Nature Based Solutions for Water and Peace - recording at UN 2023 Water Conference

So very happy to be your host for today. We have 1 hour 15 minutes. And this session, we will first listen to 2 presentations by the people on the left side who are introduced later, and then we have a panel discussion. Those participants are spread— we'll introduce them later— panel discussions of about 40 minutes. So today, the session, uh, reciprocity between the state of biosphere, global freshwater distribution, and social stability. So really addressing it in a systems approach, as what the Commission for the Economics of Water yesterday— for the ones joining in that session, you've heard also we need a systems approach. Well, that's what we are talking about here today. It's also corresponding to the interactive dialogue themes 3 and 5, so on water for climate resilience and environment, and the Water Action Decade. So again, how can we turn soil degradation, water scarcity, while taking into account the social, economic, political, and security dynamics of a region into account? And we will address it in different ways today, very practical What role can industry play? What role can the water sector play? What about data science technology, new blended finance arrangements, but also including society, including us all as we sit here? What can we do in this case? What is our transformative change which we can make? But let's start with some presentations to kind of ground and get ourselves on the same page. We'll start off with Juliette, Juliette Cole from The Weather Makers, and after that we'll have a presentation from Laura, Laura Bergman to my left, from the Hague Center of Strategic Studies. Juliette, please take the floor.

Thank you. Can everybody hear me like this? I prefer standing. Yeah? Welcome everyone to our presentation and panel discussion on Nature-Based Solutions for Water and Peace. Today I'll start you guys off with a landscape-scale perspective of this notion, this problem, but also this solution. So I don't think I need to go extensively through what it means to have a changing climate. Freshwater distribution is changing. We have biodiversity loss. Need not mention the latest IPCC report. IPCC report. We have natural resources that are depleting. And what is interesting in all of these issues of a changing climate is that it often has to do with a changing water cycle. And that's what we're gonna touch upon today. And this natural instability causes social instability because it disrupts the natural functioning of a society. And It causes an increase in vulnerability to crises, mass migration, forced relocation of natives. And Laura will touch upon these social issues more extensively after I finish my presentation. But for now, we are obviously not here to only focus on the problems. I think we've done enough of that. But we are also here today to find new pathways to find ways to meet the needs of future world populations in the backdrop of a changing climate and a natural resource depletion. And luckily we're not starting from scratch. I think we're seeing good developments, carbon neutrality in the energy sector. We're seeing changes in mindset, activism, relationships between social and environmental issues. They're completely intertwined. And So we're really not starting from scratch. However, I think if we use our thinking of carbon math only, we might just miss the spot in really, really meeting all of the needs of future world populations, including clean air, good soil, and to support the biodiversity necessary to feed humans for human health, food production. So that brings me to the point of land use change, which touches upon all of these issues and actually controls the water, the energy, and the carbon cycle. And for this, I'd like to take a pretty big step back to a time that seems ancient and distant to many of us. But we have to remember that humans have altered landscapes for thousands of years. That's not something new. And it's still impacting us today. It actually started 2.8 million years ago when we arrived at this Earth and up to now, but also more specifically since the agricultural revolution 10,000 years ago when we really started changing landscapes to the point which now 75 to 95% of our Earth is directly altered by by our use of land through agriculture, through mining, deforestation. And in all of these interventions with the landscape, we've mostly altered our biosphere, so our vegetation coverage. And this is an important point because altering the vegetation, the terrestrial biosphere, has a direct impact on our atmosphere. And not to give you a small science lesson, but I think it's good for our, you know, perspective. So let's see these two environments. And to note that the biosphere plays a critical role in the energy partitioning at the surface. So not only energy partitioning, actually, but actually the transport of moisture from Earth to atmosphere. Say this left side is a dry environment, no vegetation. On the right, you have a cool, wet environment with a lot of vegetation. If solar energy hits both of these environments, 60 to 70% of this energy on the left side is used or is converted to sensible heat, which is an increase in temperature. On the right side, actually 70 to 80% of this energy is used for latent heat, so for evaporation, condensation, precipitation, and eventually rainfall. So looking at this from a landscape scale, 70% of global land evaporation rains down over land. So we should not take the rain for granted. Vegetation actually makes the rain. And this challenges the traditional notion that areas like the Congo or the Amazon are receive a lot of rainfall because they are specifically at a location that receives a lot of precipitation. But if the vegetation actually makes the rain, you can imagine that makes— makes your— changes your perspective. Again, we should not take the rain for granted. And same, we can look at our degraded landscapes, our damaged landscapes these days, and we can imagine in how far have we shaped these. Because even a small a small disruption of a landscape, changing vegetation or a thriving forest to, for example, agriculture, can trigger a regime shift, can change a regime from a wet regime where it's gaining moisture to a dry regime. So to put it in one sentence, the state of the biosphere plays an important role in how freshwater is distributed over the globe. And we in turn shape the biosphere. And I'd say this, you know, this thought is simple and it's confronting, but it's also empowering. Because just as deforestation can trigger a regime shift to a dry regime, large-scale afforestation can do the opposite. Take for example the Les Plateaux, which John D Liu has a lot to say about. He was the man who documented this project. Started in 1999, and recent research actually from this year shows that this project actually increased the rainfall over 20% within a period of 20 years. And unfortunately, the same is happening, for example, or the opposite is happening actually in the Amazon, where it's said to be reaching a trigger point, or a tipping point actually, sorry, to a drier regime. Or in Spain, where in the east coast, the loss of vegetation is actually coupled to the loss in summer storms. Now, looking at our today's landscapes in this lens, take for example the Sinai Desert in Egypt, where the remnants of a lush river system actually show through the arid landscape today. It almost looks like a beating heart. And Egypt now being in the grips of a water crisis much like any area around the Middle East, they are in dire need of a sustainable water source. And in actual fact, our only sustainable water source is precipitation. Look at— if we look at it like this from a cross-section, what if you have the landscape that it is today, which I'm not sure everybody's background, but a simple— simple a simple meteorological lesson of the sea breeze. If the, the land heats up, it pulls in moisture from the Mediterranean. And that heating of the land, if there's no additional moisture added through vegetation, this moist air mass actually moves over the mountain. No condensation occurs and no precipitation happens. What if you revegetate this region, taking into account all ecological intricacies that exist? So considering the lagoon, considering the wetlands, the grasslands, the trees, everything going from the coast inland, what if we can restore this? What if we can restore the full water cycle by adding enough moisture leading to precipitation and eventually a totally restored water cycle? And the interesting is, is that for As long as we have existed here, we have been altering our landscapes. We have been changing our biosphere. Unfortunately, the main driver has been economic growth. Economic growth has been the primary driver behind land transformation. Our extraction and consumption culture has led to a point where we should rethink why we are changing landscapes because it's not serving us in the the way we might have thought it would in the beginning. So what if water cycle restoration and the restoration of ecological functioning can become the primary driving force behind land transformation? Because in fact there is nothing more valuable than a good ecological functioning Earth. That's what we're fully reliant on as human beings.

