 Good morning everyone and thank you for joining today's session on Accelerating Sustainable Value Chains. On this issue, the challenge that lies before us is enormous. I read a report by BCG and HSBC which shows that nearly 80% of the planet's carbon emissions can be traced to global value chains. And then more than 90% of the firms in these global value chains are actually SMEs. Now many of these supply chains are actually led by MNCs and that's part of the reason why it's important for us to listen to what our business leaders are going to be saying on this issue today. Research also shows that supply chain emissions are almost 11.4 times, excuse me, higher than operational emissions. And there are additional complexities that we need to deal with. Because of forced labor, minimum wages that are paid and workers working exceptionally long hours which leads to health issues and other problems. So new ideas are really needed in terms of industry practice and policy cooperation to leverage value chains for sustainable development. Today we are here to discuss what strategies, policies and partnerships can help manufacturing companies accelerate the transition to sustainable value chains. Joining me for today's discussion is Ms. Arancha Gonzales-Laya, Dean of the Paris School of International Affairs, Institute Atude Politique and former Executive Director of the International Trade Center. We have with us Mr. Ron Rombusch, President and CEO of Siemens. We have Mr. Enrique Laurel, President and CEO of HP and of course Mr. Martin Lundstedt, President and CEO of Volvo. Between the three of them we are going to be covering sectors that deal with several supply chain issues. So how about I begin with you Arancha. Before I begin, let me just remind everyone who signed on online that when you're communicating on social media, could you use the hashtag WEF22 in all your communications please. So Arancha, let me turn to you. You have a very rich experience in working on the sustainable trade and value chains with both public and private sectors. So what potential do you see to leverage value chains for sustainable development? Thank you very much, Shefali. Yes. I mean, I've seen this from both ends. I've seen this from the public sector, from the regulatory side, let's say at the international level, from the World Trade Organization, from the United Nations. But I'm also seeing it from the private sector. I advise a company that is active in food markets than on to include as an independent advisor to include the sustainability criteria into the business operation. And for me, the biggest hit of this is the transformative impact that embedding sustainability into the business, the core business can have not only for the companies, and I mean, I'm sure that the companies will speak about that themselves, but also for their suppliers, for the consumers, and for society at large. So what we have here is a possibility to transform the way in which our economy works, but doing it from the core of the business, not just as an afterthought, not just as a good to have, but as, you know, from the point of view of businesses who understand that this can be a source of competitiveness, as well as social good. So that I think is what the beginning of this conversation, I guess, is about. So based on the interactions you've been having with business leaders and all, what is the reality today? Is it still an afterthought and not really part of the core operations yet? No, I think if I look at the last 20 years, I think this issue is moving closer and closer to the core of the companies. And there are very few out there that now consider this as an afterthought. Mostly because considering it as an afterthought doesn't deliver results. And in a world that is becoming much more transparent, where transparency is a bigger requirement, whether within the company, with shareholders, and, you know, with the broader community, if you're not doing this as the core of your business, it shows. And it just doesn't work. Got it. Let me turn to our CEOs today and get their views on the issue. What I'd like to ask you is, why don't you share your information on the advances that are happening in your industry on this issue? Let me begin with you, Rodin. Yeah, thank you. And just let me come back to the question we are talking about is, of course, sustainable supply chain is not only about using less energy, it's also using less resources. It's respecting local and labor law. It's contributing to societies. And of course, I mean, since COVID, we talk about it, to make our supply chain more resilient. I do believe in the past due to this labor arbitrage going for cheap energy and then alike, and I don't ever see a price, so therefore maybe energy is artificial high. We I always say we polish the asymptote of our supply chain. So it's just in time, just in sequence delivery for automotive, for example. If something happens, I mean, you go to a full stop and COVID showed us this is hard way. And so therefore, that's something that we have to change. And they're actually, for me, these are two elements. Of course, it's the strategy that you think about your supply chain, how you diversify it, allocated to different regions, countries. But then I'm a strong believer in technology to give an answer to that one. And it starts in the design phase. Eco