We started today with this week of Plataire with one of our main activities which is called The Panel and Debate in Latin America today. We have three panel members moderated by Mauricio Barrilla. Mauricio, please say hello. Hello. Hello. Mauricio is a playwright and teacher of the University of Chile in the School of Theater and he will be in charge of listening to the presentation, so the provocation that we have prepared for you of these three panel members and then he will then create a good discussion and then we will have Q&A session, hopefully lots of questions. So enjoy it. Ok, thank you very much, Maria José, good afternoon, and this is a match of freshers that are outside. It is very hot, and this week is going to be very hot in this city of Santiago, but hopefully this heat will be as well projected to be projected to all our bodies because what we started today is the beginning of some of the initiative that was due to be projected along the week, and the idea of Plataire 17 and the stretchable of Santiago Middle. I believe it is an interesting idea in terms of all the non-programmers to see, but we are invited to open to this course, which is a link to the work you do, which is programming and curating, and which are decisions which are not only based on your tastes, but which are also ideological nature because somehow theater, the one who goes towards the world, is an idea of you presenting the world, and somehow as well this shape of presentation is what are presented in contradiction. So we live in a very complex world today, apparently globalized in many senses, but with an urgency of particularizing or individualizing the identity of the territories, which obviously is important, and this is as well shaped in all this logic of programming. So the question open to this panel is a question which is very open as well in terms of what is, what do we understand by Latin America today, and the idea is not to come to an answer, but maybe two or three, but maybe the idea is just to trigger, to activate on you this question, and the possibility of breaking our prejudges, obviously we all have, on what day the Latin American scene today, an exportable scene from Latin America, et cetera. That is why in order to have this debate done, to have this conversation triggered, we have invited three good, a good some people that in ten minutes only they will present an activating idea, provoking ideas, more than an academic lecture. It is just an idea, hopefully not to converge, but hopefully they will clash so that once each of them will present this polemic idea, then the forum will be open 360 degrees so that everybody would participate by asking, dialoguing, commenting. Forgetting this structure, this is rigid structure that we are separated by this counter and try to generate a circulation. We are theater people, understand that theater is circulation, is energy, and this is what hopefully we can produce today among our bodies and minds. I will introduce them all first, and I will offer the stage to them. My extreme left, Claudia Zapata, she is a teacher of history, specialized in Latin American studies, and she works in the center of Latin American studies in Chile. I had the pleasure to meet her in the last hemispheric of performance that was done in Chile, and I believe that she is someone that obviously has something to say in terms of this question of what is Latin American today. To my left, or to my right, it's all relative. To my left is Damien Cervantes, Damien is an actor Mexican, and theater director of Vaca 35, a company that is performing two plays in the festival in this company with a long trajectory, ten years this year. And today is a very pleasant for us to have the view from an artist that somehow he feels that he is a real body in terms of what are these curating policies. And to the other side, I'm not going to say the word, it's Héctor Ponce, he's a researcher, my colleague as well from the theater department and a specialist in the area of Latin American theater. As you say, he's a very varied panel, quite interesting, and the next panel members are you. So you are kindly invited to be very attentive towards the notions presented here and to contribute to the dialogue. We are going to have ten minutes presentation, I'm going to tell them what's the time to present their ideas and then we're close. If needed, I can do a comment, otherwise we'll go directly to the word from you. So just be prepared, you have arms so that you can shoot very quickly. So thank you very much, and first I will offer them the floor to Claudio Zapata. Good afternoon. Well, by professional deformation I did my notes, hopefully I can do it more loosely. I want to find this opportunity to participate here and talk, and obviously to Maria José and Mauricio Barria that they invited me to be here and to start by saying that I feel myself part of the area of culture, although fear I do not know very much, so this is my starting point. I come from the cultural Latin American studies as an area where we analyze the history, the culture of the continent, trying to put the emphasis on their problematic situation and more than in the stability of it. And thank you to talk, to allow me to talk to you, the actors in culture, in this continent in the moment that I, at least I feel, and when you feel so proud of being Latin America, but now I feel myself in pain, not because of a complaint, because we are coming through important and difficult moments. It is difficult for the world, but to the Latin American world as well, not to tell you any cases, any more cases we are talking with my mother, what happens in Chile in Brazil, what is going on in Mexico, in Central America and the Caribbean, so I believe that it is a tolerating moment and this has to do with the critical reflections that we can share and see how we can face this complex moment. Starting from the things, the issues that I have worked along this year has to do with something in principle very specific, which is the Indian or indigenous movement and indigenous writings, but I have gone to a much more cross-cutting reflections on things that I believe that are challenges that we all share and they have to do with affecting on the place, the place of the peoples, our nations and this continent in the world, in a world that despite everything which is said on globalization is sealed, quite higher Christ, where we still have the imperialisms, where we still have the economical dominions and war as an expression of this conflict and from this small issue in principle, truth is that, and there is a long tradition in Latin America about that, I have come to the concerns on the contemporary colonialism and together with this on racism and the interweaving of different processes with social classes and gender. So I feel that those are particular kinds of oppression that in culture they have a privileged action. In the culture we have hierarchies, de-historization in a symbolic violence without which you don't understand the material depriving or even the missing. And colonialism as always has been a complex of problems. I believe that is still here with us and we can identify a colonialism between countries, but not only among countries but also among peoples as inside the countries of Latin America, but I believe that is the same in Asia and in Europe, not to take a Europe out of this problem area that they have, there are all problems, internal problems and internal conolializations. And just to come to the painting point that has to do with the conolias that has not yet finished between Europe and the United States and somehow was called the third world, I believe that independently of this category today is not sufficient. I still believe that it's necessary to mention this macro level where there is a place of experiment for colonialism. And something that has to do with the work in culture that we do, that has to do with identifying from my point of view how has been so fundamental for the settling of an ideological conolialism, which is material, but also ideological, the creation of the otherness, the otherness in the function within this conolialism construct. Because from my point of view, it's not only a cultural otherness, it is always an inferior kind of an otherness or out of our world. And I believe our world in brackets because in Latin American countries there are sectors that assume a place of central discuss this course although we have been exotized in other places of the world. And this is an otherness which is inferior, it can be addressable and ingenious. And as part of this construct we have the exotization of the others. And as I mentioned, different levels of conolialism between countries, inside the countries, also we have a chain of exotization that is relevant to continue warning about that. There is with the concurred people, with the racialized people, they have warned in our work that I have done on the intellectuals of the indigenous people where we have this cause in them which is very difficult to digest because the indigenous peoples are identified with other things, whether rural use space, with nature, with a different tradition, not necessarily with the spaces of intersection but with the hegemonical culture which is writing, it is the city, it is the political practice, it's even university. I believe anyway that those parameters of authenticity are expressed in the Latin American field as well. And I would like to dwell on the relevance to identify on this exotization because of the strengths because they are speech because they are present in the conolial speeches, et cetera. But I believe that with this idea I would like to talk to you as well. I believe that unfortunately, and I warn very dangerously in the discourses of solidarity and brave indication, I believe that you can be or start making solidarity by exotizing and this is something to be discussed. I'm not out of this construct which are very long lasting. I believe, I think, I'm thinking for example on this imposition of authenticity onto the indigenous peoples for example and by extension to the Latin Americans themselves and to have seen that many years ago, 20 years maybe, I saw it when I saw the Europeans in the civil society being in solidarity with that saboteurs where we have both exotizations, the Europeans and the Latin Americans. So the indigenous were thought as a culture that would be there maintained but not transforming as something from nature, from innocence even. This explains that coming from sectors of the left