 to this very, very important session, accelerating a nature positive economy for people and planet. This comes towards the end of a wonderful week at the World Economic Forum. I commend the web for really terrific events over the last few days. And they've saved the best almost to last, which is about nature. And that's what we are going to talk about today. It's a bad news, good news story. Most of you know very well that the planet is in trouble. As humans, we've destroyed half of the world's plants. We've lost 60% of the world's wildlife. Critical ecosystems are breaking. In 2014, so concerned about this, the nations of the world committed to stop deforestation by 2020. Instead, deforestation increased by 40%. Climate change has a two-way relationship with nature. Climate change itself is accelerating the loss of nature, but so too the loss of nature is accelerating climate change. How can we get out of this vicious cycle into a more virtuous cycle? But there's also good news, and that's what we're going to talk about today. How do we make this change that we need to make? There's a huge intellectual revolution that's taken place. I just look at the World Economic Forum itself, a remarkable integration of the role of food and agriculture and water and land and forests and seas in a way that's never happened before. And look at COP26 in Glasgow. Never before have we seen the integration of climate change and nature loss in a more wonderful way and all kinds of commitments. Just as the world's nations committed to end deforestation back in 2014 and failed, so too 140 countries have committed at Glasgow to do it much more seriously by 2030. And this time, it seems to have more teeth in it and certainly has more resources. $19 billion were put into the program for that. Philanthropy is also stepping up. I'm Andrew Steer, by the way, president and CEO of the Basos Earth Fund. Our fund alone committed in Glasgow, $3 billion for nature, $1 billion to conserve what we still have, $1 billion to restore what we've lost, and $1 billion to help transform food systems to get onto more sustainable footing. And other foundations also joined in. A total of $5 billion was committed to conserve nature. So that's all good news. We have a panel today that's going to really unpack some of these issues as some really remarkable leaders. And we're gonna try and have a sort of a realistic discussion, recognizing just what a dreadful state actually we're in, but how do we shift that so that we can build upon the hope? And let me say the World Economic Forum itself through a whole range of its own activities is contributing to this intellectual and practical revolution, the nature action agenda, the new nature economy report series, the Tropical Forest Alliance, a whole set of issues on food as well. So we've got some really great analysis and data. We just saw some of that in the film. So let me introduce you to our panelists. First Matilda Ernkranz, who is the Minister of International Development Corporation of Sweden, and Akim Steiner, who is the administrator of the United Nations Development Program, Bill Winters, who's the group Chief Executive Officer of Standard Chartered Bank, Geraldine Machet, who's Co-Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the great firm DSM, and Anish Shah, who is the Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of the Mahindra Group, one of India's sort of iconic companies. So we can't do better than this. So let's start, and I want to turn to you and Matilda Ernkranz first. This is the 50th anniversary of the famous Stockholm Conference, which created the United Nations Environment Programme and really set us in a new direction. As you look towards celebrating that in June in Stockholm, what are your hopes for this year? And tell us about your own plans. Thank you very much, Andrew, and thank you for being a part of this panel, truly important. And for me, being the Minister of International Development Corporation, it feels very good to take part in this panel and also because my background is very much of the background of an environmentalist. I actually was, for many, many years, I was the chairperson of the committee in the parliament, the Committee on Environment and Agriculture. So I've been working very many years with these kind of questions. And now I've got the opportunity to be in the government as Minister for International Development Corporation and working with this. I've been talking a lot about the first UN Conference on Environment that was held in Stockholm in 1972. So I'm very happy to be a part of Stockholm plus 50. And of course we need a game changer. We know that we need transformation towards net zero, nature-positive and zero pollution. And we need a transformation that leaves no one behind and creates a healthy planet for the prosperity of all. And as you said, in June this year, we will host the Stockholm plus 50 UN Conference on Human Environment to mobilize energy for a strengthened, accelerated action and showcase of solutions for a sustainable future. Because I truly believe that we, knowing what challenges we have ahead of us, we need to also focus on what kind of solutions do we think is necessary and needed. And actually some of them are up and running and we can show that they are doing an immense difference. And I hope that Stockholm plus 50 will provide sort of a timely opportunity for progressive governments, business actors, civil society, youth and other stakeholders to advance the sustainability agenda, bridging the gaps between climate, biodiversity, economy and the recovery from the pandemic. And of course we can't do this without bringing in the youth. And I am very pleased that we have established a youth led Stockholm plus 50 youth task force, which aim to promote structures for meaningful youth participation by strengthening the voice and representation of young people. So that's our hopes. We hope that Stockholm plus 50 will need transformative moment and contributing to new understandings on how our economies, societies and stable climate and resilient biosphere, how they are inseparably interconnected and generating urgent actions towards sustainability and ensuring the well-being of current and future