 Ladies and gentlemen, I should say colleagues, welcome to this lunch seminar, we're going to talk about sustainable development goals. Of course, this is for an institute like ours, a very important topic, not only as a subject of our teaching and our research, but also because the sustainable development goals provide a framework of all the activities that we do and how we prioritise them in our strategy. We're going to talk about sustainable development goals. We're very happy to have Professor Stefan Ullenbroek with us, who is the UNESCO director of the World Water Assessment Program in the lovely town of Perugia, Italy. Stefan is also a professor, a touch to us in the chair group hydrology and water resources, and I think I would like to invite you to give us the presentation. The title is already mentioned there, it's about sustainable development goals. How do they contribute to the 2030 agenda, what's the state of affairs, and more particularly, what are the knowledge gaps. So the floor is yours. Thank you, Johan. Colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, pleasure to be here. I put this literally this slide together this morning. We had a celebration last night because one of our PhD students graduated. I put, of course, that's my main, and I completely forgot to put IG there, which I don't know what happened there. My apologies, and of course I'm affiliated to IG Delft, and I will put that next time also on my first slide. I want to speak about the need for science, for achieving the SDGs, particularly SDG 6. What is the best way to click this? We do a few words, yes, of what WAP is doing, the World Water Assessment Program, it's part of UNESCO. And this little cartoon shows it all. We tried to look at water problems from different angles, different perspectives, and trying to shed some more light. And also tried to translate the signs that many of you in the room are doing for a policy and decision maker audience. All our reporting is largely not so much for scientists, but more for so-called policy and decision makers. We also developed a UNESCO program, a UNESCO temple with our strategy. And the three main activities we are doing is creating evidence-based knowledge products, like the World Water Development Report, the SDG reports we have been doing. Then we work in this transdisciplinary research projects or impact projects, including water and gender. For people working in that field, I would like to announce that next week, in two weeks, we will launch the next toolkit for this aggregated data measuring in water management. And that's a very interesting tool also for you to work more on social sciences in your dissertations. En nummer 3 is we work on science policy dialogues, where we bring together scientists and policymakers and discuss what needs to be done. That's also what I'm personally quite involved in. Our main product is the World Water Development Report. That's this annual report nowadays. I put the line there to distinguish from the first couple of years when it was a quite comprehensive review document. I think the last version had more than 900 pages. En then it was switched to an annual report, a thematic report, always on different topics. I got involved in this with the first report in 2016 on water and jobs. And since then we published a report on wastewater, which was launched in Durban, South Africa. And then nature-based solutions, where also IG colleagues contributed quite a bit. And also this year we launched a report leaving no one behind. Which we was actually launched at the Human Rights Council in Geneva in March earlier this year. But if you want, you have to write me again if you want to let me speaking about the World Water Development Report. Today I want to speak about the SDGs. I'm mainly speaking for the students. I see many, it's very nice to see so many colleagues, former direct colleagues when I was a staff member here directly. You know all this, but maybe for the students. I hope you're all kind of aware of these and which is the most important goal. Tell me. All of them. Good. Number one. Oké. Oké, nobody says water, that's already suspicious in this institute. What is the most important goal for kind of a development point of view? What would you think? If you are in charge of country x, which is one of the least developed countries, and you want to make a difference, what would you think? 16. Democracy sometimes works, sometimes doesn't work. The same question was asked to leaders. That was a study done by the World Bank. I haven't seen the final report. This is kind of a work in preparation, which I received last year from a World Bank colleague. They were asking leaders. What is the most important goal in multiple ticking boxes was possible for development priorities? Number one is quality education. Second was peace and justice. And the third one is a decent work on economic growth. These three were at the top, and then the others came. Water is here somewhere. And if you think that responsible consumption production, I believe there's also an important goal, but it's down there. And the last one is the ocean goal. Only 3% consider ocean as a development priority in that country. Interesting. It's also if you separate these leaders into different groups. They were asking leaders from government, development partners, civil society, non-governmental organizations, and private sector. It was