 Basically, since the COP in Bali in 2007, there has been a bunch of different subnational red projects that have emerged in a bunch of different countries. And these are led by governments, subnational governments such as state or province level governments. They're also led by NGOs, they're led by foundations, and they're an important testing ground for how red will work and could work at the national level. And so we're looking at some indicators of early success of these projects to try and help inform some of the later implementation of red, which the idea is that that would be eventually at the national level. But these projects, as the national frameworks are going a little bit slower, these projects are an important way to understand how red could work. Well, as part of C4's global comparative study on red, we conducted baseline research last year in five countries, Brazil, Cameroon, Tanzania, Vietnam, and Indonesia. And our promise to both the red project proponents as well as the local communities that we worked with was that we would go back in one year and return the results of this baseline phase. In Brazil, this one year later after the research was conducted, we went back and returned results at the majority of the site. And this involved giving presentations to the red project proponents on some of our early findings on land use, livelihoods at the project sites so that they get a better sense, actually, of the areas where they're going to be conducting interventions. That surprisingly, many people are still getting to know, so our results were very welcome to help them actually get to know their project sites better. And then we made some interesting observations about some of the process indicators. So that could actually affect the effectiveness, efficiency, equitability, and the co-benefits that are associated with red. So we even highlighted some strengths and weaknesses or challenges with the early implementation of projects that we had done in this initial analysis that could hopefully help them in the further implementation. And at the same time, we visited all of the communities where we had conducted the fieldwork, and we gave each community a report that was called the Village Report. And it essentially highlighted a lot of the baseline findings from that particular village. And those were extremely well received, just the report itself, as well as we would do a big presentation in a village meeting. And again, that was really well received. And I have an interesting story from one of our field research supervisors, Marina Kromberg, who worked in a site in the Brazilian Amazon, who said that she arrived in one community and they actually said to her, ah, you came back, but you're a week late. So they had been waiting for the teams to come back and return these results. So people, I think it was really important, not only in terms of a content contribution, I think we really contributed a lot of important content information for both the proponents and the communities. But it was also that important way to foster good relationships. And I can't tell you how many times I heard researchers never come back with results. Thank you. You're the first group that's come back. So thank you so much. And I think we have to change that, not only within C4, but also beyond C4. And I think these kinds of efforts, and there are researchers who do this, we're not the first group. This is an ongoing effort to try and disseminate scientific results to different publics beyond the peer reviewed publication. But we need to keep going that way and changing that paradigm so that actually the exception to the rule is the researcher who doesn't go back to the field site. We did one part of the research that was really interesting for people was that we quantified household level income, actually from a variety of different land uses. So from the forestry sector, the agricultural sector, different, sort of based on the poverty and environment network model of quantifying cash and subsistence income. And I think those results were very interesting to people because it's sort of highlighted from where, from which activities they're gaining the majority of their income. They know how much time and effort they're spending. But by including cash and subsistence income, there were some really interesting results and discussions that emerged at the community level about those different income sources. So maybe that was the most interesting for them because it's something that they didn't, they weren't totally aware of in that way. What we've really seen is that red has moved slower, sort of, I guess, worldwide in comparison with our expectations. But what we we've seen a lot of other kinds of initiatives moving in such as national or state level policies that are either designed to promote sustainable use, sustainable agriculture without the use of fire in the Amazon or deforestation policies or higher enforcement. So these are road building or, you know, all kinds of different things that are happening at these dynamic sites that will actually affect how we interpret some of the results. We're going to have to separate the red intervention from a lot of these other related, yet different, either public policies or separate conservation and development initiatives. The benefit for us as researchers is not only this sort of feel good that we're cultivating these positive relationships. And so when we go back in a year or two to conduct this after stage of the research will be welcomed back. That's in our own self interest. We also are able to validate a lot of our findings. And in this stage, we were really able to see how many changes had already occurred at the project sites that weren't related to red. So we were able to actually identify some confounding factors that we that that were important to document so that we don't confuse them with a red intervention that that will come in the near future. So I think just simply in a researcher's self interest of creating high quality knowledge this this feedback from local stakeholders is extremely important. And it's extremely rewarding both personally and professionally to do this.