 Welcome, everyone. Good morning, good afternoon, good evening to all our global participants. Welcome to this high level roundtable on the impact of livestock research on sustainable development, looking back to accelerate future food system transformation, much of which is documented in a recently released 700 page book. You can see it here to be formally launched next month. Our aim in today's roundtable is to get you excited and impressed by the results of the investment in livestock research for development and to explore how to build on that for the future. We're really pleased that you've joined us. My name is Shirley Tara Wally. I'm assistant director general at Hillary, and I'll be moderating the opening session and the closing session that will look into the future and the closing session. And in between, we will have two other panels that will explore the impacts of over four decades of livestock research. The first exploring what livestock research has delivered, and the second getting into some of those wider development impacts. Before we get into that the real stuff of it. Let me just give you four tech tips, put your full name and organization in your zoom. You'll see some questions and comments in the chat as we go through today's session. Please feel free to join that conversation. This session is being recorded the audio the video and the chat. And if you have a private chat that will be seen by the organizers. If you find you have a problem you can't see you can't hear close your zoom restart and also close your other programs. Before we get going, let me acknowledge the presence of officials from illies to host countries, State Minister Regasso Fikra from Ethiopia and the PS for livestock Harry Kim tie from Kenya. First, we're really pleased that ill repatriant and Nobel Prize Laureate Professor Peter Doherty has shared with us a video message to get us underway. Welcome to this online round table on the impact of life Scott research on sustainable development. This is an enormously important topic that's very close to my heart. My name is Peter Doherty. I'm trained originally as a veteran area and then due to various circumstances made my reputation in basic immunology research and was awarded a Nobel Prize for that. But among the achievements that I regard as particularly significant serving for a significant time, I think for two terms, on the board of what was the ill read library and Nairobi, which is now of course, the ill read combining with the ill call laboratory that was in as a bubble. That was a wonderful experience coming to Nairobi regularly, working with colleagues from across the world, including many wonderful colleagues from Africa, and experiencing what was required to help people and to help sustainable societies exist in that type of context. It's impossible to be in Africa without realizing the enormous importance of livestock in so many aspects of culture and development and food resource for the people. Ill read was a laboratory and that is to some extent built in to the model. It did a wonderful job, I believe, in building capacity in molecular science in Africa. Scientists from many African countries and from Europe and America went back eventually to various institutions where they established very strong programs and have had a very significant influence on the progress of livestock research in general. The various problems that ill read tackle. In some senses, they were too difficult trivenous amiasis and thylareosis, and they couldn't readily be solved using the types of approaches that we used initially, but the Institute evolved. It evolved to follow different lines, genetic lines, for instance, looking at livestock resources, and it has evolved further to take a somewhat broader remit. These are enormously important institutions supported by the CGI network. They depend on the generosity of donor and donor nations, and they are a wonderful investment for our future as human beings across this diverse and wonderful planet. I think building capacity in Africa that can't be anything more important or anything that should be closer to our motives. Thank you. Thank you. What a great start. We're really grateful that Peter took the time to record and send that message to us. Now before we get into the panel discussions, we will hear some opening remarks. We have three speakers in this section. Let me introduce them all together, and then we'll hear from each of them in turn. Really pleased to welcome Jonathan Wadsworth, who is the lead agriculture specialist at the World Bank and principal advisor to the chair of the CJIR system council. Welcome Jonathan. We also have online the current Ilri board chair, Elsa Marano, who is Associate Vice Chancellor, Strategic Academic Initiatives at Texas A&M University, Agriculture and Life Sciences. And we have Jimmy Smith, Ilri Director General, who's joining us today from Ethiopia, from Ilris campus in Ethiopia. So let's begin with Jonathan. Jonathan, please go ahead. Thank you very much and welcome to everybody. On behalf of Jürgen Vogeli, I'd like to welcome everybody who's participating to this highly topical and I think very timely roundtable on the impact of livestock research on sustainable development. Looking back to accelerate future food system transformation, it's going to be an exciting roundtable, I'm very sure. Jürgen sent his apologies and asked me to thank Jimmy and Elsa for the invitation and for also asking the bank to co-host. It's an honour and it's a privilege for me personally to represent the bank and even more personally. It's a huge pleasure to revisit my livestock roots and friends. Livestock, as probably everybody knows on this call is a fundamental part of the global food system. Livestock contributes 40% of the global value of agricultural output and some 1.3 billion people depend directly on animals for their livelihoods and nutrition security. Livestock's multiple roles are especially important for poor farming households and communities. So this book launched today is really timely. It's an honest and detailed examination of 45 years worth of research efforts. And it provides valuable lessons on which to base future future actions. This is really important at this moment in time. I'm not shy away from addressing failures and mistakes. And it helps understand the contradiction between research with strong scientific impact, yet only weak development impact, which is ultimately the primary concern of donors and investors. It explains how context matters. Livestock revolution, as predicted by Chris Delgado and colleagues, is happening. Increasing affluence, changing diets and population growth have made livestock one of the fastest growing agricultural sectors in middle and low income countries. So it's therefore not surprising that requests for World Bank support to livestock have increased almost fivefold over the past decade. This is the only 1.9 billion invested in active livestock projects. However, investment in livestock is not without its critics. Currently, the livestock sector accounts for 15% of global greenhouse gas emissions, and the bank is committed to finding ways of reducing the carbon footprint of livestock by ensuring mitigation and adaptation measures are built into operations from the very start. Fortunately, researching collaboration with CJIR has been fundamental in developing methods to quantify, measure and track climate co-benefits across all the banks lending portfolio, currently running at over 60% for livestock projects. Changes in context inevitably affect changes in opportunities and priorities. CJIR centres were established in the Green Revolution era or post-Green Revolution era in that period of change, which is believed to have saved the lives of a billion people. That was a third of the world's population at the time. This context simplified priority setting. Food supply was all important. And it was interesting to read in the book that ILRAD was founded on just two priorities. East coast fever and typhonic viruses, which in the words of the book, simplified the definition of research. Fast forward to today, we find ourselves dealing with many more issues and priorities. We have 17 interacting SDGs and all of them are priorities. Complexity makes it hard to prioritize, but let's not confuse priority with urgency. Some priorities are more urgent than others and context matters more than ever. Our new context is defined by climate change and has a name, the Anthropocene epoch. Quite simply, if we don't urgently get a grip on climate change, many other priorities will quickly become redundant. Food stock production is a major component of a global food and agriculture system and also has great potential to deliver a triple win of increased productivity, reduced emissions and carbon sequestration. We must address livestock from a broader perspective than before. It's not just about live weight gain or milk for cow anymore. The global context has changed and so must our approaches to research, development and innovation. One excellent example is a program involving several research teams, including the CJIR livestock program and investors including the World Bank, which has shown how livestock can achieve that triple win at landscape scale. The Columbia mainstreaming sustainable cattle ranching project, which converted 32,000 hectares of degraded land to silver pastoral systems. Not only did milk yields increase, but sustainable stocking rates also went up and costs of production went down. At the same time, over a million tons of CO2 equivalent were captured and biodiversity was improved. This is a pilot program on 32,000 hectares, but just illustrates the potential for livestock to become a big part of the solution rather than constantly being criticized as a big part of the problem. In closing, I'd like to quote from the next to last page of the book. I didn't read all the book, but I managed to get to the last chapter, which was absolutely fascinating. In the future, and I will be able to adapt to the new one CJIR context. Jimmy Smith and his colleagues right. Research programs and projects are increasingly being conceptualized by starting with the end in mind. This means we start by identifying the development challenge we want to meet the impact we want to make, where and on whom. Then we work back to what outcomes are required to achieve this, what research outputs are needed to produce those outcomes and what research activities and resources are