← The Saudi aviation reference, in one place.
ICAO Global Aviation Safety Plan (Doc 10004) 2026-2028
Reproduced for study. Always verify against the official GACAR at gaca.gov.sa.
Doc 10004
Global Aviation Safety Plan
2026 –2028 Edition
Notice to users
This document is a draft version of an ICAO publication pending endorsement by the ICAO Assembly ,
at the 42nd Session. Any content , information, data or conclusions presented in this draft are provisional
and may still be supplemented, removed or otherwise modified . ICAO shall not be responsible
whatsoever for any costs or liabilities incurred as a result of its use.
INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION
Published in separate English, Arabic, Chinese, French, Russian
and Spanish editions by the
INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION
999 Robert -Bourassa Boulevard, Montréal, Quebec, Canada H3C 5H7
For ordering information and for a complete listing of sales agents
and booksellers, please go to the ICAO website at www.icao.int
2026–2028 Edition
Doc 10004, Global Aviation Safety Plan
Order Number: 10004
ISBN 978-92-9275 -702-1
© ICAO 20 25
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a
retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, without prior
permission in writing from the International Civil Aviation Organization.
(iii) AMENDMENTS
Amendments are announced in the supplements to the Products and
Services Catalogue; the Catalogue and its supplements are available
on the ICAO website at www.icao.int . The space below is provided to
keep a record of such amendments.
RECORD OF AMENDMENTS AND CORRIGENDA
AMENDMENTS CORRIGENDA
No. Date Entered by No. Date Entered by
(v) FOREWORD
The Global Aviation Safety Plan (GASP) has proven to be a driving force for the implementation of regional and national
aviation safety plans, providing the framework for Member States, regional entities and industry stakeholders to develop
strategies aime d at improving international civil aviation safety. The GASP contributes to the identification of global safety
issues and assists in the design and revision of safety enhancement initiatives that shape regional and national priorities,
guiding action plan s that serve as the basis for continuous improvement.
Initially introduced in 1997, the GASP has evolved through continual consultations and reviews. The Plan, now published
as the 2026 –2028 edition, continues to align with current needs, capabilities and resources available to States. This edition
considers the safety issues presented to Member States and industry by a dynamic and ever -changing environment,
as well as recent developments in the field of aviation safety. Key revisions include new targets to address challenges
such as insufficient financial re sources for safety oversight authorities, lack of qualified technical personnel and the need
to facilitate assistance to States struggling in the regions. This edition maintains the same five global high -risk categories
of occurrences as before but address es other global risk categories of occurrences, such as turbulence encounters,
which have featured prominently in recent accidents and incidents.
Continued aviation safety -related events reinforce the need for an unwavering collective determination to enhance aviation
safety worldwide, as demonstrated in the fifth edition of the GASP, in line with the ICAO ’s Strategic Plan 2026 –2050 and
our Strategic Goal to ensure every flight is safe and secure. It calls for a strong expression of commitment from States to
allocate sufficient resources to meet their national and international obligations in terms of safety management, to contin ue
collaborating thro ugh ICAO and with industry, and to deliver outcomes at the national, regional and global levels. We are
committed to achieving zero fatalities from aviation accidents and incidents.
Salvatore Sciacchitano, President of the ICAO Council Juan Carlos Salazar, ICAO Secretary General
______________________
(vii) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) is committed to enhancing aviation safety, to the resourcing of
supporting activities and to increasing collaboration at the global level. The Global Aviation Safety Plan (GASP) presents
the global strategy for the continuous improvement of aviation safety. The GASP aims to continually reduce fatalities, and
the risk of fatalities, through the development an d implementation of a global aviation safety strategy. A safe, resilient and
sustainable aviation system contributes to the economic development of States across all regions and their industries. The
GASP is the master planning document, upon which the regional aviation safety plan s (RASP s) and national aviation
safety plan s (NASP s), respectively , are developed and implemented. This plan lists global safety issues and sets global
safety goals and targets. It provides a collaborative framework for States and regions to manage operational safety risks
and organizational challenges, through their resp ective NASPs and RASPs, together with industry. The GASP is
complemented by a series of safety enhancement initiatives (SEIs) to achieve its goals, contained in the Global Aviation
Safety Roadmap (Doc 10161).
The periodic review of the content of the GASP is done to ensure the plan remains relevant and best reflects current global
safety issues in aviation safety, as well as means to address them. The 2026 –2028 edition of the GASP marks a significant
change in how the global safety strategy is developed. The global safety issues addressed through this plan were identified
using a set of standardized frameworks and data from multiple sources, including indust ry. This new development process
was created to ensure that goals and targets for this edition of the GASP focus on the issues that States and regions are
facing and that they serve as catalyst to address them. This edition also includes a process for the development and
review of the GASP, to foster alignment with other ICAO Global Plans.
Most of the goals for the 2026 –2028 edition of the GASP remain the same as in the previous two editions. This is to ensure
the stability and continuity of the plan, and to minimize its impact on existing RASPs and NASPs, as well as the SEIs
already underway. The five global high -risk ca tegories of occurrences (G -HRCs) also remain the same as in the previous
two editions. States, regions and industry need to address the following G -HRCs to mitigate the risk of fatalities: controlled
flight into terrain; loss of control in -flight; mid -air collision; runway excursion; and runway incursion. The main changes in
the GASP include new and revised targets, as well as amendments based on feedback received, mainly as part of the
ICAO Fourteenth Air Navigation Conferenc e. This edition also addresses three other global risk categories of occurrences,
in addition to the G -HRCs, which though they may not have a high fatality risk, figure prominently in the most frequent
types of accidents and serious incidents across ICAO r egions: abnormal runway contact; system/component failure or
malfunction (non -powerplant); and turbulence encounter.
The vision of the GASP is “zero fatalities in commercial operations by 2030 and beyond”, which is consistent with
the United Nations’ 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development . The plan’s mission is to continually enhance global
aviation safety performance and resilience by providing a collaborative framework for States, regions and industry. This is
supported by a series of goals:
Goal 1 is to achieve a continuous reduction of operational safety risks.
Goal 2 aims to strengthen States’ safety oversight capabilities.
Goal 3 calls for the establishment and management of State safety programmes.
Goal 4 focuses on strengthening collaboration at the regional and national levels to address safety issues.
Goal 5 calls for strengthening aviation safety planning, through RASPs and NASPs.
