Name: Nature-Based Solutions: Practical Strategies for Climate, Resilience, and Sustainable Development
Uploaded: 2026-04-09T15:16:42.808Z
Duration: 1 h 8 s
Description: Nature-Based Solutions: Practical Strategies for Climate, Resilience, and Sustainable Development

Transcript for "Nature-Based Solutions: Practical Strategies for Climate, Resilience, and Sustainable Development": Hello, everyone, and welcome to today's webinar. Nature based solutions, practical strategies for climate resilience and sustainable development. Nature based solutions are gaining global momentum as cost effective, powerful ways to protect our planet, support sustainable development, and help in the fight against climate change. Today, we're moving beyond the theory. In this webinar, we will explore how working with nature delivers measurable environmental, social, and economic returns. From climate mitigation to disaster resilience, we'll dive into the real world case studies and expert insights to show you how nature based solutions are being scaled across the globe. I'm your host, Ella Wilkinson, from Sustainability Magazine. And joining me today is someone who sits at the forefront of one of the world's most unique land and sea portfolios, Lameva, sustainability director for net zero at the Crown Estate, and someone who has spent years embedding sustainability directly into product design, manufacturing, and sales pitches, Jeffrey Whitford, vice president of sustainability and social business innovation at the Merck Life Science. So welcome both of you. I have given you a very, very quick overview of who you are and what you do, But I would love if you could tell us a bit more about who you are, your background, how you got to where you are, and and and why you're an expert on this topic. So, LeMay, you're on my screen at the moment. Should we start with you? Alright. Well, thank you very much, Ella, and, lovely to be here. Thanks for inviting us. So my name is, Lamey Bure. I'm the director for Net Zero at the Crown Estate. I sit at the enterprise level, helping the business to take its sustainability ambitions into actions across three very different portfolios. So we are custodians of the seabed. We release the seabed for offshore wind development. We also lease the seabed for dredging and mineral aggregate activities. We lease the seabed for pipelines and, cables. We're custodians and managers of 50% of the foreshore across England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. And we also have 200,000 acres of tenant farmlands mostly in England, but common lands in Wales and Northern Ireland. So it is a very eclectic portfolio, but very, very exciting to work with and work on. In terms of background, I'm an economist by background. I've come from an energy, sector space and worked my way through the energy transition into the role I now hold at the Crown Estate as the director for Mitsyra. So lovely to be here. Thank you. And so exciting for you to be here as well. It's such a vast knowledge on the on this topic. So, Jeffrey. Yeah. So, it's good to be with everyone today. I'm Jeffrey Woodford. I'm a vice president of of sustainability and social business innovation at Merck. So Merck is a, a very remarkable company in sense of its age. So it is actually over 357 years old. It started in 1668, so it's got a really incredible legacy. A family owned company, headquartered in Germany. We have three business sectors that we work in, health care, life science, and electronics. I specifically work with the life science sector. I've been with the company now for twenty one years. So I'm a bit of a rarity in that sense, of sticking with one company for my entire working career. I started out as an intern, proofreading, our catalog at the time, so that gives you a little sense of of timing. But weirdly enough, my background is kind of not where you would expect it for this topic. So I actually have a degree in journalism, in advertising. Yeah. So I think if there's anything that I bring to the table, it's definitely being able to do storytelling, hopefully. But I think really the thing that I take away from this and the kind of experience that I've had is the ability to, one, learn on the job, but then also be really focused on data. How do we have the data and the transparency to have the proof points to share with our stakeholders, specifics on progress and how we're transforming our company to really think about sustainability, social equity within the combination of how we bring these solutions, to scientists, researchers, around the world as they discover new drugs, new treatments, new ways to, to monitor the Earth, and we get to sit at a really remarkable kind of space as an enabler of that. And I think, actually, as a journalist, you're probably very well placed with this because you're naturally, obviously, very curious. And you Absolutely. Are now at the forefront of something that's huge. Lots of questions, Ella. When you think about I think that's one of the things that drives me consistently is also thinking about what are different ways we can look at this. Because I come from, like, a different profile background, I am usually a good counterpoint to most of our of our scientists because I just I think of things differently. And I think that's one of the beautiful things about how organization works is you've got this kind of multiple this melting pot of experiences that is helping strengthen what we bring to the table. Brilliant. Well, it's it's a pleasure to have you both with us today. So shall we something quickly in terms of the kind of historical heritage. So So we're also 260 years old. So we've got a very deep historical background together, Jeff. So it's really good that we have an opportunity to exchange notes on this call. Brilliant. Let's jump into topic one, which is understanding nature based solutions. So let's start with that big picture. Nature based solutions are everywhere in climate discussions right now. I think that's fair to say. What truly qualifies as a nature based solution, and where do you see the concept actually just being misunderstood or overused? At the current state, we