 Some people say that life began at 40, and I think we start the life again since 40 years ago in 1972, mark my word, 1972 is not 40 years from now. In Stockholm, people say that in the conference that was before the Earth Summit in Rio, that if we continue this path of ignorance and negligence, a very bad thing is going to happen to this planet. That was 1972. And then people talk about that. In 1992 we have the Earth Summit, and then after the Earth Summit, you have the UNCCC, UNCBD, UNCCD, as if the solution of the planet problems on climate change and other things can be solved with separate silos. It does in terms of getting to the clarity of the matter, the scientific analysis of that, but it's time now to converge again. So when we are talking about forests since Montreal to Bali to the next Copenhagen and others, we are now back to landscape. Because when you're talking about those negligence, those ignorance, we are talking about landscape. In 1972, landscape was the agenda, and now we are back to landscape as an agenda. Why I mentioned 40 years? Because the idea of landscape was brought to the front in the year 2012. That was in Doha. So 40 years, now we are two years into the time when we are getting back to the roots of the issue, to the roots of the solution, finding the solution to the root of the issue. I believe, ladies and gentlemen, that when President mentioned about sustainable growth with equity, we were talking about several criteria, several indicators that we need to address. Emission is one of those criteria. Emission is one of those indicators to address. But not only that, we also need to address the issue of growth. We need to address the issue of development. We need to address the issue of governance. We need to address the issue of equity and inclusiveness. Those are the things that, in my opinion, is what our President mentioned yesterday. And I think that has to come in a way that is properly done here. The diffraction of the two days that I have been around here listening, both the noise and the voice, both the sound, the concern, solution, thoughts, as well as complain and protest, was actually something that goes into the two areas. There are substantive things, what needs to be done, and what can we do about it? And when do we start action on that? And the other side is talking about how do we actually fund that? How can we actually channel the resources to make that happen? We understand the discussion about the public fund, the private investment, the private fund, and all those things. Let me reflect on that and discuss that on a metaphor of the flow of water. On the top end, you have the upstream. That is where the fund can come from. In the middle, you have the dam. And then after the dam, you have the downstream, where the money or whatever the resources is, is going to be applied such that the whole objective of achieving sustainable growth with equity is happening, not only happening but also work. What are those things that we consider to be flowing into the dam? And where are they in the films of things? Let's look into this. Where is the supply and where is the demand? Because always you have to have the flow. Talking about funds, you're saying that the supply will come from the private sector, will come from the donor country, so to speak, the developed country, and get into a mechanism that will now get into the forested country for distribution and for development in the right way. But let's think about it on the reverse side. You have the painting of Azure whereby the stairs goes up and down at the same time. The carbon, what we are, the emission that we reduce, the reduction of the impact to the climate change that we happen in this country, the forested country, is actually a supply that can ask for the demand for the fund to pay for it. So actually you're talking about two kinds of flow, the flow of resources and the flow of results. And these two flow needs to be balanced. It is not proper to just discuss the flow of funds to finance to develop the outcome, which is the reduction of emission, the development in an equitable basis, and then there is no demand. What is the point of having a certification if there is no differentiation on the price of your commodity? So you're talking about the flow of the results to the demand as to being the supply and the supply of funds, I will say funds in the general terms, to feed the development so that that will create the product. That is a metaphor that you're talking about, the flow and the flow can only happen if there is a difference in high, if there is a difference in level so that it can flow, which means what? The demand needs to be as high or higher than the supply to get this flow continuously moving. Look into that. We, the developed country, sorry, we, the forested country will say when you're talking about red plus, when you're talking about funds on the sustainable landscape for green growth, we are the supplier of the solution for the climate change. Where is the resources that will make us able to supply? That is the equation that needs to be addressed. Alright, that is in terms of the flow. But when you're talking about funds here, I'm not talking about money alone. I'm talking about funds, the skills, the capacity, the expertise that is already being developed somewhere else, and also the time and attention. If those flow is not having all this element, if there is no expertise, no flow of resources, if there is no time and attention from the developing country for producing that results, there is no flow again. So, this is a flow not only of money but also of expertise, flow of technology and flow of time and attention. I am just continuing this from my last landscape meeting when landscape is only landscape and it is going to be silent, it's going to be quiet if there is no flow considered that. The flow of money, the flow of goods, the flow of people and the flow of technology and knowledge. They are an integral part of the analysis on landscape. And that is what I reflect listening to the various speakers during these two days. And then we have come a full circle and beyond. Why I mentioned that beyond? Because in this conference, I will ask myself, if I do this conference in Accra, will we have the same agenda? If we have this conference in Lima, will we have the same agenda? And I think 85% of the agenda will be the same and 15% will be specific to the locations because this is a global problem that we will call for global solution. But what is that plus? This conference normally have a lot of age people like me. But this one, we are youth with us. And that is so important to me because I always say in a meeting whereby youth is present because they are very important. So today, ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to knock on your gate and ask dear leaders of the day, am I allowed to get in? Have I done good for your future or have I done bad so that you can refuse me to enter your world? And I hope when that time comes, the youth will say, oh yeah, you have been in that confidence in Jakarta, right? And because of that, I will welcome you all to be the citizen of the future because that is what sustainable landscape for green growth is all about. It's about the future, it's about the generation that is to come and to come and to come. Not only 25 years, not only 40 years, but forever. Thank you very much.