 area, feeding the Magat River, the largest tributary of the Kagayan River, and traversing one of the few remaining primary forests in the Philippines. Local residents varicated against the entry of the company in their lands, leading to violent dispersal and injury of several indigenous persons, mostly women. And this line of defense against development aggression is also a line of defense against disease and their spread. Land use changes and deforestation disrupt this balance in relationships between nature and people. This is true in natural systems or in industrial food systems, which create conditions for animal pathogens and diseases to transfer to people. So I can see exactly how these relationships are true in the Philippines. Thank you, Georgie. It sounds that some fairly horrible things going on there, both for local communities and with potential spillovers far beyond. Looking more sort of on the positive side, it's been suggested, as I mentioned earlier, that if indigenous people in local communities have stronger land rights, then that could be one of the most affordable options for preventing the kind of spillover conditions that Eric mentioned earlier from wildlife. Could you talk a little bit about the potential for doing that? Yes, as I was mentioning earlier, territorial governance and customer use by indigenous peoples have safeguarded much of the remaining biodiversity. So yes, it is affordable because it is carried out through the collective actions of community members, often without direct financial contributions by the government. But this guardianship remains precarious and land rights are not secure despite the existence of the Indigenous People's Rights Act in the Philippines. Implementing this law will require budgetary contributions for delineation, demarcation and restoration of community lands and support for community self-determined development. Indigenous peoples have become impoverished by the current economic model. The government continues to promote mining, which is extracting local wells and causing destruction of ecosystems and communities, which requires very expensive remediation. The costs of addressing biodiversity loss and climate change impacts are far more expensive than preventing these global problems. In much the same way that curing pandemics when they occur is much more expensive than preventing them. The incentives given to destructive projects far outweigh the meager financial support flowing to indigenous communities for our vital contributions. So affordability may be one criterion for supporting indigenous peoples land rights to protect nature and prevent pandemics. But taking a broader view and other values into account, securing indigenous peoples land rights is also one of the best ways to address systemic and structural inequalities which are at the root of our planetary crisis. The weakness of an instrumental approach towards indigenous peoples, for example, just focusing on affordability, is that the full values of cultural diversity and our other contributions may be overlooked. For example, many indigenous peoples are prioritizing revitalization of indigenous food systems to address the current biodiversity and health crisis. So this nexus between food ecology, health and culture is at the heart of an indigenous food systems approach, which links the well-being of the planet to the well-being of people through sustainable and healthy diets. Indigenous homelands are rich in species and genetic diversity compared to surrounding lands. The full values of these lands are actually priceless contributions by our peoples. Thank you, Joji. You put that very well. You wrapped all the different elements together. This is definitely not just about affordability, though unfortunately it seems affordability is one of the driving forces. There's so much more to that and in a way the culture is wrapped into a more healthy relationship with nature. When we lose the culture, maybe we lose that relationship. So I think that's a really important area of discussion. We've heard from Indonesia and Southeast Asia. Let's cross to the Pacific there and hear what's happening on the ground in Brazil. Let's hear from Francisco. Obviously, Brazil is one of the hot spots of the pandemic. 439,000 people have died in Brazil. A very high number of them, proportionate to the population, are indigenous kilumbola or from riverine communities. Francisco, can you please explain how indigenous people in Brazil are coping in this situation? When in Brazil we have a very high number of deaths, we reach 440,000. So that represents a lot for us. In India, we have reached more than 1,000 deaths. So we indigenous people in various parts of Brazil are dealing with another situation that is not just the pandemic, but the lack of a strategy, a commitment of the state to define the best strategy to protect indigenous people. So we have done a lot internally to our communities. We have worked so that we can protect ourselves from our traditional knowledge, because it's not the first time that we deal with the pandemic. Historically, we have lived many difficult times like this. And we have a lot of knowledge, medicine, forest, many cases, in order to save many lives because of this knowledge that our people have. So we have done a strategy of isolation. And we have also worked a lot so that we can be through medicine, immunizing ourselves, taking care of ourselves, protecting ourselves with some knowledge from our pageants, our spiritual leaders. So we have overcome, we are managing with this difficulty, but we have lost many important leaders. And speaking more about the Brazilian Amazon, we also have been coinciding with the moment of a very big crisis that we are living of a very big destruction that is happening in the Amazon. And this is very scary. It seems that it is very combined with this pandemic, with this moment of the pandemic, a very strong other attack. And we, indigenous communities, we are working hard so that we can fight these two very violent issues for us. We have very clearly understood our people, maybe on the line that has already been put here because when the forest is intact, well taken care of and we are inside the forest, we are well protected. As you change our way, our river, our forest, our environment, we begin to be more vulnerable. And