 So, during the session, Tech and I are going to outline a new programme that we've been working on for the last 18 months, kind of 24 months at my own level. It builds very substantially on the, it builds on the terms of the urban quality and informality work that's been underway in Ireland since it's been a human settlerist group. And I guess it's, when I started, I really found myself in the longstanding full-time memory group in the settlement group. And that wasn't the case when I joined 10 years ago. And I guess when I started, the work was moving, the work our partners was moving from solely focusing on the quality of informality to thinking about adaptation and how that's raising the need for more settlements in such a high Africa and Latin America, foods also incorporate or would also incorporate a focus on resilience. But I guess, for most of the time that I've been here, there's been very little focus on decarbonisation and mitigation in formal settlements. I think that's principally these people that live in formal settlements where there are small companies, small companies that want to be burdened with decisions around decarbonisation. The programme of work that we're establishing at the moment with our partners is, is principally around this idea, they're a generation defining investments and cities that are happening at the moment on the focus on the situation. And if lowering them and all the communities that are excluded from those discussions and decisions in those investments, we know that poverty and inequality will be exacerbated. So that's the stuff with where we're at. And we're just going to have a bit of a conversation about how, how and why we're committed to those agendas. And then we're going to hand over to our colleague in part that she was going to send us over from Zimbabwe, I know who's online from Buenos Aires. Yeah, so this burden has really led to really fruitful conversations with the colleagues in IED as well as partners from the world, and also very often productive kind of tension and conflicts about where we put our attention and where we put our resources. But we maintain that is actually very important for us to begin the work to link kind of a global climate justice agenda as well as urban climate justice with mitigation and zero carbon cities. And this, it's taken a while to get here for the past couple of decades. Climate justice has really remained at this global level where the default subject was also a nation state representing kind of very abstract populations. It doesn't mean that haven't been effort to localize climate justice. There have been very commendable ones and they've focused for good reasons on adaptation. And that makes sense because poor populations in our countries disproportionately suffered the effects of climate change. We, as Anna was saying, so much of the drive and especially finance is focused on mitigation. And so we believe that if we continue to operate in this mitigation adaptation silos, we run the risk of leaving our prime low income populations as we kind of make very definitive decisions about what cities are going to look like and how we plan economic development. In fact, mitigation investments might end up subsidizing sustainable living for the middle and higher income earners in cities while they either ignore or potentially displace low income populations. And what we are trying to do is kind of moving beyond a conversation about cold benefits. So very often when we see climate policy experts talking about innovations in cities, and why we need to implement certain sustainable practices, it's sold with a series of cold benefits to make cities more inclusive, greener and healthier. But we would like to kind of start these conversations and with the priority of justice and equality as intertwined with decarbonisation. And we think that this is important, definitely from a normative perspective, but also because efforts to decarbonize simply won't be successful if you don't have a majority population supporting policies and do that. So we need to sell solutions that kind of operationally serve the interests of middle class of the work of course. When we see there are a lot of unmet needs and inequality, so we're looking at investment needs of 6 trillion US dollars to kind of provide adequate infrastructure to more than 1 billion people living in settlements. How can we leverage momentum and finances to respond to these needs. The kind of a staggering statistic is 80% of urban buildings and infrastructure that will exist in 255.5% content to be built. So how can we ensure that investments in a sustainable built environment that everyone in the city might be so bold to suggest that investments should disproportionately benefit the urban core than the urban core disproportionately suffer the consequences of climate change. Yeah, just in addition to that, I guess lots of people that are familiar with IRZs know that we have a long history of decentralising the need to decentralise development finance, to decentralise climate finance. Adige's work focus is quite strongly on the need to decentralise adaptation finance to make sure that it gets to communities and local governments who are on the front line of climate change, but we know that 90% of climate finance is actually on the need to decentralise adaptation and the idea that we haven't been able to develop a narrative or a framework with our partners that's focused on getting that finance to some uproading programmes to housing to basic services with a huge deficit and actually about investments is essential. I think that's the most important thing. Our work in this actually stuff in Latin America will get to the opportunity to start thinking about this