 Okay, welcome everybody. Let me stop sharing my screen so that you can see me. Welcome to the session on grounding policy. And thank you very much for joining. We may still have a few more people joining as we go along. My name is Fiona. I work with Care International and I'll be facilitating the session. And just to start with to remind about the housekeeping rules, just as in other sessions that please use the chat box, you'll find yourself muted remain muted and video off. Unless you get a chance to speak in the group work. We will be doing group set group work. We would love to invite you there to put your video on. Share the link with anybody else. And do introduce yourself in the chat box, we'd love to know who you are and we won't be able to allow everyone to say hi so I see that we've started that already that's great. And just to let you know that if we do reach a certain maximum number we're going to lock the meeting so that we don't overcrowd our, our discussions when we get into the into the group work. So once again, welcome. The session as I mentioned is grounding policy, how communities and local participatory processes informing adaptation policy and planning in practice. And the sessions going to be sharing experiences and practical lessons focusing on success factors and challenges for local voices being heard and influencing the outcomes and being part of decision making and adaptation planning and policy. And we want to really look into how do we overcome the very real challenges that we are all experiencing and facing. The sessions hosted by care international. There's a climate learning and resilience advocacy program in care, which Obed Karingo is working in and Obed and I are hosting this session. And also that Obed hosts the coordinates of Southern voices on adaptation community of practice, where Southern civil society networks, exchange experiences and learning on national to global civil society advocacy, especially around the NDC's NAP and more broadly adaptation planning and policy. The Southern voices network has conducted quite a few studies to generate evidence around influencing particularly this year around how adaptation is included in the NDC updates. So in this session, a number of the civil society organizations who are members of joined the session and will be sharing their experiences with all of us. The network also partners very closely with the NAP global network and we're very pleased to welcome Angie does he as our co host, and she's leading learning around vertical integration in that processes and she'll be sharing a little bit with that with us shortly. What are we going to be doing in the session. We're going to explore how these processes can better inform and influence adaptation policy and planning and discuss the challenges and how, how they can be overcome relating to four key themes so the themes will be addressing those when we get into the group work. And we're hoping by the end of the session that will have collectively developed and even prioritize some key messages to inform adaptation policy and planning processes to be more inclusive and listening to local voices. So, before we go into the rest of the agenda will be having a framing presentation from Angie will be having three examples from three different countries. We'll get us going and thinking about what's actually happening on this on this topic, and then we'll get into breakout group discussions and have time there to come up with some messages, which we will feedback and assess, and then we'll wrap up. Before we jump into the session we'd love to know who we are, especially in relation to this vertical integration what, where are we all coming from and where are we, what level are we working at so we have a little poll for you. And if we can launch the poll, please, as quickly as you can answer the two questions which you can see here. And we will see. When we're done will will be able to get a visual impression. We're almost there just a few more to go there we go so we are nearly all of us from NGOs and majority from national but a good balance so that's great because we do want to look at how the whole vertical process of planning away from community up to national above. So, thank you very much. And without more ado, we can move on and I'd like to invite Angie. Wait a minute. Michael, could you share the results. There we go. Sorry, I thought everybody was seeing this. There you go so this is the visual impression of who we are. Thank you again to all of you for joining the session. And think we can stop sharing, and then we can move on to the, the next part. Thank you Michael. So, Angie. You're welcome. And if you could give us a short introduction to vertical integration so that we can all be on the same wavelength. Hi, Fiona and good morning from Ottawa everyone. My name is Angie does a and I am an associate with the International Institute for Sustainable Development and I is the host the secretariat of the National Adaptation Plan or Network. So I've been asked to provide a short introduction to our topic today and in providing these remarks I'm going to be drawing on insights from the NAP Global Network. So for those who aren't familiar with the network were a global initiative that aims to advance adaptation action in the global south. We work with governments and other stakeholders to support effective national adaptation planning processes. To do this we provide technical assistance we facilitate peer to peer learning processes and we share knowledge on adaptation planning and action. Vertical integration is a key theme for the network and we feel that local to national linkages are critical for effective that processes. Well, I'm going to assume that everyone attending this session agrees that it's essential that communities and local organizations, including women's groups community based organizations and other grassroots actors, meaningfully participate in adaptation planning and policy making processes. We know that this is important from a right space perspective for gender equality and social inclusion, inclusion, and for effectiveness of these processes to ensure that no one is left behind. These principles are also established in the UNFCCC which calls for adaptation to be participatory transparent and to consider vulnerable groups communities and ecosystems. It's also essential to create opportunities for community based adaptation to be implemented at scale, moving away from fragmented initiatives to policies and systems that facilitate local action. This is something that I believe the CBA community agrees on. The question is how. How do we ensure that people at the grassroots, including those who are marginalized have a voice in adaptation decision decision making at all levels. How do we ensure that national policy processes like NAPS and NBCs are informed by local priorities and that they create an enabling environment for adaptation at the community level. How do we ensure strategic and intentional linkages between the different levels from local to national. These are the challenges we want to explore today. To get us started I wanted to share one example of what this may look like drawing on the NAP Global Networks guidance on vertical integration and NAP processes. The graphic on the slide shows how linkages can be created between the local level and the national level in an adaptation planning process. There are a few things I wanted to highlight here. First the linkages must be two way. Community level needs and priorities must be fed upwards to inform national planning while national plans must provide a framework for subnational planning. This is an iterative process with improvement of linkages over time. Subnational governments, particularly those at the level closest to the community level play an essential role in linking the grassroots to planning, budgeting and other decision making processes at higher levels. And they need the capacity and resources to do this effectively. Attention to gender and social inclusion is important at all levels, not just the grassroots. For example, having the ministry responsible for gender and social development involved in the national coordinating mechanism for adaptation can really make a difference in how the problems are framed and how solutions are defined. And finally, these linkages rely on information sharing across the different levels, effective institutional arrangements to ensure ongoing coordination and capacity development to enable government actors to facilitate participatory processes and stakeholders to effectively engage in adaptation planning and policymaking. Making this work is a huge challenge and one that requires creative solutions. The speakers coming up are going to share some examples of how this is worked in different contexts, as well as some lessons that they've learned along the way. Throughout the discussions to follow I would really like to encourage you to focus on the how we know that local voices are essential for effective adaptation planning and policymaking. So how do we get there, what needs to happen. I will leave it there and I look forward to discussing this further. Thank you. Thank you Angie. Thanks very much. Sorry about the slides. I don't know quite why they were jumping up and down. Thanks very much. And from here, I would like to move on to introduce our, our three speakers who will elaborate in a few minutes, some examples of how this is working at different levels and in different countries. So my three speakers are Julius Ngoma, who's the National Coordinator for CISOnec in Malawi. He's also a Southern Voices member. And he'll be speaking around how women have been engaged in the Malawi adaptation planning process, the NAP process and what they've experienced and learned from that. Welcome Julius. Also to introduce Christopher. Christopher is the Initiatives Manager for Care International in Uganda. And his case study is around how care supported the integration of community adaptation action plans that they developed with different community groups in an area of Uganda where there's quite a large refugee community. With the refugees as well as the host community, and how they worked with the district development planning process to get these community adaptation action plans incorporated at the district level. And our third speaker. Welcome to Jessica. And Jessica is a specialist on gender and vulnerable populations in the directorate for climate change and desertification in Peru. Good morning, Jessica. Thank you for getting up early. And Jessica's case study relates to facilitating engagement of indigenous and local civil society voices in the NAP process in Peru. So welcome, welcome to the speakers. And I'd like to call upon Julius first. And maybe we can have Jessica to go second and then Christopher. So Julius. And let me stop sharing my screen now so that we can see you. Julius. In the support you've been giving to women's engagement in this Malawi NAP process. What do you think was the most important factor to ensure that women's voices were heard and that they influenced the outcome. And what would you do differently if you could go back to make sure that they had an even more significant influence. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you so much for Fiona, for introducing me and welcome to all of you to this session. I'd like to begin by indicating that indeed we civil society, natural climate change in Malawi have been engaging and we thought we felt an opportunity was on our table when we actually saw that there was the government of Malawi introduced the NAP process for us to actually engage and also develop for the country. Just for your information, first Malawi is an agro based economy. And with that, we have a lot of, you know, farmers in Malawi for which are actually making up 80% of the population. And even when we look at the farmer in Malawi, most of these poor rural women farmers who are actually comprising of 90% of the population that is doing farming in Malawi. But we have also been heavily affected by the impacts of climate change, droughts, floods over the last couple of decades, which tells us simply that the population which we are talking about here which has been practicing farming for a lot of time for quite some time is also affected, heavily affected by the impacts of climate change, which is the women group. So with that, they are also particularly not able to adapt to the impacts of climate change on their own, although they are facing a lot of challenges that would need to be assisted. For example, the women have not been able to participate or be engaged in different kind of processes that are leading to the development of policies and even legislative frameworks that can help them to adapt to the impacts of climate change. They are the least to have, you know, to access to the resources, financial resources. They are the least to have all the education that is needed for them to adapt or even for them to be informed by different processes on how they can manage climate change. With this, we also saw this process of national adaptation planning as an opportunity for us to start addressing or contributing to addressing the impacts of climate change, particularly those that are felt by these women farmers who are the most vulnerable in the country. So we tried to ensure that at the beginning, we have to create a platform that will help to actually consolidate whatever issues are there in terms of women involvement. So at the beginning, right at the beginning of the national adaptation planning process in Malawi, we had to contribute to the setting up of what we are calling the Coalition of Women Farmers as a women group that helps to actually consolidate all the efforts that women on the grassroots at district level and even at national level are doing to actually feed in two different policy development processes. In this case, especially the national adaptation plan. We had to do that because we wanted to address the challenge where women farmers were not able to coordinate, were not able to actually be heard and also be represented in different technical committees at different levels at grassroots districts and even at national level. We took advantage of this creation of the platform to start engaging and even training women farmers on some of the elements that they were actually lacking. For example, we're training them on how to analyze budgets and policies and so that they are able to engage with the policy processes in a very informed way. And we also actually assisted the women farmers to actually train them on how on climate change related issues, climate smart agriculture issues, including other issues that are related to to them engaging in the agriculture sector as a business. For example, farmer market schools, farmer business school approaches. We were also actually helping these farmers to actually ensure that they are part and parcel of the participatory monitoring and evaluation processes of different policies, particularly the national adaptation planning because this is a process that was actually ongoing and we needed them to actually engage and influence the policy development process. With all that, we had to carry on to actually make sure that these women are also given the platform of linking them with the decision makers as they actually were trying to actually contribute to different processes with the inputs that were actually generating from the platforms that we are actually creating. So we could link them, we assisted in linking them to national technical committee on climate change, for example, the national adaptation planning core team that was there, but plus also other decision making platforms that were there at national district and even at community level. And just to say, say further that after this, we had three key outputs that we could these women engagement in structured way contributed to the development of the national adaptation planning stock taking reports. They also contributed to the development of the green climate fund readiness nap proposal that was submitted by government of Malawi in 2019, but also they were in the leading process of actually developing the nap roadmap. So all this, if I was to go back, then one thing that I would say was that to ensure that when to lobby at first we do the government that whenever they are trying to set up such kind of, you know, policy development processes, they have to also ground that into, you know, making sure that the different stakeholders who are particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change are represented fairly in different committees that are going to take up the process moving forward. Thank you so much. I'm available if we can discuss further if there are other questions. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much, Julia. And a reminder to everybody, please do put use the chat box for your questions, comments and so on. We may not have a lot of time for the speakers to answer but we'll ask them to also put their answers in the chat box. Please do use the chat box. If you have questions and yeah thanks Julius so interesting points around the need for developing representative institutions that can link in a more formal way with policy processes, and that there was success in terms of what they were able to link up with actually representation from the beginning is what we need to be lobbying for. Thank you Julius. Jessica. I'd like to invite Jessica to to join us now so Jessica will be speaking from Peru. Sorry. And you're welcome Jessica to talk to us about Indigenous voices, civil society voices in the NAP process in Peru. You're welcome. Hello, how are you? Thanks for the space and for make to share each other the good things as we're doing in that process. So in Peru, in 2019, we carry out a prior consultation on the regulation for the framework law on climate change. Within the framework of the right of Indigenous peoples. And then we consider it that we had extensive experience to carry out participatory process. As a result of prior consultation, the Indigenous climate platform is great. In this context, we do the NAP process in 2020. So the NAP process was carried out when we had a month in quarantine for COVID situation never experienced before. So we have to do the NAP process virtual with Indigenous people. That was really, really, really hard. I think we can highlight two such factors with Indigenous. The first one, the previous close relationship with Indigenous people, which is based on the principle of flexibility. For example, it's implied that ministry made a methodology proposal, but it was improved with contributions of Indigenous people. Dates and times were changed and another methodology was great for them. The second one, we had previous training for the use of Zoom platform. The first, we planned to do group trainings of about 10 people. But under the principle of flexibility, we ended up doing training for two or three people. So you can imagine the work. We ensure that on the day of NAP event, they could connect and participate without problems. With civil society, a meeting was held only with them. And there was a space to collect contributions, and they will also give contribution during the public consultation, which implies the prior publication of the NAP on the web to collect contribution for all stakeholders. When you ask me what will I do differently, I believe it's necessary not only to provide data for connection to Indigenous people, but also to provide device for virtual participation. It's not the same to connect by phone, but by computer. And it's not the same to connect through an old telephone than through an iPhone. We have a gap, an internet and digital gap, and we have to see that. The second thing I have to, I think we have to improve is that we have to create a space only for women and young people. We did that during the regulation of the framework law, but unfortunately in the NAP process, we did not repeat the action, do the singular context. But it's necessary that these two