we can even feel some this courage in fact as the people who are in fact being so disheartened when they come to the indigenous cultures or some indigenous being affiliated in some political parties they were not that indigenous because they are linked to the occidental world and in fact they are not that pure and I insist that it can be seen with a certain idea of a Latin American as a primitive rebellion not interfered by external ideologies and it is this way that we are a satellite from others all the Latin Americans were as the non-modern thing or even the magic things those are images that put us out of history and they have the function of putting in the sphere of the civilized who is this course going to be replicated so it is called in what we call the alternative economies not Buddhism or the cultural tourism which is a metropolitan figure that is modern and civilized and that is going to see the one who is not even to learn new ways of life but we have the distance a fracture in the culture which is more fictional than real and by saying so I believe that and I am out of time with good and bad intentions I believe that those are in discourses with lots of stereotypes that they show a complex kind of history but from the world of art we are called to make them complex still more complex this is an eternal interrogation where I can see in theater or even in cinema or in music there is lots of replications of these images but also lots of discussion and I stay with one because I feel that it is a way of discussing places where these stereotypes they come to their culmination for example in the cultural industries and as we were talking with our colleagues from Mexico a very known example is the one of a Frida Kahlo with a filter with no problem areas in fact to understand this nation as complex as Mexico and Latin America in turn so this appropriation of the cultural industries that they have to be discussed I will stay as well with a very recent example still more abrupt the publication in Spain of a book from Elena Garro a Mexican girl that she is a very problematic person in Mexico in political terms I will say and because of all the literary elaboration that even comes before the boom of literature and she said she said sorry in the Spanish editorial says Elena Garro the woman of Octavio Paz the lover of Casares the inspirer of Valcia Marques and admired by Borges poor she said I would like dentists to end that with a question that I have having you here I know that the Latin Americans are the Latin Americans I would like to interrogate those people for example when you come to to show in your countries what you feel that it is absolutely absolutely authentic Latin America what is the metropolitan people trying to consume as something Mexican Chilean Latin American what are the images that we consume do we consume stereotypes or those problematizing discourses that are full in theater in theater as well this is a question that I would render to all of the dominating sectors the abuse of the exploited ones and what is consumed from that as a Latin American or as a Chilean or Brazilian or Mexican identity this is my question to conclude thank you thank you very much Claudia this is getting the right temperature this discussion so I now want to give the word to Fabian good afternoon well my my talk will be focused on the other side I probably come from somewhere else my professional is different because I do see it and I think that the place where I can problematize this subject is from my experience from a fringe theater independent group which came up in a complex city like Mexico City complex based on culture and Mexican Latin American general how has our way been deployed how did we open our way in international arts I would like to ask the question from this place why did this happen why do we have theater groups who always start from the same thing the idea of the theater per se representation of the world and directly in the niche of the markets you have to know how to sell this and to distribute this you are here because of that me too so I think we are analyzing this is the way I could problematize this issue which has got all the connections to the academic reflection we just heard from Claudia and much much better study than what I could say with a group of thousands we have been existing for 10 years now this year working in theater we our group started out of necessity to break up with the established dynamics we then had the Mexican theater is no news for anybody lived in a kind of obscure religion where nobody knew about the theater and all developing Latin America was developing with very specific emblematic groups but not Mexico Mexico was in a sort of internal development sort of creative institutional but I think that hasn't changed much it's just changing the way still no students from these schools these institutions created by these people were subdued Mexican theater for so long and here you want to break up of these lotics of the students we decided to break up first of all the idea of in a country where everything is in a primitive way we want to this is something fundamental something which today for me is the best way of resistance anyway because developers horizontal structure which grows together with others and strengthens the presence of those who we are and not the creator of a system of course we are always struggling against the system which privilege is the individual creator of the the director of the group and it's always somebody the director of the group speaking in public discussions because he's one who knows he's the head of it so I think the development of a group always has to do with the capacity which I have seen in my context in Latin America because I can compare and I have travelled around as well and I can compare creating these connections of construction cultural real cultural construction that implies a way of life implies changing a decision against the system which is that we do not be willing to earn a lot of money and we do not have all these opportunities as others have work as a collective more and unemotional what happens with that group we decided then we decided to we decided to we decided to renounce to all mechanisms which for us are not useful anymore this is an element of we renounced to the hegemonic thing everything we now have to be presented in a sort of Chinese theater we go to any space in Italy mostly there's a hegemonic in britain dramaturgy we do a different one it is the juvenile rebellion but it's our search as a group which as such owes its name to the contribution we could to a student to become a fund in the group to make a vaca in spanish means to to get us some money to get money for organizing something for an event so and that's what is our foundation that's how the group started when we renounced all these things I will speak quickly about the experience of the group but then you get a bit to the story of our market and how is the experience as a stable group but when we when you renounce you are facing two ways to stop doing theater because it's not feasible financially, economically socially sometimes even in your families you have to start creating your own structures your own structure with your own structure you are theatrical thinking when you think from the creative you question your social position political position it's related to your activity these things are related you don't realize it at that moment what happens then we renounce absolutely after some years of having been waiting to laboratory to know each other and in renouncing we became to a point where all the renounces come together and we did emblematic play and this play is given somewhere right on top of a house of five people watching it without production and by decision and curiously at that time I spoke to our actresses and actresses I told them well this place is so specific this place on top of a house makes it go shit and this is where the experience will stay perhaps it might be a play which goes out to the world and I think this is the point where the analysis comes in why do these things happen why all of a sudden you do a whole design because they have to do it a whole design a whole logistics political production logistics which in all sense means to try to get to the world and to some extent they don't access the world they don't make it if you do have good political connections you will make and a group which doesn't have anything of that which has been asked and which only has no audience finally ends up getting to the world this is he is my question what happens it would be absurd to say because we are so brilliant it has much more to do with doles of big love to be at the correct time at the correct place with the correct people with the right people and I think it has to do also with the idea that the more local things become universal so you realize it consequence you really understand that speaking from your own eyes from the internal things from your personal shit that sort of kind of people love that Europe is the center of the distribution of cultural information of the world or if Europe says it's okay it will get to the world yes, especially here in Latin America if you go out from your country and Europe says that's okay you come back to your country and they say yes it's okay before they wouldn't and that's a way you have to live it inconscientely there's a giant desire to show your work in all the possible world in every other context there's a necessity to feel internationally but it has to do because you are looking for an audience because in your country you don't have any real impact now which is the real impact it's always been the same to dialogue about to put our realities to dialogue but if you don't manage in no way that these realities come to your context that people see it then you do something wrong or something wrong in the context something doesn't work in a context so okay so automatically my friend is gone automatically you you already entered the system of free market you are part of the system where culture is the product where the cultural product has to have an interest where the cultural product has to be attractive not only for you but for the programmers for the governments who finance 90% of cultural issues in the world very few private financing unfortunately and oh yes to end I remember a sentence teacher told me Ricardo Diaz his name is Ricardo Diaz he was in Yugoslavia then years ago he studied there and as a student I told him I want to go out I want