High-Level Dialogue on Food Systems and Soil Health - Action Dome, UNCCD COP17

Your Excellency's, ministers, distinguished guests.
Ladies and gentlemen.
Good afternoon ministerial Dialogue on food systems and soil health.
Our title this afternoon Investment and Partnerships for resilient and inclusive agri food systems.
Can I please ask production to turn off the music, please? Thank you.
Food systems sit at the intersection of some of the defining challenges of our time, land degradation, climate change, biodiversity loss, water stress, and food insecurity.
Beneath every crop, every pasture, every agricultural supply chain and ultimately behind every root system lies the same fundamental asset, soil.
Healthy soils are not simply an environmental concern, they are productive infrastructure.
They underpin food security, livelihoods, water resilience, and economic stability.
Yet the people who manage those soils, farmers, pastoralists, indigenous peoples and local communities are being asked to produce more while dealing with increasingly degraded land and a changing climate.
Cop 16, decision 19 created an important momentum around agricultural land restoration and resilient agri food systems.
The challenge here at Cop 17 is to move decisively from commitment to implementation.
So over the next 2 hours, we are going to focus on three important questions.
How do we turn political ambition into action? How do we make soil health an investable economic proposition? And how do we break down the institutional silos that continue to slow implementation? To open our dialogue, it's my pleasure to welcome Yasmin Poet, United Nations Secretary-General, and Executive Secretary of UNCCD.
Welcome, doctor Poet.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, President Aferdo.
Thank you for being with us today.
Dear Beth, thank you for being our partner on that important event.
Today, we have our last day on the land action agenda, and as they say, we're saving the best for the last.
So sustainable agriculture, food systems, and healthy soil would be the core of how we would like to end our stay here in this beautiful city in Ambatar.
Within CP 16, decisions 19, we had for the first time a true discussion on sustainable agricultural land, how that relates to the convention, what we have been talking about on the certification, drought and land degradation.
And based on that decision that came from our parties, there were guidance to the Secretariat together with the FAO to start providing the guidelines on how best that would be made.
So I'd like to thank the FAO for providing that kind of support that would be discussed throughout this COP.
The whole issue of what we're talking about here goes beyond the core idea of land and whether that land is capable to provide the food to the people or not.
I think that the central discussion goes also towards the synergies, where the soil itself and the land acts as carbon sink, as well as its relation to the biodiversity and vegetation.
We have different figures coming from around the world that shows that every year we're losing 1 hectare of land and we're using X amount of food.
And the idea goes beyond the land is the natural infrastructure to how can we convert that into a business model.
And we've started those kind of economic cases.
I'm sure that colleagues here will be discussing that.
A very simple one saying that in each dollar that you're investing in land, you can take a revenue $7-30, which means that this is the land that you would like to restore to.
So what if the land is already trying to be healthy and how best can we do that? The second part also of why we are interested in that discussion of the food system and healthy soil, and we'll continue on the decision that we got from Riadh.
I was following up today on the decision here in Alambatar so how it is progressing.
It's getting a lot of attention.
So we're having new terms coming like it's new to our process regenerative agriculture and other terms of technology transfer, how to use the AI and so forth.
What I want to say here in that as this is the last day in our land action agenda, We're moving from here to Armenia to have the same discussion, but within the community of the biodiversity.
And then after that, with Turkey on a special day on food system and food security as well as on the radio synergy.
What we would like really to achieve by the end of this year is to show three important facts that the UN is trying within the UN reform to do a more effort to be more efficient, united, coherent, and less using of so many resources.
Secondly, that we would raise the attention that our environmental challenges, they are integrated at the ground and they need integrated solution.
Three, that an issue that we're thinking now that we're taking that for granted, which is our food that we eat In ten years, that will not be the case because there is an escalation to environmental changes and every day we're losing more lands.
Thank you all very much and wish you a pleasant stay here and successful deliberations.
Thank you.
Many thanks, doctor Bad.
Next, we are truly honored and delighted to welcome His Excellency Carlos Alvarado, former President of Costa Rica.
Welcome.
Thank you very much.
Thank you to Madam Executive Secretary for her remarks.
I'm delighted to be here.
I believe we have one political problem and one conceptual problem, don't worry, because problems are all opportunities.
So I'll try to frame it in a positive way.
I believe that the conceptual problem remains our notion that we are separated from the land.
Our human conception of fragmentation.
If you think about it, when we see the topic of soil health, We might have the temptation to think that the hell of the soil is separated from our own health.
And we go through life like that in that fragmentation, not understanding that we are linked constrictly linked to health of the land.
Our language deceive us.
Literally, we are with the land.
In the best case scenario, we use land services and food services three times a day, not only us, our loved ones too, our constituencies.
And yet, what the problem is, conceptually, we don't live that reality.
We live a fragmented reality, which is the products of the land we might get in the market, we get digitally ordering our food to get to a table, but we're not connecting all the dots on what that is sim.
The good news is that we can change those concepts in our heads.
We can bring value to the land and to what it means to us.
But that means conceptually, seeing ourselves not separated from the land, but integrated.
The moment we start to change those concepts, we'll be treated differently land, which brings me to the second political problem of opportunity.
I think we all agree in this that food systems and land agenda might be one of the most, if not the most important topics for humanity moving forward.
Actually, one of the insights has been that land restoration, food systems is perhaps one of the most strong threads that connect the free conventions, real synergy, but beyond in the world that has conflict everywhere.
The topic of food security and food systems literally unite The family of humankind on the table to dialogue.
But what's the problem? Is land at the top of the political agenda in our countries? Is land and soil health and food security at the top of the political agendas, at the finance agenda? I believe it's not.
It's under served.
Bless you.
But that my friends, that can change.
But again, that can change not because change is something outside of ourselves.
If we're talking about restoring land and hope, The hope resides that the change we need is within us.
Each and every one of us has to become ambassador to elevate the importance of those agendas politically and conceptually.
So we start to see what is one of the topics of this panel this session, whether our commitments translated in reality.
And that, my friends, is good policy and good politics.
Moving from commitments and paperwork to shaping the reality in the lives of people, to live, to incarnate life, as if, as it is, humankind being one with land.
That, I believe, is our greatest challenge.
But the hope is that each and every one of us contributes daily on moving the agenda to where it belongs.
The agenda of systems, of land restoration, and of soil health at the top where it belongs, because at the end of the day of the day, my friends, and with that, I am is literally what gives services to the ones we love.
We are nothing but made of what we eat.
That's what we are here.
And we're not treating it with importance.
Let's change that.
So with that, I thank you for your attention and I'm looking forward to listening to what the real experts, not myself, but the real experts have to offer.
Thank you.
Many thanks, President, for this very powerful address and it's very impassionately reminding us that looking after nature, land restoration should be top of our political agenda everywhere across the globe.
Thank you so very much for that.
So to take us into the implementation challenge, that's what we have been discussing here all morning, I am delighted to welcome Beth Bechtel, Deputy Director General of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Thank you.