robust design gives you from the very beginning, if you lose the right tools, it gives you what we call a digital twin of a product, including a digital twin of the footprint. So of the CO2 footprint, is it recyclable? And of course, you can also in an eco robust design, you would design in different different suppliers. When we talk about complying the real in the digital world, because once you make it digital and you have a digital twin, then also of your manufacturing side, then you bring it to life. And then you control it also during the operational phase, is the output really what you thought you would go in. Just one more word to make it more tangible. Let's talk about our trains, our myriad trains, commuter trains. We do that. We design them virtually. We have a virtual image. They are using 25% less energy. They are recyclable to 95%. We can power them with an overhead line, but also with hydrogen or batteries, if you want. And since we are running then in the operation phase with digital AI, we can basically guarantee 100% availability because we know which part is going to fail and when and why. So we can pull them off, repair them and bring them back. This is very powerful. If you deploy that to our industries which are serving, I think it's a very, very good answer to go forward using less resources while still maintaining a higher growth what I do believe we need. Yeah. I couldn't agree with you more, but in your industry, to what extent is this digital twin phenomenon happening and what do you think is preventing companies from taking to it? I mean, as an idea it sounds good. So I'm looking forward to your answer too, but I see there's a strong demand and we see and you see that if you talk about our software business, I mean, our software and digital business is a 5.5 billion growing with more than 10%. It's growing over proportional. So obviously, the customers are asking more for that. It's clear. If you really want to maintain your productivity level, if you want to shorten your cycle time, there's no way other than going in this digital world and do whatever benefit you can get. The pickup rate so far can be even faster and I think it's a combination of sometimes hesitating to invest, sometimes a lack of competencies which brings me to one of the biggest topics which we have is education and training of people because a shop on a shop floor on a fully automated line looks completely different than a shop in a semi or non-automated line. This includes also our software engineers. They're using different tools which are going way beyond just make a 3D drawing. You really simulate whatever it does when you shake it, when you heat it, when you burn it, whatever, even the software running on a hardware. So education and training and then last thing is in most cases when I see companies making a big step forward, it's from the C level. It's a visionary CEO who says, I want to go digital, I want to do that and then pull it off. Absolutely. Always about Volvo. Yeah, absolutely. We are utilizing that every day of the week, otherwise I should have given the wrong answer here. But no, I will come back to it actually. I will come back to it. You can continue right away. No, no, but obviously for different reasons, I mean both when it comes to the business models today where we are moving from products and off the market services into solutions and we need actually to replicate much quicker together with our customers and customers and that we are doing in so to speak the digital twin world to see how does it work before we are actually deploying different type of solutions. So both for our internal efficiency to shorten lead times, quicker time to market on our traditional business, but I think more importantly for the whole transformation actually because that gives you completely different opportunities to interact with downstream, our customers and customers, customers, but also very important for us with as you know Roland also very complex and important innovative supply chain network that gives our ability to capture their innovation force. So in your industry, which involves so many firms, I'm keen to know what are the advances that have happened in recent years that excite you beyond the digital twin or, you know, just I mean, if you start with a bigger picture as one of the world's biggest provider of commercial, vehicle and construction equipment solutions, right? Of course, the big movement for us is the all the positive effects about Paris and in particular the science-based target movements. And the reason for that is obviously that now companies are stepping up, talking about okay, what is their CO2 footprint? How does it look like? What is the scope one, scope two, scope three? And that is giving two very dynamic effects. First and foremost, we see that most sectors are coming pretty quick to transport and logistics and infrastructure and construction activities. And they're also coming to that by understanding that in order to abate CO2, start with transport and logistics is a pretty good deal. If you're in retail, for example, maybe five, six percent of your cost is logistics, but 40, 45 percent of your footprint of CO2 is logistics. So if you can abate that by even increasing it with 20 percent, that will mean one percentage of your total cost base taking out 40 percent. It's