to show my work to the world it's good to go out it's good to get out to see, to realize that everything is just the same but you have to go out to realize that so I would stop my reflection a bit here about the Latin American product thank you Damian and other interesting the question of the paradox that I have to talk about and finally close this first part of this conversation Hector hello listen well listen well I'm going to read I'm going to read 6 minutes only 6 minutes I'm going to try to also from 10 years I want to start my exhibition and I want to retake it from a very long discussion on social sciences epistemology and science the idea is to discuss the use of discriminatory categories of activities that we use frequently to understand or to classify or identifies us as Latin Americans the Peruvian Antonio Cornejo Polar used to say that the current use of neto-mini takes us to confusion in such a way that is what the center talk about theater and other ways of this course a method so trans-cultural heterogeneous or hybrid each of them of these labels summarizes an interpretation field where we have systemic things not necessarily coincident and that make of all characterization a forced attempt of synthesis and deproblematization that from the base to all the approach to the production of this course is at the risk of being resisted to a categorized dominion and I'm going to talk about theater practices in terms of frontiers as the space for sending and resenting discussion by understanding the idea of frontiers something that precisely do not separate on the limit I conceive the idea of social theater or social theater and constant movement as the ideologies are not systems the idea of mark and jeno refuting is at the safe nor the performance has got a determined space regardless the desire more or less declared by those who represent the center or in for guessing for the pedicities let's take two examples understanding of systems of representations on the one hand we have the production of you as canon and to the other from Argentina in the last decades I'm talking about Mauricio Cartoon and Daniel Veronesi I know that all attempt of this is vain but as my minutes are short I want to insinuate a couple of programs associated to the field of theatrical production we can think that although in one of them memory is a resource to rebuild precisely this map of making the Peruvian territory heterogeneous field both at the level of a base and at the level of the schools in the other one we have in the other one it is also an exercise of memory a biographical and from the neighborhood memory in the context of Cartoon and very close to the revision of what the realism is in Veronesi in which as a formal exercise it is the response to a research that wants to answer the sense of realistic acting or performance in the context of crisis which is in Buenos Aires in the 90's that was projected in Chajol and Veronian as well in the last decade in the historical history of Latin America there is no such a thing in Latin America something to be done yet before of the saying some kind of of readings we have to see where these courses are seeing where the canon is formed and the forces fighting to establish criteria and system to validate this canon Chile might be an example and this festival might be an example to understand the difficulties of this problem with a very diffuse scene to the metropolitan expressions and to organizations that even controls the structure of the feelings of the audiences it is very difficult to conciliate these ideas and organizations to control the feelings it is very difficult to have the idea of heterogeneity when those metropolitan senses are the ones that legitimate and validate the ways that the criticism allows them to come into a pattern of method without frontiers the symbiotic frontiers and the frontier developed by anthropology it is a continuum we come from the nucleus to the periphery and from the periphery to the center of the score it is an idea that we can read in complexity with the category of frontier posed by Mark or Jay the frontier is not a barrier but a part as it shows the presence of the other and the possibility of gathering or meeting with him close of sight Estabros degrade things the city as a spacer of frontiers where we have the possibility of creating this frontier and the theater is the art of becoming the other the interesting thing is that we can read the phenomenon of theater in terms of which are much more friendly what would be then a frontier according to these references I believe that at least the categories which are coherent with the framework of descriptions where these are the frontier is a way of passing through and a way of understanding the American theater is given by the presence in our country of a very strong mobility that changes the neighborhoods and the center of the cities and it creates between these spaces an interesting place is what we saw last year a place which was called Trabajo Suscio directed by Marcos Guzmán where the passage from an Asian character became a white character so this talk about me is the other and this is a motto that a believer says you are in a place with a center of the other at least for a moment the idea of frontier without frontier I believe that's the motto proposed by FITAM is very very open towards our own reading as we are going the idea of saying what Latin American it is thinking of the frontier in a naturalized way is that in no university can be accepted as it is not accepted thinking that the canon or the canonized theaters by the system of elections it could be the only miserable a place to understand the different if we understand the world without frontier understanding epiphany the believer said living together all the countries all together we have to be responsible of the difficulty of naming or giving identity to the things doomed to obsolescence the expression of as syncretism should open new ways to understand the articulating ways in which we see where the identities are in reciprocity so this makes it absolutely necessary the way of opening the discussion on the way gives sense to the canon Latin American theater so I believe that the notion of heterogeneity is valid because many other ways and the system of production of this a scene like the Latin American one is heterogeneous from the Antilles to the Patagonia from Valparaiso to Bahia in Brazil and as we affirm to all attempt to unify clashes towards these multi ways and all synthesis tends to be consummating and this is the way symptoms of a system of election that do the periphery to open the space for the pattern of the Coa thank you very much Hector we have three different chairs three conferences universes in the idea of imagination and the ambiguity and the ambiguity of the construction of the definitive plans which is acceptable to some as on the other hand to imagine that this otherness has always been a standard of frontier heterogeneous otherness and it finds every kind of standardization of canonization and finally this experience of an artist who is currently the product of today in the case of the theater the problem of the individual collectors basically the market is a eyelid ofANE which is of an in the open the first to ask for So, whoever would like to start in this discussion. There we go. They are going to hand around the microphone, so. Hi, my name is Gerardo Salinas. I'm a playwright in Gavius. It's a theater in Belgium, and I do have an answer and a question to Claudia. Well, to some extent, to the three. The first and is what look, what, what, once Europe to find when they go to Latin American. Part of the dialectics in the, the colonize from the position of Latin American has to do with fiction of the white Europe, which is a fiction because in, at this moment in all the more relevant urban context the boomerang of mestissage and colonialism is landing heavily with, we do have now more sort of, we have three representatives of Belgium, Daniel Cordoba, Chilean, my self, and Argentinian born. And so other nationalities in Europe are building this current Europe. What do I want to find when I look for Latin America? Do I look for allies for anti-colonization, for cultural colonization of the arts of the world? What am I looking for outside Europe? My question is what is Latin America searching when it goes as it. It still maintains a fiction of white Europe. At this moment I think that the works, the urgent works to do, or we can see mestissage, is great as an artist's distribution of the economy of arts in Belgium, which is a center, a very strong center for contemporaneous art is in a crisis because of audiences in itself. And at this moment it's a kind of search. We are searching for a new theater or new art which could represent Europe, which today is the world it is. And that's why it is my question. What do you look for when you go to Europe? Well, thank you. I completely agree with this fiction of white Europe and lots of our Latin American efforts to question this colonial enterprise which is this euro-centrism which stood in this as this sensitive sort of confusion between Europe and euro-centrism. I referred to the euro-centrism and this is still existence and scope is effective. It's not a fiction. Actually in this image of white Europe it's part of a discussion which the world of the arts is being carried out and more than trying to see what else I could incorporate into this dialogue which I share with you. The important thing to resolve here is, I always said, but I've been spending so many years that I've realized that what's hard to achieve is not to see how difficult it is to get to the movement, but to be able to build bridges and agreements. Political sphere, there's the possibility to figure out this kind of discussion. Interesting, really. Nobody's got the emotional resolve. We have been discussing for decades how to name it, how can we reflect this heterogeneous with the reality of our as a paratism. I'm interested in this exercise and this exercise is also done in Europe precisely because of all the heterogeneous of the European continent and for its own internal colonization. I've learned a lot from what I've learned about writing of indigenous authors. For example, it's not rare in the course of political and indigenous construction and national autonomy that many of those references have to do with the colonization of Europe. Lots of these reference points have to do with the fast people. So it's interesting to see that in this exercise, Europe needs also to be able to rename itself and reach itself and not just this. Brown Europe or this Afro-European these are all worlds, though never said if in Latin America, if in Latin America, can we speak in Latin America from Indo-America? I don't think so. Because you only speak from our children from the PowerPoint in which we speak of the Ayala, which means to name the continent. This is incompletely true. I'm probably not asking you to leave to try to come out because I think that's the challenge because that's for a metropolis. Metropolis and this is trying to center the ideas just to think as a possible union. A political union. I'm going to lose the horizon. I think that's a problem. That's one idea I find problematic. Let America maintain this fiction of white Europe and I would say yes to this. That's a bit dangerous. It's a bit dangerous. Let Americans look for validation. They look for validation. That's true. We are not discussing this. We are discussing the hierarchy. We are discussing the hierarchy. We are discussing our world. We don't have the chance to resolve it. And then there's the heterogeneity. Who is looking for validation? Who is looking for validation? All the elites in other countries are looking for validation and other social actors are looking for validation. Without the opportunity to look for another white life.  