 The idea of this session is to move on from some of the policy discussion that we had this morning and the big picture around Paris, to dive a little bit more into the detail about what's happening on the ground and what individual participants in the private sector are actually engaged in. And I think as Minister Friedenberg said in his speech this morning, part of the original initiative of the Asia Pacific Rainforest Partnership was to really try to start to engage with the private sector. And as part of that role, Minister Hunt set up what is the Asia Pacific Rainforest Partnership private sector roundtable and that roundtable was really to bring private sector into the discussion. I think this is a very important point because a lot of the work around forest conservation and around red has been government led or through the multilaterals. And quite often it doesn't interface with those individuals on the ground doing either agroforestry or doing conservation type projects and there is a gap between those two areas of activity. And so in many ways the roundtable was to really focus on how to bring the private sector into the discussion and that's what's been done. And so Minister Hunt set up the roundtable and as chair of that roundtable he appointed Ada Greenberry who's the Manager Director of Sustainability and Stakeholder Engagement at Asia Pulp and Paper. Ada has taken a lead role in running that roundtable and bringing it together and will tell us a little bit about what the roundtable has produced. Next to Ada I've got Mary Kate Bullen. Mary Kate is Associate Director at New Forest and has been a contributor to the papers that have been produced. Also from PT Rima Mirtima we have Desana Hatano. Desana has been very active in doing a conservation project, a large project on the ground of which there is also a policy paper written in the documents which you'll hear a little bit more about. And I think Desana is very important because he will talk today as will Ada about actual conservation projects and how you finance those separate from sort of financing sustainable agriculture type projects. And then finally we have Miss Perchua George, who's the Assistant General Manager for Sustainability at Wilmar and welcome. And so with our four distinguished guests welcoming you all today onto the panel. So what I'd like to do is to start off by just asking Ada to begin by talking a little bit about the roundtable and what we were trying to achieve and also perhaps introduce the papers that have been done. And then I'm going to go through and get each panelist to talk a little about what their activities have been. So Ada, over to you. Thank you. Thank you, Martyn. Good afternoon, everybody. So the private sector roundtable was set up, as Martyn said, with the previous Environment Minister of Australia, Mr. Minister Hunt, and requested us, myself and Martyn, to chair and co-chair the private sector roundtable. So as the chair of the private sector roundtable for the last couple of months I would like to highlight the role that the private sector is already playing in forest restoration and conservation. The projects put forth by the members and many more who are not here are already evidence of our role in forest conservation. There are remain challenges that we are facing, such as scaling up efforts, which is why we have tried to outline our recommendations for addressing a few of these key challenges in the policy briefs that we put forward for discussion. We launch it today. I'm sure some of you can have a copy of this upfront. If not, the private sector roundtable and the secretariat will be able to give you the soft copy. There are a number of key challenges that we need to resolve if we want to make the Paris Agreement a reality and arrest deforestation. And the Asia Pacific and also in the region. Number one, how do we incentivize business when participation in the carbon market is voluntary and the carbon price are very low? Secondly, how do we actually monitor progress? What baseline are we working from? And most importantly, how can we organize finance mechanism so that the cash actually reach the forest? Based on my own experience in the company I'm working for, this Asia Palvin Beaver Group, we launched our forest conservation policy in 2013 as our landmark policy. It consists of key building blocks that we used to create, hopefully, a more sustainable business model, including halting all natural forest clearance, more responsible management of peat, resolving social conflict, informed concept and etc. The overarching principle behind all of our management and conservation efforts, the landscape approach, in principle, it is the principle that the conservation efforts goes beyond administrative boundaries and will only succeed if the sustainability of the whole landscape is taken into account and all the stakeholders within that landscape work together towards very similar goal. The initial step of the implementation of our landscape approach is the integrated sustainable forest management plan and through this process we have increased the conservation areas across our supply chain from previously 383,000 hectares to more than 500,000 hectares, while area to work together with the community has increased from 370,500 hectares to 420,000 hectares. So as part of our best practice management for peat strategy, for example, more responsible peatland management to re-wet the area, we also managed to conduct a lidar mapping across 4.5 million hectares for peatland in Sumatra and Kalimantan and building more than 5,000 dams in the canal perimeter. So those are just a few examples of the progress on the ground in our times. Thank you. Could you just talk to us a little bit about, I guess the journey that APP has come on from being traditionally more forestry company to embracing sustainability and how that has come about and how that has led to forest conservation? Could you tell us a little bit about how the journey that APP has come on, which you have overseen, to look more at forest conservation to digest forest production? Because we see forest conservation actually as an investment with the launch of our forest conservation policy, for example, we have infested in the last three years, we have invested more than 200 million dollars for three years in the implementation of forest conservation policy and why? Because it's not just we want to be green or we want to be environmentally friendly, we want to treat it as an investment. The return of