a pretty good equation, right? And so that is by far the most important. That means that we are now connected. We have always talked about the ecosystem. But now the ecosystem is happening at scale because what is my scope three, and by the way, that's 92 percent of my footprint given I'm in supply. Is someone else to scope one, scope two, or even scope three? So we need and we want to connect in the supply chain. And the other part of that that is so important is it's a bigger cause because another very important part in the supply is supply of talent. And if you want to be in the coolest industry in the world, you should be in logistics and transport, okay? And that means also that we are attracting a lot of talents. Number is true. Number is true. And I mean, and the third thing about it is also that it is actually connecting different sectors. So I mean, what has been a traditionally extremely transactional industry automotive and commercial vehicles, you know, send out an RFQ. And we don't want to have any opinions. So you just answer to the RFQ request for quotation has completely changed. Let's see for my, and if it is my executive when it comes to purchase and sourcing, I mean, the most important tool we have now is not the RFQ, it's the innovation dialogue. And why? Because we need to have all our supply chain partners along this line. But we can talk more about that later. Of course, yeah. Great time to say. Yeah, yeah. And Ricky, yeah. I think that I would answer the question in a slightly different way. I think that what is most exciting about what is happening now is the fact that companies from almost every sector now have plans and have integrated sustainability as one of the key objectives. Each of us is doing it in a slightly different way because our businesses are different. But the definition of the problem is very similar. It's not only what energy do we use. It's how do we design our products? What materials do we use? Where do we build our factories? What transportation, super cool technologies do we use? And this is really what has changed in the last year. And as we were talking before, the other important change is that in the past, we were talking about goals for 2040, goals for 2050. The conversation has shifted now to, what are we going to be doing next year? What is the plans that Volvo has to improve in the next 12 months? What is Siemens going to be doing in the next six months? What are we going to be doing immediately? That's what is, I think, important for the change. It's not a vision. It's things that are happening today. I agree. And here comes one interesting observation, talking about the timeline. It was written recently in an article. And out of, whatever, 160, 80 countries, maybe two of them are a little bit beyond 2030. Almost all the others are sitting on 2030 with their carbon-zero target. Take the same picture for industries, any kind of small and medium sized company, big companies. All of them are targeting for 2030. So we are writing 2022 now, which is just eight years to go. As we approach 2030, I think we can all imagine what happens. Because none of them would really be gross zero. You might be net zero. That means any kind of offsetting or whatever. This would be really a huge pile which we're building up. I'm wondering how that goes. And so it's move now and move fast. Exactly. Yeah. Absolutely. Exactly. Actually, tied to what you're just saying, I'm keen to ask you, it has often taken a back seat. The whole push towards sustainability. But can sustainability and competitiveness go hand in hand? It's a clear yes. And for us, it's business. I mean, it started off in being part of a report, treated somehow in the aftermath of our financial reporting. And it sits now in the core of our strategy. Talk about buildings. I mean, we are automating buildings. Building efficiency. And not only efficiency in automating them, but also making them using the full nine yards of technology which you have. Is it heat pumps? Is it photovoltaic on the rooftop? Is it storage? Connecting that to a grid or even running on a microgrid. Trains I was talking about, but the whole industry. I mean, at the firm of time, they just talked about how can I produce productive. Now it's about how can I produce more sustainable. And one of our customers, and we disclosed that, Mercedes, they decided to build in Berlin the most modern, most automated, and most sustainable electric car assembly planned in the world and have two Siemens. Because we go for the full nine yards. We go on the shop floor. We go for the buildings. And we also have an agreement to educate and train people. Which is, again, a point which I believe cannot emphasize more. But would this also be true for small and medium scale companies? I think so. When I talk to them, they come back to us and ask us also, how can we support? It's very interesting. It starts really not in saying, OK, I want to deploy a technology. It starts really, I have to make a plan. And it starts even before that. I have to create transparency. Where am I? You talked about the footprint, scope one and two. Our case, half a million tons. We have low energy intensive for Siemens. Cut it by half already, since 2015. The supply chain, so scope three upstream, it's 20 times more. It's more than 10 million. So you see that pattern all the way