 I am Julie Merin. I am a postdoctoral researcher at the Caille-Leuven research group of urbanism and architecture. I think it was maybe in 2014, when this term was really popping up with Jabert in Rotterdam. But then, of course, what falls under the umbrella of urban metabolism I had been dealing with before, but I think it was from there on that really this label of urban metabolism. I think we've talked about it already a lot. It's difficult to really define what is urban metabolism, because every discipline uses it in different ways, or I think in this one text, this Castan Broto, she says, or he says that all the disciplines who use it use it to push the boundaries of their own discipline. So maybe to think of then how I use it in urban landscape design would be not really to push the boundaries of that own discipline, but to employ urban landscape design to find bridges between different disciplines and integrate that in urban landscape design. So that would be, I think, how I use it to facilitate transdisciplinary dialogues through forward-looking urban landscape design. There's, of course, also the industrial ecology approach, which is quite clear in how quantitative modeling to optimize urban metabolism. Well, I guess it depends on the researchers and the fields that you're talking to, I would say. Well, urban metabolism in itself may be not so much, but sometimes I think in practice, et cetera, circular economy is more interchangeably used for anything that has to do with making the urban metabolism circular. Yeah, difficult to answer. Yes, the metabolism studies in Antwerp, et cetera, yes, so in that sense, definitely, yeah. Yes, I do feel that any assignment now, any tender asking for design research or design explorations, is incorporating notions of urban metabolism, but then I would say the terminology used is more circularity or circular economy. I do have the feeling that most of us from the network are involved also in practical work, so being advisors in certain projects that are commissioned by municipalities or other governmental agencies. So in that sense, I think this exchange is quite productive in terms of that it aims to transfer what we discuss internally to concrete projects. Yeah, I do think that the learning by doing approach is key here because it's such, as we said before, a wicked problem to deal with. So this iterative work between testing it in cases, bringing disciplines together and at the same time reflecting on it more in an academic way. I do have the feeling that it moves forward. One thing that I think maybe is missing to even accelerate that more is that after the designing with flows workshop, which was very well documented and put online, et cetera, all the other work that was initiated by OVAM in terms of design research has not really found a way to be broadcasted and widely dispersed and maybe that would even support more the distribution and the advancement of what we are doing. I think there's a box where it could perfectly fit in. If you look at circular flounders, they have these different tracks, circular economy that is more focusing on innovation within business, et cetera. But then you also have the track of the circular city. And there's quite some interesting things around Reburg, which certain infrastructures, circular infrastructures, biogas, insulation, et cetera, our research around that is broadcasted, but I do feel that everything that happened in the designing with flows workshop and the research on metabolism in Antwerp, in Brussels, et cetera, could go into that track, not as, let's say, a final solution, but as an exercise where a lot of thought was put in, a lot of data was gathered, and to advance this question of what is a circular city. You did already a great effort with building out the network and creating the group communication, et cetera. So I see that really as a first step in what eventually would be ideal if you would also have a physical space where you can meet each other, work on your own or find collaborations, have exchanges over coffee that maybe lead to projects. Yeah, that would be, I think, interesting with the group that you've assembled as a first step as a chair. So what I feel is, I'm speaking from the urban design perspective and what's happening in terms of design research around metabolism and circular economy, which is really a lot. You see a lot of calls for design research around circular economy. Many policy plans now with the new legislation as well where cities really want to get this circular economy landing in their cities and develop their cities around that concept, also connected to spatial development. But what I do feel is that there's so many studies, so many things happening that we don't take enough time to really sit back and reflect on the trajectories that we have accomplished. And there I think there's a lot of lessons to draw, a lot of things we can already learn and transfer to next sessions. But I do feel that the momentum is more okay, a new study, a new study, a new study and that studying the results of the studies is a study in itself that could be very, very valuable to really learn from it. As a collective learning trajectory, like reflecting on since maybe the designing with flows workshops, all the studies that have been done, it's often the same people that have been involved, so to really structure a learning process around that. Well, that's part of this learning, this question. That's I think an important question because every study has a big report in the end, which is probably most which has a lot of complexities embedded and I'm not sure if all these complexities come across for people who weren't involved in actual trajectory, because there's so much learned across this trajectory. So I think it's also a challenge for us to start thinking about then how to then have develop like a communication strategy or is it as you say like a page flow or a forum or something very open that is not saying this is how circular antwerp should be, but this is how the question was approached, that is what we got out of it, those are the takeaways, this is what went maybe not ideal and then move from there both in terms of the roles of the designers but also of the many, many people sitting around the table wearing different hats, having different expectations.