I think that philanthropic organizations in many ways, right, can provide that spark, that little inspiration for all of us to follow, right? At the end, the money will have to come from corporates. It has to be somehow make sense financially, otherwise, that gap will forever be there, right? But I think that you need that spark, you need that accelerator, you need that convening. And I think that's what philanthropic organizations can really help us here. That's a very interesting point, because we don't think the philanthropic organizations can replace private capital, but they kind of will bring in that extra bit of altruism, really, that that's sort of what we need. And Siokwe, I would want to sort of lean on you here, what's your take on this? Exactly, right. I like the point about inspiration and that spark, because just to give an example, Temasek Foundation is within our Temasek Trust ecosystem has got this livability challenge price. It's a global call with a $1 million seed funding for a winner. It's to draw out the climate tax startups, but that's not enough. First of all, they need that money to kick things off, to pilot solutions to make them bankable. But we also bring in through the network, to your point on corporates have the real money, to then put in additional follow-on funding. And so one example of this is in 2021, the winner that year, it was formally called Sea Change, now it's called Equated Tech. Really, it came up with a solution to capture carbon dioxide from seawater. And the ocean is a great sponge, in fact, 150 times more efficient than land. So once you do that, it re-absorbs et cetera. And the carbon dioxide captured became then carbonates for constructed material. So that's great. And then because of this, where did the government, that public pee coming, it came into a right additional funding to trial a solution for desalination of seawater. So that's one great example of the PPP, the public private philanthropic sectors coming together to scale for greater impact. Yeah. Minister, do you see any push back from the government on philanthropy instead of making its way into helping, you know, achieve our targets? Well, as I said, my focus is really on imparting knowledge on people. For me, philanthropists should come in now in terms of funding higher education, research and technology. A lot of our institutions of higher learning are undergoing transformation from being traditional academic institutions in order to align themselves to emerging technologies, emerging challenge of climate change and so forth. We have programs, for example, like the green hydrogens that are coming. Do we have programs that our institutions of higher learning that equip students well in order to position themselves in order to develop these types of projects, not only to talk of people coming from developed countries, coming to developing countries to develop this, but to capacitate people in developing countries in terms of skills and knowledge. We need to fund the research programs that are aimed at ensuring sustainable development. And that is where philanthropists are coming in in order to ensure that these new innovations that we are coming up with. We have people that are well equipped to sustain them. Sabrina, I want to get to you now. You mentioned a very interesting point about bringing people in the fourth P really. Do you see instances of that across the world when you look at when you look at examples? Do you have examples where you can sort of bring to the table and say, this is exactly where the trend setter is and would like to go this way? With, you know, how do you bring people into the equation? OK, so let me expand a little bit more about end forest. Then everybody gets a sense of how to, you know, we use a platform to engage people. And also we're happy to see this model not only in China, but also just inspired by us and a lot of our partners they are outside of China. They're doing this. So the idea so it's engage users for their daily green actions. But the key here is how to really incentivize them, OK? Maybe today I won't do this, but tomorrow I'm busy. I don't want to do this. OK, so you need incentivize people. So we come up with this mechanism. Just we make every action can count. So like you take a bus, we give you 80 gram green energy. This actually based on the carbon emissions you saved compares to driving your own cars or the average. So actually every actions we have a certain amount of green energy, this gives people a very just a real tangible feeling. OK, this is really valuable for the nature. And the second is we use this green energy point. Actually, you can like a player game in our APP. We call them gamification way because people all love games. Right. So they use this green energy point. They can plant a virtual tree. Once a virtual tree planted, we will donate money to the philanthropy partners and they will plant a real tree in the desiccation areas in China. Nowadays, 400 million trees has been planted already. So you can see the huge power from everybody they're gathering together. But the very important part here is how to incentivize them doing this daily and continually to be a really sustainable way to engage a lot of people to do this. So this is like, so the one side is people. The other side is corporate put fund in this and the philanthropy partners. They are helping with planting trees in a very professional way, scientific way. And also because a lot of trees that are planted in the country owned, stayed on the forest. So need a lot of support from the public sector. So all these four parts play together make this happen. Not only people, not only