 Welcome to the high-level panel on operationalizing a red plus in the Asia-Pacific region. It's always challenging to manage the session in the late afternoon but hopefully quantity doesn't sacrifice quality of the discussion. As we know COP decision have given sufficient guidance to implement red plus from readiness to full implementation involving performance or result-based payment including our framework for red plus. Paris agreement also recognized the important role of forest and encouraged parties to implement and support existing framework set out in the guidance and decision for red plus including a through result-based payment. Many countries in the Asia-Pacific region have already involved in the design and negotiation process of red plus under UNFCCC. These red plus countries are also progressing on their works in preparing for red plus full implementation with result-based payments. Nevertheless only few red plus countries have successfully accessed result-based payment. At the same time red plus countries are also facing challenges in coping with the global development affecting red plus including the existing red plus result-based payment under various scheme outside UNFCCC mechanism. Also how will be the treatment of red plus post-parish agreement. This high-level panel brings panelists from various background of expertise and experiences current roles and institution to share on progress and challenges in red plus operationalization in the Asia-Pacific region in terms of technical legal and institutional aspect including in accessing result-based finance. Also to share perspective and idea on action to be taken to gain benefits from the global development outside UNFCCC and to realize red plus contribution to the achievement of NDC target. We have here with us eight panelists first from a red plus countries we could we have good representation from Asia and from Pacific. We have Miss Emma Rahmawati the director of mitigation in the Ministry of Environment Forestry of Indonesia and Miss Gwen Siso a director of red plus and low-carbon growth climate change and development office Papua New Guinea. We have also representative from sub-national government. We have here Professor Dady Ruhiat the chair of climate change council in East Kalimantan province Indonesia. We have also representative from international agencies supporting red plus. Mr. Wang Chang senior forest and land use specialist green climate fund and also Dr. Danai Maniatis senior policy and technical advisor climate and forest team UNDP Bangkok. From private sector we have Mr. Martin Wilder head of global environment market Baker and Mackenzie. From NGO we have a very good combination from international Mr. Jack Hart conservation director the natural conservation Asia Pacific and Miss Miss Danyar Andrani executive director of Huma Indonesia. Colleague panelists and also a participant considering that we have only 90 minutes for our session so we will give opportunity to panelist to respond to the question that we have sent earlier and I will also also explain the question here. We'll start from red plus country from Buema then Gwen. Colleague ladies and gentlemen both Indonesia and PNG have played leadership role in the negotiation process as you know PNG was the chair of the rainforest coalition of rainforest nation and Indonesia at the time also leading ASEAN member states both we successfully develop common position on red plus and with that we also both PNG and Indonesia are progressing with our red plus. At this opportunity I would like to invite Miss Emma and Gwen. Both have the same question of us could you share on progress and challenges in operationalizing red plus in your country both Indonesia and PNG in terms of technical for example a rail establishment and MRV a legal and institutional aspect including progress and challenging in accessing result based payment from different sources and mechanism and ways to overcome the challenges. The second is about the role of red plus in your countries and disease. So Buema five minutes. Thank you Dr. Noor. Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen as UNFCCC decision have provided parties with complete guidance for implementation of red plus Indonesia since couple years ago has prepared all instruments policies and also institutional arrangement for red plus implementation. Currently Indonesia has national strategy on red plus we also have MRV and also national forest monitoring system. We also has established safeguard information system for red plus and also we have submitted our national frail to UNFCCC. In addition there are some locations that have also could be used as the DA the demonstration activities of red plus that give us a lesson learned then give substantial feedback to the policy. Ministry of environment and forestry has established ministerial regulation number 70 year 2017. This is a very comprehensive regulation for red plus implementation in Indonesia because this is covers not only technical aspect which include MRV and also frail but also include financial aspect and also institutional arrangement for implementation red plus. In addition currently we in the process of establishing financial institution that could in the future manage finance for manage funding for financing implementation of red plus. We call it as environmental fund management agency or in Bahasa Indonesia Baduan Pengolaan Dana Lingkungan Hidup. As this institution has not yet established recently we could not really continue our process for for implementation the result based payment for red plus but based on our current preparation for red plus Indonesia is ready for having result based payment stage for red plus. Quite interestingly as previously mentioned in the previous session the mentioning this in this issue is on MRV. How we could provide MRV at national level and also at sub national level and also on site level. It is mostly related with capacity building and also the availability of relevant and also appropriate institutional arrangement in many provinces in Indonesia we do not have such kind of institution at this moment. While we would like to develop that under the implementation of red plus at national level is under the ministry but at sub national level it should be a dedicated institution that are responsible for the implementation. And with regard to the second question Dr. Nur it is red plus talking about reducing deforestation and also forest degradation it is very much related with our commitment on the target of NDC for forestry sector because in our forestry sector that consists of four big activities one is reduction of deforestation and then forest degradation and then restoration of peat and rehabilitation of forest and land. So red plus is included in these four activities of NDC. So it is therefore red plus also could contribute to the achievement of NDC target. Thank you very much. Thank you Ibu Emma. I would like to invite Gwen to share your progress and also challenges. Thank you. Thank you Dr. Nur and firstly thank you to the government of Indonesia for the invitation and for the government of Australia for providing the support to enable me to come here. We are very much happy to be here to share this progress that we've made so far. So why are we doing red plus? For PNG our forests are very important not only to our economy which is very much based on extractive industries but also most of the people 85 percent or so live off the land livelihoods and also the culture and heritage is based around the forests so that's why we are prioritizing or we have prioritized red plus policy in the country. In terms of progress we've made significant steps since Bali with the support of many partners including some who are organizing this esteemed event including the government of Australia the governments of Japan and multilateral agencies and organizations. So with that support we are very much humbled that people stepped forward to help us to see how best to plot red plus and the elements that the UNFCCC has asked us to do under the Warsaw framework. So we have developed a national red plus strategy. We have a forest reference level. We have a national forest monitoring system and we are now developing our safeguards information system. These have been developed through a collaborative effort within the government and with all other stakeholders. Since developing the national red plus strategy we are now looking at a red plus finance and investment plan which will help to identify where we could potentially bring in support both financial and technical support to implement the national red plus strategy. We also are progressing a green climate fund proposal to do similar to implement the national red plus strategy and to support the FRL and FMS continued work. Our challenges are numerous and they are complex. For the red specific ones which are technical they are similar to Indonesia and also to the issues highlighted in the earlier panel in that we need additional capacity for monitoring NMRV. At the moment we don't