But that's also a discussion of how this relationship can be an integral one to impossible. It's impossible to stay outside the market. It's not an issue of demonizing the market. I know you've been talking about this. It's not an issue of demonizing the market. It's not an issue of demonizing the market. I know that the market didn't come to the world of capitalism. Capitalism is the capitalist market. This is another historical structure. And you're saying that responsibilities never are a sign in our challenge to continue without traditionally discussing this continent. To discuss this bombs and bombs in our country where we have a malevolence and don't look for validation and not step to this mind that there's a risk of division so that we are asked for our heterogeneity and to threaten us in something out of romance. We are always seen as mafia corruption and that doesn't exist in Europe. Chile, so often with that time, Chile's got a colonial history which we haven't seen in the last 20, 30 years of the pop-spaces because of our intellectuals showing you that our problem is the capitalism. But where is the colonialism and the indigenous people where the colonialism which now explodes in our faces? So we have to recognize ourselves also in this problematic sense. So in this sense thank you for coming that in fact Europe is a fiction that dominates this idea of white Europe I think a learning is to identify the terms and we have to identify tools to do this and mix up Europe with Occidentalism and Eurocentrism in Europe isn't it? I was inside the sense of a black power which is on the floor and colonial writing is white. But it takes up colonialism as not Europe. So colonialism is Europe's illness. My name is Kion. I am a Chilean playwright. I work in the United States although I'm from Chile. My question is very general for all of you to start with understanding that all the issues discussed by Claudia are very open in the United States as well. We're discussing that in social justice and how to talk about equality and equity with people which are not white and this incorporates the Asians, the black ones, the lesbians or the disabled. And within this context well there is this kind of sovereignty of the white in the United States which is quite discussed today. And this kind of supremacy is different from imperialism that is discussed in this panel. And imperialism, the American imperialism, the Eurocentrism of our aesthetics as theatre people is different because as artists we look for acceptance and recognition of these European aesthetics but in the Chilean context I believe that different from other countries as the second language is an indigenous one in Chile specifically the second language after Spanish is English. So within this context the relationship that we have as Chilean artists with the hegemony of American neoliberalism is different from these European aesthetics that as artists we have as a tradition we just want to present this an idea to see what do you think about that. I saw your faces and apparently you are quite boring. No, not that much. It's a sister time, it's a nap time. I believe that there are quite diverse things that are being presented here that could be part of a conversation that I imagine that you will continue to do or maybe you are going to continue to do or when you go to the shopping mall or whatever you do and when you are leaving this place you will continue discussing the big problem that I have to do fundamentally and this talk on to the label of this festival which is a discussion of different categories of such particular circumstances although they seem to be quite exclusively Latin America that are global in nature and those are problems that can make us blow the idea of globalization, blow it down as a unifying idea of things to be concluded that even we, the analysts and the creators and artists in general we should pay attention to understand the reality of the production theatrical production in a less categorizing or standardizing way like maybe it's just kind of a selection the problems can be local but also global as the big contemporary issue is the mobility, is migration is the place where some poor countries look and come closer to the material world and this is a very interesting what a friend said that it is a Korean or Chilean or North American but that's a challenge because we can say that it is a a disgustic idea and I think this is a plastic idea if this is a term that allows you to talk and to think at some time so this happens in Canada regardless of your thinking but it's the idea of thinking in two languages at the same time because the Latin American country that do it always in long ways is Paraguay they have two languages Guarani and Spanish we are not but I would like to give my opinion on the place of the culture and the market we shouldn't demonize the existence of a market because if you said as well all artists that wants to be recognized as well and recognition sometimes but we see through through some rejection for example you reject something that you come to the logic of the market to be recognized and obviously you have to train of certain principles and to me it's not a perverse problem to be avoided I believe that the scene or this kind of context should allow the discussion of these things and realizing that you construct fictions as the same way as Latin America does when we create a space for interpretation we are making fiction or our republics is fiction it does not mean that we do not exist as Latin America because we have an identity but this identity as well as Claudia said at the very beginning is an identity which is permanently in revision so it is not static it is not rigid it is modifiable and Santiago de Chile and Chile in general as many other Latin American countries they have been forced to to modify their places for the different places and if this happens to a theater obviously visual arts literature as well as other industries the problems of the cultural industry the problem is that the cultural industry can house different systems of production of this course and not only having one system of production which is legitimized per se we have to understand that the shows as all anthologies of selections it is difficult to choose a selection done by group of persons and they have an ideology and I feel that I believe that went beyond thank you very much for the panel and I'm a North American the programs which finances plays dances from Latin America in the US and every day I speak with programmers from all the countries I don't know whether this has to do with language or whatever or lack of studies people seem to have an idea of Latin America as if it was very monolithical and I would like to hear comments of the panel to this subject as to migration in the United States this is a very important subject very relevant subject and the programmers today are thinking a lot of that but it is a very personal subject every country's got its history it's a unique situation and I would like to hear your thoughts on that I think that the subject of migration is the hot subject of the world right now it's not only a subject in the United States and it is a subject in the rich countries to get the conditions to structure the conditions for that happening now so the interesting thing here is I understand what you say but the monolithical thing I know there is a kind of political or sense of the violence in Latin America but it's also not but this doesn't happen in every area especially for me in the theater this does not happen I think that in the theater to do have the development of very specific thinking which is getting more specific ideas about Latin America as a perpetual but this is an exhibition of life and I think this is one of the artistic successes that theater has and I'm going to define a specific identity about being the danger I see is that's one of the things not many people but I know theater groups even those who travel in the United States travel to the United States we are neighbors where we are right next to you but still it's a problem for Mexico but for everybody they don't access but it's also been around the festivals where I think some of the groups American groups don't get there there's a lot of internal market and the United States has to do with a sort of political or artistic complacency and that market is sufficient to speak about the political issues which they are interested in but in some cases it's something that happens in countries like Germany where the issue of immigration is hot and where people in Germany say you speak about immigration and you'll have theater and curiously you will have theater and from the 15 selected players the journey of them where about migration this is not something America speaks more about the phenomenon of social politics that concerns the evaluation of the class in itself and that implies immigration and for me this is fundamental I think there is an absolute absolute identity I couldn't speak about the Latin American identity in the theater but I had progress and I think it's only to let an American is now present on the festivals of the world but I think what I think is that the incapacity of reading the subjects from where the country approaches them and not posing them as the country who consumes them well unfortunately we have to close down on the last centimums and it's quite interesting because it's a crossing between those who produce and those who see what is being produced to take it from where else theater is intimately cultural theater in a difference to visual arts I might be wrong it seems to be a very localized art and that's why I think that this kind of discussion are not secondary discussions they are right in the center of the work you realize this is only the starting point to be a little activator of neuronal movements of body and the heart right now and the heat affects us all and everywhere so I would like to thank you for the activities during the week and I think that's why Jose is going to close the panel first of all thank you to everybody thank you for your words for your thoughts to share them with us I would like to inform you that tomorrow at 10 o'clock in the morning in the hotel Crown Plus thank you