generations. And I stop that so we can have a more interactive conversation in this panel. Thank you. Well, thank you so much, Minister. Just one follow-up question. So obviously Sweden is one of the most generous countries your Minister of Development Corporation. As you look at your own portfolio in nature, what will be your priorities moving forward? What other you probably don't want to tell us what big initiatives you're going to announce this year, but give us a hint. No, but I think and I think and I can say so much that you know that Sweden, international Sweden is one of the largest contributors when it comes to international green financing. And we have raising ambitions when it comes to green financing, but also when it comes to biodiversity in development corporation. And we are in this together and we must seize every opportunity to sort of make peace with nature, but with strong focus on implementation and implementation. And as I said, we are offering Stockholm Plus 50 as a stepping stone for urgent actions for this. And as I said, we have as a priority from the Swedish government, we have raised our ambitions when it comes to green financing. And I hope that we can contribute and in this area at Stockholm Plus 50 showing also how we can get financial support from countries, but also from business sectors and so on. And how we can meet the needs and priorities from when it comes from countries developing countries, of course, out of what they need us to support them. Because we're in this together and we have to do this transformation together in a fair way. That's great. Thank you so much, Minister. Let's turn to Akim Steiner. When the history books are written, Akim will be for this point in history, one of the most important players in really moving the sustainable development forward at the international level, a two-term head of the United Nations Environment Programme and now leading the United Nations Development Programme. Akim, this is a pretty important year. You sit at the center of it. We've got a biodiversity convention meeting to make 10-year commitments. We've got the biggest Paria UN Ocean meeting in Portugal. And then obviously we head towards the COP 27 and obviously we have Stockholm Plus 20, with Stockholm Plus 50. What are your aspirations for this year? What gives you hope and what are you doing? Andrew, thank you first of all for the kind introduction. It's a great pleasure to join the WEF and such a distinguished group of panelists. And in the good tradition of WEF, let me be very brief and then perhaps dive a bit deeper. So as you just laid out, it is a very special year, but I think my first priority would be how do we leverage the post-pandemic recovery precisely to mobilize the kind of switches in policy investments and actions that allow us to accelerate that nature-positive economy? Because I think it is critical for us to realize that the world is in a very distressed moment, in a very economically socially disrupted moment. And I think there is an extraordinary opportunity to build forward better and therefore how we combine these aspects of the ministers just forward that you alluded to, to an overall recovery narrative, but also investment plan I think is critical. That immediately links to financing. I think we need to tackle the issue of financing in order to overcome the experimental, the incremental and actually get to scale. And two things here I think will matter in particular. One can be deal with the distortions in our economies, whether it is the fossil fuel subsidies of over $420 billion that still essentially drag us in the wrong direction. And the same is often true for land use, for the use of natural resources. And secondly, how do we make investments more attractive, more effective and scalable? So in UDP, SDG Impact, which is an attempt to develop the norms and standards that would allow governments and businesses to go to the financial markets and actually raise capital through bonds, is one example of how we can actually multiply the finance that is available globally, but also nationally, the task force and nature related financial disclosures that has been set up to also help financial markets and investors to be able to essentially step into this arena that is still in many financial sector daily realities, uncomfortable, unknown or at least very risk associated. And thirdly, digital technology. Clearly much of what will happen in the next few years when it comes to staling has a great deal to do with the Department of Technology. So these are three, let's say, domains with which we can actually not only tackle a nature-specific issue, but actually deal with what is really the context of our economic and policy decisions as consumers, as investors, as producers. Thank you, Akim, very much indeed. Can I just follow up on one of the last things you said about digital and big data? How much of an opportunity does that provide us to hold accountable and find solutions, deliver results in a way that would not have been possible 10 years ago? And I know you at UNDP are doing a lot on this. Someone was just telling me yesterday about your plans to show the impact of climate change at a very, very granular level all around the world. I mean, that's going to be an amazing, amazing gift actually. You know, I have in the last few years really begun to believe that digital is perhaps the single biggest transformative variable in the way that development choices pathways can actually be rethought in the coming years. And this is not to simply dream into a technology realm. It has a lot to do first of all with the ability to better understand what is happening. You have led a WRI Global Forest Watch. And it's a great example of how we can use satellite data literally in real time almost in order to look at what's happening to our forests. It's not only an issue of transparency of illegal deforestation, it's also deal with the risks of fire. I think there are so many examples today that we are able to first of all monitor what's happening on our planet in real time and therefore act with an understanding rather than perhaps a vague notion of risks. Secondly, I think it is tremendously empowering. Citizens are able to now exercise in