Thanks very much.
Excellency distinguished participants, ladies and gentlemen.
I think President Alvarado has set out very clearly why this issue demands political attention.
And as he said, the question for us now is how do we turn that political ambition into commitments and into implementation? We don't lack commitments.
I think we also don't lack scientific knowledge, and in many cases, we don't even lack promising solutions.
What is too often missed are the connections between and among these.
So I want to just very briefly touch on four of these connections that I think are particularly essential.
First, we need to connect policy ambition with practical national priorities.
We have a discussion here in this session on food systems, just a disclaimer from the Food and Agriculture Organization.
We say agri food systems because we think the agriculture and the production part of food systems is important.
Agri food systems cannot be transformed if we have isolated soil, water, agriculture, and environmental policies.
Countries need integrated approaches that identify where land degradation is constraining production, where restoration can generate the greatest return, and which policy and institutional barriers are preventing action.
The guidance that has jointly been launched by FAO and UNCCD today is important, precisely because it helps translate the commitments made at CP 16 into practical options for countries to avoid, to reduce, and ultimately reverse agricultural land and soil degradation.
Second, we have to connect science with decisions that farmers and governments can use.
Countries can't invest effectively if they do not know the conditions of their soils, what those soils can sustainably produce, or which interventions will deliver the greatest benefits.
FAO is working with countries in Africa and Central America to build national soil information and decision support systems.
This is not data collection for data collection sake.
It's about helping governments make better choices about crops, fertilizers, water, land restoration, and public investment.
And we do that.
When we do that, we help farmers also make better production decisions.
This is what we say is not just soil science, it's soil intelligence.
Third, we must connect solutions with partnerships that are capable of delivering them at scale.
FAO can't do this alone, UN CCD can't do this alone.
National governments and political leadership can't do this alone, nor can the private sector, financial institutions, research organizations, farmers organizations, all of whom are represented at this very meaningful convening of these last week these last days.
Partnerships must be built around clearly defined national priorities with each institution contributing what it does best and really setting aside the competition among ourselves that has taken us down unnecessary paths for far too long.
We can't lose sight of the fact that farmers have to be central to these partnerships.
They are not simply beneficiaries of agri food systems transformation.
They are investors, they are producers, they are land managers, they are the private sector in many circumstances and the solutions have to work economically at the farm level.
Finally, we have to connect investment with measurable productive value.
Soil health is still too often financed as an environmental cost.
It must also be recognized as an investment in productivity, and water use efficiency, and resilience, and importantly in food security.
And so to attract finance, we need credible data, coherent policies, investable programs, and mechanisms that reward farmers for the benefits that they generate.
Moving from ambition to action is not a single step.
It doesn't happen with just one set of discussions, one set of conclusions, or one set of convenings.
We have to work at it.
FAO, I commit to all of you will continue to bring its technical knowledge, our country presence, and our data and convening capacity to this important task.
The test of our ambition will not be the commitments that we repeat.
It will be whether countries have the information, institutions, partnerships, and investment that's needed to put better solutions into farmers' fields.
That, I believe, is how we begin to turn ambition into implementation.
Thank you very much.
Many thanks, Beth.
Thank you very much.
We've heard the institutional and the political case.
Now let's bring it together with science and frontline experience.
Please join me in welcoming Kina Samba, Regional Director for West and Central Africa at the World Food Program.
Welcome, Kina.
Please come and join us here onstage.
And doctor Ratan La, Professor of Soil Science and Director of the Carbon Management and Sequestration Center at the Ohio State University and 2020 World Food Prize Laureate.
Congratulations, and please come and join us.
Welcome to both of you.
To set the scene, I'd like to ask you first the following question.
Across many regions, land degradation, climate change, and food security, in this case, insecurity are reinforcing one another.
It's a vicious circle.
From your respective perspectives, what are you seeing on the ground and why does soil health matter more than ever? I don't know.
Thank you very much.
That was a very nice question, but coming after the two excellent speakers, it's kind of a very hard to come up to their level.
I'd like to begin that soil, you know, the question came up connecting things.
Soil is the biggest connector on the planet Earth.
W soil sports life are life.
It provides nutritious, safe and healthy food.
It filters and a new water supply.
It enhances activity and species diversity of biota.
It connects planetary history, it sources all antibiotics taken by human and livestock, and it connects human with nature.
Despite all this, 40% of the soil and land are degraded 1 billion people do not get enough food, hunger, more than 2 million people suffer from malnutrition, freedom.
Therefore, it's our duty to make sure that we can harness the ecosystem services which are generated by soil.
And to do that, humanities must follow the example of healthy soil as a bridge.
I want to say that bridge and a bridge builder across communities, ethnic groups, religions, civilization, and political ideologies.
At this moment, I'm going to turn from a speech for something else, building bridge across nations.
And an old man going along to Highway, came at the evening cold and gray to chasm vast and deep and wide through which he was flowing a sudden tide.
The old man crowed in twilight dim.
The sullen stream had no fear for him.
But he turned back safe on the other side and built a bridge to span a.
Old man said a fellow Pilgrim here.
You are wasting your strength and building here.
Your journey will end with the ending day.
You never again will pass this way.
You have crossed the chasm deep and wide.
Why is this bridge at even The builder lifted his doll gray head.
Good friend, the path I have come, he said, There followed one day after me today, a youth whose feet must also pass this way.
This chasm that has been to me to that fair youth might a pf be.
He too must cross in the twilight dim.
Good friend, I'm building a bridge for.
And that is what we have to do by restoring soil will bridge.
Thank you very much for this very poetic answer to my question.
I just wanted to point out that you mentioned that soil is our greatest connector, after all, we eat, walk, live on the same soil.
So thank you very much for that.
Inste now, I'd like you to maybe share your perspective and what you're seeing in West Africa in particular.
Thank you very much.
I don't think I can compete with that poetic response.
In West Africa, and I'd like to speak specifically to the region of the Central Sahel, which borders the Sahara Desert, where 80% of the land is degraded due to a number of factors, principally climate shocks, poor land management, really poor agriculture practices, overgrazing, and we're really talking about one of the most vulnerable parts of the world.
The communities continue to be faced by frequent shocks, droughts, erratic rainfall, and growing pressure on natural resources as a result of displacement.
We have some of the highest numbers of displacement in the world, continued conflicts, so people are being displaced internally and we have refugees coming in.
And 80% of the people living in this area depend on the land.
I mean, they're farmers or pastoralists.
And so this degraded land translates directly into lower harvests, lower food availability, reduced incomes, food prices going up and growing food security.
Unfortunately, the food security situation is not getting better.
For WFP really soil health matters a lot.
And we're supporting communities to improve soil conditions with land rehabilitation techniques.
We received our work was recognized yesterday for the World Restoration flagship.
And what we do is we construct put in place infrastructure called half homes, pits, stone bonds to promote sustainable agricultural practices, castor restoration, water has structures, and reforestation.
