 Kepasaran ini akan memperkenalkan PNCC kerja perniagaan untuk pembantu, dan juga untuk menjelaskan potensi dan perniagaan perniagaan untuk perniagaan ekosistem dan perniagaan perniagaan. Untuk pilihan ini, kita akan mempunyai dua penyakit. Silahkan kami berjalan-jalan untuk menikmati Zita dari WBF Indonesia. Ia akan menjadi Encik Astier Monumentan, Direktor Asia Pacific Regional FAC. Saya juga mempunyai prinsipan Encik Tim Karstassin, Direktor Encik Tim Karstassin. Ia bukan seorang penyakit, tapi kita berjalan-jalan untuk penyakit ini untuk seorang penyakit. Hanya saja jika penyakit tidak dapat mempunyai jawapan. Jadi kita tidak beritahu kepada Encik Karstassin. Perempuan-perempuan, saya ingin mengenai Encik Astier Monumentan untuk prinsipan ini. Terima kasih. Terima kasih kerana menonton sesi ini. Terima kasih kerana menonton sesi ini. Terima kasih kerana menonton sesi ini. Terima kasih kerana menonton sesi ini. Saya akan bercakap tentang projek FAC dan projek FAC. Ada orang di dalam perjalanan. Saya akan mulakan dengan tradusional FAC. Saya akan bercakap tentang projek FAC dan projek FAC. FAC bergurau mengingatkan perjalanan projek FAC. Sebelum 20 tahun. Saya telah memperkenalkan perjalanan projek FAC dan mengingatkan perjalanan projek FAC dan perjalanan projek FAC. Kita ada perjalanan ini di organisasi kita. Kita ada perjalanan sosial, perjalanan perjalanan, perjalanan perjalanan. Mereka bergurau bersama untuk mencuba kongsi. Mereka bergurau mengingatkan perjalanan projek FAC. Apa yang kita buat adalah kita membuat perjalanan perjalanan dan perjalanan perjalanan untuk membuat pilihan tentang projek FAC yang mereka mengambil. Apa yang kita buat? Apoko. Apoko. Ingat. Tidak mengapa. FAC ada tiga hal asli. Kita mengembangkan perjalanan untuk membuat pilihan dan juga untuk perjalanan perjalanan. Kita mengambil perjalanan untuk mendapatkannya, tetapi dengan perjalanan perjalanan yang tidak berjalan, tapi dengan perjalanan yang tidak berjalan, kita membuat perjalanan perjalanan untuk bergerak. Kami menghadiri ceritakan di sebuah region ini. Saya mengajar bahawa ini adalah perjalanan kepercayaan. Pada Hong Kong, kami melihat yang sangat berlaku. Dan ada ceritakan di sebuah region ini. Kami masih berdiri di dekat dunia di seluruh dunia. Kami masih berdiri di dekat dunia. Pertanyaan penting, kami dapat menunjukkan bahawa ceritakan di sebuah region ini sebenarnya tidak berlaku di sebuah area. Jadi kami tidak mencubanya di sebuah area. Kami dapat menunjukkan bahawa Kami mengambil setiap perjalanan di antara perjalanan dan perjalanan. Kami mengambil perjalanan di sebuah area. Di perjalanan kepercayaan ini adalah sebuah area yang terkenal. Ini adalah perjalanan yang menghidupkan sistem. Dan ini berlaku di sekitar 28,000 perjalanan di dunia di seluruh 110 perjalanan. Kami dapat menghidupkan perjalanan yang berlaku di sebuah area. Terima kasih, Encik. Terima kasih, Encik. Dan juga, Kami mengambil perjalanan di sebuah area. Dan sekarang, Kami akan memperkenalkan Ketah dari WUWF Indonesia untuk menghidupkan perjalanan di sebuah area di Indonesia. Terima kasih, Encik. Saya adalah Issyedah Manini dari WUW Indonesia. Dan saya akan memberikan perjalanan tentang perjalanan di sebuah area. Kemudian saya akan memberikan perjalanan yang berlaku di seluruh 110 perjalanan. Di Awwara Meskipun, saya akan membawa pekerjaan pengawasan biasa untuk membantu perjalanan dan menghidupkan perjalanan di sebuah area. Atau yang tidak sudah lama lagi, saya akan memberikan perjalanan yang berlaku di seluruh 110 perjalanan. Dan kemudian, saya akan membawa permintaan pengawasan biasa Dan sekarang kita dibuat oleh SMB, dan CHILE, kita dibuat oleh APACI CHILE dan NEPAL, kita dibuat oleh IANSA. Di Indonesia, kita berkongsi dengan Minisburg Forestry dan the ALEI, atau Indonesian Equalibrating Institute, dengan C4 sebagai perjalanan internasional kita. Sekarang, pertanyaan yang terbesar adalah, apa yang penting, apa yang kita perlu lakukan. Seperti yang anda tahu, perjalanan tersebut menunjukkan ramai perjalanan ekosistem, daripada perjalanan turisme atau fungsi rekanan, perjalanan air, perjalanan karbon, dan banyak lagi. Dan ia menunjukkan kemungkinan bahwa perjalanan manusia untuk perjalanan perjalanan perjalanan adalah menguruskan perjalanan ekosistem, seperti perjalanan air dan perjalanan air. Atau, kita fikir bahawa berharga untuk uruskan perjalanan menerima pementerian yang lebih tinggi untuk perjalanan ekosistem dan yang tidak berkongsi untuk uruskan perjalanan. Jika anda melihat bahawa perjalanan di sebuah perjalanan, ia sangat berkesan dan berlambut. Sebab perjalanan ini adalah cuba memberikan kejutan lebih sedap untuk keperluan ASA. It means that the unit management that will be later certified in Africa's past is the unit management that they have to hold the usual of the traditional FSI certificates. Another reason is that the appreciation for our services are low. For example, in Indonesia, most of FSI certified natural forest concessions already do forest services. By implementing the FSI scheme, they preserve the water, they preserve the soil, they preserve the carbon, but after now there's a very limited appreciation of that. So WWF as a country partner, we expect by the end of this four year project, we are now in the beginning of the third year project. We expect that in the end of the project, we can give a recommendation for FSI to have set of ES certification system that is credible, applicable for even small holders and applicable to other area in the world. And one of the key important role that C-Port can facilitate in this project as our partner is that to help develop indicators. So right now we're going to run through and give a little bit of summary of three policies. There are three area of policies in Indonesia. The first one is in West Kalimantan. The second one is in East Kalimantan. And the last one is Malam Island. If you can read it, I'll give you several actions that need to