 What are we doing? Fabio, do you want to put up my presentation? Yes. We might wait one or two minutes more to see if there's other people joining. You can see the number of participants on the lower bottom banner of Zoom. I think we can start. We're ready to go. Okay. My name is Michael Brady. I'm a principal scientist at the Center for International Forestry Research based in Bogor, Indonesia. I'll be moderating today's webinar. I'd like to welcome you all to the first webinar of the Forest Trees and Agroforestry Program. And this webinar is focused on innovations to overcome barriers to access to finance for small holders, SMEs, and women. Next slide. So the CGIAR has several research programs. This particular program focuses on forest trees and agroforestry. And it's the world's largest research for development program to enhance the role of forests, trees and agroforestry in sustainable development, food security, and to address climate change. C4 leads the FTA in partnership with a number of other centers, including Biodiversity International, CATEA, CIRAD, ICRAF, INBAR, and TBI, or Tropenbos International. As of the FTA held a science conference earlier this year in September where we had over 500 scientists from the partners at C4 and ICRAF. We had a two-week event. It was a series of open webinars, science sessions, extracting the highlights from the conference and bringing them to the public. This webinar is the first in a series building on the September Science Conference and bringing the results of that conference to the public. The aim is to inform and support concrete actions on the ground with a focus on transformative science derived from FTA's most innovative lines of research. Next slide. So the innovative finance for sustainable landscapes is one of FTA's 22 priorities. And it's led by Tropenbos International, one of the managing partners in FTA. This priority aims to enhance smallholder market access by reduced market barriers. And the intended outcome of this priority is that financial service providers adopt innovative financing schemes for sustainable land uses and smallholder involvement. Next slide. A little bit of background on the science conference I mentioned earlier. It had a, what the first stream in the conference focused on inclusive value chains, finance and investment. And it was broken up into two sessions on inclusive business models and value chains. And the second on reducing barriers to inclusive landscape finance. And we had a wide variety of C4 partner scientists presenting and a number of invited guests and speakers. And the conference session identified a number of promising areas of new research on innovative finance. For example, locally appropriate financial instruments and inclusive business models that enable scaling up of inclusive finance for sustainable landscapes. And other strategies to foster the inclusion of women in value chains and enterprise. And these research areas are now being pursued by C4, ICRAF and the other partners. And today we'd like to present some of these results to you and get some of your feedback. Next slide. So one of the results of the innovative finance priority and FTA is a report on innovative finance for sustainable landscapes. This report was led by Tropenbos and you'll hear a presentation from Bass Lowman to explain the report just after I speak. The publication explores the complex barriers that hinder the potential of external finance to increase sustainability of tropical landscapes and achieve positive impact at scale. It identifies some promising financial innovations schemes that discusses pathways to alleviate barriers and these will be discussed in this webinar. The findings result from a quite a lengthy participatory process with strong engagement from civil society and the private sector. This webinar aims to illustrate the key findings of the report and open questions that the study reveals in future areas of collaboration for implementing innovative finance. Next slide. I mentioned a quite an extensive engagement process that started back in mid 2018, where the draft report was presented at a global landscapes forum finance event. And that proceeded through quite a large number of engagement events and opportunities through to a final peer review mid this year. And the report has just been released and you can find the report on the FTA website. Next slide. So in today's webinar we have a wide number of panelists. We've got three partners that we'll be presenting during the webinar. Evil Mulder from UNEP Finance Initiative. Jennifer Chen from Impact Investment Exchange. And Elko Bronkhorst of Financial Access. We also have a number of panelists participating to provide commentary. We have Felix Huigveld from Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the Netherlands. Rob Busenk from Ministry of Agriculture in the Netherlands. And we have with us the director of FTA, Vincent Getz. And of course I mentioned Baz Lalman who has led the finance initiative priority in FTA and process with Tropenbosch International. Next slide. So the program for today's webinar. A number of different activities. Following these remarks, Baz will present the innovative finance report. We'll then get some reactions and recommendations on the report by the three panelists that I mentioned. We'll go through a polling, an opportunity for all of you to engage. And then we'll ask for comments from some of the other panel members. We'll then have a question and answer session with the audience and a panel discussion. We'll then move into the second part of the webinar where we'll have presentations from the three panelists on their work. And then we'll get related to future collaborations with FTA to address the identified barriers. We'll then have another session of polling and comments. And then a question and answer period on the presentations from the panelists. And Vincent will provide some closing remarks from FTA. I finished just a few rules on the event. Please put your questions in the Q&A box. Not in the chat box. You're happy to use the chat box, but we'll be looking at the Q&A box to bring up questions for the panelists. I think other rules are pretty standard that we're all familiar with using Zoom over the last year. We've got presentations are going to be managed centrally. So all of the presenters, please mention when you'd like your slides changed. I'll also ask all of the panelists to open your cameras. With that, I will be keeping time. But I wish all of us a very good webinar. Thank you and over to Bas. Thank you, Michael. Antop, could you please show me? Yes, okay. So good day to everybody, some in the morning, some in the afternoon, some already quite late at night. I'm pleased that in spite of the short notice, so many people could actually join today. And I'm even more pleased that after two years of reading discussions and consultations, we have a tangible product that helps us. And hopefully also many of you towards a way forward in increasing access to finance for locally controlled farm and forest producer organizations. As we went through an extensive consultation process in preparing this document, you can imagine that many people contributed in some way or other to its content. You can see here the co-authors that contributed. But besides that, there were still many people and really too many to name and also from different organizations. I want to express my gratitude to all of them. And I hope that some of them are also attending today's seminar. This document started in an effort to understand why relatively little of the international public finance flows reach sustainable landscapes and to identify whether FDA might have a role in solving that problem. Since at that time, very few documented cases had been published describing financial mechanisms that successfully had provided finance for integrated landscape management. We had to expand the work towards understanding better our finance flows to and within landscapes. And we did that with the help of eco-agriculture partners and also the Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food by designing a landscape analysis methodology for financial flows. The results of that are also partially incorporated into this document, but they are available separate as well. This brought us to focus on locally controlled farm and forest producer organizations with the potential to contribute to an array of locally relevant development and conservation goals. Next slide, please. The slide for the introduction. Thank you. Large amounts of finance already flow into landscapes. FEO in a 2018 study mentioned that more than 380 billion US dollars already go to landscapes. But most of that is used within the international value chains to achieve value chain objectives. Well, of public funds, which also flow into those landscapes. Yeah, in reality, are destined for such landscapes in reality, only a small proportion reaches the field and even less of that reaches communities and local farmers on small and medium sized farms. Yeah, that want to use finance or need to use the finance to transform and upscale their practices to become more sustainable. These are the missing middle in this particular slide. The publication be presenting here explore explore some of the barriers to finance for this so important missing middle, and that therefore hinders external finance from making greater contributions to the sustainability of topical landscapes. It also discusses the way in which some forms of innovative finance will be able to overcome those barriers. Next slide please. In this table. We can see two types of difficulties that hinder the large scale implementation of finance initiatives for sustainable and inclusive landscapes. There is the already mentioned gap between supply and demand of finance for local farm and forest produce organizations that need to be bridged. But there's also factors that hinder the sustainability