three years ago, we were -- i was teaching high school at dunbar class on technology and i asked him a bunch of students what, do you want to be when you grow up. their answer was doctor, lawyer, ray lewis. now what we're hearing, as early as last month, in arkansas, maryland, virginia, everywhere, doctor, lawyer, forensic analyst, doctor, lawyer, reverse engineer. i think this grassroots movement has created a movement that our neighboring states are now starting to work upon and collaborate upon, so we can protect the nation and create the cyber generation. so it is my pleasure now to introduce a teacher of a local high school, steve moral, and one of the students to come up and introduce rogers, and steve, if you guys would make your way to the stage, and i want to just

make a comment about this teacher in general. this is the world's first cyber teacher, who at a high school level, has now built a program in a high school where the most popular sport on campus is cyber. over 106 middle school, high school students come after school from three to seven under their own volition, and learn, compete and he has now built this into the cyber high school, and the model. so now high schools around the country and around the world are modeling this school on how do you give student whose have the capability to really demonstrate cyber skills to be able to continue and grow this model across the country. so it's my pleasure to introduce steve morrell from loyal high school. steve. [ applause ]

good mornings, folks. i'm director of technology and cyber science in maryland. thank you for the opportunity to be here. the cyber maryland conference is near and dear to my heart. this really was the inspiration five years ago to start our program. it is nice to be in a room full of like minded folks, and that's educating the next cyber generation. over the past five years, one of my goal has been to solve the talent pipeline problem, from k-12, and through higher industry. as rick mentioned, we started five years ago with six students. i thought that was a fun club for a year. now we have 106. i don't hang posters. i don't get on the morning announcements. it has been driven by student interest, because students in

middle and high school can do more than what we may think. so this morning, we're joined by several of the students, one in particular here is junior andrews. this past summer, as a sophomore, i think back to my sophomore year in high school, i think was still mowing grass in my summer, he did an internship in chattanooga, tennessee. he brought information become to loyola and is teaches switching, routi routing to students. now he is a junior. he is already looking forward to continuing his education in college, when he graduates from us in 2018. he is carrying a full load of ap courses, plays varsity rugby and he works in the science program because he wants to, not because

he has to. so motivation is key. with that, i'm pleased to introduce you to loyal high school student, andrew stanen. >> thank you. i would also like to think mr. powell for inviting me to the summit this morning. and as a junior in high school, as mr. morrell said, i completed an internship in chattanooga, tennessee, and i found great passion in the field within two years. it relates to everything we do everyday, and it excites me. this morning, we are joined by a man whose position is the head of the national security agency and central security service two organizations that play a crucial role in today's world. more information about admiral rogers distinguished career can be found in your programs.

cyber has now become the space race of my generation. with the growth of the field, unemployment is nonexistennonex. under admiral rogers, i am proud to say the nsa has welcomed more interns my age than ever before. he has faced us with real world challenging issues we face, and i'm willing and eager to fulfill those needs of this country. by accepting interns from high school and college, i appreciate that admiral rogers has recognized and embraced that us young adults can do more than what is expected. it is great honor i welcome admiral rogers to the stage. [ applause ] >> is that one impressive young man, or what?

thank you very much. so imagine if you were 16 or 17 years old and somebody asked you to stand up in front of hundreds people, introduce a man you never met and to do it in front of a whole bunch of people. thank you very much. i want to thank you all very much for taking time to support cyber maryland. i'm here because i'm part of the maryland cyber eco system, commander of the national security agency. we're proud to be apart of the eco system. selfishly, i'm here today because if there is a young man or woman in this audience who is interested in challenging work in the cyber field, nsa and cyber command, we've got great opportunities. i'm interested in getting talented person we can to help build a future, both in defending structures, networks within the united states government but more broadly, how we small parts of a bigger team

can do our part in defend our nation and help our friends and allies around the world. cyber is the ultimate activity. the 35 years i have been a commissioned officer in the united states navy, i've never been part of a mission before in which your success and ability to generation operational outcomes is so dependant on a broad variety of partners. that is both challenging, but it also represents opportunity. you see that in this audience today. among you are high school students, college students, people involved in academic thought, people involved in industry. people involved in the government, at the state, at the federal, and at the local level. it is our ability to harness all of these capabilities that these groups represent in an integrated team that's working on some tough problems. i think we all have to

acknowledge, we are not where we want to be when it comes to cyber security. that's reflected in the increased level of investment, it is reflected in the increased level of activities that you read about and whatever your potential source of news is, whether it be print, online media, whatever, you cannot go literally hours without something popping about a major cyber challenge somewhere both here within the united states and but globally as well. this is not a phenomenon that is restricted to a particular nation, particular area, or a particular sector or segment. there is a literally activity of concern out there in every segment of our private sector, across the u.s. government, with our allies and friends around the world. and i suspect that dynamic is not going to be changing in the immediate near term. so collectively, we've got to step back and ask ourselves what can we do working together to attempt to address the

challenges associated with the cyber environment that we're dealing with today. that means information sharing is going to be critical. the government with legislation that has been passed within the last 18 months, we started framework. we've taken time within the last months under the president's direction to outline what are the roles of the different parts and how will we coordinate support, how are we going to apply that capability more broadly across our nation. as apart of that federal government team, i'm the first to acknowledge that one of our objectives has got to be how can we help to simplify to our private sector friends how you interact with us. we've got to make it easier for you. and we have got to align the insights that we generate to generate value for you. you need to define so what is the information you need, how do you need it, and in what format,

you don't want us deciding that. we need to understand what it is that you feel you need. at the same time, we are all out there competing for the same work force. that challenge isn't going away. right now, if you look at the human capital piece of this challenge, i would argue in some ways that is the greatest challenge of all. that while the technology is incredibly important to our ability to meet the needs that are associated with the challenges of cyber and cyber security, perhaps the greatest challenge is not the technology, but it is the human capital in all of this. how do you make users smarter, so they're making smart, intelligent, well-informed decisions. you can have the greatest defensive strategy in the world, but if your users are making choices this that undermine that security, you've made your job

that much tougher. by the same token, you need an incredibly motivated and focused work force. you not only have to have a work force in which segments specified, specialized training in information technology and cyber security, but as i said, we have to raise the knowledge level of every single individual within our structures. so the human dimension here and the ability to generate trained men and women with the right kind of background and insight is a challenge that as a nation, we are only beginning to come to grips with. i don't think there is any of us here in this audience that would tell you, oh, yeah, i have all the people i need with all the right skills, and all the right background. clearly we are not where we need to be here. so that's one of the reasons why i like to do things like cyber maryland. nsa and cyber command, we want to be part of the solution. you heard in the introduction, some of the things we're doing in terms of outreach to the

private sector, both in terms of the academic world, with students, one of the things andrew mentioned wag our internship program, like many organizations. we have come to the conclusion that one of the greatest returns of investment for us is getting young motivated men and women familiar with us, both at nsa and cyber command earlier and earlier. and so we've got a pretty aggressive internship program both at the high school, undergraduate and at the master's level for our organization. and in fact, humorous aside, i've been here for about two and a half years and my first week on the job, i like to walk around, walk the halls, eat lunch in the cafeteria, so i can talk to some of the work force. the first week, i go downstairs from my office, i go in the cafeteria, and along the way, i stop and say hello to two young ladies. and after lunch, i go back to my office. and i said to my team that works

with me, i can't believe how young we are hiring people. i just met two young lady whose i swear were 14. they looked like they were 14 or 15 years old. and i got, well, sir, they were probably interns. i said we have interns? because the thought to me, again, just starting the job, was you mean we're giving security clearances to, you know, 15 and 16 year olds. i'm the first to admit, i was struck by wow, this is truly a different world, and we're going to have to do things differently than we have historically done. but i will tell you, the internship program, for example, has among the highest returns on things we do. something over 65% of the people who intern with us and end up working with us once they complete their education. that's a great place, a great place for us to be. you see that investment, not just in us, lots of other

organizations are doing it. as a naval officer, i highlight the work that we're doing at the navy academy. you see where we are making cyber courses mandatory for the entire brigade. we believe it is foundational to the future, and everyone must have some baseline of knowledge. we're way past the time where it can be i don't have to worry about that. as i said, given the challenges associated with user behavior, that's not going to work. we have cyber major, we have broken the ground, or soon will this month, breaking the ground on a new cyber center at the naval academy, and something that we had not done until just a couple of years ago. so as a military, as a service, we recognize that the world around us is changing, and we realize you have to do things differently. you see what the secretary has done in terms of defense, diux