investment that we are measuring right now is basically three-fold. One is definitely commercially, return of customers, of course. Now environmentally friendly procurement is basically the new business as usual. You cannot survive in the market without implementing a good, robust environmental policy. And secondly, of course, the return of investment from the landscape itself, restoring forest and conserving forest is basically a risk management for our natural resources, which is the plantation, reducing risk of pests and diseases, reducing risk of fires and also encroachment. And the third one, which is a much longer term, is, of course, the greenhouse gas emission itself. Martin, can I provide the POM perspective? So a very quick introduction to Wilmar. So Wilmar again is the world's biggest edible oils trader. We were in the same boat as APP in the early 2000s. So if any of you remember from the 2005 to 2008, nobody would touch Wilmar. We were so bad. We were so bad in the POM sector. That made us very quickly realize that that wasn't a good way to sustain business. So much like APP's model, in 2013, Wilmar also adopted a no-deforestation, no-exploitation policy, very much mirroring around the New York commitments. And again, but the point, the reason why Wilmar is doing this is because it is good business. And the role of the private sector, I believe, not just for forestry but for the POM guys, agribusiness, is to ensure reduced impacts on deforestation or reduced impacts on forests is good business. And that's the only way to make it work. Okay, well, we might now hear from Mary Kate just because you also are running a business that has its revenues primarily from undertaking timber activities in a sustainable manner. Do you want to just run us through what New Forest are doing in their philosophy on this? Sure. Thanks, Martine. I think I'll start off by explaining quickly who New Forest is because I think we're a different type of participant at this event for most people. New Forest is an investment manager and we manage funds that invest in sustainable forestry and conservation assets. I don't think there's actually a lot of capital providers or finance side folks in the room, but it's a very important segment of what the private sector is doing here. And I think what Pep said and what I'd have said have mentioned the external pressures and that relies, impacts us as well as an investor and what are the expectations from our clients and broader stakeholder groups. So our clients are primarily pension funds, some sovereign wealth funds, reinsurance companies, very large institutional investors. And as we heard this morning from Minister Friedenberg from Australia, institutional investors have woken up to sustainable development and that's come from the Paris Agreement, it's come from the SGGs and it's come from a momentum that's been growing over I'd say the past decade and really strengthening in 2015 to a good culmination in Paris. So what we have as a duty, as an investment manager is to be a steward of that money and to make sure that it's invested for both a financial return, but also to make sure that we're protecting our clients' reputation, protecting our own reputation, controlling for environmental and social risk, but also increasingly it's not just about risk, it's about looking to see what are the proactive values that we can get out of environmental and social management. One thing about the type of investments we do, we're not investing in companies that are on the stock exchange, we're not looking to turn a dollar quarter to quarter a day to day, we're actually buying forestry companies or land or forests and looking to manage them well over the long term so that they get increased in total value and are also providing income from revenue from timber products, rubber, other products. That's really important because if we think about long-term perspective, we're not going to be cutting today just to have a dollar today, it's about the total package of that value and so I think that's one thing that helps us address the lack of value that's in natural capital today. So while we do lack a carbon market incentive in this part of the world, while we lack biodiversity, monetary value or a way to understand what biodiversity is really worth to a business like any of ours, we do know that over the long term these things matter and that managing them can help produce that total long-term value as well as reduce risk today and tomorrow. Okay, so all three of you have touched on the fact that you're all in the private sector businesses that are basically in the timber parmol. You're in the business of producing products that produce an economic return. Desana, we're going to turn to you now and have you talk about, you're at the other end of the spectrum where you are in a business that is basically conservation, where you produce a product which Aida's already told us there isn't a market for the moment. So I'd like you to just talk us through what it is that you're doing and the economics of that. Thank you, Martin. I'm glad that actually I'm the last one to speak with these outstanding ladies next to me. Well, for, in this case Wilmore and APP, conservation is good for business. For us, it's our business. So it is a different business plan here. So just to give you a little bit of a background, I founded this company about my own company seven years ago with the idea when Dread Plus was sort of like a the hype of Bali Cobb then. I actually came back from New York and I worked for JPMorgan. So I'm a banker in my previous practice and I came back and I realized there is, there should be a value for us to invest in conservation and restoration. So we're sort of ahead in our time seven years ago. But I think the lesson learned over that seven years of time are probably the most valuable time in terms of my experience as an entrepreneur in this space for a few reasons. I think the first one is to start saying that there has to, there's probably a new business model that has to be implemented by, you know, by the world nowadays. And I think there should be a way we can do this sustainably while, you know, we are preaching for protecting the forest and conserving the forest seven years ago. At that time Wilma was still sort of like in the production side. And now we actually converge where, you know, you have agriculture company, pop and paper company start talking about protection where I start talking about protection seven years ago. Now, you know, they