Okay, I'm not gonna lie, this intro is being recorded after the reaction you're about to watch, and the reason for that is this very quickly becomes a fanboy video. Oh my god! I don't know how it happened. In the original video I mentioned I'm very skeptical about Street Fighter 6. I didn't really like Street Fighter 5 that much, and I was worried that the more realistic characters and models in this game would have a direct impact on the personality and animations of the moves, but this trailer kind of shut me up real quick.  Yeah, so let's just watch it now. Okay, hey, that don't look bad. I'm like furiously looking at the background. Final feast. I'm just furiously looking at the background. Yo Hugo! Yo! Put Hugo in the game.  That would be wild. I'm turning this down, dude. What the? Ah, here's Luke, dude. Luke is just the face of Street Fighter 6. It's not like a game. Yo, why Luke got such a low stance? He is just doing body shots on this bag. Okay, that's like three ribs broken. That shot looked pretty good. Oh, dude, this is some personality right here. Abigail, they showed Abigail in the background. Yeah, I don't know why I'm looking in the background so much. What is it? Wait, what is this? It's like a single player? Why did you just shoot her? You can unbox. Okay, so it's a single player. Like, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. That guy was a character? Or are they just like making like single player like bots? Wait, hold on. Now we got to replay this. So just this traveler guy. So this is him engaging a fight. That was definitely him in the back dash. Like, hold on. I got a, look how goofy that looked. They just got to throw down right here in the middle of this cafe. You know, this woman has had enough, bro. She is not having it. Oh, Chun-Li. Oh, they see Chun-Li looks so like realistic. What is this, dude? Doesn't look better. You look sick.  That's a really cool character. I don't know why I like the headphone design. Who is this? Then they're showing off a lot. I assume this is just a cut scene. I'm not getting too hyped about that. Now that looks like it could be an in-game animation, like an intro. The music is so good, dude. It's like, I don't want to say it, but it's kind of like, it's giving me third strike vibes, bro. Yeah, it's a far cry from NBC. Oh my God. It actually looks good in motion in the actual fighting game. Yo, the animations look really good. Wait, wait. They're like real, obviously they look like real people. So they kind of have like the NRS animation thing, but like not at all. Look, look at that. They have like the real looking people, but actually like cartoonish looking animations, or at least like very fluent. I like to call Perry. Get that out of here. I wonder, Perry is probably just a Ryu thing, but that was sick. We're getting to see some supers.  The supers look so good. Shouldn't you? Oh my God, wait, that was a great trailer. Wait, they kind of popped off with that one. Battle hub? What is this like PlayStation online? So you're just going to get to walk around? I guess that makes sense. That was really cool. Hold on, I need to go back and see these soup. I need to see this Shinshory. I love the color splashes. That's great. Damn, Street Fighter Six might be the game. Street Fighter Six might be the Street Fighter. Look at that Shinshory. Hold on, let me see the impact frame. I've been playing a bit of Street Fighter Four recently. Let me see the impact frame. The facial expression.  This is like a Street Fighter Four image. That's sick. They actually did it. They did the personality and actually mixed it with the real-life looking models. No way, dude. I think there was actually another video. Let me go see. Yeah, there was another video. I'm not sure what this one is. I think it's just more fighting, like actual in-game fighting. God, this aesthetic is so cool. Look at this. This is actual gameplay. Neutral? First ever in-game real-time commentary feature. Oh, so it has like an NBA 2K thing. Yo, that's actually a kind of a cool feature, though. I wonder how much feedback they could actually provide, though. That jump attack was good. So is that like their crush counter system, like the way those attacks stand out? That super-animation goes wild. The startup looks so sick. K.O. screen is nice as well. Man, they did it, dude. They added the personality so good. Oh, the Todd Totsu even looks good. Okay, I am so happy that, again, I'm going to keep saying this. They did the real people thing without it looking like, you know, the animations are super stiff. The Hadouken looks a little more realistic, but that's not bad. In fact, it looks fine. The animations are so good. Donkey Kick got armored through. You can definitely combat that, bro. You have to be able to. Oh, the slow-mo. We got a bit of Tekken 7. Look at the combos. Why does Luke punch like that? I didn't play Luke in Street Fighter V. Does he always punch like that? Oh, the full Shinshu Ryuken? Oh my God. Why do they like black and white the screen, dude? That was sick. Nah, Street Fighter VI might be it. That got me really excited. That got me really, really excited.  I ain't even gonna lie though. That got me kind of excited. Street Fighter. Oh, look at this shot. This is so good. They did way more person. Look at these facial animations. This just looks really good. Oh my God. Nah, Street Fighter VI is it. Street Fighter VI might actually be it. And that's all I have to say in this video. Look, my expectations are sky high now. Okay, Capcom. Look, when I saw the teaser trailer, I said the logo doesn't look that good. But other than that, it really didn't show a lot. But now, I don't even care about the logo. The logo looks sick. Everything looks sick. Please don't let me down. Yeah, I might have gotten a bit too invested in this. But whatever, dude, I'm excited. Hopefully you guys enjoyed this weird reaction video, but that's it for me, dude. I'm out of here. Bro, why did they do this? Now I'm excited. Please don't let me down, dude. Oh my goodness.


It's very important, I would say critical for public safety and well-being. HHS, who are not CEC scientists, published the following guidelines stating it was not required to test people without symptoms of COVID-19. Dr. Yuri Shostak, a Drug and Discovery Developmental Scientist who's currently working on a vaccine for COVID-19, gives us insight on who HHS is. HHS stands for Department of Health and Human Services and it's a department that has a large umbrella of various agencies and some of the most critical and relevant agencies for our topic of discussion are CDC, the Center for Disease Control, as well as an FDA Food and Drug Administration. In response to the news, Sarah Fing, a computer science and electrical engineer major at Cal, says she prefers advice from the CDC over HHS because of lack of experience. Well, if somebody of a scientist is straight out of their PhD, I'd say they probably really only have expertise on the subjects they wrote their dissertation on in terms of general public health advising. To really be an expert, I think you would need enough time to have done the research yourself, somebody with decades of experience over somebody younger or less experienced. With September's updated guidelines published against the CDC scientist wishes, Dr. Yuri Shostak reminds people what COVID-19 is and the importance of taking the virus seriously. It's a disease that's caused by a virus SARS-CoV-2. It's very important. I would say critical or public safety and well-being is social and specifically physical distances, distancing is critical by wearing masks. What you do, you actually not just protect yourself, but you're protecting others. Reporting for Cal TV, I'm Danielle Evans.


since the launch of All Hands magazine online two months ago. The team at All Hands has been working hard to bring timely and relevant news to the fleet. We've added a variety of new content this week that should help you understand key topics affecting you and the Navy today. Here's a quick look, some of our latest content. Take a look back at the last major American sea battle with the 25th anniversary of Operation Prang Mantis, when in 1988, the mining of USS Samuel B. Roberts sparked an American victory in the Persian Gulf. As part of Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention Month, Command Master Chief Sybil challenges sailors to take action. Also get the scoop on PCS moves for the remainder of the fiscal year, and hear the status of Navy Manning Levels from the Chief of Naval Personnel. Check out our new health and fitness section with a feature that explores Judo in the Navy. We follow IT2 Robert Turnquest, a competitor on the Armed Forces Judo Team, and Sensei Edwin Takamori, a Judo instructor at the US Naval Academy. Also find out if your rating or NEC was affected by the latest selective re-enlistment bonus message, and see how the Navy is partnering with civilian industry to explore future technologies for the fleet of tomorrow, all on display at the recent Sea Air Space Expo. Go to www.ah.mil on your computer, tablet, or phone to see the latest news affecting the fleet. And don't be afraid to give us your feedback. You can comment right on the story pages. You can also submit your own content and story ideas by clicking the Submit tab on the top of the home page. New content is uploaded frequently, so be sure to check back often to stay in the loop. From the Defense Media Activity, I'm Petty Officer Andrew Johnson.