of the practice one of practices once are being funded. This table summarizes the barriers that were mentioned most often in both the literature and during our interviews, the dialogue and the panel discussions. In this document, you can read more about each one of these barriers and how these are being perceived by different stakeholders. Today, we will focus in particular on the barriers mentioned in the left column of the table. And out of these three stand out scale risk and rate of return. These are considered by all stakeholders as essential barriers to be overcome independent of where stakeholders were involved in conventional private financial mechanisms or innovative mechanisms which intend to draw private capital to investments in sustainable and use practices. We will see later that current initiatives intend to address above all these three barriers, but that achieving them also depends on reducing the other barriers mentioned in this list. Particularly interesting to see was for example, that during one of the panel discussions, both the representative of a major bank investing extensively in agriculture and that of a community business organization agreed that risk of the investment needs to be reduced. But that perceived best strategies to do so may differ quite substantially. Diversity, however, was in both cases important. In the case of the bank diversity of finance resources, each with their own risk profiles. So blending, for example, public finance with the bank's finance or with guarantees. And diversity of activities invested in and financial insip invested in and financial instruments applied to better adapt to local conditions of vulnerabilities where was the type of diversity more relevant at the local level. Next slide please. Following the GLF finance of New York in 2018 and supported by our revision of existing documentation. We focused in this study on three relatively new financial structures blended finance, where public finance is used to leverage private finance to achieve specific usually development or conservation objectives. Green bonds where money is land on the particular conditions usually at softer rates and longer terms than conventional loans. And crowdfunding where private individuals organizations provide finance for particular objectives to which they usually feel personally attached and for which, again, usually they expect lower financial returns or other types of benefits. As you can see in this table, we looked at documented examples and try to rate their potential to address the different barriers earlier defined. While innovative finance structures have potential to address most barriers to access to finance sustainable implementation, you can see the yes and sometimes the yes no answers in the different columns. Yeah, in practice, we have found few documented examples of how this is really done. Yeah, and a selection of those documented examples confirms that here too. Yeah, for this innovative financial structures, the barrier of scale remains. Yeah, they did not really were not really able to solve them, at least not to link the large scale available finance to the relatively small scale for on the demand side. There's also a minimum interest in reducing rate of return requirements. Yeah, and risk management strategies that do exist have basically been designed to support the investors with few examples recognized that also the investors or the beneficiaries have or need their own strategies to do reduce risk. For example, by being able to invest in acroforestry practices, spreading climate risks over different crops within the same farm plots. Next slide please. Next slide please. Sorry, could you move to the next slide. Yes, thank you. We found that digital financial services have an enormous potential also to contribute to increasing access to finance by addressing one physical distance or two, like transparency of transactions of the barriers, but others need to be reduced as well through adapting financial instruments in combination with one of the mentioned innovative structures. Finance that takes a landscape approach is rare. Several cases have been documented where the local expert is a company dealing with international value change of acro commodities seeking to achieve a sustainable resource area. While such examples are steps towards the sustainability of acro commodity investments. They seem too focused on single commodities and may increase the dependency of local farmers heightening their vulnerability to external shocks. In one of our landscape analysis of financial flows, for example, in Indonesia, we found that much of the private finance does address the income issue for local farmers, but does not address issues of fire food security and availability of clean water. And in some cases may contribute to social conflicts. Other cases have been documented of private money flowing into conservation areas in order to safeguard locally relevant ecosystem services mainly related to capture and storage of CO2 by trees. These efforts, however, may also have secondary effects on land uses in and around conservation areas and also contribute to some of the social conflicts. Integrated landscape approaches need to start really from the landscape and not from the outside. So making sure to identify local needs and aspirations before seeking to balance these with your objectives of national or international investors. Next slide, please. Some of our recommendations are that locally constructed and locally controlled financial infrastructure can adapt financial instruments and the requirements to the local needs and conditions. In our document we describe an example from a community forest association in Guatemala, which also has a business arm. Yeah, which show how they adjusted collateral requirements adjusted interest rates and adjusted payback periods, but creating such local financial infrastructure requires time and a combination of financial structure over time. And there we describe an example of a company in Kenya. Yeah, which has been using development funds to start up towards blended fun then went to blended finance. Concessional loans and then fully commercial loans. Next slide please. And this is the last one. Other recommendations that we make are that on the one hand financial institution need to become more aware of the local conditions and needs and adjust need and adjust our instruments to meet those. But also at the same time local farmers and SMEs need to strengthen their financial literacy in order to improve their presentation of business cases to the financial institutions. Together they should help to increase mutual understanding of each other's business. It's also important to identify within individual landscapes, which organization would be prepared to take the risk of translating internationally accepted financial strictures into locally appropriate financial instruments in Guatemala this was done by the local community association with the help of donor funds and NGOs. Another example on a larger scale we will later today from Indonesia presented by by Jennifer Chen. Finally, it's important to better understand how risks are perceived by both investors and investors, and we're working on a number of case studies at the moment of innovative risk strategies that are being piloted. And we're working at the moment for Ghana in Uganda and Indonesia. Next slide please. Thank you for your attention. Thank you best. Very interesting presentation on on the report. We have about 10 minutes to get some reactions on on your presentation on the report. Any recommendations. I'd like to ask the panelists to to provide comments. We as I mentioned we've got our three partner panelists who were perhaps more familiar with the report. We have we have the other panelists as well so please, if you've got a question or reaction. Please speak up. Maybe while you're while you're thinking. There is a question. I want to ask the question is. Can you explain how standards and certification are constraining factors to sustainable practices. Yeah, there's actually it's a good question because they were designed of course to improve the sustainability of practices, but in our institutions, very often. Where they were applied. Yeah, the comment from the, you know what we call in the beneficiaries, which would be the, the farm enforced organizations, they perceive standards and certifications as an as a barrier in the sense that for many of them it was very difficult to actually be able to meet the standards of certification. Yeah, so in that sense we see them as a constraining factor. Yeah, and it probably and you can see that for example in forestry within FSC. Yeah, they have been working for a long time in trying to involve more community forestry operations or small holder groups. In there, and they even were trying to design specific standards and specific ways of evaluating the small holders when they apply the standards. Yeah, so for them it's much harder to actually invest in the improvements that they need to make to meet those standards. So that's why we actually talk about the most as constraining factors. Okay, well thanks. Now, I'll go back to any of the panelists like to react to the report. Please. Yeah, I don't mind to react but I don't know do I have to raise my hand or. No, no, just go ahead. Okay, thank you. Thank you so much also bus for the presentation. If I recall value, you mentioned three aspects scale risk and rate of return. And on the oldest three aspects I wanted to give a kind of a policy. Command on scale. The question for me is, do we do you have enough inside knowledge now to bring actions to scale, even it could be different approaches different strategies and different parts of the world for example. On the risk. The obvious question for us coming from from the ministry is always if you blend public and finance, public finance and private finance. How do you share the