And all these investments are really translating into increased availability of agriculture, productive land, grazing areas, livestock feed, and water resources.
And since 2018, we have restored over 335,000 hectares of land across the semi desertic Sahara region and improved the lives of 4.2 million people across 3,000 villages and Evidence is showing that where we work, we're significantly improving vegetation growth and when you compare the areas that we've restored to non restored areas, and rehabilitated pastureland f production also contributes to reducing conflict between the farmers and the pastoralists.
Because you have the soil moist for longer periods of the year, it allows communities to engage in gardening and other income generating activities outside the rainy season.
So even though we're seeing food insecurity increasing in the areas where we're working, we're really seeing the reverse happening.
And this is also translating into improved nutrition for children and from EFP, reducing the need for humanitarian assistance.
And we're really seeing quite important results.
And one of the previous speakers talked about, I think it was the Madame Foard me, you know, what the returns on investments, we're showing that land restoration alone can generate returns of up to $30 for just $1 invested invested.
And we conducted a recent study that showed that resilience investments can generate up to $25 in avoided climate losses for every dollar invested.
So that, you know, the evidence is clear, we really need to work to manage our soil better.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
That shows how much we could unlock by investing in land restoration, indeed.
Many thanks to our panelists here.
Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts today and a little bit of poetry.
We always need poetry in our lives.
So thank you very much for that.
We're going to move on to our next conversation.
Thank you very much.
Let's have a round of applause, please for our distinguished speakers.
Our panel discussion on financing resilient and regenerative food systems, investing in soil health as a strategic economic asset.
Because indeed we've established, we know that healthy soils matters, and now comes the difficult question.
Who pays and how? Investments in soil health and regenerative agriculture remain too fragmented and far below what is required.
We need to change the way we think about soil itself, not simply as an environmental concern or a cost, but as a productive economic assets, as we have just heard here.
So please welcome our first panel Today, to the stage, His Excellency Davsarn Sam D Jaar, Deputy Minister of Economic Development of Mongolia.
Ruth Davis, the UK Special Representative for Nature, La Wali Gaba, Division Manager for Agricultural Research, Production and Sustainability at the African Development Bank Group.
Hello, welcome everyone.
Christian Laazwa from the World Parle Forum and Matthew Donda, General Director and Vice President of NextEra, and a Business for and champion.
Welcome to all of you.
I'd like to start this panel discussion with the same question for the five of you, please.
I will take a very short answer, please, initially, and then we can dive a little bit deeper into the theme of our conversation.
When your institution or your company or the organization you work for looks at investment in soil health, which of the three words best describe it? Cost, risk, or opportunity.
Your Excellency.
All right.
Good afternoon, everyone.
Thank you for having me here.
And once there are very good and official translators are here, so let me speak in Mongolian The risk and the opportunity.
But the question is, like, which word best describes the when it comes.
So In our case.
So the soil health.
So I would say that for all three of these describe the circumstance because if the soil is healthy, this would be a great opportunity.
And so behind the opportunity, there would be usually we are So the healthy soil is opportunity itself.
So the way we can ensure soil health would be a risk and the risk would indicate the potential cost contingent cost.
So therefore, the So therefore, I would say that soil is like there is an economic term, land, labor and capital and technologies.
So any production would take place by combining these elements.
So this is the key term.
So in this sense, from that perspective, soil itself is the one key, very key element of that belongs to the land.
So this composition, this important composition element needs to be protected in order to in order to ensure our well being.
So that would be the base conditions of the health of the soil would prescribe any conditions.
According to the world statistics, 40% of the dry land across the world is somehow degraded, eroded.
So these statistics, if we look at the population, so the 40 nearly 40% of the world global population is somehow indirectly or directly affected.
So in the case of Mongolia since 2000 since the year 2000, the the drought and the ot frequency has constantly been increasing, and overall, there is a 20% increase compared to 20 years ago, and more than 70% of the grazland has been somehow desertified.
So the latest this is the biggest at as of 2024 in the agriculture sector of Mongolia.
I 27% decline, and so this is a reduction in the agriculture sector.
So this would have 1 trillion reduction in the potential GDP.
So economic implication would be 1 trillion M&T.
So by the year 2027, the economic growth was So the six point in the year 2025, that the economic growth was 6% eight and three percentage point the country is contributed by the agriculture sector.
And we have an increasing climate change impact, and that is triggering increased soil erosion issues, soil degradation issues.
So therefore, this has the implication that implies that the soil health should be in the center of policy strategy.
So the So the PPP and cross sectoral coordination and the strategy level and policy level.
So in terms of your question, which of these three keywords to describe, I would say my answer would be all three of these.
Thank you very much.
The stairs bottoms are still.
What your take on this is Okay, good afternoon again, and thanks for the organs inviting the bank to share our experiences on systematic.
So just to start, let's say that the barrier of this investment is not really the short.
What we realize is in terms of sting resilient value.
The table as bunk set.
This is an issue because we have really disconnection in terms of, different measures that come.
There are different barrier.
The first one is about data from fragmentation.
In many countries, pharmacy registration, land tener input is really disconnect from different stakeholders, Government, donor, NGO, which have these data lands they cannot assess portfolio risk.
A scan, you have to proceed project by project, and this is the issue.
The second also is instplementation.
In many countries, agriculture, climate finance, water and finance are different ministry that are implementing independent program.
So forcing every financier to rebuild coordination among the stakeholder is challenges in many countries.
The third one is about the market fragmentation.
When we're talking about, processing, and uptake, I finance it separately and secondarily rather than one a value chain.
So these are really some major challenges that are facing the investment in the thematic.
So what works based on experience, what we see is the leaking of the production, processing, and furnace.
The three have to be linked.
And the bank shows this pattern of production support alone, strength to attract capital, a private sector of capital.
What work is pairing with the processing and the market.
We have two flagship which are really dedicated to these thematics.
The first one is technology for African Agriculture Transformation Program, which is a platform of ten Sager, which brings technology and innovation on sustainable land management and soil healing to farmers.
And we implemented this program last ten years, and for now during the ten years, 25 million farmers have access to innovative technologies, which generate up to $4 billion in terms of production volume.
And the complementary flagship we have, which achieve this is what we call a special agro processing zone package or SAP et, which supplied storage and logistics that turn raw production into some films that private sector can actually finance.
We have two example which illustrates this.
We have this in Ethiopia, which during the last five years link more than 400 small farmers to processing value chain, which create more than 100,000 jobs and mobilize up to $350 million from the private investment with a commitment for now, which is about $1 million.
We have the same experiences in Nigeria where these agro processing zones the government invest $200 million to support the production.
And this attract now around $1 billion from the private sector to now implement the agro processing zone.
So the farmers and the agro processing zone are linked.
So while it works, the idea is really private sector don't finance and farm on its own.
The risk is to diffuse and uncertain.
