 Well, good morning, everyone, and I want to thank all of you who are here at 9 a.m. Start the day off on a very important topic. In fact, this topic that we're discussing this morning affects every person on earth. It can't wait till tomorrow, and many things are optional, but this one is not. We're speaking, of course, about food. We all have to eat. This topic over the past decades hasn't been at the top of the alarm list in the world or even a major focus in past decades here at the forum. So why has it moved up to star status not only here, but in the G20, the G8, and elsewhere? Troubles on the food front. Anomalies, dislocations, disruptions, distortions. But at the same time, there's also unprecedented need, knowledge, and opportunity. And today, indeed, we're seeing new models of collaboration, innovation that could change the face of food and nutrition security in the decades to come. Just a few key facts. The world has never fed more people and never with better quality food and more nutrition. Never before has food existed in such abundance. Global agriculture produces an estimated 17% more calories per person today than it did 30 years ago, even with a 50% increase in the population. But all is not well. Today, nearly a billion people will wake up and be unsure how to fill even this humble cup, which is cup the world food program uses to reach children. That's how much food they get a day, and that transforms their life. But a billion people, many of them, will be unsure how to fill even this cup. So one out of seven people on earth today are food insecure. We know how to prevent the devastating personal and economic effects of malnutrition. Yet today in the developing world, more than 200 million people, brains and bodies are stunted by a simple lack of nutrition in the early days of life. 70% of brain growth we now know occurs before two years old. And if children do not have access to nutritious food, the effects of that can never be reversed. And you can see brain volume actually reduced up to 40%. So investments in food and nutrition are not only logical from a business point of view, but imperative to build healthy societies and a healthy world. Yet since the early 80s, the official share of development assistance for agriculture dropped sharply from about 17% to about 5% and is finally back on the upswing. History has shown we cannot build stable, prosperous, educated world without food and nutrition, and with that drain open at the bottom of the development bathtub, progress simply cannot be made on all other fronts. And we also know this is critical for peace and stability. If people don't have food, they have three options. They can revolt, they can migrate, or they can die. And we need a better plan, and we have a great panel. To talk about the great things that are happening to help turn the situation around. I just want to mention we humans can be self-defeating on this topic. Up to 40% of the food produced for human consumption in the world today is lost or wasted. This is not just in the developing world where after the farm gate, in the supply chain, you'll often see 40% of the food lost due to lack of proper drying equipment and storage equipment and other issues. But in the richer world, you see 40% of the food lost also. In the value chain, it's wasted or lost at the consumer level or retail level. So a very important and timely issue. We have a great group of leaders here with a proven track record on investment solutions. And on new ways of doing business. And today we'll address the question to put it starkly. Is hunger and malnutrition a Malthusian nightmare that will hit us all like a brick wall as global demand for food skyrockets in the next few decades? Or an unprecedented opportunity to create jobs and value through the entire food supply chain with smarter technologies and a better way to reach those who have been left out of food security and nutrition security? And what will it take to unlock those investments? Paul Pullman. You'll be heading up the B20, which is the business aspects of the G20, headed into the Mexico summit in June. In addition, Unilever's products are sold in more than 180 countries across the world and on any given day, 2 billion people will be using your products. How do you see new models of innovation and collaboration driving investment in food and nutrition security? And what can world leaders do to help make sure you keep investing in this area? Yeah. Thanks, Josette. And again, admiration for what you do with your cup. Keep it up for all of us. The theme of the World Economic Forum, great transformation, new models, applies here more than ever in my opinion and is incredibly relevant. I'm not in the Malthusian nightmare scenario on this, although the statistics are daunting, but it's a tremendous opportunity for green growth that we all need for employment and keeping that focus at this time of equitable and sustainable growth makes you very enthusiastic to work in this area. The statistics are daunting. It's very clear as the population goes from 7 to 9 billion, as you say, that 77 million people more every year, every three years in Indonesia, you have to feed them. The FAO estimates that the supply of food, despite the tremendous progress that has been made, has to go up by 70 percent between now and 2050. Add to that, by the way, that is in the next 30 years the same amount of food as we have produced and consumed in the last 10,000 years. That's what people don't understand sometimes. That's 70 percent. And separately, 70 percent of the world's water, 20 percent of the carbon emission, some other things are related to food. So the climate, the whole nexus, we were briefly talking out of water energy and food are closely linked, which make it extremely complex, but also tremendous opportunities. People reckon that the current trend of climate change will reduce food yield by 20 to 40 percent, so they are closely linked. And then, as Josette says, we're starting from the wrong base where a billion people go to bed every day hungry, and where still a child dies every six seconds of malnutrition. So we're not exactly on a level playing field already today before