 We have here with us a very distinguished panel of truly professional experts in this area. So we have three studies which will be summarized for you today. The first one will be from Zambia and to present that is to my left, immediate left here, Mr. Ignatius Makumba, who is the director of forestry, the Ministry of Lands, Natural Resources and Environmental Protection for Zambia. After Zambia, we will be listening to Mr. Ivaris Nashanda, who is the principal forest officer for the National Red Plus Task Force in the Ministry of Environment in Tanzania. He is seated in the middle here and following him, we will have a commentary on the similar study on forest evaluations by Mr. Carlos Gomez, who is seated next to him, who is the National Red Plus Coordinator for the National Environmental Authority in Panama and also at the same time the UNF CCCC Red Plus negotiator, as well as co-president of the Red Plus partnership. That will be followed by myself with a commentary quickly on Indonesia. These are four of the five forestry variation studies which are put together by the United Nations Environment Programme. Tim, who is the coordinator and host of these projects, is here. Thank you, Tim, for being with us. But before I launch into the, and my colleagues here launch into the studies on forestry, let me just set the scene a little with a background in two ways. One is where we are and what we are doing and is anyone listening. And second is what is this whole connection between in the context of the landscape between eco, agri, and food systems and how we need to be conscious of this entire complex and in that I want to also formally announce to you and to this audience the start of a study called the Teab for food and agriculture at this right. So the first question that I have to ask ourselves is anyone listening and I was pleasantly surprised on my flight in from India via London via Miami to read as an ex-banker as some of you may be aware, I tend to read the financial precedent. This is the Wall Street Journal and on page three I suddenly look at this article which says warmer water cited for rapid iron-tastic melt and I think because I just smiled to myself saying that oh, finally the financial world is actually putting this on page three and of course any of are there any people from England in the audience, any English British people? Yes, so page three in England has a different connotation, but just forget that for the time being. But this is basically now the top financial journal talking about what is actually our topic. So I think finally, finally the penny has dropped somewhere. Not only that, but there was another article in this in this Wall Street Journal, which was on Nobarez, one of the Nobarez brothers talking about something that we have all discussed very much in the past, which is the the fresh water generation function of rainforest and can we just have someone close that door and don't necessarily want to hear the pantry from here? So and all of these literally occupied one entire page of that newspaper and I thought to myself, okay, you know, we are all traveling here to to Peru and to Lima for some good purpose. The TEAP study is my next argument in terms of the economics of ecosystems and biodiversity. It was in fact inspired by the stern review of climate change and we explored the value of ecosystem services and we explored it from different perspectives. One was the underlying ecology and economics of these ecosystems and what they provided and together with that, of course, we tried to size the economic and social impact of their loss. Size not just in global macro terms, but also size right down to the location and to the community. What did it mean to lose ecosystem services? What was the meaning of the GDP of the poor and so on? And we addressed the audiences of decision-makers. So the TEAP study was actually one study, but in fact it was printed in four different ways. There was a TEAP for the experts on ecology and economics and there was a TEAP for policy makers, basically international and national policy makers. Then there was a TEAP for the business community and this morning those of you who are in the plenary would have heard Paul Pullman and the comments he made were quite relevant. And finally there was the TEAP for local administrators, mayors, local administrators, provincial governments and so on. And the last TEAP was essentially a TEAP for people, a TEAP for NGOs and citizens, and which basically was not a study, it was a website with relevant information. So we did all that with a view to explaining the value of ecosystem services to a largely illiterate audience from our perspective and most of you are literate in this and there are experts in the audience and especially at the podium. But we are trying to explain this complexity to the man on the street and to the finance ministry or to the banker who reads the Wall Street Journal. That was not easy and that was the challenge of TEAP. But the challenge that we did not have at that point was to, even though we understood the importance of ecosystems towards agriculture, whether it is soil productivity or whether it is freshwater cycling or whether it is just local micro-climate support, whatever it is. But there are huge benefits that go from ecosystems to agriculture. Those were not part of our evaluation. So unfortunately, our study did not address the basic lack of understanding of eco-agri-food systems in the common man's mind. And this is a caricature if you like, it's a diagram which shows you what typically someone thinks is agriculture and food, a man on the street, so to speak. And they would think in terms of a system of growing plants and in fields and cattle for the purpose of generating output like food and raw materials like cotton and jute and maybe some agro-tourism. And these are the priced outputs of agriculture. And then there are the unpriced ones, the ones in the open areas, which are lined in blue, those are the unpriced items, which is basically the cultural heritage aspect of agriculture. But what we did not look at, and I think this is the study that is being done today, is all of the other aspects of this landscape, of this eco-agri-food systems landscape. And when we do that, actually to draw you the diagram of how complex it is, this is what it looks like. There are all of these services all the way from water to pollination, the supporting services which support agriculture, whether it is decomposition of waste or carbon fixation. And these are the benefits. They're all invisible. There's no market price for any of this. Then there are the invisible costs in terms of the loss of habitat, a loss of ecosystem complexity, soil erosion and so on. Then there are the invisible costs between agriculture and food and human systems in terms of health, the costs of pesticide and fertilizers causing health problems. And then there are the impacts on the climate. All of those are invisibles because there is again no market price. There is no way of putting this into policy using the usual tools of policy makers. So this is the challenge, ladies and gentlemen, that when we look at ecosystems and agriculture and food production, the priced