So—

To summarize this aspect, landscape-scale nature-based solutions, to put it in the jargon terms we love to use, as a strategy for water cycle restoration. And the question then is, where and how should we distribute our energy and water resources to produce regenerative ecosystems? Because it is not as if placing any trees anywhere will lead to a positive water yield. So we have to rethink how we do it and also be informed on how we afforestate and be informed on whether the productivity of an arid region can actually be restored or whether it cannot. So who plays a role? That's also a huge question we have to answer. And the simple answer to how and who is we have to take it step by step and we need everybody. We need Indigenous to co-create with industry. We need to change our economic system that actually values ecological functioning. That's the only way ahead. And we need to interdisciplinary find ways working with academics, ecologists, engineers, scientists from every aspect to work together to find solutions. So to summarize the criteria of a nature-based solution that would lead to the maximum outcome on a holistic level, on a social level, but also on a physical level. First is to take a proactive adaptive approach. And by this I mean, I think a term we've seen these days also is learn by doing. I liked— what was it? Flying a plane and building it on your way, something like that. But to make this maybe more specifically on the topic, it's not as if you don't do the research ahead. You do the research, but you optimize while working. And you construct rapid feedback loops between implementation and observation. So have an extensive monitoring scheme. And as I mentioned, rigorous interdisciplinary science. Scientific planning, merging ecology and atmospheric science is necessary. These projects must be data-driven. We have to use the technology, and I have no doubt about the level of our techniques, technology, geospatial data. We have enough information. And it has to happen at landscape scale. At some point there's— it has to— yeah, to go from local to regional to global impact, the scale has to be big enough. And this pun is intended. We have to move mountains quite literally, so we need the industry support. And the most important point, I'd say, is that it has to be grounded in the indigenous knowledge. And it's not to say we have a global strategy and to take them along, but this people on the ground have to be connected to the global strategy and we have to move from two directions. We can't go top-down, we can't go only bottom-up, we have to go from two directions. And it has to be supported by blended finance and governance structures. We have to create new win-win situations for public and private in the short, medium, and long term. And this one I haven't written down, but we actually need a shared vision. Just as we had a vision to land on the moon, we have a shared vision to restore this Earth.

Thank you.

Thank you, Juliette. Good introduction in how to regenerate the water cycle or water cycle restoration. Laura, over to you. The security side of things, how do we connect that with nature-based solutions.