risk or how do you come to a reasonable affair. Let's say balance in what do you finance and what's risk are you taking or is the other party taking. And certainly on the rate of return. It is maybe a bit bit too big of a question but rates of return are, of course, important for specifically for for private lenders, but does this mechanism this let's say this paradigm the current paradigm does it leave enough space for other kinds of looking at rate of return. Thank you. I feel it's thank you for the questions. Well, actually, these are quite difficult to answer, of course, these questions. First of all, because the conditions may differ quite a lot between different countries. Yeah, but also in what you consider to be scale later today in the seminar. I hope that's evil will be giving an example of how we could get to scale. But in our case, we've been looking at a little bit from a different point of view not so much to do for the from the investor point of view how can I invest a lot, but rather how can we get local people together so aggregation is one way to get to scale. Even though then, we may find it difficult to come to the large scales where for both all northern investors are looking for if we talk about some funds in the Netherlands, for example, that are that want to invest climate finance, they look at one million minimum or five million minimum. Yeah, depending on the funds. Yeah, and that is is for local companies is quite a lot of local local farmers and companies quite a lot of money. So, and we actually look at trying at creating, first of all, local financial infrastructure, you need to first bring people together at the local scale, before you can start investing in there. So we think that that's where you have to start. Yeah, otherwise, and you can see that in some of the new financial structures at the moment, a lot of blended find in the end is going still towards the companies and not to to small holders or forced and farm corporations. Yeah, in terms of blending. Yeah, that I think is a question of negotiation what is a fair share of risk you want to take. Yeah, but I think also here, part of the problem is not just trying to take the financial risk, but also look at how we can reduce the risk, or how, how much risk is there really in the investments. Yeah, and part of the problem we feel with the investments is that they very often look at one crop. Yeah, you can see that in oil palm in rubber, many of the investments are being made. Yeah, rather than investing in a series of crops crops in the same area. Yeah, so that would also spread the risk of investment. Yeah. And we actually working at the moment with with with what boosting on that in in Africa looking at how we you can spread the investments over different assets forms and we also are looking at agroforestry schemes. Yeah, and see if we can show that agroforestry really is a business case, agroforestry or mixed cropping with oil palm, agroforestry with cocoa. Yeah, and then not just invest in one particular crop. In the rate of return. Yeah, we have in the documents some examples. Yeah, where rate of return are adjusted to that lower rates of return are requested. Yeah, but that also depends really on this on the on the risk being perceived. Okay, but thanks for some. We've got lots of questions, but we'd like to just do a quick poll, and then we'll return back to more, more Q&A, but Fabio if you got a polling question for us. Yes, here it is. Okay, so this question maybe Fabio you can provide some instructions after I read it, but the question is, to what extent do you think that the discussed innovative finance structures, green bonds blended finance crowdfunding address the barriers for local farm and forest producer organizations to access finance, a number of responses, partially completely only blended finance solves all only green bonds solve all crowdfunding solves all and none at all. And please provide suggestions in the chat box if you select this last one. Fabio. So, all the participants can vote. So, please go ahead and vote will give you a minute to think about it. And as Michael said, if you think that none of these mechanisms work, then we are very eager to hear from you what, what would work or what are your ideas. So we're going to give it another 20 seconds, I think 20, 30 seconds. And thanks for sharing your, your insights. Okay, so I'm going to count from five down. So make your choice, because we're closing it five, four, three, two, one, and it's closed. We're going to show the results in a minute. Okay, here we go. That's very clear. It looks like the majority view these structures as partially addressing barriers to local farm and forest producer organizations. So thank you very much. I'd be interested in any reactions to the poll from the panelists. Any, was that surprising or to be expected. Maybe I can give some comments. Sure. Jennifer. Yeah, so, firstly, I'm, I'm very happy to be here. So representing impact investment exchange, which is a woman owned woman led organization and our own CEO professor, she knows was the keynote speaker at the FTA conference for for two years now so very much. She's been a champion of making finance work for underserved communities, women and the environment so very happy to be representing IX here today and and this paper is it's a wonderful way to to set the stage for future collaborations. And I think where I can really add value is, again, from as a practitioner who, I guess is tasked with how to move beyond risks and barriers to really design solutions that unlock capital for women and the environment. You know, the poll I thought was that it was the exact answer I gave so I'm glad to see it was along with the with the general response. But I would also like to add that, you know, what what I how I X, you know, we look at the paper, I think, if you look at the risk return scale lens. We can sort of modify that a bit or sort of ask about how we can look at risks and barriers in terms of sort of risk return and impact and I think this is this is that other other return that that that we were talking about earlier. I had one comment on on the paper that I wanted to ask about about risk. So one of the, the paper explores three different kinds of financial instruments. And they're sort of through the examples that were given there was, you know, yet again a very quite an absence of instruments that have an explicit mandate for gender lens and I think that's that's just reflective of the market. That ongoing scarcity of climate finance instruments with a gender lens really points towards a greater need for for donors to play a role in a cat in a catalytic way and so so really for us. There are absolutely roles that that the risking layers where partners can come in. And the trick here is really to look at designing blended finance in a way where you're incentivizing behavior change. So I think that's, that's a big difference difference for ix is that how do we look at moving forward. Actionable research where we're trying to look at how to design innovative finance in a way that's moving investors to act in a different way where it's moving companies who are involved in harmful force management practices to move and behave in a different way. So this is, this is exactly the case of the, the haze and the clean air bond that that you brought up in the report which is actually what what ix had had developed for C4 so. So this is that for based on the survey of the instruments and the landscape, the dearth of instruments for gender lens. I, we, from our perspective we really do think there's a there's a big role to play in terms of de risking. Oh, thank you Jennifer. Would you want to respond or should we collect comments from other panelists. Yeah, well, I completely agree with Jennifer. I think that that's also what we saw that that the existing examples of blended finds in particular. Yeah, we looked in particular at it's a tropical. landscape finance facility. Yeah, they're really all the intentions are very good to practice is that it's not so different from more conventional finance so it doesn't really change behavior of the of the events investors. Of course there are impact investors but we know they'll need to change their behavior you need to change also the other the behavior of the other investors. Okay, let me comment. Yes, please. Yeah, so I think, I mean, I think there's, I mean I was one of the 83% who filled out partially. Even more than from from from UNEP. Introduce yourself. Yes, sorry. Even though I lead the climate finance unit in in UNEP. One challenge is for a lot of investors and banks to to finance a farm of producer groups who do not have a credit history or who are considered to be too risky from say a traditional credit perspective. At the same time, I think, especially if governments would come in with with blended finance models and I think the comments from from Felix Hochfeld were quite interesting in that respect. One thing that governments could think of is to basically ask for a percentage of capital to be directed to farmer producer groups, or a percentage of capital that will ultimately benefit directly or indirectly as small producers. So that's good. How do you say, move away from from financing larger clients who would otherwise probably be the main beneficiaries. The other thing that is necessary, you basically need a whole infrastructure. I'm sure that that Ilko will talk about some of the products that financial access will do but you need you need models then that traditional banks are not using that are able to quantify the credit risk for for individual small holders or clusters of small holders basically and without that, even for impact investors it will be difficult to to come up. And then the third element is if you work through say a company say a palm oil company or a rubber company or otherwise. You will have to absorb and be willing to take some of the risk, if they own