it -- in mongolia. >> mongolia is one of the most water stressed countries in the world and climate change is a major factor to this because mongolia is affected by climate change. the average temperature in mongolia increased by one of the highest in the world. and 70% of our land is affected. this is from rural to urban areas and over 1.6 million people and over half reside in a single city, our capital. in addition, it is home to 2/3 of all the -- [indiscernible] so i think all this highlights

critical infrastructure such as power and water supply in improving this in the face of the climate change. back in 2016, joint u.s.-mongolian study identify water shortage as one of the constraints. and studies from mid-20 20's faced a water supply shortage. it works to preemptively to this is will increase the water supply about 80%. so we are implementation of investment activities. [indiscernible] we are constructing wells that will unleash ground water for

residential use. and building state of the art advanced pure fix that will purify the water. [indiscernible] so around this time next year when they come on-line will have doubling the current water supply. i want to highlight these new fields are constructed under a heavily industrialized area where for decades waste water has been dumped into the area. we are eliminating these constraints and to create economic value and enhance the quality of life of our people. so in addition to the 55 million cubic meters of water, 23

million is used for heat and power generation, which is we are the coldest capital in the world. the waste water activation activities is aimed to decrease the fresh water demand by using waste water. the waste water that we are building under the compact will treat somest effluent and will create up to 18 million out of the 20 million cubic meters of fresh water with recycled waste water. mongolia will be able to save $38 billion worth of fresh water each year. mongolia will have a brand new

water source in the form of waste water and will be able for the first time to consciously and deliver and implement water supply and management. this is part of the puzzle. so basically, in short, what this activity needs to do is strengthen the capacity of its institutional, operational and human resources capacity of water utilities to properly operate and maintain. and second, it introduces a sound and self-sustaining framework to unable cost recovery. and third, it is undertaking actions to increase -- to improve water governors for years to come and unable the -- enable to continuities

commitment. i think the mongolia water compact is an approach towards aid that can really help urban areas in the face of climate change. >> thank you so much. it pains a specific picture of coming together using waste water instead of potable in the coldest call of the world and reversing what you had seen as the trend which is the water shortages. thank you for sharing that example. how does the private sector led to the approach described? and what are the advantages and challenges of taking the systems approach that we are all seeking

pleasure to be here with a distinguished panel and thank you for organizing this and we are part of the call for action and get chance to dive into. and tell you about the work. and the work we do before diving into the specific question. we have the global engineering firm with a humanitarian focus and work under management response. we tackle from the disaster management and response cycle. to relief, construction and that is a long-term development side. and part of a company that has this. we have about 75 years of experience, 20-plus offices around the global and we are a

multi disciplinary team to tackle housing, community engagement. so back to infrastructure and let's say more -- i think we talk about infrastructure resilience and system-based resilience. ultimately, we are about empowering communities and building long-term sustainability and that requires a holistic approach. that will and some of the points that have been made by the panelists. we like to call or say that we focus on what we call a three-way approach. this means the first is really looking at multiple dynamics. there is a dependency on

different dynamics and need to understand those, from growth to energy and networks and public spaces to connect activity. we need to understand how they come together and what their relationships and dependencies as well as lack of dependencies. the success of the physical infrastructure of roads and drain age. can we protect those that allow that. if we focus on one, building flood barriers that might solve one solution but brings about a lack of diversity or service to another. we have to think about this. if we don't think of local governance and settlements might be left out of the solutions and some of the social and economic

diversity we are seeing. this idea of engaging in multiple dynamics is the first. the second is resilience is linked. we have to look at the scale of the infrastructure to the neighborhood, to the larger kind of city and regional approach. again, we might be looking at a house and raising that house so the flood levels won't affect it and how we can interact with different green corridors and allow that water to happen. we might be looking at restoring some of the wetlands and looking at as an overall network system and supporting the ecosystem. we have to look at these multiple scales as we approach

those. and the third really multi hazard. and it's ease for us but it is compounding it and we have to look at them together and it's not just about making it which used to be our bread and butter and through the last 15 years. there is also floods, drought, erosion, climate change and becoming more and more relevant and alarming as well. so we have to start tackling those all together. those are the three for the resilience. second is really how do we equip our team and the resources to be able to provide action around us. and i will say we will need to

create multi disciplinary teams that work in multi disciplinary fashion. and we have to get beyond our silo approach and have these discussions. i'm a clear example of that. i'm an architect by trade but we work with architects with nature-based solutions and even biologiesists trying to seek this knowledge and integrate it together. and the third point i want to stress overall is we need local actions and i'm so excited to be with my colleagues here but we need local action, promote local leadership and you know we have 20 different offices and led by local staffs.