through, also for small and medium scale enterprises. So they want to create a transparency first. And once they have the transparency, then they make a proper plan to do that while. And this is the point. I do not believe that you are impacting your competitiveness. I strongly believe you can increase your competitiveness at the same time. And Rike, may I ask you, from your position, how much of visibility do you have in the supply chains that are working with you? I think it has become a critical need for all of us to understand our supply chains and understand the progress we are making. I think Arancia said it very well at the beginning. We cannot manage this as a separate initiative. What most of our companies have done, we have integrated sustainability as part of our business initiatives. It's not something separate because we are all convinced that it is not an or, it's an and. We need to be competitive in the future. We need to lead in sustainability. We, for example, publish every year our sustainability report. We have, in the report this year, we will hear that in last year, we won more than $3 billion because of our sustainability practices. Because here's what Martin was saying, our scope three is the scope one for our customers. And they care about the sustainability programs that we have because we'll impact their programs, they will impact their initiatives. And we are winning business just because of sustainability. And this is only starting, we are convinced that this is gonna be even more important in the future. Great, Martin, you are gonna say something. No, no, but I think also just to add to what has been said here that I fully, I mean, support is also what we have learned during the last couple of years here. It's obviously, I mean, if you take trucks, for example, I mean, that's made to measure built production equipment. It's not a truck, it's not a truck, it's built for the specific purpose of the customer, right? That means enormous variety. It means a fantastic network of supply chain partners. And it's always the weakest link, regardless if you talk about the supply chain shortages that we have been facing now, short-term. Or if you think about the mid and long-term execution of our strategy, right? That is a fossil-free transportation system. And that is something that we have learned now that really continue to not only focus on the T-1s, but the T-2, T-3, both from a resilient point of view when it comes to visibility volumes, commitments where they feel on boarded, but also when it comes to sharing the vision so we can pull from the innovation capabilities of all these fantastic companies. I mean, we have a lot of SMEs, but they are sitting on huge capabilities when it comes to innovation power. And we have, for example, Camp X in Gothenburg, where we are sitting mixed with the small big supply chain partners that can make a difference for us. So I think a lot of things have happened over the last, not only related, because we relate everything to the pandemic and things like that. But since we have understood that you cannot do it alone, this is a system game. We need to move from a brown to a green platform. And maybe one to add. And I do believe the full transparency along the supply chain is a topic. It's a topic for big companies and for small and medium sized in particular. We used our software portfolio and we developed what we call CGreen, which is an extension to the supply chain, which is a platform where all the data can fit in in order to really make it fully transparent for your developers. So that means whenever you are designing a part into it, as long as the data are coming in, then you see really what your footprint is. And I think it's also in the context with SWEF. We brought it to life, Estanium, which is a community of companies who would feed in the data. Because if you have the data, then you really, better the days, of course. And it's not trivial, I tell you. It's not trivial. Think about a manufacturing. If we manufacture a PLC, what's the share of energy going to that very same PLC, part of the whole energy consumption for plants? So you really have to think about it, how to do that. Once you have it, you have full transparency, and then you can attack. Right. On that point, Martin, we've discussed digital twinning and related issues. But is there a bigger role for technology to play in encouraging our push towards sustainable value change? Of course. I mean, without technology as a base, we will not be able to do it both when it comes to the, so to speak, core technologies in the transformation, such as the whole electrification era, both when it comes to battery electric execution in our industries, but also when it comes to hydrogen fuel cell, electric vehicles utilizing the same modular platform when it comes to powertrain. But then, of course, it will be a lot of digital layers coming into this. Because in order to create, we are moving from, as I said, to move from the brown to the green, the trick here is really to move at the same time. Because otherwise, it will be the chicken and the egg situation, right? But this is the trick in when it comes to infrastructure, when it comes to certainty among customers, when it comes even to things, I mean, residual value, durability for the batteries, how long were they lost, how should you think