all these things happen. It's very clear as the theme of the World Economic Forum that applying yesterday's tools to tomorrow's problems doesn't find the solution. And increasingly, we're very encouraged by the new models that are out there, and I'll just want to briefly mention three of them to your question. The first one is a model that started here at the World Economic Forum about two years ago under the office of the WEF and with the help of McKinsey, we put together what is called the new fission for agriculture. It's a holistic model that looks at employment. It does affect a 2020-2020 goal, 20 percent more employment, 20 percent reduction in CO2 emission, and 20 percent increase in yield. It started with President Kikweke in the Green Gross Corridor of Tanzania. It is subsequently extended to Vietnam with the Minister of Agriculture Fat or SBY, President SBY in Indonesia. I'm very pleased to see that President Calderon is picking up on this as well in Mexico in anticipation of the G20. It takes a holistic approach. The first thing is, obviously, be sure that government policies are right. They are critical. Looking at the total supply chain, involving all the different stakeholders in the supply chain, governments, NGOs, different businesses along the supply chain, and then, more importantly, tailoring the solutions to the local circumstances. One-third of the global population is actually in agriculture. Eighty-five percent of those people are small-hold farmers. Seventy percent of the people on the bottom of the pyramid are actually small-hold farmers. So, if we focus in this new vision of agriculture on the small-hold farmer itself, we also solve to some extent the issue of not only food security, but also of the billion people going to bed hungry. It turns out that an investment in agriculture actually has one of the highest returns of any investment you can make. This brings me to the second model, which is a Unilever model, where we've clearly made a commitment to decouple our growth from environmental impact. Where we have, as part of that, committed to sourcing all of our raw materials sustainably is a very important part of this. And last but not least, directly link 500,000 incremental small-hold farmers to our supply chain. Needless to say, you have to create the markets. Companies alone cannot do that. Often, it's fairly inefficient, but we're tracking and measuring that. We're well on our way with nearly 200,000 small-hold farmers linked to us, mainly with brands like Lipton and the T. The third model, as Bruno will explain that much more, is the work we're doing that Chaucet referred to on the B20, with the food security. We're very proud, in fact, that we caught 16 of the biggest food companies together in a task force to help the FAO, the World Bank, the Ministers of Agriculture prepare for the G20 and food security, again, on the President Calderon as high on the agenda. And here, obviously, it is a longer-term plan covering four or five elements, not surprising to you. Investment in agriculture has actually come down over the last decade. It needs about 80 billion a year to get us to an increase of 30 to 40 percent in production. Companies are committing to do that with concrete action plans that are being measured. We expect governments to do the same in the different places. Increased functioning of the markets is a key part of that. Technology transfer, sustainability, and more importantly, moving the debate from calories to nutrition. This brings me to the nutrition part. It's very pleasing to see that the G8 under U.S. aid, and Raju is now leading that in Chicago coming up, has nutrition written all over. In Mexico, we will certainly be moving more towards building nutrition further in the recommendations. Women in agriculture, women historically, no access to training. Land rights or tools can increase productivity by about 30 percent. Half the small old farmers are women, so we'll be putting that in. The issue of land rights needs to be further worked. So I'm very pleased to see that industry, NGOs, governmental organizations are getting together around the G20 on an ongoing basis to put this agenda together. Well, thank you, Paul. And it's been a transformation to really see business leaders like yourself having such a comprehensive overview and really looking at solving the basic issues, in addition to how we move ahead with investment. Ngozi Kandwele, you've always struck me as a very practical, solution-minded leader, and you need to be even more so now as Finance Minister of Nigeria. But just to follow on Paul's point on supply chain, it's estimated by the World Bank, under your old hat, that $4 billion worth of grain is lost in Sub-Saharan Africa post-harvest. It's about 40 percent. And theoretically, we could end hunger in Africa if we could figure out how to capture that and ensure that people have access to it. What do you see from your new vantage point on what's needed to get the kind of investment in the post-harvest infrastructure and to stop the losses of wet maize and in other areas? Well, thank you, Josette. As you've said, this is an area in which I think if we don't all pay attention, then all the other developments that we're trying to do, be it in health, education, and elsewhere, will come to naught. So it's a critical area. And I do believe that even though many of the crisis on food security and farming occur in Africa, that Africa is perfectly capable of feeding itself. But it needs a totally different approach in terms of strategy. And I think many countries now are seeing that and are beginning to transform their agriculture. And the new approach that takes into account sustainability, employment, and other issues that are wrapping is very welcome. Now, I think before we used to focus so much on production. And to some extent, we still do. But that's not the issue. I think the issue is how to transform the whole value chain of agriculture, taking it from research where you have to look at the nature of the crops that are being grown and how to make them more ideal so that you don't lose so much in terms of the losses post-harvest, all the way up the value chain to production, to