take by the country partners in this process project. Among those, one of the most important thing is to conduct market analysis to see whether it is too paid from potential past buyers or users. Because in the future, we really want the certification to be paid, real paid. That's why we need to find a real connection between the FSI past certification and the potential buyers with the suitable business. This is our first policy. It is located in Sasala and Sebel villages in West Lombok. That covering 3,000 hectares. It is a local community. And what we see in this policy is the water services. So the water services in West Lombok is already running since 2009 based on the local government population. If you can see there, it's a painless scheme since 2009. So the upstream community, they conserve the area in the foot of Rinjani Mountain by doing a river station in order to preserve water quality and quantity. And the water is collected by Pedia M. Pedia M is a state-owned enterprise water company. So it's a water company owned by the government. And the Pedia M also collect a monthly retribution to around 16,000 houses up to now. This is the example of the monthly water bill that the Pedia M collected every month. The highlighted in yellow is the retribution for the ecosystem services. It costs 1,000 rupiah. What we see in this policy is because the water services and the mechanism of pain when free as it's already running. What we need to do is we have to make a science-based verification to prove the impact of reforestation activities conducted by local community on the quality and flow of the water. We need to make a monitoring and evaluation methodology as a protocol to help expanding existing pape water services to other area of Lamo. Because right now it's only running in western part of Lamo. Where the forces hopefully can shorten up the process. And we are partnering with relevant stakeholders of course. And we prepare local community for emphasis of the application assessment. For second pilot sites, it is located in Kapuas Hulu Corridor in Kapuas Hulu District, West Kalimantan. So if you can see on the map, the green one is the Kapuas Hulu Corridor. It is called Corridor because it is an imaginary corridor that built to bridge the key species between two national parks. In this area, what we are trying to see is the biodiversity-based ecotourism. It is one of the places where the subspecies for orangutan in West Kalimantan live. What we see in the ecotourism value is that we are trying to improve existing ecotourism that has been running since 2010. One of the things is by collecting data on biodiversity such as orangutan, key or enemy fish species, hydrology and tourism package. We do a partnership with relevant stakeholders, the Forestry Service, National Art already office, tour operator and local government. And we prepare local community for emphasis certification assessment. And this is our third pilot site. It is Pederada Timber, or Trata. It is located in West Gunai, East Kalimantan, covers 95,000 hectares. Trata is an active natural forest concession and already got accuracy certification on April 2012. What we see in Trata is biodiversity and carbon value as the ecosystem services. We help Trata to maintain their emphasis certification and implementation of reducing by clocking. The assumption that Trata is already certified, Trata has higher carbon sequestered volume and biodiversity values compared to the non-sustainable AFMU. That's why we're working with Kyoto University to conduct biodiversity and carbon assessment. And this is the 60 plot of the biodiversity and carbon that is the result of this collaboration between WWF and Pederada Timber and Kyoto University. Among the highlights based on our milestone so far, based on the market analysis that already completed in three pilot sites, there's a positive response from our respondents from the potential buyers and user is that they are willing to pay if there is an ES certification take place. Please to the end of my presentation. Thank you very much. Updates on the forces project development in Indonesia. And after having listening carefully the two speakers, I'm quite sure that you have something in mind. I want to ask the speakers to further knowing the subject matters. But before I'm opening the discussion, I have some points for clarification to those two speakers. Firstly, I would like to give a short question to Mr Alasius on how FSC is adapting to the landscape-based approach to forest management and how managers and local people can gain an economic benefit from the ecosystem services. Thank you. So FSC has been looking at the following discussions on landscape approaches with lots of interest. And in our review of our principles and criteria, which was completed in 2011, 2012, there was a lot of discussion about incorporating more issues on the landscape level into those standards. And some of that was included into our global standards. Particularly on social issues, community issues. So we now have very, very good criteria for evaluating how forest managers are working with communities, working with social issues. So we're really good at guiding tools as well on free prior and focus set that can be used in light of that evaluation process. So that's built into our regular certification system. And with additional work on ecosystem services, we can add value to that whole thing using our existing systems. So we don't have to build something new. We can use our existing networking certification bodies, use our existing network of accreditation and certification, and also use our existing supply chains to build value for communities by using these additional indicators to verify something different which is ecosystem services. Traditionally, FSC was very much just focusing on the timber or the paper that was produced on the forest. Increasingly, we're seeing that that's not going to