land to to others, which means that the company needs to be fairly certain that those who they lend to are able to to meet those commitments basically, and that there are clear rules and steps and sticks for for failing to do that. But the infrastructure for most traditional financial players I think isn't there to to reach directly to small holder so it will have to go through microfinance institutions or for a lot larger companies. But again, I think governments can play a role to to basically mandate that when they put contracts in place. And boss, if you allow me I'm not fully agreeing with you I mean UNEP is involved in the Tropical Landscape Finance facility it's, it is a in a way a traditional bond. At the same time, I do believe it is a market maker as well. It's been very difficult to get investors to buy into it as a matter of fact being P pariba had it on his books for much longer than they wanted it. I've seen a lot of senior people in the bank that were very uncomfortable with underwriting this bond. And it took it took a lot of effort to get a few impact investors to ultimately buy it. And I think failing to do that would probably have nullified any additional appetite for them to do something like this again. You're right in that we need to strive to ultimately make sure that the end beneficiaries say the small holders who live on the or who work for say are you or are part of some kind of plasma scheme would ultimately benefit as well as the environment and I think there's a lot to win there. Yeah, I agree with that at all. And of course I don't know all the details behind the setup of the bond. We've been looking at what publicly is available. Yeah, and we also see that actually intentions are very good but we haven't been able to look at how for example the small holders have been reached which was also an intention I think so. And they're probably still working on that. That's another thing that I didn't mention but which is part of the reason that so little is available at the moment that though most of those schemes are relatively young. So it might be very early already to actually get to see and to get the impact also documented in the fields. I was going to make a comment. Hi, it's Elko Bronkhorst, everyone. Yeah, I think the involvement of government obviously is really critical and I think most of the research and attention is going towards incentive schemes for banks or other financial providers. But there's also a very, very strong hurdle that we're seeing in financial regulations and capital requirements which are sometimes not highlighted in the research and reports. And especially when it comes to small to finance and in particular the longer term investment loans which which all tie, you know, to, you know, to to to sustainable landscapes you know replanting rejuvenation those types of loans are extremely unattractive for for financial institutions to look at simply because they're multi year and therefore the capital allocation, you know, on top of the risks that the banks are running the credit risks are running, you know, makes this, you know, an aggregate very often unattractive and impossible for financial institutions to go there. So I think that's an opportunity that that could be looked at and some of these rules are dominated, you know by international organizations like the Basel rules. There's also a lot that these local financial regulators can do. And, and COVID-19 is a very good example of how some of these, these regulations can be relatively easily changed. We've seen in a number of countries in Africa, financial regulators becoming extremely flexible simply because they wanted to make sure that especially for for food crops that was sufficient capital available to, of course, to to make sure that that that that the planting reasons were, were, you know, were met and that that farmers could plant especially making sure that food security wasn't threatened, you know, with the supply chains that that all got got disturbed. So, you know, when push comes to shove and when there's really an urgency there is, there are ways to do that so it would be interesting bus to, to know whether you've looked at at financial regulations and some of the sometimes very complex underlying rules that that that might actually be an opportunity to actually to look at. I'll go for this particular document actually we did not, but we're now wanting to set up. We want to actually implement some of the recommendations of the report in Indonesia about you'll be involved in that yourself as well but there we already notice for example that you cannot work just with any financial organization because of regulations to actually work with local bank in Indonesia. Yeah, then it's a state bank so that might be difficult to do so we foreign money so that needs to apply. Yeah, you need to follow certain rules. There's a local accredited union but that is even more difficult to have because of the regulations to come in with project money. So, so we are getting there we do for we do notice it now, but we haven't really done that and analysis in this particular documents. If I had a interesting comment in the chat box on the, I guess the role of basal three and four on on influence on banks to focus on short term lending as a capital adequacy requirements, complementing what what Elko has just mentioned. Rob, did you want to say. Yes, but I can only echo what Evo and Elko said our experiences well we to introduce myself we're working with three countries on and force farms producing organizations in Kenya, Zambia and Ghana. And actually we try to combine agriculture better agriculture practices and planting forest or maintaining forest. And we have developed the business cases and we presented them to financial impact investors. There was hardly any question I think I filled in in the poll that those instruments didn't work at all also to be get some discussion I was doubting we've been partly and working on at all. But I think the problem is what bus already said in his presentation that the missing middle is a real challenge. And the country we're working with, they are the missing middle they are far more force and farm producer organizations. And while they don't have the credibility that the bank will lend them money probably because of all kind of rules, but also there is a problem of financial literacy I think the governance is there the lens their property what is the long term. Prospect for them to make investments, and you are not sure whether the country the land is still your own after five years. So I think on the governance level so as please, especially the, the forest and farm producer organization need to professionalize. And also it's dependent on the mix of crops when you produce crops for the international market so I think you should make a difference between commercial agriculture and subsistence agriculture, and especially the letter that's even more hard to get a business case. And finally, I think when you combine agriculture with planting trees then actually those farmers also produce so called public goods. And when there is no say equal payment for ecosystem services, then it will be even harder to achieve kind of rate of return so there are several elements I think that hinder that those financial innovative financial instrument doesn't work. Thank you. Thanks Rob. That's any response comment. Actually, but what can I say I mean we're trying to address most of these issues also together with Rob so yeah we really fully agree with that. And that's some of the big challenges we have in there. We've just got another two minutes, but I think we've heard from all of the panelists. I like to go back to the Q amp a box and we were speaking somewhat about role of government public sector. There's an interesting question. A different angle related to government. The question is some governments with India in brackets, do not make public forest extent data, I guess available, and they lead their management. While plantations are private and privacy is a barrier to aggregated data. So the question is how can private climate finance address these two situations. So I guess it's it's lack of publicly available data. I guess I don't know if you address that in in the report. No, I would think maybe evil will be able to to answer that question since he's more in climate fine we did not particularly look at climate finance nor at that type of restrictions. Can you please repeat the question that Michael, I'll try to invest. The question is some governments do not make public forest data available. And yet they lead their management so I'm assuming the government would manage concessions and licenses. Plantations are private and privacy is a barrier to aggregated data. How can private climate finance address these two situations so I guess it's, I guess it's the lack of access to data on, in this case, forest concession areas. That's a tricky question. I mean, I think it's, I mean, I think the part of the webinar I think is around various I mean I see the lack of data as a, as a barrier for private finance to actually come on board. This is I think the reason why, why both from governments as well as from from businesses and finance see as most most climate finance is directed to renewable energy investments and energy efficiency and sustainable transport. The reason being is that there are simply more comparable data there is more transparency and land use that is is is just much more tricky I think there's a lot of different initiatives that are trying to address it but I think it is important for government representatives who are who've dialed in that I think part of creating an enabling environment is to ensure there is good comparable data both for public lands as well as for private lands. Maybe I could add to maybe I could add to that that that really that's one of the issues also we trying to deal with at the landscape scale to get a