 Thank you for coming to this parallel discussion session. My name is Tony Bartlett, I'm the Forestry Research Program Manager for Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research. We've got six speakers this afternoon, and then hopefully we'll have a little bit of discussion. We originally planned for a two-hour session, now we have 90 minutes, so I've got all of these speakers. We had a discussion last night to try to shorten the talk of it, so this discussion. But we will run for six presentations first and then have discussion, otherwise it's very difficult if a lot of questions come up in one topic only. So just briefly, so that some of you I know understand what ACR is, but ACR has been operating as part of the Australian Aid Initiative for the last 30 years, working on collaborative research in partner countries in the Asia-Pacific region and beyond, primarily in Asia-Pacific region. The Forestry Program is one of 14 programs, and we operate in 12 countries, and quite a number of those are in Asia and some more in Pacific, and we will be in Africa. So we basically do research in all areas of forestry, and the priorities for the research are determined in consultation with the partner countries. And a fair part of what we do focuses on smallholder forestry, but right through the value chain up to policy. Jeff, you have to turn the next slide please. You can see there are two results from some of our work, one from Indonesia and one from Vietnam that show very high cost-benefit ratios from the results of this long-term research collaboration. So that demonstrates very clearly why it's a very good investment to do this type of forest research, and how it can pay a lot of dividends to both the economies of those countries and the smallholders. But one important message, and you'll see from the presentations that we have a variety of types of research that we've been supporting that I think is quite important in a conference like this, is to understand that there isn't just one area of research that you can do to make all this work, even in the concept of integrated sustainable land states. You have to have a lot of different interventions so that you address all the issues. And then of course there's the issue of getting the research results out to all the stakeholders who need to understand it. So I'm not going to take any more time. I'm going to introduce our speakers one by one. The first speaker is Dr. Jim Rejecto from ICRAF. And to save time, I'm not even going to tell you about the background, so I'll just let each of them to do a little bit about some of the research that they've been involving. And in some cases they're also standing in for some other colleagues from other ACR funded projects just to share the breadth of the research that they've been involving. Over to you, Jim. Thank you, Tony. Yeah, I'm Jim Rejecto. I work with ICRAF. And I'm going to share some of the activities, forest research activities that have occurred in both Indonesia and Vietnam. The Indonesian work I've been involved with personally in Vietnam work is some of our other colleagues who are up here. Also, just to give you a snapshot, I want to make sure that as they realize this is not really just an ICRAF set of projects, but there's a bunch of different players in the hands of stakeholders involved with this research. So I guess the first thing, and this goes through all the presentations here, is that we've got to remember that small holders are key producers of timber in 1904 products. So timber in 1904 products are focuses of the ACR research portfolio that Tony just shared with you. But for farmers, teak trees are more trustworthy than vents. So it's growing on their land, they can harvest it when they want. They have basically four types of teak growing systems. Some of them might be like a monoculture woodlot. Other systems are mixed with fruit species, mixed with other timbers, even to the point of home gardens. So for the most part, farmers prefer them in systems because it reduces their risk. They diversify the crop production, products for the farm. And it's also very important that they see a sustainable environment as being an important thing. So sustainable landscapes as we're talking about at this conference. And important thing is to remember that they go by a blue-toed system, so they cut the trees when they need them. They're not trying to maximize the yield. And that's very important, it's their safety. They also know that they need to improve their management. There are some points down there about it. So the next thing, we wanted to look at what are the typical farmers of cultural systems. How do they regenerate their system? How do they manage the trees? And we found out that the majority of germ plants on the farm is just what they can get their hands on. They don't think about high quality seedlings or seed. You can see at the bottom only 12% use improved germ plants. Same thing for pruning. 65% of farmers prune their trees, but they prune them to harvest firewood. They don't prune the branches close to the trunk like they should. They leave some to its degree of the quality of the plant. Same thing with vending. 