from then on, we began to come to worries. We are, our great challenge is to keep fighting to have the right to the land, to protect this environment of biodiversity for an important achievement that is also threatened today. It is threatened because we have a state that is not taking care of protecting this right that we have been able to put in the federal constitution over time. So these threats also impact a lot of our lives. So as these rights are being violated, they will not be respected, our way of life will not be respected. And we begin to see external pressure for external interests passing over our houses. Forest is our house. Our rivers are our way. So it is incomplete. We work to maintain this because this is what gives sustainability to our people. And we are going through these problems. And we know that as this begins to be changed, begins to be destroyed, our people will be together. So we work every day of our life so that the state can help us protect because our part we are doing and we understand that any change it represents threat to our lives. Whether it is through the pandemic or other climate changes that can happen in our lives and we may not be prepared to accompany, to have a rhythm to adapt to the changes that come. Thank you Francisco. You have already answered the second question I was going to ask you which is what would be the value of protecting or strengthening indigenous land rights in terms of helping to reduce the risk of disease spreads? I mean, I've spoken to several epidemiologists recently and they've said they're very worried that perhaps the next epidemic could come from the Amazon because there's so much deforestation happening there. You've already answered my question so maybe briefly a different question. This would be, do you think people in Brazil are starting to realize that there is a connection between destroying nature and becoming sick? I think it's a big step. First, science has already alerted society about this. There are many. Research has already been done. I believe that at universities at the young age it must be feeling a little bit of this need to understand better. But it's still very far away from the people of Brazil to assume the importance that the Amazon has for its own life. For your well-being to maintain a production that exists today in any area that the Brazilian State survives is very far away from understanding that. Because you realize that you still don't have sufficient strength to face this crisis to orient the Brazilian State to fulfill these obligations that it has. So, international pressure has influenced a lot here in Brazil so that the Brazilian people can call themselves this responsibility. Some people are still thinking that the world is getting into the life of Brazil. I don't think it is. I think we have a global responsibility of where we are concerned with the well-being of the planet. Because it's our face. We understand, as people think, that we have to act together. Because it will give an effect that everyone will pay the same price. So, we understand that it is a process that has to be much more powerful to defend these issues. Because at the pace that is going here in Brazil the environmental issues regarding the indigenous people to not value these knowledge we are at risk of becoming a problem for Brazil. And a problem for the world. Because it is at the time that it stops doing the service that it is doing today. When it disappears, the consequences will be very big for Brazil and the world. So, we are working so that there is awareness of this. There is no other way. We have to have a worried state. We have to have a worried Brazilian people. Because we are so rich Even if we are in the forest we still need after many centuries that live inside the forest we still have we discover every day new things. Imagine who never stepped on the forest who never knew the forest at the top like a green thing. And nothing else. Understand that there is a tree understand that there is biodiversity but it is much more than that. There is a spirituality that needs to be understood too. So, I think we need to act respecting all the continents all the countries with their diversity but also with a responsibility to take care of our house that is this planet. Thank you very much Francisco. Thank you very much. I think you've really brought across that important point that people starting to understand but not nearly enough, more international pressure is needed. Clearly, webinars like this on this topic it's why it's so important and there needs to be a lot more. So, thank you very much for that. We'll now move to Carlos Hi Carlos. Now, from more the science perspective and a sort of more global perspective before the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic a 2015 paper from EcoHealth Alliance suggested that land use change leading driver for emerging zoonosis. Can you tell us a bit more about this study? I mean, we kind of semi-predicted that this might happen or something like this. Please tell us more. Great. Thank you so much for the question. I will reply in Spanish exactly. I'm going to say to that. Gracias por la pregunta We're working on infectious diseases and mainly deforestation on land use change. The study that you mentioned in 2015, what we did was to make a list of all the diseases that appeared for the first time in human populations since 1940. So, for example, the first time that an animal jumped in Africa to humans is an event. The first event that we could find. The first time that, for example, a VIH jumped from primates to humans is an event that we're investigating. We tried to understand what were the factors that could explain what happened at that time. Something important to remember is that the important thing is that the diseases, as Eric mentioned, are present in animals, in human life. But the key to this between humans and wildlife this interaction, this connection how we humans interact with wildlife determines how this emergency will occur, this appearance of diseases, this jump of human life. So, for every case, we examine and try to understand what factors were behind the appearance, for example, through Ebola jumping to humans. In most cases it's because there's a fundamental change, an important change in the landscape of these places. For