data on forest forest and both quality and quantity of forest at the landscape scale available. Yeah, so in that sense we, you could deal with that, but you need to local, while in our case we're working through multi stakeholder platforms supported by an NGO. Thanks. We've got lots of questions in the Q&A box. I don't think we've got time to address them all but I can see that a number of questions bas relate to micro lending, small informal enterprise and I'm wondering, I think the gist of the questions are how, how can financing address those needs at the smaller scale. Yeah, well actually, we specifically did not look at that and in our document because we had to limit the scope a little bit and we couldn't look at everything and really the addressing micro enterprises. Yeah, depends also where you put the border and where do you put the line, but we were not looking at families, for example, a specific family, individual families because there's a lot of micro finance institutions already working on that. Yeah, and we did not think that, yeah, and there have been really enormous, has been enormous progress in that also mobile payments, for example, address a lot of the problems that they have. Yeah, where we saw the problem is exactly trying to start a business or to expand a business that's already existing and to transform it into a business with sustainable practices. So we're going a little bit, yeah, a bit higher scale. Yeah, that's why we have not really addressed that in here. There's still a lot of questions also in the chat. Yeah, we will try and answer them also written, yeah, as far as possible and maybe I can invite also the other panelists to do so to look at them. But also there's another question and answer session I think after the next presentation. Okay, well thanks, Bass. We'll move on now to the second half of the webinar program. And this first activity is a series of presentations from our three panelists. And the first presentation is by evil Mulder. Can we have evils slides up. That's yours. Thanks, Michael. Yeah, so what I'll do in a nutshell is basically explain what what the climate finance unit in unit does and how it is related to today's topic and towards the end also make basically a pre announcement for for a new Jeff funded project that we will be executing together with C for the focus of the presentation is around creating a leaders group of ambitious time bound commitments from investors banks and businesses to move to finance sustainable landscapes. Next slide please. This is very briefly I think the case for sustainable land use is something I don't have to repeat for this group. But at the moment, the finance case is weak for for for many reasons outlined be it risk be it the cost of capital and so forth so so a lot of the focus that my team has has put on is is to create a number of blended solutions to try and and and deal with this next slide. So this just a snapshot of of how this runs, say, along the, the financial value chain. At the moment, we can say that green bonds are a good and interesting solution but tiny percentage of outstanding bonds are so called green bonds and the tiny percentage of those very few green bonds are directed to sustainable land use so I think there is a lot of opportunity but at the moment the actual capital that institutional investors have put in that is ultimately reaching communities that is ultimately having a positive environmental social impact is very, very little most commercial banks still focus on trying to avoid negative impact, let alone trying to to see how to work with clients to achieve positive impact be it from a gender perspective, be it from a climate or biodiversity perspective. We have a few examples with with Rabobank, Pente Pariba and others but I think that the challenge will be to try and scale up and even impact investors, I mean the name says it are trying to focus on creating impact but the tiny percentage of the amount of money that is sort of documented by the GIN, the Global International Western Network, is directed to forestry and agriculture so I think it just shows the challenges of this of the and for government agencies especially donor governments, most so called climate finance or climate funding to date is focused on providing feed-in tariffs or subsidized loans to renewable energy investments and a tiny percentage again is going to forestry or land use in general. So it's not to say that that climate funding for the energy transition needs to be scaled down, I think it needs to be scaled up but the relative percentage of land use needs to be moved in line with with the climate solution potential in my view. So I'll basically focus briefly on two parts. The climate finance unit in UNEP is trying to actively redirect public and private capital towards basically positive impact on land use in terms of deforestation free agricultural commodity production and other forms of sustainable land use. And I think the reason why proof of concept is needed is because there are a lot of naysayers in the world, a lot of people say this is not doable, this isn't possible. So you basically have to prove the contrary. So I believe that we can only move to scale if we first can create some proof of concept. Can we move to the next slide? So these are like three or four initiatives that we have helped set up or found. The left one is the restoration seed capital facility that works specifically with impact investors to try and basically get more fund managers into the space and make sure that they are successful in closing more deals. Then the Agri-free fund, which we've set up with Rabobank, FMO, Merova, IDH, the Tropical Landscape Finance Facility and we've helped to capitalise in green funds. In each of these cases, at the bottom you see the reason why we believe it was necessary for UNEP and my team to step in. We believe there is a need to basically be active in creating the market for this, increase the number of investors that are active in this space, increase the amount of capital raised, increase the number of bankable projects, etc. In all of these cases, what I want to outline is that it's not for UNEP to say which projects to invest in. My team chiefly focuses on setting the environmental, social, criteria and boundaries, helping to open doors to sources of concession of finance and basically trying to get commitments from institutional investors, commercial banks, DFI's and governments. We, as UNEP, we just don't have, say, the boots on the ground. So that is really up to the banks to work with their clients or NGO partners that we work with. Next slide. Two minutes, Evo. Okay, I'll just do this in one minute. So the objective of the AgriFree Fund is to unlock a billion dollars and mostly private capital. The target for the AgriFree Fund itself is 145 million. Most of that money will be issued in form of partial credit guarantees with a total estimate exposure of 300 million, and the private capital will then come from, say, Rabobank or other commercial banks. So that's sort of the model to basically create a double leverage. And we're already at 19 million, which means to basically two thirds of the capital that we're aiming for. Next slide. I won't go into detail. This was an initiative we launched last month, the Restoration Seed Capital Facility. It basically provides co-funding to fund managers who will try to set up investment funds or close deals that have a positive impact on forced and landscape restoration. So it is one of the several financial solutions that I believe are needed to catalyze more private investments in this space. The key barrier is that the challenge that fund managers are having in raising capital, first of all, and the second challenge is the fact that there's very few sort of ready-made projects that they can invest in. It takes a lot of time. It takes a lot of money, and it's preventing them to ultimately close a lot of deals. So the facility basically provides 50% of the cost that they need to cover. If they're successful, they'll have to pay it back. If they're not successful, it's a sum can cost, basically. And then last but not least, so these are all basically proof concept initiatives. If we can move to the next slide. The ultimate objective for UNEP, of course, is to move to scale and normative changes. So if we move to the last slide, which I will then highlight. So the Jeff is in the final stages of agreeing on a new project that will be jointly executed by UNEP and C4 called Green Finance for Sustainable Landscapes, GF4SL. And it basically has three components. One is to increase the number of commitments from financial institutions and possibly also agree businesses. So we have a number of individual commitments, but I think we need to scale that up and basically grow that tenfold. And in a time-bound and in terms of really ambitious commitments, because many of the initiatives out there at the moment, in my view, are still too vague and too voluntary. Second focus will be on standardizing and framing, measuring, reporting, deforestation-free commodity production. I think there's a need to harmonize how impact, positive and negative impact needs to be framed and measured. Ultimately, with the idea to create market transparency and interest from, say, institutional investors. And then the third component will be led by C4, which is focusing on community-based, forced agribusiness producer groups to have access to knowledge, private investment and environmentally sustainable projects through learning hub through knowledge exchange products and lessons learned. So this is something that I'm sure Michael can also further speak to, but this is an initiative that will most likely kick off in January. Thanks for that, Michael. Well, thank you, Eva. I'll have lots of questions in the Q&A box. It would be great if you could maybe address some of those questions in writing, and then we'll have time for some of them to discuss