 Thank you. Okay. I'm Christine's co-host. I'm co-host. My name is Chris Henderson. I'm head of Agriculture and Practical Action. Practical Action with Christine has been working on the adaptation technology theme as she mentioned. I mean today one of the big challenges we're looking at is how can we get climate policy and plans to be more effective. The objective of the the overall objective of the theme is that we know technology works. We know technology excites people. It's exciting. You can almost speak to everybody about changing the world through technology and technology is a means of implementation even in the Paris Agreement. It's a means of implementation together with finance and building capacity. The issue is how can we engage with this and use technology so it works for communities. It works for community-based adaptation. And other theme other sessions in this theme we'll be looking at nature-based solutions. We'll be looking at finding the finance or looking at how young people can thrive. This session is about how policies and plans can be made more effective at scale. So the overarching problem we face is I mean everyone recognizes the importance of adaptation. The overarching problem is that there's a failure to achieve adaptation at scale. We have projects but we don't want islands of excellence in a sea of chaos. We want to change the sea. Our hypothesis is that adaptation technology can help governments achieve successful adaptation. To achieve successful climate action. We know technology works. We've got a few presentations coming up. These ignite presentations that are referred to in this slide. We've got one on coffee agroforestry in Peru. We've got one on soil organic matter in Nepal where soil organic matter is a crisis. We've got one on water shared management and ecosystems-based adaptation. All these things that are mentioning we all know they work. Do we see them going to scale? Do we see policy being effective? I mean if you look at solar power and maybe electric cars there's a lot of optimism that is really going to change climate action. In adaptation we should have the same optimism and we should find ways to make it work for communities and community-based adaptation. So that is the challenge. What should we as CBA do about this? As a community of practice how can we enable policymakers and planners to use adaptation technologies so that policy really is effective and so that we achieve adaptation at scale? So in order to do this we're going to have three short presentations. We're going to break out into groups to discuss this challenge and we're going to report back and hear from you and then have a discussion what we as a community might do. So without further ado actually we'll go on to the next item which is the first of those presentations. Next slide please. Here are the three presentations so you just have a sense to see what's coming. Carlos is going to present on the challenges in Peru using coffee agroforestry. Monisha will present on their work with the government of Nepal for multi-stakeholder action on soil organic matter and Devaraj will present comparing their experience in two contexts India and Guatemala and addressing this missing middle. So I'd like to hand over to Carlos and say you've got five minutes Carlos and ignite us. Hello everyone, hi Chris. Yes I will continue. So my name is Carlos Rueda from Peru and a thematically of practical action in forest and agriculture and I will share with you this experience of the multi-strate agroforestry in Peru. First we need to the next one please. First we need to understand the coffee systems and the challenges of the of their people and a few years ago when I was traveling around the coffee prey sites in the Amazon of Peru I came across with these pictures and you can see on the left there is the traditional coffee fields with many monocrobes and many landslides and different problems. Later when I get to talk to the farmers I saw that they have similar stories, their struggles and to make a summary is that most of them say that they are pretty small farms and always wanted to move forward into the forest to secure their lands of their future generations. They also said that they had no options to access for credit from banks. So most of them were not associated and also most of them rely on middlemen to have the cash and also to sell their products. So sometimes their prices were unfair adding the fact that they have low education level. Also as you can see in the pictures this couple many of them say I'm too old now. Many of them have an advanced age and their sons moved to the cities for better quality of life. So the question is who is going to continue the work that they are working now, the parents. And also in Peru say someone or many of them say other crops pay better and this is because of the high risk to migrate to illegal crops. So you can see that the farmers have many struggles. So the outcome you can see on the left is a traditional coffee farm which is low-tech use, poor productivity and quality, extended use of monocrops that also increase the landslides and diseases and use of many chemicals to control the plagues. Also there is a high rate of deforestation and greenhouse gas emissions. So this overall over one decade it managed to shift to more distract agroforestry system. So how they shift to this system that we were creating. Over the last decade we developed a series of technologies, 12 to be more precise to increase the productivity and quality but also to conserve the forest and to reduce emissions and later to engage them the farmers to the market. And now we know it works. It's been developing over the years, it's been better over the years and you can see on the on the right on the pictures how these multi-layer have different outcomes. The coffee on the bottom and the trees to have a wood later and on the other picture on the top we have a different landscape that have a better conservation outputs. So the next one please and second once we understand the context we need to understand the government view and the policy systems which is why we are discussing this today. So first of all as you can see the red spots in the in the map of Peru this is my country. You can see all these red spots are coffee