and welcome everyone, welcome ladies and gentlemen to SCI. This used to be my home for about five months until I left the Stockholm office for the office in Oxford which is equally nice but very different. But it feels very, very good. It feels a bit like a homecoming for me to be back here at the institute. So to start off with Jakob already introduced the background of the report that we're launching today and the project that we've done. But I wanted to give a little bit of detail and I also wanted to express some of the thanks that Jakob already mentioned mainly to the Nordic Council working group of climate negotiators and we have pretty much the whole working group present here today and we have a few of them who will comment on the report and on the topic at hand today as well. But we of course very much like welcome them here at SCI and thank them for supporting this research also from a very personal perspective I found tremendously interesting. It's not only timely but I think there's really some a lot of let's say issues to be discussed and to be explored in much more detail and hopefully what I'm presenting today will give you some teaser as to what we found in the report. What I already mentioned the report itself there's one copy at the back but it's been launched yesterday so it's basically being printed in Copenhagen right now. We also have a number of policy briefs in the back which you can take so basically you can start reading right after the seminar. And then finally I also wanted to reiterate what Jakob said and then to thank in this case Horkensselen from Cicero who is here with us but also someone who couldn't make it today that's Peter Powell from the German Development Institute and it's been a very pleasant collaboration with these colleagues to get this report done by today. So before I go into some of the more technical details I want to give a little bit of background why we're doing this report what the topic of the report is. Then I want to highlight some of the key findings and messages from the report and basically open the room for discussion that we will have with the panel later. There might be questions that you have about the report and about my presentation. We'll have a quick opportunity for questions right after this presentation but I think most of the discussion will be useful to have this afternoon in a broader group. So as many of you will know 2015 is a very important year for climate change. It's not only a very important year for climate change it's also a very important year for addressing sustainable development more generally but as most of you will know is that by the end of this year in December there will be the 21st conference of the parties to the UNFCCC so basically one of the key climate change meetings to come up with the new agreement under the UNFCCC an agreement that is applicable to all parties so not only just developed country parties like the Kyoto Protocol but of course before we get to Paris it's useful to know a little bit where we started from and this is not even showing let's say the real start let's say from the 1919 onwards when the UNFCCC was negotiated but basically how the negotiations have evolved since 2011 so in 2011 parties launched the so-called ad hoc working group on the Durban platform on enhanced action and with that they launched these negotiations on a 2015 agreement to come up with a universal climate change agreement that really covers all the countries and to really get all the countries to take action on climate change mitigation and adaptation but beyond these negotiations or beyond the launch of the negotiations there were still quite a bit of there were a lot of question marks around the specific architecture of the 2015 agreement but in the last few years more and more details have become known about this and I think a key moment here was in 2013 when a new acronym was introduced in the climate change negotiations and if anything the climate negotiators and the climate change community is very good at introducing acronym and in this case let's say the acronym du jour is the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions or INDCs please remember this because they will refer to them quite a few times in the next slides as well but basically countries were invited to come forward with pledges to take climate action under 2015 agreements at the same time there was not a tremendous amount of clarity about what these INDCs actually were and I'll get to that in the next slides but in Lima in December 2014 so just a few months ago parts at least agreed on a bit more information of what could possibly be included under these INDCs and I think by now in February the first INDC was submitted and in March the second one followed by now we start to get a bit of a better idea of what countries actually mean with this acronym and the whole idea is that by December there will be a range of these contributions of these INDCs that can then be included in the Paris Agreement the question is though whether all the INDCs of all the countries will be ready in time for Paris obviously I'm not showing here that the error continues also well afterwards Paris is not the end point of international climate change action Paris is a very important point but at the same time of course Paris will not agree on all the details the parties will still elaborate the details also in the coming months so Paris is a crucial point for now but it will not be the end point so then what are these INDCs and a few months ago there was a lot of discussion about what this could actually mean whether it would include let's say mitigation contributions but also contributions in the context of adaptation and now that the first ones have been submitted there's at least a little bit more clarity so the first INDC that was submitted the best kid in class was Switzerland in February which pledged to reduce its emissions by 50% by 2030 and by 35% by 2025 the EU a few weeks later also agreed on its own internal goal of reducing emissions by 40% by 2030 or at least 40% there's some other similarities between the two contributions one is that both the scope of both these INDCs are economy-wide and also include land use land use change in forestry another one of these acronyms they use the same base year although they differ in the use of international carbon credits where the EU has clearly said no we will not use any carbon credits to achieve our targets Switzerland has left that option open but then these are just two let's say the first two that have come in what's going to happen when more of these INDCs are coming and I just want to highlight the two likely INDCs or the two likely contributions that will come from the United States and China two of the major powers in international politics especially in the area of climate change what you see here is that the US has pledged to to reduce its emissions of 26 to 28% by 2025 below 2005 thus so maybe comparable in the sense that it's an absolute emission reduction target but it uses a different base year and China has a different contribution altogether which is focusing on peaking CO2 emissions rather than absolutely emission reductions and then there are other points that it's about 20% of energy supply needs to come from non fossil fuel sources so you can imagine that given the fact that there's no let's say complete streamlines idea of what these contributions will be that the variety between them theoretically is going to be quite large even though as you can see with the EU and Switzerland they can be quite similar then a related question there is that also adaptation might be included for some of the INDCs and we can particularly think of developing countries who say well the action that we've taken on adaptation is our contribution to the tackling climate change so this is what we're going to see in the next few months and it's not yet entirely clear what the INDCs or all the different countries is going to look like but what is becoming quite clear is that it's going to be difficult to see whether all these INDCs will come in time this is a graph made last month by the New Climate Institute which shows a bit of the progress made by the different countries on developing their INDCs and as you can see some have already submitted and some are planning to submit in March already but most of them are actually going to submit only in September at least most of the countries they have surveyed and for even some countries there's no internal planning process at all at the moment so the question is well when will these INDCs come in might it be just one or two months before Paris or might it be earlier at the moment it's not completely clear for all countries yet so it's important to know this as a background yes we are going to look at the contributions and how they're being reviewed but it's important to know what these contributions actually are and when they're coming in so why then is assessment and review so basically the topic of our report why is that important and here I think there's a number of reasons so first of all we argue also in the report that assessment and review can be crucial in identifying to see whether we are on track to meet our collectively agreed targets but also to see whether the contributions made by different countries and different parties are actually fair so both from a point of view of effectiveness as well as fairness the assessment and review process can be of crucial importance then also assessment and review can help basically uncovering the information and the assumptions underlying these contributions so it can also enhance the credibility of these contributions by increasing transparency and finally by sharing this information widely not only among parties but also among other stakeholders with NGOs, with businesses with the research organizations it can basically enhance accountability accountability of the actions taken by parties so over all these aspects effectiveness, fairness, credibility transparency and accountability they form the foundations for trust building for international cooperation and climate change so that's no mean feat but as was reformulated in the report in a world that is increasingly moving towards a top-down system the review forms let's say the last bastion of the top down increasingly moving towards the bottom-up system the review system forms let's say the last bastion of this top-down system so that's why at least we think that the rationale for the report is justified so when we did research one of the first things that we encountered was that there was actually quite a high level of confusion of actually what is meant by assessment and review and there were a lot of discussions at the time on there's on one hand ex-ante review and on the other hand there's an ex-post review and we're trying to disentangle these aspects and the types of review that that's parties but also observers have been talking about so on the one hand you can make the distinction between a review of individual contributions so a review of the contribution by Switzerland