orally later. Okay, well, let's move on to the second presentation. This is Jennifer who will talk to us about her company's programs. Thank you, Jennifer. Great. All right. Thank you, Michael. Great. So let me, if you can move on to the next slide, let me spend a minute to explain what IX does. And that will also help explain the kinds of opportunities that we see for collaboration. As I mentioned before, IX is a woman-led, woman-owned organization. For 10 years, we've been focused on transforming financial markets so that women, the environment and underserved communities have a voice and a value in capital markets. We're established in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, so the last time the markets crashed, and this is where our CEO and founder, Professor Shenaz, really began to innovate a new approach to development and finance. So we continue to really push the boundaries of the financial system because of our three key commitments, and that's first to really be committed to giving women a value and a voice, to be able to really connect the back streets to the wall streets. And again, this is sort of something that we often say at IEX because it really is about going the last mile for underserved communities. And then three, really bringing all of that together. So really a lot of our work is looking at the intersection of women and climate action. So to date, we've unlocked 200 million in capital, empowered 80 million minds across 46 countries, and we're moving forward in the new COVID era with very much a new lens to sustainability. So if you go on to the next slide, this is what I mentioned very briefly. What's key for IEX in moving from research to action is really this lens that we bring to inclusive finance, and that's really the lens of risk return and impact. So this is where we really look at collaboration opportunities where we can really bring in different stakeholders to address issues of risk return impact so that we can unlock more capital. And so this is built off of a decade of our founders proprietary impact assessment methodology. And it really is a data driven way to be able to change the way that investors look at and assess an opportunity. For example, instead of seeing a woman as a risky investment, we're actually able to show investors with data how investing in women focused as these actually mitigates risk of the investment. So, so these are the kinds of collaborations that we're looking for where we're able to continue to innovate and sort of bring a new approach to changing behavior in the market. If you go to the next slide. So one area of collaboration that that we are interested in is looking at how we are using data and information in a new way to unlock more capital for women. So, women's lack of a voice and financial markets very much presents a barrier to progress in climate change mitigation and adaptation. And we believe very strongly that without beneficiaries voices. So a lot of what you see in the market impact focus focused investments actually do lack a lot of transparency and there's actually a very high risk of impact washing. So to give women a voice in the market. We really need greater efforts around being able to address the lack of technology enabled gender lens data collection methods and so this is where it becomes critical to be able to help donors understand where the needs are from the beneficiary perspective. At IX we're trying to address this through again our impact measurement approach and really bringing that on to a technology platform, so that this is something that can help to verify impact on the ground of financial instruments whether it's a it's a climate bond or gender bond. So we are looking for collaboration around research where we can use more innovative tools for data collection and really use that data to accelerate more gender lens financial instruments. If you go to the next slide. The second main area of collaboration that's of interest to us is around innovative finance so really in order to push, you know, women's empowerment in, you know, in themes where it is it is really still absent, such as climate finance donor countries really have the responsibility to move beyond traditional risk averse development tools and really to play a more cataclytic role so here again we we we do believe there's a role that donors can play on in taking on the risk of innovation so that new solutions can be designed at the intersection of gender and climate. So here, you know this is where what IX has done around our women's livelihood bond is essentially a way in which we brought together over 20 partners from the public and private sector to launch 150 million debt security, which is now which was the winner of the climate action board. And what was critical there again was blended finance where you can enable donors to come in, in this case, the Rockefeller Foundation and USC ID to take a role of de risking the innovative financial instrument, especially in themes and markets where there is very high risk perception associated with certain impact themes such as women or sustainable agriculture or fisheries. And to date you know so we've been able to continue to expand the bond so that it includes more sectors and themes and markets and most recently, the one closed in in early 2020 expanded from three countries in Southeast Asia to include more countries like Indonesia, and also Sri Lanka and India as well. And, you know when we talk about the challenges of overcoming all these gaps this is this is exactly why the women's livelihood bond was designed to address the, the missing really is what how we sort of innovated and overcame this challenge of driving large scale capital to smaller enterprises is by pulling them together in a basket and this combines MFI's with women focused enterprises who are sourcing from small enterprises and this is a way to to diversify the risk of the of the portfolio. And these are enterprises who are even still considered too risky for, for many DFI's so. So even though they have good business they have good, they're very strong business and they're making deep impact. They're still not being covered by by even the development finance institutions. And there's also in terms of the, you know, the in terms of the approach of always working through local, local financial institutions I think this is where we would push back a little bit because when we designed the women's livelihood bond. You know it's so new and the instrument in the market that even the bankers that we work with and we're working with standard chartered and A&Z and DBS. They themselves were not really able to understand this kind of instrument and so we were actually told our CEO was told in the first, the first issuance of our bond that, you know, as it was going on the market, the bankers were having trouble selling it to Asian investors because you know, gender lenses is definitely not an investment area that is, that is hot in Asia, but the, the, you know, the bankers actually asked us to drop the name women's women's livelihood from the bond and they said, Well, if you just drop it you'll sell it immediately it'll be a high yield, you know, emerging market bond. And so that's where we really had to put our foot down but that's really also the limitations of just working through financial institutions because you really have to be able to also look at how the local financial institutions will not have the foreign investors and they will also will not have the local investors so it will be actually critical to look at these instruments that maybe they're, they're regional or maybe they're multi sector multi country so that you can build the market and build the investor confidence first before you go in and start looking at local financial instruments. So, so final to the last slide. So the last part of for us really about research is again it's it's action oriented research. So here we are looking at the research work actually is this the process of designing a new instrument. So I've given an example here but actually what we would love to do is to be able to work with Tropenbos on the fund that they're looking to design right now, which is to bridge financing for small holders SMEs and community communities but essentially, but really to make sure that it is inclusive and that means, making sure there's a gender lens to it making sure you're addressing risk for small holders. So that's it you can go on to the final slide that's really IAX the three areas of collaboration that we see through the through the paper. Thank you very much, Jennifer. That's very interesting and thank you for making the link to Tropenbos and FTA. Okay, our final presentation is from Elko Brockhorst of Financial Access. Elko, please. Yes, hello everyone. I've decided not to put a former presentation together because there's a number of pointers that I would like to share with you, and where I would certainly invite your your feedback on I think this panel provides a fantastic opportunity to talk about some some very challenging issues that that we're dealing with in the space of access to financial sustainable landscapes and let me try to share the experience that that we have in this with financial access. The work that we do with financial access is primarily bottoms up so we work with with local financial institutions with microfinance institutions in these landscapes, and to really try to understand what what their needs are and to what extent these needs could could be could be met. And, and, and combined with with some of the solutions that impact investors are provided. Bus mentioned in this presentation basically three important hurdles to access to finance which are scale risk and rate of return. I'd like to give you some some of our input in terms of these three hurdles which which are are very clearly out there there's a number of issues there that are in our view, equally important. If you