Yeah, thank you, um, and, uh, good morning everybody. My name is Laura Berkman. I am the head of the Climate and Security Program at the Hague Center for Strategic Studies. I'm going to remain seated because I see that there's a lot of different people and I think the screen, if I stand, will be not visible to everyone. And, um, basically what I want to discuss, um, as an opener is how we can think about, you know, really making more sort of conflict-sensitive approaches to also nature-based solutions and climate adaptation in general. And I will first look at why, you know, why should we think about this and what is the case for security-proofing nature-based solutions and climate adaptation. And then I will go through a number of steps on how you can start conceptualizing and thinking about that. And finally, I will provide a couple of takeaways for action. So why? Why should we think about security-proofing, as you call it, nature-based solutions and climate adaptation? Well, if you look at this map, this is a conflict risk forecast map that was developed by the Water, Peace and Security Partnership, of which I am a member. You can see that in those yellow areas you have ongoing conflict and also real risk of violence erupting within the next 12 months. And this tool is really important because it really helps to sort of understand through machine learning how how, you know, certain developments, so social but also economic, demographic, and also environmental variables combine to produce insights into where there's areas of risk and how things might, if you don't have any interventions, spiral out of control. So we use this forecast to better understand where the risks are, where the hotspots are, where the hotspot areas are. And the Water Peace Security Partnership actually produces quarterly reports to really kind of set, you know, the tone in terms of, okay, these are the areas where these risks are really quite pertinent. So if you look at this map, you can see that surrounded by quite a lot of regions that are at risk. Basically, there are four, you ingredients that we would really want to focus on. Firstly, we want to analyze and better understand what the nexus is between climate change or water-related risk and where conflict may erupt. For this, I will go a little bit into some of those pathways that you can, you can think about. Secondly, we want to anticipate. So I already showed you this global early warning tool, but more broadly, targeted for Foresight and early warning systems really support our understanding of where these risks really are taking place, and that helps to buy time for those interventions that you need to, need to make. Thirdly, mobilize. So how do you involve local communities but also more broadly society around, you know, tackling some of these challenges? So it's really key that— have a strategy to engage in those areas at risk? And last but definitely not least, what then are you going to do with these communities in order to mitigate some of those conflict challenges or conflict risks? Very briefly, my institute developed a few years ago an overview of what we call high-level climate conflict pathways. And basically these pathways describe how natural or environmental factors may lead to conflict. I think many people have already mentioned, you know, there's not always a direct relationship, but there are often very distinct pathways where a natural cause or a climate-related cause or, you know, water risk may lead to trigger or multiply social, economic and political factors that could lead to the outbreak of conflict. And if you look at those 7 pathways here, you see it's actually quite an escalation sort of ladder. So in any area you could have multiple different pathways at play. And the first one really starts at the very hyper sort of micro local level where you could imagine that access to water or access to land becomes an an issue of tension between farmers or between very local communities that could, if it involved certain factors such as ethno-sectarian or different tribal dynamics, could escalate into more intercommunal and finally also involve government or other actors all the way down to potential transboundary disputes. I will not go into all of them. We have them in a report, but it basically gives you, I think, a very comprehensive overview of how these pathways can erupt, and it provides a very useful first step to sort of identify, okay, what is happening in terms of those interactions on the ground? So these pathways, as I mentioned, are applicable to a wide range of case studies. I mean, different countries will have always different manifestations of those pathways, but the specific chain of events underpinning them, and the specific chain of events underpinning them can differ significantly between localities. And that's essential to know because basically what that means is that you really have to always check on the ground with actors and communities to make sure that you understand what are those dynamics that really kind of are at play. So they give you a handle on how to understand those dynamics and also provide important input for intervention. So I would leave it there because basically we've come now to the second step of the process of the Security Assessment Framework where you want to anticipate those movements also on the ground in a way that's what we call data-driven and also really supports a kind of a broader systemic analysis for, for your intervention. And so there's three main ways that you, you can look at this. So I already mentioned the predictive models. I won't go into that in too much detail. So that's where you identify those hotspot locations. So that's the first step. And then You want to go into causal models or more of a causal understanding of why those dynamics and how those dynamics are looking so on the ground. And finally, you have what we call a causal intervention tool where you can use those dynamics to really kind of start planning and really sort of assessing what you can do next. Here is an example of a regional causal model. This is also from the Water, Peace and Security Partnership. And this is really important because it really helps us to understand better what is causing certain conflicts in different regions or different countries. And while it doesn't really provide sort of the finite answer in terms of, okay, how you would design an intervention. It certainly provides a way to optimize where you could target those interventions because you're not just looking at the outcomes. So for example, a negative outcome is conflict, but you're also looking at the causes of those outcomes. So won't go into too much detail here, but here you see how you can sort start designing more optimal interventions if you're looking at— so for example, on the top left-hand side, what are causing— what are causes for that intervention? So here it would be, you know, what's the evidence here? You would look at the conflict itself. And then the second one would be to really look at, okay, if you go into this map, you can see where the red area is. Okay, these are some of the causes. So in this case, it would be additional water runoff. So these are really kind of water-based issues that you could be looking at. And finally, you can see how if you would adapt your strategy to sort of minimize that water runoff, and that would be the green areas, you could really, in terms of your intervention strategy, start thinking about how you can start mitigating that. It's quite technical. But it shows you that you can play around a little bit with those various loops that are in that dynamic. So having those data-driven models, I mean, it's not the end of the road because it's actually just a starting point to understand the system. And so the third step really is to get far more sort of real in terms of, okay, now we have some instruments that can help us get a better handle on the situation in terms of where these hotspots are, but also in terms of how those dynamics are at play. And then you really want to start, you know, thinking about how you could engage stakeholders on the ground to make sure that what you're doing actually is going to have effect. And this really brings in, I think, the fundamental part also for today's discussions around how you can involve communities to really, you know, support better outcomes when it comes to unstable or conflict areas. And so the Water, Peace and Security Partnership, which I mentioned earlier, is one of those strategies to really integrate this model in terms of understanding what the situation is and then how to design methods to really, with stakeholders, build a participatory approach to start mitigating some of those risks. And the aim, the broader aim of the Water Peace Security Partnership is to really turn those vicious cycles of water specifically and conflict into virtual cycles of water-based peace and cooperation. So that's what you're doing this mobilization for, is to really together with local communities start discussing how you can support water-related challenges in such a way that you become more effective in terms of mitigating those risks. And so here is an illustration of how that vicious cycle can become a more virtuous one. This is an informed and inclusive and integrated approach where we have— in the design of the partnership included water expertise, peacebuilding expertise, science and data, as I mentioned earlier, but also policy and practice. So that is really an essential ingredient in order to start really understanding the system at the local level in a comprehensive way. And so to mitigate— So you've mobilized your stakeholders because you're looking at different communities. So specifically what we've done is involve defense experts, diplomats— so this is in terms of the government— but also you want to understand, you know, from development aspect, so more the social community level, and also the disaster community itself because you're dealing with situations where there's a lot of potential hazards if you engage. So you need to understand, okay, what are the mechanisms at play that could make things worse or could, you know, need to be tackled in order to avoid those. So in WPS we have a method to support capacity development, dialogue facilitation, facilitation and decision-making. And this is basically through these integrated action areas. So again, understanding— so what are the specific dynamics at play in this hotspot area of risk? You want to mobilize and create political awareness and an urgency around the topic, so with the various stakeholders on the ground. You want to enable actors to have a shared understanding also of how the water-related risk can lead to a security risk. So that involves really sort of leveling everybody's knowledge through all kinds of trainings, exchanges. And because in conflict areas there are a lot of stakeholders that do not get along, per definition, you want to support interventions that really gets people together around the table to see if there are pathways to work together around these challenges. So some takeaways for action, and that will, I'm sure, also lead to further discussions here. Socioeconomic and political stability is essential for adaptation success, and solutions require constant monitoring to make sure that when you deliver on a certain outcome that's potentially contributing to a better, more sustainable solution, you actually are able to either scale it or maneuver it in such a way that it can stay that way over time. You need targeted foresight and early warning systems that can predict and explain these security dynamics, because then you can buy yourself time actually to make those interventions as effective as possible. You want to make sure that in the local communities that you're active that you also understand who those communities are in terms of their position in that society. So you want to make sure that what you're doing is gender and conflict sensitive so that you are dealing with the parties in a way that makes them trust the process and also able to to act on it. And this involves also integrating knowledge of local community leaders who, of course, have a plethora of methods to engage also on the ground. And you also want to make sure that you engage security actors because they have a role to play specifically in conflict areas. And this is where it is a tricky sort of caveat because security actors aren't always trusted, and I think that that's where you want to really think about, okay, how are we going to engage on the ground in such a way that these actors can actually be a force for good? So on that note, I want to hand over back and let the panel begin.