outputs, those for which markets tell us an answer as to what is this worth, there are only three of those and the un-priced are 23. So this is the challenge. So therefore whether it is the policymaker at the national level or whether it is the farmer in the field, this is the landscape of externalities in which you are expecting that person to make good decisions. And how is this going to happen? Because none of these, there is no appreciation of the value of any of these decisions. So we were just discussing a study that was done by some scientists that surveyed more than 285 ecologically friendly farming projects. We were just talking about this, my unit colleagues and I, and they had looked at the outputs of sustainable farming, but of course what they are not looked at is the costs. And therefore this is the kind of work that does need to be done. When we do this work, we will then finally be able to get a sense of what is the small farming system compared to the intensive farming, compared to the extensive farming systems. Only that. Because otherwise, these simple facts are not known to people and those who were in the session this morning between 11.45 and 12 would have heard questions regarding Paraguay. Somebody was asking about the small farmer and what do we do about that? How do we not appreciate it? Well, for obvious reasons, because of the externalities. So we don't appreciate that half the food on the planet is actually grown in small farms, that there are 400 million small farms, less than two hectares, that those outputs in the small farms actually provides three-fourths of the food that goes to feed the food in secure regions. And that very often today when big corporations talk about solving the food security problem, they're not really the main actors in this challenge. The main actors is the small farm itself. And it is the farmer and her ability to generate higher yield in a small farm that makes a difference between low income for the poor and higher income, because the surplus can be taken to the market or low productivity and high productivity. So we are talking here about solving two major problems, poverty and hunger. And yet, how little do we focus on means of increasing productivity in the small farm? How little it is a center of policy focus to actually target the small farm energy? Invariably, you end up with situations where you are thinking of transitioning systems from small farming to extensive to intensive or small to intensive. In me, almost jumping to the conclusion that this is wrong, this has to go and we must replace it with something else. Forgetting that there are 1.1 billion jobs in small farms and that if all of them were to become intensive farms, you would need to re-employ 1.1 billion people. As an economist, I'm telling you, all of you, that you cannot do that by expecting them all to become Ferrari makers or making Porsche. That's not going to happen. So this is not just a poverty problem, not just a hunger problem. It's an employment problem. And we have to make sure we get the solutions right. But how to bring that whole context in? And this is where RED Plus comes in. This is where landscape-based approaches to carbon management come in. This is where forestry valuation comes in. This is where it really becomes important to look at what is the real value that forestry done properly generates for the economy and for society? What does it do for the small farm? And this, I think, is the topic of today's discussion. And this is why I think our topic is actually heart and center of what the UNFCCCOP and this is about. So the way that we are going about in the TEB group for this study on eco-agri-food systems is to not just look at it in terms of simple product lines. We're not just talking about rice, maize, wheat. But we've looked at that. We've looked at those systems because that's how people think. But we have looked at it and we are looking at it across different categories. How do we look at the output? How do we look at the farming system type? Is it holistic? Is it not? What are the socio-economic characteristics? What are the land tenure types? What are the property rights issues? Looking at all of those matters holistically and then comparing different systems and their externalities. Because even our initial work suggests that there are different levels of externalities for different kinds of farming systems. So I think this is where we need to look at. The reports that the TEB agriculture and food study will generate will begin with an interim report which will be launched in the Milan Expo, which is an agricultural expo meeting taking place in May. It will be followed by two major reports, one on the scientific and economic foundations and the other one on what policies and what production and consumption strategies can and should be encouraged to get a better result. And finally, we'll have a synthesis report. And we have already begun work. As I mentioned, there are initial studies that have been started and led by groups such as the Food and Agricultural Organization, various institutes from the CGIAR network by Wageningen University in the case of the Animal Husbandry Study and initial study results will soon be available to you. The usual website is where it will be posted, the teabweb.org and a very important figure from the world of food, the Food and Agricultural Organization, Mr. Alexander Muller. He has been appointed as a study leader and I will be advising the group overall. So this is our preparation. So I just wanted to mention that this is happening in the background but the context is evaluation, is ecosystems and without any further ado, I would like to give the floor now to the next speaker, our guest from Zambia. Thank you. Can you set up the next PowerPoint please? The next speaker's PowerPoint please. Yeah, whatever you like. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. At the first place, I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to the organizers and to the organizations who have been supporting us for inviting us to share the preliminary results regarding a study which was conducted in Zambia, Benefits of Forest Co-Systems in Zambia and the Role of Red Plus in a Green Economy Transformation. I decided to structure my presentation following those outlines. First of all, I will talk about the background, then discuss a bit about the Red Process in Zambia, then talk about the major achievements this far, then highlight on the rationale for forest ecosystem evaluation and discuss the methodology and key results and then talk about the role of Red Plus to support a transition to a green economy and give some insights regarding the way forward. So this technology sometimes... Yeah, you need to press it hard in once, otherwise it'll do the... Regarding the background, Zambia is a very rich country in terms of natural resources. The total surface area of the country is approximately 750,614 km2, or about 75 million hectares. In terms of forest cover, the country is covered by 49.9 million hectares. This is about 66% of the land cover of the country is actually covered by forests. The vegetation type is mainly the Miomba woodlands and this is further categorized