So what is important really is to have the SPC Z program which fix the processing infrastructure, brings the guarantee buyer and all this.
So it is really important, I think, in terms of what finance should MDB should do differently.
So what do we do Yeah, Mr.
Cnova, I'm sorry.
I have to interrupt you because I invited brief remarks to start with and for you to pick this was a cost an opportunity because we need to move on to the rest of the panel.
Very quickly, was your pick on this cost risk opportunity, clearly.
I mean, what's important is really to connect the production, processing and the finance.
And this is what really we are piloting, which was able to attract the private sector financing.
So in the context of Africa, this is really what we are working on, and it works with the results we have because it's now increased the revenue of farmers, which allows them to invest in land degradation.
Without this connection, this is not feasible.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Ruth Davis, here's a working microphone for you.
Thanks very much.
Well, everyone in the panel is going to cheat on your question.
They're all going to say that all three things are important.
So forgive me, I'm not going to make the choice.
I'm going to very quickly say at the moment, we have a situation in which the costs of soil degradation are experienced by farmers and by consumers.
They're experienced by farmers in degradation of their incomes, livelihoods, and future, and by consumers in relation to growing price shocks and inflation.
But these costs are not recognized and fully internalized, frankly, by the economic system and often the finance ministries that we work with.
So it's clear that there is got some where that lives.
We think that a really important way of making the connection, which is an important part of the conversation that I think Beth was talking about earlier, is to really systematically expose the risks associated with soil loss and do that in a way that then actually enables you to quantify that and to make that risk visible in the context of the economic plans of governments and the private sector investment situations.
Only then going to be in a position where we can actually grasp the opportunity, which my Belin colleague was describing, which is the process of actually connecting markets, process and production.
Forgive me, this is the journey, and I'm not going to choose, I would say that's the process of the journey to get to the place that my colleague next door was talking about.
Thanks very much.
Thank you, Ruth.
Thank you very much.
Quickly moving on to Christian Barza from World Rural F.
What's your take on this? I'm hoping you're going to give me a straightforward answer.
Yes.
And I think unlike the other panelists, I'm going to choose one.
And I would definitely say opportunity because family farmers can't make they cannot earn a livelihood on dead soil.
And I think that is a reality for all of the members that are joining me here today and everywhere in the world.
And if just I can very briefly explain on why do we think this is an opportunity? I'm going to provide just a quick example of one of our members in Tunisia in North Africa, where in the southern part, in the Arid part, farmers are harvesting water using traditional water collection systems.
They are planting figs, olives and almond trees.
They're managing organic matter, and everything is just to keep the soil alive.
In one of the places where agriculture is the most challenging, these agricultural and agroecological practices are already sustaining and helping protect their incomes and their livelihoods.
So I think that is the opportunity from the farmer's perspective that if we keep a healthy soil, we can keep healthy and sustainable livelihoods in the future.
So that is, you know, this is what is in front of us right now is that opportunity of really supporting them to continue providing food security and livelihoods in the rural communities.
So that would be my answer.
Thank you.
Thank you very much, Christian.
Maeda next.
Cost, risk or opportunity for you at N zero.
Thank you, Charlotte.
Good afternoon, everyone.
It's an honor to be here today at this high level session and to be here also for poetic thoughts.
It's the first time since I've been here and I find it interesting.
To give a little bit of background, N is a French family company located in France, where we produce natural and organic ingredients for the food and nutrition industry coming from plant based raw materials, but come mainly from the acacia tree and the barberp tree that grow exclusively almost in dry land areas of soil in Africa.
The reason why I am here today and to maybe slowly answer to Charlotte is to represent the private sector, actually even more private company and a small and medium sized company.
I please know I think that we need to include more and more small and medium sized companies from the farmer to sometimes traders and also industrial companies.
I think it's vital.
I'm a strong believer in collaboration and to create socioeconomic impact with, of course, environmental benefits, that's for sure, but at the end, coming from the business world and using acronyms, the best bankable KPI is going to be the ROI.
What is viable or not and how can we create economical benefits? I will try to very briefly demonstrate that with a program that was launched almost 20 years ago in Chad with the NGO SSL and where, of course, sustainable land management was part of the program, planting trees.
Acacia trees which are a natural defense to the desert.
They fix nitrogen because they capture the nitrogen.
They also with their deep root allow water to feed the soil with water and they are also a source of an ingredient that is using all the industry, the food industry that is called Gamerbic or gum acia and which is, I would say relatively major economy.
And with this program, we started by producing 1,500 tons.
We went to 25 to 30,000 tons, and we have an objective to go to 5,000 tons.
Just for this area, we are talking about 300 villages and 30000-50 thousand target producers, farmers.
At the end, not only the socioeconomic impact is important, but I think it's what I heard this morning, it's economic power.
It's the best way to potentially help some areas also to leverage on economy, which is also the best leverage for stability.
We spoke a little bit you mentioned conflict and we are talking about areas that are in conflict and a Let's create more virtual cycle than a spiral where if we don't do it, actually it's going to get worse and worse and the land degradation will be worse and worse as it was mentioned, soil could be degraded too.
Let's try to make it better and provide more natural organic and healthy ingredients to the rest of the world, which is needed.
So what is the one word you picked math you? I hear this morning, I think economic power sorry Opportunity Opportunity.
Thank you so much.
So we're going to move to a second round of questions for all our guests here.
I'm going to start with you, You Excellency, because soil health isn't necessarily the first thing that people associate with economic development, but we've heard today so far that, of course, it's inseparable from it.
What convinced you that it belongs in that conversation and not just in the Ministry of environment? It's a very interesting question.
Thank you for your questions.
As I mentioned before, so our panelists also mentioned about that the soil health is opportunity, and this is a very interesting and vital point.
This is not I would like to also I mentioned also earlier an example in 2022, due to the decline in the heads of livestock, there was a decline decline in agriculture.
So that perhaps negative implications.
So that implied percentage points or in monetary amount, 1 trillion shock to the economy.
And that triggers inflation shock.
The degradation of the soil and the deterioration of the soil quality is impacting directly impacting directly and indirectly to the well being of the people.
So from the Ministry of Economy and Ministry of Economy and Development, the soil health should be reflected as international development strategy, as the infrastructure of development.
So the soil and land should be reflected as an asset and should be taken into consideration as development infrastructure.
So in order to develop and maintain the vision, the green development taxonomy should apply, and we need to re engineer, redesign the land and soil as an asset as an infrastructure.
So this is this looks like one way to ensure health of if we deem it as financial asset, So the financial institutions, like my colleague also mentioned, so one of the key priorities for the financial institutions should be to ensure the quality of the assets.
So for the businesses, so the improvement of the health of source should be the business objective.
And if we ensure the healthy soil, we can he can come the incentives of subsidies.
So the subsidies and incentives should be one instrument to better manage the asset as an infrastructure.