Thank you. Thank you also, Laura. Water as an instrument for peace. That's one side, the social side of the story. Story which we heard, and a very good introduction from Juliette on, on weather making, actually. So how can we change landscapes, change weather patterns, and allow for water availability, actually. I want to now move to the panel where we're actually going to address the three themes, as I simply would like to put it. So more the nature-based solutions, the environmental side of things as a solution itself, but also the social side So how do we involve communities? How are they impacted? But also, what can communities do themselves? And maybe think about how we should— well, as Einstein said, with the same way of thinking which generated the problem won't solve it. So that's the kind of what we want to have in this panel. And the last one, the last part of the discussion about value and how to make an impact. And I deliberately say value., and not finance. Finance is only one way of valuing things. So I'm very happy to have on my panel, and let's start on the left, John D Liu, ecosystem— sorry, the ecosystem ambassador of the Common Land Foundation and also the advisory board member of the UN Decade on Restoration. Very happy to have you here. We have Robert de Brane on my right-hand side, the Director Corporate Affairs at Van Oordt. Welcome. Next to Robert, we have Dennis Kerckhove from Tomata Foundation. Welcome as well. And then Lara, Lara Müller from Invest International, which is a state-owned impact investor, and Lara is the Director of the Public Sector. And to my right, Tom Middelkoop, Chair of the International Military Council on Climate and Security. So a very very varied panel. Let's move to the first question, which is about more the environmental side of things, nature-based solutions and water, and what do we see happening. And Tom, you bring a wealth of experience from your previous role, having seen in many parts of the world what is happening and how actually water is crucial to all what you have seen happening.

Yeah, thank you very much. I think what we overall see is that we are globally facing a trend towards longer periods of intense droughts and shorter periods of more intense rainfalls and usable lands moving away from the center belt of the world to more the northern side of the world and the southern side of the world. So that really affects our possibilities to survive. And the network I lead are experts from countries in all continents of the world, and they see that impact. They feel that impact every day, and they see how that can lead to tensions, to all kinds of shortages, to disruptions, but also to migration flows and people making desperate choices for, for instance, extremism or organized crime. And that's an impact we increasingly witness, especially in those fragile areas around the world. So to me and to all these experts, it's becoming increasingly clear that climate change is not just an environmental issue. It's also a security issue and it's also a geopolitical issue. And let me elaborate a bit on the geopolitical side for this question. I see 4 global trends. And if we look at climate change, we need to see that in the context of 3 other global trends. And the first one is resource scarcity. We are running into an increasing range of shortages all over the world. And the second additional trend is population growth, which means that on the one hand side we see an almost doubling in the demand for resources—water, food, all kinds of goods—but on the resource side we see a dropping ability to deliver those resources. So there is an increasing gap between demand and supply worldwide, and that's, for me, is the biggest question we face this century. How are we going to bridge that gap? And to me, it's completely clear that we cannot bridge that gap by producing more in the way we are doing now, because then we will only deplete our resources more quickly. So we need to find— to move to new solutions.. And those new solutions are solutions like nature-based solutions where you move towards circularity, to a new model for living. We are all children of the industrial age and I think we need to become fathers and mothers of a new age of circularity. And the fourth trend I would like to mention is the more the geopolitical trend of a world that has been globalizing where everybody was doing business with everybody towards a in a world that is becoming more fragmented. And the fragmented world makes it very, very hard to come to global solutions, and the UN is exemplary in this. If we don't— if there is no willingness to cooperate and to come to global solution, the UN system will fail. So we really need to make these efforts work again, and we need to find ways to come to multilateralism and to find global answers to global solutions, but a large part of those answers don't need to be global, can be bottom-up. And that's what I like about the case presented here in the Sinai Desert. But we do need different approaches, and I'll wrap up with that. Einstein once said, "If we do what we did, we get what we got." So we really need to have a kind of a paradigm shift to new solutions. And I hope this discussion can also trigger us to think about new ways of doing business. Thank you. Thanks, Tom.

Trigger ways of doing new business, actually, that's a nice one to hand over to Robert. And nature-based solutions, building with nature, you have a track record as Van Oordervoet. Please share something with us there.