into semi-evergreen forests. The cedars are forest evergreen forests, shrub thickets, grasslands and also wooded grasslands. Out of this vegetation, we have about 61,000 hectares of plantations. These are mainly exotic plantations consisting of pine species and also eucalyptus species and some other species. Unfortunately, despite being endowed with so much forest, the country experiences high rates of deforestation and according to the recent study, completed in 2008 under the integrated land use assessment, it has been estimated that the country loses about 250,000 to 300,000 hectares of forest per annum and this is mainly caused by charcoal production, wood and fuel use, timber production and also infrastructure development, most especially mining. Now, with regard to the background continued, there is an overwhelming reliance of the largely poor rural communities on the natural resources, particular forest resources for various uses. It's been estimated that over 70% of the country's energy supply is from charcoal and firewood but only about 25% of the population have access to electricity and when it comes to the urban population, this is about 49.3% who have access to electricity while on a poutry, 3.2% of the rural population have access to electricity and then when you have this kind of scenario and then it shows you how much people rely on the forest for the purposes of energy use. I now wish to talk about the RAID process. Through the UN RAID program, the Zabian government has actually undertaken a RAID plus RAIDness process to try to address the highlighted drivers of the deforestation which I've mentioned and this is mainly due to agricultural infrastructure development and also charcoal production and the whole idea is that we are moving towards developing a national RAID plus strategy. This has been the basis for actually conducting a number of in-depth studies in order to understand the current situation and trends and this particular study, the evaluation of forest ecosystem was just one of the studies. Other studies looked at drivers of deforestation. We also looked at the economic context of deforestation just to mention a couple of the studies. Now with regard to the major achievements, the RAID plus has been integrated into the government budgetary frameworks. We have as at now completed the preparation of the RAID strategy. We have a draft strategy in place which is yet to be completed hopefully before the end of this year and this gives an indication that Zambia is actually demonstrating its global and national commitments to promote RAID plus. Then with regard to the forest reference and emission levels and forest reference levels, we have completed the land cover mapping for 1990, 2000 and also 2010. We have currently nationwide forest inventories being undertaken in all the ten provinces of the country and then the approach is to have forest reference emission levels and forest reference levels integrated into the draft RAID plus strategy. With regard to national forest monitoring systems, a web portal has been established for national forest monitoring systems and ready to be launched and we have also established a GIS unit in all the ten provinces of the country and then with regard to safeguards information systems, the country approach for safeguards is already outlined with strong stakeholder consultations in all the ten provinces with representatives from the 104 districts and this is at the end of the day hope to be integrated with already established RAID plus weekly linked to national forest monitoring system and web portal. Now what was the rationale for the forest valuation? Basically I would want to just concentrate on three main points and the whole idea was to provide a more holistic understanding about economic value of Zambia's forest ecosystems and then secondly to feed into analytical work for the development of a national strategy because if you have to develop a national strategy and then you don't understand really what is the value of the ecosystems then I think you'll have a problem in terms of implementing the activities which you want only when you understand the value of these ecosystem resources then can you be able to justify the need for example to avoid the deforestation then thirdly to enhance the understanding and importance of forest in the national economy. Then the methodology used here I'll actually run through the different types of ecosystem services and try also to highlight the estimate how the estimate was actually arrived at. The first one I'll talk about is the industrial wood. The value was actually based on sustainable yield rather than the current use. This study used firstly an existing estimate of Max-Mamalawi-Bokat which actually equates to about 0.6 of the estimated standing stock and secondly the estimate of the proportion of ground wood versus fewer wood. This was using prices per cubic meter special distribution of the value which was mapped based on distribution of forest biomass. Then the second type of ecosystem service work was wood fewer. This was arrived at using prices per cubic meter per price per bag of volume for final products and conversions was then calculated to cubic meter inputs where it was ranging from about $7 to $3 per cubic meter. Then the other type of ecosystem was the known wood forest products. This was used by comparing data from area studies and analyzing using district level information on forest biomass and also rural population density. Then the cash income from forest products was a function of forest biomass and population density. Then the subsistence income was a function of population density and wealth. Using these relationships to estimate income at the district level and the findings of area studies and contributions of different types of resources to cash and subsistence income, overall income from non-wood forest products was estimated for rural households who are mainly dependent on the forest resources. Then the other type of ecosystem service was the ecotourism, the estimates of the proportion of tourism which is mainly nature based with regard to Zambia were obtained from an earlier study which was unpublished and updated using restaurant tourism statistics. The proportion of nature based tourism within forested areas was estimated on the basis of the spatial distribution of actual photo uploads from Google. Then with regard to the other types of ecosystem services was the erosion control and sediment retention. Soil erosion and transport was actually modeled for Zambia's catchment using invest. This involved estimation of a range of parameters relating to erodability of soils and impacts of different types of land use, land cover on erosivity and also capacity to trap sediment which was done based on the literature and also other similar studies. Then with regard to agriculture support services, the total area and production value was collated for crops which are dependent on pollination. Estimates of the number of hives for example was required per hectare and estimated based on values in the literature for relevant or similar crops. Then the replacement cost was actually estimated based on the published cost of hiring B hives from