always quality education first, peace and justice, and growth and jobs. For the private sector, also infrastructure was then considered a very important priority. Does it make any sense? Is that meaningful? I'm actually very critical, because consistently oceans is always the last one. Does it mean oceans are not important? Professor Rainer Rassinger, maybe he's not really in agreement with me. I couldn't agree more. Of course it's not about ranking goals. I really believe this is actually misleading. It is interesting to look at this and ask yourself these questions. I believe that, I followed this diagram that the Resilient Center in Stockholm was publishing a bit more than a year ago, I think. They call that a wedding cake. You know what a wedding cake is? When I got married in Germany, we got a big wedding cake. It's not only about the creep. No, it's about all the different lakes. And it's not that the one is more important than the other. You need a good basement. The basement is the goal for terrestrial ecosystems, oceans, climate and water. Based on that, they put the societal goals and the economic goals. And they're all interconnected. And the size of the slides is not indicating this is more important than the others. But we cannot afford to miss out on the one or the other. It's not that oceans are not important. Maybe for a landlocked country somewhere, it's not a development priority. It's the concerted effort to reach all of them. So that's, I think, the important part. And I believe this is a more useful way than ranking them, I guess. Good. After this, every year, I think one of the key lessons learned from the millennium development goals to the sustainable development goals is that they said, well, we need to continuously observe where are we with these goals. Where are we making progress? Do we need to readjust our policies, et cetera? To do that, they agreed on an indicator framework in the performance management system in the indicators. And some 230-plus indicators were agreed on, mainly led by statistical officers. The indicators will come to them later. And every year, they meet at the high-level political forum in New York where the senior representation of government is meeting. And they say, oh, are we making progress? En last year, the water goal, our goal was on the agenda. It was one of the goals to investigate. To inform that process in 2018, quickly talking about the millennium development goals to the sustainable development goals, the focus on the millennium development goals was very much on water supply and sanitation. Therefore, you see a pittler tree there and a well, and on developing countries. Well, the SDG agenda is a much, much more comprehensive, much wider agenda. It's not only water supply and sanitation. It is also other aspects, water use efficiency, water quality, water management aspects, ecosystems, water-dependent ecosystems. So it's a much more comprehensive agenda, including aspects of cooperation and participation. So it's not only the wash part, which no doubt it's important, but that was very much the focus. Now we have a much more integrated agenda, but I believe it's a game changer because the complexity of water is considered in a much better way than just focus on water supply and sanitation only. I mentioned this meeting in New York last year. The governments were discussing where are we with water. To inform that process, we put together the so-called SDG6 synthesis report. It was a UN Water Task Force that put that together. I was coordinating that the last three years. And there were some 14 organizations put together. I manage a family with three children. I found this is challenging, but 14 UN organizations agreeing on one report. That is really, I think I lost some sleep and some gray hair. But it was an interesting exercise. And that was also then the only report from the whole UN system was presented to the member states in New York and was discussed there. It's summarizing with all these different indicators. We had some 90 plus maps with all sorts of indicators. Some you will see in a minute showing where we are with SDG6. Are we making progress and are we making progress in the right direction? And also what are the interlinkages between water and all the other goals? Ecosystems, climate change, gender equality, et cetera, et cetera. And what are the key policy recommendations? What can we offer to the world? What needs to be done to achieve this important goal? So I was standing there in New York and we were proudly holding up this report. 200 pages, lots of statistics and maps and I don't know. Some 70 people contributed as co-authors to this report. You know what the most popular was? It was a two-pager. We called that the highlights. It's a two-pager and very much in lay person's language. Trying to summarize what does the report say. That was the most popular document. Really, I saw everybody taking it. It was also helpful if you have a camera in front of your face. And sometimes you need some wording for a general public. And I found this a very useful document. Everything is on the internet including my slides and all these reports and highlights in many different languages, by the way. And the main message is the world is not on track. If we continue as we are doing now, we will not achieve SDG6 by 2030. It's a beautiful objective, but we will not get there. That's the main message. Sometimes