areas moving into the forest which is the green areas and this is big. It's around 2000 kilometers along this area. It's to put you in context it's from the coast of Portugal to the end of Germany in the border with Poland so it's it's quite big. So Peru need to work on improve the management of these crops that are on the edge of the forest. It could be cocoa, it could be cattle, it could be palm trees, it could be coffee so because the rate of the forestation needs 150,000 hectares per year. But we are on a good track. The recent policy development focused on reducing the forestation and climate change and you can see on the left that Peru has three laws at the national level, three sector specific laws, the NDC commitments and the national adaptation plan as a draft and all of them include at least one related to agroforestry systems. So that's a good start but still it's on the national level and also it's still mostly on paper so it needs to be implemented on the field at the local level so that's the next step. There has been some policy advocacy work. Many NGOs and research agencies were involved. We gave technical support to improve the agroforestry laws and the sector specific laws. We gave support to the development of the NDCs and now the national adaptation plan and we came across and we found we have been finding that diversification is key to adapt. There's no silver bullet to address different problems like climate change, fires, lakes or lately it's COVID. So finally we know our technology works. It can enable the government to accomplish the goals but we'll still under track to be delivered widely. Maybe we had some policy barriers, lack of funds, regional involvement or private sector involvement. So that's our next step in our in the next years. Thank you. Thank you Carlos. I mean that map of Nepal of Peru I'm thinking about the next presentation already. That map of Peru just shows you if this technology could work the impact on this global issue not only adaptation but mitigation would be incredible but there is a huge challenge in getting it as you say from paper policy into meaningful action and you came up with one specific suggestion there around diversification which I think we need to probably look at maybe in the breakout groups. Let's move on to the next presentation. We're running a couple of minutes behind time so but I'm handing over to you Manisha and we should be okay. Thank you. Namaste from the Himalayas. Good morning, good afternoon and good evening ladies and gentlemen. I bring this question before you today. Can unhealthy soil feed seven billion people on the planet? We all know that soil organic matter is required for healthy and fertile soils. It's essential for retaining moisture in the soil and for generating nutrients needed for crops to thrive. So most certainly soil organic matter has a critical role to play in healthy food systems and the soil's ability to feed the current and future generations but despite this understanding the problem is that we have opted for the wrong pathway. We have chosen the green revolution and the problem with green revolution is that this has led to farming practices rapidly shifting towards intensive farming, monocropping and indiscriminate use of chemical fertilizers. We're extracting from the soil and not giving back enough and this has also led farmers to move away from traditional farming practices. For example can you please move the slide one slide ahead please. For example farmers have moved away from traditional farming practices such as retention of crop residues crop rotation and intercropping all of which have ways of replenishing the soil and the consequence I think we are on the wrong slide can be moved to the second slide please and the consequence is that the average national soil organic soil organic matter value in Nepal stands at a staggering one percent and for soils to be productive and healthy this value needs to be at least four percent. You know earlier this year I met with a farmer his name was Chandraprasad Adhikari an experienced farmer from a place called Chitwan who started commercial farming in 1973 using chemical fertilizers. During the initial days his production went up and profit soared and he was all happy but by the fifth year he started having serious issues with best management and soil fertility. The result is the profit headed downwards to a point that he even had to consider alternative means of livelihood. Now this ladies and gentlemen is an example of how decreased in soil organic matter increases the vulnerability of smallholder farmers and threatens their livelihood. What we need is immediate action for adaptation measures. Now not just adaptation measures we need adaptation measures at scale for it to work for the millions of farmers in the country. Next slide please. So for adaptation to work at scale we need policy vehicles. Fortunately the government of Nepal realized this and has set a target to achieve four percent soil organic matter by 2030 in the agriculture development strategy and this is also reflected on the enhanced NDC targets but acting on this problem is very complex. It's complex because the issue of soil organic matter requires a paradigm shift in farming practices. Shifting farming from chemical laden chemical input laden agriculture to agroecology based farming systems and a change of such magnitude requires changing the behaviors of all the actors engaged in the soil agenda. Smallholder farmers, fertilizer industry, researchers, policymakers, implementers, development partners, everyone. Practical action in Nepal has been working with the Ministry of Agriculture Development to develop a multi-stakeholder action plan to enhance the soil organic matter and this document has identified the seven key pillars and this requires engagement of a host of stakeholders. Now we believe that the action plan offers the alternative we desperately need for adaptation to work at scale for smallholders and for the planet but the challenge is how can we support the government to get all stakeholders the community on board to achieve adaptation at scale. Are there any successes that we can learn from? I'd like to hear from the practice on what has other governments done in a similar situation. What would be the