 Let me thank all of our presenters for all staying within time. I've never seen such a thing. So it can be done. And what that means, if I'm, we started at about 25 till, is that we have a full 20 minutes now for Q and A. I do want to go back to the questions raised by Dr. Escobar and by David Perkey relating to the broken nexus and some of the issues around legal. But let's open up the floor. And before we do, can I invite our panelists to come up here and just take a place up here and choose it if you would like to join as well. You've been participating in the urban metabolism. And I think we need a micro, 15, okay, we, okay, that's fine, 15 minutes, but that's, that's fine. And what I'll ask is that we'll open up the floor here and I hope we can get a microphone up here. If you could simply, you know, perhaps state your name and state your question as succinctly and clearly as you can. And if it's directed toward one of the panelists, please, please identify that panelist. Or if it's to any or all, then we allow all to join. So with that, the floor is open. Is this going to work? All right, this is our microphone people. Hi, good morning, Jacob Granit from the Stockholm Center. Thanks for this presentation. I think that they're very good because they actually, all of them addressed the question raised by David, should we engage in the essential policy process with our tools and models. And the presentation by Brian is clear on that, I think, because if we do not understand the broader political economic context, even the economics will not really help. So the question is if we need to supplement some of our work with a more developed way of addressing the political economic situation, both at national level, local, of course, but also regional in order to address these multiple problems we have related to water law in California or in the more much more complex Jordan basis. So it seems to me that I think we need to think in two tracks always. One is the model, the biophysical world, but also exploring ways to address these more complex, broader political economic issues, which I think was also raised by Eric in the question in Bangkok, because without understanding them, it would not be very difficult to provide any real advice and guidance in these processes. Thanks. Would anyone like to respond? Or should we take a couple more questions? Okay, let's take a couple more questions. Back there. I apologize if I don't know your name, sir. Thank you. Anya Grubitsky, Global Water Partnership. This was a really wonderful session and thank you so much for all the information on these various excellent projects which SCI is undertaking. I can see why Weep has changed David Perky's life, I think. I was very taken by this idea of the broken nexus. Indeed, there are many, many river basins where the nexus is broken and if Weep can help to rebuild it and put the pieces together, then that's a huge service. But first of all, my first question is really to David. I have two questions. Well, firstly, congratulations on this tremendous success in getting a contract with the state board and in stepping into these murky waters of the law. It sounds to me as though perhaps SCI might need some liability insurance. Now that you're going to be dealing with these really real life issues. But I just wanted to ask you a bit more about that. How do you see this actually affecting SCI's work? Are you bringing water lawyers on board within SCI or will you be doing it in partnership? And just to hear a bit more about how you see this area of work expanding because it's a fantastic practical application of this science policy interface. My second question is really to Jenny Barron. And Jenny, I was fascinated to hear about this, this TAGME, the decision support system and the way in which it's been applied in the Volta Basin and the Lampopo River Basin. Given that the challenge program will now be phasing out, I wanted to ask you what plans there are for actually perhaps putting this decision support system on a more stable platform because it would be a tremendous pity if this was not to be further applied. Have you thought maybe of linking with the river basin commissions in order for them to use this as a platform to have that basis of the technological choice available to them in the future? And I just wanted to mention that if you are thinking in that direction then perhaps GWP can help because we do have a strong link with the river basin commissions and also with ANBO, which is the African Network of Basin Organizations. Thanks very much. Great, let's take one more and then we'll have some responses. Do we have one more question? Yes, right there in the middle? Thanks, Richard's client, Stockholm Environment Institute here in Stockholm. Question also to David, you asked the question whether, you know, there's basically if there's a risk if SEI then also applies WEAP in terms of legal issues, is there also a similar risk if others apply WEAP? In other words, I mean, does it really matter? Is the risk with the fact that WEAP would yield certain results or is the risk really with the people who actually apply it? I mean, what would be the distinction? And if that's the case, I mean, if WEAP is going to be applied and its results are going to have legal significance, then that liability insurance might be needed anyway, even if you aren't necessarily directly applying it for this purpose. Okay, thanks. David, perhaps you can start. You had two questions, one on how the issues of potential liability affect SEI's work and then the question that Richard just provided. Yeah, well, on that first one, there's this great thing about disclaimer. So I think in the software downloads, for both WEAP and LEAP, there is a disclaimer about other people using it and we're not responsible. So hopefully