example, deforestation. Now deforestation can be measured in different ways, like, for example, the loss of the forest. But it's also the fragmentation, not leaving small pieces of the forest here or, for example, the expansion of the agricultural part. For example, more plantations of palm oil or plantations of certain products that have world demand. And also important is the expansion of the agricultural part. The world is eating better, eating more, and we demand in general more meat to consume. So the demand of meat, for example, in Europe or China causes deforestation in the Amazon. So, those demands is what is putting the pressure in these places. After deforestation, there are more people working in these places and interact more with wildlife and in that way there is more probability, more chances of a virus that we don't know or that we do know, jump into the sea. Thank you Carlos. Very important the way you linked the local outbreaks and global pressures to eat into rainforests and other biologically rich environment and create new interfaces as Eric described them where these interesting things happen that start to cause problems in a much wider area. So, thank you for elaborating on that. And then the question that we're asking everyone, the fundamental question here for this webinar is how can stronger indigenous land rights help to reduce these risks or manage these risks and maybe you could also tell us a little bit more about the study on this subject recently by IPEZ it's basically the UN's collection of scientists to study biodiversity. They looked directly at this link between biodiversity and pandemics so maybe you could tell us a little bit about that as well. Thank you. Great. Thank you so much. I will keep this now in English to streamline the discussion. Yes, the IPEZ report on pandemics and biodiversity and pandemics we look at what is the evidence that link biodiversity and the emergence of inflation diseases. So one of the important discussions that we put there is the role of indigenous territories to prevent pandemics. So we need to understand that indigenous territories, most of the diversity of the world exists in this landscape that are traditionally owned by indigenous people and local communities. So that it's extremely important to understand from this part from this landscape this landscape it has the biodiversity is slowly declining in this area so there's less biodiversity loss inside these areas where they're serving better biodiversity but also these territories indigenous are suffering from the inox a lot of pressure around these areas for the expansion of agriculture for example. So these areas can really preserve biodiversity for any reason that you may think even for future generations even for genetic resources natural resources or just by the part that we want to preserve biodiversity but also there is another co-benefit of having indigenous territories which is the maintenance of human health. For example we've seen that the forest stations directly link to the increase of malaria especially in Brazil and in Malaysia and other countries that we are working on by keeping the forest in all low disturbance of forest then we reduce the number of the cases of malaria in this region and that has for the people in general but also reduces the costs of the government that they need to invest to treat people with malaria So this is just one example this is just one disease. Think about other disease that Eric mentioned before. So there is an accumulated saving economic benefits that they can be we can gain from keeping indigenous territories. Finally I want to mention that we need to start thinking about indigenous territories as a network not just an isolated area somewhere in Brazil or somewhere in Africa or somewhere in the southern station. This can really as a whole can help to protect the human health for everyone. We need to take advantage of the protected areas in general overlap somehow with indigenous territories I'm having this network, global network of well managed forest can really help us to save our health our human health but also can help the economy of each country. Gracias Carlos. I thought that was very exciting that last point you made really thinking in terms of an indigenous network not one pace here, one piece there I think to some degree that has started but it's not nearly recognized enough and this year when we have big cop events for climate and Glasgow, for biodiversity and cumming, I would love if this was discussed more fully because I think too often indigenous and traditional communities are very wrongly seen as sort of like whatever way you want to put it they put it in a pejorative way but this is nonsense they provide their specialists on protecting biodiversity and needs to be thought of in those terms, it's like super specialists who've contributed a lot to biodiversity in the forest so thank you, I really found that very stimulating now our last speaker Gladys we turn to you now it would be great if you could tell us from the programs that you've been working on and the work that you do what would be your recommendations for preventing zoonotic diseases in local and indigenous communities? Thank you very much for inviting me on this webinar I'll say that we championed a one health approach as early as 2003 based on experiences I had working as a first vet for the Uganda Wildlife Authority and the reason they hired a vet was because they were very concerned about diseases spreading from tourists who were coming to visit critically endangered mountain gorillas which at the time were only about 650 left in the world they were concerned about a fatal flu such as COVID-19 spreading to them and they felt they needed a veterinarian up to that point everyone thought that wildlife should just be left on its own and it should be natural selection but very soon when I started working I found out that community health was very important for protecting wildlife because within nine months of my being hired we investigated a skin disease outbreak which turned out to be scabies in the gorillas the baby gorilla died and the rest only recovered with treatment but it came from people the local communities living around the park so the gorillas went outside to eat people's banana plants because once they got habituated for tourism they