57% of the farmers claim that they've been in their tea stands. But in reality, they're harvesting usually the biggest trees. So this is this genetic process, right? They're actually decreasing the quality of their skin instead of pruning them. And in general, they don't manage to improve production. They don't manage to improve growth. So in general, we can say that the sort of existing farmer of cultural practices are leading to a system that's overstocked, slow growing, low quality, low productive. We discussed this with farmers that the farmers pretty much agree that these are the things that they want to do. So what does that mean? A lot of the hybridicaceous comes from cutting hedges. So if the hedge is very old, the germplasm that comes from there starts getting old as well. So the growth rate decreases and the form decreases. There's some questions there at the bottom too. Those are circled. Those are future research objectives, right? So how can we maximize growth? Key messages. Okay. Cutting right to the chase, the last slide. So small holders are key producers of timber and non-timber forest products. Their systems are very good. They're very sustainable in a landscape sense, in an environmental sense. Okay. That's important to remember. They're very good at supporting small holder livelihoods. They're also very important at supporting industrial timber, but also say the macroeconomy, right? Because they're producing cacao, they're producing rubber, they're producing a bunch of other non-timber forest products. So we need to develop a participative research agenda, which includes farmers' concerns, government concerns, and other stakeholders to address the real needs of the small holders on the farm, which can guide investment in research and development activities. So thank you very much. Well done. Thanks very much, Jim, and for keeping to time. That's excellent. Okay. The next speaker is Dr. Daniel Mendham from CSIRO. Thanks, Tony. Okay. So following on in the rush theme, given the time cutbacks, just a little bit of background. I'm sure we're all aware that Indonesia and a lot of countries, I think most countries in Southeast Asia, got pretty ambitious plans to increase both the area and the productivity of their forest plantations. And the reasons are pretty clear that forest plantations are good for regional development and wealth creation, and also to support the development of sustainable feedstock for downstream processing. And the key to all this is that profitable yields are, you know, essential for keeping growers interested in growing plantations because there are lots of competing options out there. And in fact, in some of the research that we've done, we've found that farmers have a track record of not actually achieving optimal yields. So there's some communication problems there. Okay. Thanks, Jack. And coming along stream alongside that, there's some key threats to what I'm calling the profitability of short rotation plantations. So there's some biophysical problems. Pathogens are becoming more prevalent. And it looks like some sort of active management strategy is likely to involve a change of species there. Again, I've made the point there that small holders have a track record of lower productivity. Is that because they have a less intensive management strategy or is there a lack of information for them to deal with optimizing their productivity? And again, they've got alternative land uses which they can adopt if they feel that that would be better suited to their land. And so we really need to provide them with a better value proposition in order for them to grow plantations. So I'm just going to delve into a few snapshots based on three projects that I've had a little bit of involvement with. There are obviously plenty more. Tony gave an overview there and then there's a strong history of projects with a high benefit-cost ratio. So I think ACO can be pretty proud of their record there. Next slide, Jack. So just go back one. Is there something missing there? There should be a table. The table hasn't come through in the translation. But in some of the work that we've been doing in Indonesia, it's become pretty clear to us that in fact wherever you go in the world that the plantation productivity can vary dramatically from site to site and even within a given site there can be huge variation in productivity. And if you're a small holder farmer you want to know whether your land is capable of growing a highly productive plantation or a not so highly productive plantation and that will affect your decision to invest in trees or not. Some very interesting work that we've done with Mahroof Nuruddin looking at the relationships between soil characteristics and plantation productivity shows that there are some sort of key diagnostic indicators of plantation productivity that we can help farmers to understand the sort of productive potential that they may get on their plantations. And you can just imagine that there's a nice table there explaining all those characteristics of sites that are highly productive and sites that are not. Typically it's soils with sites that have deep soils and good drainage is critical to getting highly productive plantations. Moving along to soil log management in Vietnam another project that we've been involved in. I think Jim just showed us some of the results from that but we're really trying to understand the optimal stocking density and soil nutrition for a case of hybrid production because there's a huge demand there for good quality soil logs for the emerging furniture industry that currently has to import a lot of timber and on the other hand there's a lot of case of hybrid plantations that are growing but they're not growing they're planted at very high stocking and they're not growing very well for producing soil logs. But as that project showed there's quite a few risks that we need to manage quite intensively. So disease is one, wind susceptibility is another