and, not only just the philanthropy and also the government. The four sectors, they play together. So I think this is very like encouraging examples for us. That's why just, you know, I think the posture only last year for our foundations we put here, we have actually we have two foundations from and alone. So the money we spend is more than 110 million US dollars. Why? We're not doing this for business because business, this is the philanthropy side. Why we are keeping doing this because the passion, the enthusiasm from the people and from all partners. And also I think this can definitely happen not only in China, all of the world because in Philippine our partners, they're inspired by this idea. They launch a Philippine and forest too. And because there they need a lot of trees planting and we are so happy to see more and more partners. They like this idea. I think just not only just that, like the platform business, they can do this. Even a lot of consumer brands, they can do this too. Like we partner with the IHG, the hotel group, they encourage everybody when they're checking the hotel, they do not use one time toothbrush, a lot of things they can get the incentive. So this is the same idea. I think all the consumer brands can work together to just influence their users. And this means a lot because they are the end. They are buying everything. They tell the brands and up all the industries to where to go, where is the right way to go. I think there's an optimal to go to like everybody work together. That's very interesting. And yeah, sure, please do, please do. A question for Sabrina. Your idea of hand forestry really inspired a lot of people and a lot of other activities. One problem that we discussed in Mongolia just last week when I was hosting a green finance capacity building event there. And we discussed with the president of Mongolia that they want to plant a one billion tree. And they asked me how to raise money for the one billion tree. Maybe you have an idea in the philosophy, can they play a role in helping Mongolia, which will help China eventually. Because the sandstone, the Beijing experience is probably related to the desertification in Mongolia, right? Yeah, definitely can do so. And also another thing I think is very important is technology. Because when we are planting trees in Mongolia, we find they are planting the trees the way like 10 years ago, maybe 20 years ago. Because the leader of Northern labor, but actually the environment is so complicated. Actually, I think technology can really play a very big role there. And also can share that technology, not only the fund, and also the way of doing that in a good way. Yes, a sustainable way. Yeah. You've taken my job. That's great. Well, this is what we want, right? We want the how. That's exactly what Varga had said earlier, that we want the how of climate innovation. How do we go forward? And how do we translate some of the conversations we've had to cross-border? Now, how do we take it globally? And this is an open question for the panel. We've been talking a lot about what we've been doing in specific countries, in the region itself, so Asia, Americas, and Europe. How do we make it more global? So any ideas, any examples, what's stopping us really? So open question for the panel, whoever wants to jump in. Can I start? Yeah, go for it. Well, I'd like to talk about Gaia, giving to Amplify Earth Action, and a wonderful initiative announced by our friends at the forum. And really, we are very proud and very privileged to have been the first Asian partner to sign up when it was announced in Davos earlier this year. It's really about harnessing the PPPs, more peace in the soup, public-private philanthropic sectors to come together and identify the gaps and the challenges and find opportunities there to work together through lighthouse projects. So what we're doing as our first deliverable as part of this Gaia initiative is to come up with a climate philanthropy report for Asia. Because to Borges' earlier point about less than 2% of total philanthropic giving going towards climate, and actually of that about less than 10% is from Asia. So really, we need to up those numbers. What we've found in doing, so it's a three-track approach for this report, we are looking at the quantitative, the data, the qualitative, we're doing interviews, and then case studies to showcase the success stories. So what we're finding though is that it's fragmented landscape. So we need collaboration. Why? Because people don't know who else is addressing these issues and what issues other people are working on. So there needs to be more sharing of work and learnings. So we need collaboration as the first thing. It's also come across quite clearly that there's a lack of a talent pipeline in this area. So there's opportunities for capacity and capability building there. And really, there needs to be more active information exchanges. And then the third and last point that we've seen is that we need to translate all this talk, all the science, into an action, into an action-oriented approach, communicate that globally to partners so that we allow easy adoption. And then we can scale globally that way. Yeah? Anyone else wants to jump? Can I say a few words on this fragmentation of the system of finance markets? When I was co-chairing the G20's system of finance working group, we spent a lot of time discussing how to promote cross-border green capital flows, especially in raising money from more developed markets to low-income country for climate actions and for supporting nature. There are two major problems now that's really sort of limiting or blocking the cross-border