needed to produce these outputs. I can find no better words to kick off this round table and hope that net zero carbon livestock is prominent prominently on the agenda. Thank you. Thank you very much Jonathan. Thank you for the same introduction and yes we are really pleased to have the chance to co host with the World Bank. Thanks to you to yoga and and your colleagues for all the support. Let me now invite Elsa Marano to give her opening remarks Elsa, you're there. I am. Well hello everyone and. Thank you to our Wally for this opportunity on your leadership at Elri. And Jonathan thank you for your very inspirational words, sir, and thank you especially for the support that the World Bank has provided you'll read and the CGI are as a whole over the years actually. You may know that the first CGI our secretariat was hosted by the World Bank, showing the great commitment that the bank has for the application of science for the betterment of people across the world. Well the book that is a focus of our discussions today is obviously about the impacts that he has made as one of the leading livestock research Institute, if not the leading livestock research Institute of the world. But let us realize that it is also about the systems wide approach that the CGI are represents. Several CGI are centers have played specific roles in advancing the science of livestock, not just Elri, having been involved in developing approaches that have helped integrate livestock crops, and civil pastoral systems. Well this book demonstrates how investments made by the donor community in agriculture research and development, help us to see beyond short term horizons truly making a difference in the long term. In fact, recent study on the impact of the $60 billion investment that donors have made in the CGI are over the past 50 years as returned at 10 fold benefit 10 to one. Well I would like to point out that this year also marks the 50th anniversary of the CGI are so the timing of the publishing of this book is perfect. As all of you know the CGI are had its start from the green revolution as was mentioned, which certainly is a science based movement, which the great Dr. Norman Borlaug was a key part of, and those of us who knew him personally continue to be amazed at his impact. It has focused on developing solutions to important challenges. Now, of course in the 21st century, including those that have been posed by the interconnectedness of health environment and social inclusion. These and other challenges the CGI arch mission is committed to deliver science based solutions through innovations that will help transform food, land and water systems, especially now, given the climate crisis that we're experiencing. My own research and policy career has focused on food safety so I'm excited to to hear. Dr dealier grace today, and I am very pleased to see how it really has elevated the topic of food safety to a central position within the CGI or agenda. In fact, we see food safety and at least two of the proposed one CGI research initiatives, the one on one health, as well as sustainable urban and peri urban every food systems. In addition, the work of Hillary is also part of many of the other CGI research initiatives, including the one that focuses on livestock climate and systems resilience, and another one on the role of livestock on livelihoods and nutrition. All of these programs show the integrated nature of the research conducted by CGI are centers, which has transitioned from a sole focus on crops and commodities, which was the tradition to tackling important development challenges that impact health through a systems approach. It is the type of research conducted by ill reaction the and other centers that is encapsulated in the new one CG IR research strategy and organizational structure. One CG IR is a dynamic reformulation of the CG IR partnerships, the knowledge base the assets the global presence with the goal of enhancing integration and impacts in the face of the interdependent challenges that I mentioned, which are facing our world. As chair of the Board of Trustees of Hillary I am extremely proud of the work conducted by our scientists. And so I'm very excited about this book. I'm also very interested to hear from key development stakeholders about the impacts that livestock research research has had, and where the challenges posed by food nutrition health, climate and equity lie. So all these comments made. I want to thank you again Dr Taro Wally. And I will give it back to you. Thank you. Thanks very much indeed. Also, and for your leadership from the top of the board there. Let's conclude this opening segment by hearing from Jimmy. Jimmy Smith director general. I hope he's there. Yes. Great. Very surely distinguished ladies and gentlemen. Let me join out as an expressing my appreciation to all who have joined today for their interest in participation. Over the past 18 years, the international community invested more than $1.8 billion in global livestock research. Not only in Hillary, but most of it. Some also went to a quarter and to see it. This book helps to highlight how that funding was spent, and the impact it has had on development, our science contribution and building research capacity of professionals and institutions. Thank you so much for your support on me to thank all those donors past and present for their support without which the work embodied in this book could not have been accomplished. The book reviews for five years 1973 to 2018 of major achievements. And impacts generated by the International Lifestyle Research Institute, and it's two predecessors. The International Lifestyle Center for Africa and the International Laboratory for Research and Animal Diseases. And of course, our many partners. Some have been critical about why spend time on publishing this book. I've been asked many times, why spend the time recounting the past when we should be focusing on the future. Well, for us, this book attempts some measure of accountability to our donors who made these investments. This is an attempt to demonstrate and differentiate the impacts of livestock research, which are far more diffused than perhaps our crop crop counterparts, where a single variety and new variety of rice or maize can make a big impact. It is a compilation to facilitate access to the findings, and therefore an effort to get these findings into wider use. It will also allow us to look at the future, not reinvent the wheel, but build on the research accomplishments of the past. Ilri has expanded from its original focus in Africa of its two predecessors, and now have offices across South and Southeast Asia and Africa. I'm indebted to the two host institutions which host our headquarters in Kenya and Ethiopia. Let me give way to the panels that Shirley referred to, to explore the subjects of livestock and its imparts. But it would be remiss of me. I did so before acknowledging the contributions of previous board chairs and members and previous director generals. It would also be remiss of me if I did not recognize as well the many contributors to this book. All the contributing authors, and in particular the lead editors of John McIntyre and Delia Grace Randall and co-editors, Susan Macmillan and others at Ilri who have done so. So, let me turn it back to Shirley with a big thank you to all of you for joining. I will come back at the end of it or attempt a brief wrap up. Thank you very much. Thank you so much, Jimmy. Thank you, Elsa. Thank you, Jonathan. You've set the scene really well for what I'm sure will be a really stimulating series of discussions. To start that off, I'm really pleased to invite Brian Perry to introduce and moderate the first panel, which will be looking at what have been the impacts of livestock research. Today, Emeritus Fellow Brian has 50 years of experience, seeking solutions to improve health and well-being of livestock and the systems they inhabit in lower middle income countries. He led epidemiology research at Ilri for some 20 years, and latterly has had several engagements with the UN and bilateral funding agencies, as well as holding honorary professorships from Oxford and Edinburgh universities. I think with that, the panel will not get away lightly. So, Brian, that's over to you. Well, good afternoon, everybody. I do hope you can hear me well and it is indeed a pleasure to be asked to coordinate this discussion. And Shirley, thank you very much. Jimmy, also thank you very much for your introductory words. We've got three people on this panel. It would be nice to, we can see them. We've got John McIntyre to start with, and John McIntyre, who I will say a few more words about in a minute. We've got Michael Peters. Michael Peters, particularly from the forager's side, and I'll say a little bit more about them when I ask them specific questions. And we have Delia Grace Randolph, who has just moved from out of Africa to the United Kingdom. So let me start off with John. John McIntyre involved for, he said for, he says many, many years. John, you have come from, you've been involved in research. So you have a background in the CG system. So you've seen the system side of it. You've been involved in IFPRI, ICRASAT, and ILRI. So I think you were a director of research. And also at the country level, you had Mexico, Bangladesh, Côte d'Ivoire, and other countries on the ground with World Bank and other. So you have a broad comment on this research impact. It's relevant across CG systems and across the countries you've done. How relevant is this book that you have done a fantastic job in leading the editing of how relevant is it to the both the systems that you've been with and also the countries that you have worked in? Thank you, Brian. The book is most relevant for defining the kinds of priorities for the future based upon what has and what has not worked in the past. At the beginning of ILCA and ILRAD half a century ago. Doc systems mainly in Africa, but also in Central Asia and Latin America were not terribly well understood, and were often understood through the filter of what I should call colonial biases in understanding of how these systems work and what their objectives were and what their constraints were. At the same time, the work that has been done has rejected possible solutions, notably the vaccine solutions for trypanosomiasis to a lesser extent East Coast fever. And it is created a much greater understanding of the rationale and efficiency of extensive pastoral systems and of the role