So the next the So in the agriculture industry, I know that for many countries like many developing countries, agriculture is that gets the biggest amount of subsidy from the government.
And if we look back at the different subsidies that were provided to agriculture, we have a legacy of providing 16 different subsidies.
And then we need to revisit, reconsider these subsidies, whether these are improving the quality or healthy status of the soil or not.
So our policy should be directed towards providing subsidizing the restoring programs.
So the Costa Rica representative also mentioned that this is part of our day to life.
So we need to be and we need to treat soil as live asset and capital.
And therefore, we need to improve our strategies.
So and redesign the policies and strategies and the management in terms of green financing, So we have many it has been many years for about green financing for many years, and we need to also improve the green economy and amine it with the asset management principles.
So in this regard, so the quality and the health of soil shouldn't be treated as a standalone or isolated issue and needs to be treated as an economic indicator, economic economic item, and so that it would be turned into an opportunity.
Yes.
We've heard throughout Pp 17, the fact that nature is infrastructure and soil is capital.
Absolutely.
Thank you very much for that.
Mr.
Gaba, development banks are often asked to bridge the gap between public ambition and private investment.
From your perspective, what is the biggest barrier preventing more capital from reaching soil health and resilient agriculture today and what can development finance do differently to unlock investment at scale? Okay.
Thank you.
So as I indicated, I mean, one of the major barrier for the investment in land restoration and agriculture is really the high risk of this investment.
So what we have to do is to really makes that swell heat, we didn't see it as expenses again, but to have swell heat is investment that generates return revenue.
So for this, we must really have so heat measurable and monetable.
Investment need credible data on productive gain, climate risk, improve input efficiency, carbon, and former income.
We must use constitutional finance and strategically to de risk the private sector capital.
When you have guarantee, face loss capital, low currency facilities, and the risk sharing investment, just really ensures that even the local commercial bank will become more comfortable to invest in agriculture.
We should really put money exactly where private investors are most nervous, not spread this everywhere.
So our value chain has the value chain has really weakened.
So we should place the private sector where they are most comfortable and have now the public investment in the high risk area.
So in short, what I can say is that MDBs, like African development bank should not only finance agriculture, but we should also build the market structure around resilient value chain.
That means reducing risk, aggregating demand, strengthening local finance institutions, and converting soil heating from scattered intervention to scal and vegetable pipeline.
And finally, what I can say, again, is that we don't need to go to pilot to demonstrate that soil and resilient agriculture can be profitable.
I see that there are already some evidence on this, but what we need is to develop finance willing to form the connection between farm, market and capital at scale.
Thank you.
Thank you, sir.
Thank you very much.
Bruce Davis, you have spent years trying to well, trying to get nature onto the agenda of finance conversations.
Has the reception of this message changed recently compared to when you started, especially after the summer we have witnessed in Ewope and in the UK in particular? Thank you for the question.
I think things are changing, but quite slowly.
I'd really like to pay tribute to the fact that Her Excellency, the Deputy Minister from the economy department is here with us today.
It's really showing the way Mongolian leadership and having the economic department on the platform talking about soil health.
I think soils is a great way of actually having this conversation because I think many people can understand that the agriculture sector is both vital and also it's an active productive economic sector and it connects back to natural and ecosystem services.
It is a good way of having the conversation.
Um, look, do I still think that the community of people who understand nature based solutions, ecosystem services, the fundamental underpinning of the economy that is given by nature, are talking well to the finance community? No, they're not.
We're using language which both sides still fundamentally don't really understand and the translation process is extremely difficult.
Some of that has to do with timescales and what the expectation is of the timescale for a rate of return.
Um, some of it is to do with, I think, a sense that somehow or another, the market is separate from those natural systems, that the market can operate somehow independently of the underpinning infrastructure.
And some of it is to do with the fact that actually we're not being clear enough and consistent enough in knocking on the door of economic departments and universities, economic finance ministries, and making the point in a clear, consistent way about infrastructure, which I think is the point that was very clearly made by the deputy Finance Minister.
I answer, things are changing.
This panel is evidence that things are changing.
So as a really good vector.
But no, we're not doing enough, and I'm always open for any opportunity to do more in this space.
I think this conference needs to take its message into the economic and finance systems of the world.
So thanks.
Thank you very much what you are alluding to here is two almost alternate realities, just to go back to the point you made a president earlier of two communities living in parallel universe is almost a financial community and the real community producing the fruit, we eat every day.
Christian, now, you spend your time advocating for family farmers from small farmers worldwide.
What is the one story from the ground, you keep coming back to when you need to convince a room exactly like this one, although I think this room is pretty convinced.
But what do you need to convince a room of people who work in finance to hold farmers and their perspectives at the heart of their decision making or in political circles, let's say? Okay.
No.
Okay.
That works now.
Well, thank you for that question.
So when we were preparing to come to UNCCD, our organization ran an articulation process, and we worked toward network to identify what were the priorities that we would bring to a conference like this in Cop 17.
And what we learned is and what reaffirmed is the invaluable role of farmers organizations in this conversation, and also how important is how farmers organizations are organizing and articulating from the local, regional, and then to the global level.
Um, and one of those priorities that came out of our discussions was around land tenure, and because tenure security is like a precondition to restoration everywhere.
And the gap is even wider for women.
And this is where I come to the story.
And this is an inspiring story that we heard throughout our network and it's from one of our members in Cameroon.
And I want to get the name right, so I'm just going to go look at my notes very quickly.
It's Li lagli, which is led by Rfakov.
Um, and this is an initiative that lets men pass land to their wives and to their daughters so that women can manage their own agro forestry plots through community ceremonies.
And in its earlier years, this initiative secured land ownership for 35 women across 18 villages, and it led to over 60,000 trees planted and 16 new community nurseries.
So at WRF as a global network, we continue to call, regardless of the convention where we are, is that we need more farmers' voices in this conference rooms, that we need, specifically for UN CCD, more secure land tenure, especially for women, and more direct access to finance, because I think a lot of the work that farmers are doing is done because they are running the business and it's own from their own pockets and sometimes without safety nets.
And as a global network, we see it every day that when farmers are enabled, when they get the support that they do and through their organizations, they are able to deliver real impact and real change for the rural communities.
Thank you.
Thank you very much, Kristen.
Thank you.
A great story, indeed.
Matthew Dodi, it's really interesting to have you on this panel because you embody the voice of the private sector and business here, indeed.
And maybe more of us would like to know what convinced you to engage in the UNCCD progress and process, sorry, and to become a Business for land champion with UNCCD.
I think I already answered earlier, but I will repeat and go a little bit more in details.
I think that being part of a business for land is a very good opportunity to bring the business world at the cup, of course.
Again, bringing medium sized companies like ours.
It could be small.
I think it was mentioned a little bit before, small companies, farmers, should be more involved, I think, and we really need to have this economic overview, I think that demonstrates this economic power can be verged.
Once again, it's a collaborative approach where we can have both the public and the private world.