know the sustainability of resources to continue the forest monitoring system that we have. Then we have issues of alignment within the national forest reference level as well as project based actions that are happening or are proposed in some of the areas. So we need consistency in the methodologies for us to be able to come in with a policy that says that sub national or project based MRV will be similar to the national forest monitoring system. We need support with things like more detailed imageries that light imageries that are specific to the sites and that costs a lot of money and it will need more capacity manpower to be able to do the assessment and the analysis. We also need a system whereby we can start to allocate whether emissions are coming from either sector wide or through geographical sites. So we need something which is similar to a registry or system of accounting for the carbon that we are monitoring and measuring. So while we've tried to work through our red plus elements and understand what they mean for us we still have the existing challenges which face the country in terms of our economic development issues around social challenges including land tenure governance. These we believe are very important if we will achieve red plus. If we do not deal with the existing business as usual challenges that we face in the country red plus will not be successful. So therefore we think that bringing in financial support for red plus will help us or will at least meet the transaction costs that we need to do to improve the challenges that we face to be able to implement red plus. Thank you. Thank you Gwen. I think the financial aspect we will have three panelists at least that could address the issue later. Then next I would like to invite Professor Dadiru here. Colleague as some of us knows that East Kalimantan is the champion of the green concept the green East Kalimantan. Also East Kalimantan is the province that receiving FCPF carbon fund I mean has been approved to receive later if we could show the performance the FCPF carbon fund. So Professor Dadiru please share with us the vision of East Kalimantan green growth and the importance of red plus to support the vision. And second is also please explain potential contribution of FCPF carbon fund to East Kalimantan vision and how East Kalimantan aligns its endeavor to red plus national policy and NDC. So Professor Dadiru please. Well thank you Ibu Nur. Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. There are two main reasons why East Kalimantan should implement green development. The first reason is because East Kalimantan province has experiencing less sound and less qualified economic development phases. Since year 1970 until today East Kalimantan development depends highly on non-reignable natural resources. In fact the economic growth rate of East Kalimantan was declining continuously from period to period. Another reason is by extracting by extracting the natural resources East Kalimantan province become the sixth largest carbon emitting province in Indonesia. Major source of emitting stem from forest conversion and other land uses. Conversion of forest driven mainly by palm oil, forestry and mining which creates deforestation, land degradation, fire and draining of land. To overcome those challenges in year 2009 East Kalimantan government has taken a significant step in form of economic transformation. The economy of East Kalimantan that originally depend on non-reignable natural resources was transferred into renewable natural resources in form of agriculture in a broad sense including the processing of its primary products. On the other hand to reduce greenhouse gas emissions since year 2010 East Kalimantan government builds readiness to implement Red Plus. Several programs has been taken among others mainstreaming of emission reduction program into provincial and district middle-term regional development plan. Next step is the establishment of provincial council for climate change serve for coordinating activities in reduction of greenhouse gas emission. Another step is promoting sustainable forest management forest management unit and accelerating social forestry program. Ladies and gentlemen in October 2015 Indonesian Ministry of Environment and Forestry has selected East Kalimantan province as a pilot for performance-based emission reduction jurisdiction program sponsored by FCPF carbon fund program managed by World Bank. In order to run this project several strategy has been taken first is to increase implementing of Red Plus in the whole restriction of East Kalimantan and second is focusing the project on management practices that can reduce emission reduction significantly. By successful implementation of Red Plus including FCPF carbon fund program it is expected that the economic growth of East Kalimantan can sustainably develop and also it is expected that it can contribute significantly to the NDC target. Ladies and gentlemen another thing that is important in FCPF carbon fund implementation is that the all program designs to reduce emission should be integrated to the provincial development plan and investment plan. I think another thing is that the program must be aligned with the national Red Plus architecture. Thank you. Thank you for sharing the green vision of East Kalimantan and also the effort in aligning with national policy on Red Plus and NDC. Now let's move to the other panelist. We'd like to invite a colleague from international agency supporting Red Plus. We have Mr. Yuan Jiang and Dr. Danai Maniatis. First I would like to invite Yuan to share information on the status of GCF support to forest particularly Red Plus is compared to overall GCF support. I think this is one thing that every one of us would like to hear. So Yuan please. Thank you Dr. Moore. Can we put the presentation? Okay thank you so much. So this is a very brief presentation and I want to show you some numbers that's why I'm using presentation and not just a speech. So can we go to the next one please. For some of you just to be general information, better informed about the GCF. The fund is operational since 2015. It reached effectiveness once a page of 10.5 billion was reached. Now so far the fund provides several sources of funding. There is funding for readiness support to countries. There is an allocation of one million per country per year and under that readiness support has been 80 million been approved in more than 100 countries. The way the fund operates is through accredited entities and at the moment we have 59 entities that are accredited to the fund. So any proposal or any project that the fund will support will have to be submitted to these accredited entities and there are different kinds from multilateral banks NGOs and others. And recently the last meeting at the board approved a primary mistake in around 12 projects and in total we have approved 1776 projects until February 2018. Next one please. So the forest and land use sector is one of the priorities of the fund. Now the fund has two windows. One is an adaptation one is a mitigation and there are certain priority areas in each of these windows. So the forest and land use is included in the mitigation window of the fund. However if we click again please again we see that the forest and land use sector will also provide adaptation benefits. So in many cases when we receive proposals in the forest and land use sector these are covering not only mitigation benefits but also adaptation benefits. And one additional piece of information is that the GCF board approved an envelope of 500 million dollars for resource-based payments since last year and with that envelope GCF now is in a position to provide funding for all the phases of red plus from the readiness as I mentioned before for implementation of activities and for resource-based payments. Next one please. Next. Overall this is the distribution of how the funds have been approved. As you can see in Asia Pacific around one third of the total funds have been approved and there are different instruments that have been used in the approved projects. In most cases the projects in the land use sector have been requested for mostly grants and I will talk about that a little bit later. Next one please. And if we are more specific on the forest and land use sector we have 10 projects approved up to now and the total amount is 314 million dollars approved. As I mentioned before in most cases these are relying on grants. Next one please. So here are the lessons learned and challenges that we see when we look at these projects and it has been mentioned before what we need to see is the ambition to have the overall red plus strategy has been implemented. Now this comes with a challenge. In many cases what we see is a costing of how much does a red plus strategy can cost to implement but what we need is a financial analysis. What is preventing the domestic and private sources of funding to implement that strategy what can we do with the limited resources that we have from climate finance to unlock those