entry point for next slide please, next slide. So what would be the entry point for engaging all these stakeholders to actively work on the seven pillars to make adaptation work and in conclusion I leave you with another question. How can multi-stakeholder action on healthy soil build resilience of smallholders? Thank you. Over to you Chris. Thank you Manisha. So there you have very strong commitment from government and a huge problem across the country. We may have a great plan, we may have a great plan with them but to solve it actually requires joined-up action including action with communities. That's the challenge for us. Let me move on quickly to Devaraj so that we can conclude in this 30 minutes this section. Devaraj. Yeah okay thank you Chris. Good morning, good afternoon, good evening evening everybody. My name is Devaraj Lekondapa. I'm working at TMG Research in Berlin, Tintang based in Berlin. So today we're going to tell you some of the work we are doing in terms of upscaling EBA in Guatemala and India in our project climate SDG integration project which is being funded by the International Climate Initiative from the German Ministry for the Environment. So we are working with partners in Guatemala at EME and WWF and with water in India. Next slide please. So why are we talking about upscaling EBA? I'll be very brief here but as you surely know a nature-based solution NBS are being backed by global agreement, let it be the Paris Agreement on climate change or the Convention on Biological Diversity. This convention especially refers to ecosystem-based adaptation which is really adapting with the help by conserving and by using ecosystem services. So our starting question was how to scale up the adoption of EBA. Next slide please. So to do so we have organized our project at the three level of intervention the local national and global level. So why so often if we look at the local level we can notice there are several cases of EBA which are more or less successful but which tend to be isolated in time and space. If you look at the national level you have different policy which I played but which tend to be sexual and compartmented and usually don't really conduce upscaling of EBA. So if you want to say there is a missing middle between the national and the local scale and what we wanted to do in our project the main objective is what you see in the middle in green is to create an enabling and policy environment to upscale EBA. So how do we do so? We are working on a roadmap to upscale EBA to connect the local with the national level. What do we do concretely? First at the local level we have we're doing some field research to study how EBA is effective to gather evidence on this effectiveness and this feed from the local to the national level to to feed on this evidence and the objective eventually is to mainstream EBA in the different policy that we have at the national level and then by going back from the national to the local level we are aiming to implement this mainstreaming to implement EBA by having synergy in planning, investment, monitoring and evaluation for example. And we're also working at the global level as you can see on the top in the sense upscaling EBA can help to achieve some of the international targets for instance the SDG the NDC so we make sure that this is included in the national reporting to this international agreement. And lastly what you see at the outer cycle is we are fostering exchange of experience between Guatemala and India where we are in both countries we are gathering evidence on EBA effectiveness so we are having an exchange between these two countries but also at the international level at the global scene where we are reporting our field research evidence on EBA. Next slide please. So I'm going to end just now to give you some example some illustration of what it means a road map development in India. So there we are having a demand driven and evidence-based road map. We are doing so by organizing a series of thematic sectoral stakeholder consultation involving people from the agriculture, water, biodiversity sectors. We have formed a multi-sectoral committee to support us in the process to help us mainstreaming EBA to help us identifying the government the national scheme which are existing which can be relevant and I want to end just with one of our indirect impact of our multi consultation is that nowadays there are ongoing discussion about the recognition of EBA in the process of reforming watershed development program. This is not directly our impact but it indirectly understand that we have invited a national stakeholder in our workshop and they have carried away this idea of upgrading EBA and including EBA into other programming that is how it is illustrated and we are pretty happy about that. That's our next slide Leticia and that's all from us today thank you. Thank you very much to all three speakers, Devaraj, Carlos and Monisha. Now you will have noticed okay it's been pretty much one-sided at the moment we've been sharing with you these examples and it's been listening mode. We are however on track with 30 minutes and we can move to the breakout groups. The idea is some of these presentations may have provoked you to thinking yeah but this won't work or this will work. Let us move to the breakout room questions. Now here are three questions. The first one is asking how can policymakers better learn from communities and practitioners about adaptation technologies that work. In the India example I think and the Nepal example are great ones. I mean the policymakers have got a clear vision with the water sheds or the soil organic matter and what they want to do but to turn that into reality so that it really works across the watershed across the soil agricultural landscape is going to require a lot more and it needs effective learning from what works in communities with farmers by communities. That's the first one the second one is what can we do as a community practice to facilitate the uptake of these technologies that work for communities and the last one may be diving down into the barriers and the enablers of the uptake of adaptation technologies. Which community probably can address those barriers and those enablers. These questions are prompts for you. What matters