work if we want to work at the landscape level or if we want to look at other things in order to make ourselves maintain the relevance. So looking at biodiversity or carbon or water, it's all part of the picture. We've heard a lot this morning about how moving to that landscape approach is going to be very important for the forest and FSC sees that as well, particularly in this region. If you're trying to work in Indonesia or Malaysia or Vietnam or Nepal, you can't just look at the timber concession in isolation. You have to look at the wider landscape and you have to look at the wider benefits. Otherwise, there's not going to be enough value there to maintain that forest and maintain that. Okay, thank you very much. In principles, I think FSC certification is no beyond the usual timber certification. It's no expanding into the environmental services to account of the economic social and economic aspect of the environmental services. Is that the point? We already include social environmental economic that is very strong in our conditions. We're looking to expand the impact of what we do beyond just the timber. We've had a lot of debate over the years about how much we can see and whether that's something that's credible for us. This is one of the ways by which we're using our system to make an impact using our existing networks or existing tools and building on those so that we can have okay, thank you very much. Well, I don't turn to Ms. Dita. Well, I learned from your presentation that the FORCES project in Indonesia is implemented in three locations. One is in the West Kalimantan for people to see and ecotourism. And second is in Lombok Island for water supply. And the third is in the West Kalimantan for biodiversity and environment. So among the three pilot sites which one is more potential to be FHC and environmental services certified. What we are trying to do in this FORCES project is we're trying to develop a standard. And there is no easy way in doing so. But in the FORCES project time-wise our third pilot site which is the Rata Timber that already FHC certified is the one that has a big potential to be the first FHC test certified in the future. But on our other two pilot sites in Lombok and West Kalimantan the services are already there. What we need to do is to help the local community to be FHC certified which is we are going that way in this project. Okay, thank you for that. So I think we got some additional information from my previous question to this post because and I think it's time for me now to open the floors. And I would like to have three questions from the floor and I just want to remember five parts to two. Is that right? So at least we will have 245. Oh, still a lot of time. I thought that we are in the past so I want to limit the discussion but since we have an ample of times we will end at 245. So it's quite enough for us to have quite a long discussion now. And well for the first round I will invite three questions on the left side, yes and then yes and two. So please identify yourself by mentioning your name and description. My name is Jim Tower from Manjility Energy. My question has to do once you get to the landscape level you necessarily go beyond any individual project or company effort and I'm wondering to what extent particularly in the case of Indonesia has FSC and the forces project in particular involved the Kelepaten or Kota Magya level governments in the whole process of governance in respect to landscape management Thank you. Thank you James and the second question would be on the red scrap the lady with the red scrap. My name is Fabi from USAID Lower Indonesia in the United States Forest so my question is like thank you for the presentation first it's very interesting so the project in Rata it's very interesting about the carbon and variable carbon predating mechanism so my question would be like the project boundary it's not only about the boundary of the project or the company but then also what happened with other landscape sorry other land use or the companies like I think for me FSC is one with the certification that has a very comprehensive principle and standard and then they are not including other land use into the standard and the monitoring so I think that would be interesting but also talking about that because maybe in the term of carbon there will be a lake leakage and the activity will sift into other area Thank you Fabi and the third question from USAID I have a question for Miss Dinar you should mention about you conduct a survey of millionaires to pay and I think if your information sharing would be more helpful for us for private sector investment strategy I just like to know when you conduct a survey you will probably ask them also what is the key factor for decision making of millionaires to pay what you found like a citizen factor when people dislike that and for the one who dislike I have a three person who address three question who are still and to be done so I think Miss Dinar first will answer the question The question is for you so I will go to the first question thank you very much your question is how the process project or the advocacy or district government in this project for the water services I have to answer it one by one in long walk the water services has been running since 2009 and it is based on the local government regulations number four year 2009 so since the very beginning we involve the government district government for the water services and in the process project we have all the stakeholders to develop a monitoring and evaluation to justify and to help verify that the local community who live in the upstream preserving water quality and quantity for the urban people in Bata-Lam City and for for the Kaukua School of Pilotsite we also involve the Kaukua Paten because the corridor it starts from the Putusiba office Putusiba, I don't know if you are familiar familiar with the