a sense their role as consumers, as investors, as essentially people who also are voters and elect governments to really be able to see the consequence of their choices and decisions. And therefore much greater public accountability but also empowerment, including in the consumer world that I think is so crucial. And thirdly, I think it empowers communities. I mean, we have an Equator Prize winner last year from Peru, an indigenous community that is now using satellite imagery, mobile phones to monitor forestry management in their domain and have almost managed to reduce it to virtually zero on their land. So also combining the world of indigenous communities, the custodians of so many vital assets, biodiversity assets on the planet with state-of-the-art technology, the frontiers have simply been rewritten and as UNDP also personally, I think we have just begun to gain the kind of digital literacy to then be able to bring the benefits of this technology but also the use and the impact to bear on the way we can actually achieve that nature-positive economy. That's terrific. Thank you so much, Akim. Let's turn to Bill Winters of Standard Chartered Bank. Bill, you've been at the very center of something pretty revolutionary that's been going on, at least in terms of commitments, $130 trillion assets under management committed to net zero by the middle of the century and you have been one of the engineers of that. As you look at that commitment and obviously there are some doubters, you know, is it genuine and so on, what do we need to do in order to get the right amount of that going to where it's needed most with regard to nature and with regard to developing countries? Yeah, well, Andrew, thanks very much for having me and for that question. You're right that the challenges are many. If we could just restate the context a little bit. It's something like one third of the required emission reductions by 2030 need to come from natural climate solutions. We know that something like 90% of the practical solutions are sitting in emerging markets, developing countries. Indonesia and Brazil alone account for close to 30%. We also know that if we actually deliver these solutions, it's a real boost for economies locally, but also globally, something like 400 million incremental jobs, $10 trillion of economic growth. So it's not all about cost, but there are enormous challenges as you point out in your question. The funding gap for nature-based solutions is something like $1 trillion per year. Again, the bulk of the gap is in developing countries. So when we look at some of the research that we've done at the Center Chartered, we can see a reasonable line of sight on something like 60% of the financing being available in developed countries. In the lesser developed countries, it's far less. In Sub-Saharan Africa, it's less than 10%. In other words, 90% of these projects which themselves comprise 90% of the opportunity could go unfunded if we can't get the money, this $130 trillion in the irreference, which is the total assets on our manager for the entire group of asset managers and banks in the defense organization. If we can't get that money to the right place, we're not going to accomplish our objectives. When we ask our clients and do our own research, what are the critical components to delivering this money into the right place? We have to get a good measure of the baseline. Corporations are making net zero commitments, but those mean nothing if we don't know with some clarity where we're starting because that's the beginning of the process to hold the corporate world and everyone else accountable. And I can reference that in the context of TCFD. It couldn't agree more. Second, we've got to identify not just the ESG funds, there's actually enough ESG fund money that's either there or will be there. It's getting it into the hands of the highest impact users of that financing. And that for sure is going to require not just private financing, but also public financing and importantly, that the catalyzing effect of development organizations, governmental organizations crowding in private capital. We're not fully developed there at all. And then broadly developing the other techniques, whether it's standardized to underlying commercial contracts, apportionment of political risk or development risk into the hands of the people that can actually put the financing structures together to deliver this trillion dollars plus per year, recognizing that there's another $2 trillion per year that's necessary for the underlying reduction objectives that corporations have committed to in the context of their own net zero plans. So it's never all about the money. Although the money is a pretty big obstacle right now and that there's a huge amount of work going on IGFans inside the private sector inside the asset management organizations to channel that money but it's definitely going to require some partnership with the public sector as well. Thank you very much, Bill. Could I just ask you about something else that you've been leading on which is the sort of voluntary markets, carbon markets or credit, carbon credit markets for nature. You are heading a committee that's sort of trying to or a task force that's trying to really set standards and get everybody onto the same page as opposed to the past where you couldn't distinguish high quality and low quality and so the whole thing evaporated. Just tell us a little bit about that journey this year. Yeah, it's been fascinating and I think hugely impactful, at least prospective though but I think we're already seeing the effect. The carbon markets have been around for years and we know that there are government-backed markets not least the European emission trading system which have been very effective in reducing carbon emissions within the confines of those programs. Obviously China, the largest emitter has worked on their own government-backed or compliance program and there are early signs that that will also have a make a difference but there's big chunks of the emissions like well over half of the global emissions that aren't covered by government-backed markets and that can only be exchanged through a voluntary market. The voluntary market's been around for 