marketing, to the transportation and infrastructure for storage and for distribution. And I think that transforming our approach into this value chain will make a tremendous difference to dealing with the post-harvest losses. Very recently, a CEO of a major company visited my country, and he made a remark that he was traveling on the roads and didn't see one single cold storage truck on the road. And he said, now I can understand why you are experiencing some of the problems you are in terms of storage losses. And this illustrates why in Nigeria in particular, we've taken a different approach. I mean, Bill and his foundation have been working with us also on the agriculture front to look at the entire value chain crop by crop of the major crops we produce and look at this issue of storage and infrastructure. And how do we then put into the value chain the proper storage facilities, the proper marketing, the proper price information. I think it's a whole chain of events to deal with these losses. So that I think is the strategy that we need to take. And I'm happy to say that some African countries, we have recently Malawi and Rwanda and Bukina Faso that have turned things around. They've doubled production. They've been able to get it to market. They've turned from net food importers to net food exporters, exporting to neighboring countries. So it can be done with a changing strategy, a changing approach, the right investments. Now how? The issue is that government alone cannot do it. And that is why this partnership with the private sector is critical. That is why a linkage between what the small farmers do and what the larger commercial agriculture can do is also vitally important throughout gross schemes because they can help provide that part of the chain that helps with marketing and storage and processing and distribution. I just want to say one thing. I feel that the issue for us in terms of food security is not so much production. I mean, if you take the continent right now, 50% of the 446 million hectares of cultivable land still available in the world is in Africa. And we have some of the lowest indices in terms of use of technology in production, irrigated land, use of fertilizer, improved seeds. You can either see it as a disadvantage or as an opportunity. There is an opportunity there to increase, to improve production. But I feel that that is not quite the issue. The issue is access. The world can feed itself. Africa can feed itself. But the question is that we have vulnerable populations who will not have access. And so how do we then ensure access to these people? And that access, a lot of it lies with infrastructure. How do we get the roads and these facilities and the storage and the distribution to areas where people may not have it? It even lies with peace and conflict. You know, how do you solve problems in areas where there may be conflict so that people you can get access to give them food? So I think this issue of access to the most vulnerable is critical to the issue of food security. Thank you. And after this first round, we're going to go to you to ask very short but direct questions for our panel. And let's try to keep this moving so that we can go to the floor very quickly. Bill Gates, speaking about different approaches in terms of strategy, you have been one who's looked at transforming value chains. And I, for one, am very glad that you've set your strategic sights on the issues of food and nutrition and hunger. At the G20 in Cannes last year, you really lay down, I think, a new way of doing business, which is learning between new partnerships south-south, connecting business and government and others together. How can these new models of collaboration really make a difference to the hungry kid on the ground? Yeah, our foundation is probably best known for the work we do in health. And so I want to make clear why we think these food issues are of such critical importance. For the billion-plus people who don't get enough food, the effects are quite dramatic. In fact, the reason that kids end up dying of malaria and pneumonia is heavily influenced by the fact that they're not properly nourished. And so if we could just solve the food issues alone, it would have a huge impact on health statistics. Even more important and although harder to measure is that when kids are malnourished at a young age, it has this permanent effect on how well they developed. So this is a very urgent problem. My annual letter came out this week, and the majority of it was focused on talking about agriculture and what we can do. Historically, there was a lot of success, so-called Green Revolution, people like Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation. And in a sense that success, I think, led to the complacency of the last 10 years. And it's only in the last three or four years that agriculture has gotten back on the agenda and people are saying, hey, let's get a reasonable level of funding in for this. Unfortunately, that's coincided with the financial crisis. So there were big commitments made at Laquilla. Only a pretty modest portion of those were fulfilled. However, I'd say I'm pretty optimistic about the most critical problem in food security, which is helping out these billion people. I do think raising their productivity is going to be absolutely key. Largely, they're not in the market whatsoever. Whatever they grow is what they're going to be able to eat. As was said, the productivity of these farmers is low enough that the opportunity to double or even triple in many cases that productivity is clearly there. Better inputs, better information, better seed markets in these countries are the key things that will get us there. So despite the fact that the financial crisis means that keeping these aid dollars strong will be very difficult, I'm fairly optimistic that this is coming back on the agenda. It was a significant part of the discussion at the G20. The G20 is very interesting because it brings in the middle income countries. It brings in China and Brazil. And those are both countries who've done such a fantastic job of feeding their own population. So they bring both in a technological sense and