barriers and that's usually a missing element when we see proposals. Second element is the sustainability of those investments. As I mentioned before in many cases the request that we receive from the GCFR relying on grants which is natural. Of course there are many needs that need to be addressed and in many cases investments will not provide returns to use other financial instruments. Now this comes with a question. How can these investments be sustained after the grants are finished and this is where I think we need to innovate and trigger private sector intervention in order to make sure that these investments will last longer. Finally it has been mentioned before by some of the previous panelists. Resource-based payments is fairly new for the GCFR. It's actually the first time that the GCFR is implementing a resource-based payment pilot program and this is subject to the process that the countries have to go through under the UNTCC. Now previously the requirements that were set under UNTCC are not necessarily set for payments. Now when we translate those results into payments we see that some countries may face some challenges when they started preparing their monitoring systems and reference levels and in the absence of data they may face challenges in translating this into possible request for payments from the GCFR. Now I have many more points and I'll be happy to discuss if there are questions. Thank you so much. Thank you Juan. The next I would like to invite Ms. Danai. We would like to hear your experience and lessons in facilitating red plus countries at the various levels from global, regional and also national level. From the start of readiness phase to full implementation and once again I always focus on the challenges in accessing resource-based finance from various sources and also mechanisms including GCFR. So please Ms. Danai. Thank you very much. Thank you very much Ibu Nud and thanks to the hosts for inviting me today to participate in this very interesting event so far. So I was asked to share experiences and lessons in supporting countries and implementing from red plus for readiness to implementation to results-based payments in five minutes. So that's a tall order. The first so I have a few points I would like to share with you here today. Also in the opening speeches this morning what we've been hearing in related to red plus is deforestation and forest degradation. Very important but there are another three activities in there and if we want to talk about this issue we need to talk about all five of them and that's a discussion that's often lacking. We tend to focus on deforestation and forest degradation for obvious reasons but the other three activities being conservation sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks are equally important in tackling this problem. The red plus activities are obviously enshrined in the UNFCCC COP decisions and in the Warsaw framework and that is our guiding book when we look at supporting countries for red plus implementation but it's not a simple book and I would like to make an analogy here today on building a house. Building a house is not simple right. You start with an architect for example and you draw up a plan and what you need are really strong foundations and pillars and you would hope that your house withstands the days of time and you end up with a greek temple that is still standing many years later. Red plus and the Warsaw framework are function in the same way. What we have with the Warsaw elements are really the foundations and the pillars for red plus implementation. They need to be really strong and they take time and that is the redness phase that we support countries in building but if you have a house that has a strong foundation and pillars and a roof but has nothing else would you live in it? Would you use it? Or how much would you use it? Not very much right. You want it to be functional. So the challenges that we face and the discussions that we have with countries is how do you take these elements and operationalize them? How do you make them functional? How do you make red plus functional in the NDC context and the SDGs and how do you make it important for the countries across the government levels? So you've built your house. You've had a great architect but you need a plumber. You need an electrician and this is really important in red plus as well. The ministries of forest and environment are at a heart and soul of this discussion but if we're dealing with situations where the driver one of the main driver of deforestation could be agricultural commodities if we want to find a solution we need to be talking also with the ministry of agriculture. We need to be talking with private sector. So in some of our work for example in Papua New Guinea we've been working with the Treasury, the ministries of mining, the prime ministers cabinet to make this a reality. While we're looking at the plumbing of our house a key point and Juan just touched upon it as investment planning. We can have really robust foundations and a great national strategy red plus national strategy or action plan but how do we turn that into a reality and investment plans are for us are a key part of that puzzle. How do you take this strategy? How do you operationalize it? How do you make sure try and make sure that all of the great initiatives that are ongoing are not all overlapping and how do you help the country navigate that difficult landscape and bring in the finance that you need and create those conditions. So looking at the financing opportunities the investment opportunities you can also look at the land use the landscape of land use finance in the public sector and the private sector and that's what we've been helping countries think through as well. So Juan mentioned before a lot of the instruments seem to be grant based two of our important parts of this puzzle are looking at the land use the public land use finance and the land use in the private sector and trying to pull all of those strings together. Now all of this cannot be done without strong stakeholder engagement that can be within and across the government but it also requires all the other stakeholders in the countries and for example in Vietnam we've been working with ethnic minorities that are part of this process and it's the first time they actually have voice in this debate and are seen as an equal partner by government. Now we have our house and I'm down to zero minutes. How do we access results based payments? How do you maintain it? We've made it functional right and how do we support countries in getting to that part where they can say okay we're ready to access results based payments. It's not one solution we've seen today we've heard from different people what that can look like and this is the really creative and fun part without reinventing the wheel. It becomes very difficult often for countries to look at all of the different requirements be it from the forest carbon partnership facility carbon fund be it from the green climate fund be it from bilateral agreements or from trying to attract private sector. So what we try to do as a trusted partner in our convening role is trying to bring all of those stakeholders together and understand together how we can make results based payments a reality for countries without making it incredibly complex. To finalize I'd also like to leave you with a question with an ask in this discussion where we're talking about policy design and policy implementation creating enabling environments for to attract investment in business we're talking about changes and what we often lack I think is understanding how people everyday people in the developed world and developing countries make these decisions that impact on red plus and the land-based sector and we need to embrace the inter-disciplinarity of red plus I think in a much broader way in this sense we need to work with sustainability psychologists with behavior psychologists when we're talking about implementing policy design changing markets bringing investments in to make sure that everyday people in everyday decisions have these solutions in front of them and so that we change the discourse also from what it seems to be an unovercomable task and all challenges and focus on the solutions. Thank you very much. Thank you Mr. Naye. Now we come to a few from private sector. Mr. Martin Wilder existing red plus related result based payment involving a private sector mostly project based activities. Red plus by concept under UNFCCC negotiation and what we have agreed already is national approach. Forest countries generally included forest or red plus in their NDCs. This is national commitment under the Paris agreement. So we would like you to share your perspective and ideas on how red plus could benefit red plus countries and assisting them to contribute to the global goal under the Paris agreement through their NDCs. The second is your views on the possible option for engaging private sector in achieving the Paris agreement goal and sustainable