and that's going to have to come to the group and that will take a bit more about that project. Sorry, so we have a few initiatives looking at the largest of which is an IKI funded project in Latin America. We've worked with a consortium of partners to set up five urban labs in Buenos Aires and Argentina, Teresina and Recife in Brazil and in Mexico, Leon and Nadalpan. This project is using urban labs with multi-stakeholder participants from communities from civil societies, private sector, municipal government as well as academia to define problems in the addressing and to deliver solutions that are aligned with zero-coding trajectories. What's interesting here, reflecting on operational patients, is that we can see the different approaches from the urban labs operating in different political contexts with different governing closures as well as different setups of what participation looks like and how it feels like and how decisions are made. This has led, again, to a lot of productive tensions not only within each urban lab but also when we close exchanges across geographies so they can exchange what does inclusion and participation mean and now on Mexico versus in Villa Renta, which is an informal salon in Buenos Aires, Argentina. This is very much the beginning of a conversation which we hope we can build on across future project environments. We're trying to kind of handle that process at the moment by using series of global and regional dialogues because we can do this work with partners in Latin America but we also have a really strong network of partners in South Saharan Africa. We've been working on issues within policy and adaptation for some time so over the next two to three months we're seeing a series of regional dialogues but we're trying to kind of try to unpick the relationship or the potential relationship between a fraudurising of climate action that includes decalculation and social justice and to dispel this myth but that we don't have a role to play in decisions or investments related to simplification. What's been really interesting in the last couple of weeks because we've just hosted the first dialogue is that we're considering how progressive climate action or focus on miscation could potentially crack open challenges around India or how local knowledge and local building materials can be brought to the table, given the debates that kind of largely European driven around potential to invest in a system that made up timber. So how can you bring them on a gym? How can you think about like that availability of local resources to not only upgrades in a sustainable way but in a way that kind of contributes to decalculation? Linking back to the theme of the day, we're going to highlight a special issue in environmental organisations that's going to be published next spring on this exact theme and we're going to host a couple of abstract workshops on that. And I guess just to emphasise for you to be trust through the theme that we'll host an abstract workshop in English and also in Spanish that you can submit in Spanish, Portuguese or English or French. So if you're interested in thinking and you'd like to kind of look test and abstract out with us, we'd really welcome your participation now. But before, I guess, unless you've got anything else to add, I'd like to invite George Macimbran to the text in the panel to talk a bit about the impact of climate change in forms that I'm looking forward to. George didn't prepare a pathway, but it's my fault. It's not up there. We have to connect. We'll be always learning. I'm not going to touch that. Thank you, Adam. Hello, everyone. My name is George Macimbran. I'm from Diolch and Shorthack, an organisation that is working in SLAMU last international. And I'm going to go through a presentation that will focus on the intersection between climate change and urban informality or informal settings. So as I indicated, I work with the SDI and in terms of the way that we do, it's grounded around the three key principles or approaches in terms of community management settings. The ... processes, and then learning along continuous relation processes. These approaches have been refined over the years by the SDI. We think they are very key in terms of the current project that we are coming forward. cymdeilio'r cyfrifio mor adresyn, lleiwyr cyflwytoedd, yn ffocws yn gyfor mawr sylwn. A oedden nhw'n cael ei ffordd y cyflwytoedd cyflwytoedd yn gyflwytoedd, gyda'r cyfrifio yng nghymru o'r gyflwytoedd yn Aral, a'rldeych yn ymddir i'w ddiwylliannol, mae'n ddiwethaf i'r eich ystyried o gyrfaenau, i ddim yn ymddir i'r cyfrifio'r cyfrifio'r cyfrifio, fylirio a'na fyddai werthio. Felly, y gallai cyd-feydd hynny yn paroedd o'r paroedd. Fy ydy'r hyn yn ymgyrch gael eu warnebu o'r holladeg ëa gynllunio Gwynhgyrch ond y gwelwaith holladeg ëa gael'r paroedd. Felly, y gallai cyd-feydd hynny yn yr ymgyrch, na fyddai yr ymgyrch yn paroedd... ..cynny'n roi'r paroedd ar y gynhau Gwynhgyrch... ..yna gen hopeau i s eden o hefyd o ddimyn nhw i'r fferwyd o'r holladeg o'r holladeg yn robbyd. of assets, loss of property, distraction of housing. In addition to that, we also notice a distraction of interest tracker is a value for the flooding, plug-in for drains, for example, as part of some of the effects that you notice in formal settlements. In addition to that, droughts, recurrent droughts also is a value or impact in formal settlements in terms of drying up for water sources and also a level for water in formal settlements. This is implications also on social issues. For example, whenever a challenge is to do with water, that also presents an added burden on women in terms of a collection of water, they have to walk long distances. And also, in addition to