30 years but it became very, very small because there was no confidence that the contracts or the credits that were being originated were actually reducing emissions from the environment. So we set out about a year and a half ago. We ended up with 450 members, 250 separate organizations representing civil society, NGOs, academics, emitters, asset managers, money intermediaries saying we have two objectives. One is to set a very high standard that we can all agree to that they can then be implemented in action. And second to put a governance framework in place so that those standards can be maintained as we have developed a better understanding of the science or as the situation in the world changes, et cetera. And we did that. So in the second half of last year we went from a task force to a formal governing body. It's called the integrity council of the voluntary carbon markets. It's the board of directors who are the ultimate adjudicators are majority non-aligned parties. In other words, NGOs or academics who don't have an economic interest in the underlying market. We've made a first ad at a very clear set of standards for what qualifies as a legitimate and high quality carbon contract. The integrity council is now working through the very specific details of what that means. The governance body is up and running. It's advised by an expert panel of names that we would all recognize as masters of this trade. And we've already seen a dramatic impact in terms of the amount of money that's changing hands in order to for the most part deliver nature-based solutions. And the market's increased in size by about five times. The final headline, if we get this right we go from 2020 reduction through offsets of about 180 million tons to in 2030, 23 gigatons. That's what can be funded if this carbon market ramps up just in the next eight years in the way that we think it can. Simply buy what they ought to be doing within their home turf. So first you've got to get your own house in order then into these credit markets. Good. Let's turn to Geraldine Machette. Geraldine, you run BSN, which is for those of us that know it is a remarkable company that uses science to make the world a better place. A lot of people don't know DSM so well, but you're huge. And you've got all kinds of products that actually are relevant to our discussion today. And you look at the whole food system in an unusual way. Tell us, just tell us a little bit about that. What gives you hope and what are you planning to do? Thank you, Andrew. And I have to say this is already a fascinating panel. I was listening to Bill. I am both a CFO by training and a geographer. And we must never forget that the best mechanism to draw down carbon from the atmosphere is photosynthesis. So actually vegetation, nature, food production has everything to do with carbon credits, carbon markets. And I'm sure we'll get there because it has a lot to do also with scaling some of the innovations that without these well-intreated carbon markets may be a little bit challenging. Maybe just a one thought that I would like to put forward before I talk about DSM and how we see things is that sometimes when we look at food systems there is a bit of a demonizing of food production but it's good to look back for a second and realize that in 70 years, the lifetime of one person, we have three times more human beings to feed on this planet. So from the 2.5 to this nearly 8 billion people and at the very same time, the number of people in extreme poverty shrunk from 70% to eight. Now 8% is still far too many, still 650 million, but it just shows that how we have as humanity managed to find ways of increasing predominantly the production of food. Now, of course, now we're realizing that the scaling of that food production is now coming back to bite us. And the video that we had as an introduction as a good indication of how we have depleted our top soils, how we have basically damaged planet Earth. And the way we like to think about food systems is that it is the flip side of climate, both in terms of cores, but also the most disruptive. And I think it's super important for this audience to realize that effectively when we talk about the food system is in crisis and we are a science-based company, people tend to think about Sub-Saharan Africa, vulnerable populations, no. We're thinking about every single geography is under pressure when it comes to food production. Look at the floods yesterday or the week ago in Brazil, the fires, the droughts, it's everywhere we look, we have an absolute emergency when it comes to food production. So there is a, the climate emergency is actually a food production emergency. And I think in many countries we forgot that food is actually a national security topic. Now, to the point of what can we do because we, I think we all, most of us realize the degree of severity of the situation. And while we've been hearing a lot about some of the more structural actions that one can take, there are also some very pragmatic actions. And as you said, we are a science-based company sitting in the middle of the value chain because we're the company, we mark world leader in what makes food actually nutritious for humans and for animals. Which means that we look upstream to the production of food in particular proteins, whether it be animal-based, eggs, dairy meats, plant-based, but the production, can we make that sustainable? But also what people are eating because currently we're eating ourselves sick, unfortunately. So diets have a lot to do with actually sustaining healthy people on a healthy planet. Now, three topics I would like to throw in and leaving time for debates. One is scaling regenerative agriculture. To the point that photosynthesis is the best mechanism to draw down CO2 and carbon sequestration, scaling regenerative agricultural practices in all geographies at scale must be a priority. For that, we also need to connect producers to consumers and therefore transparency is important. And all of the companies that we work with upstream and downstream are thinking about this and how we tied to capital markets, et cetera. So one food for thought is all about regenerative agriculture and how we tied to capital markets, et cetera. So