 And welcome to Food, Forest, and Landscapes, Solutions for Sustainable Development. Today, our panelists will talk about an integrated approach to managing land, water, and living resources in an equitable and sustainable manner to help achieve food and nutrition security. It's an approach that eliminates some of the silos between agriculture, forestry, fisheries, and conservation. So without further ado, I'll welcome our speakers. First up, Peter Holmgren, Director General of CIFOR, which is the Center for International Forestry Research, one of our sister centers within the CGIR system. OK, great. It's great to be here. Thank you very much for organizing this seminar. It's also, I think, a great opportunity to illustrate how much more closely we need to work between agriculture, forestry, and fisheries to make this whole thing work. This painting could have been in my home country in Sweden. It isn't. It's actually from Finland. It was painted in 1893. And it illustrates a landscape where you can see that people are struggling to eke out the living from the land. And now you've seen that the picture has changed. It's now somewhere else in the world. It's in South America, and it's still the same situation. Now the question is, what happened in my part of the world was a lot of things, including economic development, intensified agriculture, less dependency on the land. And we now have a forest in that place. What will happen to the same location in South America? This is one of the key questions of our time. And we're here to try and discuss how we can approach it. A few words on CIFOR for those of you who don't know it. As mentioned, it's a sister agency of IFPRI. We're located headquartered in Indonesia. We work across the tropics. And our main topic is, of course, forestry. But we're taking forestry into the landscape. And we think and know that the decisions related to forest and landscape is what's going to shape our future. We're part of the CDIR. You know what CDIR? 15 research organizations and some other entities. CIFOR leads the global program on forest, trees, and agroforestry. And I want to point to one specific item in this program. That's what we call Sentinel landscapes. We're making an effort to establish long-term research sites across the world and to use those sites to study multi-disciplinary, multi-sectoral issues. We think we need to be brave enough to make a long-term investment, to take a long-term perspective, even if we know that funding would never be more than three years ahead of us. CIFOR turns 20 this year. We were a product of the previous Rio meeting. And actually, it might be interesting to note that the US was one of the founding countries. Now, the title of this seminar, Food, Forests, and Landscape, Solutions for Sustainable Development, Raises a Number of Interesting Questions. I'm going to address four of them in this talk. What is the problem? What defines our priorities? Why is the landscape approach needed? And how will our landscape approach actually work? So to start with, what is the problem? Sometimes helps to zoom out and look not only to the last two weeks of media or the last five years of research, but look at the 50-year period and see what's been going on. Over this period, obviously, the GDP per capita has tripled. Over the same period, our food production has more than tripled. Over the same period, the number of not food insecure people has also tripled. And of course, over the same time, our emissions have also tripled. It's a pretty good correlation here. Further, over the same period, food has become cheaper in real terms. Yes, it's become a little bit of an issue over the past 10 years or so, but over the full period, it's cheaper. But then, the number of hungry people has stayed the same. So I think this is an interesting perspective to take. Obviously, increasing food production, increasing the economy has not led to a reduced number of hungry. We should perhaps take some lessons from this. And I think we are doing that, and it will be important for the future. Because the future, what can we expect? 9.6 billion people in 2050. And in 2050, the United States will not be the third most populous country in the world anymore. It will be Nigeria. Changing consumption patterns, continued economic growth, expectations of justice and equity, migrations, both to cities and between countries, increased climate variability that threatens our systems of production. So only 30, 40 years ahead, the world will not look like it does today. Why are forests important in all this? Livelihoods of poor and vulnerable? Forests provide an enormous amount of household earnings for those that need it most. We get food, nutrition, and safe drinking water from forests. Forests contain 80% of our biodiversity. And we might think that climate change is a problem here, but it's the opposite. Forests actually absorb a huge amount of carbon every year, despite deforestation. And following the re-emitting green economy, green growth, we have an enormous expectation on the bioeconomy in the future. And forests will be a big part of it. And finally, agriculture. Forests provide ecosystem services that sustain a lot of our agriculture systems. So that's the problem. Now what defines our priorities? I have started to refer to these as the big five of sustainable development. It's the post-2015 agenda. It's the food security processes. It's handling climate change. It's biodiversity. And it's the green economy. Big five was sustainable development. And when I talk about forestry and what we should aim for, I would like to see forestry contribute directly to each of these objectives instead of having its own goals inside the forestry box. And then we can hopefully achieve political relevance and a more positive perspective of forestry. Forestry is always a problem. Deforestation, illegal logging, forest degradation, loss of biodiversity, corruption, you name it. It's always a problem. I want to turn that around. So one way of, one example of this is to look at the water supply in Jakarta. Jakarta actually enjoys safe drinking water, which is hugely important for nutrition. Within this circle lives 15 million people. And you can see where the headquarters of Seaford is located just outside. Now why do these people have safe drinking water? It's because there is a volcano outside the city which has forest on it. And it rains about five meters per year in this region. So on the slopes of this volcano, drinking water, safe drinking water is harvested and through various enterprises brought to Jakarta. And interestingly, as the economy grows in a country like Indonesia, people now afford this water. And they even prefer it because, as I heard from somebody, it is