that, there are also social issues. If some of these communal water points are for gender-based violence and during COVID, for example, with very disturbing cases of sex for water, for example, communal water points for women or girls to access point. In terms of health issues in formal settlements, we talk of water-borne diseases in cities where we are flooding, vector-borne diseases in terms of flooding again, malaria, like that. And also, the amount of nutrition due to food insecurity exacerbated by drought conditions. So, all these impacts, all these issues, you consider them against the vector of the conditions in informal settlements, where basic services are a challenge, social services also are a challenge. Then you begin to imagine the kind of vulnerabilities, the kind of challenges that are faced by informal settlements in terms of climate change. If we talk about these impacts in informal settlements, I think that my problem just illustrates some of these impacts. I will proceed to the intro course. Why is it important to connect climate change actions with heaven upgrade or an improvement of informal settlements? Like I indicated, informal settlements constitute some of the most vulnerable parts of the cities with housing infrastructure planning. In that context, it is very imperative to connect climate actions with upgrading. In fact, climate change responses heaven upgrading in particular contributes towards adaptation and mitigation measures. For example, coming up with criminal water points, for example, coming up with innovations such as waterless sanitation toilets, for example, all these are innovations that fall under heaven upgrading, but at the same time contribute towards addressing the challenges that communities face in informal settlements. Then thirdly, there are very huge opportunities for connecting with community-led experiences around, for example, community management plans and the scale of climate change action. In other words, imagining climate actions or imagining upgrading in climate change actions is connected and allows us to then begin to develop approaches of climate actions from below, from the bottom up. Heaven took that point, the potential connections between climate change actions or climate actions in upgrading. What are the challenges that we have noted in our experience working in cities, working in informal settlements? First of all, it is important to note that this very limited, I like to present mention of data, was my challenge to speak to that as well. There is very limited evidence and institutional capacity in particular within government, all the central and global government level, which helps to illustrate intersections between climate actions in informal settlement upgrading. Assuming we have a lot of data in institutional capacity within government, at both level, central and global government level, that would then make it very difficult for an imperative to act or to ensure that climate change actions are mainstream in terms of how we imagine and progressives in our cities. In the end, as we speak, or in best-in-our context, there is very limited evidence, very limited data and institutional capacity. Therefore, at a policy level, the connection is not very sufficiently articulated and pronounced because there isn't that information, there isn't that evidence to really stress and highlight the connections between the two. Related to that, informal settlements are also not recognised, hence the challenge. So the default mode for local governments, for city managers, is to demolish informal settlements. And that presents a huge challenge in terms of how they deal with the impact of climate actions when informal settlements are not being acknowledged or at least considered as part of the city. Depending on the public also in many of the contexts in Sub-State and in the global south, also making it difficult because of issues to do with erosion of disposable incomes and end savings, which typically cushion communities in terms of the artist's impact of climate change. Then there is also the element of the huge costs that are associated with transitions to sustainable infrastructure that, for example, we talk of solar power lighting in informal settlements, much as that pathway is important and is desirable. Increasingly, what we are noticing is that that transition to sustainable infrastructure option is not an easy part. They are very expensive in terms of the initial costs that are associated with transitioning from non-sustainable metals to sustainable trips like this solar. Then lastly, in terms of the challenges, as a result of the lack of data that I talked about earlier, there is also a lack of policies and agreements to support specific climate actions. For example, decentralized energy solutions, decentralized infrastructure or off-grid infrastructure options. All these typically speak to a sustainable infrastructure and yet we don't have adequate policy agreements in our city that then embrace or incorporate these alternatives. They need to be. They haven't talked about challenges that exist. It's also important they have to play some of the opportunities that are there in terms of the intersections between climate change and informal settlements that are free. So in terms of the SDIs experience, there is massive grassroots infrastructure that has been set up in terms of organized communities that are safe in, that are regular meeting, that are engaging in each other, which presents an opportunity in terms of making sure that you can come up with local-related, for example, adaptation or localized climate actions that are designed or informed by community events. So there's that massive grassroots infrastructure in