 Hello everyone. Good morning. Greetings from Sunny Costa Rica. Today I have the pleasure to take you on a journey, a journey of what has been the history of gender within the CBD mandates. I would then talk a little bit where countries are and here is where I will use the example of Costa Rica to bring things down so we can see what countries are struggling with and then I will finish off by talking a little bit of what could be the next steps for policies and for decisions in the CBD as well a little bit on the country work. So let's start off with the history. So the CBD is actually one of the most gender-sensitive using the framework that Francesca just presented, multi-environmental agreement. And the reason why we were saying this is that gender decisions started to trickle into the Congress of the parties since 1996. This is before the climate change convention did it. It was before the desertification convention did it. And we see that this pattern or that there is an evolution of the number of decisions that you start to see. The COP that has had the most decisions so far has been the one in Nagoya. We had 13 decisions there where we have even a gender decision regarding one of the Aishi targets which is number 14. After that we see things leveling off a bit and we start seeing that there are less gender decisions in the Hit-or-Bot and the COP. Now what do these decisions cover? These decisions cover many issues. They would cover issues related to conservation, the dramatic program, fine ends. There is a lot of them covering about gender balance in some of the bodies that are created. Of course there are those related to the strategic plan, capacity building, beneficiary technology. But what is interesting about these decisions is that when we look at them using the social equity framework that Francesca just presented, we see that most of these decisions are regarding recognition and process. And very few of them actually talk about the equal distribution of benefits, costs or responsibilities. Perhaps those that are related to access and beneficiary are the ones that do talk a little bit more about this distribution of benefits. There's some regarding finance. What does this mean? Well let's look at one of the first decisions. This is article 8J. It's the article that covers all aspects related to Indigenous people. And we see here exactly the pattern that I was showing you, that it recognizes the role of women and their contributions to the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity. And then it emphasizes on strengthening their role and participation. So we see that the first part has that recognition aspect and the second part has a participation aspect. This format and this decision repeats itself until even the Korea decisions. You start seeing the same pattern where there's a recognition of the role and there's the emphasis on participation. Most of the process decisions are regarding participation and inclusion. Some of them do address capacity building, but very few do so. So we see a pattern here that we're doing great in terms of recognizing women and ensuring that they can participate. But recently we have seen that that might not be enough because we start seeing that women are being involved and they are being included in the meetings. However, there aren't being included in decision making and they're not receiving the actual benefits, as I said, or costs of conservation are not equally distributed or the responsibilities as well. So we do have a lot of work still. And with regards to policy, there's a lot of food for thought on how we can move these patterns beyond these two realms and start thinking more in general about this social equity framework. So that leads us to now to 2018 and where are countries? And what is interesting is that it is a robust policy framework with regards to gender. And the CBD is the first convention to also have a gender action plan. So this has really moved countries forward and these mandates, I do have to say, have a great impact on the countries. And when developing their MDFAPs, we start seeing that gender starts trickling into these policies from the international mandates or international policies to the national policies that are addressed in the MDFAPs. And so we start seeing that 56% of 256 MDFAPs that were reviewed these cover from 1993 to 2016 have included either women or gender as part of their text. Now that's great. It's an impact. We can measure it. However, when we start understanding how gender is addressed, we start seeing that these inclusions or this recognition of gender is always or almost always in the form of a principle or a guiding principle. And there are very few of them that actually talk about gender considerations in the activities or in the indicators of the MDFAPs. In the case of Costa Rica, as I promised, we have had a really interesting process because we have been an example of this evolution of going from no recognition of gender to moving to a more gender responsive dimension. Our policy law from 1996 is completely gender neutral and only includes a general equity principle. Our national biodiversity policy starts recognizing these roles, these inequalities, and finally our national diversity strategy, our MDFAP, becomes gender responsive because we have it included in one global role, six national roles, and two indicators that address gender considerations in the diversity of topics. Now with this national mandate, what we have is Costa Rica now developing its sixth national communication and we have really tried to develop a very unique approach where we have both looked at process and at the content and we have done some sensitization workshops while developing and consulting the national communication that is going to be presented in December. And from a content point of view, again the country has pushed a little bit the envelope and followed some of the guidance provided by the Agenda Action Plan and what we have really tried to do is start integrating gender segregated data when reporting about the different policies, the different, sorry, global and national biodiversity topics. So far we have included in 14 of the 25 global goals that we have. We have also tried to include a lot of case studies that show how the country is implementing some of these mandates. We are including maps that relate gender and environmental data, gender recommendations for each one of the global goals and really trying to focus on Aishi target 14 to be able to provide as much data as possible. Here's just an app that shows you, this is very excited. We're starting as a country, we do have a lot of information environmentally so we were able to combine these two. We combine the percentage of women that own land by district and then we over post different layers related for example in this case to low carbon productive systems and that allows us to start understanding where are these women and how they can be or we can start thinking how they can be involved in these biodiversity actions. So the future, the last second that I'm left, I think that we need collectively to start thinking of theories of change that promote gender equality at different levels and that policies, we should try to think of a strategic way of having policies linked together so that we can talk about recognition process and distribution and not only about recognition and process. I think that Aishi, the next set of goals need to take a page from the SDG and try to mainstream gender more comprehensively. We need to harmonize our Rio conventions in order to have similar mandates and more transformative implementation on the ground and this of course requires ground guidance and support and of course the biggest challenge of them all, a list of global and environment indicators to guide countries because countries I feel a little bit lost when it comes to sometimes the implementation of all of these gender mandates. Thank you.