 Thank you for this invitation to the solutions from below panel. So, Mexico City has abandoned the water under natural conditions, but human mismanagement has caused artificial scarcity of this element. 500 years ago, this city was this. Once stopped by Spanish chronicles, the Venice of the New World. Today is home to 21.8 million inhabitants and looks like this. So, the entire lake was desiccated. The 13 rivers that irrigate the basin have been toothed to remove sewage waste. Sewage outflow, landfills and gas station pollutions pollute the city's aquifer. Millions of cubic meters of clean rainwater are annually lost in the sewage. 70% of population reports water shortages just rainy season last seven months a year. There are constant floods during rainy season. 50% of waters in the basin are heavily polluted. 40% tube water is lost in pipe leakage. 20% of household income is spent in bottled water. So, I will give you an example of a solution from below that I have been working recently with an interdisciplinary team and the Berlin Studios Mac. To the urban exchanger research project sponsored by the Alfred Herrhausen Hescheltab, we came in contact with the community of Mirabaya in Mexico City. Mirabaya is located in the far east end of the city at the foot of the Guadalupe volcano. The community has access to the city centralized water network only once a week. People store water for house use in buckets and cisterns and buy bottled water from tank trucks because commercial water is too expensive. They do not have a culture of recycling and harvesting, no infiltration infrastructure. Despite the community's proximity to the Guadalupe volcano, the people had completely turned their back on the natural world. So, our first step was to design a side action inviting the local people to take a walk up to the volcano hill. The walk was a social breakthrough. For the first time, they look at Mirabaya from the volcano's perspective. The irony of this fact could not be any greater considering Mirabaya literally means in Spanish, look at the valley. After side actions such as these architectural interventions in community are more effective. Change begins with a positive shift of perception. Together with the community, we observed there was an underused dome covering a public area already surrounded by a public dining hall, a health center and a library. For low cost interventions, we recycled the dome as a rainwater harvesting structure supplying potable water to the community's dining hall that invites the general public to pump drinkable water out to an open source by pedaling on a fixed bicycle. The social impact of the intervention could be summed up as follows. It decentralized water supply. It sets a cultural precedent for sustainable water use. It is a pedagogical infrastructural tool operated by the community which could detonate the integration of water recycling into private homes and other public spaces. It is a visible public element that symbolically represents Mirabaya's autonomous sustainable solutions, self-management and awareness. It counteracts the general feeling that water is a lacking resource that gets to homes. Instead of the dome gives back to the people active responsibility and control over the local management of this resource. As designers and architects, we are careful not to impose solutions. We design with the community and not for it. This makes people receptive to new ideas. However, there are some issues we have encountered in this process which, to conclude, I would like to open for discussion here today. We have found it very hard to get across to people the idea that design matters, that it is not superfluous but part of a strategic outlook, valuable in restoring life, quality and public space dignity. And this happens regardless of funding being top-down or bottom-up. So first question. How do we communicate and convey the necessity of beauty as a tool in the production of contemporary cities? Like artist Fiasca Gates has said, beauty is not a luxury but a basic service. And second and final, we find that working with community requires an authorship to design authorship. Architects work towards integrating form and function, but often the building process done by the actual community preserves only the most basic aspects of their vision. This directly affects the show-and-tell economic part of authorship in architecture. Achievements are hard to show. So second and final question. How can we imagine authorship in architecture when working with community? Thank you. Thank you very much, Roxana. I suggest we stick with these two presentations for a moment and think about those collectively. And I want to follow up with this question about, clearly you're taking many of the boxes which we have highlighted at this conference around experimentation, design, engagement. In your mind, how do you deal with this idea of scalability? So this is one very specific example. As a designer, are you inventing a model which you see being rolled out? And I think, Julia, it's the same for you. Are you inventing something in very specific contexts which you would like to see being replicated? If so, at what scale and in which context? Well, I think, first of all, yes, of course, you want to replicate these things. As I said, we would like that this dome could be the idea of harvesting water and making potable and that they can be more sustainable. That we would like to replicate it into private homes and other public spaces, of course. I think that you start replicating with very simple ideas, very simple, very small elements, like very experimental and local. And then maybe when you replicate it and it begins to grow, then it starts changing and then you can transform the city with that. But you start with very small tactical interventions and then they will become bigger. Julia, what's your response? It is the perennial acupuncture urbanism question of the scalability. And I would say my first reaction to that is, of course, there is rollout. And I think my thinking about that is that that's about the stakeholders that you engage with and that rather than hiding away from government or bureaucratic processes that are often found in these kind of spaces that you need to engage with them. In this case, the municipality was heavily involved in the project. They actually had to sign it off and they were involved in some of the sort of funding aspects of it. And I've been to conferences in Delhi where they present the project as if it's their own. I'm fine with that. However, the second thing, comment is, I don't think that it's necessarily about taking my drawings and replicating and building septic tanks throughout India. I think it's about developing a more effective taxonomy to react to the problem and that there isn't sort of one solution that's just going to get washed out. And it's about replicating the process as opposed to the product. I think Rahul perhaps said that more eloquently than I just did this morning. Joe, can I invite you to maybe respond? Here's a generation of young, dynamic, enthusiastic architects. No, I wasn't going there. I was suggesting the wise advice of someone who has done this for many, many decades. Could you speak closer to the microphone, please? Is that a bit better? I'm interested from the point of view that we seem to take upon our shoulders a huge amount of weight. I've heard today, for example, architects talking about transforming the world, about dealing with global issues of migration. And now we get to this wonderful opportunity to talk about small, little experiments that can just move knowledge a little bit forward, but to be followed by many others. And then we slip into the same old problem of replicability. How can we translate it into a European experience? How can we save the world of water? Let's keep it small. Let's keep it experimental. And let's not have any higher aspiration than just making it once and seeing how it works. And leave it at that. And we need many more architects to make many more experiments all over the place. And maybe we can start moving forward with some kind of confidence. That's my view. Wonderful. Let's applause. Is there anyone else around the panel who wants to react to, I think, a very sort of nice moment? Amika, I think you do. So we also work on a really small scale. And it's also a question that we're posed really regularly, how you replicate it or how you build a model from it that's applicable elsewhere. And I think the question is, it's emerging for us. It's very similar to the way it's emerging for you, which is not what's this design methodology that you can roll out elsewhere, but what were the conditions that enabled us to work in that way. So what's the infrastructure that you need at a city level, whether that's administrative, financial, to do with human resources, that enables maybe a city administration to work directly with the local community without these exceptional kinds of interventions from architects or from exceptional kinds of funding.