one food for thought is all about regenerative agriculture. The other one is to be pragmatic, we have found that you need to take value chain by value chain. It's very difficult to talk generically about food production, food systems. But when you start saying, for instance, how do we get to a net zero dairy chain? It's absolutely possible in today's technologies, but how do we do that? And bring together all of the stakeholders, including legislators, technology, digital has been mentioned, to actually value chain by value chain most likely geography by geography go to action. And that is the second sort of thought I would like to put forward. And the third one is actually the true value of food. And there was a great session earlier this week, again, in the context of the WEF week, looking at how do we actually factor in the real value that food production brings? Basically, a society cannot be stable without a stable food production system. And how do we start quantifying not only the cost of food and there's a lot of talk about inflation. So if you bring in the externalities, it doesn't make food too expensive. But if you actually look at the benefits, then you start getting an equation that's much more balanced. And that can help, for instance, countries and legislators to repurpose 700 billion of subsidies that go with food production, which are currently not in the right place. Well, thank you, Geraldine, very much. Could I probe on just one of those examples you gave where you mentioned net zero dairy chains, for example. Now, you, I know, have developed a product, and I'm sure other companies have too, but I bet yours is the best, to change the feedstuff or feedstock for ruminants that will significantly reduce their methane emissions. It strikes me, though, that that's the sort of thing that ought to be subsidized because it costs more than regular animal food. Governments, for the most part, are quite willing to put a lot of money into renewable energy, into electric cars. They're willing to put a lot of money into agriculture, but actually aren't using their money to, if you like, tweak the incentive structure. I mean, are you hoped for? What should we do about that? I mean, should that be part of voluntary carbon markets, for example, subsidizing that? And which countries are taking this issue seriously? Yeah, I mean, this is a very good example of how do we scale a very effective innovation, so in two words, if you add a quarter of a teaspoon of this ingredient into the feed of a cow, you can reduce the methane burnt by cows by 30%. Now, when we started this innovation more than 10 years ago, people thought that was a very weird thing to work on, but of course, if you look at last year with the methane pledge at COP26, agriculture is the second biggest source of methane and we know it's the low-hanging fruit when it comes to climate change. Now, how do we scale the adoption? It requires zero infrastructure. You basically just add something in addition to grains and vitamins and whatever other nutritional ingredient, you just top this up. How do we scale that? And what we're seeing is there's actually, and I'm quite hopeful because we're seeing thanks to the attention on methane, we're seeing a lot more traction from countries realizing in the NBCs, oh, methane is actually something we need to tackle. But voluntary carbon markets could help a lot because farmers need to benefit from transitioning to sustainable practices. If farmers are not better off and see a much brighter future when they're adopt regenerative or adopt Beauvais, which is our feed ingredient as one of the examples, it's very difficult to gain speed. And that's where the support of legislation and regulation can be extremely helpful. And this is one example. And I'm sure we'll talk about track and tracing, digital imagery, all of these technologies can really turn our farmers into the custodians of planet Earth, but we need to be able to put a little more muscle behind scaling these innovations much faster. That's great. Thank you so much, Geraldine. That was great. Let's turn to Anisha, who is CEO of the Mahindra Group. Mahindra Group is quite remarkable for having an integrated approach to the way they treat water and land and climate and so on. I should say, Anisha, we are very grateful to Mahindra because when we established the Science-Based Targets Initiative, it wasn't clear how many companies were really gonna sign up. When the Mahindra Group got all of your companies to say, look, we have to be scientific, we've got to make ourselves accountable, we've got to be transparent, that was an absolute tipping point. And now we have what? 3,000 companies around the world signed up to that. So very grateful. What is on your mind as you think about these issues relating to nature? And first, thank you for your kind words. What's on our mind is that we really need to find a way to reimagine capitalism, where growth and impact should coexist because without companies coming forward to make a significant contribution, this effort's gonna fail. But if we do make a significant contribution, we've got to be bold about the targets we set. At Mahindra we have set a target of getting to net zero by 2040. But 2040 is a long way off and I'm not likely to be the CEO at that point in time. So what we have to do is what are the targets we set for this year, next year and the year after that? And that's really the path we're laying out. But what we've also learned is it's not about just what we do within the confines of the company, it's how we engage with the broader communities. And let me give two examples here. Our journey started about 15 years ago and one of the projects we commenced was Project Hariyali. Hariyali means greenery and we've planted about 20 million trees at around rate of roughly one million a year at this point in time. Our target is to get to five million trees a year in the next five years. But the real difference we've made is the impact that these trees have had on tribal communities in various states. And one example of this is a tribal community in the Arapa Valley of Andhra Pradesh, a state in southern India. True trees were planted there with the help of the tribal community that provide soil