is that you have an active, a creative, a constructive discussion on the overarching question which is how adaptation technologies can improve the delivery of policy and planning so it's more effective and deliver adaptation and climate action. So you're going to be allocated groups by the organizers. You don't have to pick do all three questions. You need an active and a constructive discussion with key points of action. You've got 30 minutes and we're going to break out now. Okay let's kick off then shall we with the first group? Oh well actually I was in the first group. Do you want me to read? I just think you need to pick the top three or four points as we had put in the chat. If you haven't got but you can do them if you have them which would be great. From group one, the top four points that we have come up from the discussion is how best can we localize adaptation technologies issues and diversify the discussions. Positioning the community as stakeholders in the projects. Maybe in decision making incentivize the community to be part of the climate policy dialogue and lastly harvest and scale indigenous knowledge and technologies so that it can spread around and everybody gets a technology. Thank you. Maybe if I left somebody something my team can add but I think those ones are the four key ones. One thing I think the group would have wanted you to add was about co-creation is really important. It's known about for a long time and I think one of the things they identified is that some departments actually do work more closely with communities and they need to be involved in this co-creation from the beginning and their voice somehow needs to be empowered so that they influence policy better. It's not the norm. Perhaps those departments are the ones that are not normally given power in policy making. Our organizations need to get better at learning from communities and be political with how we use that learning. I thought that was an interesting message telling us to be political and be involved in advocacy. Interesting point. So I think if our group is unhappy with that report back for now please put it in the conference chat to make sure your point is up there but because of time we do need to move to the next group. The next group is Christine and Amias where they were the reporting facilities and reporters. So I'm reporting back on behalf of group two. Why is my Google not open? Okay so for question one what emerged was the issue of the need to generate the scientific evidence. Since policy makers work with evidence so we need to have that evidence that will allow them to integrate adaptation technologies within the policies. Then another issue was to consider community local community plans should be integrated into township or district development plans and this would act like a bind from the communities and would also attract the co-financing from them and be able to scale to bring to scale adaptation technologies. Then there was on the second issue of on the second question uptake of adaptation technology we noted that there is an issue there is a gap between the local and the national level so we need to empower communities to also be able to develop and input into the moment plans the relevant adaptation technologies that they feel are appropriate. Then for question three there was as an enabler one of the barrier was the caricature barriers and so the group thought it prudent that the communities should be involved in decision making from the what go in these technologies are being designed and being implemented are being piloted in their regions and also engagement with the networks so that the networks for example the CBOs the NGOs can be able to advocate for the existing adaptation technologies thank you so much. Christine, I think there's some very concrete very practical suggestions there this is really great, yeah well that's a great example we'll come back to it we'll have time for discussion. Group three is Monisha and Marie Claudia so Maria I think you Yes well we mainly have a very interesting conversation based on question number three which are the barriers and enables of the uptake of adaptation technology and I think there was tricky points address when the question the first is a really big barriers we need to address is that mainly policies or sometimes they're gender blind they don't focus on and that participatory methodologies there are just usually not include women or vulnerable communities especially if they are really far away in rural areas so it's something that need to be addressed it was mentioned that some of the causes for this is the lack of information of the needs and the problem of women and policymakers need to be embedded with these communities and their problems to actually mainstream gender within the policies the second key point that was mentioned is that even when climate is mainstreaming within national policies local policies and local planning is usually climate blind there are years behind when it's regarding mainstreaming climate and adaptation technology within their planning so this is an issue that need to be addressed and on the other hand community or also need to be informed and aware of the advantages of these adaptation technologies and the disadvantages of traditional ways of agriculture and finally something that was addressed was that sometimes policies are based on the needs of the private sectors and the market and is moved by the market if the industry needs some agricultural product for example it is usually really promoted at a national level so it was pointed out that there's need to be a balance between what the private sector needs and the markets and what is better for communities and their development so this is basically the three points we get to address within this question we also talk a little bit but not too much about the first one the first question about policymakers learn from communities but we basically just talk about how even so governments are willing to learn from communities sometimes the resources are not enough and it is really challenging and it's difficult but they need to prioritize some areas to influence and actually mainstream and do all these participatory adaptation that need to be to mainstream climate within their