about it. And this will create an enormous network, and very similar to what Roland mentioned about, I mean, the development phase. It will also be in the operational phase, right? And here, I think we should be more generous by sharing data also now as we speak, because that will allow us to move quicker. And we will end up with much less stranded assets because we do it together when it comes to moving the platform. Then we should continue to compete on the new platform. I think on the technology side, if I may, there is also the traceability of the value chains that need to be improved. And technology is a big means to do that. So what happens? I mean, the big problem that you all have, and maybe in your industries, is a little bit less of a problem because you have very tight control over your entire supply chain, whether it's tier one, tier two, tier three. But if I think of textiles, if I think of food, which is much more atomized, the technology will be essential to trace what's happening below the tier one. And to make sure that you do not find, take the food sector, that you've got labor conditions in your chain that are not on the textile sector, that are not the standards that the company has agreed to adhere to. So technology is a big part of the answer. And what I think is good now, frankly, but you will tell me whether you think otherwise, up until now, all of this was in the hands of the private sector, private initiatives, private standards, multiplicity that made your life very difficult because you didn't know really which standard to respond to and to report to. Whereas now, at least in Europe, this is becoming public policy. So you've got rules that everyone needs to adhere to. So a bit more cumbersome, a bit more probably puts a little bit more pain on your quote, unquote, on your business, but it ensures a level playing field and greater transparency for all of you. So whether it's on traceability of value chains where it's on circularity, whether it's on barcodes and the rest, the legislation that is coming out of the European Union, in my view, is now going to provide you with one set of rules and a better level playing field. Let me add to that, and I fully agree. The taxonomy, which we are talking about, is the right thing to do. I would give a little bit of a pre-warning because the grip on tier one is strong. On tier two is a little bit weaker. Tier three, I don't know whether you have full visibility and if you go to the mine, I think we lost. We are losing control. So therefore, and this is a big company, we have a lot of supply-gen management people, I tell you. Small and medium-sized companies, if you really deploy the taxonomy full-stream now, they do have a hard time to really comply completely with that. So I think it needs time to create this transparency and therefore, yes, the right thing to do, but respect the time that you need because once you are signing your report, I'm in control, then you might have a problem and this is what we have to avoid. On the other side, on the other side, coming back to your point about integrity, also, of the supply-gen, I mean, and you're fully right when we talk about food and beverage, it's about from the farm to the fork to have an integrity, what happened to your food, not only in terms of CO2 footprint, but what lands on your table and this is something we use blockchain technologies to do that is one way, one answer to it. It's a massive trend, you see that, and which includes then everything. What is the water consumption related to it? What kind of fertilizer are you used and whatnot? And that's the thing which technology can help, but again, you have to deploy it in an end-to-end way which makes it a little bit complicated once you think the whole thing through. And let's hear from Enrique on this issue as well. Yeah, I think the point about reporting and transparency is fundamental and it can be one of the biggest accelerators of change because it's one of the major obstacles we find today. We report in a way, role, and we report in a slightly different way. Another company in a different place will do differently. It is hard to see how everybody, what type of progress is each company making, having clear standards and forcing us to use them is fundamental and actually something that from the public sector we have been pushing for, so we really welcome the help from the public side. We wish there is some coordination between the European Union and the US and some of the big governments because if not it will be complicated, but it is really something needed that we will welcome because it will help us really to make even more problems. I totally agree with you. We need to have these standards that all companies and countries can buy into because otherwise the trade becomes so much more complicated. But let me turn to you again and let me ask you for your ideas on what kind of public-private cooperation would you like to say coming after of Davos or even in the future? I think the most important one is probably what we were just talking, aligning on in the definition of what are the standards that we need to use to report and forcing every company of every industry to use those standards to those that are relevant, of course, to make sure that we use them to be able to compare and to track progress. That will be such an