groups, mainly young people, women have a dog space and methodologies. A dog, it's only for them. And the third factor is that we have to do sessions in their mother tongue. Try to collect contributions from someone who speaks to you in a language that does not handle 100% generates that you don't know collect all contributions. And that you do not ensure that the information provided has been fully understood. We have to work a lot in the future for translate the information and we have to translate also the participation process. Thank you for the space. Thank you. Thank you, Jessica. These are real challenges that I'm sure in the group discussions that we will be, we'll be discussing. And we need to go in more depth to really unpack and understand, you know, how we can overcome these. Thank you so much, Jessica. I'd like to invite Chris. Chris, you're most welcome to speak to us about Uganda. And I know that last year, the older districts in Uganda, it was, it was the time for them to develop five year district development plans. And my understanding is that this coincided with communities being supported by care to develop community adaptation action plans. So there was an opportunity that you had to find ways to integrate the community plans into these longer term five year district development plans. I'd love to know what you found was the most important factor in actually achieving this and getting the community plans and priorities to be included and what you might do differently if you could do it again. Welcome, Chris. Do you do go ahead. Thank you. Thank you very much Fiona for the space and thanks very much for the spend and context. So like you have you rightly put it last year, when Uganda generally was a planning time, and most of the districts were developing district plans that would go for a period of five years. And this as care we saw it was an opportunity through the different local partners for us to influence the planning to ensure that the voices of the local community of the grass root community are well catered for in the plans. So one kickstart this we ensure that we did undertake an assessment to ensure that we get to understand how the different gender groups affected by the vulnerable to the climate. We did this exercise in collaboration with the different district leaders and in a way it gave us an opportunity to engage the leadership of of this district from the start, but we didn't only look at the district level we took it down up to the sub county levels where we did pick the different technical staff and the leaders to be part of the exercise now that one gave us a buying, but also the leaders were in the know of the process and and we're expecting some issues to integrate in the in the district plans or right away from the sub county plans. So that was good that it gave us that opportunity. Now some of the things that gives us confidence that the issues that we presented with these districts and the sub counties are clearly the voices of the communities is we did reach out to the different categories of people in their different capacities. We will know where that Uganda is host districts where we mainly focus on refugee hosting districts, like some of you could be aware of. So we did reach out to the refugees as refugees to hear out their voices and then also collect them. The same was done to the category of young of the youth, both young girls and boys, and then we did the simple women and men to hear out those different views and their issues, mainly even based on climate change aspects. That gives us confidence that this process, the voices, whatever there was integrated in the district was the voices of the community. But how did we do this, we feel that giving room only helping the community to own the process. And we made it clear that most of the civil servant organizations facilitate these processes, and in a way it looks like we are owning them. But this was from the start leveling the ground and informing the community that care and the partners are only but at the end of the day these are plans that should be owned by the community and expectation is the community should push for them to be integrated in the district development plans. Now they can do that on their own. What we did was to also go ahead and form them into groups at sub county level, where we are able to build their capacity on how do you lobby and advocate to have these issues well integrated. So the issue was that we trained them in the skills of lobbying and advocacy, and then it also helped to facilitate them to attain the several planning to ensure that what they are pushing really the voices of the people. So that was already an achievement to us and given that these are issues they push and they are passionate about. We're already confident that they are pushing issues that really concern them and it is it is there from their own initiative from that. Then also the fact that we managed to train this forming the different groups of the refugees. For instance, we know that the refugees were well concerned that given this district have been hosting them. It is also the mandate of the district to plan for them on some of the government programs. This was never the case initially, but now we we happen to know that in this way we're not there where we want to be, but we're happy to know that some of this district have deliberately now agreed to plan for the refugees to benefit on some of the government initiative now. This helps us in terms of trying to ensure that the refugees are self reliant and they do not necessarily have to depend on the handouts from the different civil societies. So that was key to us then also ensuring that these people that we the leaders that we involved. Helip asked also to push because the leaders were in the know we are included in the process from the start where we started to do the assessment. We went back to do validation of what was in the report that we developed again with the communities and again with the leaders. So, when we go to the buying of the of the two leaders who were part of the exercise in that whenever these community people would push for these issues. They would have a backup voice from the leadership because they were there, they were part of the process they had the women's voices. They had the use they had the refugees. So when it would come to integrating them, they would clearly be in an agreement and say yes, this is what is needed at the grassroot level and we need to do this. So for us that was a score and it gives us confidence that it is it is indeed the voices of the community coming in. Then also having the fact that we are supporting the communities to realize their potential in doing cups or in doing community action adaptation plans. The communities are able to realize that not all their problems should be sold off by the by the by the leaders should be sold off by the district to the sub county. But actually they have the potential to also solve some of the problems. So when you draw a plan, the communities are able to see we can actually do this for ourselves. So some of the things were climate smart agriculture, they realized that they can actually have, they can actually do this on their own and by doing that they come into groups and one group supports another group to adapt to their practice. So that was the other key that was realized, and that made us also happy and confident that the voices that have been presented out from the community indeed. Now, if I'm to go back what one thing that I would do better. One thing that I would highlight would do better is is reaching out to the smallest structure on ground to hear those voices to pick those voices. Now, of course, with the limitation of the resources, we did this at almost at a parish level. But if we went back, the best would be to go as far as the smallest unit, which is a village and pick the voices of these people from the village and then be able to consolidate and then that would surely give us confidence that what we are having included in that woman plan is is very much integrating the voices from the different people. So but as now what they what we did was more at parish and sub county level. Well, that gives us confidence, but if doing better, then it would mean going to the lowest unit which would be a village, which would even mean having the disabled alone. Each and every category on their own such that we pick those places and consolidate them. Thank you Fiona, I'll be available to answer any questions from anyone can see some questions flowing in the chat books, I will be answering some of them. Thank you. Great. Thanks very much. Thanks Christopher and I think one really important point you raised is that when it comes to empowering local communities. There's two aspects one is in terms of their own agency and having the adaptive capacity to make their own plans and actually act and implement by themselves on those plans. And at the same time, where that's not feasible, having the agency to now engage with local government and find ways to lobby for for support from that level. And many other interesting points. Thanks so much. Thanks to Christopher. Because we are really quite behind time, rather than allowing time for for questions now. We'll go straight to the to the groups. And that's where you'll have the opportunity to to discuss further. So all the three speakers will will be in three different groups obviously not more. And we will go ahead into six groups. We're going to talk about how can communities and local participatory processes better inform and influence adaptation policy and planning. And we're going to do this in relation to themes. So one theme is gender and diversity, which relates very much to what Julius was talking to us about. And the last theme is looking at the linkages between all of them and how do we create effective linkages from the local to the national. So what we're going to do now is each group each theme has a facilitator and you'll have 30 minutes in the groups. In case your facilitator