for example and on the other hand you can look at the review of parties collectively so for example what parties are pledging in aggregates does that live up to globally read those but then at a similar or at a different level you can also make a distinction in terms of the timing of the review and when people talk about ex-ante review they are most of the time talking about that's in the top left corner they're talking about review of contributions before they are somehow being anchored or inscribed in a 2015 agreement or maybe in a future agreement in a future contribution cycle but at the same time there are already ongoing processes of review that have been taking place since the very beginning of the UNF triple scene the process of monitoring reporting and verification and I will talk a bit about a few of them which are more focused on how well are parties implementing their contributions and then finally there are processes which basically after the fact or after let's say a certain commitment period has ended look at well did a country or did a party comply with its commitments and this is normally what is referred to as the ex-post collectively you can make a similar distinction you can look at the collective contributions in advance or you can look at it at a slightly later date or during the implementation so in a report what we did is before we wanted to look at the options of assessment and review under 2015 agreement we really wanted to make sure that we covered well what is already out there and any review processes under 2015 agreement is not going to start on a blank slate so here are just four of the processes that we covered, we covered three more I think in the report but each of them offers their own lessons so when we talk about the review of national communications which are submitted regularly by NX1 and non-NX1 parties you can see that already in these national communications in their review emissions trends and emissions policies are already being reviewed but also one of the lessons from this process the high frequency of review can be quite resource intensive and this is something to keep in mind especially if we try to include more countries similarly with technical review of several reports under the period protocol and there's a few lessons that can be learned there and here one of the main lessons is that extra review process as such basically having a group of experts reviewing the report from a country can actually help that country in realising well this is how we can really come into compliance at a later stage but also here one of the lessons is that reviews actually require quite a large pool of experts and quite a significant resources then from more recent review processes and again I have two new acronyms and this is IAR which is international assessment and review and ICA which stands for international consultations and analysis with IAR being applicable to developed country parties and ICA applicable to developing country also here there's a few lessons one is that these processes actually show that there's some level of streamlining that is possible between all these different review processes what they also show that it's actually possible to combine expert reviews and more multilateral part to part in reviews and finally they show that it's actually possible to treat some countries differently because in this case the least developed countries and the small island states need to treat it differently under these processes and finally another example from the current processes is that already there's experience with aggregate level reviews at the moment there's an ongoing review which is trying to see whether the two degrees target is actually adequate for parties and whether it's maybe necessary to move towards a one and a half degree target so as you can see there are a number of lessons to be learned but also a number of systems that can be built on in the future then the other thing which was already mentioned by Bayakop is that we also looked at the number of processes outside of the UNIFCC not because you can take these as analogies and say whatever happened in the World Trade Organization can also happen in the UNIFCC but just to get some lessons and get some ideas from these processes and here one of the things that we figured out with the trade policy review mechanism under the WTO is that actually it's interestingly possible to link the frequency of the review to a share of World Trade so to specific criteria so that might bring the idea is it possible to link the future review to a share of global emissions for example but it also shows that group reviews are possible so a number of countries being reviewed at the same time another interesting process that we think is the universal periodic review which is the human rights review system and I think here one of the most interesting aspects is that even for a sensitive let's say a topic that really touches upon national sovereignty as much as one can imagine it's possible to actually involve non-government stakeholders in these processes and then again might might form a hopeful lesson for the climate review another aspect that they do is that today the subsequent reviews future reviews actually built on how well the outcomes of a previous review have been implemented what this process shows is that funding is possible to help countries participate and implement recommendations and what this process shows is that actually it can be quite difficult if countries really do not want to cooperate so if a country is being reviewed and recommendations coming out of a review then the country says well nice that you give us these recommendations but we're going to ignore them what do you do then what you do then is look at the Montreal Protocol where there is actually a stick so if there is non-corporation under the Montreal Protocol on ozone depleting substances it should be possible to take trade measures for example against the country so what you see here is that there is a possible stick to really make sure that countries live up and really cooperate with the review but another lesson that the Montreal Protocol offers us is that there is a link between the outcome of a review and the receiving financial and other support so as I said there is quite a number of ideas that come out of these processes and that could be helpful also in the coming year in thinking about designing and organizing a process under the UNFCCC so we structured the reports along a number of questions with the first of these questions being what exactly should be reviewed and I already mentioned that the INDCs themselves their substance can be quite different for different parties so maybe until now it's maybe about mitigation so how many emission reductions are countries going to commit to but it might be that some countries also will include adaptation related information and maybe other countries will include financial or technological information so basically to say well our financial needs are this much and we want to receive that or a country may say well our financial contribution is going to be X dollars and maybe this will happen in the coming year at the moment it's still unclear there's no specific mandates in the most recent decision but at the same time some countries have indicated that they want this type of information in their contributions the question here is that what information should be reviewed and it's here it's important to know that already these existing review processes that are mentioned they already focus almost all of them focus exclusively on mitigation but it's also interesting to see that some of them also focus on means of implementation so finance technology transfer and capacity building so for example the international assessment and review that I just mentioned is one of these processes which not only looks at mitigation but also at the financial contributions of parties then it's important to keep in mind when thinking about well what kind of information should be reviewed it's important to note that and I think Hogan can probably mention this in more detail is that the review of means of implementation and a review specifically of financial contribution has been a key priority for at least some developing countries and I'm thinking particularly of countries like China and India have been really hammering that this is an important aspect for them but then reading more information is not necessarily easy to do it may require more resources it may require more expertise also it's really useful to have just loads and loads of information to be reviewed it might also just confuse the stakeholders so it's not an easy thing to say whether it's the review should be extended also to other types of information from a political point of view it might be necessary then another question again a very contested question should there be differentiation between different types of parties in these processes and here it's important to distinguish between on one hand the type of differentiation and on the other hand the way that can be differentiated so in terms of the type of differentiation you can differentiate maybe between different contributions so you will have a different review process for each target versus a process for maybe voluntary energy efficiency targets but it could also be done by parties or by groups of parties so there might be a different review processes for the least developed countries versus other developed countries for example but then in terms of the means there's actually a very long list also in the report and my view is that the way that can be differentiated there's a lot of creative team there's a lot of possibilities to do so here I just listed a few of these options it might be that you give some countries access to funding and I was not it might be that for some countries group reviews are possible for others it isn't it might be that the frequency for some countries is higher than others or it might be that the outcomes of the review processes might be requirements for one country and let's say soft recommendations for others so there's a lot of aspects and a lot of flexibility to play around with differentiation when we're looking at what was how to move forward I think it's important to know that differentiation can be done for both reasons of fairness and equity so it might be necessary to treat countries differently because their circumstances are different for example because they are poorer but also for reasons of pragmatism I already mentioned that the number of experts and the number of resources the amount of resources is quite limited so maybe we simply cannot have a review as much as that for each country but at the same time what you end up with is a trade-off between on the one hand the transparency so ideally you would show as much as possible for all these countries versus the administrative efficiency so the cost of these reviews so this is a difficult trade-off that needs to be made the third question we looked at is well which kind of criteria do we actually use in the review