and the long rotations also cause problems with or not problems they play around with the economics so that for farmers it can cause cash flow problems. Okay so the third project I'm going to talk about is the sustainability project and this was, is there one before that Jack? Yes. This study was conducted just recently by Chris Harwood in Sudan and Nambia and it's a review of the biophysical sustainability of short rotation acacia and eucalypt plantations in southeast Asia. They went to, they visited a heap of companies and extracted lots of information from in Vietnam, Indonesia, China and a few other countries and they looked at whether there was any evidence for a problem with sustainability of plantations and in fact the example here that is from Indonesia shows and this is replicated across the data set it shows that between the first and second rotation there's no evidence of any decline in productivity and if you go to the next slide Jack. So yeah they found that there's no evidence of systemic sustainability issues that in order to keep growing productivity growers do have to have an adaptive management style so that to overcome disease threats or to tailor their approach but that's no different to agriculture and agriculture has managed to increase productivity year on year. However there are still some examples of poor practice like site management, soil preparation and weed control which could be done better. So there are pockets of problems but overall there's no systemic problems with sustainability of these plantations. So moving on to the social science aspects of these projects it's pretty clear that the small hold of farmers are the target beneficiaries and forestry is a pretty valuable part of the farm enterprise for a lot of farmers. In Indonesia a lot of companies have an outgrow scheme and that can be a very good mechanism to improve the livelihoods of communities and farmers in very poorly serviced areas and when it works well it allows for a very short adoption pathway so that any new technology or new productivity improvements can be easily deployed to the farmers but a lot of the work that we're doing now is finding that there's a need for probably some improvements to those schemes to retain the incentives for farmers to continue to be engaged with the outgrower schemes. Just go back Jack, what did I miss there? So social science is a pretty important aspect of our projects in trying to understand how we can best deliver our scientific outputs to farmers and the social situation is different in almost every situation and location that we come to so that's something that we've got to deal with as well, that variability. Okay, so just in summary these ACR projects that we've been working on, I think they provide a pretty valuable mechanism to both push the frontier of science and also make sure that the work that we do is of practical benefit to farmers but it's not just the farmers that benefit. There's also lots of other downstream benefits to communities in terms of increased wealth in regional areas and that's it. Thanks very much, Daniel. Well done. Came in in 30 seconds under so that's excellent. Set the pace for everyone else. Okay, Dr. Dedi Rohati is the next speaker from Foda, seconded to C4. Thank you, Tony. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. After James and Daniel talk about the production system, the biophysical aspect of the plantations, I want to bring you to some social aspect and economic point of view of the small holders plantations. I think this is the main creation is the plantation is an attractive business to farmers, to small holders because this morning our president stated that we have planned four billion trees that's including I think planted by small holders but again the question is are they planted because they believe that it is a good business? Yes, in terms of demand, timber is increasing while the natural forest production is decreasing. There are a lot of potential from small holders. Also a lot of support from governments, distributing seedlings for examples, establishing nurseries everywhere. And also it's also very much related with human factors because people have long experience on cultivating timber in Indonesia, particularly in some part in Java. But still we are looking that there are some evidence that small holders planting with traditional practices as Jim stated, they are still relying on natural regeneration for example, they do not really manage the plantation for commercial purpose. So I'm looking what are behind this small holders behavior. Next, so these key findings mainly based on some completed and ongoing projects thanks to Asia who has funded a lot of these activities. First, completed project in 2012. It is mainly dealing with the civic culture aspect, microfinance and the marketing. The second one is with different models of community-based commercial plantations in particular the value chains. And also I took some lessons from different case studies. Next. I don't want to talk a bit about the methodology but of course you can ask me in the discussions. But first I would like to draw the perspective of small holders in timber plantations. If we are saying that small holders planting timber with all of their effort, maybe we have to look at this graph. And the share contribution in terms of incomes from timber if joined together. This is the case in Gunungkidu on tick small holders plantations. That's about 15% of the income structures. So it tells you something that timber is not the main source of income for small holders point of view. Still the majority is other non-farm activities. 