Goal 6 aims to expand the use of industry evaluation programmes and safety data sharing programmes.
Each region and each State should use the GASP to develop a RASP and NASP respectively, with industry participation.
The RASP and NASP present the strategic direction for the management of aviation safety at the regional and national
levels, for a set period and should be developed in line with the goals and targets of the GASP . To achieve the GASP
goals and targets, authorities within the State need to provide sufficient resources and qualified technical personnel for
the development and implementation of the State’s NASP.
______________________
(ix) SUMMARY OF AMENDMENTS
This table contains a summary of the amendments made to the 2026 –2028 edition of the GASP and their rationale.
Amendment Rationale
Goal 1 – Target 1.1, from the 2023 –2025 edition,
(Maintain a decreasing trend of global accident rate)
was expanded into three separate targets. The target was expanded to encompass not only a
decrease in the accident rate, but also in the rate of
accidents and serious incidents for each of the five global
high-risk categories of occurrences (G -HRCs), and the
three other global risk categories of o ccurrences identified
in the 2026 –2028 edition of the GASP.
Goal 1 – Targets that replace the previous Target 1.1
call for States, regions and industry to decrease the
rates, using a five -year rolling average and the year
2025 as a baseline. The targets rely on a five -year rolling average to provide
more stability in measuring progress towards their
achievement.
Goal 2 – Targets, from the 2023 –2025 edition, calling
for States to reach an effective implementation (EI)
score of a certain per cent were replaced by targets
addressing specific challenges, based on critical
elements and audit areas. This goal remains unchanged. However, existing targets
were removed to address expressed concerns that
setting high EI scores as targets, within a short time
frame, was ineffective and deterred States with low
EI scores from taking action, knowing they would be
unable to reach the targets. The first new target under
Goal 2 addresses the identified global organizational
challenge relating to the provision of financial resources
to each safety oversight authority to meet national and
international obligation s. The other two new targets
address specific critical elements and audit areas, based
on the analysis of the Universal Safety Oversight Audit
Programme (USOAP) results. Their objective is to focus
States’ attention on specific issues to be addressed,
taking into consideration their limited resources.
Goal 3 – A new Target 3.1 was established for all States
to assess the level of implementation of their State
safety programme (SSP) by 2026. It replaces Target 3.1
from the 2023 –2025 edition (By 2023, all States to
implement the foundation of an SSP). There is limited information on SSP implementation
globally. Therefore, this new target focuses on States’
completion of self -assessments by (end of) 2026 to
determine a baseline on SSP implementation.
Goal 3 – A new Target 3.2 (By 2028, all States to
establish an SSP) replaces Target 3.3 from the
2023 –2025 edition (All States to work towards an
effective SSP), which was removed. Changes to the previous Target 3.3 were made to align
with Annex 19 – Safety Management and the guidance
provided in the Safety Management Manual (Doc 9859)
to promote the effective implementation of the
SSP-related Standards and Recommended Practices
(SARPs), which incorporate the notion of a continuous
improvement of the SSP. The concept of SSP “maturity
(x) Global Aviation Safety Plan
Amendment Rationale
levels” is not referenced in the new Target 3.2, since it is
not addressed in the SARPs of Annex 19 .
Goal 3 – Target 3.2, from the 2023 –2025 edition
(By 2024, all States to publish a national aviation safety
plan (NASP)), was moved under a new Goal 5 and its
timeline extended so that the plan may be revised in line
with the latest edition of the GASP and the
corresponding RASP. A new Goal 5 in the 2026 –2028 edition, on strengthening
aviation safety planning, is meant to consolidate the
existing targets aimed at the publication of NASPs and
regional aviation safety plans (RASPs). This new goal
and its targets are in line with Assembly Resolution A41 -6
and serve as the basis for the development, revision and
implementation of a safety strategy at national and
regional levels, harmonized with the latest edition of the
GASP.
Goal 4, from the 2023 –2025 edition, which focused on
increasing collaboration at the regional level, was
expanded to encompass collaboration at the regional
and national levels to address safety issues (in line with
those identified in the 2026 –2028 edition of the GASP). The targets under this goal are meant to empower the
regions to identify and help individual States to put in
place mechanisms to address safety issues. This should
facilitate the achievement of GASP goals at the regional
and national levels, thus contribu ting to the improvement
of safety globally.
Goal 4 – Target 4.2, from the 2023 –2025 edition
(By 2023, all Regions to publish an updated RASP),
was moved under a new Goal 5 and its timeline
extended so that the plan may be revised in line with
the latest edition of the GASP. A new Goal 5 in the 2026 –2028 edition, on strengthening
aviation safety planning, is meant to consolidate Targets
3.2 and 4.2, from the 2023 –2025 edition, aimed at the
publication of NASPs and RASPs, respectively. This new
goal and its targets are in line with Assembly Resolution
A41-6 and serve as the basis for the development,
revision and implementation of a safety strategy at
national and r egional levels, harmonized with the latest
edition of the GASP.
Goal 5, from the 2023 –2025 edition, which focused on
the expanded use of industry programmes and safety
information sharing networks by service providers, was
maintained, apart from “safety information sharing
networks by service providers”, which was removed.
The goal was renu mbered as a new Goal 6. The text related to “safety information sharing networks
by service providers” was removed to focus this goal
exclusively on expanding the use of industry evaluation
programmes and safety data sharing programmes. Its
target was maintained but modified to f ocus on the use of
these programmes.
Goal 6, from the 2023 –2025 edition, related to the need
for appropriate infrastructure to support safe operations,
was removed. This goal is captured under the Global Air Navigation
Plan (GANP, Doc 9750), which focuses on key aspects,
such as the basic building blocks. Therefore, to avoid
duplication of efforts, it was no longer deemed necessary
in the GASP. The removal of Goal 6 (from the
2023 –2025 edition) and its indicators also addresses
discussions from the Fourteenth Air Navigation
Conference (AN -Conf/14), calling for the removal of
duplicate indicators from the respective Plans, as part of
the longer -term work towards buildi ng a common
performance framework for all Global Plans, which
contains a comprehensive set of indicators.