of livestock and mixed farming systems that is where mixed farming systems being those where crops and livestock are held on the same enterprise, notably through the provision of sole fertility inputs, power and savings investment vehicles for small farmers. So you're the bottom line, which is a very nice clear statement, John, you're saying that impact assessment has been the one of the key measures that has helped. I mean, how do you, when you look back, Phil Saunton, who may be involved in this meeting, he did an impact assessment of the roles of ILCA and ILRAD between 1975 and 1998. He looked at adoption, economic impact, social environmental impact and the methodology of tools. How does his assessment then done and he was appointed as the sort of impact assessment person? How does that approach differ? How has yours built on that approach and added to it? So, the Fontana Dera work was published in about 1998 and covered what at the time were existing impact studies done under the leadership of ILCA and ILRAD and then for a brief time when ILRAD was created early in 1995. It focused on terpenisomiasis control, largely through the use of drugs, not through the use of vaccine, obviously, and land management, soil fertility, other animal health issues. Tree Forge was a notable area where Thornton worked himself personally on impact. So that work covered roughly the first half of the three institutions, the first half of their existence since about 1970. And what we have done is updated the existing studies, the studies that panned out with real impact as compiled by Thornton and Odero and brought them up to date with a more extensive literature review based on work that has evolved since the first half of the two institutions and then carried out in the second half in the existence of Illry. OK, thank you very much. So it's an updating, but I think it's a little bit more than that. So some comment earlier on was about the reason for this book, which is partly a big thank you to the donors. It's accountability and documentation. But my question now to turn to Delia. Delia, in your background, you are an epidemiologist. You've been an epidemiologist for many years in the field working at Illry. You are also specializing in blocks and things like this. How is the when is the hello magazine version of this coming out to tell the public and putting it in terms that the public will understand what has the impact of this institution? Well, livestock are beautiful and should be on the cover of every glossy magazine. I must say we have a really great comms team at Illry. I think comms are very good in the CGI. They are my new joint institute here. One of the first things they said, which is a university in England, said how much they admire the CGI for their communications. And that was nice to hear. It's out there. There'll be videos, blogs, infographics, articles, and papers. If you want to hear good things about livestock, just Google Illry and us. OK, well, sticking with you, Tia. Thank you for that. That's a very good. A lot of people will endorse that. You have you are an epidemiologist and you have evolved into food systems or you have transformed and become attracted to food systems. What is this for? What reason? Is this your personal interest? Is it the the funding interest? Or is it the driver of the priorities that you've had to deal with? Yes, I mean, I Brian is a vet, too, of course. And I have strayed from the fold because vets like to work in zoonosis and especially wildlife if they get the chance. And here am I working with sausages which have gone off and are sold in informal markets. I must say it wasn't something I immediately was interested in my first love and still a passion of mine is community animal health. But having worked in food safety for the last 15 years, it's become increasingly clear that this matters. This matters to a lot of people. Many people consume livestock, livestock products. Fewer people are farmers. I think it's a part of the transformation of the CGIR. We've moved off the farm and down towards the plate. And that's where we should be because we've realized how important issues around nutrition are, the impacts of stunting, the potential that animal source foods could have to reverse some of the greatest challenges facing the planet, which are around nutrition and especially child health. So it's an area where I think which I think is very exciting, which is very new, very important. It's also a kind of a low-hanging fruit. We've done so much work on the farms over the decades. We've done a lot of the easy things. We've done so little work on the consumer's plate and in the informal markets where most people buy their food. And where the impact of foodborne disease is comparable to that of malaria, HIV, AIDS, or TB. But the investments in the control of foodborne disease is less than a hundredth of the investments in any of those. So the economists will probably tell us that that is not a good thing. OK, well, thank you. You heard from the board chair that there is a delight that you've moved into that. Let me turn to Michael Peters. Michael Peters, your background is very much. You're 30 years in the area of tropical forages and livestock crop systems working in Latin America, in West Africa, and to a certain extent in East Africa, and very much. But a lot of your work relating to Seattle, the International Center for Tropical Agriculture, how well has that the forages and the feed systems been integrated into the livestock side of it under the CGI research? Thanks, Brian. I think quite well, particularly through the and more integration through the recent CRP. And I hope that will continue into the one CGI. While forages and feeds and feeds are important for animal production, they always can only go if you have the animal genetics and animal health with it. And obviously the whole context with this. And by the way, I started with Ilka and then later Ilri. Well, that's all for now. But feeds somehow seems to, if I'm being in person, a little bit of a later arrival on the scene in terms of Ilri's concern. I mean, I did a study in the Hall of Africa recently when we were looking at trade issues and quality of disease of trade. It wasn't the disease wasn't the issue. The priority were the feed to get animals to a quality that they would be competitive with other products emerging from other parts of the world. Is it a latecomer and has it been underfunded? And but has that all been corrected? I think in terms of foreign research, there had been a lot in Latin America and a lot of impact. And in terms of ill research, basically in Asian Africa, there also had been quite a bit of investment. However, while there had been quite impacts on the more the feed sites, crop residual work and so on, work on forages to get impact, I think, is only coming now in the recent years. And I think that has to do because the whole context is changing. And definitely in Eastern Africa, forages are dramatically taking up with probably four-fold increase in seed sales over the last two years, including the time of COVID. And I made a quick calculation before this meeting, probably this year, about 20, 30 tons of seed are going to be sold in East Africa of improved forages. OK, excellent. Thank you. John, you are going to make a comment. Yes, Brian, with respect to forages, I think one of the, if you will, the original sins of Ilka long ago was not to have done much on forages for the first decade of its existence. It didn't have a forage seed bank until about 1983. And it basically adopted the model of ranching with over-sown forages in the way it looked at African livestock systems. And this was, unfortunately, quite a serious mistake. And second, they neglected the role of crop residues, which are essentially a byproduct that becomes a planted forage. And Ilka, Ilri, didn't really do much on crop residues until the late 90s under the leadership of Ercole Zarbini and later by the late Michael Plumel in partnership with Icarusat and Hyderabad. So it's this kind of reflection on the role of planted forages in smallholder systems. The, again, the adoption of a model from other areas of the world that's not necessarily well adapted to small farms in sub-Saharan Africa. And in a way, the late arrival for research on an important area, notably crop residues seen as a type of planted forage that are several of the important lessons you can see by looking back if the objective is to continue the transformation of future agricultural systems involving animals. OK, thank you. John, can I have to carry on? Because I didn't respond on the underfunding, but I don't want to complain about the funding, especially as there are a lot of people who have supported livestock here in the room and forages particular. But if I compare it to a crop like rice, which is very conservative estimates is equal to the importance of planted forages, it's not a lot. And in terms of cross value, planted forages, not livestock, is equal to sweet potato and cassava combined. And so in that context, it is probably underfunded and probably not known the importance of tropical forages. OK, thank you. So this book, I must emphasize the fantastic job, John, you've done in pulling it together and editing the determination and with Delia as input. So it's documenting the research. How much has the environment changed that now you're documenting lots of pockets of science, some chapters that are called multidisciplinary? How much has life changed that you now have to be looking at theories of change in terms of where the science fits into development? Who are your partners and how you're going to fund that to make sure that this science has actual impact on the ground? I know there's a session made, John. How is life going to change to make sure that the proceeds of this research documentation is adequately made use of? Well, the important development in the century in terms of ill research and the context of ill research is, of course, the problem of climate change. Now, every ill research project that need every project by every partner has to consider the marginal carbon burden, if you will, of generated by technologies produced by such research. And this was a problem that was, I won't say, not just neglected in the first 25 to 30 years of the existence of this institution and its predecessors, but even denied as a problem. I mean, there was a 1998, 1999 external review of Illry that said, well, there's no point in working on