in california, silicon valley, we acknowledge that as a department, we have to go where the best technology and innovation reside, and much of ha is outside the department, outside the department of defense. we've got to be willing to go to the outside world and say what can we learn from it, how can we partner, what kind of capabilities and insights do you have that will generate value for us and will help us in our missions to help us defend the nation and our key friends and allies. another thing that i'm always telling the work force, both at nsa and cyber command, because it is a core aspect of our jobs, we must constantly drive for success, but at the same time, we must acknowledge that despite our best interests, there will be times that we fail. we must be prepared to deal with failure in an aggressive, timely way. when i first started my personal time in cyber, i remember thinking to myself, the entire

focus was to keep the opponent out of your network. that still remains the primary driver, but after 15 years doing this in the department, i've come to the conclusion that you must not only spend time focus odden th ed on that, but you are likely to be penetrated and given that, what are you going to do. i would tell you as an individual who has had to deal with major penetrations in networks within the department of defense, it is a very different thought process, it is a different methodology, and a different leadership style at times when i'm dealing with problems and the investments we're trying to forestall opponents to enter networks as opposed to our response if we find someone in network and what we do there. it is a great leadership challenge. it goes back to the human capital piece. as important as the technology is, don't ever forget about the importance of motivating men and women. without motivating men and women, i don't care what your technology is, i don't care how

your defensive scheme is, your network structure is. without motivating men and women, you don't have the edge you need. that's why i think some of you being here today is very, very important to the future. we have to roll our sleeves up as a nation. we've got to realize this is not a short-term phenomenon. this is long-term, hard work for all of us. we have to step back and ask ourselves what, do we need to do to change the current dynamic. as i said earlier, i don't think any of us would argue that we are where we want to be right now in terms of cyber security. with that, let's open it up to some questions. >> good morning, i'm dave bitner. we have some questions that were sent in through the conference app through social media from

some of our local media outlets and we'll have time to take questions from the audience as well. we're going to start off with this one. is our ability to defend cyberspace better today than it was five years ago? are we improving or deteriorating, and how, and what needs to happen? >> certainly, if you read the news, it is easy to step back and say oh, it is just getting worst and worst. what i try to tell our team is let's step back for a moment. let's think about where we've come in the last five years. the first thing i always remind people is look, we are way past debating whether this merits attention. five years ago, i was spending a lot of time in discussions with leaders about is this something i should really care about. why should i put time, people, resources. we don't have those discussions any more. so the number one positive to me is we have widespread recognition that we have a set of challenges here that are going to take focus, effort and

investment to deal with. we've created, again, on the government side, i would argue partnering with the private sector, we have created well defined lanes in the road. in terms of who does what in the federal government. we have articulated how we're going to provide support and partnership with the private sector. and we have created the mechanisms to do that. those are the things that i think are strong positives. on the other hand, i also remind myself, as i said earlier, we have to acknowledge we are not where we want to be. i'm not interested in sitting back and patting ourselves on the back, look how much better now than they were. that's interesting, but it is not necessarily applicable or the primary focus. what do we need to do to keep moving forward. when i think about what do we need to do to keep moving forward, i'm struck by on the government side, we've got a transition point coming up in

january. that's a great opportunity for us to step back and do a little internal assessment, where are we, are we happy with the structures we created. are the assumptions proving out to be actually factual. do we need to step back and reassess, how do we get a broader set of partnerships. and don't ever forget the international d international dynamic. it is challenging to come up with solutions that only work with one particular country. but if we've got to acknowledge, we have to do something broader, more global here. >> all right, one of your were he had pred desseecessor, do yo any reactions to his characterization? >> hey, so-and-so said x. what do you think about that. so we have acknowledged that the

russians were behind the penetration where the hackers, if you will, behind those penetrations on the democratic national committee, and several other targets clearly designed to generate insight with political. we need to step back as a nation and think about so what are the implications. is that something we're comfortable with. you know, in some ways, i would argue this is a pattern of behavior in terms of the use of information, attempt to persuade, plmanipulate others, cyber adds a whole dimension to this, because it now enables individuals, actors, groups, nation states to acquire data at massive scale. and to then divulge that and make it publicly available. there is a lot of things that we've got to think through with respect to that. i think fundamentally, as a

nation, it is important to us that we all believe and trust that the mechanisms of governance will generate outc e outcomes that we can all believe in. as we work through this particular issue, that's at the forefront of our mind. how do we engender trust in our citizens, and send strong messages to others in the world what, is acceptable and what is not acceptable. >> what are the biggest challenges facing a split between nsa and the u.s. cyber command outside of the previous comments on finding the right time and process for a split? >> so i have already talked publicly about that's a matter that's currently under review by the president. he, as the chief executive, he'll make the ultimate decision, so i won't get into specifics of hey, good, bad, let's just give it sometime and see what the process generally as a good subordinate, my job is

to make it work to the best of my ability. that's exactly what we're going to do. >> all right, the technology evolution is currently outpacing the training and education and buildout of the work force. what is nsa and u.s. cyber command doing to address that understanding the technical evolution, specifically from the acquisition perspective? >> so on the acquisition side for nsa is an intelligence organization, the thing that i find very gratifying is an intel organization, we have some flexibility and capabilities that make us fairly fast and agile when it comes to generating capability, in terms was what we're doing internally as well as partnering with the private sector. cyber commands, the challenges are a little different. it is a traditional department of defense operational command. it is not an acquisition organization, it doesn't buy capability, it doesn't generate. yet our experience with six years now as an organization is

we need to step back and ask ourselves does that make sense, and is that the model of the future. there is a test within the defense language from last year's defense authorization act, which grants u.s. cyber command on a test basis for the first time both acquisition authority and a very small amount of money. so we're working our way through right now with the department of defense, what's the framework we're going to put in place to grant those authorities to cyber command, and then how are we going to execute those. you're going to see that start to roll out in fiscal year, in the current fiscal year, in '17. we owe a report back to congress, what is our experience. >> all right, mobility is a mess within the federal government and dod. certifications get completed after they've been moth balled. the threat vector for these products grow.

how do you see mobility today and in the future, and how is the agency trying to improve the certification pros snes. >> clearly mobility is foundational. i bet less than 10% do not have a portable digital device on you right now. that's just the nature of the world that we're living in. i don't see that changing. it has given us great benefit. i'm the first to acknowledge. as soon as i leave here and get in a vehicle, the first thing i do is get connected back into the world again and see what's going on. so it is foundational to the future. at the same time, we also have to acknowledge its a bit of a double edged sword. it represents connectivity and opportunity, but it also represents potential vulnerability. so each organization has to make an assessment of risk and given that potential vulnerability, what's the level of risk you're comfortable with, given your mission and the levels and kind of information that you have. and what might be acceptable for

one organization, say a company that is doing public service, might be very acceptable, versus as the national security agency, leader of an intelligence agency, hey, maybe that isn't so accept balk to able to us. we have to education our young work force. i have two young millennial sons in their 20s, one of whom is a naval officer. they both believe that the constitution forgot the part where they should have talked about and the ability to access data in the format of your choice at the time and place, and the device of your choice. for the life that they have lived, it is all they've ever known. hey, dad, i can get whatever data i want and whatever format i want on any one of multiple devices or mediums. what's the matter with you that you just don't get it. i'm here to be your fossils,

sons. and it is funny, i have this conversation with both of them. the older one, the naval officer, i got it, and step back for a minute and look at it from the perspective of a naval officer. we're concerned about security and the example of others to use that device to gain insight as to where you are, what you're doing and who you're communicating with. and trust me, there are nation states, actors, groups out there who are doing that everyday. who have interest in individuals and will use that connectivity as a vehicle to generate insights as to where they are and what they're doing. by the same token, i also acknowledge it offers great benefit. so i always remind them, hey, for example, to the older one, i'll say what works for your brother, who happens to work in the private sector, son, isn't necessarily going to work for you. it goes back to it is not a one size fits all. it is a great challenge for leaders to find that a balance. so for us, we're trying to do

it, let's take in say in cyber command as an example, the compromise that we are working on is let us provide you that unclassified connectivity in a format by means that we have high confidence we have minimized the risk. so rather than each one of you bringing in your own device, let us generate the means for you to access that information while you're at work. and to do it in multiple formats and in a multiple medias. that's what we'll sign up to. we think there is value, we want you to be able to do it. we understand, as i said, to many of our work force, i want to have access to this any time any place. when i can't bring my device in, i don't like that. i find that unsettling. it is something i'm not comfortable with. it is not a sacrifice maybe i'm prepared to make. remember, the people we're all competing for, they've got a lot of options out there. and so for example, if that