development goal. So please Mr. Martin. Thank you very much. So as you've just heard I've been asked to firstly comment on how red can benefit countries in many of their NDC goals. I think first of all we just need to remind ourselves that really the NDCs are a countries plan as to how they're going to meet and contribute to the global 1.5 degree goal. And in many cases as you know the NDCs lay out a plan within specific sectors as to how this will be achieved. And if you take the renewable energy sector or the transport sector it's very much about driving public and private capital into those sectors to help a transformative change. And in the renewable sector it's very easy you'd talk about moving a country to 50% renewables and you look at what Morocco did in terms of undertaking a major reform path, a major investment path. It's something that you can see. In the land sector it's far more complex because the issues are much more difficult. Now while many of the NDCs do include land use in red there are a number of countries that as yet have not included those sectors. And in many ways when you're talking about any protection of forests under an NDC the important point to remember is that it doesn't just benefit the country itself. As we've heard all morning today it benefits everybody in the world because of the benefits globally of forests. And that's an important point when we hear Juan talk about the results based payments because results are about getting outcomes and results as opposed to just getting carbon. So in terms of how do you incorporate red into an NDC there are a range of ways that this can be done and it's very important that the distinctions are recognised. One is that it could be a key mitigation tool tied to an overall emissions reduction target or it could be a key mitigation tool for the benefit of just simply delivering results. It could be a key adaptation tool. If you take Kenya's NDC it's simply a commitment to maintain a certain level of forest cover consistent with the constitution which is 10 percent and that's now been amended to 15 percent. So that's a promise to deliver an outcome as opposed to accounting for abatement. And so as we look at those NDCs they all treat carbon differently. And so there are a number of issues that really are arising at the moment as to how you treat forests and red within NDCs. The first is as countries go about aligning their NDCs with red you need to make sure that you align that commitment with existing obligations. So a number of countries have existing obligations under the German Reddit early movers program under the FCPF commitments with Norway and countries need to consider how these existing commitments align with any NDC commitment. So for example there are some countries that have committed to to sell the large part of their carbon stock within their forest to the FCPF of which there is no problem with but at the same time they have an NDC that talks about maintaining a certain carbon stock in country. So that brings us to the issue of really then double counting and the and the relationship with Article 6. Article 6 is still developing. You heard the Australian minister this morning talk about the desire to go to other countries to purchase their carbon and to take it as an offset mechanism to Australia. And so if if a country were to do a red transfer under Article 6 we don't know how that will be entirely accounted for but we're assuming that there will be a similar debit and credit mechanism as to what you've seen in in the CARO protocol. So in many ways the distinction between emission reductions for sale and payments for results is a very important distinction that has to be considered. And then finally there's also the uncertainty for existing investments and voluntary transfers. So a lot of money has been invested in early stage projects in red but a number of governments are now saying that those transfers will no longer be permitted post 2019 2020 and the clearest example of that is Peru have issued a policy to say that that those transfers will not be for the time being will not be permitted. So this brings us then to the private sector and how do we engage and I think I sort of sit both in a private sector role but I also am the chair of a larger NGO and I'm also on the board of a government body. When I look across the spectrum in which I work there is a clear there's a clear lack of discussion between the private sector and the public sectors about it's about how to make this work. So the first thing about engaging the private sector is that we need to understand what drives the private sector and what is a driver of investment and that investment will only come if they can make money as an economic return. If they're paid to do it or thirdly there's some regulatory environment which requires them to make investment in forests and that requirement is very much might be an emissions trading scheme or an offset program. Secondly you need to understand the conditions that drive private sector investment and that's legal and governance certainty that's legal title to assets and actually something to invest in. You actually need to be able to invest in something that provides a return and finally low sovereign risk. You also need to understand that the private sector invests in either assets or projects or financial instruments or programs and they always look for a good financial manager. So trying to talk about investing in a large scale country based red program is a difficult leap for the private sector particularly where there are a range of risks and that's why to date the project sector sorry the private sector has very much focus on project investments because their investments at a particular scale which they can understand and get their really their assessment around. So going forward what do we really need if we're going to get private sector capital to flow. The first is that we have to value forest conservation and preservation. We talked a lot about this in the last session but unless you've actually got a value placed on preserving forests beyond a philanthropic value you simply will not get large sums of capital to flow and that means you need a car market you need somebody paying you to do this or you need PPPs with governments work or private sector to make that happen. You also need to recognize that there is uncertainty and challenges with with a jurisdictional approach which I'll come back to in a moment. You also have to grandfather and not damage existing projects. So where you have the private sector who have invested hundreds of millions of dollars in early stage projects governments need to pick those projects up and sweep them into a jurisdictional approach. If you if those projects are killed at this stage they'll it will it will significantly be to the detriment of any future investment because people will consider that the sovereign risk is too great. You also need to see the current investments in individual offset forests which are projects in a way as part of the solution and not have an ideological opposition to them which often is the case at the moment. After all if you're trying to build a jurisdictional approach to forests you need investment in individual pieces of land and forests which are all part of the patchwork of forests that will go towards protecting the entire forest in a jurisdiction. You also need and this was mentioned before to focus on how you build a greater sustainable forestry sector and how you encourage investment in forestry that will rebuild degraded lands but also help supply timber material for building homes. You also need second last to take an economics lesson. So one of the challenges here is that a medium-sized red project of the size you've seen in the VCS costs about two to six million dollars a year just to break even just to run and to keep going. If a government runs a national park it requires a huge amounts of resources. So if you want to save all of the forests in a country you need you need billions and billions of dollars to do that and this is the challenge we have before us. And then finally the final comment I have is that you need to make the the approach to jurisdictional red at the moment which which is a very positive approach in terms of addressing this at a national level is a policy design approach. It is not an investment plan and what we need to do is we need to take jurisdictional red in very much the way that Dan said and turn it into an investable model. So the private sector at the moment will not invest in a model where if it invests and it turns out that the forest reference level drops its investment can be removed. So you need to have some sort of system by which jurisdictional approach actually encourages investment. It deals with sovereign risk it deals with the risk of reversal so that if you're an investor or if you're if you're actually providing the money to invest in projects that you know there'll be some ability to one get an economic return and two protect you from any loss. So going forward