one clear example is haiti. that office is still running and when we don't have an office, the importance of partnering with local partners and bring that knowledge and want to understand the local governance and can support in a much more grounded perspective of wall that can mean in that complex. and enhancing the channels through knowledge exchange and seeking to create not just around the building but a solid understanding around resilience where we can be alined with a system-based approach to tackle the challenges that we face. >> wonderful to have different perspectives on this central issue. having deliberated on the systems approach with experts

inside and outside the u.s. government and having developed this resilience at scale report that articulates the different considerations we are hearing articulated and stakeholders can take. what needs to happen next. what will other agencies do to fulfill this approach that has been articulated? >> well, i think it really underscores the need for more planning and coordination first and foremost which may not always be popular to move with the demands on the grouped being what they are. but sometimes you have to move slowly to move more quickly. take for example, the

philippines, you talk about intracorporate coordination. 30 different federal agencies engaged in thinking through various equities when it comes to water management. that represents the kind of thinking you want but it could be a recipe for disaster without appropriate coordinations. usaid created a water management authority and synthesize the work and mandates going forward. that is critically necessary and making sure you are doing the comprehensive vulnerability and risk assessments that goes beyond the individual in the infrastructure you are developing. and think about the surrounding ecosystem both in the ecosystem infrastructure and the natural

environment. going back to planning, engage the stakeholders, civil society, local communities, the government, making sure those conversations are had because everyone has a piece of the puzzle and need a unifying and comprehensive way forward. and this is what makes the investment so challenging where infrastructure is concerned. we need to think about the life cycle cost. people think in terms of the upfront cost rather than thinking about how those extra efforts you make to extend the life of that infrastructure by decades, saving you money and helping you on the increase of possibility. when it comes to the private sector, so much of the prepared to action and call to usaid has

been setting the stage. what can we do to derisk those investments. can they bring risk insurance to the table. are there guarantees available. you don't want to displace private capital where it is moving already, where infrastructure is concerned, we have an enormous gap and need to bring the private sector more fully into the terrain. those are the nings that i would mention and one more point on policy and coming in as donor governments with projects valid at hundreds of millions of dollars, taking the opportunity to think with the government about the enabling policy government is necessary, we do need that public investment. in cases where the state and

national governments have the capacity to levy appropriate taxes understanding there may be limitations for the co-investments that are so necessary to think about green roofs and storm water management, it creates an environment that will be conducive to the kind of investment we need. >> it expands on the point about the remarks about enabling environment. jonathan, i want to turn to you, from your perspective, how do you expect this more systemic approach, your agency is embracing, is that going to -- you brought? the example of indonesia and mozambique. how are they going to develop

that? >> that's a key question. i give good examples and going forward and it is fair to say we are still working on it and work in progress. as i reflect on that broader question of now what, what does it mean, i highlight through core areas. and each of them touch some what m.c.c. does in all of its work. when we start our engagement with a country, we do a series of analyses. we do economic analyses saying what the constraints to growth, what are the constraints and opportunities. we started doing natural capital and climate vulnerabilities. what is the picture and target our interventions to address it.

we have been weaving climate into that and our constraints. but what i think is different now as we look forward is this system lens. we really have been more asset-focused. and there are good examples where we haven't. that is where we are going than where we have been. as we look to that path going forward, we are going to see us being more deliberate in active planning and master planning that gets at the system and not bringing in the climate resilience. and part of that is recognizing that the countries where we work often don't have master plans. they are limited, dated and much of them don't take climate into account. as we go through that process, i think we may well see some differences in what our programs look like. maybe there is a different piece

of the infrastructure system that needs addressing than others. the second piece i want to hit on has been touched on, the policy institution national reforms and something that has been very central to all of our m.c.c.'s work. we go in and look at what policy and regulatory reforms are critical and necessary for our interventions of our program and then we build that into our package of investments. as we look forward bringing in this climate in systems resilience lens, we are going to be more deliberate in bringing that into the conversation of institutional policy reforms and do that kind of planning and master planning on their own and given the tools to prioritize and develop infrastructure systems. the third that i'll mention is