portable device and connectivity that it implies is real important to them, they may very well say hey, i'm going to do somewhere where i wan do that. we're trying to anticipate and deal with this phenomenon. it is not unique to us. >> we are going to open up to the audience for questions, if you have a question, i believe we have runners with microphones. please raise your hand, and in the meantime, we'll ask you another question. what do you sees is the significance open source intelligence will play in national security as technology continues to be compromised at an alarming rate? >> so i would argue open sources and by open source, that's the phrase we use within the intelligence community and other areas to describe information which is unclassified and readily available to all. that's the phrase open source. unclassified, readily available to all. experience is telling us that

open source represents another primary means of acquiring information and insight that is potentially of value. signal intel jenligence, imagin human intelligence, the open source offers an attractive set of insights that we may not have a access to the other means. by the same token, as an intelligence professional, every source has inherit limitations. not one single one of them, i don't care if it is human, automatic goal that whatever you see or hear, you can believe. an open source is no different. so we just always need to keep that in mind. so open source, all of us with the intelligence community are trying to work on how can we bring that as another tool to compliment the work that we're already doing. again, it is like the digital piece. it is not going to go away. and it represents an amazing

potential source of insight. i want to take advantage of those insights. >> all right, do we have some questions ready out in the audience? >> i see a microphone. >> yes, sir? >> sir, you spoke -- >> have we met before? >> i believe we have, sir. >> i thought so. you looked familiar. how you doing today? >> doing well, sir. thank you. >> okay. >> so sir, you spoke toward the struggles as a nation trying to -- as a work force to catch up to the incoming cyber threat. a good example being trying to reenforce the electrical grid, potential logic bombs or other cyber attacks. with the ever accelerating ro i rate that cyber is growing and the change of internet of things, it seems this idea of mobility and the only threat to our own personal information being leaked, being our cellphones, is changing to all the objects in our homes and all the objects around us. with this interconnected network

that's growing within our nation not only in the private sector but military as well, how are we preparing ourselves to address such a drastic change with objects that were in every designed to be cyber safe? such as wi-fi enabled toys. >> we do not truly understand the implications of the broader connectivity, the internet being the most visible largest in this phenomenon. we're increasingly simple everyday devices that we take for granted often think to ourselves, this is an autonomous object. no, it isn't any more. it is now connected to a much broader set of capabilities. those connects, those connections, are both potential opportunity, make our lives easier, but they also offer potential points of vulnerability. to me, you'll see this in many

ways, the most visible manifestation of this phenomenon is the automobile. when i got my license, the automobile was an autonomous device, had no software systems, no decision-making capability. its only ability to receive information was largerly one way in the form of a radio. and it is only ability to communicate was through a light, signals, a horn. that's a car. that's not the automobile of the 21st century. the automobile of today that most of us, as we're all looking at, you know, getting transportation, the automobile of today is a series of integrated and autonomous software sets of capabilities in

which a plethora of connectivity to the outside world is occurring arounds at a level we don't understand or awareness as the operator of the vehicle. it is just built into the car, in a way at that none of us actually know and understand. so think of the implications of that. put another way, not just the internet of things, it is -- it goes to the first part of your question. i have this discussion with my family at times, where i will tell them, so tell me what you think autonomy and privacy means in the digital world. how do we as individuals achieve the degree of autonomy and privacy that we're comfortable with. realizing that the footprints that we are all leaving are growing in the number of footprints, and in the duration. we have really got to step back and ask ourselves what does that

mean. so for me, it is things like talking to the work force about you need to think about the social media profile that you are creating. you need to think about the information that you are comfortable sharing with others. because in the world we're living in, and as we've seen over the last several months, the idea that many of the things we're doing on the networks and digital world, the increased probability that these will become more readily accessible is a sad consequence in some ways in the world we find ourselves in now. i don't see that phenomenon changing in the near term. we've got to ask ourselves wa, t does it mean for us. both as the leader of an organization, what does it mean for the two organizations that i lead, i think about that as a father, as a husband, with a family, hey what, does that

mean. and fror myself. we need to step back and think about what does it mean as a nation. i think another challenge that we have got to acknowledge is we find ourselves in a world right now where technology has outpaced the legal and policy frame works that we have in place. i'm not trying to argue, is that good or bad. i'm trying to say hey, look, folks, we've got to acknowledge, and we've got to ask ourselves, number one, are we comfortable with that. two, the next question is what is the right level of -- the second question i think we need to ask ourselves norkts ont onle comfortable, what does it mean. what are the changes, given the incredible rate of technological change. if you take the emotion out, that's at the heart of the

encryption discussion right now. where technology and legal frame works we've had in place are totally mismatched right now. we need to step back and ask ourselves, are we comfortable with that and what are the implications for that. thanks very much. >> thank you, sir. >> we've got time for a couple of more questions. this gentleman right here with your hand up. >> good morning, sir. you mentioned the dius and placement in silicon valley in boston. how does the robust innovation community here in maryland, northern virginia, plug into the department of defense so that we're also helping to inform decisions about innovation and opportunity. >> so remember, diux, we often highlight as kind of the most visible manifestation of a broader set of initiatives we're trying to execute. i don't want anybody thinking it is the only way we're trying to address the challenge of innovation and how does dod

interface with the private sector and do it in a much broader way. if my memory is right, and apologize, i haven't done it in a few weeks, so i may be wrong. if you go to the dod website on the unclassified side, my memory is that you'll see, there is a poll down there, the private sector, how do you connect with dod, and it talks to you about what particular area might you be interested in connecting with. having said that, i think we're all within the government trying to come to grips with the phenomenon of how do we create the mechanisms to go from talking about this to actually doing something. because i'm the first to admit, as i always tell the teams i lead, don't ever forget, it is all about outcomes. we've got to get to outcomes. whatever we're doing ought to be focused on driving us to generating outomcomes. i'm not interested just to talk about it, i work, i lead two

very technologically focused organizations, many of whom love technology for the sake of technology. i'll listen and i'll go, very interesting. i'm very grateful, but tell me how that ties to a mission outcome for us. in the end, don't ever forget, that's why we were created. that's why the nation invests us in us, and that's who we have to be accountable for. i would suggest that would be a good starting point. i thank you and others for your willingness to do that with the dod. we're the first to acknowledge, we can be a cumbersome, unwielding and bureaucratic to deal with. i acknowledge that. so it is what can we do working together to try to overcome that. >> all right -- >> oh, water. >> we have time for one more question. down front here.

[ inaudible question ] >> in order to increase the standardization of education with the -- within the various countries in nato. >> so nato has adopted a policy in which they acknowledge cyberism and operational domain. that was done in the warsaw summit in the summer, as a member of the alliance, united states is one of the 28 nations a member, a very supportive of that idea. we had been working with our nato teammates to try to say, hey, here is been our experience, we think it has great applicability, and cyber domain and the alliance came to that decision and announced at the warsaw summit earlier this

year. now, you know, again, as a member of the alliance, now we've got to work our way through, so now that you've recognized that, what is implications. how do you create an operational structure. how do you prioritize and he define risk. the alliance is working through that and we're part of that discussion. not easy trying to bring 28 nations to consensus is fought always easy, but i'm very grateful we're part of an alliance willing to have those discussions and committed to working its way through it. with that, i want to say thank you all, very much. remember what cyber maryland is all about. eco system that we have here in the state. we're proud to be part of the cyber command and the national security agency. how can we work together to mzzs mize o -- maximize outcomes. that's the power. you see that in the guard and reserve effort here in the state. you see that in the academic

arena. colleges as well as high school and below levels. you see that in states trying to do. you see it at what employers and many others, you know. this is an amazing place when it comes to cyber. there is a lot of great capability, a lot of great people. there is a sense of, hey, look, this is important to us as a region. we can do some good things here. i thank you for your willingness to be apart of that. i thank you for your willingness to roll up your sleeves. ladies and gentlemen, as a state, we have a lot of hard work. it is amazing what you can do with motivated men and women. thank you all very much. [ applause ] >> thank you, admiral rogers and thank you for the work you do for the nsa and for the cyber