South Africa. Then the other service was carbon storage and sequestration. The value of maintaining current carbon stocks was estimated as damages avoided due to deforestation and also the resultant climate change impacts using one, the global estimates of the social cost of carbon. Then secondly, a very rough estimation of the proportion of that cost that would actually be borne by the country based on GDP estimates for all countries and the expected relative magnitude of impacts in terms of percentage of GDP for developed versus developing countries. Then in terms of the key results, first of all talk about the spatial distribution of agricultural, I mean aggregate value of forest ecosystem services based on a dollar per hectare per year. The map is not coming up. If you look at this map you will notice that the northeast and the south of the country appear to provide the highest economic values of Zambia's forest ecosystems per hectare. Probably one of the reasons is that these are the areas which are well endowed with forest cover while the western part is not so much endowed with forest cover compared to the northern parts of the country where there is actually high levels of rainfall compared to the southern part where we have low levels of rainfall. Now in terms of preliminary estimates of economic value for forest ecosystem services assessed again per hectare per year, when you talk about industrial wood, the gross output of per serving in terms of million per year was estimated at 5.8. This is industrial wood. If you recall I mentioned about the different types of forest ecosystem services. Sorry, I hope I'm not... Maybe easier for... That's the one. Sorry about that. Then in terms of fewer wood, again this is categorized into gross output or serving in terms of US million dollars per year. Then the direct value added again in terms of US million dollars per year. Then the total value added and then the contribution with regard to employment. Now in terms of industrial round wood the estimate was at 35. Then 115 in terms of direct value added, 172 in terms of total value at about 888 in terms of employment. Then equal to a reason there was a whole range of estimates and when you come to the total in terms of the gross output this is a preliminary aspect of the economic value for forest ecosystem services assessed. In terms of the total it's translated to about 1,303 in terms of the gross output or serving and then when it came to direct value it was about 957 and then total value added 1,277 and then in terms of employment you're talking about more than 1 million or 1,400,000. Now the direct and indirect values of forest considered as part of the study estimated make a direct contribution to about 4.7 in terms of gross domestic product or 957 million dollars using 20 ten figures. When you use a multiplier effect it's estimated that the forest and tourism related activities in the sector contribute about 6.3 in terms of GDP or 1,207 in terms of US dollars. Forests are estimated therefore to provide over a million jobs supporting over 60 percent of rural Zambian households who are heavily dependent upon the use of natural resources to supplement or sustain their livelihoods. Now this is just a graphic figure, probably I will just skip it. Then in terms of the role of Red Plus to support a transition into green economy the study suggests that sustainably managed forests yield benefits with at least about 25 dollars per hectare per year on average though it may vary up to over 700 dollars per hectare. Then for each province and district in Zambia the rationale for and means by which Red Plus activities can and will be undertaken may actually be different because of the different resources in terms of value. A number of options to reduce deforestation and forest degradation include the picture I hope you can be able to see that. First we need to strengthen the management and the enforcement. I think it was interesting to listen to some presentation in the morning which talked about the lack of enforcement particularly relating to law and then also land tenure and registration reform is actually required. Then also payment for ecosystem services is another aspect which is very important then increased production efficiency for forest sparing mechanism and also alternative live loads I indicated earlier on to say quite a huge population of the country are forest dependent in terms of their live loads so for us to be able to ensure that Red Plus is able to support the transition towards a green economy then we need to provide alternative live loads and then also measures to reduce demand for charcoal are indicated earlier on that more than 70% of the population actually depend on fewer wood for energy production. Then where forests are actually largely intact and where the potential for timber extraction is highest the implementation of Red Plus could therefore mean to develop and enforce sustainable forest management but also ensuring that energy needs are actually made sustainably and then secondly also where demand for charcoal is greatest it means that more densely populated areas for example along the line of rail of the country that is central southern eastern province where forest covers already been significantly reduced and degraded Red Plus ought to address the issue of the charcoal demand so that we can be able to address the issues of avoided deforestation then Red Plus is actually an interesting vehicle for government as the implementation of policies and measures to reduce deforestation could potentially be actually financed from result based payments this would therefore enable the country to move towards a green economy that is focused on increasing resource efficiency of forest related products, low carbon development and also equitable sharing of benefits. What is the way forward now in terms of the way forward after the you know the study evaluation of ecosystem services what we think is that the results of the study should be able to support policy and registration formulation and also review where these policies exist and then probably where we find that they need to be reviewed then the results can actually be able to be used to in order to improve the existing policies and also it should be able to assist in national planning and budgeting for the forestry sector because once we know the value of the ecosystem services then we can be able to argue our case with our colleagues in the Ministry of Finance to be able to provide more resources to ensure that you know we are able to you know address the issues of deforestation and also we are expecting to contribute to the designing of strategies to reduce deforestation and also forest deforestation and last but not the least used we can also use the the results to engage various stakeholders in enhancing the understanding of the importance of forest or to national economy as well as the goods and services that they actually provide. I did not emphasize to state that you know it's common knowledge that most of these ecosystem services are undervalued and even where they are actually valued not everything is actually reported as it may exist. This study particularly I should listen to state