Summary of amendments (xi)
Amendment Rationale
The five existing G -HRCs remain the same as in the two
previous editions of the GASP. Additionally, three other
global risk categories of occurrences were identified and
referenced in Goal 1 – Target 1.3: abnormal runway
contact (ARC); system/component failure or malfunction
(non-powerplant) (SCF –NP); and turbulence encounter
(TURB). Other global risk categories of occurrences may not
have a high fatality risk, such as the G -HRCs, but figure
prominently in the most frequent types of accidents and
serious incidents across ICAO regions. Therefore, they
are also addressed as part of the targets referenced in
Goal 1 – Target 1.3.
Restructured the GASP chapters into Sections that
follow the RASP template, presented in the Manual on
the Development of Regional and National Aviation
Safety Plans (Doc 10131). Restructuring the GASP ensures that all the key content
is presented at the global level, thus allowing for better
alignment between the global, regional and national
levels.
Updated the “GASP development and review process”,
presented in Section 1. Figure 1 -1. was developed to depict the GASP
development and review process, in response to
proposals from AN -Conf/14, calling for the revision of the
process for Global Plans’ development, to clarify inputs in
the development of the GASP, as well as how t he plan
inputs into the work programme of ICAO.
Updated the “roles and responsibilities”, presented in
Section 1 (previously Chapter 2 in the 2023 –2025
edition of the GASP). The content of Section 1.4 was updated to address
AN- Conf/14 discussions calling for the revision of the
roles and responsibilities of key aviation stakeholders and
ICAO, contained in both the GASP and the GANP, to
align the content and foster collaboration between the
Global Plans and their respective expert groups.
Defined the scope of the GASP in Section 1 and its time
horizon in Section 2. These changes were made in response to proposals from
AN-Conf/14 requesting the definition of the respective
scopes and time horizons in each Global Plan.
Chapter 6 (related to the RASP and NASP) of the
2023 –2025 edition of the GASP was deleted and its
content transferred and expanded in the third edition of
Doc 10131. To maintain the GASP as a high -level document focused
on strategy and avoid any duplication, the content related
to NASP and RASP development was migrated to a
standalone document.
______________________
(xiii) CONTENTS
Page
Glossary ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... xv
Abbreviations and acronyms ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... xvii
Section 1. Introduction to the global aviation safety plan ................................ ................................ ........ 1-1
1.1 Overview of the global aviation safety plan ................................ ................................ .................... 1-1
1.2 Structure of the global aviation safety plan ................................ ................................ ..................... 1-2
1.3 Global aviation safety plan development and review process ................................ ........................ 1-2
1.4 Roles and responsibilities in aviation safety planning ................................ ................................ ..... 1-4
Section 2. Purpose of the global aviation safety plan ................................ ................................ ............... 2-1
2.1 Global strategic direction for the management of aviation safety ................................ ................... 2-1
2.2 Relationship with regional and national aviation safety plans ................................ ......................... 2-1
2.3 Initiatives to support the improvement of aviation safety ................................ ................................ 2-2
2.4 Other plans considered in the development of the global aviation safety plan ............................... 2-3
Section 3. Global operational safety risks ................................ ................................ ................................ . 3-1
3.1 General ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 3-1
3.2 Summary of accidents and serious incidents at the global level ................................ ..................... 3-1
3.3 Global high -risk categories of occurrences ................................ ................................ ..................... 3-2
3.4 Other global risk categories of occurrences ................................ ................................ ................... 3-2
3.5 Contributing factors ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 3-3
Section 4. Global organizational challenges ................................ ................................ .............................. 4-1
4.1 General ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 4-1
4.2 Summary of effective safety oversight capabilities at the global level ................................ ............ 4-2
4.3 Global organizational challenges ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 4-4
Section 5. The global strategic direction for the management of aviation safety ................................ .. 5-1
5.1 General ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 5-1
5.2 Global aviation safety plan goals, targets and indicators ................................ ................................ 5-1
5.3 Adapting the global aviation safety plan goals, targets and indicators
to the regional aviation safety plan and national aviation safety plan ................................ ............. 5-9
5.4 Adapting the safety enhancement initiatives to the regional aviation safety plan
and national aviation safety plan ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 5-10
5.5 Emerging issues and safety risks ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 5-10
(xiv) Global Aviation Safety Plan
Page
Section 6. Monitoring implementation ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 6-1
6.1 International Civil Aviation Organization process to monitor implementation
and measure safety performance ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 6-1
6.2 Process to revise global aviation safety plan content ................................ ................................ ..... 6-1
6.3 Standardized approach to provide information at the global level ................................ .................. 6-1
______________________
(xv) GLOSSARY
Audit. A systematic, independent and documented process for obtaining evidence and evaluating it objectively to
determine the extent to which requirements and audit criteria are fulfilled.
Critical elements (CEs). The critical elements of a safety oversight system encompass the whole spectrum of civil aviation
activities. They are the building blocks upon which an effective safety oversight system is based. The level of effective
implementation of the CEs is an ind ication of a State’s capability for safety oversight.
Effective implementation (EI). A measure of the State’s safety oversight capability, calculated for each critical element,
each audit area or as an overall measure. The EI is expressed as a percentage.
Hazard. A condition or an object with the potential to cause or contribute to an aircraft incident or accident.
Safety data. A defined set of facts or values collected for reference, processing or analysis which could be used to maintain
or improve safety.
Safety enhancement initiative (SEI). One or more actions to eliminate or mitigate operational safety risks or to address
organizational challenges.
Safety information. Safety data processed, organized or analysed in a given context to support safety management and
the development of safety intelligence.
Safety oversight. A function performed by a State to ensure that individuals and organizations performing an aviation
activity comply with safety -related national laws and regulations.
Safety performance. A State or a service provider’s measurable effect on safety achievement.
Safety risk. The predicted probability and severity of the consequences or outcomes of a hazard.
State safety programme (SSP). An integrated set of laws, regulations, policies, objectives, processes, procedures and
activities aimed at managing safety, at the State level.