60% they are generated from labor, go to the cities looking for job, etc. And all together the farming system is about 40%. That's including food crops. Next. But it doesn't mean that it is not important because farmers tend to diversify the income. So 15% is high according to farmer structure. Here the graph how farmers in Gunungkidu allocate their land. We can see across the land ownership. So even with very small land ownership they still allocate their land for woodlots for planting timbers. So it indicates that planting timbers is also important. As Jim said, it is a saving account for small holders because when they need money they can cut the trees. So about 10% of the land allocated for planting. So that's important. The next slide. We can see from the existing systems farmers applied tabang butu. Tabang butu is they cut timber when they need money. To some extent it is good because it's sustained. It's natural selected felling system. But on the other hand it also weakening the bargaining power of farmers when they are selling timber. Because when they are selling timber they do not care about the value of the timber itself, but they care about the money that they need. So they tend to become a price taker. And also you can see from the pictures they not really much put attention on how to improve the quality. Laid pruning for example or thinning. It's very difficult to convince farmers to thin. Although it could be many reasons. But still today knowledge it is not understood or not agree why should thin their timber because they have planted in a difficult effort. So also small holders has a lot of concern from the regulations because they have to get the permits from governments if they want to harvest in some area particularly in the outside of Japan. And if they want to transport timber they also need to get the transport documents. So those are some constraints that maybe may contribute to current behavior of farmers on planting timbers. Next, if you are looking at the value chain analysis from the study we can see that there are a big difference of price of small holder timber. For example it starts from 500,000 to 5 millions depending on the quality. But most of the small holders timber lies on the lower price. It's less than 1 million. So it again reflects the lower quality of the timber that produced by small holders. Next, if you are looking about the markets, marketing chains we can see the difference also between the marketing chains in Java where farmers have a better infrastructure and outside Java. Here for example in Ngunungidu we have farmers have a lot of options to sell their timber. They have a lot of middlemen in the village. They have a lot of industries that they go to sell their timber. But different for example in Zumbawa they still rely on few middlemen so that's again weakening their bargaining power. Next. So I think there are a lot of farmers are rational so they will invest their money in planting timber if they see the positive response for markets. So if they see a lot of barriers then they will allocate their resource to another business. So this is some of the key lessons from our studies. First I think what we have to do is to improve farmers market orientations. Even in Java for example where market is more developed farmers still have to strengthen their market orientations. So what we have tried is bring farmers to saw mills saw by themselves about the different price of different qualities. And then they already, it seems that they already okay this is good for them. And then we are trying to link between the qualities and the management practice about how the impact of pruning for example to the quality and then to the price. So those knowledge need to be feed to the farmers. And again the second I think government need to strengthen government and also the development agencies need to strengthen the collective marketing because currently most of farmers selling timber individually. So from the point of view of economic scale also it's difficult to get more profits if they can collect. As example in some cases like in Konamis Latin they got collected and they get satisfied and the timber price is increased dramatically. So if we can imitate that kind of mechanism maybe timber become more lucrative business for small holders. And in some observations that in the project that women has the ability to negotiate the prices and ability to have the collectors come to their homes and take the products and sell it to the market. We have the plant oils and also sugar products edible mushrooms, we have the vegetable tree, we have the forest honey, we have stimulants potential aphrodisiacs, yes we do have that and we also have basket trees for handicrafts we have dyes and also furniture. And we have also a range of spices goat meat and milk, we have silk, we have timber, bamboo and aromatics. If you see the products, the pictures of the products from the left you see the stimulants you have the palm sugar in the middle and next to that is the briquettes and also the aromatics. The briquettes and aromatics are taken from the middle hills in Nepal. Next. And how do we go about that? How do we actually obtain those? We decided to think through this quite a number of times in previous projects where participatory approach is important where we do participatory rapid market appraisal and it's basically designed to analyse the existing value chain from farm gates to consumers and the role of actors in adding value and their bargaining power