lost their fero people and then they went back to range where they used to range before and windy when it was created as a park it used to be a forest reserve where people could cut trees actually there were indigenous people living there the Batwa community but unfortunately they had to be taken out in order to create the park and they were put in settlements and they were looked after by various NGOs but they felt that they couldn't have them there when tourists entered the park although surprisingly they used to protect the wildlife because they had this belief that if you look in the eyes of a gorilla it's bad luck but when it was created as a park it was better to put them the government thought it was better that they stay outside and also go to the local communities so when it was traced to people living around the park we set up an NGO a few years later conservation through public health it's also a US registered nonprofit because we felt that you can't protect the wildlife without also improving the health of the communities so a lot of people think of zinotic diseases as only spreading from animals to people there's also zinotic diseases that spread from people to animals and that has been our main focus but one thing that we've also realized that why do we have zinotic diseases they also have a high prevalence of tuberculosis because they have poor hygiene and sanitation so they're more likely to get all kinds of infectious diseases and they also eat bush meat and bush meat has there have been Ebola outbreaks in Central Africa gorillas that have died of Ebola or chimpanzees people who ate them died of Ebola disease goes in both directions and one thing that we do at CTPHs on top of preventing diseases by looking at comparative pathogen analysis between people wildlife and livestock we also very much focus on behavior change communication where we basically work with the local communities and from them we select community health workers stand transparently with the local leaders and these community health workers are trained to do conservation work so as they tell people to be healthy and hygienic not to poach because poaching also results in picking up diseases from wildlife they told them not to cut down trees protect the forest it's important water source when you protect it you're also more likely less likely to get diseases so it's a whole package which goes towards them and because it comes from people within their community it's not imposed from someone elsewhere from within Uganda or from another country they are more likely to change and we've seen a lot of behavior change and I believe that the way forward is by putting communities at the forefront of changing and making their lives better not imposing from elsewhere but having a bottom-up approach and through it we even had a batwa because we mainly have around green de forest where the mountain gorillas are found mainly by batiga but the batwa who are evicted from the forest they have village health and conservation teams among them basically community health workers doing conservation work as well they basically are changing the communities in their settlements and one great thing that has come out of the pandemic is that because they're worried about getting COVID which has been a focus of our work when the pandemic began stopping people from getting COVID through improving hygiene, mask wearing and social distancing the number of hand washing facilities has gone up outside people's homes so I really believe that behavior change communication getting indigenous communities to prevent zoonotic disease transmission thank you Gladys really interesting points many struck out but among them were this idea that this transmission is a two-way street and we can harm nature as well as nature non-human nature as well as human nature that was important and this idea that you don't just train community activists to be conservationists or health workers that the two jobs are in a way combined and it's important to see those two things together and the health of nature and the health of humans is interlinked I think that's very strong the question again going back to the question we're asking everyone do you think in the areas where you work that this pandemic has helped people understand that protecting indigenous and local land is helpful to protect biodiversity and as a result can help to reduce risk of disease outbreaks is that happening? I believe it's happening a lot more people realizing the big link between protecting biodiversity and reducing the level of emerging infectious diseases it's being understood a lot more because everyone is to think it's not linked but actually when the pandemic began people who used to wonder why we're combining the two came and said now we understand what you've been doing all along and this was not only at the community level but also at the government level and the donor community as well and I think that even within where we live in Uganda and East Africa people are beginning to realize that we need to protect nature in order to save ourselves and a lot of it is you have to really support the local communities make sure that when they have agriculture on their land it's sustainable because that's what they used to do before these protected areas were set up they used to do things sustainably they used to live with the wildlife sustainably but now it's a matter of getting them back to doing things in a sustainable way they don't over harvest from the forest they protect their land they use proper soil and water agriculture and go back to some of the things that they used to do before which they have kind of given up on we even work with traditional healers in the communities to get them to recognize people who are ill take them to refer them to the health centers but also to continue to protect what they have the forest is a good resource of medicinal plants but the more that you destroy it they no longer have these medicinal plants that are unable to plant them elsewhere because everything is changing the whole climate and the ecosystem is changing so it's a matter of working with all the existing cultural leaders or cultural systems that were in place and building upon them to really protect the wildlife some of our cultures I, for example, come from the lion plant and I'm not in my