flows. Number one is the lack of consistent definition of green activities. There's so many countries, so many NGOs, so many institutions that are developing their own definitions. We call taxonomy. So China has a set of green taxonomy. Europe has a set of green taxonomy. I think 30 countries have their own taxonomy defining what green is. And then a lot of companies defining their own green criteria. Now this itself, if developing silo, creates barriers for cross-border green capital flows because, for example, a green bond issue in China may not be recognized in Europe. And then the European investors are not buying. And to address this problem, one particular initiative that's been taking I think is very important. It's called the Common Ground Taxonomy that was initiated by China and Europe back three and a half years ago. And I had the honor to co-chair this working group and we have produced the first version of the Common Taxonomy which includes 72 climate mitigation activities that are recognized both by China and the EU. And now the capital can flow. We have issued many green bonds from China and put on this label. This is Common Ground Taxonomy aligned and the European investors are buying. So this is just one example of how we can create better green capital flows. And this Common Taxonomy need to be scaled up to include more countries, including Singapore. In fact, Singapore joined just last month into the Common Ground Taxonomy development. And in the future, it could become a basis for a global, what I call, interoperability of sustainable finance taxonomies. The second barrier is a lack of internationally consistent, sustainable reporting standards. And that effort is being taken to address this problem, which is ISSP International Sustainability Standard Board. And they just published their reporting standard a few days ago. And going forward, I think we need more countries to adopt it so that globally we'll be reporting the same standard with same meaning and then international fund managers and financial institutions can compare and assess the greenness of different activities using the same standard. Yeah, Minister, I think you wanted to make a point. Yes, often we would come to meetings like this, exchange ideas, good suggestions, and they end up evaporating. And no one carry them forward. What we need is a plan of action. Because a plan of action is what tells us from here what is the way forward. What are we going to do? Who is going to do what? Now, you need drivers. For example, in my government, we have the Namibia Investment Promotion Board. This is a driving agency that is able to drive this program, that is able to partner with philanthropists to come in and showcase the projects that we are having. Who are the beneficiaries? What are the costs? And how feasible are they? So now when you have a plan of action as to how these drivers are going to reach out to others and popularize what they are doing, among others, different countries, different continents, is only when you are likely to realize what you want to achieve. That's brilliant. And I want to open the floor for Q&A. But I think I would love for you all to think a little bit about what the plan of action should be for your closing thoughts. You're all stakeholders in this. So towards the end, 30 seconds each would love to know how do we translate what we've talked today to actionable content. And so let me first open the floor for Q&A. There are any questions? I think it's a lady there. Thank you. Charlotte Perra with the Bezos Earth Fund. We are a philanthropic organization created by Jeff Bezos that will spend $10 billion this decade to address climate change and protect and restore nature. We also emphasize environmental and climate justice in our work. And I really just want to applaud the forum for launching the Gaia Initiative and elevating the value of public-private philanthropic partnerships. We're engaged in a number of these partnerships, and we think it's a very important and underutilized model, especially when it comes to climate and nature, where we know we need to drive change with really extraordinary speed and scale. And that will take powerful collaboration across all of these sectors. So I don't have a question. It's more of a comment. But I really wanted to express appreciation for this panel discussion. Thank you very much. Joseph, I know that you, McKinsey, has been working with Vef as well on Gaia. Would you like to just maybe address that a little bit and talk high level? Look, one of the things that we have been trying to do is trying to figure out, like, how do we channel all this energy into the highest priority areas? So I think starting from earlier this year, we had a bit of a, we're McKinsey when they have a framework for everything. So we have a kind of three-step framework to try to paradise and channel the energy into a few areas. But the first step what we did was that we did a bit of a scan of all the things that we actually can do and think about what would actually move the needle. One of the things that I worry a lot about is that there's so many fragmentation of efforts out there. At the end, if you add it all up, does it actually move the needle? So we looked at what would move the needle. What's the size of opportunity? And that's the first step. The second step was really trying to figure out what are the areas that have the most proximity towards what we call a positive tipping point, right? There are many things that we can do, but there are things that are closer towards the tipping point where things might accelerate, right? So what are those? And so we have a bit of prioritization