there are quite a lot of challenges we're not quite there yet but there is no doubt that there is a significant amount of private sector money that wants to go behind the public sector money to invest in red. Thank you Mr. Martin. We have two more panelist that are going to to share with us. First I would like to invite Mr. Jack Hart. The team are protecting forest and people supporting economic growth was selected for the Asia Pacific Rainforest Summit III with a strong message that in order to protect the remaining forest and people especially whose livelihood depending on forest and forest resources economic growth narrative must be part of the forest policies. So we would like Mr. Jack Hart to share with us your experience and lesson in mobilizing a public and private finance for forest and sustainable land use and then your perspective and ideas on future treatment of red plus under the Paris agreement and future role of NGOs in enhancing role of forest in climate change regime and sustainable development goals. So please Mr. Jack Hart. Great thank you very much Ibu Noor and thanks for the invitation to be here from the organizers happy to do so. So a couple things just a little bit of background so when the nature conservancy and we're a conservation organization when we think about forests we think about them in a pretty holistic fashion. We look at the economic values the social values the environmental values and the climate values. The nature conservancy first did its its first forest carbon project in 1997 and so we have a fair amount of experience over the last 20 years in these sorts of activities but you know if we step back and look at the broader use of forests and the relationship between these different types of values we recognize that the relationship is increasingly being embraced and understood by a lot of different sectors by the public sector, by the private sector, by the finance sector, by community groups etc and by but the problem is with conserving and sustainably managing and restoring forest this remains a significant challenge for us all in many countries because that idea runs counter to the prevailing economic model and the prevailing economic development model in many forestry countries involves expansion of lands for agriculture for ranching for mining and associated infrastructure development and it's those activities that drive the deforestation and the forest degradation and CO2 emissions. So I think what we need to be thinking about here with forest is how do we make forest part of a new economic development strategy rather than forest suffering from the results of current economic development strategy and so when when I think about red plus and I think about the role of forest within NDCs I think about the role of forest as part of rural economic development rather than something that's sort of set aside to be handled by the foresters only. Now as an organization we started thinking about a jurisdictional scale approach to red plus in after COP 13 in 2007 in Bali and I think from a jurisdictional scale we think about a number of different things one it can't just be about changing emission reductions at a site so changing the way that land use happens in a high hundred thousand hectares and measuring the emission reductions from that. It's really important that we do that at the site level whether it's around the way the natural forest is managed or whether the expansion of oil palm or plantation timber or rubber or agriculture products proceeds but we also need a few other things around that site-based activity. We need good solid land use planning in which multiple parties are involved including affected communities. We need a supportive policy environment that incentivizes good planning in practice and penalizes bad planning in practice. We need strong MRV systems to track performance in a way that is consistent with UNFCCC protocols and procedures and we need to do it at a scale that lowers transaction costs and we need results-based financing as a way to reward performance. What we have found over the years is it's difficult to fund this sort of integrated approach you know the funding for industrial scale forest management has largely decreased over the years there's some notable exceptions to that the Australian government and the Norwegian government being two exceptions to that but it's been hard to attract money in the NGO sector and with other partners for forest management. Funding is often available for public-private partnerships with industry that focus on driving sustainability into agricultural practices but given the complexities of supply chains and the land tenure status of producers it's really hard to translate those commitments with companies into results at a scale that matters. Always challenges trying to attract resources for land use planning because the region is littered with land use plans that don't actually affect decision making on the ground. And finally there are policy commitments there's been a lot of great effort over the last 10 years let's say on moving towards timber legality assurance systems but at the same time it takes a long time for those to play out. So I think the summary point there from us is that if we look at a jurisdictional scale approach to red plus it's very difficult to attract the different bits and pieces of money required to execute on that. Thankfully there's a lot of good thinking happening now around blended finance in which we take development finance private sector finance philanthropic investments from donors and try to pool those resources in a way that each can pick off the bits and pieces of a jurisdictional scale approach that they're quite interested in which they can value the risk and value the return from. Now when it comes to the role of NGOs and I'll just wrap this up with two quick examples. One of the things that we find if we look around a country like Indonesia where there's approximately 20 million hectares of industrial scale forest management there's about half of that that's economically viable. Securing the economic viability of the half of the 10 million hectares let's say is perhaps one of the most cost-effective and long-term efficient ways to keep forests standing and therefore to continue to preserve their ability to sequester carbon and serve as a carbon sink going forward. So it's a really good strategy in this country to figure out how do you make long-term the economic viability of the forest the long-term viability of the forest in a way that can produce goods and services for market. In other countries in the region Myanmar for example desperately trying to figure out how to restore two million hectares of forest for watershed values for fuel wood sources as a way to regenerate its its teak industry. In both of these instances there's a role for NGOs to try to bring different parties together to try to promote multi-stakeholder processes to try to promote multi-objective planning and to try to stitch together the experience, the skills, the financial resources and technical expertise of different types of organizations. So maybe I'll stop there. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Hart. Now I would like to invite the Ibu Dhaniar Anriani from Huma. Masaraka Tukum Adat internationally known as Indigenous people have local wisdom and long history of best practices in managing forests and this value in Indonesia is already taken into account when we develop principle criteria and indicators for safeguard information system for red plus. And the historical moment when President Joko Widodo granted legal recognition to Hutan Adat. Ibu Dhaniar has played a very important role in facilitating Masaraka Tukum Adat. So we would like to listen from Ibu Dhaniar about your experience in facilitating capacity development and institutional strengthening of Masaraka Tukum Adat and also your perspective how to enhance the engagement of Masaraka Tukum Adat not only in red plus but also in NDC implementation. So Ibu Dhaniar, the floor is yours. Thank you Benur. Okay Huma with the Hutan Adat Coalition we have more than hang on four or five years to advocate for Indigenous peoples in some in 11 provinces in Indonesia such as Aceh, Jambi, Bengkulu, Bantan and etc to getting the recognition and at least for the first time after the Indonesian independence in 2016 the president give the formal recognition in the palace. So it is not a short way, it is a long journey for us because if you ask how about to strengthening the institution. I can give you four aspects to see that the first aspect is communities itself because they need to assist it. So we need more people or more NGOs to facilitating them to organize the community to find the way what are they doing for their areas because if you know Indonesia we have a lot of laws who who destruct their their traditional laws such as laws number five 1979 about rural about village or desu no nang desa. So it takes a long way. The second the second aspect is more important first about community and local