place. Then secondly, there's also massive experience around community-led data collection in terms of SDIs experience. And I've also talked about that. So essentially, what I'm saying is that it's important for any climate action to be also informed by community knowledge, by experiences or by those who are meeting this reality on a daily basis. So growing or connecting with community knowledge also presents opportunities in terms of dealing with access to climate change. Then as part of SDI, what we've also been doing is also experimenting around issues to do with co-managed funds. It's a way of creating alternative innovative financing mechanism that can potentially link with the global finance that seeks to address the advocacy parts of climate change. For example, we have what we call community-lawn funds that are operated, administered and governed by communities in terms of using savings as a way of ensuring that those funds are resolved. But they are not only being resourced by communities. We have also used those community-managed funds or city-level funds to also kind of leverage resources from the state, leverage resources in particular from city government. It's a prebuter about that, that besides creating additional resources that can potentially yield in terms of upgrading inter-pages, they also create an inclusive governance mechanism that can begin to potentially inform the money in each resources flow in terms of priorities for upgrading in terms of priorities for climate action. And then lastly, there's also a history of engagement in the state. I think somebody talked about the opportunities or potential for linking with the state. I think it's on the basis of the experience of FDR, there's been a lot of collaboration or collaboration that has been undertaken with the state, in particular focusing on local authorities. And we think that presents opportunities for building collaborations or also even scaling initiatives that are undertaken by communities in terms of also even building trust, even also potential for building state capacity and creating opportunities for collaborative actions that give the orient approaches towards informal settlements. Consider that I mentioned that it defaults response usually to informal settlements, usually demolitions, efficient sector. So in the interthink of collaborations, partnerships, that also is called for ensuring that more inclusive approaches given in informal settlements are adopted and employed as part of climate responses. I think with those a few remarks, thank you. I want to ask you a question of the proposed presentation. So it moves on how are we all the way over to the point of silence now. Snow Coney's idea like that here, which is an artistial presentation of ours, is that we have to represent the mountains. If you're there, I'm going to add it to you. I don't know, we'll have a pause of conversation about both. Yes, hello. Do you hear? Yes. Okay. Hello, everyone. I'm Florencial Mansley from IDD America Latina. We are based in Buenos Aires, Argentina. And as Stacker mentioned, before we are working together in this project, together with Mexico and Brazil. And I think I have a presentation if you can share. Morgan was telling me that it was Hold on one second. Sorry. Okay. Well, we were asked to think into questions how to link climate change, the carbonisation with the situation in informal settlements. That's the first question we want to share. We think about five priorities that can explain why to link these issues. Next, please. Next. First of all, it's the matter of growth of the cities and growth of informal settlements. We all know that most of the population in the world and also in that in the south, the global south and in Latin America, 25% of the population is living in informal settlements and 29% in Latin America. But we have 45% of the population in Nicaragua and 15% of the population in Argentina living in informal settlements. So there's a lot of investment to make in the next year in this part of the cities in informal settlements. The other thing is the inequality in the cities. You know, Buenos Aires is the richest city in the country. And this is the situation you can see that the informal settlements have in the middle of the city of Buenos Aires. The same has happened in all the cities of the country. Most of the people living in informal settlements live in a vulnerable way. But they are in an urban context with around. They have all the service and all the houses for living in better situations. But the visuals, that's how we call informal settlements in Buenos Aires, in the city, live in an urban context without all the benefits that this urban context brings to the other people in the city. The next. The other reason is to bring services and life conditions to the population and the community living in the visas. They are lacking services and conditions for better health and assistance in extreme events. And also they are not being the priorities actors in the decision making of the policies in the city and in the country. Next. And another thing is that we think that everything has to be done in these places in informal settlements. And it's the opportunity to change the way of doing things because there's a lot of investment to set in informal settlements. And this investment has to change the way of doing or making the city. And we have the opportunity here. This is an imagine of how the visa vente was at the first moment when the urbanization process began six years ago. And the second figure B is the meta where the informal settlement has to get to include social and urban in the city. And everything here has to be done. We have to open streets to make services, infrastructure, bring