This morning I read something interesting too.
It's also bridging in between the private world because some large corporations don't see very small farmers and vice versa, small farmers don't have access to the big companies.
The business foreland is potentially actually hopefully going to become an even bigger platform to potentially connect all those different stakeholders of a private industry.
So that's, I think, phosphorus cop, you know, a good way to start thinking about it and maybe bring this as the next efforts for us to do with a business plan.
Thank you much.
I was smiling at Bs because I was thinking, of course, when you were talking about it that the BL forum and all the participants in this program are a great example of how you can engage the business and the private sector.
Creating those platforms are very important to do so.
Congratulations, maybe to you and CCD and all the partners, of course, because I believe Saudi Arabia and Mongolia as well are stakeholders in the project.
Thank you for that and many thanks to our panelists for sharing their insights with us this afternoon on financing resilient and regenerative food systems.
Many thanks to all of you.
And we are going to move on to our second panel discussion entitled Strengthening policy coherence and Institutional coordination from Fragmentation to Integrated Delivery.
Because food systems do not fit neatly into a single government department and that's why it was so interesting and valuable to have the Deputy Minister from the Ministry of the economy with us here.
Indeed, food systems toutch agriculture, environment, finance, trade, water, land, and social policy, and yet our institutions often still operate in silos.
Our final panel asked a deceptively simple question and welcome.
How do we make government and the wider system around it work together well enough to actually deliver transformation? We welcome Iabat Sagan Ku, Minister of Food, Agriculture and Light Industry of Mongolia.
His Excellency Abu K Polart, Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Forestry of Turkey.
Welcome.
Stana D O, Country Director of Tree Aid Senegal and advisor to Senegal's Minister of Environment.
Stana, welcome.
Good to see you.
Ia Campari, Global Leader of Food and Agricultural Practice at WWF International, and a regular feature on this stage throughout this forum, as well as Esther Penuna, who's Secretary-General of the Asian Farmers Association.
Welcome to all of you.
So I'd like to start this conversation with a first round of generic and broad question for our panelists here.
If transformation is ultimately delivered on farms and in communities, how can governments and their partners ensure that farmers, pastoralists, women, and youth are not only consulted, but have a meaningful role in shaping and delivering the solutions.
Thank you.
And we'll start with you, Your Excellency.
Everybody passed by Mongolia and today is the 11th day of the cop 17, and we are successfully completing this cop 17.
As everybody knows about one of them, I cannot see.
For the Hello.
Hello, can you hear? Is it getting through? Hello? Is it getting through? Is it getting through? Hello? Can you is it getting through? Hello? Hello? Is it getting through? Hello? Hello? Hello? Hello.
Can you move? If you can so the coordination of in order to ensure coordination between the nine ministries, we need the information platform and the coordinated policies and framework.
In the ministerial coordination needs to be ensured through policies and regulations and ensure to consolidate the efforts in restoring the land and the agriculture and so So in addition to that, the land law and land tender law plays very important because in our case, the land rights annual belongs to the state and also on the other hand, the farmers for the farmers agriculture, the land right is not the ownership, but use So therefore, legally, the land is used land belongs to the government, and this is not the practice also proves that it's not too bad, it's not too wrong resolution.
So to briefly respond to your questions, so the legal framework is must be very clear and supportive legal framework.
And of course, there needs to be also consideration of the specific situation in each country.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Dialysis, tarsal don, massing, Dorgan, her larda, metal lara means they get checked, let's show.
Vin Tjbzoan Hala politica, Sunk Chieflmk, Iannuzz Danish Maish.
Alza politica Sklnan refugee, Kan Chief Chenishm Geng Dha I Kundan or Massiah.
Dear moderator, distinguished panelists, and estem participants, sustainable agricultural transformation does not happen around the desk.
It happens directly in our fields, pastures, and villages.
Our experience has taught us one very clear truth.
Presenting a pre designed policy and then asking farmers for reviews is merely an act of consultation.
True participation means bringing producers, women farmers, and young entrepreneurs to the table from day one while the policy is still being shaped.
Turk, Bgchsa, Karal mechanism, Tbandan Tawana, Burgos, kin Zamanda, Hata dams, me fudg Tarsal rein pila ca, Schmelin moda, Sj, Marcus Danel, erl retig b clams, Ozark.
Topraka Achgshan, Anjk cesary Tri Sk, Azulangansramsm, Kara such in the key urine, lg Hare Getac Angelmser.
Omar Asad Ktalar Armkkalyv Khalil, Haram Jabinegg digital Arasa, bureaucracy, Orthodon Calder, T Ozman Ash, Prama, Omar Tarmal Ist Marin, Gacek Nala Pérez.
As Turkey, we are designing our decision making mechanisms from the bottom up in order to ensure this genuine participation.
We recently implemented the agricultural production planning and contract farming models that are focused on climate and water.
We designed these not solely at the central level, but hand in hand with our local producer organizations.
It is our priority to ensure the permanent inclusion in decision making processes of women and young people who work most closely with the land, but whose voices have historically been heard the least.
We are not merely allocating quotas for them through innovative digital tools such as T agriculture in my pocket, as well as grants and stacization programs, we are removing procretic barriers and enabling them to become the true leaders of agricultural enterprises.
Bing tori, Tsum Sada Haram Geir Bechnialm Omar canbcha, candidisrina, propcarn Drug, unamic Flonis, Sada Chief T gna Edens, Bakin Basil Bus Deluschiefin, Tara Sunda Bach, Busan, political aramzm Bachar Tm ila alrams, Uga Chief Gib Ugamramzar.
The I attend there, ornary learning, politician Germ Larsa systems.
Implementation dimension is just as critical as the planning process.
Ultimately, it is our producers themselves who will put solutions into practice in the field.
We must therefore adopt technical guidance to their own budgets, their own risks, and the conditions of their land.
What convinces the farmer in the field is not a printed brochure from the ministry, but a tangible success that they can see in a neighboring farmer's field.
That is why the success of our policies depends on the effectiveness of our agricultural expansion networks and good practices such as farm or field schools.
Ultimately, if producers cannot see their recommendations from consultation meetings reflected in policy, then the system is not functioning properly.
Coal system that indicate Buddha, Yashi Ja Kona ajazar, Chief Tilrams, Mara Bukele and Yedish, Adams grams, Orabsu Atibamik Wever, Birfil, Ishi Dori Yamanan, top proms James Kumanan cul, su.
Those who will experience this transformation of food systems are not only us.
There are farmers, our livestock breeders who depend on our pastures, our women, and our young people.
Giving them a meaningful role in this process is not a favor.
It is a necessity for doing the job properly and protecting our land and our future.
Thank you very much.
Many thanks, Your Excellency, and I believe you may have to rush to the next session, so please feel free to leave us.
We are very grateful you were able to join us for this important session.
Indeed, many thanks.
Yes, let's have a Miranda opposed.
Thank you.
Sana, now, great to have you here on stage with us.