treat nature as a strategic national infrastructure because we believe it on the pins that resilience and productivity and well-being that we need for the future. So from a case of what makes a good nature based solution, I think, is about the ecosystem that it covers, the measurable outcomes that we are kind of tracking. And, of course, it's gonna be high quality integrity product project, so it's really important that it has those three characteristics. Where it becomes quite overused is when it becomes a shorthand for emissions reduction or for kind of futurist here and a green roof there. That's where it becomes lost in translation. But at the core of what nature based solution is from my perspective, it's really an infrastructure project that is helping to sequester carbon but also providing protection for biodiversity and ecosystem. So that would be how I will frame it for this topic. Yeah. Jeffrey, do you also think Yeah. Sorry. You go. No. No. I think what we may have brought up I think that ecosystem mindset is so important. I think that's an incredibly, important piece within this discussion because so often and I was just on a call with some customers, on Friday, And we were talking about moving to some bio based solutions, and then you talk about some of the the challenges, as Lemay was was speaking about. Right? If you think about it just as reducing c o two, well, yeah, you could do that, but then there's also, moving to some solutions that could be within, like, an agricultural space. Well, within that space, are you thinking about fertilizer use, land use, the health of the soil? So that kind of complete ecosystem becomes a really important, kind of perspective to make sure you're including as you're starting to make these transitions to achieve both the sustainability targets, but also thinking more broadly about the ecosystem and just health of the planet as a whole. So I think I I love that perspective and share that view. And do you think it's then something that's misunderstood by your customers as well then? Yeah. I think it's easy for people. What what I find is people love to be able to check a box and move. Right? And so if you can feel good about it and think that you're making a better choice, it's nice to just be able to say, okay. We did that. We're moving on. Because I think the, you know, the challenge we face is we're all overwhelmed with so many things going on. There is a lot happening. And I think maybe less so of, it it I don't think it's intentional, but I think people are trying to do the best that they can with kind of limited attention spans and a lot on their plate. And so I think that we kind of think about it in the terms of, like, as a steward of that. Right? As the people who are responsible to giving our customers the best choices that are possible, we've gotta have responsibility for that ecosystem perspective as when they was talking about. And I think that's kind of how I come to the table is how do I make sure that when customers or clients are making these choices, we're clear and transparent about the things we're progressed on or areas where we still have work to be done because there's always trade offs. I think that's the other thing. We've gotta be able, to put this in the best, plus place. But if I can reduce the amount of work, I have kind of lost that, maybe naive hope that people will care about it with the same level of depth and detail that that I do, but, like, I'm gonna meet them where they're at with the best solutions possible. Yeah. And I think that's absolutely spot on. And, also, we cannot make the same mistake we made with the energy transition where we totally led the civil society outside of the echo chamber, and we only spoke to ourselves. So I think when it comes to nature, people get nature. It is local to them. And so meeting them where they're at is absolutely critical to ensure that they understand what that project means, what is the value add, and the benefit case. Because if you're just talking about nature based solution, Jen and your public are just gonna walk right past you because they've got a few other things that they need to track and deal with. So in a world that is overwhelmed with information, misinformation, disinformation, how do you simplify the language to be relevant and relatable to the general public? And I think that will be the critical point to unlocking the the impact of nature based solution because people get nature. It is in their backyard. It is very local. You know, people are nature. I kinda put them in the same bucket because that is place based. It is local to people where sometimes we talk about emissions and climate, it can feel quite big and very far removed from people's mind's eye. And so really using language that is relatable and simplifying the ask is probably the best way to go forward and move this, the needle because with the energy transition, we only spoke to people who understood the language of emissions, and we lost the civil society. And so now with nature, we cannot afford to make the same mistake. And so treating nature as an infrastructure project, as an asset that has value and being able to translate that into in that language for the general public, I think that is the, if you want a magic bullet or a kind of, secret sauce, you can strike magic bullet. A secret sauce, that would probably be the one that I will pick is really talking to people in a language they understand and meeting them where they are at. Yeah. I think that's a really good point, meeting the consumer with something that they get. So how do we balance climate goals with biodiversity integrity when designing nature based solution projects? Jeff, you wanna kick off? Yeah. So I love to go. One of one of the things when thinking about that is, you know, it's funny when you were talking about kind of expertise and expertise we have. I think one of the things, Ella, I step back and I'm like, I'm wrong probably a 150 times a day at least, probably more, to be honest. And so I think that's that's, like, number one is to know that we still have a ton to learn. And I think as we keep thinking about this, I