area it starts from Putusiba until Planja so it is almost in the water between Indonesia and Malaysia and we also have a good communication with the National Park Authority as we use the corridors between the two National Parks for the Bata Timur I think in the beginning of the operating they should have a permit from the local government so since the very beginning of the project they already involve the district government and in this project we also involve the west side of the government especially for the forces project and for the second question your question is how about other land use or landscape around the Bata Timur well it's it's rather complicated because around Bata Timur there's mining company there's non sustainable logging company and protection area and those land use has its own authority so in this forces project we only focus on the Bata Timur and next what we're going to do is we're going to compare between Bata Timur as a sustainable forest management to another logging consumption that is not implemented FSC forest management and reduced the backlogging how much carbon sequester differences and the two concessions and for the willingness to pay it's been completed in three areas so on the three areas it has a different response for the ecotourism because the ecotourism and in the Denos it's a very specific it's specific for hobbyist for people to go fishing and enjoying scenery and people that want to see orangutan that's why they don't really mind to pay when all of our respondents say that water right now the water services only paid by households so in the market analysis we try to reach out corporates hotel chains to get their response if once this ES certification take place what are the response of it and they said they are willing to pay for the ES certification product although we haven't touched the price and for the carbon it's a little bit complicated because many of our respondents they are more give critical to the current RAD situation in Indonesia but some corporates that is not directly working in the forestry sector they are willing to pay for carbon it's from the airline companies terima kasih and Mr Kim I just thought it was worth maybe mentioning that when we think about ecosystem services as part of what FSC can contribute to the starting point is to see what do we have already what is already in our standards, in our policies and in our practices that is relevant for ecosystem services and there was quite a lot of resistance for stakeholder engagement we already have professionally working certification bodies we already have high conservation values protected in the certified areas we already have a lot of considerations for social issues working on free pride for consent so there is already a lot that we have and I think what the challenge is there is to be able to measure it to be able to measure the actual impact of certification on the ground on these issues so that I think is in itself a first set of issues that we are dealing with what do we have already and how do we measure that better then I think there is a whole range of secondary issues which are enormously important because if we want to deal with ecosystem services then it is completely correct we cannot just look at what the considerations are in the ecosystem setting so therefore we need to look at how do we then make sure that what we have already gets relevant in the broader issue and the broader setting of the landscape and then the second set of issues is about how do we make it economically viable to do these things how do we make it something that has a market value and what do we do Thank you Mr Kim for your additional information and now I'm opening the second round of our discussion again from the left side yourself and then second and then from far back lady there Okay first your Thank you very much My name is Phillip Wells from Damage Consulting and this is a brief explanation In Indonesia what Indonesia in British Forestry calls an FMU is a landscape level unit which may have a number of what FSC might term FMUs within so it might have mixed use it might have better protection for us and might have a bit like the landscape in your example it seems to me that if you want to achieve things as a unit of management that exists which is just beginning to start and I'm wondering I suppose my question is have you been in a discussion with the Ministry of Forestry to look at the potential of the possibility to get certification for Kapeha as this would enable this would make all the members within the Kapeha having to to improve their standards to achieve a certification for the whole landscape Thank you Thank you Mr Felix Second question I'm from Totorimasti I was very surprised my two years study in Delta Timber our data can continue and this is the FSC F4E, F1O, CES and my question is how to get a profit for this F4R, CES because in case of Delta Timber most of the product is private and most of the private is exporting to Japan but as a certified it's only 10% the production as a Japanese company don't want to of course they buy private from Delta but they do not give premium they just buy others normal private the reason is FSC it's not so popular in Japan and it's a strong pressure for Japanese company to reduce Delta Timber so for Japanese company to reduce to import Delta Timber do not care about FSC certified actually it's a volume of Delta Timber importing from Indonesia but because the government do not do not do not do not ask the trading company to select a certified FSC it's a trading company still importing private from Indonesia Malaysia do not care about FSC certification I guess still only a few percent of private from Indonesia Malaysia is certified even so many companies in Indonesia more than 10 companies already FSC certification they cannot state to Japan as a certified private they just say also that private is said to Japan