important area that I don't want to ask for more. Let's make progress. Absolutely, there's so much of work to be done in this area. But Martin, can I draw your attention to this issue like on public-private cooperation? Are there new initiatives that need to be taken? Of course, I mean, there are a lot of them and I think one that we are participating that is the first movie coalition. That is how do we actually focus on a number of very critical supply chains in order to create the prerequisites in the private sector primarily because it's a cooperation between different companies. We are, for example, I mean on the fossil-free steel. We have seen good traction but that will also require a lot of public-private partnership when it comes to the speed as Roland was into here, eight years from now, 2030. And when we see a lot of the enablers, the political and the public arena is very important. Permitting processes still being done in a way that is coherent, obviously, with all the requirements. But today it just takes too long time and how do we cope with that in order? Because I think there is a great willingness and also we need also to integrate sustainability efficiencies into the competition law because today it's only pricing efficiencies, which is good and important because we need to protect the consumers. But we should protect the consumers also in a sustainable way and sustainability efficiencies are required for industries to cooperate on standards to lift the industry into new platforms. And that is today also an area where we have a number of processes ongoing for actually cooperation that takes too long time, basically. We don't have the time to wait for that because we need to move 2030s around the corner. And we need to start to put sticks in the ground now. So there are, I think, more of that enabling factors than it's often a lot of talk about incentives and funding. I mean, you can have that for a short period of time. I'm not a big fan of that. I'm more fan of the enablers. It's something that's going to be very hard to do, but Ronald, quick thoughts on this. Not necessary. Let me add two dimensions. It's regulation and stimulation. On the regulation side, I fully agree. I mean, we have to get in sync. I mean, it's cannot be that we are writing two reports, one for, let's say, the US regulators and one the European ones. It's meaningless. But also coming back to the big discussion about CO2 and since we're at VEF, we want to make a better planet. We have really joint forces. And I mean, one CO2 price would be a global one, would be a blessing because then you're really, and then you can start lifting it and find a way how to be looking for it. So it's dream. I know that, but actually we should have it in mind. That makes it much easier, which brings me to stimulation. Stimulation, we know that also growing through COVID, obviously governments are stimulating. And this is great because all the stimulus money goes into the future, into the past. Yet you have to do it right. And for me, one lesson I learned over the years is stimulating money works best if you do not put it on technologies, but if you put it on outcome. I mean, what do you want to achieve? Is it, if you say you want to have a recyclability of whatever, 95%, then go for that. And we want to have a CO2 reduction then just raise the price and stimulate, could give money where we achieve that. With one exception, if it's about new technologies, whatever you talk about, then we should, there's of course a first phase where you really have to go into research less near to the market. And there I do believe stimulus money has its justice. One last sentence, and I come back to regulation data. If you over-regulate data, you have another problem. Because we just talked about the whole thing goes about a fully, fully up the value chain and down the value chain integrity of data in order to create transparency. If you're putting hurdles on it and not to share it and because it's so difficult, you have another problem. So I would be a little bit more easy on that. Respecting privacy data. I'm going to draw in Arancha on this point. Oh, I didn't think. No, I mean, I think what we need now is to put the regulators, not just of the EU and the US, but I would put the regulators in China and India in the same room, together with the businesses. Because at the end of the day, it's the businesses that need to tell the regulators we do not want you to have a multiplicity of regulatory frameworks. Give us one, whichever you want, but give us one. I think the web has to spend a lot of time putting the businesses around the table into these kind of private standards. But now what we need is the public and the private, all the big guys, if you can get some of the smaller ones too because part of the minds, et cetera, that you described are also in parts of the world that need to be around the table. One regulatory framework, regulatory convergence. That's a bit the name of the game. And the sooner the better because, you know, we set 2030 as the magic date for achieving results, but now we know from the last IPCC report that 2030 is already late. So back to your point, accelerating efforts is what we need, and I think what we need is frameworks that would allow for this acceleration to take place in a cooperative manner. One of the themes, and I'll