policies and that's everything I think I have to say for this sounds like you had a really valuable conversation and the gender focus I mean one thing I wanted just to be clarify were you saying that admittedly the national and local policymakers don't have the same perspective on gender and you are saying that the local policymakers are more blind than the national ones yes there was a something that came out yes well in terms of gender no they just mentioned in general at a national level sometimes it's not considered but in the in the climate approach I'm streaming normally the local policies and local planning don't include climate or adaptation technologies it's not that they are not aware but it is not included this national approach within their local policies okay so there's distinction there between gender and policies yes thank you next person next group I have on the thing group for you've got Carlos and Manila I think it's Manila's going to report back yes Chris thank you so we had a very interesting discussion in our group we had very diverse participants from different countries we discussed in all three questions but basically we tried to answer the main question how can adaptation technologies be used to make climate policies and plans more effective we discussed in our group that policy design is not an issue it's not a problem in every country we design a very good policy through a collaborative process but the implementation of the policy is a key challenge investments is a challenge so it really requires a very strong political commitment from the governments and not only from the governments from community and all the related stakeholders we discussed in a group that key barrier for adaptation technologies not going to scale is ignoring the community who adopts the adaptation technology you know we ignore the community we ignore their local indigenous knowledge and understanding we try to ignore their needs so the key suggestion that we have received is that engaging the community local people in adaptation technology is key for taking these adaptation technologies to scale and another suggestions that we received from our group is that the first one is we need to sensitize we need to create awareness about the adaptation technologies to everyone we need to sensitize community we need to some sensitize policymakers and we need to sensitize all relevant stakeholders engaged in adaptation technologies the second point that we found is that evidence we really need very good evidence from local level from ground level and most of the times we document only the successful evidence to inspire the policymakers but it doesn't always work so we have to document the evidence from the ground not only the successful cases but also the failure cases what works and what does not so that we can really inspire and inform our policymakers another key point that we discussed is about the engagement so we need to engage community people but we also need to engage government all different types of the government not only the local government because sometimes the local government has very limited reach so we need to engage all different types of national local and provincial government in the adoption of the climate technologies if the local government is inspired and convinced then it's very easy to replicate widely in other areas too and another point the most strong point i would say that came out from our group is effective communication we really need to communicate evidence effectively to all the stakeholders to everyone in a way that everyone understands you know and feel the gap and how technology can be conceived we discussed that the science have to be beyond the evidence and the idea have to be well understood by everyone thank you for that last but not the least is about the community best at book ac because it's the community who are adapting the technologies you know so we need to empower communities so that they can advocate on their one for the adaptation technology so we need community best at book ac yes that's our group but there was a lot in your group there was a lot there and we mustn't lose that richness so i think we're going to have to capture those points well interesting was your message that if local government are convinced it's easier to convince national government i do feel there's some contrasting messages coming through here between about the differences in the strengths and weaknesses or relevance of local and national government we don't have time to unpack it sadly though we need to go to the next group which is devrage and raffaida i can't remember who is feeding back i think it's raffaida hello everyone so our group also has the emphasize and on response to question when emphasize on the importance of creating the link between the community and the policymakers and building that space where the community can have their voice heard and also to create that co-learning and co-producing environment and it also they emphasize on the importance of testing and ensuring that these ideas or this knowledge are effective on the on the long run they also said about to achieve this link it's important to capitalize the role of the cbo's the community-based organizations because they are underestimated and they need to be uh they are very close to the communities and they can create that links between the policy level and the the community level for the for the second questions the they talked about the importance of bridging that gap and bringing the knowledge to the ground and establishing that connections so into different level also they mentioned the importance of including the academia their researcher and the from the local universities because they also have the the local context and they they have the knowledge and they can support on developing the policies but this is all shows how it's important to for the communities to be really involved with that from the beginning regarding the question three the the enablers for the for uh technological adaptation technologies there was an examples from Kenya on the use of incentives uh to not necessarily money incentive by providing subsidies or trainings or others to help communities that to help adapting or to be more adapting using adaptive practice um uh