still not certified certified private to Japan to market yes, thank you thank you Mr Najima and the third question from Nubek, yes already in Nubek thank you hi and this idea of kind of mismatch spatial scales has come up a number of times but because the FSC project has been a larger landscape but also because these ecosystem processes that support ecosystem services are functioning kind of at different spatial scales from one another so I'm wondering if on the market how you plan on dealing with that and what will these services together sell them as a unit or will you kind of parse them out and subdivide them sell them that way okay, thank you and I will be quiet and I still would like to answer the question from the first question put by Mr Felix he was mentioning Kapiha Kapiha is a forest management unit that is an area designated for forest management in a production as well as in a conservation and in a protection forest and I think it is a policy from the Ministry of Forestry to divide all the forest area in Indonesia into FMU into Kapiha so the question was that the process project has been a discussion with the Ministry of Forestry on the certification at Kapiha level is that correct? in this project the one that is particularly working with the Kapiha is in West Kapiha so the district government not possible in the process of developing Kapiha but unfortunately the process is really slow while in this project we have a timeline that we need to catch so in relation to this Kapiha in the Forestry Service in that district we help the community of their working area residential area and the forest area and that we propose that to the Kapiha so that the Kapiha can recognize them inside the whole Kapiha especially Indonesia just for additional information even though the project was not a frame into a certain Kapiha the location the project site it is already located in Kapiha area for example in Lombok it is belong to Kapiha Rinjani and also the Kapiha Zulu project site as Dita mention that the district government is no developing or establishing the Kapiha Kapiha Zulu but it's not established yet but later the project will of course adopted as a Kapiha activities so that's what can I add to the Dita's answer that's the same question so on the question about the market in Japan it's a really good question so FSC is a market based tool and the way it works is that we create anggos and market for certification so it's why you have that curve of growth in supply chain as the market wants more and more certification or more and more certified product then you can get that exponential growth because it demand more supply but we're not a marketing agency we're an NGO so we work with partners to try and create additional market pool so we have a team who work with companies and in this region we work all over the region including in Japan with leading companies that are specifying for us purpose and traditionally historically that's been the major way by which the market has grown is by working with specifiers with retailers or with big brands so we work for instance in Japan and on paper we're working with Mitsubishi we're working with Eon Group so we work directly with them to see office in Japan but also with partners such as WWF and I'll say in Indonesia with TDI and we try and create these partnerships and create these relationships to improve the demand from these businesses through that and also to awareness raising of consumers we can try and raise awareness of consumers and we need to do that we need to have products and shelves and we need to have products value so what we've done in Japan over the last couple of years we've invested money for pregnancy international and to run an awareness campaign and to understand the market better it's very different in Japan to study Hong Kong and we've found that the market there needs different drivers to change it so we're investing in our own resources and also working with partners to try to give the market more sensitives and what we've seen is in certain parts of Asia we have a very passive consumer awareness so now in Hong Kong we're at 36% consumer awareness so it's increasingly known it's gone up from 7 to 7 that's by working with partners working with companies so in Europe it's 76% consumer awareness in Japan we're down to 10 so we need to work together but we do that by working on these partnerships I just wanted to add related to the situation of a country like Japan and we have the same tendency in many countries in Europe where there's a move away from wanting to buy tropical timber and there's not a real big market for it anymore and the market is certainly going down I think discussions like the one we're having here looking at ecosystem services as part of what we include in certification of tropical timber I think is hugely important for them because that sort of downturn on the market comes very much out of the criticism and the fear of tropical deforestation and if we can actually begin much more clearly documenting that a certified product from a tropical country actually produces at the same time ecosystem services in terms of water, biodiversity and local social issues then I think it would be much easier to actually counter that sort of campaign against tropical timber it packs more clearly and to make sure that they get part of what the whole conversation is around certified timber and other products from the tropics Thank you, Tim for the additional information and the last question was I think Alisheh if you want to answer it It was on the question of scale and how you could apply FD certification in different scales and at the moment, yes, we have most of the certification is at the FMI level or the forest level but there is no reason why FD certification can't be done at the biggest scale you just have to include in the scope of the evaluation so in some cases we do include non forest land