clan you're not allowed to kill or touch a lion because it's a big taboo and everybody has a different plan to a particular plant my mum is from a certain plant and the way that it works is that there's always going to be a group of people that protects a certain species of animal or plants within our culture and so all these things people are realizing that if you want to avoid future pandemics you have to start go back to preserving culture and preserving nature and preserving the rights of people who are living in certain places in a way that the silver lining into the pandemic has been that we need to be much more careful about conserving nature and looking at it as a way of keeping us all healthy Thank you Gladys thank you all for these comments we are now moving on to question and answer a little bit later than planned but have a fair bit of time we already have quite a bunch of questions but feel free to add to them don't forget at the question and answer button at the bottom of the screen let's start thank you to my colleagues who filtered some of these questions for me there is okay the top question addressed to Eric and Carlos so this question the researchers have successfully trained communities in DRC to use technology to monitor and report signs of Ebola before spillover occurs and IPEZ experts worked with indigenous hunters to assess extinction risk so the question is what role do you see for local communities as partners in protecting human and planetary health so very much building on what Gladys has just told us but Eric and Carlos from this sort of bigger global perspective what are your thoughts on that okay you said my name first I'll start and then hand to Carlos it's essential any health system that is divorced from the people it's supposed to serve won't function very well and so in the context of interface environments working with people who live and use those environments is really important we've heard Gladys' examples sometimes it may simply be around surveillance and sometimes technology can help with that reporting systems but otherwise ensuring that there is a means by which the people at those interfaces have a voice to speak of the things that are going on there and report that through the system where it needs to be heard so that appropriate actions or preventative actions can be taken so I don't think we can divorce the actions that need to be taken at those interfaces from the people who live at them the two are completely intertwined Carlos yeah that's a good question and actually I'm absolutely I think the indigenous people can play an important role in surveillance systems and this has been some interesting examples for example in Bolivia a few years ago as part of a project that I was working with there's a local community living very close to the area they were working with us and they observed different like a bunch of monkeys holler monkeys that were dead and immediately one of the teams examined these animals you know they had yellow fever so we said there was a response by the poor ah das klantasin, pwala ko pwala ko pwala ko in humans in that area it's possible to do that and there are systems for example in Thailand there are a few systems if you see other animals they take pictures and then they send it to a center like veterinarians they can assess immediately if these animals are one of the diagnosed because they are far away and they can help even potentially prevent local objects this is developed for domestic animals but then can be easily expanded to monitor it while thank you the next question that this is for all of you maybe as Eric and Carlos have already spoken on the first one we could focus on Gladys, Georgie and Francisco for this one but later Eric and Carlos happy to chip in if you wish to so this question is how would you see the global north and western countries, wealthier countries making up for decades of using and resource extraction that have resulted in the mass deaths of indigenous communities and resulted in environmental and infectious disease ramifications that we see now so basically I suppose this is a question of responsibility is a question of inequality and how to address that and some of the things might have costs who should be paying if any of you Francisco or Georgie Gladys, whichever of you would like to start just jump in I will come first I think everyone is so interconnected today and as you yourself mentioned the very destructive policies money or law actually emanates from these powerful governments in the north and also the overconsumption of goods are also emanating from the north acting on structural changes in your own countries and societies will actually be very important in lifting the pressures away from for example indigenous peoples because indigenous peoples are in a way our survivors we have navigated how to address these problems but a lot of them emanate from unequal wealth and even lack of understanding that modern societies have actually much to learn from indigenous peoples and that these impositions of knowledge coming from the north needs to be addressed in our own minds and in everyone's own practice and behavior thank you Georgie Francisco or Gladys Can you address that Francisco I believe that a country like Brazil could be more intelligent and observe how the countries of the first world have already been able to discover things that were very dangerous in this process of in this phase of discovery, of growth Brazil can no longer repeat speaking in a country like Brazil mistakes that in other countries have already been discovered that it is not the right path that we have to try not to live a ignore the experiences of other countries I believe that it is necessary to close to follow the global debate and address many questions that have already been proved that it is not the right path so we are trying to correct many things because no matter how much we have reached a great advance but there is still a lot to be done for a population totally with their problems solved. It is still very far from that no matter if it is countries of the first world but still have a lot of problems but already have indications that can make countries do not repeat mistakes that in your at the beginning of your history so I think this is a point another question that I think is important is that