interestingly the the group also talked about the role of the private sectors and how they can have really particularly the the small producers and the small cooperatives uh how they can be a really enabler for adaptive technologies and how they can help uh providing services and support the livelihood by providing access to the market uh and providing services at the at the local level uh also with bearing in mind the sustainability of the private sectors because they are really concerned about the the profit making profits and this is required the government to support uh by providing subsidies or whatever so I think you've provided a segue there or your group provided a segue to the session on Thursday about finding the finance where we're looking at the business case for government to invest in these incentives to to for uptake of adaptation by people and private sector investment too anyway two more groups to go through we're not doing so well in time at the moment it's so try to keep it quick so we have an opportunity for feedback other dialogue as well Maria and Anna Maria thank you Chris for that uh what was coming out strongly in the group for the first question is the the need for documentation and evidence generation so that uh clear messages can be shared with the policy matters and also that the policies also need to be appropriate enough to address the various contextual needs of the different communities and there was also what also was coming out was that there is need to include all the stakeholders and also getting the youth involved as well then on the second one on how the community of practice can you know enhance uptake what came out strongly was that there is need for all the practitioners to acknowledge that indeedness knowledge systems are very critical and we should not just go into communities and come with the top-down approach but to also look at how the communities have been handling and what technologies are existing there and then we then build up from there and then there was also um what was also coming out was that there's need to identify models which work for particular areas to address specific issues using the technologies and then once that is done they they is need then to validate that it works and find ways of upscaling uh with others and then on there was also on the second one still excuse me there's also uh what was coming out was there's need to enter into MOUs with local local area authorities and governments to demonstrate uh technologies which work within those local communities and those can be used to influence at a higher level and then on the barriers we just managed to bring out a few um the educational levels also the differences in farm income and finally limited access to agriculture extension thank you Chris over to you Maria thank you um and the groups have done so well you've covered all these questions um these are rich points here um engaging the youth there is a session on Thursday about that adaptation technologies that will enable young people to thrive um that can deep dive down deep into that one last group group seven um Robert and Harrison I think Robert uh you were nominated to give you back on this one hi Chris thank you very much well we had a very interesting discussion and regarding the question one and I think a lot of points that we discussed really resonate well with other groups with what other groups have discussed so in terms of the point one point one uh it was there was a lot of talk about uh a need for policy makers to address and recognize the grassroots initiative so to understand that communities are central for the process to understand and recognize their indigenous knowledge their indigenous technologies their context-based technologies uh and also there was a mentioning that you know related to local knowledge is that communities really have the crucial data that can provide that can facilitate the uptake of of adaptation technologies and their better effectiveness so for instance uh communities affected by flooding will be best placed to know where the floods happen so to help with you know the local risk information then how do we if we if we think of the second question it was very connected to what was discussed in the first in the terms of how do we you know how do we make uh how do we enable and facilitate the sharing of these lessons and the group proposed that kind of a three-step process it was a lot about a need for a platform where uh the platform for policy makers practitioners and communities where we can create the linkages between the three groups and share best practices it's partnering with national government agencies responsible for research and development and it's also uh that you know policymakers can learn and be guided in developing policies that support adaptation technologies that will work for local communities then similar to other groups there was a lot of emphasis on the need for evidence so good policies need to be evidence-based so that's that's really important when it comes when it comes to the barriers and enablers one of the big barriers we identified is just this mismatch between you know rhetorics and between practice when it comes to involvement of local communities so there is this huge disconnect between local communities and policymakers and universities and researchers etc so it's very difficult for local communities to have dialogue with policymakers due to lack of connectivity different levels of education and just existing hierarchies so there is a very limited flow of information between national and local levels so community-based organizations could be a key enabler there one thing that we thought was was really really important was not mentioned I think so far was just thinking of the sample thinking of the scale so one crucial problem when it comes to the upscale of adaptation technologies that we need to think about is the fact that they are local they're based on the local context environmental social and political context so you know how not to lose that contact baseness while mainstreaming it into into policies thank you thank you Robert look we are one minute over time but I'd like to say we've got something really quite valuable to do we do need to I think get takeaways from Christine