as part of that evaluation we include communities, we include soil we include other activities and that is looked at in the audit process but what you need to do is you define the scope of the audit process and then you evaluate it and as long as you can evaluate against the principles of criteria then you can do the certification so it can be at a bigger scale compared to the forest but the things that you can actually verify using the standard does that answer the question? I guess I meant how is it consistent and what are the policies that are actually providing for different ecosystem services particularly if you're looking at multiple ecosystem services that happen at different scales within one project? So as we discussed before that can be difficult with different ecosystem services and that's one of the things that the project is looking at trying to develop indicators that will capture that to find the indicators so we can try to get that scale included in the evaluation so it's practical because it's all about good to have standards if you can't use them on the field so it's field testing to get them to work changing them, consulting getting the local way I hope that's answering your vision and if not you can have them by the throat later on so I will invite another question from in front rows yours and then second yourself and yourself three question Hi, my name is Astrid from HSU Indonesia and one of the financing we have in timber and logging companies are 100% FSC certified and at the end of the year and I want to ask a very simple question is there a practical way because I know in FSC website you have the name of the companies that are already FSC certified but given that the requirement is 100% certification especially when it changes constantly is there a practical suggestion that you can give me to identify the name of the companies that already achieved 100% certification because sometimes they only have 25%, the rest are coming from unsustainable sources and we would like to know that for giving funds to these companies unfortunately the information is provided if it could be improved for the interest of the financing institutions and on the other hand that source can also be used for targeting the companies that we think are sustainable Ya, sorry No, let's wait for the other question Your turn Hi, I'm Mariana Moffino from C4, based in Kenya if certification of ecosystem services is going to move to the landscape level and there are organizations looking at certification of agriculture impact so I was wondering whether FSC talking to those who are certifying agriculture products and how these benefit from ecosystem services will be shared A very easy example is forest providing water to agricultural land uses around the forest and there are products that are certifying agricultural products say tea or coffee so how could these benefit from the existing services between those who protect the forest and those who practice agriculture Thank you, Mariana and the third question I'm Don Juan Roon from Okola Agricultural Agency from Okola Agricultural Agency I have two comment or questions first if we are doing sustainable forest management say a certain forest management unit and this forest management unit say they got this FSC certificate so I think in that particular forest management unit they have already also passed these so called forces if they are doing sustainable forest management in that particular forest management unit say a production forest I think they already produce environmental service in a sustainable forest also I understand there are some cases that forces being done in a production forest area so this clarifies by understanding about this and the second we bring up to the forest management again forest management unit FSC certificate it means that particular forest management unit has been assessed and given forest certificate and I understand that this certificate valid only for a certain period of time say 5 years so what happens say in the case in Indonesia forest management unit has already passed got FSC certificate and then after 5 years this particular one one in the SES they fail what does it mean in relation to this sustainable forest management unit because this is only good for say a certain period of time say 5 years and then no more I don't think that's sustainable forest management unit and how could you guarantee for each F3 forest management unit that has us and got FSC certificate eventually they will really doing sustainable forest sustainable forest management thank you thank you Makogu for your questions I think we would like to invite us at first to give the answers so HSBC so HSBC and a very strong policy on investing in companies that are sustainable and they specify FSC as the goal for that in terms of forest management it's very easy to see with FSC certification whether something is certified because you can look on the web and you can see the whole report it's all very transparent and you can see all the knock authorities and anything else and at the moment it's in the supply chain that are buying and selling certified products and chain coastal companies and they also need to be FSC certified which is good however if you're FSC certified in the supply chain it doesn't necessarily mean that everything you sell is FSC certified you can buy and sell non FSC products you have to be acting legally you have to be applying these certain norms but you can actually sell products that could be unsustainable and at the moment FSC doesn't have a mechanism by where HSBC or anybody else can see what percentage of the companies in the supply chain are selling as FSC certified and we've looked at that over the years and the way it works at the moment is it's a market based system and it's very difficult for us to impose that onto a company and essentially what we say to them is if the more market demand the more