around them. And at the end, we thought about, okay, what would be most important, right? Or feasible, or most appropriate for PPPP to work on, right? So anyway, at the end of all that work, we have about 30 areas that we thought would be high priority, prioritized by kind of country lines across sectors and all that. So we will publish this later, right? And, you know, again, as a bit of a thought partner, what we do is to catalyze a little bit this process, right? But I hope that we'll be picked up by other partners to move that forward. But that's kind of what we're doing. But hopefully, right? If we can all channel energy towards these few areas, we have a little bit more of a hope, right? To move the needle, which is kind of what we all want at the end. That's great. I think, yeah. I'm Eric from the S&P Global. S&P Global also has a very big function of sustainability one. And also I'm a big fan of Dr. Ma. From one study at the Duke University environmental research center, there are many renewal papers from G20 and the Green Finance system as well, reinvesting principles on the Bell really initiative. So my question regarding to the topic is, I have two, one is the, we did a research that there is a top, we found that if the ESG performance is higher, there could be a reverse U shape. When the investors, when the corporate have better ESG performance, there is an opting trend on the ESG investing. However, when crossing a turning point, their investing intention or the shareholder ownership will decrease. It means that whether this is the argument that if the corporate put too much energy or the attention to the ESG performance, they will influence their business activities or their business performance. And my second question is regarding there to consolidate the different ESG disclosure reporting standards like the GRI, SASB, IFAS, et cetera. And how is the progress of the current status quo and what's your comment on how to unify all those different international standards, especially under the China one to have our own voices or the other countries to have their own geopolitical concerns. Thank you. Dr Wang. So maybe address your questions quickly. Number one, ESG enhancement effort, is it a cost or is it a benefit? And short term and long term. I think definitely in the short term it's a cost. You have to do something, right? For example, you need to introduce a system to capture your carbon related information and you probably need to spend a lot of time and energy talking to your suppliers and telling them that you supply your carbon number to me so that I can report the scope three emission number. So it's a lot of cost involved upfront. But in the medium longer term, the company is going to benefit because with better ESG performance, you will raise money at a lower cost, whether it's from that market, from banks, and especially from the equity market. And also your brand name is going to improve and the more consumers will buy your products. And also you can avoid a lot of potential legal litigation reputation costs, which will save you money. But when the benefits come, it's uncertain. Sometimes one year, sometimes five years, sometimes 10 years really depend on your horizon of the boss. That's why I think the lengthening the horizon of the digital maker is very important. If ESG is only decided by a CFO focusing on this year's bottom line, it's not going to work. And you have to be really decided at a very high level, at the board level, who will own the company for the next 10 years. That's my answer to your question number one. The second one is how to unify the reporting standards. There's so many reporting standards, principles, templates, and so on. I think at least 70 of them globally. And they need to be consolidated. Eventually, I think this basis for consolidation is ISSP. And ISSP just announced their standards a couple of days ago. And I think they're going around the world to convince the regulator to please adopt it in full. And fairly likely, I think Hong Kong will be one of the first mover to adopt ISSP, which will help build capacity among Chinese companies as well, because a lot of Hong Kong-listed companies are Chinese companies. And globally, I think, in the Europe and the US are moving in the right direction. I'm not sure if they will call their standards ISSP, but it will be quite similar. And then the big job is to really convince developing country emerging market economies to adopt ISSP. And that's why coming back again to capacity building is so important, to help them to raise awareness on the need for ISSP, and how we can help them to lower the cost of being inclined, including using digital technology, and finally making sure that we help SMEs to deal with this reporting challenge with tools. Great. One quick reminder, you can also ask questions in Chinese if you like. Yes, go for it, sir. Thank you. Thank you for a very interesting discussion. I'm Edward from the Edan Price Foundation. We recognize innovative ideas in research and practices that can change education for the future. I'd like to pick up on Dr. Ma's point about developing a common language among countries about what is green and what actions countries can take. But I think getting philanthropies involved and getting the younger generation involved and to the minister's point about, then the future generation will then drive markets. And driving the market will demand actions that companies will have to take to address the issue, collective mission. So I'd like to hear from the panelists' point about how do we develop this common language, teach them to the younger generation, so then they will drive the