I find it a very interesting proposal because it covers the main issues that represent a challenge for development in Lima's society. However, there are issues that have a strong correlation with the social inequalities in the capital, such as the aforementioned "Wall of Shame". I mention this issue because one of the reasons it was built was to stop the rampant urbanization that took place in that area. Behind all these families who hide a story full of dreams and a great desire to get ahead are the land trafficking mafias, which is part of a social problem: citizen insecurity. The article mentions the various social inequalities, but it does not mention how this plan will adjust to that reality that is lived at the national level. That is why many intangible areas are illegally populated, which represents a loss of valuable areas for the conservation of many species of flora or for the construction of future infrastructure projects. On the other hand, highlighting that Lima is one of the main cities that will be affected by climate change and water shortages is a good reason to seek various solutions to mitigate this problem. The use of fog, which accumulates in the upper parts of the hills, to transform it into water for public use is a brilliant alternative for the second most arid city located in a desert. In addition, not only will the ecosystem benefit, but agriculture will have a significant increase that will bring additional income to the agricultural sector. Another reasonable alternative would be the use of native flora, because they consume less water than non-local species. These species should predominate in the parks, so that the municipalities do not invest so much water in the irrigation of common areas. Another point that should be given more consideration is the quality of the water that is intended to be delivered to the population for daily use. We are aware that the population located in the highlands is the most affected by this shortage, due to the great effort they must make in order to have water in their homes (the large number of homes in a single settlement and the amount of water required to meet the great demand must also be considered). On the other hand, the imposition of a cost higher than the maximum human needs for water (politics) will result in income to bring water to the poorest consumers in Lima (economy, diets) and a reduction of water-thirsty residential gardens (environment). More expensive piped water will also provide the economic incentive to make water use in urban agriculture as efficient as possible (environment, technology, economics), but not without raising the cost of home-grown food (economics). The idea of imposing a cost higher than the maximum of human needs contrasts with the reality of the economy in Peru. Almost 70% of this is informal, which does not allow a rise in the price of water to be a very effective option for motivating responsible water consumption. However, the idea that the prices of agricultural products are not affected means that the most vulnerable social groups are not harmed by this measure. Finally, it is interesting how a gastronomic innovation is proposed to boost the demand for marine species such as anchovies. This is the species that is most present in the Peruvian sea, but it is not included in the diet of the inhabitants despite its high nutritional content. This species can be included to combat anemia in children and to complement the diet of the population in general.