to capture the end user part. And this can subsequently be used to raise awareness with farmers about the importance of market information and guide intervention that aims at improving the efficiency of marketing systems and generating benefits for participants. Next. And this is actually my last slide. The farmers may be having difficulties in actually knowing how to conduct a very basic market research but this comes back to a question whether farmers should be successful being an entrepreneur or just being farmers as cultivators. And one of the things that raises within the observations conducted in those projects is that should the farmers need to know how to do market targeting, segmenting and also differentiating? Should they be involved in product development? Should they do market testing as in participatory market testing? And should farmers think about the following questions before implementing market development? One is, is my product profitable? Will it require the introduction of new or modified products? This morning you heard that the president mentioned green economy. Also Peter Holmgren mentioned the green economy. But what does it mean by green economy? You have defined green economy into three things. First is how to do with the poverty eradication. The second one is something related to you. It's sustainable production and also sustainable consumption. Not only to produce, but you guess how to consume the timber in natural resources. And the third one is protecting and managing natural resources. Next please. This is still our president, the president of Indonesia of course. I think I quoted two years ago. He mentioned that we know the problems. We know the problems. Everybody knows the problem. Also we know the solutions actually. So the president that we saw this morning knows the solutions. But he mentioned it's difficult to achieve and we must act now. I think the question is everybody needs someone else to solve the problem. And it is you will be part of the problem, not to be part of the solution. So the question is how then research can contribute to the action. And then our third, in the ACR, we call it research for development. In the CGR consortium, we call it research for impact. And in C4 and FORDA and IPB, call it action research. What we mean by action research is understanding the problem and changing the behavior happen at the same time. Not understanding the problem and then proprietary combination and take five years to change. No. Action research being understanding the problem and changing behavior of the people, of the stakeholders happen at the same time. This is what we call it action research. And why value change? Now we are talking about the value change because a simple globalized trade. So the producer can be in different location and integrated into a global value change. And you know, linking to global value change can provide opportunity to improve the income. So it's very, very nice if you can insert yourself to the global value change. And also now, today, the SME, even you are small. Even you are the producer with only five workers. They are not the local players. They can be a global players. So even they are small, they can be a global players. I saw in CEPARA, so one mother with five workers, they export to Timor-Leste, they export to Egypt. So you know, even they are small, they can be a global players to insert to the global value change. Next please. So talking about furniture, this is the total trade of wooden furniture is 74 billion. And in ASEAN, there are three big players in Indonesia with 2% of the share. Malaysia 3% and Vietnam is the biggest player in Southeast Asia with 5% share of the global wooden furniture trade. It's CEPARA. Now we talk about CEPARA. CEPARA is located in the center of Java. It's 10% of the Indonesian export coming from CEPARA. Now they export 120 million dollars annually and comprise 12,000 businesses and proceed 0.9 million cubic meters. And also the economy of furniture in CEPARA almost 1 billion, 1 billion. 0.8 billion economy of CEPARA. It's about 26% of their economy. And you know, even the decision to buy furniture made by women, as there is here, it's not by men. If you guys work together to furniture store with your wife, decision to buy which furniture even you pay the furniture, still made by women. And also what we call it value change analysis and survey including gender study. Next, please. This is the result of the furniture value change. Here's small scale producers here that we concern and see in the top as a market and the bottom as wood producer and also farmers. You see why we arrange from top to bottom to down because the power the value change any forest product is located at the buyer. It's buyer driven value change. So if they want to improve their income there's the small scale producer, they have to move up not only becoming, not only become good furniture producers but also become sellers, become traders, become retailers, even become brokers of furniture. This is the only way how to improve their income. So they call it the first scenario of moving up. The second one is green product. We talk a lot in CHOPARA about the SVLK, about the certification. So see the value change is not only understanding the income distribution understanding of the power distribution but how to do it with the value change with the existing value change. So that's why in CHOPARA we develop several scenarios and we act based on that scenario. First we have moving up make the local producer as a going to be a seller. So the producer in CHOPARA