climate at Illry. And mercifully, this is a vision that's changed. And so to me, this is the main change in the external context. And it imposes a very different constraint on the kinds of research that Illry does now today. I mean, after all, if it were possible to develop a vaccine against tripanosomiasis after so many years of work, the question would have to be, well, what would be the carbon effect of the induced land use and production changes by such a vaccine? And the same question could be asked of practically every other line of research. Thank you very much, Delia. Would you like to comment on that relating to disease, the climate change and disease, the pluses and minuses that have just been, some of them have just been illustrated by John? Yes, I think there's actually a lot of similarities between the two. By the way, the World Bank estimated that the cost of pandemics was comparable to the cost of climate change. And again, when we talk about underinvestment, there's been a lot more spent on climate change. That's a good thing. But there's been not much spent on pandemics. And we're seeing some of the results of it and have done for the last year and a half. So that has been a shift. As you said, when we started, it was sort of very much looking at specific diseases, which affected productivity. But when we look at the real cost of animal disease and remember that 75% of human emerging diseases come from animals, when we look at the real cost, it is so much bigger than production. And in fact, production and productivity is only a very, very small part of it. Much bigger is the impact on human health, the impact on societies, the impact on economies, the impact on trade. I don't even have to tell you that. You've all lived that. We've all lived that. And that has been a shift. In fact, we were also told when I joined ILRI that looking at food safety by external evaluators, that looking at food safety and zoonosis was not where we should be focusing. They're people. Doctors look at people. Your vets go and look at the animals. And that's now everybody is thinking about one health. We have to work together. We will never solve these wicked problems. We will never cure the planet, cure people, cure animals, unless we join hand in hand human health, animal health, ecosystem health. And it's really good to see that being generally acknowledged now across all of societies, across all of donors. And as Elsa said, being a lead initiative in the new one CGR, we have one health. Okay, thank you. That's covered a lot around there. This issue of carbon neutrality and livestock. Jonathan was with add a little gem there at the end to challenge you. Reactions from the feeds, from the health, from the livestock side, the target of the impact that that is going to have on livestock research. John, would you like to start? Yes, I think I said previously, is that now every project done in this area of mixed crop livestock systems or extensive systems, whether it's vaccines, whether it's feeds and forges, whether it's water development, whether it's food safety or other aspects of animal health has to consider the marginal carbon effect. And this is a very tricky problem. It's something that there, it has to be part of the screening of every research project is that, what is the additional greenhouse gas burden? Generated by technologies produced by this research? And again, with focus on the important aspect of, would higher livestock productivity resulting from pasture development or from better animal health, would that lead to increased land use clearing? Which in land use clearing is the biggest carbon generation effect of animal production in the tropics. Okay, thank you. Can I pass to Michael on that same question but also the balance with water, which we haven't mentioned, but can you please give us a context from your feeds and forages point of view? Yeah, I mean, there was a big book, Livestock Long Shadow and just to put that greenhouse gases to go together with water and with land degradation. Livestock production is associated with the biggest negative environmental impacts on all of the stream. But that just means that that's also where it's likely the best way to find the solution. So which may be different from what some people think. And coming back to the climate and I think Jonathan already mentioned silver pastoral systems, but not only silver pastoral systems. In essence, in a very few words, it is about reducing emissions and balancing basically the whole carbon with some measurements. So it can be genetic, can be carbon sequestration. And I think we have demonstrated if you use basically locally produced feed, you can have a carbon neutral up to carbon positive livestock production. Last words, this is part of NAMA for Colombia, which Jonathan alerted to. He didn't mention that. Okay, thank you very much. The last comment from Delia before we wrap up this session please Delia. Yes, just to finish on the health. Of course, healthy animals produce less emissions per kilogram of product. This has not been researched. We're looking towards the future now. We want to work on it. But quickly, carbon neutrality is important. It's not the only important thing in the world. Other things matter. Animal welfare, for example, beef production gets a very bad rap. The single worst thing for animal welfare on the planet is broiler chickens. Beef, grass-fed beef is one of the best. If you care about climate, you'll eat chickens. If you care about animal welfare and animal suffering, you might prefer beef. Delia, what an exciting note to finish on. Thank you very much for that. I'm afraid I've got, John, this is put his hand up, but I've got Shirley looking very anxious there at the desk. Can I have to say a big thank you? Looking at the clock, Brian. Sorry? Looking at the clock. Yes, I know. But I want to say, first of all, thank you very much indeed, Delia, Michael and John for your stimulating comments. And thank you for being part of this. And thank you, Ilrie, for inviting me to engage in this discussion with such distinguished people. Thank you very much. Thank you so much, Brian. And let me add my thanks to Delia and Michael and John as well, highlighting some of the achievements of livestock research, but also stressing as we go into the future, we've got to connect what has come out of that wealth of the past. Now, we want to explore a bit what that research has meant on the ground. And I'm really pleased to welcome Umuliza Muthoni and Jiro, who worked in that communications team, you heard mentioned, for Ilrie for a number of years. But Muthoni's moved on. She's now communications policy and advocacy lead for Africa with the Rockefeller Foundation. She's got a great panel lined up for us here. So Muthoni, please come up over to you. Thank you, Shirley, for those welcoming remarks. It's exciting to be back, especially now during this launch of this comprehensive book. To echo the panelists of the past session, livestock systems don't exist in a vacuum. Collectively, with other actors in the ecosystem, guess this particular roundtable will focus on development impacts. You will hear why livestock research matters. Through reflections of my esteemed panelists, you will see how livestock research has impact across the continent, across the globe. And it has various and impactful strides that it has made. You will listen to specific sectorial gaps and lessons learned. Finally, you will hear the opportunities and challenges we foresee in the coming years. To achieve this, we've brought together leading representatives from donor agencies, governments and regional research organizations, other development organizations, which I would like to introduce right now. So with great honor, I would like to introduce my panelists. I would like to first introduce Dr. Vikru Ragasa, State Minister of Agriculture for Ethiopia. Secondly, I'd like to introduce Dr. Nick Noakwapa, Acting Director, Director General, Africa Union, Pan-African Veterinary Vaccine Center, and Acting Director General, AU Aiba. Third, I'd like to welcome Dr. Rob Bertjen, Chief Scientist, USAID, Bureau of Resilience and Food Security. I would also like to welcome Dr. Trugon Tuyet-Maya, Vice Director, National Institution of Nutrition, Vietnam. And then I would also like to welcome my final panelist, Ariana Gullio-Dori, from the World Farmers Organization. Welcome panelists. Kindly panelists. I'd like everybody to get to know you a bit better. So one minute each, I'd like to ask you to please share how livestock for development research has been close to your heart and why. So we'll start with you, Dr. Ragasa. Thank you very much. And of course, Nero, of course, the first thing is livestock. It's really our life, our food, our company and friends. So Ilri is one of the leading international institutions. Of course, it started with Ilka. And it helped us to really develop the livestock sector in Japan. And it's really with passion that we were working with Ilri. Thank you. All right. Thank you for that. Next, Dr. Nupapa. Sorry, sir. I think you're muted. Yes. Good afternoon all. I'm sorry I presented such a difficult name for you to present. Yes. I've been working in the livestock sector now for over 30 years. I started, of course, that is where you see my passion coming from. I started from the National Veterinary Research Institute firm in Nigeria, where I rose to the rank of director before coming to the African Union in 2010 as the chief veterinary vaccine officer. And I've remained there until 2015 when I became the director. And finally, they appointed me as acting director here. Livestock is very close to my heart. I love livestock, even though, as they say, we have to eat our patients sometime. But we do everything to protect them, to make sure we get a good source of livelihoods and also good source of meat from them. And as Patience Ilri, everyone knows Ilri has been supporting livestock research and have been doing a tremendous amount of activity in the livestock sector. We have had to collaborate with Ilri on a number of occasions, both in the vaccine side, in the health side, and also here at IBA. I've seen a number of projects dealing with coordination involving Ilri. So Ilri is a great partner to be within the livestock sector. Thank you. Thank you for that. And your name is not difficult. It's me who's struggling. All right, next. Dr. Bertrand. Thank you, Umelisa. And it's great to be part of this panel today. And I have to say, it was wonderful hearing the opening panel trace the arc of that 50 years of livestock research. And I think it was clear that livestock were always important, but I think over time, we've added to that in terms of our understanding of why we invest in livestock research. And I think this is true in USAID and probably other investing donor partners as well. So for example, we've learned so much about the role of animal source foods around things like child nutrition and growth and reduction in child stunting. We've learned a lot about the role of gender in terms of generating income that gets used very wisely in the household and in the community. So I think nowadays, when we think about livestock research, we're thinking about it as essential for our poverty reduction goals. We're thinking about it as essential for our nutrition goals. And then very importantly, as we also heard from the opening panel, the climate change challenge has is looming large. And yet we also heard that we have global challenges, but we have very differing local contexts. And I think it's going to be some of those that are going to emerge as we link that climate challenge to those other human challenges around poverty reduction, nutrition and growth, and environmental sustainability going forward through that systems approach that was also mentioned. Thank you. Thank you for those sentiments. Dr. Mayer, please go next. Yeah. Good afternoon, everybody. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Liju. Yeah. My name is Chiu Dutmai. I am the medical doctor. I also am a nutritionist. So my institute of nutrition belong to the Mini Chi of hell. Yeah. So for the related with livestock in the Vietnam, so my institute is for the research focused on the food safety testing and for the nutrition for the human. So that's why I know we have many projects with related with how to improve the nutrition for the Vietnamese people. Of course, I think it's the livestock in the very related with our research. So in the last five years, we have a big research to talk about the antibiotic in the Vietnamese big problem. So I think that's why I can hear to would like to share with you some information about the nutrition and livestock in the Vietnam. Yeah, thank you. All right, thank you. Lastly, but of course, more importantly, Ariana, please. Thank you, Melissa. Well, I am surrounded by eminent scientists, but I'm here to bring the farmer's voices. So if your question is why does livestock matter to us? We are those people, those families that are running the business in the livestock sector. So for us, livestock is our livelihoods, livestock is our business. But even much more than this, I really appreciate the fact that it was a vote that we are now more and more entering into systemic approach to science within the livestock sector and more in general, in approaching the way we produce and consume food. And for us, the farmers, the livestock producers, livestock is also culture, livestock is a fundamental piece, a fundamental component of our communities. And I'd love to have a final point on climate. I think there's a lot to be said around the opportunity of the livestock sector and not the threat of the livestock sector in the climate challenge. And finally, maybe we should talk more and collaborate more also on equity and how much livestock can contribute to overcome some of the challenges related to nutrition and to poverty and to end in hunger. Thank you, Ova. All right, thank you for that. That's actually quite a great segue into my first question. So the book states that recent evidence suggests that the health burden of food-borne diseases is comparable to three major conditions, malaria, HIV, and AIDS, and tuberculosis. Most of the unsafe food burden is due to contaminated, fresh food produced from informal markets. So Ariana, I have a two-fold question for you. First, how has this impacted the livelihoods of farmer communities in informal markets, especially with those dealing with animal-sourced foods like milk, meat, and eggs? And the second part of my question is what is the shift that is needed in terms of the narrative for farmers to stop being end users and to get at the forefront? Please, Ariana. Thank you, Melissa. Let me combine the two questions that you are bringing to the table right now, because the only way to provide a meaningful answer and a relevant answer to the first part of your question is to face the second part, which is to say we as farmers, we feel the need not to be considered as targets of solutions emerging from scientific activity, from the research work. We feel the urgency of being considered as partners by the research board. At WF for the World Farmers Organizations, which represents more than 75 farmers associations from more than 60 countries in the world, we pledge for a farmer-driven approach to innovation. We don't pretend to have all the answers and all the solutions. But for sure, by getting nearer, by getting closer to the farmers' communities, to their families, to their needs, it would be possible to highlight some of the threats, some of the challenges that they have to face to be able to cope, for instance, with food safety at the farm level. And these challenges that need answers from the scientific were particularly relevant when it comes to smallholders, to the most vulnerable in the farming world. That's why I could tell you that for sure farmers can do more. That's always true. We can improve. We can do better. But I won't tell you this. I will tell you that we need to work closely together, science and farmers and their organizations to make sure that we are providing the right answers. And so not only working perfectly from the scientific point of view, but that makes sense when they go down, they go down from the science to the real life work, including coping with the reality that is sometimes very harsh and very tough to face. For instance, there's a lot to be done when it comes to improving infrastructures so that there's more holders can be able to better manage food safety issues. And those infrastructures are something that the farmers can do almost nothing about. Thank you. OK, Dr. Maya, with your work that you did on the Safe Pork Project in Vietnam, could you share some insights around food safety more so around consumer-led approaches, especially around the fact that in Vietnam there's a high demand for animal-sourced foods? OK. Thank you, Umi-Lisa. Yeah. So I think I would like to introduce some in the situation of food safety in the Vietnam. So in the Vietnam, over the past 10 years, the government we have developed is the law of the food safety and the last and last charity on food safety and last and last charity on nutrition. So I think the issue in the food safety in the Vietnam has been significant in improving. For example, is reducing the number of the farmers struggling and ensure the safety for, I think, the almost the food product. So what I think is the in the Vietnam, still exists the many problems for the food safety. For example, is the biological contamination and the residue substance. I would like to have some, for example, in the Vietnam now have from some research we call in the sample of the cattle and protein with the DZ coaching in the micro biological contamination is around 25%. So I think another problem we have facing now for the antibiotic using in the farm. Yeah, so in the Vietnam, do you know in the last 10 years, the Vietnam economy and the population is growing rapidly. So production and the consumption of any more products as increasing very faster. So now is the last 10 years, last year in the, we have a last in the Luchesan survey. We saw that in the dietary intake of any more product. So now increasing by year. So for example, is the eating for meat around 150 gram per person per day. Yeah, so I think it's a very quick need in the increasing for the consumption. So to the many, the big DZ and the increasing meat, the product farmer and as a turning to the antibiotic and other antimicrobial creating in the Zootic DZ and the resistance to the antibiotic drugs. So I think in the, sorry, yeah, yeah, I think it's the same another country. Yeah, so I would like to focus to some, to talk about the project of health and the antibiotic of the Vietnam meat, big product from the last three years funded by the Danila. So we have a cooperation with the University of Copenhagen and the last of the veterinary research and the Luchesan and the U.D. is a very big project. So we have done now. So I think it's after Phyllis project, we have two files us. So we can establish one health approach to map and the many driver to antibiotic use and the antibiotic resistant uproar in the Vietnam. So I think in the very big problem, now we have a limitation of the OLX and the practice from the farmer how to seducing in the using for the antibiotic in the Vietnam. Yes, I think it's a very big problem. So I think it's a future. I think the next time after Phyllis research, we have continued to how to for the communication and to training for the whole the farmer to how to seducing using the antibiotic for in the big product. Yeah, so yeah, I would like to say I'll pick you through some information. Thank you, yeah. All right, thank you so much, Dr. Mayan. I'm sorry, we're just restricted in time. That's why I was cutting. Oh yeah, okay. Thank you. Thank you so much for those insights. I'll move to my next question. Dr. Regessa, competition between livestock farmers, farming, traditional farming and conservation is already a significant issue in many parts of the continent. Continent speaking about across Africa, especially around northern Nigeria and areas in East Africa, like in Kenya, like Ibiya. What options are available to identify and support sustainable investments that drive equitable growth and development of the livestock sector that can contribute to food and nutrition security and economic development? Sir, sorry, you're muted. Yes. Okay, thank you very much. Of course, first I would like to really express again what livestock is to Ethiopia and how it is going and the plans in the future and where the research is contributing and specifically Italy is solving those issues. And as you know, Ethiopia is one of the countries with biggest livestock resource, but a country which is always complaining about the potential is not being used properly. And this is because of the constraints that we always talk about, about the poor genetic makeup, about