used to do production now talk about protection. Now actually we are doing protection and we're actually going to production. But I think to answer your question Martin in terms of the financial, any project developer like us in Indonesia because there is no sign of financial incentive. I have been doing this for seven years and our company have not received any revenue. So that's a challenge itself. I mean somebody, my colleague from JP Morgan in New York asked me, Darsono, why do you even do this? You know, you underwrite risk all the time. You know how we think. We keep on telling people that we think long term but it's always about short term benefit that you can get yourself. You know, that's a, for me it's about doing something right. It's about, at least there's an idealism and dream part of it but I think what make me more in, you know, open my eyes is actually the way we do things. Because when we started seven years ago we started seeing the benefit of this from a climate perspective getting the carbon revenue. But I think we also realized that it's actually good for the communities. You know, that's how we've been working very hard in terms of getting you know, all these activities before we get our license, like we're getting the participation map exercise for 10-year-old rights. I personally go to the village myself to talk to the people but in the end, the finance, you know, my company have been putting a lot of money out. There's a lot of outlay money has been putting out and we're still hoping for the market to come. And I really think that there has to be a way to get this the fact to get this thing solved in a way. Otherwise we've been talking again, you know, the last 10 years we've been talking about this carbon credit, the RED Plus and it never materialized. So this is something that I think we have to look into in terms of how we private sectors, private sectors think differently to get the financing because there's a lot of initiative, like the Norway initiative with 1 billion dollars. But I think, you know, the fact is there's a you have to be more practical because we as a project developer have been talking to you what we have been doing for the past 7 years how it's that give benefit to the communities it's good for the climate and there has to be somehow compensation being given to, you know, people, the private sector who wants to engage then you can actually scale up because everybody's looking at D'Arsono and say, hey, we're just waiting for you to come and if you start making money we'll jump into it but again, there's a lack. I mean, the lesson learned from this experience of 7 years is it's really take a long time to get the funding from some communities. So to actually start a red plus project takes some time too. So can you just describe to the audience your actual project? Can you just actually explain what it is? So basically, the company that I formed, we actually protect and restore about 150,000 hectares of peatland in Santa Calimantan. So this is quite intact, 90% intact, 10% need to do some kind of restoration but I think our business model is not just about restoring per se the environment. I think it's about looking at the communities surrounding that area. How can we actually engage communities because we know that the cost of deforestation or illegal logging all these fires are actually based on communities. Then how we can actually enhance their livelihood, make them sustainable to look into that on a very long-term basis. So my company has been engaging community from day one. We worked with 34 villages. We have all these activities that we have and I think our company has even signed MOE with all these villages. But I can tell you, it takes some time to start this process. You really need two to three years. You really have to really go to the field. And the reality is you can actually it's not good for business. It's our business because for a project like us to be verified you need all of that ingredient to make that happen. So not only that, it's an open book. So it's a very transparent process. I think that's something that we can learn over time because people are always questioning whether Red Pass Project works. But there's a mechanism that you actually can look into it and be transparently and say that yes, the project that Arizona working on in Santa Calimantan is benefitting the communities, also benefiting from the climate because the fact is even last year when during the COVID-19 pandemic, we had a lot of challenges. We had a lot of challenges and we had minimal hotspot and fire. So those are the things that we nowadays we can prove to the world there's a project, existing project that can have that kind of achievement. So I hope that this also opened a lot of eyes for people in terms of getting where the market is because I know for sure my project will survive. But in order for us to scale up and the outcomes it is producing. So now I'd like to ask all the other three panellists, would any of you invest in or buy from Desano's project? Now, Mary Kate, you're representing institutional investors. Can you convince your institutional investors to put $10 million into his project and buy his carbon and his biodiversity benefits? That's a good question. Probably when D'Arsono was starting his project we also started looking at Red Projects in Indonesia and we don't have them today. So on behalf of dedicated institutional clients and when the regulatory framework wasn't there the clear market signal wasn't there they decided not to proceed. And so we have to honour that and from an investment perspective we weren't able to continue. Fortunately it's been a long eight years for some people and I think things are getting to the point where we could start to look at them again. We managed the Tropical Asia Forest Fund which is $170 million fund sustainable forestry in Asia and within that we are able to do Red Projects alongside other investments so a bit of the protection production sort of combination that D'Arsono's mentioned is becoming increasingly looked at. We haven't been looking at standalone Red Projects for quite some time but if there were the right signals we absolutely would in response to California creating a cap and trade system that includes forest carbon as offsets. We've now got a dozen projects that interact with landowners including four Native American tribes across the country and more than 100,000 hectares lined up in those projects and that's what happens when there's effective