doesn't appear or doesn't start talking. Take it to get going anyway put on your video introduce yourself. Maybe less than five minutes because we are a bit behind and then the facilitator is going to really bring one particular problem related to the theme. Which you can then discuss in depth drawing from your own experience. How can this challenge be overcome what needs to change. We have a Google doc where the reporters are going to be noting noting down the challenges and the changes that need to happen. And that's important because we're going to use the notes in the Google doc together with very short verbal feedback with each group will only get less than two minutes about one and a half minutes to give your top point from the group work. So we'll be using the Google doc and the records in there the notes that together with what you share verbally to generate a collective outcome. And at the end of this session we're going to do some voting relating to what we come out with as a collective product. So let me just double check out. So I think please continue using the chat box adding your questions and comments there if we do have any time right at the end we might have a chance for some verbal Q&A. But right now I'd like to ask Michael but he can launch us into the groups and we'll have 30 minutes there. So it's now 10 to so 20 past the hour. We'll be back. Actually quarter past the hour quarter past one final notes. I'd like to make to all the session hosts for these groups. You should all have been able to have been made able to record what happens within your group. So if you could please start recording. Once I send you into the groups that would be very helpful. Okay. I'll open them all now. If not my name is is Christian level I work at the International Institute for Sustainable Development, and I'm based in Ottawa, and I'll be co facilitating this with with Jessica who you heard from from earlier. So in terms of the, in terms of the challenge that we wanted to discuss so as you heard from my colleague Angie and we've been supporting national adaptation plan processes. And we heard an excellent example from from Jessica on indigenous engagement in the process in Peru and some of the opportunities and challenges there. So the challenges that I wanted to discuss in this group is that as we all know an effective process engages engaging as a variety of stakeholders takes time, it takes resources both human and financial, and it requires capacity, such as an understanding of gender. And while governments want strong and good processes, they also want processes to move forward quickly and to comply with both national and international deadlines. And so the question I wanted to ask to to you in this group is, how do we balance this need for participatory and inclusive processes with the urgency of meeting deadlines and moving processes forward in a timely way. And is that in general, or is that specifically for the nap process that you're asking this question. We wanted to focus on on national level adaptation and policy and sorry, I may have, may have glossed that so this discussion will be on. The framing question is how communities and local participatory processes can better inform and influence national adaptation planning and processes. So, hopefully, some in the group have been engaged in kind of formal national adaptation plan processes. But the, you know, there's kind of a lot of thoughts that's happened at the national level on adaptation that isn't kind of necessarily formally part of the national adaptation plan process so that's certainly relevant as well, in terms of local and community engagement. So there's one question I have on this is in many ways, you know, if you want full and proper engagement from the local level and from communities and from groups that tend to be hard to reach or the more vulnerable the more marginalized. Is the right question to ask how we can, how countries can meet deadlines set your imposed externally or internationally or actually, you know, should it be done differently that, you know, should it be recognized that maybe for a country to have a much more thorough process and a much stronger engagement, then it shouldn't be about meeting such deadlines, but actually be about the process itself and making sure that it's right and correct. And for those setting the deadlines to actually show flexibility and, you know, and focus more on the process then on on when it needs to be done by. Great. Thanks for that. Any, any reactions or any, any kind of feedback for that that input. Yeah, I'm agree. I'm agree because a always a community people and indigenous people that you have a deadline, but I have my process, and we have to understand that we work for rights, not for products and the rights are a process in a very big process And so Jessica just to kind of to unpack that a bit. Have you seen any kind of solutions in it when you know you see these really strict deadlines in kind of negotiating for for more emphasis on the process rather than on the deadline. Yeah, we have to to change our deadlines, we have to put the deadline with the people, not with the international process. And because the indigenous people and the jam and women want to put the, they are on deadlines. They have a lot to do a lot to do things to do, not only collect my chain, they have to leave. One of the onus say as you make meetings you make a workshop, but I have to work for leave. And this is important. Okay. So from others. Have you experienced challenges related to kind of the need to balance a strong process and a strong participatory process with the the need for kind of urgency on the government side. And what, what kind of approaches and solutions have you used to overcome that. I, I'd love to say we had some solutions we don't. I mean, we're all driven. We're all process driven. We're driven by that processes were driven by cop. We're driven by government sort of policy policy sort of frameworks and time frames. And to shift the balance of power here. There's a lot that we're doing in the space for example of shifting the balance of power and knowledge and learning and I think we're having separate sessions later today on knowledge and learning. We're having some knowledge and learning from a North-South direction to do a South-South direction calling in the North as and when needed. I think this is linked to it. If you can shift that balance of power to the people who are most affected by the most vulnerable countries being affected by climate change are able to start setting the timetable. And then you can start to get those holding the power to start listening but I don't think we're anywhere near that at the moment. We were locked into processes like cop, which are, well, apart from COVID and part of this year are an annual process where we're in the short term horizons and we're saying we need to act faster rather than slower. We've got a real imperative to act and to move towards net zero and all the rest of it. And that's, that's, that's overcome. It's kind of overpowering people's capacity to keep up with that. I think we're all kind of feeling the pressure from working in the sort of organization like I do in the foreign Commonwealth and Development Office to local local organizations in Peru or Africa. So we're all sort of wrapped up in this, this rush to try and deliver results. So I'd really like to get, you know, to see how we can strengthen the voices of the South to contribute to not slowing down the process because the imperative to deliver on climate change is absolutely critical. But how we can make that work for the poor is not something I've got a solution to, but something I'd be very supportive of seeing a solution to. So it's the movement is in the right direction. Thanks for those comments, Vincent, and it's really well, well taken points. I think just to look at the chat from the the plenary we had one participant who had said, there are only 20 national adaptation plans that have been communicated to you to the UNF triple C to date and this is something at the back that we hear often people say, you know, most countries have an NDC, why are there so few national adaptation plans and does this show that the, you know, that the processes aren't moving forward. I think that my colleague Angie responded and you know I think our short answer is that there's a lot of progress happening in countries. And a lot of it is on these really important process oriented pieces, you know, around strong institution building. But, but it's often the challenges that people don't, you know, if there's no national adaptation plan in place that people can easily see and understand maybe that the funding won't flow, but if there's not a strong process then that funding won't reach the grassroots and vulnerable communities and ecosystems the needed so it's a bit of a, it's not a simple, a simple challenge at all. I would be, you know, I'd love to hear others response on how do you kind of balance those two pieces the need, you know, to to kind of communicate out to donors, maybe specifically about all of these, you know, the progress that's happening alongside the need to kind of really emphasize that shift from power to from the north to the south. I just wanted to share my experience because currently we are implementing climate pilot project in North and Shand state of Myanmar. In that project. We are, we are conducting the CVC process climate vulnerability and capacity assessment process with the with the community members. So, what I observed that the, when we, when, when we did this process that look at people understand the climate change rigs and also climate trends, and also what climate impact people, and also, they are likelihoods. There are different kinds of information. They reflect themselves and they produce, they produce the, like, you know, they are experienced and also how they are overcoming, currently how they are overcoming this climate change rigs. So now we are analyzing the results and then we have, we will produce the air as