end here if you allow me, one of the themes here has been de-globalization on the risk of fragmentation. And I guess from what you've heard this morning, this is the thing to avoid the most because what I hear you say is that you've got your value chains all across the world. So we don't need a fragmentation. What we need is great coherence, greater coming together. Okay, Sean Martin wants to. No, no, I fully support this. I think this is so important to underline. We have learned a lot about resilience that we need to reinforce regional value chains for good reasons. It will also come with the price on carbon and a lot of different factors. But to continue to allow for global supply chains, both for innovation and for real executing on the borderless challenge we have to gather on on climate and biodiversity, we must continue to do so. And one thing that I've been a little bit afraid of during this World Economic Forum is that we have forgotten open in strategic autonomy. And for me, open strategic autonomy is a well-balanced phrase because we understand that different regions need strategic autonomy in different shapes and forms. But the openness must be underlined in every conversation to your point. So I just want to support that. And if I may, I think the way globalization has been designed for defined for the last 10 years, I think it's gonna be changing in the next five. And I think this is actually an opportunity from a sustainability perspective. Because at the same time, we are gonna be redesigning our value chains to be more resilient, which is something that we have learned during the last two years that we have to do because in some areas we have exposures that we shouldn't have. Redesigning them is the opportunity to make them more sustainable as well. And the definition of globalization might be different, but this is a big opportunity we have now in the next years to really accelerate some of the changes that we have to do. Aracia? One more point. Because you mentioned the strategic autonomy. I mean, I'm a little bit reluctant to use this autonomy word. So I would underline a bold phase strategic, meaning it's only in those areas where you really need, are vulnerable, where you should target for autonomy. Other than that, it's completely, it's exactly this open. For me, the point is, look about Germany, for example. We will be forever, if you don't go for fusion or whatever, we will forever be an energy import country. Full stop. So how can we be autonomy? There are food import countries. Middle East is one of the largest food imported. They cannot be autonomy. So therefore it's more the open and strategic part which is important then. And I think they're fully in line here. Yeah, but also globalization is all about cooperation and collaboration. But let me turn to Aracia, beyond regulation, do you see a bigger role for governments in this particular area? Look, I think governments have to set the right incentive schemes. That's what governments are about. They are not about telling businesses how they run their businesses. They are about setting the regulatory schemes, setting the incentive schemes, whether it's on the taxation, whether it's on the education. I very much agree with you that we've got a huge issue. Many of the value chains will require skills that we are not producing today or not producing today at the scale that will be needed. And that's where governments can be of enormous help working with businesses. So set the frame, set the right set of incentives. That's the role of governments. And then the rest is ant transparency and accountability, you know? Then you let businesses run. Countability, transparency, so that everybody knows what's going on. I guess that's the role. Let me add one subject to that one. There's one exception I would say. I would require government to also get into the boat if it's about securing critical supplies. I mean, rare earth, cobalt, nickel, whatever. Even if companies coming together, maybe others have 11 players or 12 players on the field and we have only 10. So the government would be a very, very welcome because the reason why I'm saying that this is a very, very long term strategy in order to supply and I guess you know what I'm talking about. So joining forces here and also get a government engage because in very often it's about government relationships when you want to make about 20, 30 years agreement on how to get access to certain critical commodities. Just gonna try and see if I can squeeze in a question or two from our audience here, anyone? Okay, please identify yourself. Hello, Dan Biedermann. I'm a social entrepreneur within the Schwab community and have worked on traceability and supply chains for a long time, including with HP. What a joy to see CEOs talking about the need for regulation to level the playing field. It's something civil society has certainly been talking about for a long time. One of the obstacles to faster, quicker, and more complete progress is your competitors. So you're all leaders. How are you gonna bring the industry along? I would like to go first. I think this is where government help is necessary. If there are clear standards that everybody needs to report to, it's not a matter of whether we do it and our competitor doesn't. This is why the definition of those standards is so critical and if the