those would hold up. But in terms of the question about, you know, whether we need, what would be our strategy for engaging in this process legally? So my questions were a bit rhetorical. We are not, we're not in a litigant or a plaintive in this dispute. We are being engaged basically by the court to provide technical analysis to support an administrative law proceeding, which will be challenged by litigants down the road. And so in terms of the legal justification for the work that we're doing, it's being filtered through the legal staff at the State Water Resources Control Board. So my questions were a bit provocative. I hope that we don't need to be hiring a lot of lawyers ourselves, although it's an interesting question. I mean, should SEI have people who understand law and the legal process? And should that be an area of capacity that we're looking to expand or partnerships that we're looking to build with people? So that's our strategy for handling the legal part of this particular project. I also just wanna respond briefly to Jacob and then pass it on down to the others, first to Jenny. I actually saw some of your emails, a couple of weeks ago, about thinking about the political economy. And I wrote this desperate email to Annette and I said, what is political economy? And she said me some wiki stuff and I read, did some reading on it. I said, if I don't read about it, I'm gonna be exposed as an idiot at some point very soon. And so I did some reading and I do, if I do understand this concept, it's really about variable economic systems, power structures and that sort of thing. And by all means, I think we need to be having our analysis be better informed by those considerations and it seems like one of the ways that we would do that is through the way we deploy these tools within participatory processes and decision making processes. And what control can we have over the ways those are structured and the perspectives that are brought to bear in the way the analysis is carried out and the models are run. And that's actually something that's quite actively engaged in and the way we're using our models. We're thinking more about how they fit within political participatory decision making processes than we are about the models themselves. And we have some experiences in the US center that we'd be happy to share with anyone around these ideas of robust decision making and participatory experimental design. So, and by the way, I'm not the theme leader anymore. Sorry. I'll hand it over to the theme leader, Jenny. Thank you very much. Thank you very much for that offer. The TAGME tool has, the challenge program is just wrapping up now. I think it was finished actually in December formally whilst the approach and the way that the work was carried out actually continues in the new structure of the CDIR consortium research programs. So, TAGME is like a proof of concept at this stage. And we've had these requests of other users to potentially develop it for other technologies and other geographical spaces. And we are also in the process of trying to put the TAGME versions for Limpopo and Volta developed under the challenge program. They will be hosted by the Volta Basin Authority and probably Fundra Pan in the Limpopo, which is a research for policy institution. But we will continue to host it also at SEI just for a backup. So it's available for users and to try it. So you're very welcome. You can go there and try it out for yourselves. Thank you. Any other comments from the panelists on any of the questions raised? Okay, floor is open once again. Yes, down here. Thank you so much for your presentations. Really, really interesting. My name is Anna Gren and I work for SEI. I work with a number of issues. Right now with the Scientific Research Corporation and I've had the benefit and the pleasure of working in the Middle East and I was based in Jerusalem, working with West Bank and Gaza. And Dr. Joyce, I just wanna say that I think that your research is so important and that you did a great job presenting this extremely complex problem, problematic of the water situation. And I wish we would have had this type of research when I was there because we were really trying to discuss the issues related to area C, to the water rights, to the issues of water rights and the importance of support to capacity development of Palestinians really and the Palestinian authority, the water authority in terms of the need to have people trained in water legality. And I think it's excellent that you're working with Hebrew University and also with the Israeli government and the Jordanians. And I would hope that, and it's a question that maybe you're working with the Palestinian universities in Ramallah and in Gaza. I would really suggest that in order to have balance in terms of the knowledge and the capacity that those areas should really be emphasized and I hope that you do that. Yes, that's right. We actually are working with Anagia University in Palestine and I think that you're right, through the universities and our partnerships with them, that I think we'll find a way to really take forward this idea that I said about exploring the benefits of cooperation. No, David, I encourage me to explain that a lot of the work that we are doing in Latin America, we are doing it with university partners and we think that that's a very good strategy to really create knowledge that lasts longer before, after we leave the places where we are working, so that's how we are acting. And just to keep on on the same topic, the summer net program that I mentioned in the earlier today, that's all about research and cooperation, working with the program provides grants to researchers based in the Mekong region. We are officially out of time. First, please join me in thanking our presenters here for a wonderful job.