that most of the data was actually secondary data collected and that it would be very good for us to move forward and try to address the issues of collecting primary data so that we can improve upon the study. I think that's my last slide and thank you for your attention. Okay. Thank you Ignatius. Now I would request Mr. Everest and I would like to take the floor and tell us about the work in Tanzania with particularly a view on what were the learnings and lessons and how useful is valuation for informing green economy and that possible. Thank you Mr. Facilitator and good evening. It must be evening. So I'll take this opportunity to present podium. Can you people, you want to try and move the slides with this? If the machine is not working then we can ask them to do it for us. It's coming up. So I'm only conscious of time and we each have only about 15 minutes Max. I would wish to thank the organizers of this forum to invite us to present a case for Tanzania. So I'll present a valuing Tanzanian forest ecosystem and the role of red in the green economy transformation. So the content of my presentation will be progress of red in Tanzania, state of Tanzanian forest ecosystem, forest valuation, rationale for carrying out a valuation study. And then I'll present a little bit on methodology, key results and the role of red to support a transformation, transition to green economy and then I'll conclude. As regards to progress of red in Tanzania as we may understand, Tanzania is one of the 56 partner countries of UN Red Program and we are among the first 21 countries with national program. But this program ended last year, 2013. Tanzania has made a remarkable progress in terms of four elements as stipulated in the Warsaw framework for red and this component include reference emission levels, a national forest measurement system and monitoring reporting and verification of carbon stock, safeguard information system and also national red strategy. The national red strategy was endorsed the last year much, but we may need to make some review based on the decision which are taking place under the ongoing conference of parties. We think there is a need to review is working. Thank you. Now the current status of forest and drivers of deforestation. Tanzania mainland is estimated to have a total forest cover of 33.5 million hectares. Government forest reserves is 16 million hectares. Village forest is about 7.5 million hectares. Forest in national park is 2 million hectares. Unprotected forest in village and general land, the general land we call it like free access. In total it is 15.1 million hectares. And deforestation rate is 1.1% annually. I must say that these statistics are a bit old and we have carried out a national forest inventory that is going, the report is going to come up at the end of this year, before the end of this year and I hope that the scientists will improve, we shall improve this study based on the new data. Combined the drivers of deforestation and degradation are depreciating forest stocks, asset in Tanzania. The main drivers being expansion of agriculture is not as different from like Zambia, our neighbor, shifting cultivation, wildfires, lack of clarity on boundary and tenure, illegal logging, livestock grazing and sustainable charcoal production and for domestic and industrial use and lack of systematic management. So this is pictorial presentation of drivers. As you can see the major problem is charcoal making and of course over grazing you can witness how much a person, a single person can have as much as 2,000 cows. On forest evaluation, government can make better decision if they are more aware on how forest ecosystem contributes to their economy, employment and how forest benefit human well-being in terms of monetary value. So without monetary value people tend to ignore and if these statistics of value are captured by the government accounting system is where actually the issue of conservation can be raised in the national development agenda. This information could provide all consent stakeholders with the necessary knowledge to decide how deforestation rates can be reduced as part of transition to green economy. The rationale of the study is not different from Zambia, a better and holistic understanding about economic value of Tanzanian forest ecosystem enhanced information about the value of forest ecosystem services that are currently captured by gross domestic products and the value of the forest ecosystem services not captured by GDP. Third, provide information that could further underwrite and advance the implementation of red. On methodology used in this study the forest evaluation study was carried out by SIPA, this is center for environmental economics and policy in Africa and the University of Pretoria. The study captured the value of forest ecosystem services that are currently reflected in Tanzania economy using the SEEEA and EEA framework. This stands for a system of environmental economics accounts, experimental ecosystem accounting by the United Nations. The ecosystem service identified for inclusion in this study followed the stakeholders' consultations. The scientists used the input-output table and social accounting matrices to identify the importance of the forest sector by looking at its linkage with other sectors. A computable general equilibrium model was used to model the Tanzania economy and look at economic-wide changes if household demand for output from the hunting and forest sector was to be higher. A cost-benefit analysis was used to identify the net cost benefit of deforestation in Tanzanian catchment forests. If you could try and bring it to a close in about 5, 7 minutes. So the monetary cost of benefit of deforestation kept by GDP based on deforestation level of 367,708 per hectare the discount benefit over the period of 20 years are estimated at 27 million US dollars. Cost of deforestation, there were two costs involved. Cutting a hectare of forest implies that next year it won't provide provisioning services in the form of timber, or on timber forest products. And second, the forest sector has a positive effect on other economic sectors. Deforestation will reduce this post-indirect effect. The discount cost of again period of 20 years revealed a total cost of 72 million US dollars. The monetary benefit of number of regulating and cultural services was estimated by using data obtained from survey on Tanzania catchment forest by the Minister of Natural Resources. This was a study carried out in 2003 and the following forest ecosystem services included in this analysis was provision of services such as timber related, provision of services, non-timber forest products and other provisioning cultural and regulating services such as water provision, etc. The key results, discount costs and the benefit of deforestation captured by not captured by GDP for the 20 years. The net cost of deforestation captured by GDP for the Tanzanian economy has been estimated at 45 million US dollars. That is the black bar on top of the column. The net cost of deforestation in Tanzania catchment forest results for the economy including accounting for non-market services such as water regulation has been estimated at 446 million