coming back to weighing the cost and benefits and this is a central piece that m.c.c. does. we do a cost benefit analysis and say given the sector, where do we get the most out of our grant dollars and what are the constraints and how do we achieve a solid rate of return for our returns. we have been looking at systems as part of that exercise but not the climate resilience component of it. as we do the cost benefits, different costs to bring into that calculus but what are the benefits, what are the been tits of giving it back to the life cycle cost and put some additional funding up front and have a much greater impact on infrastructure in the longer term. and the last piece, the private

sector is really key. this is a big push. we have grant money that many others do not and we really push and work hard to leverage that to cat lies investment. and we do it in the climate space. but as we bring the infrastructure, doing it in a wayinfrastructure, do it in a wy that reinforces resilience, i think is going to be very important and shape whatever programs will look like going forward. >> on that third point, and terms of the cost-benefit analysis, i imagine it complicates the analysis when you start to take into account as opposed to just say it -- historical data to think about some of the benefits or costs. you talked about it, in terms of the forecasting of water shortages, in the case of mongolia. how does that factor into your cost calculus -- that would

factor into your cost calculus i would imagine. looking back on the planning and design for mongolia's water compact, are there elements who may have benefited even more from a more systemic approach and how do you build on what you are already carrying out, to connect your work to other parts of the infrastructure network that exists in the r across the country? -- in the capital or across the country? >> i do believe, that some components such as the -- actions, they are equally important as the physical assets of the building, especially in terms of ensuring the long-term sustainability of the compact investments. which i think honestly otherwise might have been challenging for the government to prioritize.

for instance, as we near the end of the compact, government is working to update existing regulatory frameworks that they have to introduce new dimensions on recycled wastewater use. they are aiming to expand recycled water use beyond power and heat generation, to other sectors as well. they are also planning to introduce financial incentives to further encourage water reuse instead of using fresh for industrial purposes, which i think is extremely important.

another example is the government does also plan to build on the outcome of the compact to address certain challenges. such as air pollution, which is ranked worst in the world, and also traffic and so on. -- detailed studies to provide these settlement areas, so i think these are examples of what the government is doing to work beyond the compact. >> absolutely. in what ways is this more systemic approach on the part of u.s. government agencies and other donors and stakeholders,

has an impact on what mia moto is trying to do or even what mia moto is trying to do through its commitment through to call -- through the call to action? >> let me tell you about what we are doing. i will take a step back and then jump to how a more systemic approach can help propagate leadership in the call for action, and really being a catalyst for us and catalyzing and enabling -- to be more -- one of the key pillars of the prepare contract is the effect of knowledge generation and addressing critical knowledge gaps and that is what we are doing. we are bringing technical expertise to try and fill in what we see. our focus has been on climate

resilience, housing in particular but we have noticed there are a lot of guidelines and quite a bit of work focusing on infrastructure. not necessarily on housing. even for governments or multilaterals, to have a very easy -- i don't necessarily want to call it a guide to but a very easy reference tool to understand what other solutions can be that can be developed and be relevant to specific contexts. we are ultimately consolidating retrofit guides for climate resilient housing and communities and we have launched an open source challenge to crowd source, to consolidate different case studies for organizations to form an informal coalition where we can showcase some of the solutions on housing and climate resilience and community resilience.

that repository should be live soon, it will allow us to come together, for organizations to create more knowledge exchanges, so again, back to having more system based approaches and that will help us move forward in creating this coalition by allowing these discussions to be had by creating these bridges with other organizations in creating awareness for stakeholders. in the implementation and operational sense and the projects we address is creating that awareness for the different stakeholders and sometimes local mia's abilities, to emphasize over them to understand the importance. having the backing of -- and having contracts like prepare allow us to move forward in a much more efficient manner, being able to back up what we are saying and being able to partner with other

organizations. >> i have probably 10 more questions i would like to ask but then i will pick one and then i'm also going to invite the audience to think about your questions for our panel of experts. this is a question for all of you, from your different perspectives. why is it important for american people and businesses, that the u.s. government is actively trying to pursue more systemic approaches to climate resistant infrastructure? how might you answer that, if a member of congress asked that question, what is the answer to that from your own vantage point? anybody want to jump in? who is having thoughts? >> obviously, in the world we are facing today, with climate,

horrible conflict we are seeing in places like the middle east, ukraine, just reinforces the importance of ally ship and strong relationships with partners on the ground. the u.s. government is really striving to be a partner of choice, when it comes to these countries, low and middle income countries, to provide the kind of intellectual partnership, the funding and the long-term thinking that we need, to ensure that stability and growth of the economy. we are also doing work that sets the stage for u.s. private sector growth and development. when it comes to supporting