evidence, and then we plan to advocate with the township development administration department and also the different government departments at the township at the same time, but we are planning to advocate at the national level through the network. We have a Myanmar environmental and man network, they are influencing that they can be influenced to the national level, because when the government government developed the climate change policy. So although they haven't developed the NAB yet, but they have developed the climate change policy and also master plan. So, and that this master plan, they have some of their priority areas include to, you know, the town, the adaptation plan are encouraged and that this priority set us. So we will try to link with the grass root advice to the national level. So we are using this kind of process we are doing currently. Thank you so much for that Nila and and that's, you know, that's really helpful. And so the evidence that you're presenting. So when will you know what kind of iterative process is there for the update of the climate change policy and master plan do you see kind of a clear kind of other very clear entry points and do you think that you'll be able to kind of influence the NAB processes as well when it when it begins if it hasn't already. And, and also, based on the results of the, the assessment results, we will be using the results into the development of the community based adaptation plan. So this is also the participatory process. And also we will invite down to lever departments and also our administrators to involve in this process, we will try to engage them at the community level. So we can link, we can link the community adaptation plan into the township development plan. And some of the barriers. Community cannot address. We, we can request the government to address them because, for example, the community can address some of the issue but some are, they will need some resources like a many or technical something like that. In this case, we can collaborate and collaborate with the government department to address address the issues of the community priorities. Thanks so much. And it sounds like that kind of really important work of linking the community to the township plans is already happening. Can I ask if you're seeing the, the priorities that are reflected in the communities that you're working with. Have you heard kind of similar, similar adaptation priorities from other communities in the country. Do you think that there would be kind of an opportunity to to kind of speak together as one to to prioritize some adaptation actions in the national process. Not any clear information from the our colleagues, but they are also trying to trying to trying to do the national level and also community level. Just point, Christian, just thinking in terms of, you know, the link between the kind of community priorities and national level priorities, you know, in many ways I suppose a nap and community priorities are kind of two separate but complimentary kind of elements in the sense that in, I mean we've been working on the devolved climate finance mechanisms in several countries including in Kenya, and in Kenya where it's called the county climate change fund mechanism. It allows for communities to decide and prioritize on the kind of investment, the resilience investments that they need, and they develop their own proposals and you know within the process it gets, you know, it gets funded by the counties and I think within that work, you know what matters is the coherence between the community priorities and then local development plan which in Kenya would be the county integrated development plans for counties. So, you know, at the national level your nap would be much broader than a set of, you know, community priorities I mean you've got to set the scene in terms of where you're going now that has to be fed through a bottom up process. You know, you do need the information to come up but you know where the you know what also matters actually is making sure that at the local government, there's that coherence between what communities want and then how how those areas are being developed. You know, you know, I think that I mean you need to link them right you wouldn't want a nap that's done without community input or prioritization but but you wouldn't want to set a selection of projects in a nap. I would have set out a vision, you know, I would have thought I mean I've not been involved in the nap process but you wouldn't want more kind of vision that's been fed upwards. So that I would see them as kind of different but complimentary and kind of you know, you know, needing to link. I also need to learn from the Uganda experience because now they are linking with the grass root lever and the national lever and national adaptation plan development so I think I can learn from the Uganda experience. I'm glad Flo mentioned the county, the Kenya County Climate Change Fund. I mean, that's a really good example of sort of progress in at least linking to local level and getting local voices heard and it's very much through local government, but it is something that has now been replicated in, you know, it started in Wajir County in Kenya, it's now been replicated in other Arab and Sumerian counties in Kenya. You know, it's a good, it's a good starting point, let's say that other countries could pick up on. I didn't want to mention as well because it's kind of tied into that as well as I mean we've got the LDC group, UNFCCC, I mean UK and Ireland are supporting you probably heard about the Life AR initiative several times these last few days. And the UK and Ireland are supporting that and that's that's a sort of aspiration of 47 countries to actually change the ground rules on both how climate finance is managed and how it reflects sort of demand from local level. So they say they're going to do things differently. They say they're going to respond to local level demand, they're going to meet sort of deliver 70% of climate finance to meet that local demand and change the game plan in those countries through an incremental process starting in seven countries, ultimately in 10 years moving it up to the 47 countries of the whole LDC group. But again, it's a long term process. They haven't got the methodologies worked out yet. They've got the commitment they've got the LDC vision, which they launched last year. So I think processes like this week and the adaptation conference in January and things moving forward will help to start to bring the ideas together actually how they can make this work on the ground. So hearing examples from Myanmar, from Peru, from Uganda, etc. Certainly helps to provide guidelines towards how this can work across across a very sort of heterogeneous range of countries and very different political systems and sort of aspirations. But at least we've got, you know, got an organization of 747 countries have come together and said, we want to do this, we want to make it work. Yeah, thanks. Thanks very much for that and I think that respond to Neil's point as well, you know, as we all know these are iterative processes and you know the county climate funds are definitely a great example of, you know, trying to respond both be accountable and downward to grass roots stakeholders as well as feeding those priorities as you were saying flow back upward towards national level policymakers and I know that there has been some link to date in the nap process in Kenya to county climate change funds so I think, you know, hopefully we'll see those kind of those links strengthened even more. And in terms of kind of in terms of the kind of the different examples that we've heard here so I just want to make sure that I can kind of sum this up. I'm great but it would be great to hear from from others. What are some of your key takeaways so far in the discussion on on how to balance this need for inclusive processes and overcoming the challenge of kind of, you know, the interest of moving processes forward urgently often to to meet kind of externally posed imposed deadlines. Well, I think the life a your initiative Vincent mentioned, you know, is about business unusual and about turning the tables it's about letting the country set the pace and this isn't about doing it slowly or, or wanting to, you know, not to move forward I mean the LDCs he mentions you're very much, you know, wanting to take the lead and want to move forward, but it's about them setting the pace in terms of what works for their country, and they'll be different paces for different countries. And so you know, you know, I think it partly is turning the tables around and, and, and, yeah, letting them guide the process instead of the other way around. But that has a lot of implications and that's as Vincent had mentioned previously is not straightforward, you know, due to a lot of other pressures. Great. Thanks for that. And others. Empowering look at people and also empowering civil society organization and networks that will for in our country, it is more feasible to advocate the government. Empower look at communities and also civil society organization and network is important for us in Myanmar. Thank you. Thanks so much. And Jessica were there any kind of takeaways that you'd like to make sure we report back. Yeah. I'm thinking about in in Peru, we have a lot of interest in donors to give us money to make an energy projects. And it's the not same interest to a to give us money for participation process. And that is a problem in prior prior consultation, we have, we have to work a lot to ensure the money and the money it's, it's very important, the participation is not possible without a team without a communication with that with that translators, it's not possible. So we have to change the donors minds to I think Jessica raised a very important point related to that in the plenary earlier. It was about digital exclusion. So it's about giving money for, you know, sort of participation. But at the moment with the world moving on to digital platforms and to virtual