we are making good progress, but the progress is not fast enough. We run in the right direction, but we don't run fast enough. Sometimes we really run in the wrong direction and we really need to completely shift what we are doing. If you look at the degradation of ecosystems, it's really going in the wrong direction. It's not a question like in water supply and sanitation, we connect more and more people, which is a good thing. But sometimes we really go in the wrong direction. In the next 20 minutes or less, I would like to just share a couple of main messages of this report and always illustrate that with a couple of key figures while we say that. The first one is for you colleagues, maybe a bit tricky. Achieving SDG6 is essential for all the others. Water isn't an enabler to make progress in economic growth, in climate action, in gene quality education, gender equality, sustainable energy, et cetera, et cetera. It's a bit trivial for you, because you probably understand that. But if I speak to non-water experts like yourself, this is kind of a hard alipness. We call that in German, like somebody, oh yeah, it's actually true. The critical role for water in job creation, for instance, is often completely misunderstood and underestimated. We illustrate this with a couple of facts and we show why water is so central. A couple of illustrations on that, that's the connection between water, energy and social equity. You see the situation in 2000, and we plotted on the y-axis the access to electricity, access to basic water. In 2000, in 2014, at the end of the Millennium Development Goals, countries developed. Every country is a bubble. The bigger the bubble, the larger the population. You see India and China as two of the bigger bubbles because the size of the population is so large. It's kind of a movement to the top-right, which is good. More and more countries are better connected to water and sanitation. But there's a race to the top, but on the other hand there's certain countries left behind. All these are the blue. One are Sub-Saharan African countries where we are still lagging behind significantly an access to electricity as well as basic water. We plotted that for many other parameters. All how everything is connected is the virtual water. To produce the products which we consume, which we eat, which we wear, the clothes I'm wearing today, all the cotton. The growing of this cotton was probably much more water was needed than I was drinking the last 20 years. So it's really the footprint we have to our consumption pattern in water is very significant. This is illustrated in this map with virtual water trade for the Latin American region. And you see how different commodities are also having your virtual water trade from the Latin America to the region. Again, this is for people just to illustrate how everything is connected. Second main message is while there has been a lot of progress during the millennium development goals when it comes to reducing the inequalities, we have to conclude that the inequalities are on an all-time high at the moment. In the example what you see there, we plot the GDP as an indicator for the size of the economy of a country versus the population connected to safety managed drinking water. En it's always the same, the richer countries are bet much better connected. If you plot basic drinking water or safe drinking water or sanitation or whichever parameter, it's very clearly the message is very clear. It's very unequal around the world. While water having access to water and sanitation is a human right, it's a benchmark decision by the General Assembly from 2010, which really defines the human right. Dat was a game changer as well because it clearly defines the role of the duty-bearers, the states, to provide their people with water and sanitation. It also defines the rights of the right holders. Every individual has the right to clean drinking water and sanitation. Well, having a human right is a good thing but it doesn't mean in reality that this is the case of a safety managed drinking water. It's 2.1 billion who lack safety managed drinking water. It's 3 out of 10, lacking that. 160 million use directly surface water, scooping surface water for their basic drinking water supply. This is the map for basic drinking water and you see the yellow countries which are lagging behind. If you do safely managed drinking water, which is the objective of the SDG, you see many countries became grey because we don't have data but you still see where the problems are. This is for drinking water. Inequality is also related to gender. I think this is well known in this. We from the UN, we often have these global maps and the colour code countries. South Africa is yellow and I don't know Mozambique is light green but having that, it is also very important to look at the inequality within the countries. Example from sanitation, what you see is the distribution of basic sanitation and what we see here is that 70% of the world has access to basic sanitation. The shared facilities. If you look at Latin America and the Caribbean, you have everything between 30% and 100% depending on which country you look at. If you look at Panama, a relatively industrialised country for Latin America and the Caribbean, the average is 80% between 30% and 100%. There is a huge difference for the urban and rural population, for the rich and the poor and for different