US dollars. That is the blue bar. This shows that from an economic perspective there is no rationale for continuing current level of deforestation. Another key result is that the impact of investment in the forest sector on household income. A simulation was conducted analyzing the effect on household income in investment would increase in forest, agriculture or wood, paper processing sector. The results show that an increase in the output of forest sector has the greatest predicted increase in income for rural household by 52 for rural poor and 187 for the rural non-poor compared to agriculture and paper processing. As you can see this landscape with agriculture, forestry and industry. Based on this result investment in forest sector would potentially be regarded as an interesting option for covert elevation. The role of red to support transition to green economy. Simulation of economic model developed for Tanzania shows that increased output of forest and the hunting sector has the greatest predictable impact on increasing level of household income. Investing in and expanding this sector can be an important component of covert elevation strategy and the value added of the production sector responded positively to increase activity in forest and hunting sector which lead to conclusion that vibrant and healthy forest and hunting sector is in the business interest of all production sectors. Could be a try and bring us so close because we are running out of time for the remaining speakers. So this study shows that based on economic analysis of available data deforestation is not beneficial for the Tanzanian common even on only narrowly looking at the benefit and cost that are currently captured under GDP. If non-market forest ecosystem service are taken into account the net cost of deforestation on the economy is even greater. In the cognition of the global value of Tanzanian forest red class could improve national level forest management and conservation through result based payment. In doing so red result based payment could enable Tanzania to transition to a green more resource efficient and low carbon economy. I don't see there. In conclusion Tanzania has conducted various study relevant to red class which include national forest resource monitoring and assessment and this assessment provide current start of forest resource in Tanzania and highlight police options. We have also estimated a total cost to element of red class in Tanzania which include opportunity implementation institutional as well as transaction costs but the study shows that red cannot compete with other land uses such as charcoal production as we speak unless price of carbon is higher than this land use than charcoal or agriculture. We have also met multiple benefit of forest that is carbon stock biodiversity water nantimba soil as well as wildlife corridor so this mapping provide information for potential area where forest investment for red can be located and also this forest evaluation provide direct and indirect monetary value of forest ecosystem service together with other studies stimulates rational decision making and also promote rational planning and design of project programs and policies review that will contribute to green economy. I thank you. Thank you. I have just put that photograph there purposely this a hippo stressed due to lack of water and possibly due to deforestation and forest degradation so the streams are lacking water now I don't know how this studies can capture the value of this type of impact I thank you very much. I'd now like to welcome the report of Panama First of all I would like to thank the facilitator for his introduction and also to the PENUMA, to the FAO and to the CIFOR for this gentle invitation to be able to share this night almost information about Panama specifically about the Onurret program that we are developing in the country so the data that we are going to present are the results that we are getting from some studies many of these data are also approximations and estimations but they are giving us very important information in relation to how the forest participates in the economy most of you may know that Panama is a small country 75,000 km2 our economy is based more than in the whole service sector mainly on tourism the income of the Panama Canal and the free zone of Colón this means that the primary sector plays a secondary role with respect to the other countries of the region in which the primary sector is its main economic source in this graph you can observe how the economy the behavior of the Panama economy in the last 20 years you can observe how with respect to Latin America it has been behaving and that in most cases it has been overcoming that growth in the region so here you can see in this comparison that our economy has grown from 2005 to almost 12% and it is currently 7% for the next year in terms of the total forest coverage in Panama you can observe the data that from 1992 to 2008 the deforestation has continued and in this period it has calculated 18,000 hectares annually which represents 40.43% and while in 2000 to 2008 we have 55,000 hectares which represents 1.46% currently this is based on the map of 2008 made by Katalac and currently we are finishing the new map of 2012 in which we found the statistical generation to see how the deforestation is behaving in terms of the contribution of the deforestation to the economy one of the ways perhaps more effective to evaluate this is through the contribution of the forest sector in which the forest sector participates in different sectors and now we are going to see a small analysis that we have done to reflect this here you can see that the contribution of the forest sector through the years has gone down and this has an explanation because the wood that is used in the country generally had come from forest concessions and today practically we do not have forest concessions and community permits and which the contribution has gone down as you can see here in 2010 that went down to 0.44 and yet you can see that the percentage is much greater in terms of the manufacturers that use forest products in the brute sector that this has to do with the import of paper and other wood products in terms of the indirect contribution we see that the hybrid sector because in the national statistics it is reflected as hybrid culture we see then that the sector participates in two contexts the upper sectors which are the machinery sector forest exploitation and the sectors below which is the transformation in terms of construction and business related to this what is the impact then of the forest sector on production and the added value in other sectors the question here we have made an effort to reflect precisely how the forest sector is related to the sectors above and below which we saw previously so in the period from 2002 to 2011 we see here that the forest sector as you can see here in LGX is the one that participates in the lower sector as we saw previously and in terms of other sectors we see that in terms of volume it is also minimal as I mentioned earlier the economy is based more on the sector the service sometimes sometimes it gets green some data about the environmental