countries even in the first world still can receive products that are produced in these countries I want to quote here in Brazil that are removed illegally of great impact does not obey the environmental legislation to be able to explore resources still have a big market of Brazilian products that do not respect environmental legislation that do not respect the rights of indigenous peoples so I think it is possible to work a line that begins to difficult this market this would be a line that I think is a line that we could adopt as a strategy it is no use to charge Brazil and is buying from Brazil a product illegal so I think it is a connection between what is happening here in a consumer nation and what is happening there Gladys did you want to address this too Yes just to add on to what Francisco has just been said regarding consumption of products responsible consumption it is very possible for people from the global north to support the global south because of the lockdowns all over the world people have not been able to travel to these places where they can spend money wherever they find the wildlife and the people but if there are ways that you can export these products abroad and for example if someone is buying coffee or tea they would rather buy tea or coffee that has been bought at a fair price and is helping smallholder farmers to destroy the environment and I would just like to give an example of we have we started a social enterprise called Gorilla Conservation Coffee where the farmers around Brindy Forest we found that they were not benefiting from tourism directly so we decided to give them a better price for their good coffee which is then sold all over the world but it was mainly being sold in Uganda until the pandemic occurred and then we started to look for markets elsewhere like the UK or the US and New Zealand and in this way then they don't have to enter the forest to put to survive because they are getting money and other people in the community are now trying to sell their crops abroad so responsible consumption is one very good way of the global north supporting the global north to keep things going and help to protect nature at the same time I think it's very important for the global north to really recognize that it's much more sustainable to train people and build the capacity of local groups in the global south rather than only bringing in experts from abroad to do all the work that people locally should be learning to do for themselves because this then enables a long long-term capacity building and ownership of the solutions and helping things to be in the long-term to get the countries in the global south to come from being underdeveloped to improve to reduce poverty in these countries and raise their standards of living on a long term the global north can help with training and things like that but if they start implementing the work that people are supposed to be doing for themselves to get themselves out of poverty or get themselves out of destroying their own habitats then basically you just keep on perpetuating this cycle that keeps going on for decades and decades so I think that's something that you need to find better ways of supporting biodiversity and health in such situations Thank you very much Gladys The next question going back to Eric and Carlos there's a few on this line but they basically all say along the lines of if one health had been properly implemented 10-5 years ago how could it have made a difference in this COVID crisis to make the epidemic less severe whoever wants to jump in first Okay Carlos I'm happy to see the floor to you unless you want me to start Go ahead Eric Okay So one health is not a new concept organizations individual scientists the public have been working or thinking in a one health context to some extent already for many years and that's helped us understand the interconnectivity between ecosystems between hosts and reservoirs and so on and as others have rightly said the fact that something like COVID was likely to occur at some point wasn't a surprise to those who'd sat down to consider it and there are lots of places, lots of areas which we haven't really discussed very much where the one health concept is also very relevant in terms of food systems for example in the connectivity of farm to urban populations who might consume food and so on So with respect to the question the fact that an event such as the jump of a virus into the human population would occur we knew that was happening we were sort of ready but we weren't doing enough surveillance in order to catch where and when that might actually happen and so I don't think we can blame one health on that what we need to say is that the approach and then the response to the occurrence of that event wasn't particularly well handled and it dragged on too long and it allowed really to become an outbreak, an epidemic and then a global pandemic so I'm not sure one health could have prevented that from happening but certainly it can one health can help us understand that that is likely to happen and then we need to work with people who are responsible for surveillance policy effectively to put in place stronger surveillance so that we can detect when that happens and that we can do more quickly Thank you Eric. No, I don't think the questions mean to suggest that one health is responsible in any way I suppose the question is if you could implement it more thoroughly and more countries took it more seriously and put more resources into it how could it have helped and I think you did address that thank you and Carlos if you could also tackle that No, I completely agree with Eric but it's a matter of resource mobilization through these type of approaches Another example, an interesting example is the Ebola outbreak a few years ago in in Liberia and Sierra Leone there's like 2014 hundreds of thousands of people got infected with Ebola and after learning about this problem Liberia government implemented one health approach that is embedded in the government now they learned by living through this extreme problem and they now have this implemented in the government so now every other week I believe there's reports from not just from the public health component but also from the environmental sector but also for the human and the animal sector so everybody's working