social inclusion to the population. And this is now being done in many aspects in the same way that was done 50 years ago. So it's the opportunity to change the construction of the city here. Next. And of course, the community, the social leaders, they are not in the center of the decisions. The community is who is the community built the neighborhoods and makes the great efforts to improve the place, but they are not in the center of the decision when the investments are put in place there. So which are the opportunities we have to change this? The next please. And the challenge we see for our work working in urban labs in the Indonesia in these last two years. The next please. The first things we think that the traditional way of planning interventions, in this case, urbanization process has to be changed through another framework that takes in account a process that has master plan has like a meta of this process. But in this process, things are decisions are made together with the local authorities, the social leaders and the community to go through this long period of investment and produce the change in the urbanization of the visa, in this case, visa rate. This process project allows to share knowledge in between the actors to look for innovation in the implementation of the process. And all of these things have to be done through the consensus building, not because one of the actors of the sectors decided not because of the consensus between all the actors involved in this process. The next. Another thing that is very important, and we were listening of this now in the session, the producing the collected data in a different way. We are trying to implement, we are implementing in the visa the collect of the collect of a temperature range. And this is going to do with the community putting different thermometers to take temperature and humidity in the visa. This system is going to produce data that everyone in the community with their phones has the possibility to consult. And this is the way that the community here, there are 5,000 families living in the visa can not only know, but produce data in a collective way. Next. The other thing that's very important is how to share learnings and capacities through the urban labs that are taking place in this event. People from the academia is participating, people from the government, local authorities, social leaders and community are participating. And we think that it's so important. People from the community are learning a lot from the academia and experts, but also experts. The academia sector is learning a lot about the real life in the community through the social leaders that are participating in the labs. So we think that the horizontal way of sharing knowledge is what brings the integration of an issue that is very difficult to include in the demands that climate change, because the social movements and the community is going through other demands. And speaking about climate change is not so easy, but when we start working with this project in Villa Rente, we think that it was going to be impossible to introduce this issue and knowledge of climate change, but it was a process of integration, all the things in Villa, the living conditions, the health conditions and the social conditions were integrated all with the issues of climate change. And now social leaders and experts have the same narrative about the process. And that is why we think that the horizontal learnings are important in this process to change things. The other thing is learning by doing that we think that it's important to change things. It's not about a formal capacity building or formal sharing knowledge. It's about sharing knowledge and learning through doing and implementing actions that change the city or the place in different parts of the region. Next. And of course, one of the opportunities we have is to introduce natural-based solutions and blue-green infrastructure in a rare urbanisation process in the city, but it's not so easy to do because we have some rules, norms that were written by 50 years ago. And it's not so... And these norms does not available the introduction of other kinds of infrastructure. And this is a transition moment to start changing these things and introduce a different path or streets in the vision so to show that things can be done differently. The next. Another situation is the maintenance of these communal spaces in the same way that infrastructure cannot be changed in many places. Maintenance communal spaces cannot be changed because of the ways that they were made along all these years and nothing is easy to change. So it's another issue that we have to work on. The next. So well, we think that we have to change the educational and productive metric and the status quo of the public works because everything is going on in the same way and it's a moment to change through education and through the productive way of doing things to change the way that cities and in this case informal settlements must improve the conditions of life. And also coordinating investment and decisions to make citizens resilient and inclusive for all the community of the cities. And this is the last one I think. Thank you so much. I'd like to explain what I would really like to get your thoughts and reflections on this. From both contexts, I think the thing that's most striking is how often we use the word opportunity with resused. The amount of opportunities that create new entry points to tackle all the problems as we start to think about mitigation. But I guess that mitigation might be anything in the context in the form of that, although that's right, you'll be looking at the technical framework problem. These are going to be the issues that I've