command. and can i have another round of applause for admiral rogers. [ applause ] also i would like to thank dave bitner, thank you for hosting and moderating that session. thank you. [ applause ] and also, one more recognition for steve morrell and andrew sayman. so we're off to a great couple of days here. i just want to make sure that everyone is aware we do have a conference app and everyone has a chance to download it. download it to your smartphone, there are instructions on a poster outside or on -- in the program. if anyone has any questions about it, see some of the event staff. but it is a great way to network. we are going to be communicating any changes or updates to the

event. make sure you download it. it is a great networking tool. and have a great couple of days. thank you for being here with us. and this will conclude this morning's session. thank you again. [ applause ] primetime, american history highlights until congress returns after the november elections. tonight, "american artifacts" freedom of information artifa s artifacts, 50 years after. battleship wisconsin, mows success meyer's house, and the hart senate office building on capitol hill. american history tv primetime tonight, starting at 8:00 eastern. this weekend on american history tv on c-span 3. saturday morning from 9:00

eastern until just afternoon noon. >> the british empire and its commonwealth last for 1,000 years, men will still say this was their finest hour. >> we're live for the 33rd international churchill conference in washington, d.c. focusing on the former british prime minister's friends. andrew roberts, author of masters and commanders, how four titans won the war in the west. 1941-45. later on saturday, at 7:00, texas george p. bush, jose menendez, and phil collins talks about the spanish mission, the alamo. >> the memories of my impression was that this group of people were going and they knew they were going to die, but they went or they were there, you know,

crockett went but there was something very noble and very, you know, romantic. i learned that it wasn't quite as black and white, and that's one of the things i think would be good in this day and age that, you know, we put it into context. >> then sunday evening at 6:00, on american artifacts. >> mac arthur is up front, leading attacks wearing nothing but the riding crop in his left hand. the men looked at this, if the colonel and later the brigadier, if the colonel can take it, i can take it too. >> we visit the mcarthur memorial to learn about the early life of douglas mac arthur, allied forces in the pacific during world war ii. >> at 8:00. >> conscience in chief, with the highest level of integrity. with the moral compass locked on

true north, so that we can always count on them to do the right thing, when times get tough or when no one is looking. >> author talmage boston, ten commandments for leadership, examples of presidents who excelled for each one. for the complete tv schedule, go to c-span.org. a discussion now on the refugee crisis and how international organizations are working to solve the problem. speakers include representatives from the world bank, world food program, and master card. this is an 1:15. okay, we're going to get started. i'm dan rundy, we're having a conversation today about international organizations and the refugee crisis. i think many of you are aware that we have the highest number of refugees and internally displaced people since world war

ii, 65 million, summiting and meetings in the last year, whatever meetings we've had, are probably not enough to respond to the enormity of the task. this will be a problem that will be with us for decades. the folks that are refugees stay longer as refugees. conflicts are lasting longer, and so there a whole series of reasons why this is happening, and we can talk about some of those reasons in the past, perhaps, during the cold war, many conflicts that were kind of underneath the surface were kept under wraps, if you will, with the end of the cold war and a series of things that happened since then, that's one of the pieces. there are a whole series of other reasons as well. the good news, there a whole series of countries that are joining the ranks of other countries, but there are 20 or 30 countries that are fragile

and vulnerable, oftentimes folks in those countries, i think development agencies and emergency agencies will be having to think about fragility and refugees, it is a major challenge we have to face. a variety of institutions, including the world bank group and others are responding. i think we're going to hear about that today. so we have three very thoughtful speakers. we have dr. matthew mcguire, representing the u.s. ambassador to the world bank. not exactly his title, but the concept. my friend, john browse, distinguished career at usaid, national security council, he has had two stints in u.s. government and two stints now at the world food program. thanks for being here, john. and then my new friend, let's see if i can get this, nina

nevot. that's good, right. master card's global product public sector and so thanks for being here, nieuwoudt. we really appreciate it. we're going to have a private sector perspective to this conversation as well. we're going to hear from the perspective of the world bank, some of the perspective from an emergency response, then we're going to hear about the perspective from the private sector. can you tell us how the world bank is thinking about this refugee crisis? thanks for being here. >> yes. thank you. let me make sure i have this on. by the way, it's doctor. i guess nervous they're going to ask me about their elbow or back or whatever. let me tell you what the

challenge is from a developmental perspective. the things from the world bank perspective part of the shifts have included a real decrease in people living in extreme poverty around the world. a lot of that is driven by the liberalization of china and russia's economy. there are a number of other trends, but the point -- >> we're having a technical difficulty. >> okay. the point of that is -- it just went off. >> it's not a wardrobe malfunction. it's a sound malfunction. >> there you go. we've seen a real shift in a lot of the problems we're looking at now when we talk about raising people from extreme poverty around the world are ones we have to focus much more. it's in fragile and conflict

states. it's in particular environments where we're seeing a particular set of solutions that are going to be brought to bear. it's not to say that all the problems are over in the rest of the world or getting out of extreme poverty is the end point. the types of solutions are having to get a bit more focused. the thing i would say is one of the ways we have to think about solving a lot of these big economic development challenges is in partnering in different ways with different types of institutions. so the u.n. and its agencies like the world food program historically has been thought of as doing one set of things related to humanitarian issues. the world bank has been thought of doing a separate set of issues related to develop. the big player that's more increasingly on the scene is the private sector and the trillions and trillions of dollars of capital that are sitting on the sidelines that are not working in these countries as much as they might be.

how do we turn humanitarian crises into develop opportunities? that may sound a little too buzzy and like some grand idea people might have. clearly, a lot of the people who cross borders and flee have extraordinary talents, and some of them will have talents in the agricultural sector. others are trained as engineers. the one statistic i would point to, which is not directly related but maybe gives a framework for how some of us think about this, is if you look at the fortune 500 companies in the united states 40% were founded by immigrants or children of immigrants. the core strength of our economy has been ability to absorb people coming from other places. are they refugees, are they economic migrants, did they flee the great potato famine? when you do have an influx, there can be an opportunity there. the few other things i'll say and then let me stop is the

other way we think about it as a development institution is refugee crises are not short-term challenges. people tend to stay 9 years, 10 years, 12 years, 20 years. you can't approach these crises saying we'll solve the immediate challenge these people have. you have to think about what are the sorts of things development institutions are good at. building infrastructure, strengthening health care systems, educational systems, thinking about any number of other things this which really go to the long-term health and development of that country. that's the sort of thing that the world bank has expertise in, has money ready to lend and invest for, and is the place where we can come in and make a difference. the other way the bank is thinking about this is on how do you create the regulatory and legal environments in particular countries that are hosting

refugees that are allow, encourage, incentivize private sector actors to come in and invest more regularly and in bigger ways because that really is what unlocks economic growth over time. so we have expertise in thinking about judicial systems and rule of law and labor market reforms. part of our task is shifting those dynamics so that then so many other private actors will come in or those who are already will grow and expand and high more people and create more economic activity. >> john, thanks for being here. so what is the world food program doing to respond to this global refugee crisis? >> thanks, dan. wfp is in the middle of it. we're supporting 6.6 million refugees around the world in 32 different countries, so we are now and have been involved in supporting refugees. but the interesting thing for us in this context or in this

discussion is the fact that -- >> you're microphone is actually working. >> the interesting thing now is the global refugee crisis has changed. there's a different context to it than there has been in the past. we remember refugees in africa and asia and what have you -- i don't mean this in any way crass, but they were over there. >> out of sight, out of mind. >> sort of, yes. the humanitarian community did its job and did its best to help out. out of sight, out of mind is how host countries were supported as well. >> in refugee camps in the rural places far away. >> yes. now we have millions of refugees in the middle east, right in

europe. they're educated and they have in many ways exactly the same aspirations we have. it's in a more middle income context. as the president's summit pointed out, the current response community structure has been overwhelmed, and it is not capable in its current structure in meeting the demands of this new refugee situation. so what are we doing? i say there are two levels to this. there is the humanitarian level that has to obviously continue and has to function, but function better. one of our colleagues earlier mentioned the new refugee paradigm is one where refugees are not often in camps.

they're in urban settings. the idea you're going to gather them together and hand out resources and they'll be fine, it no longer works. that's where private sector partners come in. mastercard was the teacher and the guide for the u.n. community to learn how to use the debit cards, which we can give to refugees now and displaced people and even beneficiaries who are part of the local population as we're doing in lebanon. they can go into global markets. they can buy what they need to buy. they have choice. this is the dignity aspect of this new construct. and we couldn't do that a few years ago. that's not only that can be used in the middle income countries. some aspects of that are moving into the other refugee situations as well, so that's a great efficiency for us, but it is not just an efficiency.