NGOs to walk together and the second aspect is I think it's more important is local governments. We can see the sample in Kajang people in Bulukumba district south Sulawesi how the local government with the local NGO walk together to facilitating the Kajang people to achieve the recognition not only from the president but at local regulation. This is another story about local recognition and the third one is more important thing how to get the the strengthening is the low the low the low the low the low the low opportunities because today is Indonesia since the court decree decision number 35 2012 it is recognized the other forest is not the state forest anymore but the community forest it is the the high jump from the state authority giving back to community and the fourth and the fourth aspect I think is better when the Joko Widodo or the governments today have their development framework or Nawhacita which is they mentioned two aspects will give a huge opportunity to us. The first aspect talk about the how to say if you start to development from the rural areas it means because a lot of indigenous people in Indonesia living in rural areas and the secondly we talk about the the Kebera Gaman in Orbineka Tunggalika so it is the two aspect which is as a values of Nawhacita so the four aspect is help us to to to to push the government to recognize but in the other in other hands we facing a lot of barrier if I if I saw my note first if you talk about the news people's authority is not in environmental or and forestry ministry if you talk about these people issue you have to facing a lot of ministry in Indonesia such as social ministry agrarian ministry and philates ministry too so the the sexual issue it makes complicated to to to set up the rights of indigenous peoples and secondly is about the recognition in these people as a legal subject because in Indonesia you cannot say yourself as indigenous peoples if you don't have any recognition alone from the government especially the local government or we most popular say that or and it is tax time because it need more money more political political attention because if you looking if you issuing the pair that you you must need a facing not only the local government but you have to facing the the local legislative assembly so or they pair they pair there and third one is okay after the record next the subject it it doesn't mean recognize the object of the news peoples so there's two difficult stages to be in the news peoples in Indonesia for recognizing their self or their rights or natural issues you can see in Hutan adat you can apply Hutan adat if you can become improve yourself as indigenous people so as indigenous people you have to show your a a local regulation that stated that you are indigenous peoples and the the last one is in many areas is a conflict areas is not conflict is about claim not only facing the the company but also the government claim such as national park so this is the the situation with uh facing the news people in Asia so if you ask how they can be participate or encourage in a red plus uh your engagement in red bus or NEC implementing the first thing is you you should solve their problems about the land issue the secondly you have to recognize them which is is not easy in these countries so i think even though the government have the the the good framework about uh climate change or red plus or any any name but the basic problem should be solved before like recognize the news people and the object of news people and the conflict on this area i think that's it thank you uh thank you uh booh uh Daniel um colleague we have about the 16 minutes to uh five so we can take up uh about three questions uh from uh the floor and let's see uh how much uh how fast we we move so please uh any uh question no question yeah uh okay if no question i will start the further question to the panelists uh first to uh Guwan um uh from your presentation if we look at because we are now uh in the asia pacific event if we look at the what is the fund allocated or fund committed uh approved for asia pacific about 34.7 uh percent uh but when we look at the land use uh change and forestry we are in the forest summit it's only very uh few uh countries who uh could already access the fund so uh sitting in the grain climate uh fund uh could you uh share what is the the possible uh causes why it's only uh very few at the uh project proposal approved uh in land use uh sector from asia pacific so please thank you very much very good question actually the fact is that we haven't received many proposals it's not it's the the question would be why we're not receiving proposals what happens in the countries like uh you were explaining uh you are in the process of preparing an investment plan so i think that there has been an a positive evolution from the way we have been financing land use sector in the past from what we see now as a as a next step of going beyond one of projects now looking into the investment plan and then a funding proposal to the gcf and that takes time for for countries and already countries have invested a lot of time in preparing and getting ready for implementing red plus and what happens is the translation to to the financial part of those strategies i think that that's why we are not receiving many proposals in some cases there must probably there is also an an administrative challenge in the countries in which in many cases the our counterpart from the gcf is a certain ministry while the ministry is dealing with the red plus or land use are are different ones in some countries so the coordination amount is different sectors it might possibly be another challenge um when when we are respecting proposals and another possible aspect is how countries are defining the implementation of of the red plus strategies some countries are looking into the national scale as uh as their ambition but in many countries that may have more challenges uh how to to go to that scale so defining as has been already mentioned before starting by by jurisdiction or sub-national scales like Kalimantan for example how how does indonesia will scale up from there how do you construct a national level implementation but the first point is to to define how how you start implementing your red plus strategy and that uh is something that still i see countries that need to to define when looking into investments uh thank you uh huan uh are the panelists may would like to respond this is what if is there any panelist and the panelists would like to respond my question is it is not only access to the green climate fund but also uh are the sources of fun um colleague is there a question from the floor yeah please state your name and also to whom the question uh is directed please sorry uh from new forest where a forestry investment company based out of australia um and we've been investing in southeast asian forest for since 2012 earlier throughout the day there were several calls from the government reps for more private sector interaction and involvement and i was really struck martin by your comments about some of the uh risks to early movers in red plus and sort of the penalties that they may face or just pure loss of capital um wondered if the panel at large had any comments or suggestions for how the private sector can remain engaged as a stakeholder with the risk of sort of policy and regulatory fatigue while we wait for um these jurisdictional approaches to really articulate how they will affect private sector actions and project level issues how can we be most effective and not just along for the ride waiting another five or ten years okay um please mr martin yeah okay um sorry it's quite hard to hear here because he's sort of got like a football field echo that way um so i think you're asking how can the private sector manage its risk going forward is that okay sure um so i think as most people in this room would know the private sector's engagement within red early on was really through the vcs so in the same way that the private sector took an early i guess um an early risk that cdm would be materialized into a project based mechanism as they could trade the same happened with with red and part of the reason for that is because if you're an investor you um you very much will have capital to invest on an on a specific project and you invest that you run that the asset you create is carbon the vcs came up many governments endorse those projects and many of the existing vcs projects we must remember this actually government endorse peru kenya other countries have have strongly backed those projects and so your revenue stream has been read governments to now turn around and say well we're not going to allow those projects to sell carbon post 2020 suddenly means that if you've been spending five years getting a red project up and running and you've been selling carbon and to finance that project um you've been doing that through the sale of credits for the last five years you've suddenly got no revenue stream to fund that project now let's remember