 Adrian, this week you've been participating in this Future of Pastoralism conference here in Addis Ababa. What are the main take-home messages? Well, I think the main fundamental take-home message is that there is a future for pastoralism in Africa and particularly obviously from my perspective based here in Ethiopia, in the Hall of Africa. I think that's refreshing to hear. I think we've got good research findings to prove that. We've got new policy initiatives which are also beginning to emerge from the AU down to country level. We've seen a number of ministers of state from South Sudan, from Kenya, from Ethiopia that have come from a pastoral background. I think we're basically seeing that all the indicators are that there is a future for pastoralism in the Hall of Africa in particular. Although I think that we probably would need to qualify that and say that the future of pastoralism looks like it's going to be the future of different forms of pastoralism and some groups are going to come out as more as winners, maybe more commercialised, more commercial systems of pastoralism. Others are going to be more diversified and obviously there's going to be some losers as well. And we've also looked in this conference at some of those loser groups and how possibly through various forms of social protection or alternative livelihoods or different types of support they may transition into livelihoods that are very little in terms of connection with livestock. What implications do you see for FAO for this type of messages coming out? Well FAO here in the Horn of Africa we're very active in the pastoral areas. Primarily through what's been historically called the emergencies part of FAO. So it involves around livestock in times of drought and that's been one of the key areas of work and a whole raft of interventions around supporting pastoral livelihoods during times of drought. So whether it be animal health or feed supplementation or commercial slaughterty stocking or restocking after drought that's been a main part of our work. But there are other parts of FAO's work in the region that are involved in trans-boundary diseases and marketing initiatives which are more long term. And I think what FAO is in the process now is of transitioning from just the bulk of its work being around emergencies to taking on these new approaches to disaster risk management and disaster risk reduction. So transitioning the short-term emergency programming to more longer term and then certainly middle term programming which looks not just at an immediate response to a drought or a hazard but also to trying to strengthen pastoralism over the longer term. You used to work for Save the Children which is quite a different organisation. What kind of issues do you see not represented in a conference like this which is rather academic in nature? Well there's a couple of things noted with concern that we could have perhaps looked at a little bit different. The first one was around the issue of gender and I think that gender throughout the conference was perhaps one of the weaker aspects and maybe something in the next conference that we could look at a little bit more. The other area was identified by several other of the participants was when I was in Save the Children we had a strong programme around natural resource management and we were looking at the links between natural resource management, livestock productivity and obviously milk for children. So there was a kind of a natural flow from looking at the natural resource base, how to improve range line management, strengthen range line management institutions, increase livestock productivity and then there would be benefits for them. And I think that one of the areas where I felt there was a perhaps we could again focus on another in another conference would be this whole productivity issue. The productivity of the range lands particularly under changing and maybe more fragmented systems, how we can look at range line productivity, how we can therefore increase livestock productivity and therefore be benefits from children both in terms of milk production but also in terms of sales and household income. So I think the two areas where I think we could have perhaps spent a little bit more, maybe a little bit more technical focus around productivity and then obviously the agenda issue. Last thing, ILRI is International Research Centre. What do you see as the implications of this conversation for a place like ILRI based in Ethiopia surrounded by pastoralists but some people say not really working on pastoral issues? Well I've just had a conversation with an ILRI colleague. I mean the first thing is I would call ILRI and there are certainly colleagues and I've had lots of conversations with people from ILRI over the years both in terms of them helping support ideas and trying to develop and save the children. But now I think one of the areas that I think I can see as a particular activity is as a team from Kenya that's involved in global climate change and we were just talking about the possibilities of how we could do a partnership around range line systems, grassland systems, carbon measurements and this whole business about moving grasslands to some sort of payment for environmental services. And I can see some sort of partnership emerging with the ILRI there and I would value the opportunity. I mean ILRI has got a very strong research capacity. In FAO we're much more operational and we're involved in the delivery of projects and policy issues. So I think that that relationship between ILRI and FAO could be very strong and very positive.