 So, another example of latino issues in the design of Central Africa, as you can see, it's a good complement to what Peter had just shown for South America, I'd say. But the question here is how to combine, I would say, customary rights with rights that are granted to official companies that have a lot of concessioners in Central Africa. So, how we can try to elaborate mixed DNA regimes in Central Africa, and basically logging concession. So, just a few words on the beyond table. We worked with Biodiversity on this project. And why there is a current assertion that logging concession prevents local community to increase their livelihoods by restricting access and use of certain forest sources inside the concessions. And every concession is managed according to a forest management plan that regulates the use and the access of local people to certain forest resources. But usually the forest management are a little in force in Central Africa because the states do it absent in remote areas, among other reasons. And the main idea of the beyond table project was to focus on non-temporary forest products in logging concessions. And there were a few questions at the inception of this project. What extent do NTFP contribute to local lab? Does NTFP gathering generate conflict with the concessioners? And how management of logging concession can be proved to maximize the benefit of local population, coming from non-temporary forest products but also other forest uses. So, the map of the site, we worked in six logging concessions, two in Cameroon, two in Gabon and two in DRC. To understand the real conflict, the actual conflict that opposed and still opposed logging companies with local population, we have selected a few uses that we usually meet in forest, in tropical forest, and we have observed if these use are implemented on the field. Every time there is a cross, the use is present in the concessions. And every time the cell is red, there is a conflict. Potentials which usually act like conflict between the local population and the concessioners. So as you can see, you see on the table, there are mainly three conflicting uses. One is agriculture, that is, according to the law, prohibited in the logging concession, remains a very important conflict in Central Africa. Another one is about hunting, and the third one is about artisanal, that are really generate conflict between local population and the concessioners. So basically, there are two, and one reason for such conflicts is that there are two different antagonistic land and forest dangerous systems in Central Africa. On one end, the concession model, the logging concession model, where land and forest resources are the ownership of the state, almost 98% of the total land of Cameroon, Gabon, and BAC belong to the state, and the resources of this land also belong to the state. The main objectives of the logging concession is timber production and protection of the maintenance of the forest cover. And local uses are usually tolerated, but only for distant purpose. As soon as you try to trade the products you drone from the forest, it becomes illegal. And there is no agriculture officially. The management and production are granted to industrial companies, really large companies, and the use of forest resources inside the concession are done according to a forest management plan that is validated by the forest administration. On the other end, there is a community terroir in which the rules are complete and the possession are completely different. In this view, land and forest resources are possessed by legitimate social entities, either it is liney ages, extended family or individual, it's a kind of mixture of different social entities. There is usually a combination of views in forest space. The customary rules, there are many customary rules, usually it promotes an arrangement. So if we put it in a matrix of land uses, using the different type of rights that were described by flagra and the stone, that's the picture we have for the logging concession where the state is the owner of land and forest resources. Communities can access and withdraw forest resources for subsistence, for subsistence, and timber is granted to local companies. We can oppose this model to the matrix of land uses for the customary rule where it is a mixture of different kinds of rights used by different kinds of right holders from the individual to the village or to the community, so it's much more complex. So the main question is, as we can see sometimes, is the community forestry model, the customary tenure model, can it be an alternative processions? There are strong resistances in Central Africa to go that way. The argument is to build forest management on local uses and rules. You usually quote it in the last New York statement, for instance, and give a real importance to the co-population, for instance. Well, sometimes it's an idealistic vision of the communities and the way they can sustainably manage forest resources. So it's not always the case, I would say. We have a very example in Central Africa of the community forest that was an official form of decentralized forest resources managed to go to local communities, and most of the time it's a failure. This model is today regulated in both Gabon and TAC. And basically, another resistance comes from the politicians in Central Africa who see the centralization process as a kind of reach in the unity of the countries, I would say, to make it short. So the main challenge would be trying to combine these two systems to build on the co-session model, but to adapt it to give more room and importance to local uses. So that may be a kind of example of the metrics of land tenure we can propose, whereas the state remains the main owner, but where many local uses are more recognized and are really including in forest management. So that would be a more pragmatic approach where we try to build and to modify the existing co-session model rather than to propose a complete alternative model that today is a bit difficult to promote in Central Africa. That would be a good opportunity to think and to advocate for a better integration of local uses, not only in the local co-session, but at the national scale and in the political area. And the main challenges, especially if at the scale of the co-session, would be to be able to elaborate institutional arrangements where the stakeholders are more balanced ways in the decision making. Thank you.