 I'm very glad to be here to give a comparison study on the FRR in China, Ethiopia, and in Nepal. We can see the predictable trend of the forest change in different countries of the world from the experiences of the forest transition model study. Though deforestation and forest degradation is still the main problem in the world, global and national commitments to restore the landscape is also apparently strong in recent years. So here I want to, based on the hypothesis of the forest transition model on the forest cover change, to do the comparative study on the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation, what's the motivating of the factors of the restoration and incentives of the FRR in three case countries, try to build the policy recommendations for the decision-makers. The history of deforestation in China goes back many centuries by expansion of the agriculture up until the late 20th century, China's growing population required more and more agriculture land, but we have turned around in the past 20 years. And both Ethiopia and Nepal faced DND II as agricultural encroachment. After Himalaya and deforestation was discussed in 1975 by ACOM, widespread land degradation indeed occurred from some researchers' literature. So that's why from the global and national level, they all committed to restore the landscape. There are many global campaigns for planting trees and restoring landscape ecological functions. In recent years, there are various commitments from Bonn Challenge, from APEC meeting and the UN climate change summit, and the CBD, IG, biodiversity targets, they all have targets for the landscape restoration. Most China and Ethiopia have the national commitment to increase their forest area, to rehabilitate the degraded lands, and also both three countries in China, Nepal, and Ethiopia have commitments to the IG targets to restore the landscape. And China has a large ecological improvement commenced since six national key forestry programs launched in late 1990s. We are going to restore millions of hectares of land through natural regeneration and the planting tree planting. As you all may know that six national key forestry programs including the AFPP, CCFP, and CCFP conversion cropland to forest program is the case we are using in this study. And about the forest transition model and policy change in China, we can see we have different period, we have different stages. But I can summarize it as three stages from 1949 to 1976, from 1977 to 1997, and then after 1998, we have large ecological improvement commenced to restore the landscape. And Ethiopia's forest reconstruction starts from 2000, with the national tree planting campaigns starting from mid-2000. National forest policy and forest law issued in 2007, also the CRE strategy started in 2011. All of those policies reinforce the forest tree development and reinforce and encourage the tree planting. Now both forest reconstruction starts from 2000, with several national policies enacted. Forest policy started in 2000, and the national biodiversity strategy issued in 2002. So all that, also the forest carbon policy and forest policies envisioned in 2014, they have various potential benefits from the forest goods and services for the local people and the global level. What's the drivers of the deforestation and the forest degradation in China? It's because of the populace pressure leading to the agricultural expansion for food, over logging, for timber to support the economic development, also the illegal logging for the families, house use. Even though there are several policies, deforestation and regeneration policies, but we couldn't stop the deforestation trends, so far the mid and young forests and also the monocultural forests accounting for the majority of the current forest. A rapidly growing population in Ethiopia, over 90 million, which is 80% more, depend on the land for food. But the farm sizes of the households is very small and unproductive. It's about less than 0.5 hectares for each household. As a result, agriculture expansion caused deforestation and grazing and few wood extraction caused forest degradation in Ethiopia. In the port too, drivers for deforestation and forest degradation are agricultural expansion by the landless farmers, unsustainable agricultural practices, over logging and illegal logging as unclear property rights of the land. Overgrazing and bush cutting all caused deforestation and forest degradation. What's the motivation for the reforestation in China? It's improving ecological quality, controlling the flowers and soil water erosion in the origins of the big rivers. How to integrate the well-being of the improvement of marginal people living in the original arranging of the watershed are the second main concerns of China's FR. In Ethiopia, the main actors of FR are communities and central government and also the development partners such as NGOs and donors. Motivations for the reforestation are both economic benefits of meeting households daily needs for food and the few wood and also the ecological benefits of the water and soil conservation to provide clean water for drinking and irrigation. In the port, the main actors of FR are communities and central government too, and the motivation for their restoration to meet the local people's needs for forest products, for their house building and also for their few wood and of course control the flowers. So the incentives for FR in China will include the soil water conservation and protect the arranging of the water sources for clean water. Both the CCFP subsidies and future return of the forest management for the households attract the farmers to participate in FR. And a secure land use right by the certification of the forest land tenure and also the all-farm employment opportunities outside the village after participating CCFP, more labor and time are released from the intensive crop land management. In incentives for the Ethiopians FR, it's both the on-site and off-site benefits which directly influence households daily life are expected as incentives. There are mainly timber and non-wood forest products needs, also the like such as the form folder and the water flows for drinking and irrigation. And also the payments and the jobs participating in the forest management also attractive for the farmers. Of course the future ownership of the ownership of the land are also expected from the households. Incentives for the Nepal, it's the most attractive incentives should be providing the forest products of the timber and the few wood for the households land tenure or user rights to easy to access the forest, protect the communities from the large floods and provide clean water for local people by off-forestation in water sources area. So we try to conclude with this table comparing each country's transition period and their deforestation timeframe and also the time for their forest recovery and try to compare the incentives, what's the common incentives, what's the common drivers of the deforestation. And we think learning, adapting needs time. And there are common issues for deforestation and forest degradation in the same forest transition period of three countries. And the common drivers for FRR may maybe improve both the ecological and economic benefits for the local people. And most common incentives of the ecological service is to control the flowers, provide clean water and irrigation water. And we can see no one size fits all solutions. But by breaking down what incentives have worked in different case studies, we may try to find some common suggestions for the different transition models of these countries. Thank you very much for your attention.