platforms. There's a real risk of exclusion, because large. Actually, she Jessica mentioned large proportions of population still are not connected and participation these days means to a large extent digital participation as evidence this week but you know as will continue to be apparent. So I think addressing that gap is really important part of the supporting the local voice and bringing the local voice into decision making. How do we ensure that that local voice is being adequately reflected in the type of platforms that we're sitting on this week and that I continually saying they represent developing countries at sort of local communities at developed at sort of national and global platform level. And I mean, you know the UK is at the moment we're having discussions with people like the global resilience partnership around this potentially how we can potentially support that sort of change in in sort of digital inclusion to broaden that out more effectively. Thanks so much. Please. If I can if you don't mind yeah and maybe Jessica and Nila can shed some light from their experience but we often talk about participation and participation as being the way to include the most vulnerable etc but often they're the ones who cannot participate they're the ones who do not have the time to be part of such events so often participate in it reaches the local level it reaches communities, but it often doesn't actually reach those we really do want to reach. And, you know, and what and if you cannot reach them because they don't have the time because they're too busy etc. And, you know, they have to live their lives as Jessica said, you know, and not be part of workshops well, you know what other processes are in place is it about greater accountability greater kind of feedback mechanism you know other other processes to make sure that those who do not get heard have a way of getting heard or have a way of input to have a way of making sure that what is done benefits them. And I don't know if maybe they have some experience about because you know we see participation as a solution but actually often we don't reach the ones we say we want to reach. Yeah, so I think I'm Jessica would you like to respond to that. I like to complete one thing because we are thinking about and flow in. It's reminding that participation also implies a prior information time. Without complete information, participation is not possible. And I always see it we designed participation process without information, and people go to the workshops, but they work. Like, they were, they go, they, they go like in blank space know. And this is, we have to, to, to remember that to, we have only four days. Yes, it looks like we have 45 seconds but I think that that's a great point that participation isn't the same as influence, just because you're there a few awareness raising hasn't been been done and you know that translation isn't happening then absolutely. It's not going to be, you know, actual influence on the process. Are there any last thoughts for this session before we get bounced back to the plenary. If not, I'll just, I will, I think I flow your point on on the need to kind of, you know, how can we overcome this I think Nila's point on using associations might be one kind of solution that we might have been trying to have a collective voice through, you know, through the I think you're on mute. Sorry. Sorry, I hadn't muted. Sorry. Welcome back everybody from the, from the group work. And we will jump straight into sharing back the key points if I can just ask that the reporters of the groups make sure you are capturing everything have captured everything in the Google Doc. I'll start to invite group one Angie's group. If you could share in in just one minute, the highlights of what came out from the discussion in group one. And if the reporters if you could try to capture what your presenter says in the Google Doc, that will also be very helpful for the next step. Angie, you're welcome. Thank you. So we were talking about how to ensure that planning and policymaking is responsive to gender and diversity. And I think two big things came out. One is the need to create platforms that link grassroots organizations together so that they can define collective priorities that can then be communicated by spokespeople for those organizations in government spaces through advocacy processes and through formal planning and participatory planning processes. And then the other big piece is that the governments who are guiding these processes coordinating these processes whether they're at subnational level or national level need to create mechanisms and create negotiation processes where these collectives of grassroots actors can bring their priorities forward and we had some interesting examples from Bangladesh from Niger where where this is happening. I think there's an ongoing challenge in getting from the local level to the national level but there's some interesting work being done that we can learn from. We'll leave it there. Great. Thank you very much Angie. Nice and concise. Thank you. Obed, let's move to your group. Yeah. Thank you Fiona. In our group, we were discussing on how communities and local participatory processes can better inform an influence subnational adaptation, policy and planning. The main issue was how to ensure this is effectively done by ensuring that communities adequately feed into the subnational adaptation planning and policy processes in an effective manner. And a number of issues came up, but one of the main issues that came up is the issue of capacity to engage. For instance, in an example from Kenya where there are structures that involve communities to participate in defining various priorities in terms of adaptation needs at the subnational level, but they do not have the relevant capacity, even on what climate change is or what they need to feed into this policy processes. So adequate capacity to empower these communities is very, very necessary. Another action was ensure that these consultations and community participation processes are done at the community level where those who are actually vulnerable exist because one of the challenges that came up was that some of these consultations are done at the urban level where the communities and those who actually need to engage are not able to reach. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you, Abed. I'd like to ask, I should have asked earlier if everyone can listen up carefully to the points that are raised. And if the point you wanted to share has already been said pick a different point. I'll ask now, Christian, if you'd like to share in just one minute some top priorities highlights from the discussion. Well, Christian. Thanks, Fiona. We were talking about how communities and local participatory processes can better inform and influence national adaptation planning. And we had an excellent discussion. We were talking about the challenge of balancing strong participatory processes with with deadlines and urgency to to kind of move these processes forward often coming from national and international processes. So that just very briefly the group kind of had a great discussion and there was a strong feeling that deadline should be set by countries themselves, rather than externally imposed as part of a broader shift to move from the agenda setting being in the global to the global south. And there was also a point raised to overcome challenges and participation, and to move from participation to influence there needs to be strong awareness raising so that the vulnerable communities and representatives from vulnerable groups can fully influence the process and not just participate. And also, our colleague from from Myanmar noted that community associations can be really strong multipliers in communicating adaptation priorities upward toward the national level and towards national processes. So I'll leave it there but thanks so much for the invitation to speak. Thanks, Christian. Yeah, lots of really good points in there. Thank you. And so we'll move to the. We'll move to the fourth theme, and then we'll be coming back again to hear a little bit more about the first two things so Jesse. You're welcome to tell us more about what came out from your discussion. Well, actually, I was facilitator come note taker. So we've delegated to Jess, who will do our presentation here and our feedback to the group. That's me similar names. So that's okay. Our group talked about creative effective linkages from local to national level, really looking at, I guess a challenge around the limited capacity of some national communities, particularly at local level, to be the link between communities and national level. And in particular, and I really like this, this was our framing from Jesse about how we can empower communities to play and some national governments and others to play this role between levels moving the needs and priorities upwards and the resources and capacities downwards. So we talked about that in our little group about some of the issues and challenges. Really, and then also some of the solutions. So, I guess the issues and challenges that we talked about largely related to information sharing between the different levels between sort of community. Subnational provincial governments and national that sometimes the information that shed is a different, I guess, scales and different types of information that is or isn't shared. So there can sometimes be institutional barriers and politics as well. So depending on different levels of say government sometimes the issues aren't fed up because they may be ideological and political differences and obviously that depends on the context in which people are working but then we talked about what some of the ways around these challenges are for feeding those community voices up the chain and I guess we talked about a few different things, including that we need to build a level of trust and buy in at all levels. Welcome back everybody from the from the group work. And we will jump straight into sharing