municipalities. It's not about giving Panama or any country a number. It's really about understanding the inequalities within the countries, understanding the regional and societal differences that are there with access to all these things. The inequalities are at very close proximity. This is an irrigated golf course near Durban in the Chantitown with hardly any access to, or no access to safe water and sanitation. So the inequalities is a huge thing. Not having access to water and sanitation is a bad thing. It's also very unhealthy and it really impacts development in many ways. What we plotted here is the proportion of children stunted so they are physically behind in their development and the proportion of children stunted under 5. We talk about, this is an important thing. In India, it's more than 30% of the children under 5 are stunted. We plotted here against the GDP, obviously the richer the countries, the less children are stunted. Stunting depends on many things, not only on water supply and sanitation, food security, on the deficiency of nutrients, micro-ludions, health care, on many things. But also on water supply and sanitation. What we color coded here is the access to basic sanitation and the lower the access to basic sanitation, the larger the proportion of children stunted. We have more or less the same pattern if you plot other parameters as well. It's not only that the children are physically behind, these are brain tissues from the brain of a normal child versus a stunted child and you see the branching is completely different. So it's not only that they are shorter, it's also that their human capacity is already limited in the development. So how can you ever get out of poverty in all these problems even that the brain at the very early child age is already impacted. And it has huge implications for society. Often the number of people affected by conflicts is making it to the news. We have 65 million who are directly impacted by conflict directly. We look at the people connected, excuse me, affected by droughts and flooding is much more. It's twice as many people are almost by flooding directly impacted, indirectly we all are impacted by flooding. Or if you look at the people killed, 75,000 people every year on average die because of a conflict situation. 75,000, that's too many, it's terrible. Look at the people dying because of inadequate water and sanitation. It's more than ten times as much. It's a silent tsunami. Every day more than thousand children dying because of diarrhea. Like a very preventable disease. These are dramatic numbers but they don't make it to the headline news anymore. We are kind of, I'm sure you had this in your first lectures and we just accept this. And also our society. We're looking at the European Parliament again. It's exactly that slide. This does make it to the headline news but these are the real problems as well which you are too accepted in our society. Economic damage is also dramatic when it comes to water. I don't need to explain that further here while the numbers are difficult to assess. Last message. No, I have two more. Open defecation. The objective in the sustainable development goals is to end open defecation. Open defecation is maybe not only not a nice thing to do. It is terrible for the health. People are much more exposed to health issues through open defecation. And it's also a question of dignity if you don't have access to any toilet. And in particular for women in some southern countries it's also a question of security because if they have to go out in the middle of the night to do the business they can be exposed to violence or other problems. The objective is to end open defecation. Are we doing fine? Will we end open defecation in the coming years? What you see here is different regions and the largest burden is for Central and Southern Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. You see that the numbers are going down. It's kind of almost a linear trend. Over the last 15 years there has been progress in reducing open defecation but it's always embarrassing because there are so many professors in PhDs and master students. I did a very simple thing. I didn't have the numbers. I did just linear interpolation on the PowerPoint slide with some dotted lines. Students don't do that. Your professors were not accept, but if you're a professor yourself you can do it. What we see in the numbers are going down and if you assume a linear extrapolation it's not zero. It doesn't go now. We really reinforce our efforts if we want to end open defecation by 23. The numbers do not go to zero so it's really time to act now. It's not a question. We're doing beyond the right track and we just continue doing. No, we have to speed up. We really have to accelerate our action. I can give you many, many more examples. This is a bit complicated. This is a figure from the GMP program that we plotted the countries that do not have basic access to water less than 95% coverage. En dan, if you assume that the last 15 years, the rate of change of the last 15 years is a good indicator for the next 15 years to be extrapolated linearly and say, well, the rate of change continues for countries like Laos, Morocco, Mongolia, Sri Lanka they will have 100% access to basic drinking water. But if you, globally, only four out of five countries are not on track. They're not providing the access fast enough if they continue with