actually, it actually costs a lot of money to boil water. So you might as well buy it. And then you think, okay, so they don't boil the water, which means that they don't produce some emissions instead they buy this water. There's some interesting things in this that we should look more into. Now, why is a landscape approach needed? Well, back to the big five. These big five are not only the big five, they're also five silos. Everybody knows how bad the communication is between these governance processes. Now, on the other dimension, we have the land-based sectors and everybody knows how little we talk to each other, except of course in this seminar when we're now approaching agriculture and we have a joint thing, this is very good. So what happens is that each of the five processes and each of the sectors have one solution in common and we get a patchwork of things that are supposed to help us towards sustainable development. You can see red in there is something we work a lot with. It's one of them. So this is not good, it's not very helpful. So instead, we have started to think about what would a landscape framework look like that could address these things more together, more in a combined way. And we're moving towards looking at four objectives, looking at livelihood provisions, looking at sustained ecosystem services, looking at the amount of food and non-food produced and looking at the resource efficiency. And there are not so many ways to cut this cake. We can call it climate smart agriculture. It comes pretty close to this. We can call it other things. But generally, we feel that we have a model here that can be applied and it can be applied so that it's easy to understand. I can explain this to my 12-year-old son and I can explain it to a politician. It helps. It can be applied to any scale. It can be applied to any location. It can be measured. And we also have an idea of how we would like to explain sustainability because we can say that sustainability may not be an absolute achievement. It may be something relative. If we move in the right direction on these four objectives, then we're doing something that we can call sustainable. So we want to flip this graph. We want to say that the landscape approach yields combined solutions. And that, starting from there, can actually support and reinforce those processes and sectors that we are serving. I think I've said everything that's coming up here. It's about multiple objectives. It's about both finding the synergies and dealing with the trade-offs. And very importantly, it's the local stakeholders that are in charge. Never forget that. This will be tested well in an upcoming event at the UNFCCC COP at what's called the Global Landscape Forum. This used to be the forest day on one hand and the agriculture day on the other. We put them together. It was a very interesting process. The forestry institution said, oh, don't do that. Forest reaches will drown in agriculture. An agriculture institution said, oh, don't do that. Our reaches will drown in the big forest reaches. So there you go. I think this is a very good reason to do exactly what we're doing. So how will it work? We don't know how it will work. There are many outstanding questions, but we're convinced we're on the right track, but we need to look into a number of different things. We need to look into how the planning and implementation of these multiple objective, diverse, complex situations look like in terms of governance, in terms of production system, sustainable intensification, for example, in terms of institutions. How does it actually work to work across scales, looking at this at a farm level and looking at it at a policy level? And what is the value proposition compared to business as usual, for the farmer or the political economy for the investors? And this last topic is what I'm going to talk about for my last one and a half minutes or so of this talk. Investing in sustainable landscapes for green returns. We think that this is an area we have started to work on. We think it's a considerable part of moving forward on the landscape approach. The perspectives here are that investors say that there is abundant capital out there and farmers say that we need access to long-term affordable and reliable capital. And the public sector is keen to use its limited resources to steer these investments in a sustainable direction. Very good. How do we make it work? This is how we make it work. This is excellent news for the investors. It shows that if you put the X in many enough baskets, you will have an uncorrelated risk. These are 19 production system from all continents in different currencies in different climate zones. We put it all together. You get something that you can manage. So scale is very important. Having that scale and having the diversity of the portfolio leads the investors to analyze the situation and figure out that, oh, this looks interesting. We might have something that can compete with the Italian government bonds, something that produces perhaps 14% of internal rate of return. Very good. Still some things to solve, though. We always struggled with the verification of sustainability outcomes. And this is one of the clues of this presentation. If we have a framework for the landscape, then we have a model for how to monitor and verify sustainability outcomes at an aggregated level. This is one of the points of establishing that simpler, more understandable, and more operational framework. So conclusions. We need a landscape approach to meet sustainable development challenges. We need support for this, not just within our usual sectors, but beyond that and above that. We may have critical mass at this point in time to look into new paradigms. This seminar is one step in that direction, small step, but important step. I think we have a lot of positive signals at the moment that may just be enough to move forward. But we also need more collaborative research across the landscape. And this is my final slide. Yesterday, President Obama made an announcement that tomorrow he will announce at Georgetown University, I think, what to do about climate change. And he may not know it, but he actually talks about landscapes. Because in that speech, it says, our forests and waterways, our croplands, and snow-capped peaks. That's the landscape to me. I think it will be very interesting to listen to that tomorrow. There's no single step that can reverse the effects of climate change. But when it comes to the world we leave our children, we owe it to them to do what we can. So I hope you'll share this message with your friends, because this is a challenge that affects everyone. And we all have a stake in solving it together. Great. So we all agree. Thank you very much.