 Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak here and just to say that our year's aid is extremely happy, to have this opportunity and extremely happy with the relationship with the Institute and delighted to provide support to the development series, gives us these o'r cyfgareddau i'r cyfwyrdogau o'r cyfwyrgyniedadau a lleoeddiaethau i'r cyfwyrddau o'r ystod o'r cyfwyrddau â'r ystyried. Rwy'n gweithio'n gweithio i'w ffordd, ac mae'n rhoi'n gweithio, ond mae'n gweithio'n gweithio, Fel gyntaf y flwyddyn dd border hynny, mae'r gweithio'r rhwng ddigon. Yr hyn mae ydy lryd yn cynnig, yna'r llygau y prosiectлаeth a'r oedd hynny ddod yn unrhyw gylaed. Yn y pwysig, fel y prifs Gymwysig, ond yr hyn yn agor. yw rhaid i gyd yn oed. A oeddwn ni'n edrych arall y ddweud y bwysig sy'n mynd i gyd. Mae'n gwybod i'r ddweud yw'r ddweud yna i ddyfodol. Ond mae'n mynd i gyd yn ddweud y ddweud, gyda'r rhai gweithreit gynhyrchu amgylch, oherwydd mae'n ddweud gyd yn gwneud ein fforddi, mae'n ddweud i'r ddweud i'n ddweud oherwydd ddim yn ddweud o'r un i gyd yn y ddechrau yn y ddweud o'r Ylanthog, Rodd bydd yw'r ysgolion gyda'r anghyd o ymgyrchol y battulol yn y team. Bydd yw'r amser ddim yn bach yn y cair o'r ymryd. Roedd y cwm bod mae gennym yn ffordd mewn ar biradau ysgrifiadiol. Yr ysgrif iawn yma'r unrhyw o'r ddweud o hwnnw. Mae unrhyw o'r roedd o'r gyntaf i'r ysgrif iawn serid o'r bhlu sy'n meddwl. Mae o'r unrhyw o'r ddweud o bwrdd hyn o kaleisio'r hwnneith. bydd eich mynd i'r blaenau o meddwl o ff 그렇죠 a'r sicr o wneud y ddeudio i'r lluniau meddwl. Ac yna'n byw'r bod i'n ddim eich bod ni'n unig i rhoi eich mynd am ff cór llawer o d research and ofain oherwydd o'i ff voit y cyflawni, boed iddo o'r mod i'r byw'r dyfodol o'n ddeudio? Ac yna yn fwyaf i'n mynd yn mynd i'n ffermol yn Y Oshaid o'r Eyddiad yn ei fawr i'r mae'r ffordd o cael ei wneud o'r fforddol ac'r fforddol yn ymwneud yw'r ymarfer o dydd yw'r ffyrdd ac o'r byw ddrwyfod. Mynd i chi ar ysgrifenni ffforddol yn ymwneud maen nhw'n mynd i gael, ac mae'r bwysig nad oed yn ymddydd y chatio bod yn ymddi dod wedyn o amser ym loans yn ymddweud o'r ysgrifenni a ffwyd Inside Ffordd. maen gwneud wrth mor cyllidw i'n rhwng o'r ddigonion nodi, yn amlian i'r amlian y tansaniad, sy'n ddiddorol o ridwch o hét a patrwch, o'r bod ni'n gwneud o'r maen ei oed yn bywm y 80%. Bydd hyn yn gymryd ar zeithio ddwy'r hollau cyllidwyd, gyda bethau sydd oedd yn gweithio bryd yn mor hét ar y llan yn y ddigonion a hét a patrwch ac yn ganhawn ddiwyddiadol mae'r ddweud i ychydig, ac allwch i ddweud i fod yn bod yn mynd i'r ddweud, i'r ddweud a'r ddweud i ddweud, ify mae'r ddweud ar gweithio gael, yn i gynhyrchu a menthau cynghori, gan ysgolicalionol iawn yn ei ddweud i ddweud. A bod y ddweud i ddweud i gweithio ac mae'r ddweud i gael o bwrdd cynghori ei ddweud, ac yn gwybod meddwl i gydig ymddangos i gydig y pwyno am gweithio gyda'i ddweud, if the market doesn't allow them to sell products at a reasonable price, if there isn't a demand for the products, they won't engage with the extension services, and therefore they won't benefit from the investments and the messages around nutrition that we might be trying to go through. So, in its own right, it constrains access to entitlement to nutrition's food but also affects the other things that we're doing. So, in terms of the nutrition and resilience links, yes, we do need a nutrition sensitive resilience building interventions. So, we do need resilience in things, put into things like our social protection programme. Sorry, we need nutrition put into our social protection programmes, nutrition mainstream through agriculture. But as well, we really need to think about this chain which is resilience as being one of the factors that enables people to have more sustainable livelihoods, more profitable household economies, more opportunities to gain an income and to be able to access food. And that process leads to nutrition. So, this also needs to be included in the way that we programme. So, we need to think about resilience very strongly about how it delivers profitable and productive agriculture and livelihoods for small homes and rural households. The other point I wanted to raise quickly was, is resilience really enough? And I think there's an argument for focusing exclusively or overly focusing on resilience does give us the risk of missing some critical issues. The first thing about resilience approach is it is dominated by the idea of dealing with risk. So, risk is something that is unpredictable and beyond control. And actually, and some things are just like that. So, the impacts of climate change are unpredictable, although we know they will happen regularly, their particular instance isn't predictable. And they are beyond the control of people and of communities and of government. But actually, many of the constraints, maybe they're not risks because they are quite often, they're not shocks because they are quite often chronic situations, chronic stresses which people live in. For example, the problem of prices for producers or indeed prices for low prices for producers, high prices for consumers. But they are quite predictable. The other thing about resilience is it's more about, sorry just to say that the things we are talking about really are more about insecurities and disempowerment rather than shocks. So, a rural producer, a rural household that is trying to make a living, it does face shocks of the climate type of disease type of pests. But it also faces ongoing insecurity and disempowerment in markets. In other words, households, producer households do not have the ability to influence prices. Do not have security that a market will be there if they do produce. If households invest in using fertilisers, invest in more productive