the same rate of change as in the last 15 years. If you look at basic sanitation there's only one out of ten countries that is actually on track. So there's improvement, but not fast enough. Urban drainage, a number of colleagues are working in that field and what is plotted here is the connection of sewer systems over de last 15 years. En you see on the right access there's an increase in urban sewers in all these countries. Which is a good thing, better urban drainage including wastewater management, so it's a good development. On the Y axis we plotted the degree of urbanization in different countries. You see the green countries are doing well they improve the urban sewer network and they do that at a much faster speed than the urbanization. The yellow countries they have more urban sewers but urbanization is at such a pace to speed, it's outpacing the increase of connecting people to urban sewers. The red countries are going in the wrong direction anyway because they have less and less connections. So it's a negative connection. So maybe some of you said urban sewers Stefan is that the right thing so maybe we have to think of decentralized solutions other ways to manage wastewater as well. Urban sewers is is not the way, if you look like cities like Laos you have 20 million people and only 5% of the wastewater is collected and treated. 95% is discharged somehow. So having this kind of European centralized urban sewer system will never work there to retrofit that city will not work and that's true for many developing countries. So maybe other innovations from you are more effective in these? I think I should stop in 5 minutes I don't know We have some questions I think this is well known. I want to come to water use efficiency which is one of the indicators I promise some world maps this is an indicator to measure the water's use efficiency for countries with all the wisdom we came up with we can say that but it's the gross value per unit of water if you use an additional cubic meter of water what does it mean for the economy and that's the way to measure that and then you come up with a map like this countries who are super water use efficient according to that are Luxembourg or Qatar but these are countries that are not very much dependent Luxembourg is hardly irrigating at all but it's basically getting its wealth through service sector banking in particular Qatar through oil and gas so water use efficiency if you average that for the whole economy is not a very good indicator but that's the official indicator of course we reported that but we also critically discuss what are the war meaning for indicators and I'm happy to share this result from a colleague from Italy who is invested with a ruster based model globally and simulates water use efficiency and you see then the country of India on the left side is then a much more diverse pattern and you see water use efficiency and varies a lot per pixel scale and I think we can do that with more advanced water accounting and other tricks from Professor Salomatini and others to have a much more distributed approach to that as well and the lower is even separating agricultural left hand side sector and industry so you see it's super important to separate different main economic activities and not just put that all together I closely come to the last part of my talk and my job is to of course overseen the production of these products these reports that we are doing but also disseminatings I often give lectures also at parliament we had now four times at the European Parliament session on the World Water Development Report and others dissemination policy outreach is I believe an important part and so instead of only talking the talks or walking the walk what needs to be done and I promise some reflections on research directions and I'm very much looking forward to discussing what you believe what needs to be done better and I believe these interlinkages are very important en we need to quantify them much much better we need to develop better indicators I think for the water use efficiency that's very clear and there's others as well but I really believe we need to understand beyond the storytelling that water and gender is an issue we need to be quantitative and also be deterministic models be able to describe that I also believe that we need truly transdisciplinary projects transdisciplinary is defined and I believe that this is this is an important step what we need to do well by putting a lot of data together I still believe we need more and better data we really need to utilize the latest earth observation technique citizen science etc private sector data there's so much which the UN is not utilizing some of the colleagues say oh no it's not coming from the statistical office of the country we cannot use this data maybe it's too but on the other hand we need to inform policy decision making it's not only about which we are allowed to use we need to come up with better ways to inform what is the situation but just color coding countries and giving them blue or yellow or green is this part of the story therefore I believe research from your colleagues is very important I also believe that new methods are analyzing all this data big data maybe trade data and other data which we usually don't use in water so much some blockchain technology we don't understand the math but maybe Dimitri explains me that one day understanding