benefit it is but if there's no market demand then they want to sell them so at the moment you can't see that but you can see all the company names all listed on the website and you can see what's in their scope of certification so that they're allowed to buy and sell and I'm sure you can go directly and say it's about your investment strategy what percentage you're selling and they can choose to tell you or not that's the business relationship and I don't know where at any time to try to change and on the second question on how we link up with other types of certification so we do work with other certifications but most of the certification systems I remember one of the parts is something called ICL which is an international standard and curable accreditation and fair trade and marine stewardship council standard and we try and collaborate which we can with other systems we try and harmonize the way the certification is overtaken and to try and make the system as compatible as possible so there's no overlap on the field and also so that when the certification is overtaken it's sort of the lowest cost possible so for instance if you're evaluating the same thing at different systems you're able to evaluate it twice and so we're trying to work with the supply chain and culture products and we've had a project with fair trade whereby we've also looked at dual certification of fair trade internationally about how FSE fair trade and fairness mark collaborating together so we can actually get that benefit from working together so something more fair trade to do which you can do with the system very different similarly with if you're looking at carbon in terms of the gold standard the skill sets of the auditors are very different when you're evaluating for its management and if you want to train auditors to be able to do both you might actually have these super auditors who can do every single thing so you might need to collaborate every single thing so yes, we're trying to do it but it's not as easy as it may seem but I think there is stone to move forward particularly when we're looking at communities and landscapes if you're making FSE a way more fair fairing up FSE to the moment FSE is aiming back to the forest manager and then traceability to retail and there's lots of people looking at social issues and fan issues and we're doing a lot of work with communities and the moment we have a new project which is called smaller community or label option whereby if you are a community or smallholder then you can use a different label on products which is FSE level and we're now using that in some markets to try and sell and create incentives for communities to be certified and so it's time to fair up that part of that as a watcher and I can send you some a message around and it's quite interesting and I think that will continue and there's a lot of interest in analysis and we're more in that direction of getting more social issues and fan issues and so what we do Well, the third question So Yes, a lot of the ecosystem services part supported at the evaluation however we don't necessarily indicate it to verify that those ecosystem services themselves aren't being evaluated properly so let's try to do things out and say for instance for water Yes, if you're certified and you shouldn't go into water but we haven't quantified what that benefit is so we don't quantify what kind of benefit it is but we're moving in order to be able to say what the actual value of the ecosystem service is and be evaluated so it indicates it will help us to create that at all a metric to be able to measure in that forest top of the fact that it's the same it's the same forest has this total value what's in the total value the total value of the tourism and you can try to get things lower so to provide an additional source of time and also what it does is it tries to create a market consensus so if I can see that we create a market consensus say in forest products that works and drives the system we must be able to try to create a market consensus as well as ecosystem services at the top say, that's the question Second point but no questions does it automatically for any energy who already got the emphasis certificate would be certified as environmental service as well it's it claims what's evaluated so if you claim you are responsible and unmanaged you wouldn't be able to make claims that we have quantified and measured this amount of water or this amount of carbon or this amount of bialyst for that you need to do additional checks that's what these educators do so they allow you to check and on the five year so it's just a certification program for five years actually you do the audit initially and it takes a while to get certified first so it's usually a pre-assessment and a main assessment you can comply with those before you get certified once you're certified you don't automatically have five years you're checked every year for continued compliance for the standards so the independent waters will come back and check for continued compliance and at the end of the five years they'll come back into a form against the top standard but there's no point when you say okay we're certified now we get the right years and then we can drop off and continue to check and we do we do struggle with the terms usually there's a certain responsibility i think it is really interesting look at the nature of what we are doing what we are doing is that we are making a check on what the manager or the owner of a piece of land does on that land that check can only be for a period cannot be forever because we do not know that that owner will do the same in five years or ten years or twenty years we cannot know that that owner will be the same owner in five years or ten years or twenty years so it's very difficult for us on that basis try to make sure that the level of sustainability will be convenient to you i think for that