think about an article I recently read, and and I think it goes to what LeMay was just talking about about the simplification of language, but also simultaneously how complex this ecosystem actually is. And I was reading an article about honeybees in urban environments and actually how the introduction of these, which was intended as a way to help strengthen the a declining population, is actually then taking out the wild honeybees. Like, it's it's decreasing those populations. And so it just goes to show this kind of combination of the complexity of the ecosystems. And, you know, you go back to school when we learned about we did an exercise with toothpicks, and it was about, like, they dumped colored toothpicks kind of into the grass, and it was really about how nature provides all of these different things to help, species survive. Right? And so the green toothpicks were harder to find. The yellow toothpicks were easier to find. All of these different things. But I think that these two examples really speak to in thinking about as we are designing solutions. Invariably, there are gonna be pieces that we either don't have data for just yet or that we don't have experience with. So what we're trying to do is think about what are the best ways that we can keep learning and integrate that information into product design product solutions that we're bringing to the table. I think one good example of this is we think about bio based solvents. So solvents are one of the most used substances around the world, typically fossil fuel derived. They get produced in the hundreds of thousands of metric tons up to millions of metric tons for each kind of variety. And so there's there's literally probably dozens, probably hundreds, to be honest. But if you think about that and you wanna start transitioning people to using substances that have a lower health and risk profile and also a decreased environmental impact while helping them achieve the scientific outcomes that they're looking for, well, okay. Great. We can potentially use bio based materials. Well, the initial place that people started to go, if you think of ethanol as one, is go to corn. Right? So corn is used in multiple things. It's used as a feed crop. It's used, for, energy. Right? But if you think about the use of land and then the resources to grow that, what all else has to go into that equation? Well, in that case, there's got fertilizer. There's watering needs. You're really thinking about soil health. Then how are you thinking about crop rotation, to ensure that it doesn't strip too many nutrients out. So you like, this picture just starts getting more and more and more complex. What we have learned through that process is now we've moved to a thinking about how do we use waste biomass as the raw material for these substances so that we can start tapping into things that are considered not useful anymore. A great example of this, over in in The UK So in Scotland, there is a facility up in Grangemouth in Scotland, that used to be, right, fossil fuel center. Right? Now starting to do this transition, they're using the waste from the whiskey manufacturing process. So the pot ale, the draft from that process where they can use that to then inject it with enzymes that then create, three different substances that we can pull off and become sellable materials that previously came from either fossil fuel based resources or agricultural based resources. Now once again, if you think about that full chain, well, what's happening to be able to get to that that path, you know, and draft? That's kind of right now beyond my my kind of opportunity of thinking about all the different things. But I think it's a step forward, and I think that's one of the things I think about is how do we keep making iterative step forwards and ensuring that we're not using those mistakes of the past where there's regrettable substitutions. And I think that comes in, Ella, is when we start asking ourselves more questions back to that curiosity you're talking about. Mhmm. I think that's the piece that we really try to be thoughtful of when we're thinking about these product transitions and changes is think about the entire ecosystem back to what Lemaine was saying and make sure that's integrated into our thinking at the start of the process, not getting to the end and realizing, oof, there's a problem, and it's probably a little late at that point to be able to fix it. So it's the acknowledgment that we know we don't have a fully right. There's always gonna be room for improvement, but also using ecosystem thinking to be able to design in the right choices early on and ask more questions and integrate more data. And do you think just to look on that, Ella, sorry, because I think that the piece that actually the systems thinking that Jeff has just described when it came to corn, for example, and any of the kind of arable crop that is using biofuel is the land use competition, but also the food food security competition. Because if you're taking produce out of the food system to make biofuel whilst, yes, you're decarbonizing the energy system along that pathway, well, you're creating a land use competition for what that lands could have been used for for other things and also the food production because there are parts of the world where corn and those type of crop is a staple. And so because they get higher premium for biofuel inputs, then they take it out on the food system. So you have to look at the system's thinking end to end to ensure that we do not create unintended consequences downstream because we're solving only one part of the equation at the top. So everything Jeffrey said, totally on board with that because we've got 200,000 acres of farmland that we need to balance between sequestration, emissions reduction, and also nature recovery. And those three things cannot be independent. It's an and, and you've gotta look at it as a nexus rather than a singular. I I was just gonna say, do you think they're coming back to, you know, the honeybees and putting getting bringing in honeybees and knocking out the native ones? We've done it in The UK. We did it with red