______________________
(xvii) ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
AA Audit area
ACI Airports Council International
AI Artificial Intelligence
ANC Air Navigation Commission
ARC Abnormal runway contact
ATS Air traffic service
BARS Basic aviation risk standard
CANSO Civil Air Navigation Services Organisation
CAST Commercial Aviation Safety Team
CE Critical element
CFIT Controlled flight into terrain
CICTT CAST/ICAO Common Taxonomy Team
CMA Continuous monitoring approach
COSCAP Cooperative Development of Operational Safety and Continuing Airworthiness Programme
EI Effective implementation
EUROCONTROL European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
FSF Flight Safety Foundation
GANP Global Air Navigation Plan
GASP Global Aviation Safety Plan
GASeP Global Aviation Security Plan
GASP -SG Global Aviation Safety Plan Study Group
G-HRC Global high -risk category of occurrence
GNSS Global navigation satellite system
IATA International Air Transport Association
IBAC International Business Aviation Council
IOSA IATA Operational Safety Audit
ISAGO IATA Safety Audit for Ground Operations
IS-BAH IBAC International Standard for Business Aircraft Handling
IS-BAO IBAC International Standard for Business Aircraft Operations
iSTARS Integrated Safety Trend Analysis and Reporting System
LOC-I Loss of control in -flight
MAC Mid-air collision
NASP National aviation safety plan
N-HRC National high -risk category of occurrence
OLF Online framework
PQ Protocol Question
PANS Procedures for Air Navigation Services
RAIO Regional Accident and Incident Investigation Organization
RASG Regional Aviation Safety Group
RASP Regional aviation safety plan
RE Runway excursion
RFI Radio frequency interference
R-HRC Regional high -risk category of occurrence
RI Runway incursion
RSOO Regional Safety Oversight Organization
SARPs Standards and Recommended Practices
(xviii) Global Aviation Safety Plan
SCF–NP System/component failure or malfunction (non -powerplant)
SDCPS Safety data collection and processing system
SEI Safety enhancement initiative
SMS Safety management system
SOP Standard operating procedure
SSP State safety programme
SUPPS Regional Supplementary Procedures
TURB Turbulence encounter
USOAP Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme
______________________
1-1 Section 1
INTRODUCTION TO THE GLOBAL AVIATION SAFETY PLAN
1.1 OVERVIEW OF THE GLOBAL AVIATION SAFETY PLAN
1.1.1 The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) is committed to enhancing aviation safety, to the
resourcing of supporting activities and to increasing collaboration at the global level. The Global Aviation Safety Plan
(GASP) presents the global strategy for the continuous improvement of aviation safety. The GASP aims to continually
reduce fatalities, and the risk of fatalities, through the development and implementation of a global aviation safety strateg y.
A safe, resilient and sustainable avia tion system contributes to the economic development of States across all regions
and their industries. The GASP serves as the master planning document, upon which the regional aviation safety plan s
(RASP s) and national aviation safety plan s (NASP s), respectively , are developed and implemented. It provides a
collaborative framework for States and regions to manage operational safety risks and organizational challenges, through
their respective NASPs and RASPs, together with industry.
1.1.2 The GASP contains a vision which states the intent behind this plan. It also includes a mission statement,
which reflects what ICAO seeks to achieve through the GASP. A set of values are presented in the plan, in the form of
value statements, which s erve as guiding principles for regional and national aviation safety planning and enable the
GASP to meet its purpose.
Vision: Zero fatalities in commercial operations by 2030 and beyond.
Mission: To continually enhance global aviation safety performance and resilience by providing a collaborative
framework for States, regions and industry.
Values : GASP strives to enhance global civil aviation safety by:
a) promoting a positive safety culture;
b) recognizing and promoting the aviation sector’s responsibility for the safety of the public;
c) encouraging collaboration, teamwork and shared learning in the management of safety;
d) protecting safety data and safety information;
e) promoting the sharing and exchange of safety information;
f) taking data -driven decisions;
g) prioritizing actions to address operational safety risks and organizational challenges through a
risk-based approach;
h) allocating resources to identify and analyse hazards and safety deficiencies, and address their
consequences or outcomes through a risk -based approach; and
i) proactively managing emerging issues.
1-2 Global Aviation Safety Plan
1.1.3 The scope of the GASP encompasses the whole spectrum of civil aviation activities, as per the eight critical
elements (CEs), which serve as the building blocks of an effective and sustainable State safety oversight system. It also
encompasses the civil avi ation areas, addressed through the audit areas (AAs) covered in the Universal Safety Oversight
Audit Programme Continuous Monitoring Approach (USOAP CMA) and a safety management approach (in line with
Annex 19 – Safety Management ).
Note. — With regards to operational safety risks, the GASP is currently limited to commercial operations
involving aeroplanes, due to data availability. When sufficient, verified data becomes available at the global level,
commercial helicopter operations, general aviation and other types of operations (such as remotely piloted aircraft systems
and electric vertical take -off and landing aircraft) may be considered for future editions of the GASP.
1.2 STRUCTURE OF THE GLOBAL AVIATION SAFETY PLAN
This GASP comprises six sections. In addition to the introduction, sections include: the purpose of the GASP; the global
operational safety risks identified in the plan; the global organizational challenges identified in the plan, the global stra tegic
direction for the management of aviation safety; and a description of how the progress made toward s the achievement of
the GASP goals is going to be monitored.
1.3 GLOBAL AVIATION SAFETY PLAN DEVELOPMENT AND REVIEW PROCESS
1.3.1 ICAO is responsible for developing, supporting implementation and monitoring the GASP. Figure 1 -1
presents a description of the GASP development and review process. The process mirrors the NASP development process,
presented in the Manual on the Development of Regional and National Aviation Safety Plans (Doc 10131). A similar
process is used for the Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP, Doc 9750). The GASP is reviewed and updated prior to each
session of the ICAO Assembly, every three years. The GASP is d eveloped and revised through the efforts of the GASP
Study Group (GASP -SG), a joint regulatory -industry expert group established by ICAO to ensure that the plan and its
content reflect the needs of the aviation community at the global, regional and nationa l levels. This work is done in
alignment with the revision of the GANP.
1.3.2 The GASP -SG initiates the revision of the GASP, taking into consideration the previous edition of the plan,
as well as safety data and information from several sources. Inputs in this process include: accident and incident data;
safety issues identif ied in the RASPs; ICAO documents (such as the GANP, the Global Aviation Security
Plan (GASeP, Doc 10118) and the Long -term global aspirational goal (LTAG) for international aviation); tools (such as
the USOAP CMA online framework (OLF)); and work of other ICAO expert groups (such as the Safety Management Panel
and the Occurrence Validation Study Group).