to happen we need to complement what we can do with the marketplace mechanism and directly engaging with the owner with what the legislation needs to do in particular the legislation needs to make sure that there are basic requirements for forest management that ensure sustainability and i think we can do that in an agreement with the current owner of a piece of land that's one of the limitations that i think our system will always have but what we can do is that we can actually check that in the current situation we have a responsible forest management which will actually have the potential of insurance sustainability in the long run we can ensure that we are on the right track at the moment and at least we can then check that every year through the certification system and that's clear to say for this study and it's because of the fires in one situation that we've run at the moment and it's the only support say for a certain period of life are your kids and then i can update the people that are interested in the company and depend on what you're going to do i agree technically increasingly and i see started as a way the failure of governments to be able to regulate the government forest convention so it's created a civil society and this is working together and we created this tool which we used on a temporal basis to evaluate what's happening in the forest at that particular time but as we're developing we've been around for 20 years and that's been used and it's quite successful but governments looking at our tool we're looking at governments and we can't solve all the problems we're on the tool so we're looking more closely together with governments do some other things such as legal terma legislation 20 repeating temporary regulations and all these things we have to work together and we've become parts of a thing that's trying to be a wider step so a society of all just needs a process that we need to work together and we need to work together and we need to write issues do you have any other terms then so i think your concern will be taken as a note for FSC as well as for other stakeholders so some of the reasonable FSC association is still on the equation and do you take note of it so i think we still have 5 minutes yes please 1 question on the end because time is fairly limited we only have 5 minutes before we come to the end thank you i'm Wesley from the Singapore Economic Development Board i'll just try to ask the panel currently certification at the landscape level seems quite new WWF and FSC who is driving the settings of the framework the methodology and indicators how do you all see the role of companies in landscape level certification and management and do you all see them coming on board with you thank you perhaps i'll say first and then we'll give an additional information in the recent case i think as i've mentioned before it's companies who have been the main driver in FSC certification so we do see interest from companies looking at the landscape level looking at how it has to be made by HSBC by Unilever or by Wesley looking at the water level in the landscape in terms of how they go forward so yes we need to help in what that particular objectives are what type of impact that has with that i would like to go back to the statement i'm going to my presentation saying that we relate this for the project that forces as the additional or for the expansion for the FSC certification and one of the reasons why we're doing it because right now there's a very limited appreciation for companies in particular the active working company where they already preserve the forestry services or the ecosystem services but there is no proper appreciation of that just add if you look at trying to do forest management in Malaysia trying to make money from the timber and often the opportunity because of doing other activities such as palm oil and cultural activities maybe of a higher so the finances don't work in order to make that a viable business option to show some numbers there it serves to help in that business case to give you what you need so by being able to quantify that certification and monetize that into some extent and capture the decision-making that way you can convert the lateral rise to the top of life and the same can be true in many other cases and by warning the sky we think we can was ever seen as a tool to actually have more an impact in protecting forests and also protecting the livelihoods and communities for survival and people becoming need to help Okay Let's hear from a final say who will close the session Well I can tell you say that I do believe that number of companies are quite interested in looking beyond timber as the main issue related to travel forest we see a very big interest in looking at deforestation as a much wider issue I think if you begin to look at deforestation you are more or less automatically also beginning to look at the ecosystem services involved in that because why do you want to collect deforestation in order to make sure that ecosystem services can still be provided meaning carbon, water, biodiversity plus a number of social issues involved also so I think there is in fact a lot of interest out there in this issue and I think the main challenge we have is to be able to find ways in which we can document what we are already doing that is relevant in this context and this is quantifying the water issues, quantifying the carbon issues, quantifying and documenting the social issues I think that is hugely important and then to move certification to become a tool that is also relevant for larger scale landscapes than just the individual forest management Thank you, Kim. Distinguished participants, ladies and gentlemen I think we are now coming to the end of our session and what we can learn from our discussion to this that ecosystem services is becoming more important considering the wider benefits that can be gained