got on there, but I know that this happens to be the first one since the 19th. But without the sake of any more time, I knew I was going to go out and have fun with it before lunch. Have you thought some questions, any specific questions? You might have to look at my list or any of those questions. If you're in a room, I'll just repeat the question back to you. Thank you very much. I'm Lorraine Dumbledore. I want to thank Mrs Trefford and Fema Foswllton. I think just reflections and I've been trying to link to the earlier session. What is really interesting is when we bring in community leaders, they tend to be at high to organise themselves, to think, to process things. It doesn't mean that they're rushing at this time or they're thinking of trying to do something of that kind of thing. But then when you then take the drop-down approach, in most cases, the timeline is very fixed and rushed. You bring time and finance in them. It has to be done in the same time. But when you look at these unions, it's a lot of time passes. You have time to think of the future. So the idea of thinking the everyday that was talked about and trying to link it to the future is something that is so demanding on those communities that have to deal with everything. So I don't know how that can be something that can be combined. It's this element of fun. Yes, I would do nothing, but we have to slow down. We have to go. And often what I also notice, especially in the multinatural development groups, corporations like the Asian World Bank and other places, they seem to not get to mean that when they're approaching communities need time. Do you think process the vocabulary that they are giving or introducing at this rate is? The process one views that has to, you know, they need to make sense of something that is coming from archive, which they are already experiencing anyway, but it comes with something new. Because we're using finance and knowledge. So I think time is really critical. And here also you find they are not approaching just as climate change or climate risk. It's evidence. So they are combining different things. Which again, if we look at the top down, they are generous and very silent, which is why I appreciate the idea of the world where we're looking at finance in relation to people that need to do that. So that's some of the learning I'm getting from the separate ways we're talking about such as that. And we're talking about that. But there are similarities to just the basic approaches. And it's sort of incremental. I think it just brought me back to accumulator resilience. One of David's paper, a paper that goes into accumulator resilience. Not that we used to say we need to do, finally we need to be managing resilience. But if we use other things in place, they will help in terms of management resilience. Because it's a constant, a long process. I think the adults are going for it. Thank you. Thank you. Any other comments from the room? Thanks very much. I really enjoyed the presentation. Will I say a couple of things that come to mind on that? So when you highlight basically bottom up the process of data collection, but also the learning you might do into this, do you think it can bring to me the openness page for new representation, which is the one that I see in the face of this and making it great. And second, I think ideas are not only the knowledge that you see, but also basically the actual relationship that you're doing for the user. So to effect change, we need these cross-colours relation. So people that don't have a space to have any learning to be transferred to a book page. But I wonder, using these transformational spaces is not, if you can actually share something like, what has been affected with really built-religio feedback? So this might be the question for Pearl and George. We've got a connection on the sort of relationship that we've established across the whole institution where enable change, that way. Thank you for the question. So what we've also done is part of the processes around data collection, for example, is also bringing in multiple editors in general for the data collection process. So, for example, partnering with the state in terms of local government, and also, more recently, partnering with teacher institutions is a way of also even legitimising the data that is collected, but also besides just legitimising most of your implications. Because for a very long time, the data that is collected for me has been contested in some instances by the state. So, how producing the data has been one of the ways of ensuring that the data is also refined, but also is a way of strengthening relations, strengthening partnerships between communities or of bottom up processes with the central local government institution to get out academic institutions. And then even then go beyond just collecting data, it does not even, in some instances, proceed to pilot or experiment interventions that emanate from the findings that will come out of the data collection processes and all the way use that experience to strengthen faith of the relationships. I don't know if I addressed you or not. Just saying that. You do make the final move. We're on a good journey with this. We have time also on it already, especially if you're new to it, we're not going to call out for it now and then we're looking to get a lot to the trends. So, if you're something that you're interested in, could you return and I know that as you try with the community in general, do you think that much you might be able to speak in terms of those yet to the end of the month. It is very much an avenue to be done with specific data to be used at your own risk. What's with that? I mean, has anyone seen you at your church?