squirrels. You know, we bought in the the gray squirrels, and we kind of killed off a lot of the red squirrels instead of trees. Do you think they're always avoidable, or do you think we're gonna have to be making some of these mistakes? Because we can't always tell the outcome. No. I think the mistakes are okay. It's how quickly you cost correct, because don't forget a lot of the things we're doing now are quite new, and we haven't studied them enough. And we haven't got enough data point in time line to do it. But it's being flexible in a way that you can cost correct and iterate, find that the specie, which you thought was the right tree in the right place, is probably no longer the right tree. You stop planting. You don't just carry on planting just because the train like the stations got like, oh, well, that's what we decided ten years ago that but it's not gonna happen. Yeah. It's gonna make now. So I think that's where the kind of systems thinking and how agile you are in the processes and in the investment case to say, look. We're gonna do this now because of the information we have. We're gonna track the data and ask when we know better or we have more input or superior data, then we can iterate. The other flip side is then you wait for all the data to be lined up, and then you never make progress. So it's that balancing act, you know, like a seesaw where do you progress with the information you have? How do you iterate vessels where you wait for everything to be perfectly lined up, which we know that in this scenario, it's never really gonna line up. And so protecting native species, bringing in species that are resilient and adaptable for the future climate states that we'll be in, but also ensuring that we are not competing for food. We're not competing for other things that we need to land because land is the precious and finite resource. Right? So we'll need to kind of manage that properly. So yeah. And oh, sorry. The the thing I would add to that is the it's not having pride of ownership of the idea. I think that's another thing is that I I love what LeMay said about the course correction. I think sometimes we can hold on to these things where because, like, I was right, but are we taking the new data that's coming in and integrating it? And I think that's the one thing you you kind of, like it doesn't make sense, but then it does is that, like, I work at a science company, and so research is kind of core to who we are and what we do. There's always new data coming in. Guess what? Things change. And that is an uncomfortable thing as humans. Right? That, like, it's not what we thought. Like, getting getting used to that change is is a really important piece and not having pride and ownership of being stuck in what kind of what we knew, but knowing that things can change. And that's okay. Right? Because we're always learning. We're always discovering. So let's let's move then to actually implementing nature based solutions, you know, bringing it from theory to that practical reality. From your experiences, what does implementing a nature based solution project actually look like on the ground? So I think I mean, there are three characteristics of good sorry. Am I going first? Yeah. No. Go ahead. For me, the way I look at nature based solution is, it needs to be high integrity, long durable, and it needs to be replicable as well because you don't wanna be able to do it only in one geography. You may need tweak the the ecosystem that you deliver, but being able to do it in multiple geographies at scale is kind of where you get the benefit. Planting a few trees here and there isn't going to give you the amount of sequestration or purification that you need. You need tons and tons of projects, so you need to really focus on the areas where the land is best for nature based solution and which type of nature based solution. And in some other parts, you might have to go to engineering based solution, but it's balancing those two things where you need trees, where you need, cover crops, whether it's part of collocating in your agricultural activities, which is one of the things we're looking at with our kind of tenant farmlands is taking 15% of that land back into nature recovery through hedger planting, through woodland restoration. We're looking at peatland restoration. So trying to really go to location specific solutions rather than taking a kind of, one size fits all because the geography really does change and the topography also changes. So being quite space based and geographically located is quite important coming back to the point where I said nature is very local to people. So any solution you bring to a place from a nature perspective, people can see it. Right? It's not something that is far removed from their imagination. So I think that's the approach that I would think has to be high integrity, long durable, and then it has to be place based and adapted to that location here. Absolutely. And one size cannot fit all in this environment. Awesome. So so, Jeffrey, from your from your perspective, what does what does nature based solution look like implemented? Yeah. I I think what Renee brought up is exactly like, it it's in the mindset we think about. And that replication, I think, is really important. You know, we think about and I'll go back to that example that I was giving you up in Scotland. So that technology right now is isolated in Scotland. And to think about going back to the volumes I talked about, hundreds of thousands of millions of of those substances, that facility can produce maybe a thousand tons. So if you think about how you actually start displacing and making change, how is it scalable? Right? Can you get to a place where this is going to have the impact that starts to knock out and really give people a viable economical option, for being able to transition to substances that use this more considered approach? And then you can think about all of the other benefits that come with this and and thinking about what what LeMay just said. That, process that I mentioned, so it I mentioned three products that it comes out with, but then you can also actually filter the