1.3.3 The GASP -SG then conducts a global evaluation, using all these inputs and develops a proposed list of
global safety issues, based on the results of the global evaluation, which help it identify common hazards and safety
deficiencies at the global lev el. The global safety issues are presented in a list under the form of organizational challenges
and operational safety risks, including global high -risk categories of occurrences (G -HRCs). The GASP -SG uses two tools
that it developed to guide the analysis of existing data sources in a transparent and repeatable manner: the Standardized
Framework for the Identification of Organizational (ORG) Challenges ; and the Standardized Framework for the
Identification of High -risk Categories of Occurrences (HRCs) , which are contained in the third edition of Doc 10131. The
GASP -SG then drafts GASP goals, targets and indicators, for the revised edition of the plan, based on the list of global
safety issues. To do so, the study group uses two tools that guide the drafting process: the Standardized Framework for
the Development of Goals, Targets and Indicators (GTI) in Aviation Safety Plans ; and the Decision Aid for Existing Goals
and Targets , which are contained in Doc 10131 and in the Manual on Monitoring Implementation of Regional and National
Aviation Safety Plans (Doc 10162), second edition , respectively. As part of the drafting process, the GASP -SG also
analyses the status of the GASP targets for the current edition of the plan and the progress in achieving them. The l ist of
global safety issues and the GASP goals, targets and indicators form the basis for the global safety strategy.
Section 1. Introduction to the global aviation safety plan 1-3
1.3.4 The Air Navigation Commission (ANC) conducts a preliminary review of the proposals from the GASP -SG,
as part of its work programme and consults with States and international organizations on proposed amendments. The
consultation process is conducted through an Air Navigation Conference, a High -level Safety Conference, or similar
divisional -type meeting or high -level event , or alternatively via the State Letter process. The GASP -SG reviews the
feedback received via the consultation process and amends t he list of global safety issues and/or the draft GASP goals,
targets and indicators, as needed. It then proceeds to finalise the draft of the GASP document and develops an action
plan to support implementation. This includes the development and revision of guidance material and tools. At this stage
of the process, the GASP -SG may recommend to the Secretariat the development or amendment of ICAO provisions
(such as Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs)) to facilitate the development and implementation of RASPs
and NASPs or their safety enhancement initiatives (SEIs). This may require coordination with other expert groups, such
as Panels.
1.3.5 Once the draft GASP document is completed, the ANC conducts a final review of the plan, provides its inputs
then reports to the Council of ICAO on the proposed amendments to the content of the GASP . The GASP is under the
authority of the Council of ICAO to ensure consistency among the GASP, the other ICAO Global Plans and the ICAO
Strategic Goals. The Council approves the GASP. After approval by the Council, the GASP is presented to the following
session of the ICAO Assembly for endorsement. Following endorsement by the Assembly, the next edition of the GASP
is published, accompanied by all the supporting guidance material to facilitate implementation – these constitute the
outputs of the process.
Figure 1 -1. GASP development and review process
RASP
- (R HRCs, ORG Challenges,
Emerging Issues)ICAO EventICAO Expert Groups,
Documents & ToolsGASP QuestionnaireAccident &
Incident Data
Global evaluationIdentification of
global safety
issues Drafting of
proposed global
safety strategyANC preliminary
review
Post consultation -
review Finalization of
draft GASPANC final review Council approvalInitiation of GASP
revision
(GASP edition “n”)Consultation
process
Assembly
endorsement
Publication of
GASP edition
“n+1” Roadmap & other
supporting
guidanceINPUTS
ACTIONS
OUTPUTS
1-4 Global Aviation Safety Plan
1.4 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES IN AVIATION SAFETY PLANNING
1.4.1 Introduction
This section provides an overview of the roles and responsibilities of key aviation stakeholders in aviation safety planning
and particularly in the context of the GASP. Key aviation stakeholders include, but are not limited to, ICAO, States,
Regional Aviation Safety Groups (RASGs )1, Regional Safety Oversight Organizations (RSOOs), Regional Accident and
Incident Investigation Organizations (RAIOs), Cooperative Development of Operational Safety and Continuing
Airworthiness Programmes (COSCAPs), as well as traditional and emerging indu stries. All aviation stakeholders need to
be involved in the effort to continually improve safety. The GASP provides a strategy for the continuous improvement of
aviation safety at the global level. States and regions are responsible for the development of NASPs and RASPs, in line
with that strategy, in consultation with industry.
1.4.2 International Civil Aviation Organization
ICAO plays a role in supporting and monitoring the achievement of the GASP goals at the global, regional and national
levels. The role and responsibilities of ICAO in aviation safety planning include the following:
a) develop the global strategy to enhance safety, through a comprehensive process, in alignment with
other ICAO Global Plans (refer to Figure 1 -1);
b) develop provisions, guidance material and tools to assist regions and States in the development and
implementation of RASPs and NASPs, respectively;
c) provide capacity -building to States, to support NASP development and implementation;
d) provide data and tools to monitor the GASP goals and targets; and
e) maintain the global safety strategy’s relevance, by identifying new hazards and safety deficiencies,
amending the Organization’s work programme, and revising the GASP.
1.4.3 States
The role and responsibilities of States in aviation safety planning include the following:
a) develop and implement a NASP, taking into consideration the corresponding RASP and the GASP
(and other national plans within the State);
b) coordinate and track the implementation of national SEIs;
c) monitor the achievement of the national safety goals, consistent with those in the GASP and the
corresponding RASP;
d) share relevant safety information with the RASG and ICAO (including national safety issues and the
status of national safety goals and targets); and
e) actively participate in, and support the work of, the RASG, by providing technical expertise and ensuring
that adequate resources are available.
1. A RASG may also be referred to as an Aviation System Planning Group or an Aviation System Planning and Implementation Group,
depending on the region, when combined with a Planning and Implementation Regional Group .
Section 1. Introduction to the global aviation safety plan 1-5
1.4.4 Regions
In the context of the GASP, the term “region” refers to a group of States and/or entities working together to enhance safety
within a geographic area. At the regional level, RASGs are the main drivers of the aviation safety strategy and the related
plannin g process. They are composed of States, regional entities and industry, among others. They serve as regional
cooperative fora integrating global, regional, national and industry efforts in continuing to enhance aviation safety
worldwide. RASGs eliminate du plication of effort through the establishment of cooperative regional safety programmes.