transactions of water maybe in a much more distributed fashion than we were able to monitor maybe these type of developments really help us to gain much better insights in water and I would be very pleased to listen to you if you work on these topics internet of things is another one more data I said that and that hopefully leads to more integrated science for development which I believe is an exciting part which IG is working on I'm happy to be a part of it to support evidence-based policy and decision-making and then to make a difference in my last graph this was a study from a rainwater harvesting study in Eastern Africa, I think Ethiopia they were mapping the effort in terms of time and money going into that rainwater harvesting study and you see how much is spent on future work and how much is spent on data analysis, technical reports and knowledge sharing and the last one is advising the client what you could call policy outreach think about your own project how much effort do you put on that last bar and don't take it as an afterthought that you feel like now I did my research and I started talking to policy makers to actually do something with it so we really have to rethink research plots also like this maybe your impact could be improved with this I would like to thank you for your attention thank you Stefan for the interesting presentation I read we're still in dire straits let's see if there are some indications of what could be good directions forward or other questions from the audience you may throw the microphone I can do it so who has a question for you Stefan was I not clear enough of this we cannot throw so far we should just shout we stand out in the grammar could you stand up this connection about STG number C everything that we have to achieve with the finance change agreement because the parties agreement are there some other countries the big countries that are in the bubble so how do you see that in this scenario of achieving this goal because water availability is affected by climate change how do you see this in the big picture well I have 15 minutes to answer the question isn't it it's very important climate change is changing a lot but often there is these stereotypes now it's getting more water and getting less water I didn't expect her question but I recently talked about climate change and I still had some slides I found this a very interesting figure this is the average of 18 GCMs some of the best GCMs we have at the moment GCMs simulate the climate model Professor van der Singen can explain everything about this and then it's one of the scenarios and it's the trend to 2100 you see some areas there is a good agreement that it gets wetter like parts of eastern Africa or the human tropics in southeast Asia according to this graph and others become drier for instance the Mediterranean in some other areas parts of sub-Sahin Africa seem to be drier what I found most interesting if you take one of the GCMs you always get a different pattern where 80% of the models are in agreement with the direction there are some areas which is not at this shaded area where we don't know it's getting wet this is only the annual mean precipitation not talking about interesting parameters for hydrology like the daily maximum drought number of dry days and dry spell this is only the annual maximum excuse me the annual precipitation and you see in 30% of the globe we don't know in which direction it goes even with the annual rainfall so there is a lot of uncertainty in this on the other hand we do realize that the climate is changing and we need to advise governments and we need to work in our own countries or other governments to adapt to something which we don't know in which direction it goes so there is a lot of uncertainty I also don't say that we don't know anything we shouldn't do anything we shouldn't have a more better agreement but it shows a lot of uncertainty and it shows the space in which we have to work with adaptation measures but to answer your question climate change is absolutely critical and it gets too little attention in the water sector and also we had a core meeting just earlier today at the hydrology group I believe we need to connect much better and also utilize in climate change adaptation we talked about many billions that was a long answer to a short question maybe you just shout or so thank you very much interesting talk I would like to connect however this to our discussions at IHC that will happen so we around a year ago we had the first version of the strategy that was devoted purely to one SDG6 and SDG6 is called clean water sanitation however it was renamed it goes with many of your slides into water sanitation because the original formulation is about water based clean water and sanitation so it's about how humans consume water it's not about floods infrastructure it's not about hydropower so it's about quite narrow however very important aspect of water so discussion we have now that perhaps we should sort of better connect to SDGs as their formula however our structures are different from SDGs the question is should we need sort of restructure into more SDG related topics or since our topic areas are serving many SDGs practically say hydrology serves many of SDGs and if you take other research areas or educational areas they also serve many of SDGs and so we form a matrix where we work along research lines and we serve many