remaining liquid, to make potable water. So this is gonna go to something which she was talking about. And then through the four or the fifth one is you can use the remaining physical matter as a high protein animal feed. So you started with one waste product, and then you come out the back end with five more valuable products that previously would have just been let go. So now think about that and say, one, we wanna scale because there is a way to use waste. It addresses a need in our communities around the world to be able to, deal with a product solution. And then on top of that, we have the opportunity to improve things like water quality, water availability, in geographies. And if you think about it, it can bring new economic opportunities. And if you think about, like, in The United States, Kentucky, Tennessee, where there is production of bourbon whiskey, these are not exactly, economically flourishing places. So if you can bring new economic viability to places that have been more displaced by other manufacturing technologies. Right? You just change the entire kind of opportunity that these nature based solutions bring to the table. And I think that's one of the things that, like, this isn't you know, it's not a political topic. This is kind of a holistic topic that addresses so many things about economic security, our future, healthier climates for everyone, and having a a planet that can flourish and be stronger and more resilient and help us continue to hopefully grow and survive and thrive. So I think when I think about it, I think about that scalability. I think about how do you kind of multiply the benefits. It's not just like a win. Can we get a win win win here? Where there are more things being brought to the table and, ultimately, as LeMay was talking about, a considered approach that takes all of these things to get to the interconnection of this ecosystem and thinking about the trade offs and being really clear where they exist and and why you make a choice and then being, ready, to adjust accordingly if you get new data that showcases that's not going in the direction that you you wanted to go. Yeah. Just don't be too proud. Yeah. Yes. I'm I I that's what the idea is. Sorry. So good. My next week no. Sorry. I was just going to because I kind of shared a lot about our terra structure approach, but then also we've got the marine business. I'm sorry to jump in because I think this is the beauty of our portfolio is that, you know, we've got the land based solutions that we can do today, but we've also got emerging innovation in the marine space around seagrass, oyster reef, looking at salt marshes. But also looking at bio materials, And what does that do for us is if we are able to kind of develop biomaterials from our marine environment, we can then bring that into the construction space of our kind of real estate. And so you can see that nature of this solution is not just about planting just trays or having a green roof. There are multiple dimensions, and there's a lot of innovation in the space. And so where you can take ways to create new products and then free of food crop for food security. So you can see the interdependencies starts to emerge when you take that system view again. And so I just wanted to kind of bring that full circle in terms of tangible examples of what we're doing with our portfolio and how each part of the portfolio actually complements the other as well. Yeah. No. I think it's really nice to mention how, you know, it's also helping that social aspect. But have there ever been have you ever encountered a project where a well intentioned nature based solution faced unexpected resistance from the local community? I have yet to come across one. You this may be more more closely related to LeMay's territory. But for us, I think one of the things that we see from people is a real interest in doing things in different ways. And I think this goes back to your question, Ella, about the, like, implementation or application is it's so easy for us to do what we know. Right? There's a lot going on, so why, upset the apple cart, as some have said? But I think this is where I look at it and say, you know, we've gotta start doing things differently. And it then really shows you, I would say, resistance challenges to actually doing things different. It's not easy, but when you start to do it and you start to lay it out for people, it clicks. Like, I think it makes sense to people. As Lemay said, nature's all around us. We interact with it. And regardless if you're in an urban environment and maybe you come up across a tree every, like, you know, two blocks or you live in a rural environment and literally you're surrounded by it. The reality is whatever pieces and parts of it are, I don't think there's any person who goes outside and on a day where there's, like, a clear, beautiful blue sky, they're not like, man, this is this is great. And I think that's the piece that you think about it is I don't think anyone's, like, against nature. And so you've got that on your side to be like, okay. We're gonna be doing better for the planet. And I think when you start bringing those things to table, the proof points, the data aspects of that, people support that. So I we have not come across that. I think people really do, though, wanna advocate and be clear about the ways that like, I'll tell you here in The US right now, there is a ton of pushback happening on data centers, right, because of what they're doing to people's natural habitats. Like, what it's doing to water, availability, energy prices, right, sound, disruption, light pollution, all of those things go back to nature and disturbing nature and changing things. Now we've gotta find kind of that that middle ground to where, you know, there are really great things about AI that can be transformational. Like, do we need it to be making caricatures of ourselves? Probably not. But could we expedite how research is done solving really complex problems? Absolutely. So how do we figure out how we address those things that people are raising, complaints about and rightly so. Right? They we need advocates for, our water supply, for, water