Yeah, we do have, and to be honest, life is not easy, but also let's say Looking into the presentations, I think the topic is quite complex. So allow me, let's say— so I have to be humble, but allow me to say a word, let's say, from the private sector side. Van Oord, family business for more than 150 years in business in respect not on the land use, but let's say in the area of land and water, coastal areas, ports, et cetera. We do have a track record, but I'm triggered to— when I prepare this meeting, I thought, well, in the end, well, Juliette, you had a nice presentation. It's about integrated approach, about holistic approach, but I think it's even more. I think it's about a paradigm shift we need to, let's say, to apply those MBS. Looking into that, I think as Van Oord, well, we have a strategy in which we are focused on climate, energy transition, and we have also a dedicated pillar on nature and community. Sides, and it was, I think, perfectly touched when it's about, let's say, the security side, or when we need the indigenous people, or the social content, content side. I think that's an important element. But also recalling, maybe you know the picture in The Economist 2 years ago, the first wave about economic crisis, about, about COVID what is threatening the world.. The second big wave, climate is, let's say, threatening the world, but it is even worse, I think, when it's about biodiversity, it's an existential element. Well, what we can do, let's say, from the private sector, so I really have to be humble, it's a systematic— system, I think a system dilemma we have to solve, but we are based on knowledge, and that's also in your presentations, and evidence-based, I think we We really do have a lot of data knowledge on geomorphical aspects, about nautical aspects, about ecological behaviour of mangroves, of corals, etc. So I think the knowledge is over there. What we are doing as dredging industry and marine contractors is applying those nature-based solutions in the projects. Well, and then I'm having a triple P in my mind. Yeah, we need the pricing, but I think it's more than pricing, it's about valuing some elements. Well, we definitely need also from government bodies, from the financial world, but I think we will come to that, strict criteria, KPIs, metrics to measure it. The second one is the pipeline and the pace. I think we really have to speed up with the process and prospects. Well, for the first time I visited the COP in November with big agendas, the second time in this conference, so I see a lot of energy and master planning, but really pipelines are lacking, let's say, from the private side. And the last one is, I think, the partnering elements. I'm quite aware when we work on, let's say, big, long stretches along the coast, 30, 40 kilometers along, we can work with coastal protection combined with nature-based solutions, but we definitely need community involvement, government bodies, NGOs, scientists to do it on the right way. I think that's the challenge, yeah, and on the content side, we really have a whole menu with different seagrass, mangroves, reuse of sediments, et cetera. So those elements are on a science-based method quite available. Thanks, Robert.

John D Liu, I want to move over to you, actually. Juliette shared the example of the Loess Plateau in China. You have done these restorations. Anything to share on that?

Yes, certainly. I have witnessed that it's possible to rehabilitate large-scale damaged ecosystems. The Luss Plateau was 35,000 square kilometers and was transformational in nature. So it completely altered the ecology, but also it was possible to do things that no one had ever considered. So it was possible to increase productivity by reducing the area in cultivation and at the same time restoring the hydrological cycle, the soil fertility, and the biodiversity. So this improved people's lives and they were the agents of change. So what we see here is that it's necessary to have this— what's being called a paradigm shift. It's to engage everyone. This is a civilizational change. We're at a moment of change in human civilization. And so everyone must understand that some of the things that we're doing in the existing dominant systems are wrong and that there are other ways to do these things. So we're saying that buying and selling things are the basis of the economy, but in fact we depend on air, water, soil fertility, and biodiversity, which are the basis of life on Earth. And without these things, there is no economy. So when we understand this, all people can participate together in restoring the Earth, and that is the basis of a new economy. And with that, we have the possibility of growth. And not only do we have the possibility of growth, but it's the possibility of equality and of ensuring that everyone is sovereign and free and participating in this. We can't create a system which is be so diverse and divided that you have a few billionaires, trillionaires, and billions of poor people. We have to figure out how human beings can live together and understand that not only human beings, but every living thing has a birthright. And you can't take this birthright away. And actually, we're all going to die. So sorry to mention that, but actually, we are going to have to realize everything that we're doing is determining the quality of life for all life in the future. And we have a deep, sacred responsibility. And this is not simply about business. This is deeply personal. And it's about understanding the purpose of life and our level of understanding. So we have the opportunity now to contribute to the sum of human knowledge, to transform human civilization going forward. And this is the way to restore the hydrological cycle, to reregulate the climate, to protect the soils, ensure full employment, food security, and peace going forward.

Thank you, John D Liu. Very nice how you also— well, very— we talked about it before, the transformation needed, and also really it coming out of ourselves as human beings, as individuals, and taking that along. And I'm combining two questions now with you, Laura, because this really kind of like touched something in me as well, which is about as Invest International, you also aim for impact on SDG 8, which is about promoting inclusive and sustainable economic growth. And it not only comes from the society, it comes from ourselves. Through nature-based solutions and from the finance world, you have an influence on that. So how do you take that along as Invest International?

Well, thank you for that wonderful question, but first of all, thank you for these words. I think what you said resonated very deeply with me on a very spiritual level, and I think that in the end is something we should all feel if we want to move forward on this path. So thank you for that, and that is something also these past few days that really hit me in the heart, this global consciousness these past 3 days in this area in New York, all these people with the heart in the right place in order to create an action agenda to change things for the better. So wonderful to be here. So let me address a few words on the financial side of things, because I think that in the end is also the big elephant in the room here. For the past few years, I've been appointed as an advisor of the European Commission, uh, to advise the European Commission on creating a sustainable financial system within Europe. And in that context, we based our work on the work of the European Stability Board. And the European Stability Board calculated that the consequences of climate change would result not only in the losses and the security issues that were so rightfully brought forward, and also the geopolitical background of, of the issue we're talking about today, but also in loss of GDP of over 25%. And just imagine a loss of GDP globally of over 25%. COVID GDP loss was not even 5%. So can you imagine what this will do to capital markets and to the stability of the financial system if we do not engage fast in changing the financial system and reforming the capital markets. What we also know from research, it's that it's never about water alone. Water, biodiversity, but also circular economy, climate, climate adaptation are all intertwined. So this is why within the Platform on Sustainable Finance, we started to develop a European taxonomy in order to determine the path towards a climate-neutral Europe in 2050 by determining the KPIs on 6 environmental objectives: climate mitigation, climate adaptation, water, biodiversity, circular economy, and pollution. They are all intertwined and cannot be addressed separately if we really want to tackle the problem. So from the financial side, I think, you know, the finance argument is one of the most compelling arguments we can have. Money talks. We are living in a capitalist system, and the reason I entered the capitalist world and capital markets is from the belief that we must change the way we talk about value, the way we count value, from a business case to a value case. And that has been mentioned several times, but let's be honest, this is not yet being taken into account by banks, by financial models, by the way we value companies. So I think in reforming capital markets, top— bottom up, bottom-up is very important, but I think we've reached a point where we need to go top-down and that things need to be made mandatory by policy change, regulation change, in order to change the way banks, financial institutions take into account impact and value in their investment decision-making. At Invest International, we have been created as an impact investor by the Dutch state. With one objective only, and that is the objective of creating an impact on SDG 8. Because in the end, it is about creating resilient economies, decent jobs, and giving people back their autonomy and their value in society. And by integrating SDG 8 in every investment decision we make, We can only integrate nature-based solutions into every tender we put on the market, because in the end, it's also about putting your money where your mouth is and putting things in practice. So by integrating nature-based solutions as a hard requirement in every infrastructural tender that we finance or provide grants for, We make sure that the tendering authorities, whether it is the government of Senegal or Kenya or, you know, whatever government on the African continent, has a compelling reason to integrate nature-based solutions into their value proposition, their tender, the contract, the execution of the contract, but also the selection of the party who is going to be responsible responsible for executing the contract by making sure that that is a contractor, a party that has ESG high on the agenda and is able to integrate people, to integrate communities in an inclusive way of not only executing the project but also designing it. So that is basically how we are trying to do that at Invest International and also influencing other financial financial institutions to do the same. Yesterday we had a lunch with ING, Rabobank, financial institutions that are willing to join us in this endeavour in changing things from the financial perspective, and I think this is the time where we can also get the financial sector, the capital markets on board, policymakers on board to really make a change on a scale that is going to move the needle.

