 At the time when I was studying I was very convinced by the literature that showed how growth, which is used as a proxy for social welfare, really fails to capture the substantive goals of what we want and need in our society. So it's why I'm always still a bit surprised that the alternative is also still using this terminology of degrowth, while I think the critique equally applies to that, that it still doesn't put a finger on what we really need and don't need for a good society and a sustainable society in the future. There are multiple, they relate to value of health, of care, of affordable and accessible food, so nutrition, shelter, housing, so mobility, but also access to the internet, political voice, so these are substantive goals I would say for social policies to increase to increase these social rights for everyone in society and I think using degrowth as the solution or the denominator doesn't really tackle the issues that are underneath. And you also see some blind spots. I think in the degrowth literature, in which I'm not an expert, but I think the potential lever of finance is really a bit under explored, tend to go into discussions of whether it is, whether we can afford transition or whether the welfare state redistributional systems are compromised if you go towards degrowth, but really the analysis of how the finance system is currently channeling the financial streams in our society to certain goals and not to others, to certain investments and not to others, to the ones we need is really the consequence of a regulatory framework, the rules by which banks and financial system work and I think there's really a lot of potential to make policy that this financial framework is in line with societal goals that would enable what is currently deemed impossible because of two little resources of the state which is really maybe not the essence of the analysis. So talking about regulatory frameworks, I guess we best then look at the European level to change these things. Both at the European level, yes, of course the monetary instruments are very important and can hardly be overestimated, but also at the national level within states, there could be drawn sustainable finance plans, there could be rules on how, for instance, the public finance is channeled to the projects that we need and not anymore to the projects that we need. And in order to see what we need, we don't need, we also have to make sure we leave no one behind. This is called the just transition principle. I think this is also key for building another economy. Yeah, absolutely. So we see that just transition is a concept that has a very big definition, everyone can adopt it and use it in its own context for its own goals and terms. So I think it is increasingly acknowledged that the social dimension, the social justice dimension, distributional as well as procedural is really important for bringing a sustainable society about and that there is still a lot of discussion necessary to determine which social justice, how to understand it and how can we implement it in policies, but I think this notion of just transition is certainly helpful to bring the debate to those kind of questions.