services in terms of wood provision these are average data in terms of the forest performance with management plans you can see here the data almost 8 cubic meters in the Darien region close to Colombia and the margin of profit produced by wood extraction which is between 20 and 44 dollars per cubic meter so in terms of the service which provides the forest in this case of goods like wood without forest management plans we see that these are larger than what is produced by wood with management plans and this reflects the cost that companies or communities that use the forest through profit they have to invest in the development of these plans and in the follow-up of the same another aspect here that I wanted to highlight is that wood production without management plans is generally not done through community permits but through subsistence permits or domestic permits so these are permits from two trees a month per person so this was not a forest management but it reflects here that the volume is much higher and this goes in terms of the forest and we are trying a new forest law that we are working to try to group these people so that together they can work a management plan in this way to improve the use of the forest on this map the woods that are still left in Panama we are talking on the map of 2012 we are having values approximately more than 60% maybe a little bit for the categories that we are using in yellow you can observe the areas of agricultural use that should be reforested and we are going to continue projects of agroforestry and pasture fields this map is interesting this division that we have done because the National Network we are marking it in two contexts lands with forests which is where we would orient to the network and lands without forests which is where we are going to the new government has launched the Alliance for the Million in 20 years which will be a complementary part of the efforts that we are doing through the network in terms of the income that is perceived by environmental services in this case the flow of the water we see here in the channel that the water supply is used in two ways towards human consumption and for the transport of ships in the channel and we have done some calculations for example what is the value of the water, of an additional cubic meter of water in the dry season and we see the value of .44 dollars per cubic meter which is compared with the prices of the water of the national institution that manages the water for the cities we see that it is almost less than half in terms of the protection of the soil we have also done some calculations in terms of the contribution of the forest to prevent erosion and it has also been calculated in terms of the fertility how much should we invest if the forest does not contribute this will be a value of 490 dollars per hectare per year and at this point I wanted to tell you that this is a very important aspect when we talk about deforestation because precisely this value that you see there is the value that we should invest a peasant when deforestation because unfortunately in the tropical unfortunately I do not know 70% of the soils are forested this means that at the third year peasant are using this forest the productivity of the soil is greatly reduced so it has to invest in buying fertilizers but as these people are scarce economic resources do not have how to access these fertilizers so that causes the forest that is in front of them again are forced to deforestation and this is a perverse cycle which is one of the challenges that we have and where we think that the network can contribute significantly in terms of the other environmental services that the forest provides because here we can see a list of the calculations that we have made and we highlight in the case of Panamá for example for the carbon issue that are conservation data we see that precisely this is what it is the network is an opportunity to see the forest value because as you can see without management it reflects the values that if we compare it with non-material products of the forest more environmental services are much larger income but the peasant does not perceive that the people who use the forest do not perceive it because we have always focused on the wood and it is where I think we have an important challenge to be able to understand that that the forest has and that people can live from the forest because when the peasant falls and burns it is because it makes it a zero value so I think that is where we have to focus as for the profits and losses by deforestation here you can see some data in 2012 and in the 90s 2012 how it has been accumulating the net economic losses due to deforestation and these are calculations also are conservative calculations because we have used the smaller range to make these calculations because if we had used the larger range possibly in the western period maybe it would have tripled or not which are important resources that the country has stopped perceiving when these losses are lost finally then some conclusions and recommendations that we can share with you is that the forest sector is a small sector in the economy but contributes in the other sectors although in the internal product it is not visible all that contribution which is another aspect in which in Panama we have to improve how we establish environmental or satellite accounts in the national accounts to really see the contribution of the forest and in this way also be able to have arguments with the decision makers as to public policies are referring to the subject of forest or the sector more information is needed to improve the evolution of environmental services which has made a lot of emphasis on this we have to develop new indicators that take into account the natural resources which is what I mentioned of environmental accounts through a green click and design different policies according to the region this is also an important aspect we are addressing in the national network the account as a land planning unit because we we have 52 accounts that we have worked in their planning we have a law of accounts in which it is established as an account committee and we have the account of the channel one of the most important that we are developing there many activities and pilot projects that can also serve as a model to other accounts and in this way be able to focus more the management plans that are carried out there taking into account the integration of the landscape I think I have one more left in terms of public policies we also think that also it is an opportunity for the country because it will allow us to see the forest in a way that can break paradigms in terms of the perception that the community has in terms of this resource can also contribute to the management of forestry through the certifications we have in a region where I don't know if you have seen here one of the co-workers who is here that they have been able to certify for the first time approximately 45,000 hectares and that I think is an important achievement it must be favored the use of alternative lands in terms of forestry forestry and agroforestry system because precisely the challenge is how we introduce the