This coordinated approach significantly reduces both financial and human resource burdens on States and allows for the
delivery of measurable safety improvements. The role and responsibilities of the RASG in aviation safety planning include
the following:
a) structure its work in line with the GASP to address regional operational safety risks, organizational
challenges, emerging issues and safety performance measurement;
b) develop and support the implementation of a RASP, taking into consideration the GASP (and any other
pertinent regional or sub -regional plans);
c) coordinate and track the implementation of regional SEIs;
d) support, monitor and report on the achievement of the regional safety goals, consistent with those in the
GASP;
e) coordinate all activities undertaken to address regional safety issues with RSOOs, RAIOs and
COSCAPs, ensuring harmonization to the extent practicable; and
f) provide capacity -building to States, to support NASP development and implementation.
1.4.5 Industry
In the context of the GASP, the term “industry” refers to service providers, such as: aircraft operators; approved
maintenance organizations; organizations responsible for the type design or manufacture of aircraft, engines or propellers;
approved training organizations; air traffic services (ATS) providers; and operators of aerodromes, as well as international
organizations and other entities that form part of the aviation industry, as appropriate. The role and responsibilities of
industry in aviation safe ty planning include the following:
a) actively support the achievement of the GASP goals, by being involved in the development of RASPs
and NASPs;
b) assist in the implementation of SEIs that support RASPs and NASPs, through specific action plans;
c) provide safety information to States, RASGs and ICAO (including on operational safety risks) that may
benefit the development and revision of aviation safety plans;
d) actively participate in, and contribute to, the RASGs to enhance safety in a coordinated manner; and
e) provide guidance material and training within industry (primarily via regional and international
organizations) to address safety issues.
______________________
2-1 Section 2
PURPOSE OF THE GLOBAL AVIATION SAFETY PLAN
2.1 GLOBAL STRATEGIC DIRECTION FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF AVIATION SAFETY
2.1.1 The global aviation safety plan (GASP ) is the master planning document containing the strategic direction,
at the global level, for the management of aviation safety for a period of three years (2026 to 2028). This plan lists global
safety issues and sets global safety goals and targets (commo nly referred to as GASP goals and targets). The GASP is
complemented by a series of SEIs to achieve those goals, contained in the Global Aviation Safety Roadmap (Doc 10161).
2.1.2 The mandate of the GASP stems from an Assembly Resolution. In Resolution A41 -6: ICAO Global planning
for safety and air navigation , the Assembly recognized the importance of a global framework to support the ICAO Strategic
Goal for safety (“ensure every flight is safe and secure”). In addition, the Assembly resolved that the GASP shall provide
the framework in which regional and national aviation safety plans wil l be developed and implemented, thus ensuring
consistency, harmonization and coordination of efforts aimed at improving international civil aviation safety.
2.1.3 The purpose of the GASP is to continually reduce fatalities, and the risk of fatalities, associated with
accidents by guiding the harmonized development and implementation of regional and national aviation safety plans.
States, regions and industry f acilitate the implementation of the strategy presented in the GASP through RASPs and
NASPs. The GASP seeks to assist States, regions and industry in their respective aviation safety planning by:
a) establishing a global safety strategy, including goals, targets and indicators;
b) providing a framework for the development and implementation of RASPs and NASPs;
c) providing guidance for the development of action plans to support the implementation of RASPs and
NASPs, through the use of the global aviation safety roadmap (refer to Doc 10161); and
d) providing a methodology to guide the identification of operational safety risks, organizational challenges
and the development of safety goals, targets and indicators in aviation safety plans, through the use of
standardized frameworks (refer to Doc 101 31).
2.2 RELATIONSHIP WITH REGIONAL AND NATIONAL AVIATION SAFETY PLANS
2.2.1 The GASP establishes a global strategy for improving aviation safety. It presents global goals and targets.
As the GASP presents a global perspective, its content needs to be adapted to meet regional needs. To do so, each region
should produce a RASP . The RASP presents the strategic direction for the management of aviation safety at the regional
level (or “for a region”) for a set period. It outlines to all stakeholders where the different regional entities involved in the
management of aviation safet y should target resources over the coming years. The RASP should be developed in line
with the GASP goals and targets. However, it should be based on the region’s own risk assessment and address the
region’s specific operational safety risks and organizati onal challenges.
2-2 Global Aviation Safety Plan
2.2.2 The content of the GASP and the RASP need to be adapted to meet national needs. To do so, each State
should produce a NASP. The NASP presents the strategic direction for the management of aviation safety at the national
level, for a set period. It pr esents national operational safety risks (including national HRCs or N -HRCs), national
organizational challenges, the national safety goals and targets, as well as SEIs with specific actions to address the issues
(that is, an action plan). The State should use both the GASP and the RASP to develop its NASP. Although the State
should consult the latest edition of the GASP and RASP, it should not solely refer to the GASP and/or RASP when
developing its NASP. It is valuable to identify the State’s operational safety risks and organizational challenges, using
existing processes and information (for example, safety risk assessments). The GASP includes targets for all States
(in some cases, their industry), to enhance safety nationally and contribute to the impro vement of aviation safety at the
global level. The RASP presents regional HRCs (R -HRCs) and regional organizational challenges, as well as regional
safety goals and targets, some of which are additional to the ones listed in the GASP. Some of the SEIs in t he RASP may
not apply directly to a State, as they may be addressed to the RASG or to another regional entity. However, some targets
or SEIs in the RASP may be applicable to individual States in that region. In such cases, the regional safety target(s) or
specific SEI(s) should be included in the State’s NASP, in addition to relevant information from the GASP. Figure 2 -1
illustrates the relationship between the GASP, the RASP and the NASP.
Figure 2 -1. Relationship between the GASP, the RASP and the NASP
2.3 INITIATIVES TO SUPPORT THE IMPROVEMENT OF AVIATION SAFETY
2.3.1 Two key elements need to be included in aviation safety planning:
a) a strategy: what is to be achieved by a plan ? This includes the analysis of safety issues, the definition
of goals and targets, and how to measure their achievement; and
b) an action plan: how will the goals and targets defined in the strategy be achieved ? This includes
initiatives needed to achieve the goals and targets (referred to as SEIs).
Plan Elements
Global Safety Issues
GASP Regional Safety Issues
GASP RASP National Safety IssuesGASP
RASP
NASP
Section 2. Purpose of the global aviation safety plan 2-3
2.3.2 The GASP contains the global safety strategy. The global aviation safety roadmap (presented in Doc 10161)
serves as an action plan to assist the aviation community in developing RASPs and NASPs, in line with the GASP goals
and targets, through a structured, common frame of reference for all relevant stakeholders. It defines how the goals and
targets out lined in the strategy may be achieved. To do so, the global aviation safety roadmap outlines specific SEIs
associated with the GASP goals and targets. Each SEI includes a set of actions that stakeholders may use to develop and
implement specific action plans. States and regions, in collaboration with industry, should use the roadmap to feed or
complement national and regional safety management activities , and develop specific SEIs to support the strategy
presented in their NASPs and RASPs, respectively. Figure 2 -2 illustrates the relationship between the GASP and the
roadmap, in the context of aviation safety planning.