demand, then drive actions that we can all take together. Who wants to go first? Minister, would you like to weigh in? Well, how do we, can you please just repeat the question again? How do you create that common language? Yeah, how do you create the common language? First, you need a forum. It can either be an initiative that governments can do. It can either be an initiative that private sector can do. A forum where you have stakeholders. Now, particularly when you bring in these young entrepreneurs. In this forum, you would exchange ideas. First, you also need to hear from them. What are their needs? What are their challenges? Because their challenges and their needs are not the same as for those that have been in the market for long. They are not the same as those for the government. Now, in this forum that we are creating nationally, a dialogue or whatever you may call it, you take it from the suggestions that is coming from these young entrepreneurs is how best you can assist them. Yeah. In many ways, I don't worry as much about this generation. I think the awareness, the passion and what they want to do is far better than our generation or whoever generation you want to associate yourself with. I do think that the issue is not as much as we need to teach them, as much as we need to teach ourselves. I do think that the people who have the power today, whether it's in government, in corporates, and who have the resources, I actually think that the young generation is far more passionate and advanced on these issues than we are. So I think the question is reversed. I think that it's just about us teaching them. I'm more thinking around the question is, we're talking about this a lot, but how do we then really put real dollars behind it because there is a price at the end of everything. And the question is going to be, where's the willingness to pay for it? And so I'm much more positive on them in some ways than on ourselves. So we've got three minutes, and I think we can take one last question. Okay. I'm Henk Ofink, currently for the Dutch government. I worked for the Obama administration. I want to refer two points for the role of philanthropy. One is referring back to a McKinsey report on 2009 and it was about, and the winner is, really about challenges and price to up not only the ambition, but really drive innovation and partnership. And I think there are a lot of lessons there that we applied with the Obama administration post or against Sandy, for instance, in the rebuilding where we brought the community together with private sector and government to really up our game on climate action. The second is, it's complex, these issues. And I think philanthropy plays a critical role in creating a safe space. And I think the continuity of driving that safe space where across the lock-in and the divides and generations and borders and also the different way of accounting and mechanism is of critical importance to be able to achieve something that is beyond the existing system. We can't innovate with the rules and regulations that we have today. So I think philanthropy can really play a great role in one setting the ambition and with these challenges. And at the same time, continue to create a safe space. That's great. Thank you. Very, very interesting point. So 20 seconds each, how do we move the needle? I'm gonna start with you, Dr. Ma. Just one idea. I think we need to sort of address this information asymmetry problem between philanthropies and the real economy actors. One particular example is that I run this China Green Finance Committee which we set up in 2015. And out of the 300 corporate members who have zero philanthropies. And we were talking about green actions every day but somehow we're not connected to the philanthropy. So forums like that and also better connections and communication will be very useful. Yeah. I would say trust is key to making all of this happen. And that's why we provide this alliance, this trusted platform where people can come together and to that point about a safe space to learn to collaborate and learning together in a safe space is very important because with that with a common shared purpose with a sense of collective ownership that we own this we have got to do this for long-term systemic change. That's where we can get everyone together to look then at innovative models and then of course money despite what you all say about collaboration all that money is what has to drive things forward. But with trust then you get the funders in to then drive and particularly from the private sector and the government. Joseph. I think we need leadership now more than any time before. And I do think that leaders get to track their own what I call the talk to do ratio, right? Some have a very high talk to do ratio but you got to get to do a bit more. So I think if we're going to all track that or have a bit more high ambition I think we'll get there earlier. Sabrina. I think it's mindset change. So for corporates because we stand for the company so it's very important not only the philanthropic side is your main business how to integrate your daily commercial operation with social value creation. So we call it do value creation commercial value and the social value. If every company, especially the leading company they have this mindset, they find the opportunity and use massive corporate behavior to create a value for the planet. I think that's the key, that's the future. And finally Mr. From the government we need a more pragmatic approach to drive the agenda. Yeah, that's brilliant. Thank you very much. That's it from us. Give a huge round of applause to our wonderful panelists. Thank you.