some of these project activities will you like projects or not a large-scale forest conservation projects which employ a lot of indigenous people to do park ranges or for example if you take the wildlife works project that was funded by the i of c bond that's a project in africa and kenya that employs many people in textiles ranges etc and so there's a whole community financed through that carbon sale to cut that off basically means that project will die and then that will be the end of the project and the forest will will be lost so as a private sector the challenge is much of the private sector is now focused on corsia and hoping that in the red space if they have credits they'll be able to sell it through corsia corsia is a long way away and there's a lot of political um divide between those who believe red should only be jurisdictional based in corsia and those who believe it should only be be based in um in who believe project offset should be included and that will continue to be a debate and by the time it's resolved for many projects that the timing is too long so there's a real risk so as a project as someone who's investing in red today your choice is really out of one search out of well if you're on the development side you really have to work with host country governments to say we want to put money into forest in your country how can you help us to to protect that investment to make sure that if you're doing a jurisdictional approach that investment can be taken into that approach how is our current investment going to be grandfathered how will you provide us or enable us to do an article six transfer so and then leave us out of your ndc accounting or account for it in your ndc so if you have a government like australia this morning that says in the future we're interested in buying carbon and a government like indonesia that's interested in selling it as a as someone who can provide that carbon how do you get that government endorsement to do that transaction as a pilot transaction or if you want to work with a gcf through a results base payment how does your activity contribute to the overall national activity that the gcf will buy those results but how do you individually get protected and get some sort of guarantee that your investment will not be at risk if you're on the other side of the equation it's in it's quite interesting because there are certain countries that have articulated that they will accept transfers of red credits under article six we do not know how that's going to play out but in the australian case obviously that gets devolved to industry that has an obligation to meet an emission reduction target and the government says we want to allow you to buy international offsets so they will be wanting some guarantee from their government that if they buy international offsets from red as many of them have done that they'll be able to use them for domestic compliance going forward and so on that side of the equation I think you know if I was an Australian business after hearing my minister this morning I'd be I'd be saying well that's fantastic that Australia's thinking about that if we buy carbon red based carbon from another country to meet our domestic commitment will you guarantee that we will meet our obligation that means Australia then takes on the risk of of that carbon not being endorsed in the future under article six if we buy it we're to buy it now so yeah it's a very risky proposition it's a very challenging time for red projects because of this we're in a state of flux between so come 2020 when the Paris Agreement kicks in that's when the rules change between now and then it's sort of we really are in a runoff period and we did not really know how this is all going to play out and I think the discussion that Deanne and I were having earlier was that this morning was that we don't really know how a lot of this is going to play out and many countries who are developing their NDCs haven't really taken into account the fact that they've got existing commitments under the FCPF so I can tell you one country which we've looked at which is looking at an NDC commitment it's sold all of its carbon to the FCPF it's got five red projects where it's sold carbon out of the country it's also done some work with you and read it read it the outset and so it has a myriad of obligations which come 2020 they haven't quite worked out so you as a private sector investor are really just on the side of all that watching how it will unfold so you need to engage with government and educate government about what some of the challenges that are being faced here and get them to endorse the sort of investment that you're making as part of an overall national approach to conserving the forests of the country thank you mr martin one more question if any yes hello thank you my name is Florian Reimer from Pope Roger we are a social enterprise for the private sector to finance forest restoration conservation and agroforestry planted more than eight million trees in the last ten years pre-ordered by private sector finance my question is a little bit similar to I think to the lady Kate from New Forest and I think it goes to Miss Dana Miniatis or Jack Hurt or John Shang or anybody who feels up to it this is not my first conference on tropical forest conservation I'm sure it's not yours either and so how can we avoid actually trying to be in the same bubble and social comfort zone all the time of national governments multilateral organizations and research and NGOs without having the private sector actually being here we hear so often that nine five hundred billion dollars are needed from the private sector to fight climate change and the private sector is hardly here we know the deforestation in Indonesia comes from palm oil cocoa coffee rubber and there's all export commodities and many others and there's all go to international supply chains and the private sector and the private sector is not here really so how could we remedy these maybe the next time for an extra gender and participants of such events thank you very much thank you please the panelist who I think Mr Martin and yeah please and Jack yeah sorry it's really hard to hear back here um thank you for for that question it's actually interesting because I wanted to ask people in the room to stand per per identity and check how much private sector that was in the room or how many representatives from indigenous peoples or NGOs and because it's such a big room I thought better not to do it especially in the afternoon when the energy is a little bit low but it that question is spot on how do we have those conversations and there are hard sometimes to have in in a big setting like this but I think we've seen more and more in these conversations that we often do have private sector also today as panelists and in a room when we're having these discussions one of the things that we've been working on as UNDP is leveraging private sector interests through the commodity sector so often they are very vulnerable to climate change and they may not know how to engage in red plus but actually red plus is not so interesting for them in itself they may be facing pressures outsides from NGOs because they're causing deforestation or they may have issues of child labor in their commodity chains and we may have donors that are have private sector that are heavily involved in this and donors that are also looking at red plus so a model we're testing out right now with one bilateral donor is how to engage the private sector of that country when we're looking at red plus and those are that's basically developing business cases specific to the country specific to an for example in this case a commodity be that rubber be that palm oil be that cocoa and so forth and using the leverage of the donor so bilateral donor to leverage their private sector to be interested in this discussion and bringing them all together in a country level from their HQs which may not are usually not in the red plus countries we're working with and bringing their country offices on board and having these discussions so that's definitely a way in which we're trying to have private sector more active in these discussions and also attract their interest because it has to be yes a financial interest sometimes the carbon story is a difficult one to tell and to get people interested in so when you're actually looking at their core business be that a commodity for example and they're worried about the sustainability of that commodity cocoa is a very interesting example and an easy one this is how we engage them in the business when they're looking at the sustainability of their commodity chain and that's how we invite them then I think in these forums when they have a space to to share their experiences and what they think they can contribute and just understanding that also from our perspective is not always so easy yeah those are great comments I would just add two things I think often what we see is certain for a tend to attract the public sector certain for a