Aviation Safety Planning
Strategy Action Plan
Global Aviation Safety Plan
(Doc 10004) Global Aviation Safety Roadmap
(Doc 10161)
Figure 2 -2. Relationship between the GASP and the roadmap
2.3.3 In addition to the global aviation safety roadmap, ICAO developed an updated suite of guidance material
and tools related to the GASP, to support the improvement of aviation safety. They focus on the development and
implementation of a NASP (with the same processes applying to a RASP, at the regional level). The guidance material
and tools assist States to advance through the NASP development process. Electronic tools enable the identification of
safety issues, as well as monitoring and reporting to measure safety performance. They are designed to monitor the
implementation of the NASP and assess its actual effectiveness in terms of improving safety at the national level.
Figure 2-3 illustrates the suite of guidance material and tools that complement the GASP and support the development
and implementation of NASPs and RASPs.
2.3.4 More information on GASP -related guidance material and tools can be found on the ICAO website at
www.icao.int/gasp .
2.4 OTHER PLANS CONSIDERED IN THE DEVELOPMENT
OF THE GLOBAL AVIATION SAFETY PLAN
2.4.1 Other plans were considered in the development of the GASP, including the following: the GANP, the GASeP
and the latest RASPs (refer to www.icao.int/rasp ).
2.4.2 The GANP is an important planning tool for setting global priorities to drive the evolution of the global air
navigation system and ensure that the vision of an integrated, harmonized, globally interoperable and seamless system
becomes a reality. The GASP and GANP are complementary in nature, and the GANP was considered during the revision
of the GASP, to enhance the alignment between both plans and avoid duplication of efforts.
2.4.3 The GASeP provides a framework to guide the work of all stakeholders in enhancing aviation security.
It provides shared focus and direction for the global aviation security community through its aspirational goal, milestones
and Global Priority Areas of focus. The GASP goals and targets support the GASeP by providing best practices and
models that can be as effective in managing security as they are in safety management. These include effective oversight,
organizational culture, risk management and a ssurance processes.
2-4 Global Aviation Safety Plan
2.4.4 The RASPs present the strategic direction for the management of aviation safety at the regional level.
Common operational safety risks and organizational challenges, predominant across several regions, were considered for
potential inclusion at the g lobal level in the GASP.
Figure 2 -3. GASP -related guidance material and tools
______________________
Review
Results
Monitoring &
Reporting
Implementation
Support
NASP
Development*Status of Goals &Targets
GASP Dashboard
()www.icao.int/gasp
Reporting
Secure Portal on Operational
Safety Risks and
Emerging issues
()http://portal/icao.intMonitoring Goals & Targets
GASP Dashboard
()www.icao.int/gasp
Information Sharing
& Exchange
NASP Online Community
()http://portal.icao.intDirect Implementation
Support
NASP iPacks
()www.icao.int/ipackInformation Centre for
all GASP/RASP/NASP
GASP public website
()www.icao.int/gaspOnline Training
NASP Online Courses
()www.icao.int/training
Safety Strategy
Global Aviation Safety Plan
(Doc 10004)Indicator Development
Manual on Monitoring
Implementation of Regional
and National Aviation
Safety Plans
(Doc 10162)Content of RASP
& NASP
Manual on the Development
of Regional and National
Aviation Safety Plans
(Doc 10131)
*Cycle starts with NASP Development
3-1 Section 3
GLOBAL OPERATIONAL SAFETY RISKS
3.1 GENERAL
3.1.1 The vision of the global aviation safety plan (GASP ) is to achieve and maintain zero fatalities in commercial
operations by 2030 and beyond. To support this vision, operational safety risks need to be identified and addressed.
Operational safety risks are those which arise during aviation activities (for ex ample, the operation of an aircraft or an
airport, or the provision of air traffic services). The process of identifying and addressing operational safety risks includ es
identifying hazards, safety deficiencies and related safety issues, analysing the interactions between people and
technology, as well as the operational context in which aviation activities are carried out.
3.1.2 As there is a multitude of operational safety risks across the aviation system, and limited resources to
address them, it is critical to adopt a mechanism to prioritize where efforts should be allocated. To help States, regions
and industry prioritiz e and focus actions to address operational safety risks, ICAO conducted an analysis to identify the
highest priority occurrence categories, referred to as global high -risk categories of occurrences (G -HRCs) which have
historically resulted in the highest u nsafe outcomes across the world; as well as other global risk categories of occurrences
that are trending up – therefore, stakeholders should monitor them and take action, as appropriate. States, regions and
industry should identify and address operational safety risks that contribute to G -HRCs and other global risk categories.
3.2 SUMMARY OF ACCIDENTS AND SERIOUS INCIDENTS AT THE GLOBAL LEVEL
3.2.1 The summary of accidents that occurred worldwide, and by ICAO region, is shown in the Annual Safety
Report, which is available on the Organization’s website at: www.icao.int/safety/Pages/Safety -Report.aspx . ICAO’s global
accident rate provides an overall indicator of safety performance for air transport operations. The accident rate is based
on scheduled commercial operations involving fixed -wing aircraft with a certified maximum take -off weight (MTOW) over
5 700 kg. In addition, ICAO validates and categorizes accidents for scheduled and non -scheduled commercial operations
involving aircraft with a certified MTOW over 5 700 kg using the Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST)/ICAO Common
Taxonomy Team (CICTT) taxonomy for occurrence categories. The CICTT taxonomy is found on the ICAO website at
https://www.icao.int/safety/airnavigation/AIG/Pages/Taxonomy.aspx .
3.2.2 To identify the G -HRCs and other global risk categories of occurrences, ICAO conducted an analysis of its
safety data and information using the Accident/Incident Data Reporting (ADREP) system, as well as those from
international organizations (mainly the Flight Safety Foundation (FSF) and the International Air Transport Association
(IATA) ). The analysis was guided by the criteria defined in the Standardized Framework for the Identification of HRCs
(refer to Doc 10131). These criteria include, but are not limited to:
a) number of fatalities;
b) fatality risk by accident or serious incident occurrence categories (as per CICTT);
c) number of accidents or serious incidents by occurrence categories (as per CICTT);
d) breakdown by ICAO Region (based on a minimum of five -year data set); and
3-2 Global Aviation Safety Plan
e) occurrence categories appearing in several RASPs (R -HRCs).