SDGs in the same time so could you reflect on this should we indeed sort of think of restructuring along SDGs or we better simply think how our existing research areas attribute to this SDGs and help thank you I think as former vice rector I should stay away of giving advice or restructuring my IG I had this discussion so many times but I so I avoid making comments on the structure of IG but in length times of core groups and departments I avoid that but in terms of research lines and activities I believe what you call the matrix structure if I understood your question right is very true take flat warning a number of groups work in that field here at IG, the river basin group the hydromanics group, the hydrology group and others as well but that contributes to a number of SDGs so it's of course SDG6 and different aspects of SDG6 but also the city's goal there is something on victims and ecosystems en also preventing damage of infrastructure then economic growth because I don't need to explain so I think you can take a number of boxes with this kind of one example of working on flat forecasting for instance and that is true for probably everything so it's very important to demonstrate first be cutting edge, be very good what you do in high impact for development and then demonstrate how that links to quite a number of other goals would be my recommendation I hope I understood your question right the data that the joint monitoring program from WHO and UNICEF is using is coming from the large part from the what is called domestic health survey and there is some other data and census data from countries there are surveys done in many things and also the sanitation behavior so it's not only counting toilets it's also having access to toilets as a shared facility what kind of is improved or not improved it's kind of a fairly detailed monitoring of what people do so I don't think it's only counting number of toilets that's maybe one response to you and the second one I also don't believe that certain technology like the toilet which we enjoy here in western countries is necessarily replicable around the world or just something you parachute some toilets and then the problem is solved it has much more to do with cultural social acceptance it's a much more complicated thing than just toilets so it's the whole sanitation behavior including its cultural societal aspects oh it's from 2018 it's Fred Hartman from PIC in Potsdam Climate Institute the number it disappears thank you I'm very interested in that we are putting together the word and climate change with what a development report as we speak it will be published next March and first draft is ready in June and I would be most interested to see the latest data but this is a one year old publication it's not okay Michael I think it's fascinating that you've come from the IHE community and now you're leading this part of UNESCO and you've told us you're out in the world you're talking to policy makers, decision makers I know you're also really circulating among the highest levels of water expertise and leaders in different countries I just wonder if you've had any observations about the capacity at that level and strengths and weaknesses I'm not sure if something stands out from your experiences but do you have any sense that what would help most is greater technical expertise in particular areas among the people you interact with or is it more of a more integrated higher level understanding of water and development among the people you're interacting with when you're trying to communicate simplified but still complex ideas in your presentations no, it's a very complex question, thanks Michael well just more specializations or more integration is the question what is needed more or what do I observe in my counterparts what you observe that could be improved I think we need improvements everywhere but what I call it before a game changer that be from this pure focus on water supply and sanitation have a more comprehensive looking at water as a goal with many aspects, water quality scarcity even some aspects are missing flooding is not explicitly there I agree but it's a kind of there is a development but probably these simple messages that water is an enabler goals and also progress and so many other things is important to make progress in water development that is too little understood and it's even I am often on story telling examples we need maybe more research is needed, applied research is needed to really quantify that what does that mean for a late chart or for a reforestation after in Ethiopia or for a mangrove system in a delta somewhere in a complex in showing how ecosystems, water jobs for the people how that really connects quantitatively not only in storytelling I think that's missing and also that people get this integration is often not there maybe because of all the education most people at that level are from a classical education they don't have a t-shirt they have just the eyeshift this was an insider joke a very classical education in civil engineering or in ecology I think that the integration I think is underutilized people need to the lectures I feel I would like to thank you very much Stefan for the presentation there were a lot of interesting links that we have in our minds internally in Aichi so I hope that it is also fruitful thought and further deliberation thank you very much for joining us thank you