in an equity sense, a lot of knowledge, including specific understanding, China and rice, Brazilian tropical soils. So if we can draw them in, there's a lot they can do. We also have a private sector that, although it focused mostly on temperate, rich-world crops, I think there are models of partnership where we can take their intellectual property, get it available with no royalty whatsoever, and do specifically adapted varieties for Asian and African farmers. And we're starting to see some emerging examples of that taking place. A lot of exciting potentials in the science as we're able to piggyback the genetic revolution from human medicine into the crops. We have let the research groups that work on the poor crops, the CGIR groups, be underfunded. They're funded at about half of their peak. Also, if you really look into it, a lot of it now is very kind of short-term funding as opposed to the horizontal funding that's necessary. So I think as we do the G20 in Mexico, we can highlight that, highlight the new models of cooperation. And certainly I know for the foundation this is an area of focus for us. The final group that needs to participate here are the poor countries themselves. And we are seeing a lot of exciting activity there. Nigeria's got a new minister of agriculture, who I think is quite dynamic and ambitious. I've got countries like Ethiopia really willing to step back and relook at how they do things. We have Ghana as a great example that has made the investment and has seen the results. So the different factors are coming together and we can just track the number of interest is the number that don't have enough food. Can we get that from a billion to a half billion eventually to zero? I think with the right focus we can. Thank you. And it's my distinct pleasure to welcome the new director general of the Food and Agricultural Organization, Jose Gottiana de Silva. Jose, you had a major role in the Fomezado program supporting President Lula in what has turned out to be a real transformation of the face of hunger and malnutrition in Brazil. In fact, by a number of studies, Brazil's defeating hunger faster than any nation on earth. You come into a huge organization with a huge mandate to really grapple with these questions, but I'm going to even make it a harder question for you. Are we going to be able to feed the world in 20 years? Are you confident that the tracks are laid or do we need to look at whole new models in doing this? What do we need to do to ensure we're on the right track and there'll be enough food in the world? An easy question to welcome you to Davos. Well, thank you, Jose. I am very confident. We can do it. We can do it and we now we can feed the whole population seven billion that we have. As mentioned, the problem is not the supply side. The problem is the assets to food. People don't have the money to buy the food they need. They don't have the assets to water and land to produce it when they are family, substance farmers. What I believe that it's not only the challenge to improve 70%, as Paul mentioned, the problem is how to do that without destroying the natural research as we are doing now, wasting water, erosion, soil use, destroying forest. That's the challenge. Combine these two agendas, climate change and food security is the challenge. We need to improve production. That's right. We will need to produce 7% more. That's right. We will need to produce much more in Africa where Africa has the natural research to do it. There is where the food is needed. We need to stimulate developing countries to produce more. That's all right. But even though, even if we achieve the goal of 7% more, we are left behind 300 million people. That's something that people don't see at the same time. And so the problem is how to combine food supply with a better assess, stimulated the demand size. Normally, subsistence agriculture does not have the capacity to pull local development. We need to address demand pool models to stimulate local markets. I believe that the key issue is local markets because nowadays, as you mentioned, we lose 30% in storage, transportation, post harvest, and we waste a lot of money also, money and food in transportation costs that are very high nowadays. So if we are able to combine local markets with local circuits of food production and food consumption, it will help a lot to improve not only the food production capacity, but also to have helped access to food. Thank you. Bruno LaMaire, you became a personal hero of mine last year where you really used the power of the G20 with the full support of President Sarkozy to really do practical things, not only on the agriculture issue, but for hungry people. Not only that, something not well known. Bruno LaMaire joined me on the front lines of the devastating drought in the Horn of Africa. We went to Dadaab, the refugee camp to Ajir, Kenya, but in Dadaab, where you have the refugees coming from Somalia, I was with him in a place where many children were being lost, having not had food in weeks, sometimes up to six weeks. He kept his commitment to that trip even though his wife and he welcomed a new child in their own family just three days earlier. And I think that powerful connection with the effects when all of this falls apart into the pillars of power in the G20 really helped move the world. Could you talk about the things that were accomplished there and how we take that forward and make sure we don't lose momentum in future G20s? Thank you, Josette, and thank you for your very kind words. I think that the most important accomplishment of the French chairmanship of the G20 was to put the question of food security and agriculture at the top of the agenda. Agriculture is back on the international agenda at the highest level. And as Bill just said, it is very interesting to have China, India on board and opening the discussion with countries which have to feed more than one billion people each year and which have been able to put some new solutions on the table to meet this challenge. The second point I would like to stress today is that for the first time, we have been able to take some very concrete and specific decisions. And I would