Purpose and function of the strategy
The strategy offers an opportunity to provide greater focus and prioritisation of the ATT’s structures and resources, ensuring a coherent approach across cycles, particularly in the context of limited resources. It could also enable the ATT community to better track and measure progress against its agreed objectives and priorities, strengthening the impact of and accountability within the Treaty, as well as provide opportunity to develop specific actions to build on progress made. Whilst yet to be determined, clear purpose, design and principles are crucial in ensuring that it delivers what was agreed in the mandate.
Agreement on the strategy’s focus and design will be crucial to ensure that it delivers on the mandate and helps to drive impact and implementation. The strategy should seek to provide focus and direction, whilst remaining firmly grounded in the ATT’s Object and Purpose, at the same time, considering present political and institutional realities.
In order to do the above, clarity is needed on what the strategy should seek to achieve. A strategy could be understood, in this regard, as a planning and governance tool, rather than reinterpreting or creating new Treaty obligations. Its value could lie in its ability to set a shared vision and priorities, guide allocation of resources and efforts, identify challenges, and enable measurement of progress and impact. Conversely, a strategy that is overly prescriptive or detailed could risk flexibility or overburdening States Parties, the Secretariat and other stakeholders, particularly those with limited capacity.
Given the early stages of the strategy’s development, there are differing expectations on whether it should simply be an aspirational document with high-level objectives or serve as an operational planning instrument. The strategy may end up somewhere in between. Therefore, States Parties should articulate their preferences for the function of this strategy as soon as reasonably possible to develop a shared vision of what the strategy is seeking to achieve and ensure that States Parties and ATT processes can work towards its implementation.
Strategic objectives and focus
Due to the five-year timeline, the strategy should seek to prioritise where it can realistically demonstrate the most impact. This could be envisaged through establishing a limited number of clear, cross-cutting objectives, rather than an overly broad strategy that dilutes focus and ability to make impact.
Sequencing of the strategy is important in this regard, as it may prove difficult to attempt simultaneous progress on all fronts of the strategy. For example, the strategy could establish year-on-year goals and objectives that allow for measurable progress each year with objectives which may build on progress in previous years. By sequencing the implementation of objectives over the lifespan of the strategy in this manner, it could alleviate pressure on States Parties, as well as the Secretariat.
Early years of the strategy could also seek to focus on establishing baselines, improving data quality and strengthening the systems the strategy and ATT need to deliver on its objectives and priorities. Subsequent phases could build on this foundation to drive targeted action and assess progress more meaningfully. Such an approach could more likely sustain political buy-in and avoid setting unrealistic expectations.
Core design principles
A strategy that sets aims too high or too far risks failure from its outset – a “realistically ambitious” strategy that sets goals that are both challenging and achievable, whilst grounded in reality, is most likely to ensure that it remains politically meaningful, yet operationally feasible. A strategy that is perceived as unattainable would not encourage States Parties to invest time and effort to support it and would risk failing to deliver tangible and measurable progress.
The ATT strategy, its objectives, actions and measures should be firmly grounded in the Treaty’s Object and Purpose to reinforce its legitimacy – it should continue to build on the Treaty’s “embarrassment of riches” – including Conference decisions and recommendations, multi-year workplans, voluntary guidance and standing mechanisms, rather than attempting to establish new or parallel structures, or duplicate previous or ongoing work. Learning from other instruments can also encouraged, with the caveat that their approaches cannot be fully replicated on the ATT given its unique regulatory framework.
Ownership, roles and inclusivity
State Party ownership of the ATT strategy should be a prerequisite for its legitimacy and meaningful, effective implementation. Whilst not shifting responsibility from States Parties on implementing their obligations under the Treaty, and therefore their role in progressing the goals of the strategic plan, the ATT Secretariat and relevant office holders should have a central supporting role to ensure that States Parties have the tools and resources at their disposal to make progress on the strategy’s objectives and priorities. This could include ensuring the strategy’s progress is led and driven by CSP Presidents across its lifespan, to embed continuity and shared ownership throughout. Civil society, international and regional organisations and industry, as well as collaboration and cooperation through regional peer-to-peer engagement, are also crucial to developing and delivering the strategy and supporting implementation and continuous learning.
Iteration, learning and adaptability
With a view to ensuring the strategy is sustainable in the immediate, medium and long-term, it could be viewed as a living framework that is capable of adapting to new information, changing contexts and emerging challenges. In this manner, the strategy can provide better focus on improving data and baselines so progress and intended impact is realistic and measurable. On the other hand, given that the Object and Purpose of the Treaty remains static, the strategy could also be presented as a static document. Yet, this could further exacerbate the issue of data gaps and understanding a clear baseline, potentially limiting the strategy’s ability to understand progress and impact.
Regular, light touch reviews could strengthen the strategy’s sustainability within its lifespan and beyond. By doing so, the strategy could support continuous learning and offer opportunities to course correct where necessary. This adaptable approach, as opposed to a rigid structure, could sustain continued engagement with the strategy, as well as ensuring that the ATT’s work maintains relevance in changing contexts.