tree in those agricultural activities and in those pastoral activities in the winery I think that is also important that the tree can also be seen not only as an additional income to the farm but also as an element that values the farm as an element that provides additional environmental services to eliminate the public policies that favor the use of conflictive lands this is important because often the sources of funding especially in the rural sector don't take into account the limitations of the land and often there are contradictions in public policies and there will have to be a huge work to be able to compatibilize all these laws that go towards an objective to preserve the forestry finally the network we think that it is also an effort that can help us a lot in the field of territorial management because generally in other countries there is no territorial planning and the network can take that step to be that fireman to see the forest in its right dimension and to be able to show its value to compete with other uses of the land that there is that it is generally in disadvantage so I will not finish for now thank you thank you for bringing us to close in just some time I think if we have a lecture around 5 minutes at least take a few questions from the audience those who are particularly interested in Indonesia I suggest to contact me and I will be happy to send you the study so in the interest of time I just want people to ask questions about the three countries that we have just heard and those who are here with us so the question is given your name your institutional affiliation and hopefully a tweet length size question if there are actually no questions then I will summarize I think you have made such excellent presentations that everybody is dumbfounded so I want to just put a quick question across to all of you which is in the form of a summary which is that in undertaking these studies each of you the same question would you say that the value of valuation has been recognized by your governments in other words this was worth doing and therefore has it actually led to some appreciation of the fact that these ecosystem service values need to be recognized as part of a proper red plus formulation and a proper green economy and you say this has been achieved in each of your cases what is your assessment I think at this point in time the valuation is under process under process I think and we think that after the study is complete then is where we can disseminate the findings of the study to policy makers decision makers public government agencies as well as public in general and thereby maybe convince our colleagues from minister of finance to recognize the valuation the importance of valuation and include it into a government accounting system and Ignatius what would be your opinion on this I noticed from your numbers at least your initial estimates of total value added of 1.3 billion in fact that there is 1.4 million employees and in Zambia effectively employment would you say these are beginning to be appreciated is there a value in valuation either for red plus or for the economy I would say that although the this is still a study and work in progress but I think this has been something which has been always you know asked for by our colleagues from the minister of finance that they really needed to understand what is indeed the value of particularly for us to justify even their rotation of more resources in terms of ensuring that the forest resources are actually better managed and better protected and I think this is I would say that it has generated some excitement you know in the many sectors who are actually aware that this kind of work is going on and they are indeed looking forward to the finalization of this study and if you recall I mentioned that most of the information was collected from the secondary data but I think it would be important for us now to actually ensure that we use prime and data so that we can be able to further justify the value of these resources and being a country with us endowed with so much resources it's only important for us to be able to give that value so that we can be able to justify even the resource allocation to be so I would say that this is something which yes is indeed being appreciated of course in the most of the sectors we are actually looking forward to really finding results so your general sense is that yes valuation has helped policy recognize the importance of the forestry sector it certainly has helped a better appreciation in economic terms in significance of forestry exactly because I should also state that one of the things we are doing also related to this is conducting forest livelihood and economic social service with our colleagues in the Ministry of Finance so that already points the need for much more reliable data actually it's being recognized that the forestry sector is not well captured in the national economy so with such kind of studies other studies which are going on in the country I think it's been appreciated that we need to do new studies in this country so that we can be better and let's comment what is your experience in the same context of yourself well I would say that we are like the colleagues of Sandia and Tanzania we are starting a process and we are finishing the first phase and we are right now in the consultations and participation of the National Network Strategy we are involving all sectors in discussions there have been many expectations there is a lot of interest in participating and we hope that also the new government has shown a particular interest in the issue even we have planned to create a new Ministry of the Environment because we don't have a Ministry as such to form so this is very important for us because it allows the environmental issue to be discussed at the level of the Cabinet Council and also in the future so the phrase that we say in English that economics is the currency of policy in the sense you are proving through your political actions that they recognize this that's right so I think that is positive also the launch that the President did the alliance for the million hectares in 20 years is for the first time something like this is a long-term goal we think it will be very significant because it is not only the issue of the environmental but also the social issue of the generation of employees to improve the quality of life of the people in this way to set the basis of a new relationship with the forest and the culture of the forest that we need as for the other question yes, we think that in the long term the other environmental services of the forest are there and we have to consider them it caught my attention the statistics of the countries here, brothers from Africa that put a lot of emphasis on the income they reflected high on the issue of the forest on the issue of tourism more than even the wood so that caught my attention so that are other environmental services that in the case of them are valued more than in our countries so red can also help because red we can not think that it will solve all the problems of the forest sector but it can contribute to improve public policy and to to see the forest that is red thank you