it's also a way of integrating the humanitarian activities into a broader developmental context because in lebanon, just as an example, these cards are used by the beneficiaries in 450 shops. they're commercial shops. wfp didn't build the shops. they're commercial traders, and those shops have seen an infusion of $720 million over the last three years. that's the type of economic stimulus that these programs can put in because infrastructure to support this level of additional

responsibilitycspanmc3 why is mn the refugee crisis? if i can put it that way. >> we use words doing one and doing good. that's what we can do. we have a global infrastructure that we can leveraged. we can get aid to people efficiently. it is not just financial products like debit cards that we have made available. we had a project in the philippines. we have products where they speak about commodities. that is why mastercard is involved there.

we're building communities for a better tomorrow irrespective if it is refugee, somebody who has been displacdisplaced. we feel passionate about giving people the ability to keep their families safe and give them a dignity. ultimately this comes down to choice and dignity. in the refugee crisis, people have lost so much. the one refugee i spoke to said i don't have a choice about anything. i'm stuck in greece now. i'm told this is where my tent is. i don't have a choice on the clothes my children wear. this is what i was given. the only thing i have any choice over is this card. this card gives me the ability to go into a shop and decide what i want to buy, gives me the ability to make the decision of whether i'm buyi ining baby for for my child or medicine. then there's the benefit obviously of the efficiency, the

speed we can bring, and the insights and the knowledge we bring from the private sector to help our partners like wfp, save the children, and the likes. >> you were recently in greece. can you talk a little bit more about that trip you made and some of the insights you had when you were there? >> sure. it was hugely insightful. it was probably one of the life-changing events which i can speak about. >> who brought you? >> sure. thank you very much for that. i needed to prepare emotionally for what i expected to hear. you speak to a mom who tells of how she left her 11-year-old son back in syria. as a mom myself, i couldn't imagine ever having to make that decision or going through that. you absolutely hear that. you sort of expect it or you're prepared to hear that, but

there's the stuff you're not prepared for that you hear. okay? it's the stories of when people tell you it's become the world's capital of organ smuggling. that never crossed my mind. it's the satisfactotories of ho greece since the crisis started a year ago they lost 10,000. there are children that arrived within greece and they no longer know where they are. there's a bigger crisis here we should be addressing. it's the stories of hearing when families tell you -- at this point, we met with a family. we're sitting down in a tent, and they had no idea i was working for mastercard. abnb was in the tent. we pretty much looked like staff. we had our field vests on, our caps on. they were telling us about their journey. the father shared with us they left syria and his wife was pregnant at the time.

they'd been shot at on the border. his wife went into early labor, the baby was born, the police caught them and sort of waved them on and said your wife is in labor, your baby is about to be born. once the baby is born, keep moving. they were then caught by the coast guard. the baby landed up in hospital for 17 days. he goes baby came out of the hospital and they're now in the refugee camp. his wife was not able to stomach the food she was getting. she was really weak and frail. two small children. they were in bad condition as a family. he goes we literally made peace with the fact we were going to die. that's where we were. he goes a person came around the next day and gave me a mastercard prepaid card. he said, when i got my card, it literally saved my life. it was moving when you hear somebody say that. explain more to me what does this mean. for the first time, i had the

ability to go buy baby formula for my baby who had been ill. for the first time, i was able to go and buy food my wife and children could stomach. it was a moving time as well in understanding we met with the mayor of athens and the brigadier general who runs all the refugee camps. in both cases, i was really surprised with the personalit s personalities. the brigadier general i was expected a military oriented person. a very compassionate man came out and he spoke about how we need to understand these are people. they should not be living in boxes. how do we do that and how do we change that? you go into a camp and people ask for basics like salt and

pepper. when we spoke to the mayor of athens, he goes people think this is the crisis right now. he said this is not the crisis. the crisis is to come. what about this generation of children who have lost three to four years of education? how do we cross the language barrier? we have all these refugees coming into greece. how do we expect them to speak greek? how do we get them to be integrated into our communities without causing more disconnection? so it was really, really insightful. it just gave a really different view of what that experience was like on the ground. >> thank you, nina. matt, i'd love for you to respond to that, but i'd also like you to talk about what exactly the world bank is doing to specifically respond to this dramatic picture nina just painted. >> what i wanted to pick up on is the point that nina made about the mayor and about the people who are incorporating

into the local economy to say that one of the things we're addressing is the fact it's very hard to be successful in supporting refugees if you're not also explicitly thinking about engaging and supporting the host communities as well. while a lot of the discussions often go towards the people who have come across the border, in the example of northern [ inaudible ]. the other important piece there is often the notion people have is, well, the sooner -- if we let people be too comfortable in our country, they'll stay here forever. preliminary research is showing the most likely indicator of someone going back to their home country is how well they did economically in the place where they went, which is a little bit counterintuitive. but almost everyone wants to go

back home unless they're a political refugee and it's not safe. again, thinking about how do we integrate people here in such a way that it supports the local community, supports local businesses where the cash is being spent, is core to being successful in supporting refugees when they move. in terms of the world bank, we've done a couple of things which are new and innovative for us. as i said in the beginning, we're looking at partnership quite differently and how we can engage in this. when you have the humanitarian world and the development world, they're two pieces of the same spectrum. the bank for the first time has created some facilities which allow wealthier countries, middle income countries, to borrow from the bank in order to help some of these refugees that are coming into those countries.

for the first time, we created a facility called the global concessi concessional finance facility that allows middle income countries to borrow from us on a no interest or conceptual basis. if you were a middle income country, you should be able to pay closer to market rates even though we're cheaper than the market. in this instance, the jordanians and lebanese governments said, why should we keep piling up debt? we already have pretty high debt to gdp ratios when we're doing something that is a broader public good and which is important that we do and we're doing whether we want to or not anyhow? we created a facility that will support them, help them with our expertise, and help them design programs that will help the refugees. there are many more refugees in africa than there are in the middle east. and a number of countries in that region are members of

what's called i.d.a., which is our operating unit that lends and gives grants to the poorest countries in the world. we are proposing and hoping to get funded through a replenishment that happens with all of the shareholders of the world bank in the next couple of months $2 billion which will go for i.d.a. countries, the poorest countries in the world, who are absorbing refugees as well. the oldest and largest refugee camp in the world is actually in kenya. people don't talk about that so much. of course, there are refugees throughout the great lakes region. africa has been dealing with a number of these issues a little bit more out of the spotlight. we have to shine that spotlight and help those country as well as they absorb refugees. i would just say in closing this is part of an effort to think innovatively about how our capital can be most impactful. i say that in the context of

what bob rubin used to say, which is capital is a coward. normally in fragile and conflict situations investors don't want to go. people don't want to lend. what makes the bank different is we walk into those situations with hopefully an instrument that is helpful. in thinking about pandemics, we have created an insurance product countries can buy so should ebola break out again we get money quickly. instead of waiting and adding up what all the costs are and then paying a country, after a certain number of casualties or a certain size of earthquake, the country gets the money right away. these are all things to say we're thinking about new ways we can innovatively use our capital to address some of these broader transnational challenges that are out there, and that is a very long winded way to answer

the question about what we're doing to help countries hosting refugees. >> there's an exercise every three years. the shorthand in washington is i.d.a. 17 or i.d.a. 18. you talked about this international development association. in addition to the specific monies, isn't there also some additional agreement or focus that there's going to be this special low interest loans that the international community collects from countries, very generous countries like the united states, germany, japan, or canada, that those monies are going to be used to target specific countries in addition to the specific facilities or interventions that you talked about? >> well, we're going to make it available. now, we have in mind certain countries are more likely to come forward and ask for it. but the key with this $2 billion i mentioned that we're hoping to raise from the shareholders is it is money these countries can

access separate from whatever else they wanted to do. separate and above. the idea is if you're a country that's very poor and you're weighing do we borrow in order to absorb these hundreds of thousands of people who have come across our border or do we borrow to build roads we have always wanted to build or deepen a port, the idea is we don't want people to choose. we want people to do what they were going to ordinarily do. the thing i would say about this that is really important -- you all are here in washington. the u.s. needs to come with a very good contribution. people need to understand how important this is for our leadership in the world and for the bank for its ability to go forward and do what it wasnnts conjunction with all the things we're doing bilaterally. pakistan for the first time is pledging they're going to contribute to i.d.a.