the health and about the feed issues where it is not really properly managed. So to solve these problems actually, it should be supported by research. And ILCA was the first international institute to work on livestock. And it started in Ethiopia and has really contributed a lot, especially in animal disease in some of the aspects. And finally it's developed to Ilri and which is of course, which operated for the last maybe 44 years or so and addressed a lot of issues in Ethiopia and helped us in especially the landmarks of the contribution of Ilri in Ethiopia is a development of livestock master plan, where of course we shouldn't always talk about the number of livestock that we have because of many factors that we can't keep increasing the number of large number of livestock and we should focus on the productivity of livestock because there are many, many competing agendas in the globe like the green gas effects, like the shrinking of grazing land and also there are many, many other factors which are forcing us to not focus on increased number of livestock, but focus on the productivity of the animals. So in that regard, Ilri has helped us in developing the livestock master plan which is focusing on improved the genetics, resolve also the issue of widespread animal diseases and helped us also to intervene the feed shortage issues and helped us also in drafting many policy issues. And now, of course, Ethiopia has drafted its 10-year strategic plan where again, livestock is one of the major activity that we are sticking to and where we wanted to improve and get benefit from this resource. And again, we based on the livestock master plan that was developed by the help of Ilri to really focus and explore this resource to the maximum potential. That's why we are really focusing because of there are many competing agendas that we shouldn't really go for the large number of livestock, but we are really focusing on increased production and the productivity so that the other competing agendas can also be addressed in Ethiopia. So this is one of the major focus areas. And of course, the issues of traditional livestock farming system may not continue as it is. We have to really focus and go on the intensive production system where the other agendas and issues can be resolved. I'm being advised that we only have one minute for the responses that follow from here. So thank you so much. Thank you so much, Dr. Ragesa, for those great insights and especially for the great work that's being done in your country and you're leading in the work that is being done on livestock master plans. So thank you so much for that contribution. I'll finalize or not finalize, I'll ask two more questions quickly. I'm looking at Shirley so that she can give me the green light. I'd like to address this question to Dr. Bertram. We're living through a pandemic right now and this is reminding us of the threat that zoonotic diseases poses. The growing human and animal population living closely together will increase and the chances of novel infections between animal humans and wild viruses and bacteria is quite rampant and we don't know what is in the forefront. How has research in zoonosis impacted the global response to the pandemic and what can be done to minimize and monitor threats to protect society and the livestock value chain? Great, thanks, Amelisa. Well, yes, COVID-19 has bared the vulnerabilities of our global food system and of local food systems. And frankly, one of the reasons that we're able to develop a vaccine so quickly is that there was a whole group of coronavirus researchers around the world that could stand up quickly, that were working quietly below what we were seeing but then came together to meet the challenge jointly. So that's a great story about how science delivers. But I think, we heard about the One Health Challenge. I wish that the agricultural community was as well represented there as it should be. I think it is largely driven by human health concerns and that's understandable. But we have to work doubly hard, those of us in the livestock community to make sure that that dimension of the One Health, along with environmental health, as Dr. Grace mentioned, with human health are brought together equally. A lot of the emphasis is on emerging threats, new unknown threats, which, you know, we had COVID-19 as an example of that. But we also know that there's a lot of things we can do that are just good practices. In production, in marketing, in hygiene, around market systems and livestock trade, et cetera. So there's a lot we already know how to do. And I think we need to double down on that. And at the same time, then we can be very cognizant about preventing those opportunities for new and emerging threats to occur as we've seen a number of times just in this century. Thank you. All right, thank you. Control of animal health in a development context involves the distinction of public and private interventions. Dr. Nkwapa kindly unpack the importance of connecting research institutions to academic and regulatory entities to improve applied research and problem solving. Sorry, sir, you're on mute. Yes, thank you very much. Now, the control of animal health involves two distinct aspects. That is the traditional public goods and then the private goods. For example, we have certain diseases that normally will be controlled by the government and the government puts money in there. Those are considered as public goods, diseases like CBPP, PPR, and the code. And yet we have some other diseases that nobody will touch. If you want to take care of it, you have to invest, you have to pay for it yourselves. Now, but there is recently a merger, a sort of thinning of the line, not knowing really where to say the divide is. And what has happened is that we have now come to the realization that what is really missing, the missing link in all these partnerships. For example, the speakers before talked about one health. One health is one great form of partnerships. Working together is partnerships. And now connecting research institutions to the academic and regulatory entities is now bringing the universities which are traditionally considered to be conducting basic research that will be accessible available to all. And now linking up with the private sector that with the academia that is the universities that have access to funding from the private sector from all sorts of funding areas. And these funders believe that they need to put their money to work for them. These funders believe that you can make money out of research. And these funders believe that research, when motivated, when fully funded, when equipped can turn out results on time. Now, that is where you have synergy and you have good results coming out. I'll give you, for example, over the years we've had quite some researches with Ilri, for example, East Coast fever. East Coast fever is a disease that devastates the eastern part of this country. This was considered as a public good. No private sector wants to invest because of the tedious nature of vaccine production and the disease is not a common disease. It occurs once in two to four years time. So definitely no sector wants to go in. Ilri took it, produced the vaccines and handed it over to Malawi. Malawi tried to produce the vaccines and failed. Eventually, the Billa Melinda Gates came with this power as the private sector put money into it, invested in facilities and equipment and put this system into work again. Now the facility is working and we're going through the regulatory agencies to make it work. Now the partnerships, there are fears that when you leave it in the hands of the private entities, then economic concerns will overtake everything and the interest of the people of the disease itself will not be concerned, but now bringing in the regulatory authorities to it. They serve as check and balances. So while the private sector gets what it was in terms of research, the basic traditional government makes available these innovations to the people generally and the regulatory authorities control and make sure that there is no abuse and all these things are done according to specifications and standards. Thank you very much. I have one last question. I know Shirley's standing right next to me, but I have to say this, just one more. We cannot close without talking about the negative press that has been given on livestock, especially on the environmental impacts. However, that's only part of the story, not the full story. So as we close panelists, I want you to leave with a bang. Each of you, I would like you to give me with your closing statements. What do you believe member states congregating at COP26 need to put on the agenda as they convene in November? I'll start with you, Dr. Regasa. Two words, I've been told to tell you two words. Dr. Regasa, your own mute, please. For developing countries, life is very difficult without livestock. So any pleasure, because the status of the use of livestock and the importance of livestock varies from country to country. You put yourself on mute again, sorry. No. It's not from me, I think. Yes, I think there. Yeah, so life without life developing countries. Oh, I'm sorry. We'll have to move to the next person. We'll come back to you. I'm sorry about that. Dr. Nkwapa. Okay. The name is Wampa. You pronounce it without the N and without the K. So it sounds Wampa. Okay. Okay. Thank you for that correction. Yes. Now, what I would like to be on the agenda of the COP is number one, welfare, animal welfare. Number two, sustainability of livestock development in Africa. And possibly number three, issues of conflict, the resolution of conflict with livestock, between livestock hudders and the traditional agriculture race. Thank you. Thank you. Ariana. The farmers are going to COP 26 with solutions because through an initiative that we call the Climakers, a farmer-driven climate change agenda, working closely with SEACAPS, so with the support of the CJAR program on climate. We are finalizing some guidelines on how to improve nationally determined contributions in a win-win-win approach, win for the planet, win for the countries that must implement the Paris Agreement and win for the farmers, making sure that their livelihoods will be taken into account. So from our side, what we hope to see is many governments embracing the opportunity of livestock through the support of the farmers themselves. Thank you. Dr. Ma. Yeah. So I would like to give for the COP 26 in the first