like really to insist on this point, on this question of food security, on this question of hungry all over the world, we have to get rid of big statements and big declarations. The point is not to make some big statements and big declarations on hungry in the world. The point is to take decisions and to be able to put on the table practical solutions. This is really the key point. And I'm very proud that all together we have been able to take those decisive decisions and concrete decisions. I would like just to mention some of it. The first decisions, which seems to me maybe the most important one, is the creation of AMIS, Agricultural Market Information System, which is a tool to put some more transparency on commodities markets. And we need transparency if we want to alleviate the situation on commodities markets. The second decisions I would like to stress is the rapid response forum because it is a tool that will be headed by the FAO and the leadership of the FAO and which will put some more coordination in the decisions of the most important countries when we are facing a crisis in food security. And if we are looking back at what happened in Russia due to the drought, when Russia decided to close their borders because of the drought, there was a lack of coordination among political leaders. Thanks to this rapid response forum, I'm confident that we will be able in the very next future to take decisions in a coordinated manner. The third decision I would like to stress is the decisions that we have been able to take at the level of the G20 on research. We search on wheat and also because this is an initiative that will be taken by the next Mexican presidency, we search on corn. Thanks to that kind of programs, we will be able to improve productivity, we will be able to improve nutritional value of the production in a sustainable way. That's why this question of research is so important to me. And the very last decision I would like to quote is the food emergency reserves because we need that kind of tool if we want to prevent food crisis. You just mentioned the dramatic situation, the terrible situation in the Horn of Africa. I really think that if we had that kind of food emergency reserves, the situation would have been really different. For the next Mexican presidency, and I will finish my speech with those three remarks, I think that there are three challenges that are of utmost importance for the next Mexican presidency and for the G20 presidency. The first point is to try to keep everybody on board because we have been able to try to define a new model of cooperation during this G20 when we tried to build concrete decisions on food security. We have been able to work with international organizations, with the FAO, with the WFP. We have been able to put NGOs on board, and we need the support of NGOs. We need the critical aspects of the NGOs. And of course, we have been also able to work with private investors. This is something completely new, and if we want to go the way of fighting against Hungary, we need the support of private investors. And as Paul said, as Bill said, this new partnership between private and public investors is of key importance if we really want to have concrete decisions. And I just wanted to make a hint to the B20 because I really think that this new partnership between B20 and G20 is something very useful. The second challenge is to fully implement the decisions that we have been able to take. Of course, we can open a new set of discussions and a new area of discussions, but we need to implement what has been decided. And my experience as a diplomat, as a political leader, is that the key point is always to concretely implement the decisions that have been taken at the political level. And the third point, of course, is to be aware that we are facing in the United States, in Europe, but especially in Europe, a terrible economic crisis. And there is a risk that the political leaders in Europe go away from this question of food security. We have to keep the focus on this question of food security. We have to keep the focus on this question of Hungary all over the world. And we should never forget that Hungary is not only an economic question, not only a question of policy. Hungary is an economic, but also a moral disaster for the world. Thank you, Bruno, Stefan. If we could just get the risk out of the value train, I think a lot of these problems would be solved. And unfortunately, the words food and risk are deeply embedded. I don't know if farming is the riskiest laden business in the world, but it ranks, I'm sure, very high on the list. Switzerland has done very innovative work. I'm familiar with it because we've partnered together on some weather disaster insurance that has helped farmers in Ethiopia and elsewhere. Can this be scaled up? Can we get some of the risk out of farming so families and the people that rely on the food supply chain aren't devastated over and over again? Thank you, Josette. The short answer would be yes, but I think I have to be a little bit more detailed. So in emerging market, poverty, systemic agriculture, and food security are closely linked. And the start of a solution for all three is farmer security. You have to see a farmer is an entrepreneur who works on an open roof. He's exposed to many risks. One of the most important one is, as you mentioned, extreme weather. Look at this chain. If there's a severe drought, the farmer has no crops, has no income, many give up their business, walk through the cities, and end up in the slums. What can we do as private institutions? Here I talk now to the financial institutions to help the farmer to stay in the land and do what all the colleagues have said, produce food. Of course, and I think Ngozi said this, you need access, but you also need access to financial markets. You need access to risk financing capacities. And what are the instruments which are usually available? It's access to credit, access to insurance and reinsurance, but also access to investment, to equity investment in this food chain. And sometimes even, which is helpful to start it, is access to some sort of subsidies. May I give you perhaps one example to