Thanks, Laura. Top. Continue talking finance, Dennis. Tamata Foundation, regenerative finance, blended finance, but especially the term regenerative finance triggered lots of thoughts.

Yeah, and that's— thank you, Laura, for giving me the stairway to value because it starts in the now. Where are we now and how can we build a bridge, build a stairway from a very simple case? Also in the case of the Sinai, it starts at Lake Bardawil. That's an easy, easy case, but to move forward, it will be more integrated and more complex. So that's where blended finance in a new way moves in. I'm also into the Commission of Blended Finance for Central Banks, and especially they are looking for the new way of blended finance. And why a new way? Because these kind of nature-based solutions, they really ask for cooperation in a different way that public, private, but also local community are part of the solution. And if you see it not from only a finance perspective, but all the capitals—social capital, natural capital, all the capitals—the local community can be part of the equity, can be part of the solution from a way that they feel that they have ownership, that they are really part of the solution. And if we combine it— I'm a National Alliance convener on SDG 16, not SDG 8, but on SDG 16— it's really the question how to finance peace. And peace as a cross-cutting SDG, and it starts on the ground, it starts with the people, but people and local communities can't do it alone. They need to be facilitated, also empowered by government, industry, because they can scale up, they can create— so to really investigate the blended finance part, it's to start with a region, with an asset, and it can be the project and then bring in all the different stakeholders, or in Dutch they call it 'streekholders,' people who are really connected to the area, who are really involved and play a different part of balancing, because it's really about balancing and learning risk, impact, and return. And normally the risk, the high risk or the first loss is taken by the government and then the private sector moves in. But what I see, especially in these more complex integrated cases, bring in the financial parties or the capital parties and then find solution how they can empower each other instead of having only their own transaction, It's about relation, and that's the last part that's about regenerative finance, especially in the Netherlands, but worldwide there's an exploration because we are now in a sustainability area to doing things less bad. But if you really move into the nature-based solutions and especially rooted in regenerative, then also you need to rethink and reframe your governance, how to make decisions, who is in charge on rules, accountabilities, and to bring in the relation instead of the transaction. So the— for example, the World Bank sees there all the instruments are there, but they are not used in a way that they really empower each other. So my last remark is, if we really need and can finance peace by nature-based solutions like this and really scale up and bring in industry but also empower local communities, we have to rethink how we finance but also value and think of risk mitigation, for example, because this is not about risk, this is about uncertainty and learning. So the government perspective is really about not knowing but learning by doing. That's the plane you start with.

Thanks, Dennis. You touched upon getting industries, for example, involved as well. Robert, I want to come back to you. Terms like blue finance and, but restructuring the finance mechanism, what role can the industry play in that? Or restructuring, making an impact and valuing things, actually I would refrain from using the word finance, really moving to what's the value, how do we generate value, how do we impact things positive, what role can industry play?

I think that's the $1 million question, but I think they can play plays a big, big, big role, but definitely also not alone. But when you look, and then in the end I'm using— it's about valuing, it's about pricing. In the end, John, we have to make a business case from the private sector. When it's about, let's say, the blended finance, I think it's really a journey to look who's taking ownership on that side. Well, in the end,— let's say from the private side, yeah, when we are making a project, we have to define the scope, what are you going to do, how are we, let's say, monitorizing the externalities. I think we are quite capable to do that. Yeah, in the end, it's, let's say, combining those elements in the new business case. Well, and then I think it's time also to look for new partners in that element, and I like the one from, I think, Lara touched on that, once about equity.. It's about social equity, it's about financial equity, and those things we have to combine. And also the role for private sector when it's about social equity, I think we can do really a great job in a specific project, also to involve communities, also to involve other stakeholders. So I think that's the role where the private sector can step in.

Thanks. Really, Thank you for that. Really good to hear. Well, private sector also taking a more leading role at times, I would say, as well in this, right?

Yeah, I think combined on— when you look, of course, that's about the challenges we have to face. I think in the energy transition, maybe, but that's my analysis, or it's much easier for private sectors to make their plans for the long-term investment than in the climate action itself. So when we look at our portfolio, marine construction, coastal protection, working in vulnerable deltas, we definitely need also some, yeah, government bodies or institutions, and I think international standards to do the work. So, yeah, yesterday I was privileged to join also the meeting from Invest International. Yeah, when you work in Mozambique or, for example, Senegal, you really have to make different business cases and you have to deal with different governance situations. Well, and it will be very helpful when we can standardize some elements on that level, and that has to do with KPIs, but also indeed valuing and make more specific and concrete, yeah, how are we determining the value. And on carbon crediting side, I think, well, we're making first steps, but we have also to do it with biodiversity metrics, etc.