back the key points if I can just ask that the reporters of the groups make sure you are capturing everything have captured everything in the Google Doc. I will start to invite group one Angie's group. If you could share in in just one minute, the highlights of what came out from the discussion in group one. And if the reporters if you could try to capture what your presenter says in the Google Doc, that will also be very helpful for the next step. So, Angie you're welcome. So we were talking about how to ensure that planning and policymaking is responsive to gender and diversity. And I think two big things came out. One is the need to create platforms that link grassroots organizations together so that they can define collective priorities that can then be communicated by spokespeople for those collectives in government spaces through advocacy processes and through formal planning and participatory planning processes. And then the other big piece is that the governments who are guiding these processes coordinating these processes whether they're at some national level or national level need to create mechanisms and create negotiation spaces where these collectives of grassroots actors can bring their priorities forward and we had some interesting examples from Bangladesh from Niger where where this is happening. I think there's an ongoing challenge in getting from the local level to the national level but there's some interesting work being done that we can learn from. And I will leave it there. Thank you very much, Angie. Nice and concise. Thank you. Obed, let's move to your group. Yeah, thank you Fiona. In our group we were discussing on how communities and local participatory processes can better inform and influence subnational adaptation policy and planning. And one of the main issue was how to ensure this is effectively done by ensuring that communities adequately feed into the subnational adaptation planning and policy processes in an effective manner. And a number of issues came up but one of the main issues that came up is the issue of capacity to engage. You find that, for instance, in an example from Kenya where there are structures that involve communities to participate in defining various priorities in terms of adaptation needs at the subnational level, but they do not have the relevant capacity, even on what climate change is or what they need to feed into these policy processes. So adequate capacity to empower these communities is very, very necessary. Another action was ensure that these consultations and community participation processes are done at the community level where those who are actually vulnerable exist because one of the challenges that came up was that some of these consultations are done at the urban level where the communities and those who actually need to engage are not able to reach. Thank you so much. Thank you Abed. I'd like to ask, I should have asked earlier if everyone can listen up carefully to the points that are raised. And if the point you wanted to share has already been said pick a different point. So let me ask now Christian, if you'd like to share in just one minute some top priorities highlights from the discussion. Thanks Fiona. We were talking about how communities and local participatory processes can better inform and influence national adaptation planning. And we had an excellent discussion. Talking about the challenge of balancing strong participatory processes with deadlines and urgency to kind of move these processes forward often coming from national and international processes. So that just very briefly the group kind of had a great discussion and there was a strong feeling that deadlines should be set by countries themselves, rather than externally imposed as part of a broader shift to move from the agenda to the setting being in the global north to the global south. And there was also a point raised to overcome challenges and participation, and to move from participation to influence there needs to be strong awareness raising so that the vulnerable communities and representatives from vulnerable groups can fully influence the process and not just participate. And also, our colleague from from Myanmar noted that community associations can be really strong multipliers in communicating adaptation priorities upward toward the national level and towards national processes. So I'll leave it there but thanks so much for the invitation to speak. Thanks Christian. Yeah, lots of really good points in there. Thank you. And so we'll move to the, we'll move to the fourth theme, and then we'll be coming back again to hear a little bit more about the first two themes so Jesse. You're welcome to tell us more about what came out from your discussion. Great. Thanks Fiona. Well, actually, I was facilitator come note taker. So we've delegated to Jess, who will do our presentation here and our feedback to the group. Just over to you. That's me similar names. So that's okay. Our group talked about creative effective linkages from local to national level. We've been looking at, I guess, a challenge around the limited capacity of some national governments, particularly at local level to be the link between communities and national level. And in particular, and I really like this, this was our framing from Jesse about how we can empower communities to play and some national governments and others to play this role between levels moving the needs and priorities and capacities downwards. So we talked about that in our little group about some of the issues and challenges and really, and then also some of the solutions. So I guess the issues and challenges that we talked about largely related to information sharing between the different levels between sort of community sub national provincial governments and national that sometimes the information that shared is a different I guess, scales and different types of information that is or isn't shared there can sometimes be institutional barriers and politics as well so depending on different levels of say government sometimes the issues aren't fed up because there may be ideological and political differences and obviously that depends on the context in which people are working but then we talked about what some of the ways around these challenges are for feeding those community voices up the chain and I guess we talked about a few different things, including that we need to build a level of trust and buy in at all levels. We need to build on existing initiatives and existing networks and where possible starting simple so really making sure that the different levels engage draw the voices in and use the different formal and informal networks to make sure that they're feeding into the different levels. So I guess we talked a little bit about barriers a little bit about the way the enablers and the things that can happen to help with that information flow. But the other the other topics that other speakers have spoken of already raised the need for you know that diversity of an inclusive engagement to make sure all of those voices are heard. So they're probably the key, the key things from our group, hopefully I've represented it okay. Thanks. Thank you. Thanks, Jess. Interesting in many ways that all the groups so far I think ended up talking about the, all the different levels and linkages. And then you've given a very interesting framing, which could be useful for all of us. Moving coming round again to the gender theme. Julius, do you have ideas and thoughts that came up that we haven't heard already from the other the other groups and please take a minute to share. Thank you Fiona I think we were also addressing the same question from a similar to group one. And then I think they have shared most of the points, what I can only add here is the point on improving access to productive resources to the women. And other vulnerable groups, for example, we had to take a lot of a lot of time discussing what could what what are some of the barriers that, for example, that making it not possible for women to be represented for women to actually have their voices. And also not to actually progress in terms of ensuring that they are adapting so that's one of the points but also also talked about the issue to do with improving laws and policies to support women women representation in different countries so even though we can set up let's say from frameworks and networks or platforms, but then we still need to have deliberate efforts where women can also be, you know, by law or required by law that they need to be represented in different setups, even at a community level the setups that are being made at community level they need to be representative and there has to be a number where women should be actually assisted thank you so much. Great, thanks Julius, interesting, interesting. So the final group to share. Thanks for your patience Chris, Chris's group. Again around this sub national level integration into sub national plan. Chris, over to you, or your representative. Oh, okay. Yes. Thank you for that. Thank you for being repetitive. We share the same question now. Chris, we're struggling to hear you a little bit. Would you allow Laumani to chip in? Laumani, do you want to go ahead? Okay, I would like to go to the point to share our discussions and summarize from, we have very diverse type of discussions from different places. Okay, so from our discussion we summarize the major challenges are the capacity of the community people and their access to policy process and the last one is the intention of the policymaker to not to include the or not to respect and address the community people and the improvement proposed in our groups are firstly we should capacitate the people so that they may be able to raise their voice and to be confident. And second one is the develop the skill on the adaptation and governance process so they can develop and their one adaptation plan and adaptation activities and run in their one place and one reason so they can sustain the adaptation process without external support and