 Thank you very much, Nicodin. Good morning to every actually good afternoon, but it still feels like the morning It's a pleasure to be here, and I thank Thierry de Montbrillard for the invitation Future of trade, it's a very large subject, of course, so I would like to make comments on three really areas or three forces that I think will shape the future of trade Of course, there's a certainty in what I will say which should not be there at all the first Area is it rejoins really what was said in the last panel on artificial intelligence and in particular by a Mars Wood Ahmed and That is that I think the that advanced Manufacturing technologies are going to radically alter the nature of trade relations in the future I'll take what he said and put it in a In a trade context I think if you go back to the Uruguay round and that is the multilateral framework that we have at the moment One way of looking at that round is that the basic deal underneath it was that the developed countries would Give more increased access to their markets with the consequence that jobs in low technology labor intensive industries would be offshore and In return for that the developing countries would protect the conceptual input to production namely intellectual property and That I think shepherded it was not the only reason but it shepherded this enormous growth in global value chains that we've seen particularly in the 90s and the 2000s and if you look at those global value chains Arguably the greatest value lies in the pre manufacturing and the post manufacturing that is in the design and conception and research and development and In the marketing branding and distribution and not in the manufacture now with advanced manufacturing technologies robotics artificial intelligence sensors and additive manufacturing I Think that we're seeing the possibility of the recapturing of manufacturing by industrialized countries The example was given of adidas where adidas will have the capacity to be able to manufacture instead of using factories in Indonesia or Vietnam or the Philippines That's I think That possibility technological possibility is joined by a political will which we are seeing expressed either to recapture Manufacturing and I don't think I'm not talking here about the Trump administration because I think the Trump administration is more old Economy and not new economy and when he talks about recapturing manufacturing I think he's talking about traditional manufacturing and not new manufacturing But we see a very I think Deliberate view that actually one of the reasons for recapturing manufacturing is because innovation follows Manufacturing and that is a good reason to preserve manufacturing capacity I think we see that also in the case of China very much With its strategy on artificial intelligence its strategy on manufacturing In this case, it's not recapturing manufacturing, but preserving manufacturing and this of course is going to Have a radical effect. I think on the nature of trade relations in the future And I'm not sure it's being addressed it of course Means that there will be increased in pressure on pressure on intellectual property That pressure was all already there for the pre manufacturing and the post manufacturing because you're talking about patents and designs and branding But it will also carry over I think into manufacturing in the future And this will be a major political issue The second force that I would refer to really is the whole digital economy Of which the digitization of production of which I just spoke is only one part But the whole digital economy and in particular data now It was said in the last session that algorithms are really the most important thing and that They are certainly important, but I think algorithms are nothing without data and data is The I would say suggest the oil of the new economy There is increasing value in data both in the conception stage in new business models for Distribution right across the production process and it's created the beer moths With which we're all familiar Google Facebook eBay Baidu 10 cents Alibaba and so forth And I think if you look around the world now You see that governments are struggling to know how to deal with both data and the enormous Enterprises that are built on the basis of data. There is a confluence of Policy approaches that come into question. You have privacy security data location taxation competition ownership Let's not forget and trade all as perspectives And I think one of the characteristics of the data economy is that it doesn't respect of course the Architecture that has been put in place for trade relations in the past and I don't see this really being addressed I know the WTO is addressing e-commerce But I think if I may say it's a larger issue And we are all struggling with policy approaches to data That really requires I think a fundamental rethinking of the system And I fear that we no longer or we do not have at the moment the capacity to undertake that Fundamental rethinking and we don't have that capacity because first of all it concerns competitive relations which are becoming more and more difficult Secondly internationally the the asymmetries in technological capacity are simply enormous and that creates a difficulty in being able to address questions and Thirdly, and I think perhaps most importantly the speed of the development of technology these days is such that it far outstrips Institutional capacity to respond and this is true at the national level and it's even more true when you come to the international level So then let me just make my final point Which is that I think there will also be in the future a new model of trade relations or it's actually in the present That is being pioneered by China so we've spoken a lot in the course of the conference about the vacuum that is being left by the policies of the current Trump administration But and that's that vacuum is creating an opportunity for many countries and in particular China to move into the space But I don't think that if I may say That China will move into the space in the same way or with the same model of trade relations and in this respect I would invite you to consider for example the difference between the Transpacific partnership as one model and the built-in road initiative as another model very shortly, I think the difference of the model is infrastructure as against accords or agreements and I think it's broader than change Traded applies also to development So if you like in caricature the old model is here are the rules comply and the new model is here is the road trade And I think this is going to have major institutional Or consequences for the institutional architecture. I Would not wish to be thought to be suggesting by that that China is not a fully engaged member of the current Multilateral system. It is absolutely fully engaged, but the model For the future may be slightly different. Thank you