I want to come back to you, Laura, But first I want to just ask, get in the conflict, or actually conflict-sensitive approach again, and referring to you for that, Tom. Conflict-sensitive financing or conflict-sensitive valuing, taking that as part of the value. What have you seen there? What are your thoughts about it? You've seen it happening, so what are your thoughts? Which thoughts have you developed now on that?

Yeah, what I have experienced, and in the Netherlands they call me the climate general, And in the beginning, when I started addressing the climate issue, people were laughing at me. Why is a general addressing climate? What's he doing? Is he out of his mind? So they went crazy, big screaming headlines in the newspapers. But it only made me more convinced that I needed to go on in this way and that I need to move ahead because of two reasons. The first one is about my children. I'm a bit embarrassed about the legacy we leave behind for our children, and I want to use every experience that I've built and every influence that I've got to help improve that situation, to help them be able to address that. And the second one is that I have also learned that there is no adaptation without security, and this is a very inconvenient truth. We don't like the security side of the things, but if it's insecure, you can adapt whatever you want, but it will not work. So you have to take that into account, and that's the whole story of Laura, to build tools to help people building adaptation programs to do that in a conflict-sensitive way. And then adaptation can be a tool for peace, as said before. And I really believe in that. If we do it in a conflict-sensitive way, you can give people a new perspective. You can build new futures for people and they don't have to migrate. They can stay in the area where they are. We can help them build new ways of resilience, and that's what we need to do. But to do that, you need to have these players on board. We need to bridge the stovepipes— breach the stovepipes that we have. There is a big stovepipe between security and development, an enormous stovepipe. But I have learned in the missions that I was in that The one cannot do without the other. These are two sides of the same coin. And I've also seen that where we try to do that— in Afghanistan, I shared an office with a civil representative, and together we led a mission. And it was as civil as possible and as military as needed, but with the overall aim to really make civil progress possible. And if we work in that way, then we can become very complementary and then we can really get things into motion. But that does require us to adopt, to look, to reach out for each other, to include also the security dimension in your policymaking, in your planmaking, and to develop tools on that area. And this is not convenient, this is not— people don't feel comfortable with that, but it's the only way to make it work.

Thank you. Thanks, Tom. May I ask something to you, Tom? Do you have also an opinion, let's say, on the role of private partners when it's about security? We stole, in our strategy aspect, the term from the— you're a military— the VUCA world, so it's volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous. When it's about climate issues and security, it's quite complex. What's your opinion on the role of private sector partners?

I think it's about more than building a business case. So, and— yeah, which means it's not just about making money, it's about your future, it's about the future of our country. And the only way you can secure your future is about adapting and about investing in innovations that can build a new economic system which is more value-based and which we don't exploit resources. If you can build a future of your company— that without relying too much on resources, then your future will be guaranteed. But it does require you to invest in that and not just seek for the profitable situations. Thanks.

And then we're talking about using circularity, etc. Yeah, thanks.

And how are we going to get that into standards? How do you— when you do an investment, what are your criteria and how can you actually move and push push for that direction.

Well, I think that's really interesting because if we look back a couple of decades, you know, the banks had absolutely no problem in adopting Equator Principles as their standard for project financing. And I've been in many infrastructure projects from the contractor side where we were quite bothered with Equator Principles because the banks were so strict on it and we couldn't get any financing because the banks were really using that as a condition precedent for financial close. So I think if the financial sector can have that kind of influence on a project level, on contractors, and you know what I mean, Robert, we've been also in projects together where sometimes we were, you know, complaining a little bit, like, goodness, you know, these banks cannot just move. But then in the end, we were happy that they, you know, stood firm and said, no, we really need this as a condition precedent for financial close. So if we are able as a financial sector— and this is already decades ago— to agree on Equator Principles, to agree on IFC performance standards, and to really have the rigour and the discipline to apply that on a project level as a condition precedent for financial close, imagine what we can do as a financial sector. The leverage is enormous. It's underestimated. And we're always talking about the the bad side of that leverage of the financial sector and capital markets, but actually it's neutral. You can use it for good. And I think in seeing how those international standards have evolved and have become part of the standard compliance for a project— and I'm not saying that that is the solution to the problem right now, because if that were the case, we wouldn't be in this mess in the end— but it proves that the financial sector, capital markets, if they agree to something, that they can have a substantial amount of leverage on infrastructure projects. And infrastructure really is where it happens. Infrastructure is the fuel of future economic development, but it's the way we develop infrastructure that is going to change everything or keep us in this situation. And I think the capital markets there, by raising the bar, adopting standards that go beyond Equator Principles, standards that are not only risk-based— because that's the problem with ESG, it's a risk-based approach, it does not work well enough to get us out of this situation— we need an impact-based approach. So we need new standards, we need new international standards that incorporate impact and value. We need them to be adopted by the financial industry at to scale, like they did with Equator Principles 20 years ago, and we need the capital markets to be firm in applying them for financial close of large infrastructure projects. And I think that's the way to go. Thanks, Larry. But are you willing to accept risk? There is no project without risk. Yeah. But you need to de-risk as much as possible, but you need also to focus on impact, on inclusivity, on equity. The risk-based model is old-fashioned. It's old world.

Let's actually look at the opportunity in this case. And I want to move back to John because the opportunity is also in empowering 8 billion people around the world. So how can we actually bear that in mind and working towards with nature-based solutions, solving water security, but including the social things, the social, including the people? John D Liu.