tend to attract the private sector and they don't always overlap entirely so for example if you go to a general assembly meeting for the forest stewardship council or for the roundtable on sustainable palm oil or for the tropical forest alliance 2020 it'll be jam-packed with private sector people but less so with the public sector people and in fact I remember in Jakarta the first meeting of the tropical forest alliance 2020 was there was basically zero government representatives there so the in in that instance we were thinking the private sector was going to solve all the problems around around deforestation and forest degradation in the pan tropical belt and so I think the issue here is that fora like these are wonderful for getting discussion going and a lot of the issues surrounding deforestation and forest degradation from my perspective are really about governance and what is the long-term economic development strategy of a sovereign nation that sovereign nation has to develop that strategy in in cooperation with the private sector no doubt but I think once you get out of these type of fora the more sectoral discussions do you have an opportunity to play out whether it's working with industry associations in forestry or in rubber or some other agricultural commodity I think it's at that level where you start to get a lot more constructive engagement between the different sectors and where the real problems get solved thanks so just two very quick comments firstly come to the private sector finance discussion tomorrow morning in this room because there'll be a lot of private sector people talking about finance the second answer is it's hard so the fact is every major private sector financier that's focused on financing forests we're trying to get carbon has generally ended up relying on philanthropy was ended up moving that capital into sustainable agriculture to really finance that as a means of trying to prevent the drivers of deforestation so you might have started off as a red fund to finance red but you found out that that we start off you know trading carbon that becomes quite difficult so that capital quickly moves into into the sustainable commodities which are absolutely critically important to prevent drivers of deforestation but it is a different investment thesis which is why the focus on sort of investing in a rainforest is different to investing in a sustainable supply chain or investing in sustainable coffee for example but do come to tomorrow's finance session uh thank you um yeah I think uh we have more partners would like to respond first uh Gwen and then uh Gwen Gwen first and then one oh okay yeah that was a very interesting question I think everybody wants to discuss about it well first of all by defining who is private sector and I guess all of us who are not in a public institution are private sector I'm sure there are many private sector actors here probably not in the panel and second is that um what what makes attractive for a private sector to be engaged as um Don Corleone would say business is business or Jeremy my wife show me the money so what do we offer to the private sector to be part of this discussion what what is their motivation for him to to be here or or participate what is a business case on deforestation how do we address deforestation and at the same time we invite them to participate and these are the things that need to be very concrete private sector is is business oriented there is a business case to to to show them in order to attract them so there is one part that has been discussed on enabling condition there's a huge role of the governments to provide those conditions but then what's next no and from the ECF site and there's a session tomorrow on that we see that there is a huge opportunities now there are coming on how with these public sources of funding we can eventually provide the risking instruments to attract private sector how to can we in the face of the future potential markets that are coming what else can we offer so once we have those things concrete I pretty believe that there will be more private sector engagement in these discussions thank you who won thank you um private sector participation in PNG has had um different um experiences I guess in the beginning the private sector was the first to come in and do carbon projects and that has had some benefits for the private sector but not so much for the landowners and the people in the communities since we developed the national red class strategy we've positioned red as an outcome of the sector's improvement or sustainability practices earned by people in the industry or even in the communities by doing sustainable forest management in the forestry sector or improving agricultural practices since then there's been a number of improvements I would say in the participation of private sector for instance in the palm oil sector in PNG the company that is operating there is RSPO certified and they have come to the table because they need to continue that RSPO certification to be able to reach their market so they are actually driving sustainable palm oil um in development in the country we've recently worked with them we're going to set up a palm oil platform which gives private sector a voice on how policies are developed with that particular sector in the forestry sector and other in the agriculture in developing the GCF proposal GCF has this requirement of what do you call it counterpart funding co-financing and so what we've had to do is really look at what the private sector is doing and bring them on board so they can be part of the proposal development and so they tell us exactly where they are spending their money on if it's related to sustainability then they will be the ones who implement our GCF or at least use the co-financing from GCF to improve their practices so there's some improvement in how private sector is and awareness on how they want to participate in government policy as well as in trying to achieve our red plus outcomes. Thank you Gwen, colleague time is never been enough to discuss the complex issues like red plus especially when come to the financial aspect. I just would like to take from this discussion the key messages from red plus countries. Both Indonesia and PNG we have a red plus architecture in place already and for Indonesia we always have we sometimes have joke Indonesia is in the phase three already a full implementation without payment like that that's the joke but it's the reality and we have common challenge related to MRV I think institutional aspect also it was also mentioned by some panellists when we talk about accessing fund and they're not from a national government I think something to learn from East Kalimantan the historical forest conversion caused by estate crops development and also mining activities has transformed East Kalimantan towards sustainable green growth concept and we should work together East Kalimantan international government to tackle the challenge to move to the direction and on the finance and investment it wasn't interesting mentioned that private sector is business oriented now I think the discussion is there is possibility there is huge potential to bring private sector in our and in forest sector but the challenge remain the same there is many things required to be done in forest countries there are some things to be solved at the international level too so tomorrow there will be a sub team that discuss further on finance and investment I think the concrete discussion should be brought to the sub team session and then I think we we are pleased to hear the development in GCF at least there are already some allocation for piloting a red plus now we are a red plus countries in the asia pacific how we share our experience and also our partner how the partner could facilitate us so that we could have capacity to access that fund if this is related to the capacity yeah regarding indigenous people I think buddhania the long journey but we have started already the long journey this positive sign so let's be optimistic so before closing I would like to thank all panelists for the very informative and also insightful views there that shared in this in this session thank you also to my team novia and team who has communicated directly to all panelists so that we could successfully got all panelists that we wanted so thank you thank you to the panelists thank you to my team novia and others and also thanks to all participants for being patient to be here till we close the session so let's close the session thank you all panelists please stay here first because the organizing committee have souvenirs to give to all panelists yeah and last not last but not least we would like also like to present this souvenir to ibnur our moderator so this is from the organizers on behalf of the organizer I would like to give this to ibnur so thank you very much ibnur and thank you very much all panelists for the nice discussion so we will have a picture here and please open the souvenir so we can show this to the audience