demonstrate this works already, and the only thing we have now to do is scaling this up, because the tools are there. I take this example you mentioned, we worked together in Ethiopia. In 2008, we started with a project which has some innovating parts in it. First of all, cash poor farmers could pay for the drought insurance with their labor, but it was a very specific labor. What they did, they established new irrigation systems or wells, so this makes their community more resilient against weather impact. And at the beginning in 2008, only 200 farmers were in this program. Up to now, more than 30,000 farmers are in this project, and we are now working under the so-called R4 project to scale this first now in Ethiopia to many, many thousands, and then also in other African countries, or other countries, even outside Africa. Well, thank you. I think we've given you enough topics here to step in. Do we have any hands up to ask questions? Please identify yourself and make the questions direct. And even if he didn't raise his hand, I was going to go to David Beckman, a bread for the world first. And then we'll go back there. Well, my question, maybe I can ask you, Josette or Mr. Graciano de Silva. It seems to me that the main issue is how do you build political will? Because for 40 or 50 years, we've had lots of high-level statements about the feasibility of ending hunger in the world. And people have said over and over again, all we need is the political will to do it. How do you build that political will in countries? Josette, you've been involved in seeing how countries around the world might build the necessary commitment. And Mr. Graciano de Silva, Brazil is maybe the leading example of a country that within your own politics managed to build national will to reduce hunger. I'm interested in your reflections on how you get the commitment, sustained commitment to get the job done. Well, I'm going to pass this to the politicians on our panel, but also Jose. But I would just say I was recently in Brazil with Jose. We were at Brazil's conference on food security. I think every governor from around Brazil was their local officials. And I have never seen people, thousands of people, more on fire about ending hunger. It was imbued through the entire political system that this was a national goal. And people were excited about the possibility, but also feeling the pressure to change those numbers for Brazil. And I was struck how deeply this was imbued in Brazil. How did that change? Because it certainly wasn't there a decade ago. Yeah. In fact, there has been a big change. I would say that the lessons that we can get from Brazilian experience, for sure, we need this political commitment to get hunger. But to achieve it, it's very important to demonstrate that we can do it in a very quickly way. And that was one of the most important points. We have been able to scale up good practice that were locally to a national level, and to improve them very quickly, not to make experiments, not making any. There was a decision made. There was a budget available, and we started to implement it. And to do it as the government does not have the proper structure to do it, we asked for the partnerships among civil society, private sector, church, football team, everybody. So this was because the greatest problem in the beginning of the hunger combat programs is to find the people that are hungry, because they are invisible. Sometimes you don't have even a number to address a bank account for them or something like that, even are registered where to find them. So civil society involvement is a key issue to quick, improve, and scale up local programs. The second point I would highlight is that hunger combat needs practical measures, as Bruno mentioned. It's not something difficult to do. We are not talking about sending a man to a moon or something like that. It's practical things that are needed. So build on local experience that already the people knows how to do it, facilitate this commitment, and facilitate to bring partnerships with local institutions that are, again, very important. And I would like to address a term, perhaps a lesson or important issue, that hunger is an emergency issue. But you cannot address only this emergency situation, because the environment that produce hunger, the causes, the structure things that are there will remain there. So when you start an action, you need to address both at the same times and try to bring synergies between different programs. Let me give an example. So we started improving family farmers. But family farmers do not have a sex to market because people don't buy foods locally. They don't have a push as power. So cash transfer problems help you to bridge these two supply sites, stimulate production, and also to stimulate local markets. Cash transfer programs in Brazil were key for the success of the hunger zero program. Thank you. I'm just going to ask if we can take two or three questions together, and then we'll open it up. And Bruno and Ngozi, if you want to jump in on this question, that was just asked also. We have one back here. Schengen Fan, I was going to call on you if you didn't put your hand up, and then we'll take this third one, and then we'll come to the whole panel. Please introduce yourself. Thank you. My name is François Meinberg. I'm working for an NGO called the Bern Declaration based in Switzerland. I haven't heard two words this morning, and I just wonder if the panelists believe that they are not an issue if we speak about food security. The first word is biofuels. The possible concurrence producing biofuels and producing foods, concurrence for water, concurrence for soil, and so on. And the other word is food speculation. Food speculation and price volatility. Is this also not an issue? Thank you very much. Thank you. Please. Thanks. Frank Kane from the National Newspaper of Abu Dhabi. I'd like to ask the businessman on the panel really whether there's been a failure of international capitalism here again in that we seem to not to have bridged an obvious gap in demand and supply. On the one hand, there is one billion people who are going hungry. On the other, Mr. Pullman tells us