who's been listening to all of this as co-host and takeaways from Peru, Nepal and India the three presenters if we have time after that we can also get takeaways from others can I start with Devaraj and then Christine to follow and then we'll come to Carlos and I'm missing Manisha but really it's one minute the question is this you presented a case of EBA and what's shed in India you've heard all of this is there anything now you can take away from this that you might might help with your work going forward in India and Guatemala but just to remind of our work we are trying to elaborate a roadmap to to have this upscaling of EBA watershed program and I think I mean one of the takeaway I will have in short from today is how can the the role of the private sector in this in this in helping to sustain first you know initiative with beyond their funding beyond a project beyond the life time of a project so if you have a private sector involved let it be to cooperative or small farmers connecting maybe to other bigger private farmers they might help to sustain by bringing funding by enhancing market access and that also can be helpful in the roadmap we want to scale up and a private sector could be something a player in addition to the government and the local community that's a great takeaway thank you Devaraj I mean that's interesting challenge to people as well passing now to Christine I mean I knew Devaraj had to leave that's why we went to Devaraj we will come to Carlos and Munisha next but Christine from what you've heard I've written two down for me but what are your takeaways thank you Chris my main takeaway from this is that we need the research evidence on the adaptation technologies that are working and how this can be integrated into policies and plans then the next is we need to also empower communities and evolve them in decision making when drafting the policies and actions so that they can input on the issue of adaptation technologies that can work for their respective localities then the reason also the need to capitalize on the role of CBOs and also networks as well as communities to be able to advocate for adaptation technologies that work thank you so much I wonder whether the NDC process which everybody's saying must be consultative is that a way to we should use that to empower communities for you know try and get them and those CBOs to engage in this NDC process and moving quickly on though can I see Carlos hello Chris yes I have three more takeaways oh I'm not sure you've got time for three yeah I was just going to say from the tree I'm going to say one that I hear before and I think applies to Peru that is that is the importance of of the youth in these in these changing aspects it is the next generation and we saw that for the coffee or forestry farmers they have an advanced age and the youth is moving away from the fields so we need to work on that in order to have a continuous impact over the years if not it will have a problem and you think that could change government could that change policy and planning in Peru exactly because the youth is more actively in in policy nowadays the youth has a bigger role in the policy so they have the power to make this change over the time it's not a thing that it will happen the next year I like the idea they'll be around to fight the battle later on too exactly no rather two ones can you put them in the chat box because I'd really realize I was a bit naughty I cut you off but I do want to give money and then everybody else whilst we're on because we are interested in your takeaways too please can you put if you feel we're not going to we're not at the time we're not going to get them put your takeaways in the chat box whilst this is happening but in whilst that's how you share thank you Chris I think in the case of Nepal the key takeaways have been about the co-learning and co-producing platform creation of that platform is what is key I think and it has to be sustainable that platform in itself has to be sustainable and what really drew my attention was the point on sensitizing all stakeholders on adaptation technology when we're dealing with multi stakeholders we need to be able to sensitize all of them and to do so we need effective communication of evidence to all stakeholders in a way that they understand I think that is the key to get everybody on board that's what the government of Nepal needs to do they need to create a platform and they need to sensitize everyone involved and communicate in a manner that that is understood by all the stakeholders so for private sector they have to speak in their language for researchers and academia they have to speak in their language so that's my key takeaway thank you Chris over to you thank you um well I think what this session has highlighted so far is that there is a lot of work still to be done on gender on youth on addressing this disconnect and the disconnect is in many places it seems to be between national and local government in the use of indigenous knowledge in maybe getting cbo's connected in the policy process in engaging the private sector my takeaway is more of you have talked about advocacy um than I would have expected prior to this meeting and in cba we haven't really talked a lot about well have we talked about advocacy as much as this before I don't know I wonder whether there's a change in tone because of the importance of the challenge facing us and the need to find win-win solutions and get that evidence out there um we have run out of time we've gone eight minutes over according to mine um unless uh I see I don't someone's told me I've missed something absolutely critical that somebody who appoints someone wants to make I'm going to suggest we actually do wrap up um but I want to thank everybody necessarily I think it's been a brilliant session maybe if you see where the reactions are you can give us a thumbs up a thumbs down whether you want to follow on you've still got the chat box they're live there for a moment but the discussion goes on on the notice board and we will try and write this up with the main action points coming from this session Christine thank you to you for co-hosting with me sorry I've talked a lot but I hope it's been worked for you as well thank you to Chris thank you everybody