that's really important. >> that's really great. >> that's the sort of thing we hope to foster and we hope to see. it is the kind of thing we need to keep in mind as the larger donor to i.d.a. over seven years we need to keep pushing the countries and keep doing the same and maintain that leadership and show significant support for these efforts. >> john, would you please explain a little bit about what are the gaps you see in terms of the response to the refugee crisis? the second one is i think we can all agree in this room that the challenge that we're talking about here is going to be with us for the next eight to ten years, so the next administration is going to have -- this is going to be one of the things in the inbox. if you were on the national security council staff john or having been on the national security council staff or you were a senior adviser to the aide administrator or you were a senior policy adviser to the

secretary of state or if you were an proviadviser to the wor bank president, what would be some of the things you would be wanting senior leadership to be thinking about? >> it's always nice to be able to use the president's words rather than my own especially when i said he said we need resources. even in the most fundamental sense at the humanitarian level, we're not even meeting those needs. >> let's double click on that. i think there are asks by organizations like the world food program that are saying we need hundreds of dollars in food and cash. i don't think you're getting 100% of your ask. is that correct? the pledges and what you're getting in the door isn't the same. is that correct? >> we're really about $300 million short. >> are we in arrears?

i'm hoping the united states is not in arrears. >> the united states is never in arrears. it could step forward more, but it's not in arrears. we need more resources from more dono donors. i think one of the things if i could just use your question -- >> yes. >> there's a tremendous amount of knowledge here going on. world food program works quite a bit with the bank on things like social safety nets. if we were able to expand social safety nets where we could give the host governments the capacity to take care of first their own people with the basic needs which we take for granted by default those governments would have to take care of the refugees that move in.

there are certain longer term things we can do as a global community to encourage countries to give them technical capacity to build their own social safety net systems in their own model, but that would become a resource for all of us as we move forward. it's a very big thing. again collaboration between the private sector and the bank on how best to do this -- >> what's ifpre? >> international food policy research institutes. you were talking about pandemics. if we have basic health care systems in countries, then you have a much better sort of forecasting ability on when some disease might start popping up. the sooner you know, the sooner you can act. all of these things again the united states takes for granted can actually be put in place at

some level in every country in the world. if you build off of that foundation, i think we'll see real improvement over time. >> good. i want to just come back to matt here. if you were in front of a congressional committee, could you just make the argument for why the united states should participate in the world bank, a, and, b, what is the argument for supporting i.d.a. 18? i can give all the reasons why we should, but i think it would be important for you to. >> fundamentally, it's about global leadership and what america wants to be in the world. historically, we've been so central to the creation of the post world war ii financial architecture. we were one of the core founders of the world bank and the imf. we've been central to thinking about any other number of multilateral institutions and

make sure they bring other countries into a global rules based order that really is the benefit of not only our country, but so many other citizens around the world. i would argue the world bank and other institutions have been a core piece of helping to see those reductions in poverty that we've seen over time. there's one issue which is really about who are we as a country, what sort of values we want to lead with, and it is important we continue to stand strong on that. the other thing is when we think about the stability of regions of the world we have to think about the economic health of any number of countries around the world. the bank is full of economists and a wide variety of experts around the world that call us when they think about having a more stable economy, how do we think about this pandemic which is two countries away. we want a world bank and that

intellectual knowledge to be there. if we don't address some of these fundamental issues, where they reside, trouble travels. we're all going to deal with it one way or another. there's a political situation we have to come up with, and that's part of the overall thinking, but in other instances there are development solutions we can make. the u. >> great. nina, you have some really interesting corporate partnerships. you talked about doing good and doing well. talk a little bit more about some of the organizations you're working with, a, and then, b, talk about mastercard, when you

partner with a organization like world bank, what are some of the things you want that organization to understand about what mastercard's capabilities are? i'm sure they say write us a check. that would be great. the technology is lot more powerful than just writing a check. >> most of our relationships are not about the check. i think a lot of it goes about the education because people go mastercard? that's a credit card. are you giving credit to people who really don't have money? a lot of it goes about educating people from a financial institution perspective, but also why we are doing this. we look at financial inclusion. then we look to deepen. when people are not connected, they might not be connected enough to keep their family

safe, but are they connected to power, are they connected to electricity, are they connected to water? we're all about building a better tomorrow. with partnerships, we can really do that. in africa, there's an acronym we use there. we're getting like-minded people getting together to say how do we do this. world bank, wfp [ inaudible ]. we can leverage it. mastercard has an astronomical footprint from a global perspective. we have the connectivity points. we can reach people really quickly. we manage to move quickly. we can move whether it be financials, whether it be

commodities. we have a net to support that. we are present in over 200 countries, so all of that makes a huge impact on what do we bring to the party. while we have the footprint, we also have the insights. we have the data. we understand what's needed to bring that. and we can bring it from a sustainability perspective. sure, we have the mastercard foundation, which does it from a philanthropic perspective. we've got the commercial side of the business where we're going things need to be sustainable. if you do things for free, they're not sustainable. however, you don't have to charge premium prices and if everybody can still make and do things more efficiently, it works and it becomes sustainable and it becomes repetitive. >> thank you. john, we were having a conversation at lunch about the merging of development and

humanitarian response. can you talk about how that's happening and what that means for the world food program and other organizations? i would like matt to also comment on that from the world bank perspective. >> i think the big changes in the past organizations were just happy to do their job. if they delivered their food or supplies or whatever, that was a job well done. now there's really a recognition that life is much more dynamic than that, and we have power in the resources that we provide and we need to use them fully. with the right tool, the card, instead of handing out food and just doing nothing to stimulate beyond giving people a resource, the card gives the resource. it gives choice. it gives dignity. it's already tripled its value. and then it stimulates the market. i would argue that when the market is happy and the community is therefore happy there's more stability.

you don't have as much resentment of people taking over things or us coming in and replacing systems. the humanitarian community has to be much more focused on development, and even in wfp's fundamental work with food assistance we have to really understand markets. not just who needs assistance, but how they need assistance, how that assistance can add value to the market structure, to transportation systems, to everything. then can it contribute to technical assistance? if we're doing a school feeding program in a country and we're not helping the government learn how to take that system over, then we're going to be there forever. if we teach them how to run their own program, they can take it over and more importantly if we can integrate local agriculture into that program, then it becomes again something the community values. the kids are going to school. the farmers are selling their goods. the government is getting recognition for providing a

service to a community. so these are broader things way beyond just the humanitarian action. they have developmental impact, and we all need to continue to look at how we can use our resources in a much more dynamic way. >> how is this impacting at the world bank group? >> first would be some of the things i mentioned earlier. the other thing i would say is deepening into different sorts of partnerships, like the ones john and knnina have talked abo. the third is what are we learning and seeing out there that would change how we shape things. first is picking up on the issue of basic nutrition and feeding people. we have come to realize through tons of research, not just the banks, the importance of early

childhood nutrition on basic cognitive development and how important it is children get the right nutrients when they're very, very young. from a developmental perspective, a lot of other countries where we were kept 30, 40, 50% of their children that were stunted. it's hard to see how an economy thrives if 45% to 50% of your children are stunted. what we have seen through some ou our programs in latin america is reductions. in peru building on a program, which i believe you were part of getting together back with the brazilians, we have reduce stunting in brazil. tying it into how that fits with strengthening institutions more broad broadly, that's the other piece

i would touch on. that's what we know how to do well. how do we then strengthen the rest of the educational system so it's more connected to where the world economy is going on and so on? one other example i would use is how do we utilize new technologies. i think mastercard is great payment platform. they do payments and transferring of money as well as anybody. why does that matter? in some countries -- i'll use india as an example -- there are an awful lot of benefits that are going out in a digital mode that reduces leakage to the tune of billions and billions of dollars. that's a country with an awful lot of poor people that wants to change that who can now use those billions of dollars to come back to the bank and say what's the next project you think will have the biggest impact. there are all sorts of innovations taking place as we

understand the linkages between humanitarian feel humanitarian fields and private sector fields. we can promote a lot of the values that we think here in the u.s. can make a difference around the world. >> this has been a very patient audience. thank you all for being here. i see a lot of thoughtful people in the room. i first want to call on my friend from mercy corps who is here. please give my friend andrea the microphone. andrea, thanks for being here. >> thank you so much, dan. i guess my question is for matt, rather. also in i.d.a. 18 there's a $2.5 billion carveout for the private sector. could you elaborate on how that's going to work and how the bank is going to ensure -- because the money will be going into these fragile countries

where often there aren't functioning institutions, but how you'll make sure the money is going where it's supposed to go? thank you. >> i want to take advantage of that. i want to ask wfp -- john, i would like you to answer the question how do you work with ngos like mercy corps in responding to emergencies. nina, i would welcome how you partner with ngos like mercy corps. >> a couple of things, i have to be really, really clear, the u.s. congress has in the appropriated the money for i.d.a. yet. we are in the midst of discussions. we're quite hopeful that all of these things will be realized. i would mention we're but one of the countries. while we're the largest contributor to i.d.a. over the years, dozens of others are contributing as well.