that investment in food and agriculture produces the highest return possible of any investment. Why haven't the two come together? Has this been a critical failure of capitalism? Thank you. Excellent questions. Schengen? Thank you, Josette. I'm a Schengen fan from International Food Policy Research Institute, part of the CGI research group. Many of you have mentioned about supporting a country-led, country-driven program. But one of the problems we are facing is the lack of country capacity to support, to build a country's capacity. I don't know whether the global leaders in food security can really re-engage the capacity building to build the countries to need to drive and to own their development programs. Excellent. And just one last one here. My name is Khaled. I'm from UAE. We can't hear you. My name is Khaled. I'm from UAE. And we thank all the distinguished panel for the excellent briefing. But there is something which is called accessibility, availability, and affordability of the food. Accessibility, is it possible to get it in local or international? Availability, it is available in the right way, and the right quantity, and the right time. But the most important is the affordability, you know? His Excellency Garaziano, he said that is about almost 300 million. Or is it affordable for the people to buy it from the local market? So can we, you know, give enough quantity for the poor people to buy it and to be affordable? This is my question. Excellent question. Political, oil, biofuels, speculation, failure of capitalism, building country capacities, accessibility, affordability. We're just going to go through. Who wants to jump in first, Bill? Well, no one ever said that capitalism solves everything. The two things it's known to have a problem with. First is funding research and innovation. You're always underfunded because the risk taker can't capture anywhere near the full benefit. And the other is the doing things for the poorest. The voice of the poor in a market-based system is very feeble. And so certainly in health, for things like, you know, were we working on a malaria vaccine or here in agriculture, in terms of particularly the crops of Africa, the work that's gone into cassava, cassava diseases, the work that's gone into sorghum is way, way less than you would do if you were optimizing human welfare. But it's simply there's no market for that. And so that's where government flants, we always have to come in. It can never be done by price-based mechanism. Although you want to bring in the actors who have competence. And so you've got to effectively create some sort of price signal for them. Excellent. Paul? Yeah, on the failure of capitalism. And we don't disagree. I think the failure of capitalism is a little bit simple on all those things we're discussing in Davos. There's a failure of the system to function. What is very important here is property rights, for example. Business doesn't get involved in property rights. The governments need to figure a lot of these things out. Rules of law. Many of the countries in Africa were able to feed themselves. Government changed and the feeding changed. R&D protection is very important for bringing in technology. The rights of women, which are in some countries more recognized than others. Functioning of markets, not having a dough around or other restrictions, export restrictions we've seen from Russia, for example, on grain export. So what we're not advocating here, which is very important, it's not them and us and business or government. For the first time we have an opportunity when the issue becomes far more pertinent to just work together, to work together to find the solution. And that is where, for example, the project like New Efficient for Agriculture comes in and why it's so powerful because it takes the holistic approach that all the members of the panel have been talking about. And I think it is, we are past the time now to say, you know, this group of people or that group of stakeholders has led us down. The issue is far more complex than it needs to be solved at a different level, which is that cooperation we're talking about. We're going to go to Ngozi, Stefan, Bruno, and then we're going to have Jose wrap up, because we're only in five minutes. So Ngozi and then... I'd like to put a little bit more optimism to the question whether we get the financial market interested in this type of production. There are at the moment only specialists in this business. Insurance companies and re-insurance companies are in... I summarize in one sentence what happens in India and China. It was roughly 100 million insurance premium five to eight years ago, today we had three billion both countries together. For our companies with three, we are mainly a leader in this company in both working with the government, and we have more than 100 million dollars premium there, and we earn money. So the key risk is for all investors and all those who invest in the value chain in stock and everything, they would like to get rid of the risk of weather. And this is why we invest a lot of intelligence now, for example, together with the IFC to create indices, because if this innovation is there for all the countries, for all the specific items, people can invest and can ensure their credits or their investment against this impact. And this is the moment you get money from the financial market. Thank you, Ngozi. Comment on two quick comments on political will and country capacity. I think the food price crisis of 2008 was a watershed moment that woke many countries up and has contributed tremendously to political will at the country level to try and take care of this situation because of the issue of price volatility. So you take my country, for example, we import six to seven billion dollars worth of food that we can produce. It's rice, it's wheat for which we can substitute cassava, it's sugar, and fish. These are all products we can produce. This thing woke us up to say, look, not only can we feed ourselves, but we can feed neighboring countries also depend on us, like the Sahel, Niger, Mali, where there are some issues now. So that plus a capable leader, I mean, Bill talked about a new