cleanliness, for nature. And I think that's the thing is realizing science is here to solve these types of things. How we get more efficient with cooling for data centers. Right? That's like these are the the the things that science has done really remarkably well. But I think those are the types of things where that's the closest closest I see to push back. That's not really a nature based solution. It's the disruption of nature. But I think it goes to the point that LeMay was making is, like, people see this and feel it really, really close to who they are. And so I think it's really incumbent upon us to be thoughtful of that and bring solutions that kind of address people's concerns, like and think about it like humans. If you were a human, would you wanna have that done in your backyard? Absolutely. So what is one real life lesson that has surprised you that you've taken from a a failed initiative? You know, whether that that you now implement every single time in preplanning. I can see it from my end. Sales initiative. Yeah. Go ahead. You go ahead. Go ahead, Jeff. I'll come up. No. No. I was just gonna say I don't because coming back to the last point, because I think we need to share the point that people care about nature. So I don't think there's that many field initiatives in the nature space. Is the scalability. So there's a lot of small scale projects that have gone through, but that applicability hasn't really come through. And so how do you do nature based solution at mass is probably what we need to start building into the projects to make sure that it is a skill that is really going to create the impact. A tree here, a tree there is not what's going to cut it because we know the scale of carbon dioxide we need to remove from, from the atmosphere. We know how much of our biodiversity we need to restore at least for The UK. So the numbers are there. We understand how much erosion we've got in our kind of nature, landscape, and all that ecosystem, and people really do care. So we haven't had any pushback, and I don't think I can name one field project per se. What I can say is that it wasn't planned to be scalable. So you do a lot of pilots, right, as most projects, come through, but then you don't kind of follow through from a pilot to a scalable opportunity. And that's the big lesson. It's really even from, you know, looking at climate tech and climate technology and innovation is a lot of it ends up in that kind of value of, pilots and never really make its way out of it. And that's what I would say in terms of looking at nature based solution is to ensure that it is scalable when you're kind of designing it. We'll then try and get to that scale quickly because seeing is believing as well. If you can point somebody to that project and say, this is where it is. It's in that part of the country. They can go see it. Then it's quite emotive. We saw what happened in The UK with the sycamore tree that got chopped down. It had a very emotive reaction. Yeah. And so people really do care about nature. I think that's it's a false narrative if people are saying that no one cares about nature. I think it's a really false narrative because people do. They get it. They see it. They can feel it. You know? So Yeah. And the proof is in the pudding, isn't it? So I think I think that's that's the point. It's so tangible. It's it's so it's so relatable that you can't you can't ignore it, so you have to care about it. So let's talk about that scaling up then. So what policy changes do you think would most accelerate adoption of nature based solutions in the next decade? The UK has just released its land use framework for England, so we've got that now, which is really telling us how the land needs to be relocated or allocated for different activities. But that's only just England. Right? So we'll need to see what the other nations will bring out. But at some point, we need to have one UK land use framework that then allows you know? Because you the some of the borders are kind of is aligned, and you wanna be able to do things across borders as well when necessary. And so that would be the only thing that is pending is having a kind of national land use framework that really then allows the private sector to get on with it. Once you set the policy framework, then the market knows what it needs to do, and it will rally behind it. It's only frustrating, and you may strike that when the policy and the goalpost keeps moving. And, so that's more on a a side note, which we can take out of this call later on. But I think the policies are there, but there are too many as well. So it's about simplification and getting the policy to just be usable by different parts of society so that we can, get moving on the scaling. But the scale is the key. Pilots are great. For pilots, they don't scale quickly. And so yeah. So, I mean, the regulations in The US are wildly different, aren't they, Jeffrey? Yeah. I think a lot and and I'm gonna probably be a little bit controversial here. But I really struggle with policy, to be honest. I I think we work globally. Right? And so from a global perspective, you know, it's exhausting to try to figure out where, how, what, in all of these different geographies, what's going on. And, you know, I have this conversation a lot when working with with organizations who work more at the policy level, and I love having those people as counterparts because they they still believe. And I need people who still believe. I'm trying to, like, make sure that I don't lose that hope completely. But I think the perspective that I take is, policy is a tool. Right? And as it is a tool, it's helpful for it to be there. When I think about, you know, necessary things, like, I think about how do you have the infrastructure needed. I go back to that scaling topic that I was talking about and what LeMay was just mentioning is, like, you've gotta have scale. And so if you think about that, these outdated assets that are assets that are used in fossil fuel aren't really, usable in this new ecosystem, which one is problematic because you don't wanna have just, lost assets or stranded assets. But, ultimately, you