regulation that provides a clear incentive to groups like ours we can take that to landowners we can explain it even within a Native American tribal situation how this works, what the benefits are and that we can put the dollars to work and investors like that we've got a very happy client in that project so on that point I'd like to ask you what do you think then to move money into that space is required in order to make that happen and do you think the current approaches are working? I don't want to say too much about Red Plus but I just get it, I need to get it off my chest. We all know the actual number of deliver payment is just a fraction of many of us already hope. Hundreds of Red Plus pilot projects in 2007 and according to the report analysis I received it's only about four had sold carbon credits this leaves the large majority of Red Plus project hanging in balance with no predictability or stability on how that might change in years to come. This is not a combination which market for us more available standing in fact it creates an environment where Red Plus style investment are seen as increasingly and many players have back away from the market. If the goal of Red Plus is truly to keep the forest standing we do need to make some changes. The issue of timing is critical if Red Plus and other donor funded schemes must stick to the payment bear result mechanism then more needs to be done to channel funding towards supporting communities involved in Red Plus project to meet their short term needs while they wait for the forest to grow. We are working with very similar programs in our supply chain with our agro forestry program as part of which we are supporting small holders to build capacity for developing alternative livelihood and intercropping to provide them with short term sources of cash flow and food while also keeping existing forests intact. It will stop them for further encroachment or destroying the forest. So a better framework would establish the level of payment up front if certain parameters were included with indicators for short term performance on carbon and non-carbon benefits. I have a direct example working with some organization working with the community for this agro forestry program. Communities simply will not have anything based on promises. They do need to see, they need to believe in, they need evidence, they need to be shown that this new system works. They need to see evidence that this new system actually give them crops or food and then they will commit to that. So we need to invest up front first and then yes we do have to have a clear indicators and care MRV system and everything else but we do need to invest in the agro forestry program that we are trying to do here with every members on this panel and we need to come up with a better finance mechanism to upscale these efforts. I think from the palm sector we would echo that. I think the complication again is if you look at the agro business sector it's not really set up for red plus. Simply because look we are not in the forest business, we are required to look at quite complicated structures of projects. I think it's beyond the capability of a lot of planting organizations or planting companies. Willmar being one of them. We have a very good conservation, a forest conservation team but again they are quite limited in terms of trying to put together very complicated CDM projects and so the rhetoric from the palm companies will basically be well if the big boys are growing guys. So the complication is a major factor and I think in the fact that essentially we are not seeing the money. The money is not coming down to the ground and I think that's a reality. And again the community is it's almost like playing a rerun of the Wendy's commercial where's the beef but where's the money. You can't get them on board. There is a certain limit to what you can say oh there is a limit. So it's an important point and particularly I think in Indonesia the discussion has to a certain degree I think excluded forests that occur on lands that are not gazetted forests that are not a permanent forest state. And I think there needs to be some recognition from not just Indonesian government but essentially the Southeast Asian governments in general around forest that are under pressure that are not gazetted as forest state. And I think a lot of governments including my home state of Sabah in Malaysia are only just getting on board with the fact that look okay we have to deal with forests and emissions from those outside of the permanent forest state. So these are I think a lot of the major issues in particular affecting the palm sector guys or the other countries which do need to be addressed at a very top level in these countries. But you know essentially the reality on the ground is there is no money. Maybe. I think I want to basically share the experience. This is exactly the point of our company you know we're willing to take the risk to put the money up front. That's what we do. For example to see real example you know after we basically we have been working very hard with the community in terms of identifying what the livelihood program that they have. So our company through a process of very bottoms up village planning process you know to actually start identifying what are the alternative livelihood and we have a program that we have. So we not only that we create a program we also help them working with the local NGO to identify what are the alternatives and then basically channeling the money. So in this case where we do we the company our company actually give them a grant. We give a grant to all the certain villages and then those money are being given to a microfinance to certain group and the good thing is you know we've been finding about I think the reality on the ground is you have to also look at the capacity. If you start throwing the money and the good news is we started this last year in May we signed an MOU with 13 villages. We're finding on average about $10,000 per villages for all this alternative livelihood. So we are doing a lot of microfinancing involving up to a thousand people and then you know all of basically about $120,000 that we spent for this and we you know for fishery program, for cow breeding, for this party all this agroforestry all the activities that we have and the good news is I just got a report few weeks ago that $120,000 that we invest actually now it's worth $150,000. So there is really a value if you invest in communities they are