i don't want people to leave here thinking this is all locked in and down. in terms of the private sector windows, about 1/3 of the bank's lending and investments go directly to the private sector. the other goes to governments. that's through something called the i fc, the international finance corporation. that's business we've been doing. and what it goes to are companies that are doing things which increase economic development in any number of the countries where we work. we operate in about 120 countries. that's something we've already been doing. as you might expect and to your point where you tend to have stronger institutions, more cred worthy banks and more reliable regulatory environments, the ifc has not done as much in poorer i.d.a. countries over time. this is an effort to set aside money specifically to push harder on that front. there's a book recently called

"rich people, poor countries" that talks about how you really grow the economies of very poor countries. she has some fascinating statistics showing 30% to 50% of exports come from the five largest companies in those countries. if you can identify the local entrepreneurs that are growing rapidly, you're going to see huge hiring and job growth over time. how do we identify those companies, really help them to expand, then importantly how do we also show, again, other investors that are the ifc is in in, we've made good money, and other people may be enticed to come in as well? we don't just go in and lend money for project finance or to invest in a health care company. it always goes with advice.

for example, if it's very hard to start a business, if it's very hard to export because of customs regulations, those are the discussions we're having in particul parallel with the business climate. we rank countries on any number of indicators like energy provision, how regular it is, how long it takes to start a business, whether or not you can declare bankruptcy, whether or not one has an easy time in resolving disputes, all these other things. that's a tool we have to point the light at different countries and say, here's some things you ought to be working on to improve over time. so it's part of a much more comprehensive effort, but it's one that we think is quite timely. we're hopeful that all the shareholders come in and allow ifc to do more in these poorer countries because it is so important for our overall mission. >> how do you work with a

network of partners -- there's a whole universe of nonprofit organizations and civil society groups. you must work with them to do your work at the world food program. is that correct? >> we do indeed. people would say, oh, the ngos, they're the last mile implements for wfp. while that's true in one context, there's so much more. i think it's -- when we talk about innovation, a lot of times the ngos are the incubators for some of the most creative innovation out there. i think in the case of the cash base transfers and debit cards it was the ngo community that began investigating that and testing that early on. what the ngo can do with partners is take these things to scale. we have the symbiotic relationship. one wouldn't work well without the others. we're also implementing partners, so we do need them for in many cases the last mile, but

it's -- it's just one facet of the need to partner in this new environment. we have the ngos we need to partner with. we have the private sector we need to partner with. our partnership with refugee response is just almost -- we're practically married because they set the standards for targeting, but we have a lot of the implementation tools, so we have to work back and forth with them all the time. again, it wouldn't work without them. don't ever think of it as a simple relationship. it's a very dynamic one. >> nina, talk about how you work with nonprofit organizations as parts of what you're doing in the context of refugees. >> sure. every crisis is different. every country is different. every need is different. that's how we approach it. we haven't gone with a one product or one solution fits

all, so therefore it requires that we understand what are they trying to do, how quickly do they need to do it, and what is the point they're trying to solve. based on that, we go in and help solve that problem whether it be something where it's out in the middle of nowhere where there's no connectivity, we have products specifically for that. how do they get stuff there? how do they get the ecosystem to work? how do they build that up? we want to get people money, be -- but they need access to cash. we understand the need and we build accordingly. it's costing the ngos money at the moment to get stuff out there. the difference is whether it costs them $5 or $1. it's the difference of whether they need 50 people to get out there or one puerson to get it

out there. we look at the efficiencies, the insights we can bring them through data through partnerships, who else do we need to bring. we're seen as a market organizer, bringing the right people together, to make sure that it works. >> other questions and comments from this thoughtful audience? yes, please. this woman here. >> thank you very much. i'm with the united nations development program here in washington. great pleasure. i wish we'd met before in person. i'm inspired by your experience, of course. there's two questions perhaps that i'd like to raise. one is local authorities. a lot of our experience is that the burden and the onus of responding not only to the host community grievances but also to the incoming communities say in jordan or turkey or in lebanon

is sitting with local communities. how are we working together with the local communities? that's one area that i'd like to ask. the second is thank you so much for sharing the experience. we've read a lot about the partnership between mastercard and wfp. one of the most successful or all the successful social assistance programs in any developing country are the ones that empower the women with the card actually. so it's not only the incoming populations, but also the jordanian women in northern jordan. if she has the card, she's also equally empowered. i would like to hear your thoughts on the broader development work that we all partner with together already but on the host communities and using the technologies. thank you. >> thank you very much. >> so i might start quickly on that. it's not just being a world bank or i have to go back to the economic points here. i would say it's not just the empowerment that we see when women get the money directly, but we see a huge increase in

expenditures on health and education for their families, which has a big long-term economic benefit on the family. if you move money directly into women's hands, you get ancillary benefit. i would say in terms of working with local officials you're exactly right. when we were in northern jordan -- i've been there twice -- we make sure to meet with the appropriate administers and imam. it's the mayors. we sit with the mayors and hear what they want. we ask those questions what would be most useful to you. this gets back to why it is so important we strengthen the host communities because obviously they're worried about their core constituents who are people who have lived in jordan for many years. they're drawing on the many years of experience of jordan absorbing refugees for a long time. for 40, 50 years, they've been

absorbing palestinian immigrants and so on. that helps us to shape the overall design, even if we end up lending to the national entity ultimately. this is core, and this is part of what the bank team have learned over the years in how we design and have the greatest impact. >> is the world bank able to lend directly to the cities or subnational governments? >> we do a lot of work with subnational entities. there is a gray area in some of the regulations, so we're looking into that. there are cases where we have absolutely in the past. it's something we have to navigate a bit, but, yes, there are mechanisms through which we can do that. the question is where and how is that the best opportunity. in many cases, especially in poorer or more fragile countries, the municipalities are just not that strong. the question is do they have the capacity to absorb this money,

are there ways we can go in and build those entities in such a way over time they will be stronger, but it's really a case by case where we have to think carefully and see what makes the most sense. >> john, how does wfp work with governments at the local level, at the city level, and subnational government level? >> i think we have a very intense engagement at all levels. we're working with the government of lebanon. we're working with the banking sector. we're working with the local government employees, if you will, to teach them how to track the refugee data, if you will, to report what's going on in their own community and understand it. in another way we're asking the community to help identify lebanese vulnerable families so that it's not just, oh, we're

providing assistance to the syrian refugees. there is this need to not only constantly assess who the vulnerable are among the refugees, but also who the vulnerable are in the local community and then everybody has a better understanding of how it -- of how the assistance helps the whole community. there's a lot of work that's done. unhcr does a lot of us as well. we're working with a lot of the universities in the area because we want them to help us understand what's happening in the community. so there's all sorts of outreach going on because we don't claim to know everything that's happening there. we need the locals to help us understand what's happening in the community and better guide us. >> john, let me just go a little bit further. i think there's a bias in diploma diplomacy. there's a bias in development to do capital to capital engagement. we had a conversation about

urbanization earlier today. nina painted a very stark picture in contrast to her conversation with the mayor in athens. do you have to get a permission slip to go to the national government? can you go directly to a mayor? i'm not sure -- i don't know what a.i.d.'s arrangement is. >> wfp always has an agreement with the national agreement. we have our blanket agreement that lets us engage -- depending on the country, it is sometimes more controlled than the others. >> the national government is red sox and the city government is yankees, just using deep, sophisticated think tank talk here. there are many times in developing countries i can name many examples where the