seeds. Or indeed, if they start using more nutritious crops, producing more nutritious crops, they don't have any security that the market will be available there to give them a value to do that. And many of these issues, particularly around market feathers, they may be beyond the control of the individual or a community, but they're not beyond the control of the state or of public action. In other words, many of these things are amenable to public policies and actions. For example, issues around warehousing, storage, prices, prices of inputs, issues around access. How good is the rural road infrastructure? How good is market infrastructure? All of these things are amenable to public action. So, the other point I would think about is that resilience tends to focus on the individual and the household or the community. Now, that's fine. That's absolutely right. We need to focus on poor people and the most vulnerable. But it kind of sees people as the vulnerability of people as a problem. So, you're focusing on building the resilience of households or of individuals or of people. And it seems to be about people, for some reason or another, are living in this very insecure and unsure environment and we need to build up the passes to be able to manage that data. Yes, we do, but actually there are things that we can do to improve at the environment in which they're living. So, it's not just about dealing with a very bad, about their ability to deal with a very bad situation. It's about promoting as well public policies and action to improve that environment and make it less hostile. So, the approach on resilience, I think it runs that risk of providing a sort of a rather limited ambition. It doesn't push enough for systemic change in the context that we're working about. And it sort of de-responsibilises the state and public policy and action by focusing on the individual's ability to deal with that situation. I just wanted to put up this next graph, which is just to give one example of one of the issues. And it's been mentioned already. This is maize prices in Malawi. And it's actually, this is an if-free piece of research that produces. This is very interesting. I mean, there it's genuinely zero-h, so this is when the global price crisis was just about starting. But you can see, sorry, just to be sure, it's all different coloured lines. Those different coloured lines are all different rural markets in Malawi. This black one is the world price for maize. This is for maize. So you can look at the total non-relationship between the world price and the prices in rural markets in Malawi. That's one thing to say. The other thing is the obvious huge volatility in it. And all of it predating the time, predating the time when suddenly it came on to the global agenda as a big issue, price volatility. But actually, this isn't really price volatility. This again is quite predictable. It's happening so regularly. Now the size of the peak changes from year to year and there will be reasons for that. But you can see that in the market and the rural economy that this represents, there are severe problems. Totally economically unjustifiable price wedges between the time at harvest and the time at lean period, experienced by people. In this context people cannot really be expected to produce or to invest in increasing their production in agriculture. This is a very hostile environment. I think people have the right to expect that their government and their state should have public policies in place to try to iron this out. If that was about law and order or conflict, you would do something to deal with the issues systemically. We talk about the need, and it is a valid thing to do, for farmers to organise themselves and we should support them so that they have more power in the market. So they can build their local stores and put off selling the maize for three weeks. But we wouldn't be advocating for them to form self-defence groups or vigilante groups to go out and deal with crime. The same thing should apply here. There are expectations that citizens should have of government, and we need to push them forward. The last point, I want to say, is that we need to think about reducing the resilience requirement. It isn't only about making people more resilient, it's about reducing the need for them to be so resilient. Particularly to the things that are amenable to public policy. I think some of these are critical. These are the sorts of things that we see. Access to land, pasture and water and security over access, prices and costs and entitlements to food. The general message is, of course, it isn't about de-prioritising or not doing resilience. It's about how resilience has actually worked best as part of an overall supportive framework of public policies and actions that work in the rural economy and that focus on the same target groups that we're talking about. I think there's a really important area of work to do, which is about re-legitimising active public policy in the rural economies in least developed countries. It's something which has been de-legitimised significantly. I think there's a growing consensus of the need to address this. Work needs to be done. I think IFPRI is a very good partner to be doing this sort of work to support the design and delivery of smart and flexible policy interventions. Policies aimed at prices are not easy things to do. There are lots of perverse outcomes and benefits that can be regressed from all sorts of things. The other thing that I think we need to do, and IFPRI, particularly the more it is involved in fact developing countries, is to build a public debate and national analytical capacity in LDCs to improve the political economy and actually delivering these sorts of instruments.