willing to work hard for it and then they are being part of this. So it is proven that we you know we take risks but the risk that we're taking is actually benefit to the market. If there is no if my project in the next two years we are not going to find buyers it's very hard for us to be sustainable because we are in the business. We already invested north of $5 million in this project if we have to continue to fund all these activities we have a staff, well before we get our license I'm the only employees of RMU but once we get a license we have for example during the high level we have to take the employees because we do all this prevention program all this kind of things but this needs this operating cost that has to be covered by the revenue. But I cannot give excuses that the fact is our project just recently got validated in the VCS. We should be proud because it's the biggest RAT Plus project registered in the world in terms of number emission reduction but hopefully by the end of this year we're going to have our credit verified so then we have our credit to be sold because right now I cannot complain because I have no product to be sold yet but let's see by next year maybe in the next 12 to 24 months we'll see how this market react to the project that we have on the pipeline. So we heard in the previous session about how Norway in working with Indonesia has a very high level government to government approach which is a young conservation approach which you as a company are committed to. The rest of you also have organisations that are very engaged in sustainability because it's good for business. Whose responsibility is it to conserve forests? Is it a government responsibility? Is it your responsibility as a private sector? Who do you think should really take the lead on this or how do you think people should work together on this? I guess from the palm sector very quickly I think for us it's it's not as clear because we don't, we theoretically especially if we're in Indonesia we're not technically allowed to keep forest in areas that are set aside for agriculture so for us it's slightly more complicated I'll give you an example of work that we're currently doing in South Sumatra in South Sumatra Wilmar has assisted with this group of independent small holders so this covers around 6,000 hectares and 3,000 small holders. Now part of that project is to go ahead with replanting and essentially the idea is we're going to work with financial institutions, pull up the downstream partners up front to share the risk of that and essentially go through the process of financing that replanting process to ensure that the replanting is done reasonably. Now the question mark then becomes how much forest can you claim that you've saved with the replanting of very good seedling material so for example if you're continuing to plant high performing or high yielding materials how much can you prove the additionality of what you've saved, the indirect part and I think for the palm sector where we have zero control because essentially what it is is the farmer from buying say another 10 hectares to plant but you can't prove that because it hasn't happened yet, he doesn't own that 10 hectares so the way we see it is the only way to make it work is essentially it's going to be a mix of governmental and private and that is essentially the jurisdictional approach so in this particular case what we would hope to see is once we've gone through with the replanting then that area saved if that's a region of South Sumatra then that could provide an impetus to say well okay we've saved this much and how much are we going to get in terms of red financing but without that that link to the government it's very difficult from the agriculture side to even begin to say whose responsibility is it because if we don't plant it and Wilmar has had a very bad experience of this in 2010 we set aside about 300 hectares of high conservation in the forest in at the time an area in Central Kalimantan where we had an initial license of permit that area was taken away from us and the permit was redone because we had essentially not met what the government had asked us to do and that 300 hectares essentially has then been cleared by a small company so again was that the fault of Wilmar I don't think it was to the RSPO but again it's not our responsibility because we are agriculture it has to come back at the end of the day to the government in this scenario well that raises I just want to go to one question with you that raises a question about leakage so one of the arguments against the sort of projects that Desano is doing is that if you do a project there forest just gets chopped down somewhere else so I might just ask you if you've got any thoughts about that based on your own conservation efforts your previous question was a little bit strange whose responsibility to protect forest whose responsibility is it to protect the planet is everybody's responsibility is not just responsibility of the government or private sector or NGOs or scientists everybody's responsible to protect the forest and the planet go back to leakage I think right now a lot of people think too much about leakage think too much about potential instead of focusing in helping or supporting actors doesn't really matter who they are to actually do the real action now on the ground and protect forest I just want to use one example about the jurisdictional approach work that we have been doing with the South Sumatana governor and also recently with the West Kalimantan governor where the jurisdictional approach is really good it brings in a range of actors it brings together a lot of actors to work collaboratively on land use planning toward a very similar goal or common goals in South Sumatana for example and also West Kalimantan is to support green growth so growth without destroying the environment and APPs probably to be part of that movement together with other actors and this is one way to address leakage at jurisdictional level we cannot address leakage anywhere I would argue that it's impossible to measure much less prevent leakage beyond jurisdiction and so we need to basically work on ways to do so to work on ways on how to avoid leakage with the boundary that we can do for example with APP we try to use the jurisdictional approach to prevent leakage let me add in terms of leakage I think for us the fact is as a project developers we have to basically have a verification every year when all the credits is being issued but