 I was facilitating a session on strengthening institutional capacity and governance for access and spending of adaptation finance. The key messages coming from this session are one that institutions are the starting point unless we get them right, functional and accommodative of the diverse views there we are going to go for. Participants mentioned that donors need to change their policies to not only focus on actual implementation but also on capacity building of these special local level institutions that are going to enable this to happen. So there is a call for upstream investment to have functional, representative and transparent institutions that can enable us to access and make better use of these available financial resources. The other point is about having the institutions structure in such a way that the voices of the vulnerable are not lost. More often than not, people have talked about mainstreaming, well-extended, how we are assuming climate change and planning. But what we often forget is that in most of these the voices of the vulnerable are often lost. They don't participate in making decisions on how resources are allocated and utilized and there is no actually reporting back to them. The other point coming from this is they need to look for better ways of enhancing linkages and coordination. Different institutions have different role to play and it's only by working together that they can complement and move the process forward. Otherwise, if people continue working in parallel then chances are that some of them will be undermining the good work that some others are doing. Of course, the only issue of ensuring that the issue of climate information is accessible to those who need to use it. Some of these institutions have not been able to contribute to adaptation, planning and implementation, but in the course of inaccessibility, so we need to reform some of these institutions. There's progress made but we need to continue reforming them to be more responsive to the needs of the climate environment. The most interesting question for me is about co-financing. How do we ensure that we attract additional funding from the non-traditional sources? That's recognizing that resources will never be enough and they need to look at how local communities can also contribute, whether it's the kind, how we can attract the private sector, the foundations. So there's some little bit of work in packaging our ideas to ensure that the other people buy in towards being done and have faith in the processes and structures put in place so that they can also contribute, but also to look more inward in terms of what is it that the vulnerable groups themselves can contribute. There could be things like labour, local resources that they can contribute to necessarily looking for money. So for me that was the important thing. But the other point that came with the theme that ran across the world was the issue of sustainability. I think we have a whole program running here and I think the big question we've been asking is how sustainable. And I think we've got some thoughts. We don't have an answer yet. Sustainability is a very difficult question. More so when you're dealing with institutions with different mandates, different tactics at different levels. So it's something that we're going to pursue further. Upstream investment in capacity building or capacity strengthening of the institutions. Be it in the technical areas, between the governance, between the equipment and other facilities. To enable them to do the work themselves, that's the only way you're going to have things happen.