they can be independent and they can be more innovative. These are the point. Thank you. Thank you Fiona. Great, great. Thanks Laumani. Thank you very much. So, thanks everybody for your active participation in the group work with a very rich Google dog full of all sorts of information we've heard some key points I realize our time is up but we have a very exciting thing still to do. And our reporters and Angie have been busy while everyone's been talking looking through the Google dog listening to your point and coming up with a list of up to 10 critical points that we really need to think about. And in order to improve grassroots voices, local voices, participatory processes, actually influencing adaptation planning and decision making. And so Michael is busy translating our 10 points that we have all come up with in through the through the initial sharing from the speakers and what you've discussed in the groups and what you've shared back from the group so we've really got a co created list of 10, 10 key points. And what we're going to do now is that Michael will launch them as a poll where you'll have the opportunity to decide out of these 10 points which do you think are really, really the most important to changes and messages that we should take away from here and work on and as intermediaries which we very much are in terms of the role that we play, and we have many roles as intermediaries. And so which of these 10 points that actually now they are 10 if you scroll down you'll find the 10th. So please go ahead and select your two most important changes. Fiona, that document actually doesn't allow my selection so it only gives you one choice. Okay, then you take one, then it's single choice. There you go. So pick your top top top one. And when we are all done, we'll be able to see how we as a group here of almost 30 people. And that's what we would say to others that we need to do first and while while you're completing this just to say that, if you look in the marketplace area of the, I think it's the marketplace area. I find something around principles for locally led action in adaptation processes and this is something that IID and the Global Commission for adaptation and others are working on developing a collective set of principles for locally led action to be really effective and to for us to actually make that happen. So what we'll do is we will actually be able to share these messages will will boost them up a bit so they're more understandable from these three words but we will share with them. This outcome from the session so that they can see what we came up with as the top priorities. I think there's just a few people left. So the last couple you could, you could do your voting. You're there. Otherwise, we could end the poll here and then Michael if you could end the poll and share the results. And we're going to take a screenshot of this. So thank you very much Michael and interesting that finally collective grassroots platforms came out on top. So we are seeing that it's more important to empower and build agency and adaptive capacity organizational capacity at the grassroots so that they can bring their voice and that maybe is more important, even than our engagement directly with the the plan is themselves in terms of the engaging subnational government and legal frameworks didn't get a look in maybe because they were number 10. But interesting that we're much more around enhancing the engagement capacity and getting that stakeholder engagement and the negotiation spaces together with a really big push on collective grassroots platform. Thank you so much to everybody and again if you have time please don't go away because we would really like our host a bed who hasn't had much to tell us so far to give us some final words and some up what's come out from the session and where we might go from here and what Southern voices might do with this from here. And so we'd like to hear from a bed and then we'll also give Angie the very last word so a bed over to you. And thank you everybody for your participation today. Thank you so much. I will not want to take much of your time because we are already way past time. Just want to reiterate that it's so it's interesting to see that establishing collective grassroots platform is actually one of the main points that is coming out from this discussion, of course among others and it resonates with the main objective of this session which of course ensures that this discussion discusses about how realities of communities and local participatory processes can inform local and subnational and national adaptation policy and planning processes. So, these points are very, very important even in our advocacy work as we keep on influencing both local nationals and even global policy processes. As Angie put it earlier on, some of these messages and what we are discussing today, especially in terms of ensuring that adaptation planning policies correspond to the requirements of adaptation planning, issues of aggressiveness, participatory and transparency, ensuring that vulnerable groups, those who are actually vulnerable, take part in policy planning and processes. And as care, we have working together with Southern voices on adaptation, which is a coalition of Southern sea or source in the global south that are engaged in promoting and advocating for policies that ensure that communities that are affected by climate change participating, defining adaptation planning options and priorities will continue to take these messages forward in even in our advocacy work and ensure that of course that this work is very, very crucial, ensuring that these policies consider the views of and in response to the needs of the most vulnerable people. So moving forward, these messages will continue with the dialogue and also talking about having conversation about the messages that have come out from this session. And of course, not only at the sub national level, but of course, even at the national level, we've talked about the national adaptation planning processes, the NAPs that are currently ongoing. We have the NDCs that are currently being revised and some of these messages are very, very important in forming these processes at the national level. And at the national level, also global level, we have of course the UNFCCC engagements, especially on the NAPs and adaptation. And I'm happy to announce that Southern voices and NAP global network as part of the technical working on NAPs. And we'll ensure that of course these messages reach this conversation that we're having at that level. And last but not least, as Fiona mentioned, these messages will contribute towards building up and supporting the momentum already created on locally led action, even as we look forward to the climate adaptation summit next year. So without wasting time, I want to really thank you so much for your participation and look forward to more conversations even on the over platform beyond this session. Thank you so much. Great. Thanks so bad. Thank you. And Angie, how do you, what would you like to tell us from the perspective of the NAP global network? Thanks. I'll try to be really brief. I think that, you know, this idea of these collective platforms is essential, but my takeaway is also that we need to work with governments to ensure that they're creating these spaces for sustained stakeholder engagement. So that as these platforms are becoming stronger and more organized, they have a point of contact where they can bring their priorities forward to inform these government planning processes at the different levels. And I think one other thing that hasn't been a strong focus of the of the conversation, but it was something that Jessica said that I think is really important to keep in mind in the current context where most of our work and engagement is happening virtually is that this creates opportunities. And bring more people in and that's very exciting, but we also need to consider who is being left out of virtual engagement processes due to technology and connectivity issues. And be sure that we're being mindful of that as we move forward in this strange new environment that we're working in. So I'd just like to thank everyone for active participation. It was it was very interesting and and I'm left with a lot of food for thought. So thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Angie. And again, thank you to everybody for a really rich session. I can see what point it would be great if the key messages drawn out from the sessions, we shared with the participants I've shared the Google Doc link so please, you know, you can find our raw, our raw material there. Hopefully the key messages that we draw out from this session, we will be sharing it to the CBA 14 organisers and therefore it will become available once the CBA conference for the outcomes are available and I'm sure that will also be on the FUBA app. Keep your eyes out for this session and the messages, but I just really like to say thank you so much for being part of what I could call a co-creation process that we actually started from a real diverse group of people and topics and themes and experiences. And we've landed on a set of prioritised key messages that we can take forward that are actually developed collectively. And I think some really important points came out that Obed and Angie have also highlighted. So thanks again to everybody, thanks so much to Obed and Angie for making the session happen and thanks to the facilitators and reporters and our Black people helping out on the Zoom side. And see you again in the next session or in the closing. There's also just to say Daniel started a chat in the community board, there's a chat about integrating local voices in adaptation planning, more or less the same as this session. So if you feel you have more to say or you want to stress some of the points or say something about what came out from this session, then you could use that community board and that particular topic to continue the conversation. Otherwise, thanks so much, and we'll end here.