standards are the same in every country or similar, even better to really accelerate the reporting. And I think one example on that, we have been engaged in that, I think, is just one very concrete example is, for example, the Global Battery Alliance and the Battery Passport. How can we make a standard about utilizing the digital capability to follow the supply chain both when it comes to all-dimensional sustainability, ethical, social, environmental, and economically distributed well? Is an initiative that I think is absolutely necessary, not only for that supply chain, but that is very critical now, since it's accelerating very quickly. So these type of initiatives and getting more and more bored, obviously. We talked very much about, and I'm a strong believer in technologies, as you recognized already, deploying your technologies. I mean the whole technology stack from the sensors over the edge to the cloud, which is combining the real and digital world. It's for me the answer. I mean, you can take every industry up and down. Yet, along with that goes a strange in mindset of how we define competition. And I'm about now to talk about the economy of platforms, multi-sided platforms. The more you give in, the better it may get out and the more player you have, the more you get. Our business managers, they run businesses in a very clear way. 3RT, Tf3 delivers to Tf2, to T1, to OEM, and you do the customer. And everybody adds value, and this is how it goes. This breaks up. It will be a network, it will be multi-sided platforms. That includes competitors playing on a platform. Unfortunately, not all of our customers are using only Siemens POCs. Still, we have to connect them to our solutions. So if we don't get them on board, we have another topic. So it's a little bit more open from that perspective. If you really want to pull it and scale and go fast, going fast, I mean about 2030, there's no way around how to really find our business model also in the context of competition. I want to go back to what Enrico was saying a minute ago. Yes, we are in a new phase of globalization. Globalization was understood to be openness without many rules. And what we now know is that openness is a requirement but that you need more rules of the game. And what is good now of this phase of globalization, at least from where I see it, is that we put these rules clearly on the map. Sustainability rules, rules to protect basic human rights, labor rights, rules to make sure that we've got more resilience, resilience in countries, resilience in businesses. So this is the new phase of globalization. So it's not less globalization, it's not globalization that is adapted to the times we're living where we need also values embedded in business. We have just a few minutes left. Do you think I can allow my panelists to say their final words? I'm sorry. So Martin, in 30 seconds, like what action can our global community take to accelerate sustainable value chains? 30 seconds. First and foremost, I mean that we have this conversation accelerated, I think it's a very good sign, talking about all the opportunities we have with technology, but also that at the end of the day, it's about people sharing values where we want to go, utilizing those enablers. So partnership is the new leadership. I strongly believe in that. And I think there are a number of tangible initiatives coming out from a forum like this. Again, I would like to advocate for the first mover coalition. I think it's a great initiative. It's concrete in different sectors. So please. What initiative is the new leadership? I think it's about action. We all have plans for the next 10 years. Now it's about what are we going to do? Sorry, in 22, in 23, in 24, and really make sure that we use our companies as platforms because we can do a lot of things internally, but we can be even more influential by influencing our suppliers, governments, and I think this is where change can really happen. Absolutely, action and driving the change, especially making your companies the platforms. Ronald? Well, I think the problem description is there. CO2 footprint, climate change, food supply, water shortage, and you name it, and actually technology brought us to the point where we are today. But it was not all bad because we are living in a world where we are feeding almost 8 million people and the portion of people who are living in poverty is lower than ever. So there's a good news too. However, going forward, in order to make that not worse, technology will be able to, it brought us to the point where we are and will get us up. Technology is the answer. Arancha, for you. So we are at the turning point, but we've got an opportunity to craft a new system that works on the basis of openness, more resilience, and works for all. For people and for planets, but also for prosperity. So that's the challenge. We can do it. To use the words of a famous German, we are shuffling this. We need it. Absolutely, thank you so much for your comments. I think today's discussion was fascinating. There's a lot of work still to be done. I think sustainability has to start figuring in trade discussions. It has to start figuring in all the investment decisions that are being taken just so that all of us can work together and push for a better future for all of us. Thank you so much for joining in today. Thank you.