point, I would like to farmer, have to improving the low-list and the practice for the healthy livestock. And the second, I would like to consummate to eating enough the livestock and to keep the good nutrition. Yeah, thank you. Thank you. And finally, Dr. Bertram. Thank you, Malisa. Two points. One is that agriculture and food systems, the environment and biological diversity and climate change are all interlinked and need to be solved simultaneously. The second point is that, as I said earlier, we have global challenges, we have local contexts that require different solutions, no one-size-fits-all approaches. Thank you. Thank you so much, Chen. Thank you so much, Muthoni and all of the panelists. That was really great and very much appreciated. If you want, please continue to engage in the chat. I've seen some chat saying, can we put our hand up? Can we ask questions? Not today. As I mentioned, we will have another session that launches the book and you'll have a real chance for lots more interaction getting into the science there as well. So we've heard about achievements, investments, time, money, people and commitments. But we know we're in a fast-moving and challenging world. So how do we build on this fantastic work to ensure the potential of sustainable livestock for future food system transformation is realized? I'm going to be joined by some experts who we've asked to take a look into their crystal balls and share their thoughts on what is needed for that livestock research with the end in mind for food system transformation, climate change, nutrition and health, equitable livelihoods, key issues articulated in the OneCGIR research and innovation strategy that refers to transforming food, land and water systems in a climate crisis. Let's hear first from these experts on their views of where livestock research fits in relation to some of these big challenges. So let me welcome first Ian Wright, who is deputy director general, integrated science at Illry. Ian, we've heard a lot about what, what research can deliver. We know that this needs to impact on real people, on men, women, young people and their livelihoods. So what does that mean for livestock research in the future? Thanks, Shelley and good afternoon. Good morning, everyone. Well, we hear a lot about rapid urbanization in Africa and Asia, which of course is true, it's going on. But despite that rapid urbanization, the rural population in Africa and in many parts of Asia is going to continue to grow for the next few decades. And agriculture and livestock is going to continue to be the major source of employment and livelihoods for millions of people in those rural areas, especially smaller livestock keeper and all the others involved in livestock value chains. So the challenge for livestock research is to ensure that these millions of people can be competitive to benefit from the growing demand for livestock products. We had referenced the livestock resolution earlier. So they need to be competitive to benefit from that growing demand. But they have to be competitive also in a way that's equitable and of course environmentally sustainable. We've heard a lot about the challenges of the environment of regular climate change. So this means that livestock research needs to ensure that there is access to markets for the smallholder. It needs to deliver technologies and service delivery models to enhance productivity. Crucially, it needs to understand how women and young people in particular can benefit from livestock value chains. And I would like to draw attention to the fact that there's a whole chapter in the book on gender. And of course, it needs to deliver on ways of reducing the environmental footprint and especially greenhouse gas emissions from livestock. Thank you. Sounds like there's still a few things to do. Let's explore that climate angle a little bit more. We have on the line of Phil Thornton, Philly's flagship leader for priorities and policies for climate smart agriculture. He's with the CJR Climate Change and Food Security Program. Phil, as we've heard already, we're used to hearing bad news often about livestock and climate change. We know it's one of those big challenges facing us right now. So how do you see the role of livestock research in the future when it comes to this whole climate change issue? Thank you Shirley and hello everybody. Yes indeed, the more we seem to learn about the impact of climate change, the worse it seems to get. And if you've perused recent or impressed IPCC reports, heat stress becoming more extreme and more widespread affecting all the domesticated species, changes in pasture species and quality, shifts in disease prevalence and severity, new diseases, water availability, so on and so forth. So I mean, research is crucial, but I think it's important that we differentiate. As I think Rob just mentioned, one size does not fit all. In the higher income countries, it's a lot around mitigation of greenhouse gases. Adaptation will still be needed. And particularly for example, around the cost and benefits of different climate action in livestock systems. There's much that's still unknown and marginal carbon effects, for example of things such as what may be potentially disruptive technologies, such as new feedstocks, say alternative protein sources, and what are the environmental, social, economic impacts of some of those. Whereas in lower income countries, there's something around mitigation, but it's much more around adaptation, given the crucial roles that livestock play with respect to resilience and livelihoods. And generally just to point out, there's much less information than's available for crops, for example. So various things here, making better use of existing genetic variability in breeds and feeds, for example. Increasing crop and livestock diversity in farming systems and making best use of the interlinkages between crops, livestock and trees, and which have all been shown to increase the buffering capacity, if you like, of livestock systems. I think even for the higher income and the lower income countries, there are various, a couple of common elements. One is around the effects of climate variability and extremes on livestock systems. We know quite a lot, we know more about the longer term effects of increased, slowly increasing temperatures, for example. But what about the short-term shocks, the climate extreme events that can have huge impacts, particularly on livestock systems? And then I think we also need work on the policy and regulatory environments that can promote and support innovation throughout the livestock chains. So there's research needed on how we can design and implement these in our pursuit of transforming food systems. Thanks very much, Phil. It's really good the way that some of those things you touched on are things that were already highlighted coming out of the livestock research by our first panel. So that sounds like we're in a good place there. We've heard a bit as well about health and we also heard right at the beginning about capacity development. So let me welcome Basiru Bonfu, who is director of the Consortium Afrique, Juan Aspire, and director Emeritus of the Sands-Swiss the Research Scientifique Concorde d'Ivoire. Basiru, we're all aware, we've heard it already, the importance of having health at the center of any food system transformation, human, animal and environment and their connections. So what should be the focus of livestock research in this area? And in particular, what about those capacity dimensions there that I know you're very passionate about yourself? Yeah, thank you very much and thanks for inviting me. Before I go to your question, I just want to emphasize that we should not mix livestock system because they have different social, economic and environmental role. And here, I think somebody has raised the legal support to reduce the gamatization of livestock dependent population. So having said that, one health has been now promoted to make the link between different sector. But what we lack currently, if I take the example of Africa or West Africa where I'm working is the lack of skills and training and the capacity building of those who are going to address the one health concept be it researchers or practitioners. Because we are now embarking into one health concept with the whole system of training that we have received. We have not been taught on how to have a system thinking bridging different sectors. And this type of capacity and training is needed in our different research centers and academia because we need a new generation of researchers to address or to take forward all the outcomes of the research that has been done. And it's very important to have the training. And we see here, for example, in West Africa how countries are struggling to have epidemiologists or to handle outbreaks and to look at what kind of support can be given to farmers and also the policy arena. Another aspect that I think researchers also should look is the consumption behavior dynamics. It's very important to talk about food safety but nutrition is now a very important aspect that can be handled by the one health concept. And that determine how we produce and what type of market is ready to take the product and who are the future consumers. So to finish, I will say investment, huge or massive investment is need to build a critical mass of new practitioners and new researchers that can address the problem with the transdisciplinary research and working with farmers, with livestock owners and not working for them over. Thank you so much for highlighting that really crucial capacity issue in this new terribly interconnected world. But of course, we've got to eat and Basira just mentioned the importance of nutrition. So really pleased to have joining us today, Jessica Fanzo who is Bloomberg Distinguished Professor of Global Food Policy and Ethics at the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics, the Bloomberg School of Public Health. So we've got to eat. How do we ensure that livestock research priorities do really contribute to better food and nutrition for healthy and well-nourished people worldwide? Jessica, your thoughts on that. Great, thank you so much Shirley. And it's really nice to be with ill read colleagues. You all work on a critically important agenda and I'm really pleased to be here. So thinking about the role of livestock in delivering healthy and sustainable diets, this is a very polarized and fractious debate. Many