- Acknowledge the work and progress to negotiate and agree the 2024 Political Declaration on AMR. Delegates agreed the commitments in the 2024 Political Declaration on AMR represents substantial progress and provides a strong framework for action. The 44 Commitments (increased from 8 in the 2016 Political Declaration) across animal and human health and the environment and numerous cross cutting themes of access, research and development and innovation, financing and multistakeholder partnerships highlight the complexities of addressing AMR systemically. It further highlights the need for multi-sectorial support for coordinated, accountable and measurable implementation efforts.
- Financing is required to ensure implementation of the Political Declaration: New models and sources for financing are required. The impetus to find new models and sources of financing has increased as a result of current geopolitical and economic uncertainty. More importantly the business case for addressing AMR needs to be made to ministers of finance, multilateral development banks and the private sector.
- Countries know best-enhanced coordination to support country implementation is needed: Countries are best placed to drive progress on AMR through country-led initiatives. Given limited resources and complex and competing priorities, it is anticipated the Independent Panel for Evidence for Action for Antimicrobial Resistance (IPEA) will support countries to prioritise actions and implement them. International organisations must build partnerships at country and regional levels to understand how best they can support countries to address their needs. This can include identifying critical evidence gaps to inform prioritisation of resources for national level action, such as through the IPEA.
- Policy and political discussions regarding AMR have different drivers and approaches which need to be distinguished: Political will without being translated into policy runs the risk of losing momentum in the face of competing challenges for governments and can lead to progress stalling.
- Political understanding and commitment to AMR is low: Stronger political understanding of the risks posed by AMR to all facets of society and the return on investment/ risks mitigated by committing to One Health AMR strategies is needed. This requires multisectoral AMR stakeholders to continue to engage at a political level, providing data and case studies which speak to political priorities. Strong political leadership is needed at every level of government.
- Public understanding of AMR is low: A comprehensive reassessment of how multisectoral AMR stakeholders can better engage with the general public and parliamentarians is necessary to understand what forms of communication might be effective to catalyse both individual behaviour change to support AMR interventions and also result in political pressure to address AMR. Engagement needs to be clear in its messaging and ask of what the public is required to do. Patient advocates have a strong role to play to engage with both the public and political leaders. Communication and awareness raising must cover human and animal health and the environment.
- Limited multisectoral partnerships existing to support progress on AMR targets: There are currently few multisectoral partnerships which span the breadth of stakeholders for systemic action to address AMR, for example partnerships engaging public, private, civil society and multilateral organisations covering human and animal health and the environment.