To go back to this first initial and very generic question of transformation of farms and communities, what, according to you, is the best way for governments and partners to ensure that all the stakeholders, farmers, pastoralists, women and young people are not just consulted, but really integrated and play a meaningful role in shaping and delivering the solutions.
Thank you so much for that really huge question because it's something I think we are discussing about at this COP and that's a very important one because in most of the cases, the rural communities, these communities are viewed as beneficiaries in our interventions.
And we can also see with a strong affirmation that those communities are the first actors on restoration in the lands on pastoralism and so on.
In my mind, and as we are proceeding in triad, we are really considering them as a partners, and this is something we are working on on a daily basis.
Let me just give one example.
If we have to build a project for those communities with those communities, for those communities, we need to co create.
We need to go on the ground, understand what is the real need, how because nature based solutions are working, those people already have the solution.
They really need the support on tackling on scaling.
So on our in our perspective at trade, we are on that solution on a daily basis.
And I'm honored to sit also as a special advisor at the highest level, like in this high level event, talking about those people because it's important to bridge the gap for us at the highest level to understand what is the real need on the ground because the solution is there and we really need with those as partners to co create to build the resilience.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Terminology matters, doesn't it? Including all the stakeholders we mentioned and not call them stakeholders, but call them partners, make them actual partners and part of the process, indeed.
Next, I'd like to hear your thoughts, Joel on this and how we can better include everyone in the conversation and the outcome.
Yeah.
Thanks, Harold, for that question.
I'm just going to continue what my colleague here on my right has said.
I think there are two parts for this question.
One of them is in shaping, how can governments and partners stakeholders or partners to help shape solutions? Then the second part is about delivering solutions.
In shaping solutions, it's as easy as if you make it easy for partners to engage, give them the same entry point.
We need to stop this thing about treating important partners as beneficiaries as if they are in the receiving end of a welfare state.
This is not the case.
We have important stakeholders at the table.
And we're talking about the transformation of food and agricultural systems, this becomes especially important because we have many times small scale farmers that are very poor, they do not even have the means sometimes or the capacity to associate.
To come into a cooperative and make collective claims.
We have pastoralists, we have women and girls, and we have the youth and need them as equal partners in decision making.
They need to help shape policies and decisions that they will then implement.
We need to move beyond this struggle because some of those who are not really well represented in food systems and agricultural systems decision making, they need to struggle their way in.
It's the role of government, it's the role of us from NGOs to make sure that the voices of everyone is heard in shaping and delivering policy.
Now, when we go to the delivery, again, it's two simple things.
Give the capacity for decisions that are nature positive and climate neutral to begin to shape.
Sometimes it's a matter of capacity, not lack of will.
As I spoke in a previous panel, I said, farmers are the first stewards of the environment.
They do not want to be the last and they are economic agents.
A economic agents, they respond to incentives.
So give them then the right finance for a nature positive transition, and they will follow through adoption of agroecology, nature positive practices, restorative practices in agriculture.
Thank you.
Very much, Zhao.
His Excellency has to excuse himself to join another session.
So many thanks to you, Minister, for joining us here this afternoon.
We're very grateful you were able to find a time to join this very important session, indeed.
Es next onto the same question of how we really include all the partners, I'm going to use the right terms here, all the partners in the conversation and the delivery of the outcome.
Well, I really love what I have heard from the government.
And from the civil society, the NGOs.
I think what we really need is governments and their partners to recognize farmers as their partners, equal partners.
We are all in partnership in land restoration, in agroecology, in biodiversity, in climate action.
And that means, yes, I agree, it starts from the design or shaping of any activity, any action, any policy, any project.
And then goes into also trusting the farmers through our organizations in the implementation of these projects because we are on the ground.
Land restoration is to be done on the ground and we are there.
We should be implementers.
We should be also trusted with exacting accountability to all the big financials and government.
So we have to be also in monitoring and evaluation of projects.
To do that, you see going into consultations, going into the ministry, especially if it's in the capital needs funding and small scale scale pastoralist, men and women must have just enough or barely enough just for their food.
They should have some budget to go to the ministry to talk and engaging for lobby and advocacy in the ministries takes long time, not just one meeting, but several meetings.
We have to have this kind of budget.
In the implementation, even in policy engagement, we have to have that kind of knowledge on the dynamics of the government, the bureaucracy who is there, how to talk to them, how to make policy proposals so that we will be heard.
And that means money for us.
So partnership equal partnership with farmers through our farmers organizations and cooperatives would also mean direct access to finance.
Finance that will empower us to be very good policy advocates, to be very good rights holders, to be very good citizens in terms of really giving feedback on the projects that are being managed, especially by our government and other partners.
Thank you.
Thank you very much, Esther.
Yes.
I that these a round of applause.
Thank you.
Stana, I'm going back to you again here, because you sit between government and the field every day, to understand or to find out what has been the most surprising thing that you've learned in terms of how ministries actually talk or maybe do not talk to each other as it participates in food systems and soil health.
Yeah.
Thank you for that question.
I may realize, yes, I'm sitting in a very unique position, you know.
In some days, it's quite confusing because we realized that there is a huge gaps in between the governments.
The ministers themselves are working very hard but separately.
They are not sitting in the same room to discuss the same priorities.
So and also in villages in farming, doing also pastoralism and so on, there is a kind of division.
So this is quite surprising also for me because everything should be a unique effort going to tackle all those challenges in Africa.
And that has shaped my vision of what it takes to close the gap between policy and implementation actually.
The biggest lesson learned I have is the gap is that the gap is rarely a lack of ambition, actually.
It's a gap in connection.
So ministries often pursue the same objective from different angles.
Agriculture sees productivity, environment sees restoration, finance sees investment.
And in all these local, we need to deliver.
So communities experience all these at one reality.
And in Senegal, we are trying to change that mindset, actually, because through the new vision, Senegal 20 2050, 2050, sorry, whose ambition is to build a sovereign, just and prosperous Senegal, through four pillar a competitive economy, human capital, and equity, sustainable territorial development, and stronger governance.
So what inspires me is that this is a vision, recognize that recognizing that environmental sustainability is not separate agenda.
It's part of how we build our economy in our territories.
And the first five years implementation strategy is also placed placing sustainable land management, territorial planning, and innovative financing at the center of national transformation.
But as we may know, strategies standing alone is not enough.
The second piece is the law.
We need also to work on the policy, and Senegal already has that very important joining agricultural pastoralism and foresteres.
This is a very huge pathway for Senegal.
And from my perspective, governance should coordinate around three practical shifts.
The first share outcomes instead of responsibilities.
The second should be sharing delivery systems and the third, share power with communities, farmers, and so on.
So with TEID, we are really willing to support the government technically on that.
And I think also the Sengal has a very nice leadership on the IDRA through the IDRA and the IDR to also go beyond what is expected, actually.
Thank you.
Thank you very much because, of course, Senegal, along with Spain is co chair of this initiative.