I think from a project perspective you can actually look into this as a look at the demographics you look at the communities we do well, we get a lot of benefit and you have more and more people going in so the argument of leakage is less because technically these are the people that might be deforesting somewhere now they come in so I think that's from a project perspective but I agree with you the fact is it's better to do jurisdictional but the reality is in the jurisdictional then you get into the bureaucracy again it's like we should be thinking more creative there has to be a stream where we can do it on a jurisdiction level on a project level working with donors so it's all everybody's responsibility whether it's government, private sector, NGO because we are fighting with time the fact is if we make it more and more like somebody mentioned it's just getting more and more complicated it's always harder because down the road 5, 10 years from now there will not be any deforestation issue anymore because there's no forest left to be deforested and in the last 8 years of this when we start learning about red plus we become more we become smarter in terms of how we do things we look at it and then I think you also have to look at in terms of the donors maybe they have to take risks I think just like Mary said it's about signal if there's a market signal private sector will come in just like her, she has a fiduciary responsibility if there's no signal for example mortgages, underwriting, selling buildings that's what we do and I think my boss always say do you want to lend $50 million to this company do you have a comparables what are the rent the reality is in our space there's no comparables so no banking, no financial we're there to make a risk to take that kind of risk because they can just say let's see if I go to the bank and ask them $50 million and they'll come to me and say this is great I love this asset is there any historical sales in this no is there any comparables anywhere else something like this ever been sold no so what are you selling me I don't understand this so they don't find it because of that reason I'll just add a little bit to this although enough has been said about leakage it's a frankly boring topic and I think that's definitely through the UNFCCC through VSBCS and so many other groups we have methodologies we can trust and that are going to account for this in a way that the rest of us can just kind of move on with getting the job done on the ground and I think that's the benefit of the private sector is we can act where we have responsibility and you ask question ago Martin who has the responsibility everybody's got responsibility it's definitely shared responsibility but we have different opportunities to act and that's what's important I think one thing that unites probably all four of us in the types of work we do is that we're all facing a mix of land use we're all facing a mix of actions we can do to use that land to restore it to conserve it to enhance productivity to intensify production in the right places and that's what we need to be focusing on we need to be taking this integrated approach that was discussed this morning looking at land use planning saying what is the best use for this area how do I plan for the needs of this landscape the functions of this landscape and that's not business as usual it is a change for all of us it's something that we're all moving forward with just to give an example I was out at our investment in West Culley, Montana last week which is a rubber plantation project 100,000 hectare concession around a quarter of that is high conservation value or remaining forest that will be conserved through the project with a great deal of that that's 25% HCBA I should say and another 20 to 25% which won't be used for production based on the way to maintain and recover forest across that landscape now out in the field looking at potential rehabilitation sites with the local team they've got a great environment manager a great social manager GIS plannings are the high level managers who are showing us around for three days you get out in the field with the division manager who is responsible for that block of land and he said through translation to me you know what do you think about this land what do you want to do and we talked about the fact that it was wetland which had been impacted there was not proper drains but some drying drains put in there's roads through the middle of the wetland these roads are going nowhere because this land is not going to be planted because it can't sustain rubber it's far too wet it's a silly road in the first place so we talk about maybe you can decommission this road how to restore water flows going through and what's it going to take to replant and he said this is really interesting to me because in all my old jobs my job would be to get this land as dry as possible as fast as possible so that it can maybe get a tree to stay alive on it so this isn't just about change at the top or convincing the companies and you know all of us sitting here what we need to do that has to filter down through layers and layers and layers of management there's 36,000 workers at that plantation right now so our challenge is how do we get them to understand the difference we're trying to make the different model we're trying to aim for and that we're not about eking every hectare into plantation cover that we can but we're about using that land wisely and redirecting it to the best use and that takes a lot of effort it takes a lot of science it takes a lot of engagement and it's the challenge I think we have in all of our businesses right now So there is an interesting common denominator here which you have touched on the jurisdiction approach each one of your companies does projects you basically do large scale investments either in conservation or agriculture you manage them as a business you run them and you do that at an infrastructure level so how how do you see if it requires a very sophisticated approach of a company or a conservation company to actually run a large scale activity how do you see a government what role do you see of the government playing such as in these larger national jurisdiction type approaches how do the two work together effectively to deliver conservation it's got to be led by the government there's no other way around it's got to be led by the government for jurisdictional for example jurisdictional approach for example the leader has to be the governor