need investment scale up the new technologies. And I look at from a policy standpoint, you know, great to say we wanna move towards this, but where's the action? Like, when is this gonna, like, come to life? And I think that's the pieces. Like, I try to think about the ways, like, how do we create market signals that there is a viable business here? Because, unfortunately, money still drives a lot of this. And so how do we get people the signals that there is an opportunity, an opportunity that hopefully is more responsible in terms of resource utilization, land utilization, outcomes for humans, but that we can create these frameworks that there is a market, clarity on the market. And then there's policy support to be able to get those investments at an efficient kind of fashion so that we can scale up what's needed to actually be able to deliver on them. So I think about it in that way, Ella, like a slightly different take. You know, like, I'm I'm trying not to just give up in that kind of civic approach because I know it's necessary. We have to keep talking. We have to keep driving that forward. But I I try to think about what are the actions that I can take, and then hopefully, the policy will follow because I think it's a it's a little bit of a lagging tool at this point. Like, I wanna be very clear. Regulation is important, and I'm not saying regulation is a bad thing. But it's also a blunt tool, that, you know, kind of misses some of the things. And so, you know, I know not everyone's gonna be a good actor. There's bad actors out there, and so you really need it for that in particular. But my goal is to think about whatever the regulation is, that's just the floor. And so there's a lot of space from the floor all the way up to the sky, and that's the space I'm interested in getting in. I think that's the more interesting space and where we need more people to be at is not just taking whatever that base is. Like, it can be better, and it can actually be beneficial for your business to be better than the floor. So Yeah. You think more that there needs to be incentives, really, instead of policy? I I I think incentive is like, you probably need both. I like, it's it's not an either or. You need both. You know, I very often in, like, customer conversations will have certain customers who come in with the stick. And, you know, those aren't fun meetings where they're like, you need to do this. You need to do that. And then we talk about what we're doing and, you know, we're exceeding their expectations, so it flips the meaning. But it's also a totally different experience when people come to you in partnership to say, how can we achieve this together? What are the things that you need to do? What are the things that we need to do to collectively do this? And I think that's what you could use that kind of as a as a visual of of what this world could look like if you had policy and incentive working hand in hand to say, if we pull these things together, and and I think it's gonna do exactly what LeMay has been talking about, which is expedite pilots into scaling solutions. And I think that's exactly what we need to do. But sometimes it's really hard to be able to free up capital for something that hasn't been proven, hasn't been done on scale. And so I think that's incumbent upon us to showcase these pilots can be scaled, are are possible, and we can use funding in a wise, smart way that actually, is beneficial for all of us. So when when we look internally then, we're talking about, you know, proving that ROI. How how do we what do we what do we need to change internally in the way that we calculate that ROI so that nature based solutions are viewed by your CFO as an essential risk mitigation infrastructure and not just the cost? Naomi, if I throw to you first. I'm happy to go as the economist in the room. So I think the whole, ROI conversation is still stemming from old economic and financial modeling principles, And nature based solutions will cover things that are non price, non commercial metrics that you need to capture, and those models at the moment are not designed to include it. So for example, if I'm restoring the coastal region that impacts a community and their lives and livelihood, there is no financial model that captures that extra benefit in terms of how you look at your project planning. And so it's literally, in my mind's eye, is the conversation on of ROI needs to flip to what is your do nothing case. Right? If you did nothing, what is the value of the asset that you're going to lose? Because if your asset becomes stranded, so that means your nature based solution is providing asset assurance. If your nature based solution is bringing jobs to a community and creating economic value, you've got to capture that. If you only take your revenue minus cost times taxes, and that's kind of your model, It doesn't work in this environment that we're in. And so trying to capture the non price and noncommercial metric is just as important as the cost or the CapEx that you need to deliver the project itself. Because, for example, we're taking mineral aggregates from our seabed to then shore up the foreshore because it is so susceptible to erosion and flooding. And so that is an asset protection mechanism, but it's not gonna be in your traditional ROI calculation metric because you're looking at a long term asset mitigation plan that makes sure that that's, you know, the farmland or whatever activity is going on in that coastal region is preserved, that the community is preserved, that the jobs that were going to come still come because they are no longer worried about climate adaptation on being implemented. So I think in in the short term, yes, it is a cost because you've gotta make the investments in, nature based solution. But in the long term, you create long term asset assurance and value created, and you also create an adaptation of resilience within the portfolio. Because no matter how much you invest in only high valued assets, if no one can come and use it, then it is stranded anyway. And so it's about in the economic modeling and the financial modeling to include the non