look at scale, if if you would consider that scale is a is a key hurdle for for providing access to finance to smallish and small agri enterprises that's that's very true but if you look at, you know where that scale could be achieved that is primarily in the larger supply chains in the mono crops, where obviously important concerns exist. In terms of sustainability in these in these landscapes and whether you should support those. So, there are certain ways where where you could, when you could achieve that scale scale is all about cost. You can find a way to, to not necessarily, you know, move away from these, these larger supply chains like old palm or cocoa, we're doing a lot of work with rubber at the moment. And there are certain very interesting agroforestry models, which, which could actually address both. What the criteria often has to do with the fact that the investments that are required, especially in perennial replanting would, you know, would be long term and and banks, you know, stay away from these types of investments because, you know, the, the risk return criteria are are are important, you know, hurdle, but at the same time, knowing that these farmers ultimately would be making more money with with better plant materials and and with with with better training. But just in the first couple of years would not be able to generate that cash would provide an opportunity for cross cropping with some very interesting species and we've been having some some very interesting results in Indonesia and now in Ghana with some cross crops, local food crops that would generate sufficient cash for these farmers that would allow these banks to take the risk of longer term loans knowing that the cash is there. So, and I know that open boss is also working very actively in developing these agroforestry models and bus IP interested in in your view of time would allow during this conference to talk a little bit about that. You also talked about risk. And of course, the first thing that that banks would be would be looking at, but very often what what holds backs these, these banks to, to move into smaller finance it's it's not necessarily the risks that are there but the risks that they perceive to be very often the risks that they perceive to be very high in practice, turn out to be much lower and much more acceptable if you look at the cash flow, generating capacity of the ones, you know that you're going to finance. So, in the research that we've done we've, we've actually seen that in the largest supply chains, where you're looking at, at thousands of smaller farmers, there's a huge variation. There's a huge inflows on a farmer by farmer basis. Now what the banks, you know, perceive this to be as an as an industrial or as a systemic risk. So if you can find a way to look at these these large groups of farmers in a much more individual way and identify, what, what allows these farmers to, to generate in terms of income and how they spend it would already already be a very small building block towards, towards a solution. You mentioned also the rate of return. And that's an interesting one, because the rate of return obviously depends very much on on the the risk that you're that you're running commercially are on that specific long. But at the same time, if you're able to to bring down the costs for financial institutions to lend to the small holders, then you'll see that that's the the awful return for lending to the smallest could be actually very, very attractive. A lot of to do has to do with the fact that the small holder lenders are badly organized, have no access to digital technology, don't have the right skills to make the right analysis, and don't have the means to reach out to these widely dispersed farmers. So if you can find a way and technology actually offers that opportunity had to to to bring down these these costs by standardizing the processes and by allowing these these these products that they that they provide to these small holders to be standardized in a certain way, you can dramatically return those costs, and therefore taking away part of the turtle. There's actually a fourth element there as well which I like to focus on, and that's product misalignment. What you see is that a lot of the banks they work with standard products. If you then invite these banks to to look at the opportunities that that a landscape investment would would provide. You very often see that that these products are not fit for the types of requirements that these farmers have very often there's a misalignment in cash flows and repayment periods and terms. And we've seen in a lot of the research and a lot of the work we do that that element has not been properly addressed. And that brings me down to the next point which is co creation. If you're looking at typically how how banks are being invited or being engaged with in these programs it's at the end of the process. And we've been involved in a number of programs where an investment case is being developed by an NGO or by by a number of different organizations. And there is this this this financial need that needs to be addressed, and then they're looking out for for a bank or for an impact investor or a combinational funding. And then once you actually come to these institutions, you say well this is the opportunity, then very often this institution says well that doesn't really fit what we need at all because you haven't taken into consideration our internal processes, our internal risk policies, we talked about capital. So, if we can find a way to at the much earlier stage in these programs, partner with these institutions, and let them become owner of the solution. And we, we feel is a is a is a much better way than to to separate those processes out and to to work in in isolation. I think the partnerships between the impact investors, where a lot of funding is available and very often they're international impact investors and, and Evo just mentioned you know I agree three and green fund they're all doing fantastic work. But the monetary impact is of course very limited, because if you look at the capital they would have available on what's needed that it's a drop in the bucket. They actually allow these types of institutions to, to develop a good proof of concept or a model or a an investment mechanism, get good could easily be leveraged, and where you could actually tap into the massive local liquidity pools which you see in these markets. Then there is that opportunity, you know to build something meaningful that could be scaled. Because don't forget, in countries like Indonesia and Ghana and in DRC and in most other developing economies, the local liquidity is, is massive. Banks have so much cash from deposits and from savings. There's there's pension funds and other institutional local investors that don't know what to do with with that cash and if you can only find a way to tap part of that. And to, to structure that in such a way that it actually reads the bottom of the, of the pyramid. That's already one way, one way to go. Now, there's a number of other thoughts that we have but I think I've reached the end of. Thank you very much. Very interesting and also interested in rubber agroforestry so that's something in common. We've heard three very interesting presentations from our panelists. I think to just to break the the cadence. We've got another polling question for you. And then we'll move, move into some questions and answers after that before we wrap up. So, Fabio, can you pull up the second polling question? Yes, it's up. Okay, hopefully you can all see the question. Based on what you've heard so far in the webinar. What do you think is the most important next step. Follow pathways of structuring and local finance infrastructure. Similar to commas in Kenya. Design locally appropriate financial instruments. For example, Afakor and Guatemala. Adjust blended finance mechanisms. Design appropriate green bonds for landscapes. And finally, none of the above. And if you choose this, please try to give some suggestions in the chat box on what you think of important next steps would be. So please make your selection. And back to you, Fabio. Yes, people are voting. We're going to give them another 20 30 seconds. Make your choice and we're going to close it in a moment. All right, so other five seconds to go. And then we close it five, four, three, two, one, and we are closing the survey. Okay, so the results will appear in a moment. Here they are. That's interesting. Again, a majority selection on the design locally appropriate financial instruments. For example, Afakor aquafop. Okay, I would also agree with that. Thank you, Fabio. We've got another eight minutes to go back to our questions, answers, but I'd like be interested to ask if there are any, if any of the panelists would like to make a comment on what they've heard in this in the second half of the of the webinar. There are three presentations, and then we've got a number of other panelists with us today. Michael, if I could make a comment rather than a question. Just that, especially the last part what Ilco was talking about the role of collaboration between finance and NGOs. Yeah, I thought it was very interesting because just this week I had a conversation with Jennifer as well and she was saying exactly the same thing. So definitely, I think you two of you should talk. And, but this is something that that's, we also find you're in trouble most and that we're really looking for in some of the landscapes we work in now with with with programs financed by the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs. And we really are trying to approach finance institutions in an early phase, but you also find it's very difficult to do so, because there's even like in terms of the way we speak, there are quite a lot of differences so probably, yeah, we need intermediaries and I would. You know, on my screen then to Ilco and Jennifer because I think