so the governor have to have a good team technical team funding team and also implementation partners and a group of stakeholders in that particular jurisdiction and give them a clear roles and responsibility to be the government and when you say lead what do you actually mean by lead because they're not going to be developing the project they'll be providing some of the governance frameworks but that could take 5-10 years so you at the moment as a company are leading the conservation efforts through the foundation of the things so when you talk about leadership what do you actually mean by that involving the input from the stakeholders underneath I'm just using the South Sumatra jurisdictional approach as an example because it's been there for a year so when the governor is designing the land use plan for the term they use the eco region so they want to develop the whole province to be in an eco region so everything they do the development they do is minimize the environmental impacts as much as possible so when they do that for example if they want to develop land in one particular district in South Sumatra then they will consult with the partners in that South Sumatra district what is the input from them and then incorporate all the input and then implement it in sort of just one way directive instruction so that's what the structure is looking right now so right now what APB is doing in that particular area is focusing a lot more on forest restoration and conservation and protection a lot of works on the peat land as well so that is reported to the district level to the provincial level we reported and embed our system into their system but so then when the governor is designing the whole province they will look at the progress made by the stakeholders in particular districts so involvement of stakeholders incorporating their input and transparency embedding the system into the government system those are our four keys and why jurisdictional approach need to be done and just to add to that I think the for us and again using the just to be a little bit different not I mean South Sumatra is great but we also have a good example of Malaysia with Sabah and I think for the Sabah jurisdictional approach it's not just planning but it's also about the land authority so it's an opportunity to really look at landscape approach to land use so essentially for example the government is the only one at the end of the day that can say okay so if we've got small holders that have been for 20 years planting in this national park or planting in this forest zone or forest estate let's dig into the conservation area so it's all about making that work at sort of a wide level and that I think essentially at least for the Sabah view that's really where the government is coming in I mean we're quite lucky in Sabah that we have total commitment from the Chief Minister through the Sabah Forest Department and so it's a combined I guess target of achieving full FSC certification for all the forests by 2017 forestry certification for all palm production in the state by 2025 so it's a combination of both the forestry and the palm and also looking at how you fix some of the fundamental problems with the small holders at one go but essentially as Aida says it's all about regulating certain components so if you've deforested there is going to have to be a requirement to provide compensation for that and then that's sort of that and also projects such as that Darsono is doing so that I think is where the beauty of the jurisdictional approach really takes into consideration I think the question is who should lead this I personally think that there should not be a leader I personally think it's a collaboration of everybody it's very hard when you say a leader then you have I think one thing that I would like to see is to have a collaboration basically collaboration between not only typically in Indonesia it's between private sectors and government because they are the given the license giver and license taker but I think you also have to start involving the people I think in order to get this work all this conservation effort and restoration effort is first you have to make sure there's a benefit to the communities if it's a financial benefit all environmental benefit but I think you also have to start teaching the community's accountability you cannot just say that that's why we work on the ground we really teach them, we socialize all this effort in terms of teaching them this is good for your health but also benefit we try to find all options in terms of finding an alternative livelihood that is more sustainable than they have so I think every time I go to the village that money is not money from heaven that can be taken just like that there is accountability we are private sector, we work hard for it it's a community, we also have to earn this this is something then we can start changing behavior because if the community start feeling this is just money from heaven we don't have to do this there's no accountability then they always feel it's their right to do for us again I think that's something very important that we have to work between public which is government private sector is a company and people to have that change basically change of the way we do business is something that we have to move forward I'll just touch on one example that we've got from Saba as well we're in a joint venture partnership with Sifoda the Saba Forestry Development Authority and one of the great things about having a government partner is that they become a true stakeholder in the business and what you're trying to achieve so they're not only aligned from the larger Saba Forestry objectives that they have but they also want to see the business succeed so that creates a really interesting opportunity for us to work through some of the challenges we have in that particular region one of them is there's 64 communities in a 25,000 hectare gazetted area it's quite packed there's a lot of people and increasingly there's people coming from the outside there's a village okay great we've got about 10 minutes left so I'm just going to open it up to questions from the floor so is there someone who would like to kind of microphone and ask a question I'm sure somebody has a question we've solved everything here we go hey my name is Sam and I'm an intern at the Centre for Advanced Research in the local university here we heard a lot from big scale like large companies such as all of yours as you have mentioned earlier