price and noncommercial metrics, which most of them currently don't have, which is why when you talk to your banking friends, they will tell you, oh, it's non bankable. It's non bankable, but it's because their model does not work in the new way. It's still the old fifty years ago, sixty years ago economic modeling tools that they're still using. So you have to flip it from a kind of business cost benefit case to kind of benefits assurance and asset protection conversations from a from a funding perspective, I would say. Yeah. You gotta you gotta go in there with the long term benefits even though it's gonna be a short term hit. Well, it's not a it is an investment. Right? It's like, you know, is it on your p and l? Is it in your balance sheet? And you choose where you wanna put it. Right? So mhmm. So if we look ahead then to 2030 and beyond, where do you see the greatest opportunity in the global push towards nature based solutions? If I throw to you first, Jeffrey, on this one. Yeah. So I I mean, I think that's something that we're actively seeing, and it kind of builds off of your your last question about the the economics of this. We have a product that is getting ready to go launch. We had the most preorders, and we're not exactly the preorder company. It's not like, you know, a Lububu is coming out and you wanna, like, order it from us. That's not what we we do. It's not like, all on the pop rates here. Like, these are these are scientific research projects. But it's a bio based solution, and it has had the most preorders. Like, why in the world are you preordering a solvent? But I think it goes to show what the potential is, and I think this speaks to that bigger opportunity, Ella, of it changes the mindset of it's not just the cost. Actually, it can be a competitive advantage to have a product that's differentiated. In this case, I would consider that, like, a commodity product that we're decommoditizing. And then on top of that, what that has created is for our product managers, they're like, wait a minute. Something is different here. And then these light bulbs are starting to go on about what the opportunity is. And so we are putting these guardrails in place to help our teams make the right solution or pick the right solutions to be able to scale up these these products. But, ultimately, it's thinking about, for us, portfolio change completely. Like, how do you fundamentally shift your portfolio to have more nature based solutions that provide quantified benefits, help our customers achieve their, their goals from a sustainability standpoint, climate, biodiversity, nature, all collectively together. And I think if I think about 2030, I think about just a remade portfolio that showcases it is possible. I I mean, I think at the end of the day, it's exactly what LeMay has been talking about, is you have to get past the point of there was a nice pilot over here, a nice pilot over here, but we're now starting to get to the scale and the momentum that we're showcasing that this actually can be done portfolio wide and that it makes sense for the business. And when you hit those kind of two things together, that is a really powerful thing that I think propels and changes people's minds about what the future holds for nature based solutions. Absolutely. And the appetite is very, very clearly there. So we are running out of time, so I'm gonna take us to our last question here, and this is for both of you. Well, is it one piece of advice for leaders listening on where they should begin looking at nature based solutions? So, LeMay, if I go to you first. I think from my perspective, because we're kind of sitting at that intersection around land, coast, and, and the seabed is that we need to look at it through planning, partnership, and the investment mechanisms to the point we were talking about just now around what is the risk we're reducing, what is that future cost we're avoiding, and the optionality we're buying because that's basically what it is. So I would suggest that for anyone listening is really to think about their assets and portfolio from that perspective is what else can I be doing today to mitigate against my risk in the future? Because if we look at Florida and California, if they are no longer able to get insurance because the events are becoming quite frequent, then, you know, it is a risk that we all face in time. Whilst it may not get to all of us in 2030, at some point in the climate change, we will all be impacted with a series of overly frequent events that even insurance will no longer be able to help us mitigate against. And so having these guardrails and protection around our assets and portfolio becomes, imperative. Right? So that would be my last piece of, thoughts on the topic today. Very, very good advice as well. And, Jeffrey, your final thoughts? Yeah. I I think it's don't get overwhelmed. Right? As we talked about, this is a complex, really interconnected, and it can be challenging if you look at this, at the macro level, even in the micro level. But I think that's what we need people to do is people who are willing to step in, understanding you're probably gonna make mistakes. And guess what? That is okay. But if you're curious, you're asking questions, you're thinking about the bigger ecosystem, that's what we need people to do who are action oriented and starting to push forward to realize that it is possible. We have the tools. We can make this happen, and nature based solutions are possible. So I think that's what we need action oriented people who are just a little bit fearless and ready to to be on a learning journey, to be able to bring these, solutions, to people around the world. Brilliant. Thank you so much, Jeffrey. Thank you thank you both. I'm afraid that is actually, unfortunately, the end of our webinar. Before we go, head on over to the Sustainability Magazine website and check out the webinar section for more industry insights. Thank you to LeMay and Jeffrey for joining me today, and thank you all for attending. This webinar will be available online shortly, so you can come back and watch it all over again. But for now, goodbye, and see you all soon.