 and I want to make two brief comments in addition to what has been said before. One is that you can see now that this type of exercise is also very useful to make scientists think in a structured manner beyond their own areas of expertise or their own discipline of research. So that this other learning exercise for us and also I believe is an exercise that can stimulate more interdisciplinary thinking and also than also interdisciplinary work. And the second comment I want to make is by doing it the way Bas has shown we identify a lot of gaps in our knowledge too. In addition to answering the question where should we invest in sort of research priorities from a product point of view or from a dissemination point of view we also get to know a lot more now in terms of what we don't know. I think I'm not sure if I remember the Donald Rumsfeld's sentence. We know, we don't know, we don't know something very complicated of that kind. The known unknowns and the unknown knowns and these kind of things. Okay, but please some questions. We'll start right there. I'm A.M. of the media. It's excellent to know that in better education water management it's possible to get 15 to 30% Gs. But how would the Institute of Rainwater Harvesting and the efficient water use underestimate situations? Yes, there are many solutions. I just showed one and in our rain-fed conditions we also have a range of potential solutions both in terms of for example drought tolerant varieties but also things of using existing rainfall more efficiently. We haven't looked specifically for rice into possible impact of rainwater harvesting but it's definitely a proven technology certainly for non-rice crops and it may be something that we need to run through this process as well. Thank you very much for that one, that addition. Okay, David. The poverty marketing exercise that was done for Bangladesh five or ten years ago looked at the impact of some of the technologies and also some of the constraints to rice production and in particular I think it focused on the instance of drought and submergence. And it found that in poor rural households, say for drought the first year of drought had a certain level of effect for which households had a compensatory mechanism but if that was followed by a second year of drought then that knocked households back to a position where they couldn't readily recover and capital had been sold, children had been taken out of school, etc. And when we look at the costs and the benefits I mean one thing that we have sort of discussed is how can we bring in some of these benefits to technologies in as much as drought tolerance or tolerance to submergence could be captured in ways that are so much more reflective of the impact on given households. I mean how could that sort of be built into this sort of exercise? I will enlist the help of David and maybe he will touch upon that in his next presentation. We are trying to capture other effects that don't directly feed into our calculation scheme. Here's just one example and that's more environmental effects of a technology like you free up what other uses are effects on ecosystem services, methane emissions. For now we park them and then try to quantify them as best as can and work it through the system. The particular issue of impacts on poverty alleviation I think it's better to wait until David has given his presentation and then we come back to that if that's okay with you David. Because I think it will be addressed so we can save some time. Other questions on this presentation? If that is not the case and thank you again Buss and we'll move on to the final presentation which will be given by David Wright.