but what about smaller and medium enterprises such as like which are very essential to smaller economies such as Brunei's economy or Malaysian economy what role do you think they could play in the preservation of rainforest as well thank you I can speak to one side of scale but I suspect my agribusiness partners will have more to say for us you know we're looking to encourage more small and medium enterprises within the areas in which we operate one of the best things we can do is to look at those alternative livelihoods which Darsona mentioned to see what it means to perhaps develop your own contracting business to get the community involved in that way in planting and harvesting in restoration projects and also to look at true partnership so in Indonesia working in an HTI concession at Hatei we have a requirement for Tanaman Kohidupen which is livelihood plantings that's a great opportunity for new development of cooperatives at the village level where you can engage with those communities ask them what their interests are let them go away take the time to develop their own objectives and then see how the company can support them maybe it's a profit share maybe it's a provision of a concessionary loan which I'm not a huge fan of to plant something in the first place there's all sorts of models that we can look at and when you're talking at a certain scale within some of these larger operations if we have 100,000 hectare project if it's going to plant 30,000 hectares of rubber that means we've got an obligation for 6,000 hectares of livelihood plantings that's several good small and medium enterprises that can be developed within it so that's where we can play a part but otherwise there's a great role for NGOs and civil sector to really support those types of enterprises in developing I do have an input and it's very clear and I think I stated earlier there's a problem with trying to get medium and smaller guys on board because if you look at comparative value so let's say you've got two hectares of I don't know, native title example because my family has some native title with a little bit of rubber doesn't make a lot of money but every time I broach the topic of something like this to my dad, my dad says well how much are you going to get a bit per hectare and I basically say well maybe $1,000 and that's really not enough if you're telling a small company that essentially they're going to have to think about the difference between the average value versus potentially oh I don't know you go through a lot of hoops do a lot of documentation stuff and maybe you'll get $1,000 I think it's a really hard decision but the challenge here is really to get the government and again sorry governments but you know it is part of your role to be looking at well why don't you look at subsidizing very much in the way that agriculture is subsidized if countries are serious about it let's look at subsidizing conservation but there's no quick and easy answer to that I mean small and medium companies I think are very much outside the discussion because they're not really plugged into the whole red plus sort of discussion and it's very complicated for them I guess I always consider myself to be small company because I guess three four years ago I was an employee of my company so I am a small company so I think the fact is of course we're not even close to APP and Wilmar the reason why we manage such a big land is because of the the landscape itself so what I'm trying to say is even somebody like me seven years ago can actually starting to do it if we have become successful there will be a lot of entrepreneur small and medium companies if they see they want to do the right thing I mean there's a lot of newer generation in Indonesia right now in the 40s and 30s and 40s and they see this as an opportunity and they're willing to take the risk as an entrepreneur unfortunately there's no signal to follow me I'm still a lone ranger out there it's like Darosono is still there but I know for sure if you become successful in terms of implementing this and start making money this is a totally new business for a lot of people I will not call it Wild Wild West but I think it's a new territory for a lot of people to be in because it's a sexy thing to be involved now you're talking about giving prosperity to the people to the company and to the planet so everybody, all this younger generation wants to be part of this but we just need to have a market signal that we can do it let's just try to sum up we've just got a couple of minutes to go is that right Howard? so I think it's been a very useful discussion today I think one of the points that Osano made was while for three of our panellists conservation is good for business he made the point that conservation is his business I think a lot of business now have hit that point and investors understand that conservation is critical for business and what we're trying to move is to also get support from the finance sector and the capital markets for conservation as a business and that's critically important to do this we've heard that the governments play a very important role in land use planning and there's a lot more focus now on how do you plan large landscapes that they're both productive as well as conserved and also this concept of collaboration between governments and private sectors is very important ultimately the private sector will deliver government support to do that and I think the final point among this is also that the timing is key we can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good and if we design a lot of schemes for a long period of time the forest will just continue to disappear so having some of that investment in the important initiatives that the APP's foundation is doing and the others on the panel are doing is critical and in that regard the papers and the projects that have been produced as part of the Asia Pacific rainforest partnership which again there are copies of this publication floating around run you through some of the thinking that the organisations are doing and some of the policy papers about what's required so I encourage you to get a hard copy of that today or alternatively go online and get a copy of it but a lot of effort went into that under Ida's leadership and thank her very much for doing that and I'd encourage you to read through the issues that have been raised today so in concluding I'd ask you to thank our panellists and we'll have a small break before the next session. Thank you.