Ja, I'm sure you could relate to what Sana was saying, trying to work across different ministries because you have to work and coordinate so many different interests in your work with different countries across different continents and very different settings, backgrounds that environments.
Yeah, thanks, Charlotte.
I Look, WWF, we work in about 100 countries.
Our greatest strength is our capitularity, right.
But this offers challenges as well.
How can we coordinate work with governments, the private sector, trying to discipline markets or talk to markets about the right way to manage supply chains and manage partners as well.
Many civil society partnerships that we have.
What we do We develop an outcomes based framework.
I'll give you the example of the nature positive agriculture framework that we develop.
We set three outcomes.
To be nature positive in agriculture, you need to do three things.
First, as an outcome, protect natural habitats from further conversion for food and feed and this would mean stop deforestation, conversion, and so on.
The second one is to sustainably manage the lands and waters that produce food today.
And the third is to restore soil health and degraded aquatic systems so that they can produce food sustainably.
With these three outcomes in place, we then do not have a prescription about what should happen in each place because agriculture and food production in each place is highly contextual.
So what works in one place might not work in the other, but all the practices in each place needs to deliver these outcomes of protect, manage, and restore nature.
So and by doing that, then we develop tools.
We work at landscapes.
So the landscape design is our unit of planning.
And since I spoke about finance before, we have the landscape finance approach that once we go into a country, into a landscape with this notion of nature positive agriculture, we then have a way to map with local stakeholders, government, private sector, the way that financial fluxes comes in and are deposited in that landscape and what needs to happen for that financial arrangement to work for nature and for peoples.
These are some of the ways that we use to coordinate our actions.
Thank you.
Thank.
And last but certainly not least, because Esther, you represent the people and the voices that this policy talk is ultimately all about.
So In your view, what is the one thing that governments still get wrong when they're trying to consult farmers? I can be honest.
Please, we're amongst friends here.
Basically, you know, many of our governments mean by consulting is maybe make farmers attend to a meeting, then write a report, and then we don't know what happened about it.
Consulting for us is not just being heard, but being listened to.
Okay.
Being listened to, for us, it would make us feel that the audience, the government, is understanding us, how we feel, what is our problem, how we perceive things, and they can feel it too.
Because of that what we call empathic listening, that moves both of us to act.
Consulting for us to be very effective is we understand each other, we got your message, we got your realities, and you've got out the government's realities too, and then we act.
Yeah.
You know, just two days ago or two nights ago, we received very bad news in Nepal.
Villages swept in flash floods.
And amongst the CSOs, we were building solidarity amongst each other.
And we said, really, climate change is happening now, no? Well, floods drought, but maybe the floods were caused by soil erosion because of the graded lands and no trees in the forest and no trees in the forest.
So Can we be empathic to these people.
Can we act now? We are in the scope.
We act now so that policies and actions that involve the people significantly can be done today and beyond.
Thank you.
For what a wonderful call to action, indeed, to anyone here who works for government, all the different stakeholders involved in policy, to really include everyone and not talk to them, but talk to them.
That's very important indeed.
Many thanks to our wonderful panelists here for a very rich and very candid discussion.
Many thanks.
And thank you, Sennar.
Thank you, thanks, everyone.
Now, to offer closing reflection, it's now my pleasure to welcome Doreen Robinson, who is Deputy Director of UNS Ecosystems Division.
Hello, Doreen.
I was looking for you across the room.
Thank you for joining us.
Thank you so much.
I feel compelled to say cost risk and opportunity.
But thank you so much folks.
Food systems, they are a driver of triple planetary crisis, but also a transformative entry point for solving it.
The UN Secretary-General has identified food systems as one of six transitions with catalytic and multiplier effects across all SDGs.
Nature is another one of the other six.
The way we produce food, fiber, and other land based products directly determines the health of our soils, vegetation, and ecosystems.
Conversely, we just heard this.
Nature positive food systems have restorative potential for production, for protecting species, and for water cycles, for avoiding disastrous consequences of hunger and food insecurity.
We cannot transform our relationship with land without transforming the systems that feed us.
We started with a call For humankind to be one with land and nature, we've also heard that healthy soils are the connective tissue across the Rio Conventions, central to land degradation, neutrality, biodiversity, climate mitigation and adaptation, and sustainable development.
This is not simply a soil agenda, it is about protecting the productive natural capital on which economies and societies depend.
Healthy soil is climate infrastructure, its water infrastructure, it's food security infrastructure, all beneath our feet.
We've also heard about science for solutions, usable, actionable information, practical and available.
In many of the discussions we've been having here for the last two weeks, there's been a clear call to defragment and strengthen local indigenous capacities to generate, own, and use science and evidence in ways that are relevant to countries context, relevant to individual lives.
Soil health must move from being viewed as an environmental cost to being recognized as an investable economic asset.
Public expenditure, agriculture incentives, private capital, and blended finance need to shift towards sustainable land management, regenerative and agroecological approaches, crop diversification, sustainable livestock systems, and of course, restoration.
Those who manage our soils, we just heard this should not be the last in line for finance needed to protect them.
Small scale farmers in developing countries produce about one third of the world's food, yet they receive only 1.7% of climate finance.
As we talk to them, we also have to finance them directly.
I want to say something about prevention, investing upstream.
There is big business in responding to problems.
But what we need is the biggest business to be preventing problems.
I am on the board for the decade of ecosystem restoration with our friends from FAO.
Yes, we're proud of celebrating the success of our Sahelan World flagship program that we heard about on our first panel.
But I think our ultimate, our ultimate goal is that we have no need for a decade of ecosystem restoration.
So a lot has been said, and I tried to summarize, and it has been said very, very well, so there's no need to repeat.
But let me end on why we are all here in this beautiful space in this beautiful country.
We are here to advance the agenda of the convention to combat desertification.
197 parties believe in the convention and the importance of combating desertification, addressing drought, investing in all aspects of land, supporting pastoralists, and many other things.
And we are all here because we believe and we know in the importance of doing it together.
The soil beneath our feet connects us.
We heard a lot of that today.
It is the source of our collective resilience.
Many of us who've been here the whole time are tired from days and nights of listening to negotiations or actually negotiating.
But let us draw on this resilience from the soil.
Let us draw on this very natural, very human, very essential connection and finish the work.
We have a day and a half left to send a strong signal to the world that we can collectively deliver on land health, on soil health, on water health, on economic health, and our very own health for our common future on this one planet we share.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Many thanks, Doreen.
This concludes our high level dialogue.
We will take a short break and resume with the rest of the program.
I just wanted to thank all the speakers who joined us here this afternoon.
I'd like to thank you, President, for your opening remarks, to all the people involved, to the people in the audience as well for their attention on, let's face it, the very last few hours of Cp 17 here.
So many thanks for that.
And I wish you a very enjoyable rest of the afternoon.
Thank you for your attention.
Bye bye.
I Yes.