questions are arising around alternative proteins like lab and cultured meats and use of other fermentation technology. Will that replace traditional forms of livestock production both intensive and extensive systems? And is that the best way to move towards sustainable diets from a health perspective? This probably won't happen anytime soon if one takes a more localized perspective. And while the science of animal source foods on diets and nutrition is quite nuanced, there's a lot of consensus that binds us more so than controversy surrounding the debates. So I'm gonna highlight just a couple of things. One, there's recognition that more plants, whole grains, fruits, vegetables, legumes and diets are required in some parts of the world like Europe, North America. And in some countries, in parts of Africa for example, livestock consumption will need to increase to meet the nutritional needs of the poorest and most vulnerable. So it's really a matter of equity. We need to push high income countries that are consuming a lot of meat more than they need to to lower their meat consumption through a range of hard and soft policies. And we need to spur innovation for countries that just don't get enough of animal source foods. And from the nutrition perspective, why are livestock foods and other animal source foods so important? Well, they're a significant source and the only dietary source of vitamin B12 and D which are often lacking in diets globally as well as omega-3 fatty acids like DHA and EPA. They contain higher densities of more bioavailable forms of zinc, iron and vitamin A, often also lacking in diets globally as compared to plant source foods. And there's a lot of unique compounds found in meat, CLA, creatine, carnicine, torene that play roles in health. And we don't totally understand those different compounds completely. Now, one of the biggest contributors to disease and death more so is probably these highly processed foods or what's called ultra-processed foods that are very high in added sugar, salt and unhealthy fats. And that needs to be more of a focus because there's a huge growth in movement of these ultra-processed foods around the world. And a lot of data is coming out on their detrimental impacts to morbidity and mortality. On the over-consumption side, processed meat is associated with increased risk of cancer on average, although the precise mechanisms and differences between subtypes of cancer and the types of meats and how they're curated require more study. And red meat consumption, there is some adverse health effects but only when consumed at very high amounts, exceeding more than three servings a week which is consistent with the national dietary guidelines of most countries. So largely this is agreed upon by the nutrition community but the question is really about equity and how do we make policy recommendations based on localized contextualized public health needs and less about global aggregation and uniformity? And I'll end there. Thanks a lot, Shirley. Thanks very much, Jessica. You've given us a breadth from details of nutrition right through to changing mindsets and behaviors and perhaps everything in between as well. And indeed we've heard from all our panelists a very wide range of opportunities for livestock research to contribute to those future food systems that we're all aspiring to, fantastic insights. Thank you all very much. I'd like to pick up on something that Delia mentioned in the earlier panel. Delia said, we've done the easy things. So panel members, I'm gonna give you each one sentence now and I want to hear from you. Give us something to think about and hopefully act on. What's your call to action? That one thing that we really must do, Ian. Okay, thanks, Shirley. We heard at the beginning of this session from Jonathan Wardsworth that livestock accounts for about 40% of agricultural GDP on average. But if you look at the investment in livestock, it gets a miserable 5% of agricultural investment. Doesn't matter when you're talking about official development assistance or expenditure at the national level, it's about 5%. So my call to action is to support advocacy for much greater investment in livestock, including in the CGIR, using the sound evidence base that we have that shows how greater investments is essential to achieving the sort of food systems transformation that Jessica has mentioned, to achieving the sustainable development goals to both capitalize on the opportunities, but also deal with the real challenges that we have in the livestock sector. And in doing this, low and middle income countries should not be bullied by some voices from the Global North who advocate against livestock. Thank you. Phil? Thanks, Shirley. I think in addition to massively increased investment, in terms of how we actually can allocate resources, we've heard a lot about integration and the systems approach. I think this is absolutely critical. And so promoting a livestock research for development environment that can really integrate across sectors. So the crop, livestock, water, disaster risk reduction, climate security and health, we all have things that we can learn from each other. And also in this enabling environment that can enable an innovation at different scales and throughout livestock value chains. There's huge potential for technological, economic and social innovations that can be truly powerful forces for helping to transform our food systems. Thank you. Masiru? Yeah, thank you. I will emphasize again on the, not maybe on capacity alone, but the performance of veterinary services in our countries. Because now evidence showed that with the losses due to conflict, due to drought or epidemics, there are a lot of problem of mental health of livestock dependent population. And it's one of the key issue we need also to address with increasing the capacity and the performance of veterinary services, especially, for example, in the meat inspection web, we lack resources to handle food safety problem. Thank you. Thanks. Jessica, last word to you. From my perspective, just really considering equity in everything that we do. And it's a bit to Ian's point, energy intensive lifestyles, dietary choices of those living in high income countries are significant anthropogenic contributors to climate change. And we know that economically poor households are likely to experience a disproportionate burden of the impacts of climate change. Diet is part of that. And so we need to be thinking about who needs to make bigger changes to their diets. In what I would call, we are all in this together kind of problem that being climate change. And that's something that I hope high income countries particularly can start thinking about. Thank you. Excellent. Thank you all. Great panel. Many challenges, many opportunities, but we've also heard huge amount of research and well positioned research going into the future. We're in a good place. So with that, I'm gonna conclude here. I'm gonna hand over to Jimmy for some concluding remarks. And just to mention again, we will have an official launch of the book where there will be a bit more time to get into some of the science details that I know many of you online have been itching to get into. So watch this space for that. Thanks again to the World Bank for hosting us. Jimmy, back to you to conclude. Thank you, Shirley. Ladies and gentlemen, I trust that you have found these three panel sessions useful to you as you consider the impacts of the work in this book and how you might put it to use. I wanna thank all the panelists for their contributions today. We will continue the efforts to make this book known and used as we advance future research on livestock as has already been mentioned. We have included in the book and was a subject of the last panel a chapter on the future of livestock research and how those contributions can make the livestock sector in the developing countries more economically, socially and environmentally sustainable. This agenda is necessarily broad and while time will not allow me to get into the specifics of it here, I must mention that it must continue to address as we concluded today, some of the controversies in which the sector is currently embroiled, particularly that of livestock and the environment and climate change specifically. Of course, some of the controversies are driven by misleading information and sometimes false information and broad generalizations from one place to another. Rob mentioned the need for local specificity and local solutions. However, it is true that in the context of climate change, livestock is a contributor and it must do its share. There's several things we can do in this regard. High emission intensities of livestock products from ruminants in particular can be vastly reduced in the developing world by increasing productivity. If we were to increase productivity of livestock, we will need fewer animals to meet the growing demands for animal source foods and therefore cutting machines. As we know, rangelands make up more than 50% of the terrestrial surface and mostly used from livestock. With appropriate management, these rangelands can become carbon sinks as significant as forest star. But as important as the climate issue is, we also must be balanced in our approach to attempt to address some other areas. The current pandemic, likely of zoonotic origin, is a reminder that we must devote research attention to preventing and controlling such diseases using a one health approach, even as we continue to address food safety and AMR and such other issues. As Yenon already mentioned, we need a continued support of our funders and increasing help from them. He mentioned the proportion contribution to GDP of livestock but the share of the investment it gets, we must improve this. But a small center in the CGIR with such a big agenda cannot do it all its own. Partnerships are key. We will continue to forge partnerships, build on the ones we have and forge new ones in the R&B research institutions continuum, north and south, south, south, up and downstream. Ladies and gentlemen, I must again thank you for your interest and participation today and look forward to continuing to work with you in the future, not only to tackle the challenges but to capitalize on the opportunities that the livestock sector offer. So thank you again for your interest and participation and let me say at this stage, good morning, good evening, good night from wherever you have joined. Thank you and goodbye.