agricultural minister who is tremendously exciting, has put forward a very specific plan of crop by crop by which we can not only substitute the six to seven billion, but we can export 10 billion dollars a year, gaining back our position that we had in 1961. So a capable leader and then, you know, infusing the whole system with this will and this excitement that they have in Brazil that we can do it and then bringing the partnerships together with the private sector, the foundations. I think this is what builds the momentum. Now, my last comment is that when you do that, you do then need international community to also step up. I mean, for Nigeria, I think, you know, working with the partners we have, we can do it. But for other countries that have put down specific plans and have the political will through the GAFC, the Global Food Security Program, they're expecting the support of the international community to do this. And when that is not forthcoming, it's also a bit of a letdown. So we need to bring all parties together to the table. Thank you, Bruno. Two very short comments. The first one, the question of prices volatility, just to insist on the fact that this was at the core of the decisions and the discussions among G20 leaders. And the fact that we improve transparency, the fact that we insisted on the production, improving production are very specific answers to this question of prices volatility. And I would like also to mention the risk hedging and insurance instruments that have been created by the World Bank. And I would like to commend Bob Zelig for the tremendous job he has made to put these new instruments on the table, which are very specific answers to this question of prices volatility, because I share your view. This is a key point for the farmers all over the world. Second remark on the question of political will, there is the political will. And I'm quite confident that with the Mexican presidency, there will be a very strong political will to go the way of fighting against Hungary all over the world. There is a key point, which is the financial support to the practical measures. And we have to keep in mind that developed countries are facing a huge debt crisis, which means that we have to invent new financial tools, new financial support. And the fact that Paul and Bill are attending this roundtable show that we are able to find new financial tools to support those practical measures. Thank you. Jose, bring it all home, not to put too much pressure on you. Well, I will address only the last point, because I found very important this, how to afford the poor's people to buy the food they need. I will start with the 75 percent of the poor's or the poor's nowadays living rural areas. Let's say three out of four, those people that are a nurture, hunger, already living in rural areas. And most of them are farmers, very small farmers. So I would say that at least three main actions. The first one is to better access to natural reserves. Land and water are critical, especially in Asia and Africa. Second, better wage and better employment. Most of the poor's work as temporary workers in agriculture or other sectors. And the salary that they receive is very low, especially when there are women. It's very, very low. Third, I would say that we need to bring the food price down. And the way to bring food price down nowadays, even speculation, goes to the fact that production and demand are very tight. So our stocks are very low. We need to improve production, but also we need to improve stocks. Stocks to deal with emergencies, but stocks also to give support to the prices, not to be so vulnerable to a country ban or a draw in some area, et cetera. We need better stocks. And stocks regulation is something that we need global institutions to deal with. And it's part of what Bruno said about rapid response management. We need to deal with stocks. Thank you. I think we actually touched on every question. This will be my last panel at Davos in my role as head of the World Food Program. My term ends in April and I'll be joining the World Economic Forum as Vice Chair. But I just want to take a moment just to say a special thanks to Bill Gates and the Howard Buffett Foundation that's represented here for the support for purchasing for progress. Today, WFP buys 80% of the food we buy for Africa in Africa from poor farmers in Africa and throughout the world and this type of innovation and making them part of the solution and value chain. The purchasing for progress looks specifically at farmers who really would not have a chance to interact with the market, so a subsection of really, and it's helping transform the face of hunger in some communities. I want to thank you, Paul, because there is a group of CEOs who's changing the way we do business on food and nutrition security and also Stefan. This is, I've got our band of brothers and Dutch brand of brothers, Fike and Peter Bacher and the people here and a lot of it happened at Davos. And I want to thank you, Ngozi, Jose and then Bruno for moving the world to get behind this. We are on different ground than we were in 2008. When the food crisis hit and half the food drained from this cup for the many, many millions, hundreds of millions of people in the world to live on a dollar 25 a day, I didn't know who to call. And today we are organized and we are focused and countries like Saudi Arabia and the Brick Nations are playing a major role not only in learning but contributing to the generosity of Europe, US, Japan, Australia and others, Canada who've really stood behind this issue. So I'm feeling optimistic. I don't believe it will be in a Malthusian nightmare and I promise that we'll keep this issue very much alive with Lisa and her team here at the Forum in the future. Thank you. I'm going to interrupt you because you should not thank us, but I think we're going to speak for the panel because the dedication and the devotion you've brought to the World Food Program, putting the interest of many always ahead of your own, bringing the cup to everybody's attention. We should be thanking you because that's why we're sitting here. And I would say we can have lots more cups of chiseled.