nutrients and shade to enhance the quality of coffee that is grown by them. And the coffee became so good that they could actually start taking and selling this and has now become famous as Arapa coffee. It now has a store in Paris and it's treated by connoisseurs as some of the best coffee in the world. So this is something that really is transforming livelihood for communities. And based on that, the community has developed a holistic program based on biodynamic farming that has increased the yield of coffee, enhance its taste, help them get premium prices for their produce. And that has resulted in greater community engagement, greater tree plantation. Across the trees we've planted, we have an 83% survival rate, which is quite high and that's really more important in terms of sustainability of these programs. And if you look at the net carbon sequestered annually by the current population of trees, it really covers half our scope one and scope two emissions. So that is a significant step forward for us. A second example I'd talk about is around being water positive. We have been water positive for the last seven years and we've got a large family of employees, 260,000, but we've had a lot of enthusiasm across various companies and they've done extensive rainwater harvesting, adopting water recycling, eliminating leakage, enhancing productivity, et cetera. But here again, the biggest impact we've had is with communities. An example here is we did a project with about 32 villages in the state of Madhya Pradesh in central India. It was a watershed development project that spread over 10,000 hectares. And in partnership with the state government, this led to a three and a half times increase in per capita income for 20,000 rural Indians in five years. And this was essentially due to large scale rainwater harvesting. And that again is changing lives of communities. And these are things that are enabling the communities to get involved in these projects and give us a much bigger impact. So really in summary, the role of corporates I would look at is to be a catalyst for some of these changes and be able to make them much more far reaching. Thank you very much, Anish. Could you say a word about the corporate sector leadership in India as a whole? I mean, obviously you are a global leader and a leader within India. And that's why we're asking you these questions. But as you look around your colleagues, is this agenda now increasingly intuitive because obviously the damage to nature is so great or is there still a big job to be done with CEOs? I think there is a lot of awareness. The awareness really took place a few years ago based on what we've seen around us. But a lot of action has taken place over the last few years. And I see tremendous momentum specifically over the last 12 months. So a lot of companies are realizing that they have to take a leadership role in this without them, this is not going to change. And we're starting to see that happen. So I would be very optimistic on that front. That's encouraging. Thank you very much. I'd like to ask you, before we turn to our final question, I'd like to ask you all a question that's on my mind having listened to you all. And by the way, it's very inspiring to listen to you. We have plenty of commitments right now. I mean, maybe not enough, but we've got a lot of commitments. And we've had commitments before. We've had biodiversity targets that were set 10 years ago. We haven't reached them. We had, as I mentioned before, the forest targets. We didn't reach them. We now have a lot more targets. Let me ask you this. What would it take to create more of a sense of accountability? And do you feel we now have that? And could I link that also to coming back to the very first question about Stockholm plus 50 in Stockholm plus zero in 50 years ago? I mean, that's when the United Nations Environment Program was created. Prime Minister Indira Gandhi came and said, you know, and it was part of a real movement. Maurice Strong went out and UNEP has played an incredible role since then. Are there institutional changes that we need to see to bring about the accountability we talk about? Just anyone who wants to address that, please just try and do it. Maybe we turn first to you, Hakim. You've spoken, you've thought a lot about this. And just very brief answers from whoever wants to. Very brief, and I hope Stockholm plus 50 will provide precisely that kind of introspection in order to move forward. And I think certainly targets are important, but we also have to be very clear what makes people then adhere to targets. And one is maybe the accountability to others who signed up to it, but in let's say the political arena, also our citizenry. I think the greatest way in which we can accelerate and scale up action is to have these targets, but then to invest actually in the ability of citizens to hold those who committed those targets accountable. If a corporation commits to doing something, then it should be able to one be recognized for it, but also to be held accountable equally governments. And we know that in the international arena, we will always not have a policing enforcement paradigm that really can be involved. And yet the NDCs, many consider them to be just documents. It's interesting, these national climate strategies that now underpin the Paris agreement, Glasgow, they've actually become more than just a document that you hand to an international process. They're beginning to drive national climate budgeting investments. And I think that is certainly one area. We need to empower those who can actually exercise authority to hold that accountability alive. And secondly, we also need to learn that in the way we set targets, that we cannot solve the world's problems one by one in isolation. This is why the SDG is the 2030 agenda is so fundamental to actually giving us a different paradigm of investment. You can enter it, you know, a climate change investment can happen through the carbonization, renewable energy, a poverty reduction project for that matter. But actually it is when you bring these benefits together, you suddenly talk about transformation. So targets need to be smartly formulated. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks very much, Hakeem. Anyone else like to take on that question? Bill? I'd be happy. I think Hakeem's answers, which largely focus on what the public sector can do, are critical. What we notice clearly is a big stepping up with the private sector. And the analogy that I tend to use is not very friendly, but it's tightening the news on all of us. And the news starts with measuring properly. And I think that the steps around TCFD have begun that. Second is eliciting commitments. There's no shortage of net zero commitments at this point, although there's clearly more that we can do. But then the key is the ongoing accountability. And that accountability has got to come from the stakeholders for the private sector companies. And the stakeholders, first and foremost, are the owners. So we're talking about the asset managers and the people who fund the asset managers, pension funds, insurance companies, many of whom get back to the public sector. But I think if we circle the problem and remove the excuses that people like me, corporate CEOs, the excuses that we can deploy to explain why we're not quite there and just do that one at a time. And we heard it quite clearly from Anish in terms of the way that Mahindra has approached us. Likewise, DSM, we can remove the excuses, step up the accountability, refocus on consistent measurement. I think the private sector can contribute as fair share. So, Refe, Geraldine. Yeah, I would love to jump in and fully agree with Bill. And I would even add in here the voice of the consumer. I think that what we're seeing very clearly is that the awareness is rising. And that is good news because then it's not about are you gonna commit to what you promised? It actually makes a lot of sense to commit to what you promised. So what we're seeing is a lot of traction around the how do we do it? Not why should we do it? Or are we being pushed and who's pushing us? But very much how can we connect the dots from food production all the way to consumption? And how do we impact diets? And how do we really shift the whole system? So for me, that's one of the big things. But I think we touched upon earlier in the debate that someone said, and sorry I forgot who he was, that digital is the biggest game changer here. And the ability to see what is going on is so different. From space, we heard it earlier this week from the International Space Station, you can actually measure, the astronaut was telling us in Al Gore as well, the sources of methane down to the field, down to the location. And I think that transparency creates much more accountability and responsibility as well. So I think there's a technology and a consumer play here as well. Terrific, terrific. Anybody, Anish and then Matilda. Yeah, I'd like to add that it's about linking the present to the future. As you said, Andrew, we've done a great job in setting science-based targets and we have a lot of companies signed up, but that's all about the future. What are the targets today? And then I go back to what Bill said about measurement and reporting. Are we reporting them in our annual reports? Are we having the same common measurement around it? There's a lot of effort going on there again, led by the World Economic Forum. I think that will help tremendously. And then finally, it's about incentives. I also do agree with Bill that the owners do have to build the stick in some form, but with the stick, there are incentives in terms of funding, in terms of what consumers will look for and companies that they want to associate with. And I think a combination of that will allow companies to start getting on this path a lot faster. Terrific, thank you, Anish. Matilda. Thank you very much. I just want to add some things. As I said, I believe we believe that Stockholm Plus 50 offers a chance to bring together all relevant stakeholders to spotlight how we can step up when it comes to this sustainable transformation and how we can bring together ambitions when it comes to net zero, but also a more nature positive way of thinking. But I also want to add that I think that we sometimes, because I truly believe in international cooperation, where would we have been without international cooperation? But sometimes it feels like we are so into what challenges we have ahead of us. So we sometimes forget to remind ourselves what we have achieved together sort of from where we were to where we are now. And I think we need to be better on that. Yes, look upon in sort of in the Swedish context. 30 years ago, we heated our houses with oil. That is not the question today. No houses are heated by oil. We had sort of 50 years ago, we used methods in our forestry that is not there today. It's much more better today. Look upon how we use chemicals within the EU. We have set up a sort of regulation where we stop using the most dangerous ones. We have to substitute them with better substitutions and so on. So I think we need to be better to also sometimes and acknowledge what we have done together. But with that said, we are just in sort of in the beginning of our sustainability travel. So and some of someone, and we have touched upon it, but I think what we can do is also have sort of more transparency when it comes to sort of nature-related risks. So that companies and also financial institutions, because we want sort of the money to go to good things. But so they can evaluate their exposure to risks such by diversity, degeneration and deforestation and so on and take action to eliminate it. And so that civil society can hold companies and politicians accountable to their commitments and keep up the pressure. So and also when it comes to sort of development policies and development finance, we can also make that more nature positive. So we can see that things are interlinked. But yeah, I told you, but what I wanted to say is that we need to also see and show that we can do better together. We have been and show that we sort of bring in a sense that we actually can do better together. And we have shown it if you look backwards and sort of the challenges we have ahead, how can we must sort of address them together? Thank you. Thank you very much, minister. The stock on plus 50 is going to be a great event. It sounds really. So we have five