together they learn from this problem and they now implemented that there are new initiatives, similar initiatives in other countries I believe Côte d'Ivoire also I think implemented something like that and the great thing about this is that more people are learning and understanding this problem and they're trying to implement a one health approach legislation into the government so it's a lesson learned but now we need to start mobilizing resources and training more people on this topic. Thank you Carlos, you remind me of an interview I had last year with Roger Fruthos who's a specialist in infectious diseases at the University of Montpellier and he also predicted that a huge pandemic would happen and he said to prevent this in the future he told me we need a massive international cooperation and investment to encourage monitoring and education at local level so yes protection of land rights is important but also investment at a local level in building up surveillance systems and then responding so you catch things early and again of course that will cost a lot of money but look at if you don't do it how much we've all paid I'd love to get in if we went a little bit further and everybody kept their answers very short I'd like to put a last question to you and if you could just keep it to two or three sentences your answer I think will not be too late but it will be this question for all of you looking forward this is an epic year with a cop for the climate it's an epic year with a cop for biodiversity and lots of other reasons if you could do one thing to sort of promote this idea of indigenous help to prevent pandemics support for indigenous land rights at that level if you could send one message to these policymakers what might it be and again please do keep it brief because we're actually at the end of our time but it will almost be like your final headline that you do leave with so maybe we could start with Georgie sorry to put this on you thanks Jonathan so the governments are now negotiating which is supposed to be adopted and the message we're sending them is that if you want to succeed in conservation in sustainable use and protection of ecosystem species and genetic diversity really respect the rights of indigenous peoples and put that in our strategy thank you Georgie to the point and very precise next Eric if you don't mind yes so the scientific community has been saying a lot of what I and others have been saying today for a long time and what I would say to those groupings of people is that ministers of finance need to now listen and need to allocate the resources necessary for a lot of what we know works to be put into action and if the finances aren't available at national level at international level and at the very local level too then we can keep talking but things will never really change so we need that financing and that is demonstrative of commitment totally agree which is why I emphasise at the beginning look at the cost if you don't do it we could have that again and so let's find that money um I would say that just echoing what what everybody is saying it's very important for yes ministers finance to put more resources into both human and animal healthcare because we often find actually that when you have diseases there's much more resources going into human health and animal health when you have disease outbreaks and then once you've served case management the source of the disease outbreak remains because it's not enough resources to prevent it you have ecological monitoring and so government should put more resources in healthcare in general and also to support communities to you know to improve on their livelihoods and I think that's very important thank you thanks Gladys, Francisco please I believe that in terms of public policy in our case here in Brazil we advanced a lot now we need to get out of the role we need to become real we have a want to give an example of environmental legislation that protects the forests, protects our communities and that now is working in the opposite direction of the achievements we had so I think it has to stop being a question just bureaucratic it has to be real it has to be in the spirit of people it has to be in the soul, this will to take care of it in a collective way so precious like the knowledge of traditional populations of indigenous people and of all biodiversity thank you Francisco embedded in our souls what a fantastic message and finally Carlos please thank you so two things I think it's important to recognize that the rights of indigenous people and securing rights for indigenous people it's cost effective so we need to start talking with policy makers in economic terms because that's the language they understand and second that we need to make sure that indigenous people and local communities participate in the negotiations at all these high events that we are discussing usually those people are not represented by their authorities and we need to make sure they are there speaking, raising their voice thank you Carlos thank you all, I think we've had some amazing discussions today some really strong bright ideas indigenous networks across much stronger than we even have now the need to focus at a community level to link human health animal health nature health the idea of embedding nature protection in our souls all wonderful messages and also reinforcing it makes economic sense this isn't a cost doing nothing is the cost I think that this has been fabulous for all of those reasons so thank you to our panel thank you again to our host the Ford Foundation the Land Portal Foundation the tenure facility and Thompson Reuters Foundation thank you to the translators Cynthia Maria, Sarah, Sandrini and Natalia thank you to all of you in the audience for watching and staying with us sorry we couldn't use all of your questions but I hope it was as enjoyable and as intellectually stimulating for you as it was for me please there will be a survey you can see a link there will be a survey about this that I hope you can fill in don't forget this recording will be available in a few days so it can be a very useful resource and please look out for the next episode of this land dialogue webinar webinar series one a month and with that I will say thank you all and goodbye I wish you a wonderful rest of your day wherever you are