opposition party or the city government is controlled by one party and the national government is controlled by another. that somehow colors the conversation even in terrible emergencies. i would like to go a little bit further and push a little bit further. do you have the ability to deal directly with mayors? do you have the ability to say no? >> well, it's complicated, dan. i wish i could say there's a simple answer. >> my sense is that i don't think the world bank and the others have enough capacity to work with city and subnational governments. they have to work -- there's a sense whether it's a.i.d. or the u.n. system there's a heavy bias towards capitals and national governments. yes, there are examples of subnational government

financing, but i've been of the belief we're going to need more permission slips or some kind of ability to work directly with city governments given the changes and the emergencies and changes in urbanization. in my red sox and yankees example, this is actually a really issue. >> what wfp would do say is we need not to speak directly with an official. we need to meet with the people who can help us get the job done, which you hope the national government would want to help address. it depends on the context. for the most part, you say we need to get into this area. we need to talk to these people. we need to understand the situation. it's assumed or presumed you're going to talk to the local officials to get that information. hey, the world's difficult. sometimes it doesn't go the way you want. >> if i could just put a plug in

for wfp and hopefully for the bank, part of that goes to reputation. if national governments have found the wfp, which i think they have over time, as fair and honest brokers, they often have more latitude. that goes back to the importance of multilateral entities because they do tend to have a different sort of credibility. in an awful lot of places, we can point to success. we just did this here that has 200 million people. that's not a small country. that's a large country. if we can take that and go to another country and say here's where we worked with the mayor or governor, by the way, you didn't read any news stories about us putting our thumb on one political party, then people start to nod their head and you're able to go to the next one. i agree the world is hard, but it's why we have to maintain the integrity or the brand and reputation of these multilateral

organizations over time. >> let's start with this woman over here. >> i'm with usaid. my question is more about corruption. to what extent is that built into your framework of systems? >> how do you think about corruption? >> correct. and also in the context of financing for development and the stgs. we see that day-to-day and how the hill is consistently making us more accountable, as we should, to taxpayers' money. i was wondering in your different setting how you built that into your assistance. >> great. we'll do this world bank style and we'll collect a couple of questions. i would like to have this woman here because i want to come back to the issue of corruption. this woman over here. >> hi. my question was what role do you see more traditional, i guess, aid programs like food air

drops, what role do you see them playing? do you plan on kind of integrating them into the more innovative things like when monotizing markets. do you want to integrate credit into it, credit cards, or prepaid cards into it? what role do you see that play somethi playing? >> great. corruption is interesting. it would be interesting to hear from each of you. why don't we start with you, matt? the issue of corruption is certainly something one has to be careful of. i know the world bank has spent a lot of time over the last few years thinking about corruption in terms of its practices, but also trying to reduce corruption in the countries where it's working. >> you're absolutely right.

it's something we've been grappling with for a long time. a couple of things. one, we have a series of a group of safeguards which are the conditions upon which we lend to countries that hopefully protect us by ensuring certain studies are done, a certain evaluation and monitoring that happens by doing due diligence and who ends up with the money. we try to institute from the start to reduce the likelihood of a world bank project tainted by corruption. it's not perfect, but we have a good system in place. we are trying to approve that. we passed a new set of safeguard that is will minimize the amount of times we get hit with corruption challenges. the other thing we do to approach this is really utilize our knowledge networks and a way we can explain on their economy, by drawing on examples of other economies. when you eliminate this, you

stee growth you are aiming for. part of this is going back to the research, the intellectual capital. at the end of the day, it is hard. people act in direct self-interest ways that are problematic. the final thing we have in place are accountability and panels and things where if they see corruption, they can come to an independent body and have it investigated and over time people realize, if it's bank money, you have to play by a strong set of rues. i will not address the other question just yet unless you want us to touch on both of them? >> why don't we deal with the corruption, then come back. that's a good way to do that. john, you work in really tough places with weak states or nonexistent states. how do you make sure somebody is not taking an extra bag of rice or somebody is not taking an extra bag of food and giving it

to their militia? how do you make sure people aren't taking commodities and selling it on markets and keeping the money for themselves? this is, i'm sure, something you think about every day. >> we do. as you say, some of the places where we work, it is very hard. none of the organizations can ever withstand a report that they were involved or had construction going on. i think what we always do is we have the monitoring systems we have in place for the traditional programs. i'm going to segway to the newer mastercard-type activities. not only do we have biometrics to ensure we are giving cards to the right people -- >> that was one of the questions. i had visions of going five or six times and getting five or six of those cards and that. >> no, no, the biometrics have

taken care of that. in the case of one of the camps in kenya we saw 15% or 20% cleansing, if you will. meaning we eliminated duplication where people had multiple cards. >> really? >> oh, yeah. this new technology has given us the ability to reduce corruption, if you will, or misuse of resources. but, it also adds to our ability to know what people are buying, to know how they are using their money, to help us better understand what their needs are. >> yeah. >> as nina says, if we see there's a spike in, i guess payment to education or payment to medicine or something like that or rent, we can see there are increasing demands in a sector that we might not have been aware of. that's not a corruption issue, but it is making sure we can fine tune our programming to make sure it has the greatest impact.

the new technologies are giving us the technology to do things. again, we can use these cards, even when there's food distribution. they can still allow you to make sure the person is the right person or the biometric link still works. it still works in the old food distribution programs, too, where they are appropriate. corruption is a huge issue everybody has to watch for all the time. i like to see the new technologies are giving us the ability to tighten it up. then we don't do much with host governments directly. that would be an issue. >> so, when you are telling the example i have the exact vision of someone going and getting five or six cards and so it sounds as if there are ways to safeguard. >> absolutely. i'm going to go through the topic and actually speak about an example inside africa where we have a government program by the name of sessa. it's a small country. when it launched in 2012, we had

a population of 58 million people. of that, 16 million were receiving social grants. before that, government would predominantly distribute the grants in cash and checks. it was costing $3.66 per social grant. the mastercard, debit card, we launched it in partnership with the bank. what that basically did from a cost perspective down to $1.60 fordispersement, we saved $75 million over five years. we called that operational savings. the way the costing worked, it came down and the multiple grants. >> i was receiving child support grants, government was no longer waying for it when you pay $1.60. that's the efficiency side. haven't found a country yet where there's not a problem with

ghost collectors, people pass zed away and whether it be adults or children. in south africa, because of this program, we managed to eradicate them. it's bringing a savings of 50 $350 million. we are speaking of a different country there. not necessarily a refugee program but it's a true example of how technology can come into partnership and make things work and bring efficiency. >> thanks. let me move back to john and the woman in the middle of the row had a question about the nexus of traditional assistance, humanitarian response, new technologies. why don't you start off answering that question, john, given that this is your world, if you will. >> a little bit of a mixed question. i mean some of the more innovative delivery technologies wfd has, air drops and flutter drops, they are going to be in

the repertoire forever. we used them recently in southern sudan or south sudan. we continue to innovate in those areas. they are, as we move to more local and regional procurement, as we move to cash based systems, there's less of a need for that except in those very violent emergencies. i think you have been to the berm and jordan. i wouldn't call it so much of an innovation, but there's a big crane that delivers assistance from the jordanian side to the syrian side of the border. it's kind of a sad situation, but you do what you do to get the resources there. we'll keep innovating and make sure commodities get where they are going. the new technology is opening up a world that really couldn't imagine a few years ago. >> you want to comment on that? >> i would like to comment on it.

i think from your question and people moving to new technologies, there's a new understanding that even when it is happening, there are times when it's more disruptive than what it's doing good. when you speak about being dropped into a community, a small community, then often the person who has had the small mom and pop shop in the area moves because there's no longer a need for him to be there. when the aid is no longer needed and the organization moves away, there's nobody left for the local or community to support and get what they need. first, when you are building an economy from scratch and saying you go and support, that mom and pop shop is going to start thriving and holding on a larger variety of goods. they are to support the community in a more meaningful way and you will find new shops coming up as well. there's a time and a place where there's a need and there's a time and place where we are going to do more good by going

digital and giving people the opportunity to build their own o conmy and get sustainability for tomorrow. >> thank you very much. questions or comments from the audience? well, this is really been great. i really appreciate you all coming out for this. i really want to thank the panelests. this has been an interesting conversation. please join me in thanking the panelists. [ applause ] >> thank you.

prime time here on c-span 3. american history tv highlights until congress returns after the november elections. tonight, american artifacts a visit to the flight 93 national memorial visitor center. then freedom of information artifacts 50 years after the law was enacted. 50 years to the battleship wisconsin. american history tv prime time tonight starting at 8:00 eastern.