they went to New Delhi to Mumbai to sell their furniture to participate in the trade exhibition. Also they went to Guangzhou, China also to sell to participate in the trade exhibition. So as you know they at the time we were there actually they are producer but now they are also good in selling their furniture. Next please. So the second one is how to collect the association how to improve their bargaining power is to associate themselves. And also collaborating there. So we are there not just talking but we planted planted thick there. This is a June Jati Ungol Nusantara to just all of thick with 9 meter height and 10 centimeter diameter. Also we work together with Pabupati to sustain the impact to produce district regulation. Next please. This is the main impact so as we have a very very clear impact that the furniture producer has improved their income. Those who join the association has improved their income. The second one is this is the certificate of SVLK now they produce the green furniture. So you have to buy green furniture to participate in the green economy. And also they now be part of decision making process in government because they have association that are very very strong in the local district. Next one. The lesson to be learned is this land study is a key to and get stakeholders at the beginning value change analysis comprehend the distribution of income and power action research is the most important. Can make difference on the ground and work at policy level is necessary if you want to sustain the impact. Next please. This is my last present slide Tony. We are working on the preliminary study we are talking a lot about landscape approach. This is our understanding. Landscape compress of natural forest, planted forest, agriculture forest and non-vegetable land. But there is a pressure of course from agriculture planted forest to the natural forest. And the planted forest they produce something there is a lot flow from planted forest to the industry to the market. It's product flow in the left but also money flow. How to invest actually how the money coming from selling the timber can be invested in the landscape. So it's very important to do research for the landscape and also investing the landscape is on the money flow as well as multi stakeholder approach. So action research is multi stakeholder approach. And we understand how the money flow we can find mechanism to invest the landscape based on the debt money. Thank you. Thanks Tony. From the biophysical and also from the technical part of small practice and also from the marketing and value change. My works I'm going to present under the title understanding policy framework to facilitate smaller productions and integrated marketing of timber and NTFPs in Indonesia. NTFPs stand for non timber forest products and this is the ongoing research as part of the project as mentioned by Aulia the development of timber and non timber forest product under integrated production and marketing system and we just finishing the first year just finishing the preliminary assessment in the first years and we are going to start the second year. So this works is conducted by C4 my name is Ani Adiwinata Nawir I'm part of the forest and livelihood research team in C4 and we have collaborators from WF and also from the district government of Zumbawa and also the university in three research sites and we are going to start next. So our study or our research works is actually responding to the underlying reasons that are related to the policy that are constraining small holders to have more cost effective productions and also integrated marketing of both timber and non timber forest products. So within that context we have regulated system and this is because in Indonesia there are different forest classifications that defining the degree of access given to the community and secondly because there are a lot of overlapping policy and regression frameworks particularly produced under the regional autonomy government system and as part of the work we map out different policies using this metrics both for timber and non timber forest product if you can see at the left column there and we map out of the policy across from production system at the farm level management and also at the landscape level and then after that in the marketing change as well as in the processing stages and also you can see within this metric we are identifying policy and legislations at the national level we also try to understand how is the process in translating this policy into the regulations that are implemented at the local level or at the district level so particularly we are interested why how the process actually affecting the small holder practices on the ground so before we start we kind of try to frame our self in our analysis what do we mean by integrated timber and non timber forest product management because that's actually the title of our project and the main goal is to have this more integrated timber and non timber forest product management and there are four important components of this integrated management which is the the complementary income portfolio at the household level coming from the optimizations of timber and non timber forest production system and this is supported by more cost effective value change this is the components that my colleague Aulia is leading and eventually all of these components will improve the management at the landscape level for all of these components should be facilitated by affordable policy and regulation frameworks so next so what do we mean by