Tom Grylls

So I think...

it really comes down to thinking about the specific sub-sector and what the kind of political economy is of that emission source.

So there's very different ways to approach it, but as a general rule on black carbon, I think there's a huge responsibility to think about the

The people and the decisions that people are making, because it's not always that this is your first choice is to do this practice.

There's often underlying systematic things that are leading to that.

And that's why there is this sustainable development and poverty eradication piece to some of the things we can do on black carbon and why therefore there's a good link to be making to other sorts of finance around development on these solutions too.

So I think we do know enough for policy to act on this already.

So one of the main international treaties on air pollution is the Gothenburg Protocol, which is for the UN ECE region.

So it's

North America, Europe, and some of Central Asia.

In 2012, it was updated again to include particulate matter.

At that point, it had a specific line to mention within our efforts on particulate matter, let's try to prioritize major sources of black carbon.

That was acknowledging where the health

evidence was there and also referencing these wider environmental impacts of black carbon through its climate forcing.

So that shows that we know enough for which to elevate this through international coordination on air pollution.

Many countries are measuring black carbon levels.

So we're not starting from scratch from a policy perspective.

But what Zorana mentioned in terms of this World Health Organization systematic review, this is such a useful piece of analysis from an international body who can provide clear science into policy recommendations.

So we're expecting the output.

come of that review to be released in 2026.