so against which benchmark are we judging countries on the other hand you have criteria which are more of substantive nature so ambition and added proceeds to basically are countries doing enough and on the other hand you have fairness and equity so is what countries are doing actually fair and you have more would we term more procedural criteria so is what countries doing transparent is it accurate if countries report it on time is it consistent with the reporting format which are more of a procedural nature interestingly these criteria are already used in quite a lot of the review processes that I mentioned so it's clearly feasible to re-enummer these criteria but it might be difficult to extend them in the future review process but what can definitely be said is that agreement on criteria as desirable as they are but agreement on criteria related to ambition and equity and fairness might be more difficult to achieve in Paris then the fourth question we looked at is the timing should assessment and review be carried out and here we made the distinction between the types of review processes that are shown in the beginning so when it comes to this Exantum review so basically a review in this case before Paris but also maybe in future contribution cycles it could possibly be done on a rolling basis so whenever new contributions come in they are being reviewed it can be done after a submission of a certain number of these contributions so maybe if 50 parties have completed their contributions then the review starts or it could be done periodically so every five years there will be a new review of these contributions that are available at that time when it comes to the review of implementations so basically how are countries doing in implementing the contributions here the question is rather what do we do with the current monitoring, reporting and verification systems do we stick with them, do we amend them do we adjust them these are not easy questions to answer but these are some of the options when it comes to the review of compliance the question here is primarily what happens with compliance in any case and that's a much bigger question that we can probably address in these two hours on one hand say that it could happen after every five years or it can again happen on a continuous basis and then finally the aggregate assessments so all parties together the suggestion that we have is that this can be done in line with existing processes so already there is a process in place that can allow for aggregate assessments on a regular basis then moving on to the fifth question which is about how do we actually organize these processes and again all ideas can be drawn from existing review processes both under and outside of the unit of the city I will not go through this slide in detail I will let you read the poster brief and order report for that but I think the most important point of this slide is that there are a lot of options here that can be done but a few months ago when parties gathered in Lima they basically for the process before Paris they discarded pretty much all of these options except for maybe a compilation by the UNFCCC secretariat of the contributions that have been submitted by October 2015 so the reason why I'm saying that is that it actually highlights what is listed down here it highlights the importance of assessments outside of the UNFCCC process and when I say outside of the UNFCCC process I mean assessments that are carried out in an informal let's say party to party basis or assessments that are carried out by observers and this is happening so organizations like EcoFace World Resources Institute, UNEP they have ongoing assessments of the new contributions as soon as they come in but also parties are having these discussions and there might be discussions on a less formal basis in Bonn in June to basically discuss each other's contributions to enhance understanding that doesn't mean that these contributions will actually change but at least there will be some kind of discussion about what's happening some kind of consultations then finally and again I will go through this slightly quickly because I think this will also be more discussed in the panel we looked at the way how assessment and review plays a role in registering up ambition over time and we made a distinction here because there's been a lot of talk about registering mechanisms so basically making sure that the ambitions of parties are increased over time and we made a distinction on the one hand that registering mechanisms that are clearly related to the region such as such and other registering mechanisms which are not necessarily related to the assessment and the review process but are related to the broader architecture of the 2015 agreements so clearly agreeing on a long term goal let's say a slightly more specific goal than a two degrees target clearly that is going to be important for registering up ambition because it gives let's say parties a destination to go to but this is not necessarily a feature of the assessment and review process similarly a regular negotiating cycle making sure that countries let's say every few years get together and have a discussion about how they're increasing their ambition very important for registering up but not necessarily part of the assessment and review process again contribution force basically making sure that whatever parties are doing this is also sometimes referred to as not backsliding but it basically means that whatever parts are doing next time they're going to do more is another important aspect of the 2015 agreement but not necessarily part of the assessment and review process so what is part of the assessment and review process that could help with registering up is two suggestions that are more suggested in the report is a recommendation for upward adjustments so whatever comes out of the review process there's a recommendation or possibly even a requirement to go to move ambition upwards which could help with registering up ambition similarly to have a periodic review of the adequacy of what countries are doing together might help with registering up ambition over time speaking of time I'm probably going slightly over mine but I'll wrap up so some of the key messages from the report and again you can read the report in more detail and also for more justification for some of these messages that we've discussed with you now and in the panel discussion as well so the first one should perhaps be the most obvious and that is that assessment and review is essential for trust building, for international cooperation broadly and in the end we think that it can help enhance ambition and increase fairness as well then with respect to the type of contribution that it should cover we believe that it should definitely cover mitigation contributions but that review process also covering means of implementation so again finance technology capacity building might help with forging a consensus in Paris then we suggest that assessment and review should cover all parties but at the same time the differentiation can be both fair and practical and again there's a lot of suggestions that we're making a report that could be implemented in practice the question is of course what will work best then finally this is a more difficult suggestion to make because on the one hand we see the need for an increased role or at least a clarified role of non-state actors in the review processes in a similar way that it's happening with the human rights regime but at the same time there's still some resistance from some parties to have observers, to have non-state acts involved in these processes but we would suggest that especially if there is no formal process like what's happening now in the lead up to Paris especially in those cases I think the role of non-state actors is going to be crucial then finally we're obviously raising a lot of options we're discussing a lot of we're covering a lot of ground-turned reports but I think one of the key messages is not all of the things that we're suggesting in the report not all of the questions that we've raised in the report need addressing before Paris and this is going back to one of the first slides the arrow continues so basically yes it's going to be important to have some basic agreement on for example that we have a review process that we ideally clarify the scope of such a review that we decide on the basic criteria of the review if we are going to use any what types of differentiation give an indication of the timing maybe an indication of the role of non-state actors but all the details, modalities and procedures do not have to be agreed necessarily in Paris they can also be agreed let's say between 2016 and 2020 so this is an important reminder that we're dealing with a very complex topic and of course this is only one part of the Paris agreement and there will be other aspects that will be equally if not more important to deal with and I think I will leave it at that but thanks so much for coming thank you


Moodle 4 Course Editing Course editing in Moodle 4 is cleaner and smoother with a new edit mode on-off toggle, a simplified navigation hierarchy highlighting your location, drag and drop from the course index and central area, an expandable block draw, and new activity icons. When teacher Mr Wilson enters his course from the new My Courses tab, he sees links to access various course elements, settings, participants, grades, reports, and from more, he will find, for example, the improved question bank, the content bank, and a new link course reuse. Here, he can import, backup, restore, copy or reset his course. He toggles to turn edit mode on top right. He can rename items with a pencil icon or click the three dots to make other changes. He can add blocks by expanding the block draw on the right, and note that the English name for the HTML block is now text block. As he scrolls down the activities, their location is highlighted in the course index on the left. He can drag and drop sections and individual activities up and down or move them from the three dots if the course page is long. Another option for long pages is to drag and drop from the central area into the course index, remembering they both scroll independently, and you can move items up and down in the course index too. When our teacher clicks an item in the course index, it displays immediately in the central area, and he can access settings specific to that activity or resource. A useful new feature here is the send content change notification, allowing him to alert learners when new or modified content is available. Clicking add an activity or resource brings up a clean, colorful palette of icons, the colors referencing their function in the course, green for collaboration, pink for assessment, red for communication, and blue for content. And with Moodle 4, our teacher can add a topic section in between two other sections, rather than only adding at the bottom of the page. To summarize, clear a navigation, smooth a drag and drop, and new activity icons enhance the course editing experience.