they are the type of intermediaries that that would be able to make that step yet to link NGOs to define an inch financial institutions. So I think really, yeah, any step and and we saw in the, and the poll that, yeah, that's local financial infrastructure is very important. Yeah, I think if we want to get there. Yeah, we need to collaborate we need to work together with local financial organization institution existing institution not create new ones. Yeah, and involve organizations like financial access or IX or local organizations which are similar to them. Yeah, because we can't do it by themselves. So like to respond. This is something that we, we indeed see a lot and and so much gets lost in translation indeed. So, I just to give a given example and I'd be interested in in views from the floor. But, but banks are relatively simple minded animals that it is there they're used to certain processes and they're not very difficult to move away from what they were supposed to do. So, if, if a, if a bank would, you know, would would be asked to to follow the line of thought of many conservation organizations or NGOs, doing fantastic work. They very often don't understand that. And, and if we can find a way to translate that work into a simple business case to start with, and ultimately to a term sheet because that's the instruments that banks could could work with right today could go and do something with that and develop the steps to actually move there in a fairly structured way which is actually not too difficult to some of these landscapes that at least we've we've worked in. That could be a very practical, very practical approach, I think that that could be one I think secondly, what you're seeing is if you, if you work in these landscapes very often you're in very far remote provinces away from from, you know, the center. And, and the key decisions in a lot of these financial institutions are not made there, they're made at different levels and very often at different locations. So, I think it's important to find out who are the decision makers, and you'd be surprised to see that that many CEOs of even regional banks are being pushed and are being being asked to move and do more with these stakeholders and to to to work with because they do see that that that there is a need, and very often they, they don't know how to do that so you just need to find the route counterpart within within each institution to start a dialogue and I'm sure if you have some experience with that as well, but I'd be interested to to hear any, any views on that. So if you, if you want to respond. Yeah, no, I agree. I mean, I mean, this unit have been very mindful, not to sit on the seat of, of neither a bank investor or project developer. I've seen other UN agencies and international organizations actually do try to create business cases and as you said earlier Elko those are often not aligned with what an investor is asking for so I think the co-creation element that you mentioned is very important. And, and I've, I've worked with a lot of finance institutions and I've worked for NGOs and I agree I think there's this perhaps frustration I think on the conservation side but I think maybe it would help on both sides to to learn from each other if there's no interaction and people from conservation move into banking and vice versa. But, but if NGOs want to move forward then it is perhaps to better speak the language of, of, of financiers and approach projects indeed from, from a perspective that a bank or an investor understands. And it's the, it's not the banks or the investors who will take the, the, the, the initial call, it will have to come from those who are on this, this, this webinar in my view. Thanks evil. Well, I guess like most webinars, there's not enough time to address all of the issues we've had a wonderful discussion. There's still many questions in the Q amp a box that we haven't had a chance to address. If I can ask the panelists to go back quickly and see if there's any quick answers you can provide that would be very helpful. Yeah, I'd like to ask Vincent gets to make some concluding remarks. Vincent. Thank you, Michael. And thank you to all the presenters. Yes. As we, as we, as Michael said, two months ago we had organized an internal among scientists, a science conference to discuss our research and look at how we can link issues together and identify some of the most promising areas going forward for research and action and then this, this seminar is the first one of a series to have a broader discussion with, in fact, with, with partners involved on the ground in the back streets very often, but also in the wall streets. And, and we call the series from science to action. And then, because this is what we think that action should be grounded on solid science and based on evidence but I think for this topic as we go forward it's also from actors to to science as we've seen that are able to question science and, and provide the experience perspectives and solutions and, and the publication that bass presented that I think is a very good example of, of what we try to build in the participatory approaches starting from the needs of two very different categories of on the one hand small holders on the other hands big investors, how can we hear them or can we gather experience and share problems but but solution so thanks to all of you for the time to participate in this process for the publication and thanks for for your very good input today also from the audience so we've gathered a lot of questions really thanks to all the questions very good questions and I think we will need to, to make order to these questions and then the team to answer to these provide some some some feedback, perhaps on the web we can do that and share some some insight. Some of the points I get from from this very rich discussion. Not not comprehensive point but what struck me as as Felix and bass said, three main bias scale risks, rates of returns, let alone the question of risk. When we look at the risking is not necessarily only the question of is it risky but it is what is the risk what is the data what is the knowledge behind and I think here we have a lot, a lot to to share the, the second point about this, what about the local infrastructures, the local financial infrastructures standardization I think was a point that that was made and how to, how to bring the, the, yes, the back office, the back office to to to the Wall Street. And the last point is about scaling of course there is always this issue about the big gap between doing more but at the same time having also more or better social and environmental consideration and what does it do to just add constraint is that the right solution and I liked especially evil murder suggestions on these on these dimensions so to conclude I think was a very interesting discussion, and I would like to make three points just to highlight the interest of, of this series of webinars and perhaps invite this public also to look at the others. To look at what we do in the program as FDA in connection with this issue of increasing inclusive finance from the issue of nutrition gender equity climate change restoration, all of these needs massive investments that will come from private sector and private money because investment is not enough, we know that in fact the biggest part is going to come from from from farmers from from foresters the question is how to support them, and is how to attract private money towards sustainable and inclusive investments for sustainable and inclusive landscape. The second question is for us, moving forward in these in these webinars and not just this one but the ones that will follow is how to get what is the more where the where is their potential for immediate progress. And I think what what we what we looked at in our conference on inclusive business model was quite interesting because there are some quick wins for instance how to improve gender equity. And I think a lot can be done quickly because it's about transferring knowledge between sectors for example land use forestry agriculture that sometimes we know well and finance that are starting to understand that we need good intermediaries for that new alliances as was just mentioned in the discussion between local NGOs finance research. And last I think we, we have an issue of urgency here with these opportunities, they are small orders, small enterprises even more now with with in the in the in the current economic context has been disrupted that deeply need finance and funds to invest they need to transform at the same time the activity to make it more sustainable, economically socially environmentally and at the same time as we've seen and alcohol Broncos I said they plenty of money looking for investments. So how can we reach the bottom of the pyramid as you said Eric or the back streets. Now there is an opportunity I think to to find ways to build to bridge the two in order to to to build back better and I think one of the points that we've been looking at is also how we can use jurisdictions because one of one other actor very often in landscapes are the local sectors the local jurisdictions that pursue sometimes the same goals as as as finance private finance and private foresters and farmers to make their landscapes jurisdictions attractive and sustainable. Thanks, thanks to all the organizers and thanks to the presenters for for their time and the rich discussion. Over to you, Michael. Thank you very much, Vincent. Very interesting summary and synthesis. Well that that concludes our webinar. Again, this is the first in a series. Please check with the FDA website. You can find the materials from this webinar should be posted on the website, and you'll also find information on upcoming webinars. So I think our time is up. Thank you very much. All of our presenters panelists and participants. Thank you. Have a good day. Good evening. Thank you very much.