affordable policy and regulation frameworks so we adopted the definitions that it would be the policy instruments that increase the cooperative advantage of small scale forestry management practices so therefore it would stimulate investment and its establishment and management of the small order practices so there are three components in the affordable policy and regulation framework that we try to use the framework in our analysis that the process should be resulted from a participatory process take into account inputs from stakeholders that are affected in the implementations and should be tailored to the process. The first one because we talk a lot about the transaction cost so I think the should be clear from the beginning before the policy being implemented or being drafted what will be the benefit and risk that are predicted and how manageable this transaction cost can be taken into account in small-holder decisions when they are trying to implement it. So in our first year works we focusing in the preliminary assessments in mapping out what are the constraints in relation to the policy and regulations so we kind of highlight that actually the livelihood strategy implemented at the local level is driven by the forestry policy and regulations at the national level and how there's been translated to the local population affecting their practice in the forest area. So next. So as part of the policy analysis because we even start the policy analysis we have to clearly understand what is the livelihood strategy being implemented by local people. So we try to identify what would be the household income portfolio this is just give you an example in the forest area. So in the forest area we have to identify where is Nusa Tenggara and is Nusa Tenggara. On timber forest product are more important than timber in their livelihood strategy. And for example the first two picture there you can see even though there is a landscape of the forest in how first state or in managing for commercial purposes while the NTFP are quite advanced. And also in Nusa Tenggara is the similar cases even is more or less intensive than practices in West Nusa Tenggara. So why are the reasons behind this can explain in the next slide. So in Nusa Tenggara it is quite complicated so I use a lot of animation so I would like to ask Jack for helping to do a lot of enter. So basically in West and East Nusa Tenggara at the bottom there you can see that people manage their own perfectly own lands close to their village but in their neighboring area of the watersheds and it's kind of important as the water catchment area. So there are neighboring with the protected forest in Zumbawa and our nature reserve in East Nusa Tenggara. So next. So okay because of this function of the forest so the policy is really strictly regulating their access to utilize the forest so therefore they have to do kind of less intensive extractive of non timber forest products. And importantly I just mentioned that customary norms and rules are more important in day to day practices instead of this policy being applied. And next. So from privately owned lands it's coming from their area is also limited timber use as I mentioned earlier. This is because there are two policy being applied. The timber management permits that are derived by the local government and also the mechanism for verifying timber legality that's derived from by the ministry of forestry. So those are two applied on the ground so that's why people are not really you know want to do it. Next. And while the focus of this policy are at the management level so at the transporting and marketing they are regulated locally based on a national policy and also is applied for next for the non timber forest product. Benefited from this panel and I see so many potential for research area in the future and also have some comment or some other topic. So about the benefit of the small holder anybody exploring about the environmental service from the small holder. Second one anybody trying to also get some idea about benefit cost analysis of the small holder. And the last one I need also I mean I want to make a comparative study with maybe other country with regard to policy of small holder in Thailand. What is very interesting is that there is different regulation about timber tree depend on species, native species or non-native species. In Thailand native species are very much regulated because they are also found in state forest. But in Thailand if non-native species not so much regulation they are not threatening the state forest. I think the Bang Buthu they cut only few trees for they needed because they are thinking about the environment. So inherently they are not speaking that I am environmentalist but they are keeping they maintain the environment. Some of the storytelling from the farmers they said that now the wells are get the waters again before it is dried. So I think that's interesting. The second benefit cost analysis for small holders it is very challenging. I have tried that. I have tried in South Kalimantan I have tried in Gurung Kidul and the reason because farmers it's difficult to have a very long time horizon. For growing tick we need at least 25 years. So there are too much assumptions and in the reality sometimes farmers maybe 0 income. In fact they are failing for example if the harvest is failed they lost all the money. So instead of of course I also calculated the BCAA and the result is yes it is feasible in terms of economically but it not necessarily I mean I forgot it is not necessarily competitive to other business