minutes left. One question, maximum of one minute from each of you. Each of you have two jobs. You have your main job, which is running the huge institution that you are in charge of. But you also have a job globally when you speak, people listen, when you convene, they come and you're all involved in creating coalitions and trying to move across tipping points. So the sentence begins in 2022 in order to advance the nature agenda, I will dot, dot, dot. And why do we go in the reverse order? Can we start with you, Anisha? Thank you, Andrew. In 2022, I will ensure that we have a very clear roadmap laid out to get to net zero by 2040 with specific actions in the field of water positivity, zero waste to landfill, energy productivity and looking for new technologies that will help us get there. Perfect, perfect. Thank you very much. Let's go to Matilda. No, Javrabin. Me? Okay, thanks, Andrew. In 2002, I will seek to maintain the momentum that was built with the UN Food Systems Summit and to get the private sector behind that momentum. And to do that, it is to increase the number of CEO coalition members from the 100 million pharma coalition to bring the different stakeholders because we need to elevate food systems from what it is today, which is about producing and selling food to seeing it as the societal and survival topic that it needs to be. So expanding coalition. Thank you so much. Now it's great, Geraldine. Bill Winters. So in 2022, we are committed to, implementing the net zero transition plan, which was a very detailed plan along with the white paper that we produced last year. It is in full swing, but the commitment is to deliver a disproportionate share of that 10 year transition plan over the course of 2022. Wonderful, wonderful. Thank you, Akim. In 2022, I will continue to focus on ensuring that we don't go back to where we were. I think, again, to where I started, it's a very, very difficult moment for many countries, for many communities. The temptation to simply scramble back the way we were would be a terrible lost opportunity. So investing in that transition that allows us to invest precisely in the topics we have covered in our discussion is really at the forefront of my work and that of my institution, I think, of many of us. So with optimism, with perspective and with courage to look forward. Thanks. That's great. Thank you, Akim, very much. Matilda, minister. Thank you very much in 2022. I hope that we have been able to reduce people's poverty by putting together the net zero and the nature positive agenda and that countries throughout the world actually are not only committed to goals, they also deliver on those goals with money and with also a great deal of courage because otherwise we can't do this sustainable travel to sustainability. Thank you. Great. Thank you so much, Matilda. And in 2022, I will be watching all of you with great joy deliver what you just said you're going to be doing. In addition to that, I will be following up with you and many, many other leaders in the field to try and figure out how we at the Basel's Earth Fund can allocate the precious resources that we've been entrusted with in a way that actually advances the transitions that will be required. And this is not easy, but it's a very exciting task. This is a wonderful discussion and it is not my job to summarize. It would be impossible to do that. But I'm really delighted that Gimwe Nio, the new managing director of the World Economic Forum responsible for the Center for Nature and Climate who's just arrived last month. He is going to summarize for us and take us home. But first, let me, I'm not sure whether it's my job to thank the panel or whether it's yours, Gimwe, but let me thank Geraldine, Matilda, Bill, Akim, Anish, what a treat to listen to all of you. Thank you so much. And welcome, Gimwe. Thank you, Andrew. And thank you for your excellent moderation. And more importantly, thank you for your leadership in this space. And we very much look forward to working very closely with the Earth Basel's Fund to see how we can continue to push the climate action and nature action forward. Thank you to the panelists. Really enjoyed listening to your various comments and insights. Mr. Erncrens, Ms. Geraldine Machit, Mr. Anish Shah, Mr. Akim Steiner and Mr. Bill Winters. It's a very important issue and we really enjoyed hearing from you today. As I listen and reflect on your comments, I'm reminded of the three Rs, the need for us to renew, the need for us to restore and the need for us to revitalize our relationship with nature and its ecosystems. Nature is the source and sustenance of life. Whether it's the air we breathe, the water we drink and the food we eat. And every one of us needs that to go about our day-to-day survival. And for any business or society to endure and to prosper, we have to take pause and recognize that we have to live in harmony with nature and be a very responsible steward of the resources it brings. Today's session is reminded us of the need for us to act now before it is too late, time is running out. We have to act together to avoid a tragedy of the commons and we have to act at scale and one of the panelists reminded us that we have to also act schematically, because the dots are all interconnected to achieve the impact that is needed. At the World Economic Forum, we strive to be a force for good. We will continue to work with you, build partnerships where stakeholders can engage to drive positive change. And we have launched several nature-related initiatives, including 100 million farmers, together with Gerardine's group, preventing deforestation through the Tropical Forest Alliance, 1trilliontrees.org, and also to look at how to better protect the oceans with blue food systems. And you can find more information on this initiative on our website, webforum.org. We also invite you to join us in this various endeavours. And in 2022, I together with my team at the Centre will continue to explore more ways to build a nature-positive future with you and support the transition for a more sustainable, just and resilient global economy. And thank you all for being with us today. I wish you a wonderful weekend ahead. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you.