Well, I would think that there's a big discussion about the infrastructure that you were mentioning. I'm not sure that we need more ruins. I mean, if we're building ruins for the future archaeologists to pick through, that's not going to really be helpful. I think what we have to look at now is that this 8 billion people is a species, and we now need to act as a species on a planetary scale. And I've been working on an experiment for the last 6 years, which is the creation of the Ecosystem Restoration Camps, and now it's the Ecosystem Restoration Communities movement. And we went from zero camps to 60 camps. Worldwide in 5 years. So people all over the world in different cultures are ready to accept the idea that they have to restore their ecosystems. They need to be supported. They are the ones who actually do the work. I have never seen anyone in an Italian suit with cufflinks infiltrate water in into the ground, create fertile soils, or protect biodiversity. It's possible to sign a policy decision or to write a check, but in order to have this happen, the people have to understand and know what they're doing. And there are very good methods of participatory rapid appraisal, or Theory U, to create collective intelligence surrounding this. So what we have to do is all work together and to find out what we believe in. We're actually, if you look at what's on television or the movies or in the political propagandas around the world, it's divisive. We need something that brings everyone together. And everyone knows that our lives, the quality of our life, our children, future generations of life will depend on what we understand and what we do. So when we choose to restore ecological function on a planetary scale and we make that the basis of the economy, then everybody is on this page. And it's not theoretical. It's not financial. It's physical. So the concepts of understanding of the true value, the basis of wealth, the actions of people who have power. We also have to consider, is it right to have power? Is it a good idea that some Do some people have power over other people? Or is everyone a human being and we're equal? We're alive. And so if we're alive, do we have a right? Do we have an opinion? I think there are 8 billion opinions, so we'd better learn how to use Theory U and participatory rapid appraisal in order to get an understanding of what we believe in as a species and what it means to have a civilization. I think Gandhi said— was asked, "What do you think about Western civilization?" And he said, "I think it is a good idea." You know, so we have civilization, we have culture going back thousands, tens of thousands, millions of years. In North America here, for 15,000 years, the indigenous people protected nature. The tallest trees were 400 feet tall, 4,000 years old. In just a few hundred years, this is massively degraded. This is This is what alters the surface temperatures. This is what alters the regulation of hydrology in the lower hydrological cycle. This is what sends— creates thermic drafts, puts moisture into the upper atmosphere where, by the way, we should also say high-altitude moisture is more— more quantitatively and qualitatively a greenhouse gas than CO2. And so we need to understand the complexities of these things, that all of these things are interrelated. It's been said a number of times, but it's not rhetorical. It's physical. The DNA of 4,000-year-old trees is much more robust than the DNA of trees which are bred for rapid use in the pulp industry. So all of these things we need to consider and we have to do this together and the people who are leading this— so in 5 years, 60 camps have emerged in all continents and there could be hundreds and thousands. That happened just by the local people saying we wanted to do that. Imagine if that is funded.

Thanks, John. A few final words, or pre-final words from Dennis, and then I'll say some closing words, but on ecology and economy.

Yes, to bridge the gap, especially on the Equator Principles, the founder is— one of the founders is Herman Mulder, and I work with him day by day, and especially also on the impact-weighted account framework. That's a new that's really measuring value creation beyond profit. Profit is part of it. And the pension sector, the insurance companies, but also the banks are adopting this framework already because they see that there's only— this is the future. And so— and what's really interesting, also what John D Liu was mentioning, Also, in these days, we have learned to think from a donor perspective and a receiver perspective, but can we also think that local communities, indigenous regions can really de-risk the financial part or the more economic or the business part, if they are part of the solution, that it's mentioned a lot, but it's really hard to bring that in the hearts and minds from a risk perspective or an uncertainty perspective. So can we move forward? That's really my message. Governance is really important, but it's really about governing. If you look at the framework of Elinor Ostrom, for example, about Commons and Commoning. She's really— how create we value based on these rules? Not rules, no, principles. We need to create space for learning by doing, by— and not stuck in the old system, in the different role playing. That's what we need to create a breakthrough.

Thanks, Dennis. And you give me a Very nice intro, kind of segue into my final words. It's we need the systems change again. If we continue doing what we've been doing, we will get what we always got. Again, the global— the Commission on the Economics for Water yesterday, same conclusions. There is a systems change, and water is actually central to that, critical to that. Water cycle restoration, what we have seen, is actually critical to that. It can be done. John D Liu in the Loess Plateau. It's happening now in Egypt, in the Sinai. Water can be an instrument for peace. We've heard from Tom about that. Laura, you've shared the mechanisms to start doing that, actually. So what are we waiting for? As said before, all the tools are there. We need to start doing it, but really in working together, moving from business case— why do we talk about a business case? Why not talk about the value case? What is the real impact we are making? I actually thought we were using the word risk way too much. I like to think in opportunities. It's a much more positive word moving forward. And also, the other thing, I had the pleasure— well, yeah, pleasure of being and trying to make an impact in Montreal at the Nature Summit. Two weeks before that, everybody was in Egypt working on climate. Now, in March, we're here working on water. Why are we traveling around the world in these summits and actually treating these themes separate? And why do we leave out the social part? I was— it was a great pleasure to see so many Indigenous people in Montreal. I see them here as well. They're the custodians of the surround— of our planet. Why don't we bring Everybody together now. So maybe everybody should go— Dubai, the next COP28, but maybe we should all go there and talk about climate, talk about water, talk about the social aspects, talk about nature. But nature provides us with the solutions, and again, water is really the linking pin between, yeah, between all these themes. The other thing I really take away from today, water is very much a local issue, and definitely Have the local ownership involved. That is absolutely— implementation is local, so have that involved. But it's also we need a global collaboration, because the global collaboration is also what is needed. Using society for a paradigm shift, using people to have this perform— this transformative change, grounded into everything we have, but really connect different teams and use the water cycle restoration and water as a tool for peace. Thank you very much for being here this morning. Thank you to my panelists. Thank you.