3.2.3 The main findings from the analysis included the following:
a) the five G -HRCs identified for the 2023 –2025 edition of the GASP remain unchanged for this edition of
the GASP (refer to 3.3);
b) there is a need to address other global risk categories of occurrences. These occurrences may not have
a high fatality risk, to be classified as G -HRCs, but they figure prominently in the most frequent types of
accidents and serious incidents across ICA O regions (refer to 3.4); and
c) the G -HRCs and occurrence categories identified for aircraft with a certified MTOW over 5 700 kg
involved in accidents and serious incidents were similar regardless of the type of aircraft (in other words,
turboprop aircraft, turbojet aircraft or turbof an aircraft).
3.3 GLOBAL HIGH -RISK CATEGORIES OF OCCURRENCES
Based on results from the analysis of safety data and information, the following G -HRCs were identified for the
2026 –2028 edition of the GASP. They are considered of the utmost priority, in the international context, considering the
criteria described in 3.2.2. The G -HRCs for 2026 –2028 are as follows:
a) controlled flight into terrain (CFIT);
b) loss of control in -flight (LOC -I);
c) mid-air collision (MAC);
d) runway excursion (RE); and
e) runway incursion (RI).
3.4 OTHER GLOBAL RISK CATEGORIES OF OCCURRENCES
In addition to the G -HRCs listed above, the following were identified as other global risk categories of occurrences (as per
CICTT) for the 2026 –2028 edition of the GASP. These may not have a high fatality risk, such as the G -HRCs, but figure
prominently in the most frequent types of accidents and serious incidents across ICAO regions. The other global risk
categories of occurrences for 2026 –2028 are as follows:
a) abnormal runway contact (ARC);
b) system/component failure or malfunction (non -powerplant) (SCF –NP); and
c) turbulence encounter (TURB).
Section 3. Global operational safety risks 3-3
3.5 CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
The G -HRCs represent unsafe outcomes that are “end states”, which need to be avoided to prevent fatalities. Therefore,
efforts by States, regions and industry should focus on addressing pre -cursors and contributing factors to these G -HRCs,
to avoid acciden ts and serious incidents. To assist, ICAO identified examples of contributing factors leading to the five
G-HRCs. Some examples are presented in Table 3 -1. For a more comprehensive list, consult the Global Aviation Safety
Roadmap (Doc 10161).
Table 3 -1. Examples of contributing factors associated with G -HRCs
G-HRC Examples of contributing factors1
CFIT – Flight in adverse environmental conditions
– Inaccurate approach design and inadequate documentation (for approaches with vertical
guidance (APV) or localizer performance with vertical guidance (LPV))
– Phraseology used (standard versus non -standard)
– Pilot fatigue, sensory illusion and loss of situational awareness
– Global navigation satellite system (GNSS) radio frequency interference (RFI)
LOC-I – Distraction
– Adverse weather
– Complacency
– Inadequate standard operating procedures (SOPs) for effective flight management
– Insufficient height above terrain for recovery
– Automation dependency leading to degraded pilot proficiency in manual flying, lack of
awareness or competence in procedures for recovery from unusual aircraft attitudes
– Startle effect, inappropriate flight control inputs in response to sudden awareness of an
abnormal aircraft state (such as bank angle, angle of attack or stall)
– GNSS RFI
MAC – Traffic conditions: considerations include traffic density, complexity and the mixture of aircraft
types and capabilities
– Air traffic control (ATC) performance: factors such as workload, competence, teamwork and
adherence to procedures. Additionally, the influence of the air navigation services provider’s
(ANSP) safety management system (SMS)
– Flight crew training and organizational (corporate) culture: aspects such as workload
management, competence, teamwork, adherence to procedures and the impact of the
operator’s SMS
– ATC systems: elements such as flight data processing, communication systems, short -term
conflict alert (STCA) systems, as well as the interaction between the human operators and the
aircraft systems and the procurement policies of ANSPs
– Aircraft equipment: considerations include autopilot systems, transponders and airborne collision
avoidance system (ACAS), as well as aircraft performance characteristics (such as rate -of-climb)
and their physical dimension
– Surveillance systems: coverage and quality of surveillance technologies used to monitor aircraft
positions and movements
– Flight plan processing: the efficiency and reliability of processes related to flight plan
submission, approval and distribution
1. This list is not exhaustive and is presented in no particular order .
3-4 Global Aviation Safety Plan
G-HRC Examples of contributing factors1
– Airspace design: the complexity of airspace structure, route layouts and the extent of controlled
or uncontrolled airspace and proximity of military operational or training areas
– Flight in adverse environmental conditions that may influence conflict management and collision
avoidance
– GNSS RFI
RE – Ineffective SOPs
– Lack of adherence to SOPs
– Long/floated/bounced/firm/off -centre/crabbed landing
– Unstabilized approach
– Inadequate reporting of runway surface conditions
– Inadequate approach procedures design
– Inadequate regulatory oversight
RI – Operations in low visibility conditions
– Complex or inadequate aerodrome design, equipment and signage
– Diversity and complexity of traffic (such as multiple simultaneous line -ups)
– Conditional clearances
– Simultaneous use of intersecting runways
– Late issue of or late changes to departure clearances
– Unintentional deviations from ATC clearances by flight and ground crew
– Phraseology use (such as non -standard versus standard; call -sign confusion)
– Concurrent use of more than one language for ATC communications
– English language proficiency
– Inadequate manoeuvring area driver training and assessment programme
______________________
4-1 Section 4
GLOBAL ORGANIZATIONAL CHALLENGES
4.1 GENERAL
4.1.1 In addition to the global operational safety risks listed in the global aviation safety plan ( GASP ),
ICAO identified global organizational challenges. Organizational challenges are systemic issues, which take into
consideration the impact of organizational aspects (such as organizational culture; policies and procedures; employee
selection and training; a nd allocation of resources) on a State’s safety oversight and safety management capabilities. In
the context of the GASP , an “organization” primaril y refers to a State’s aviation -related entities, such as the Civil Aviation
Authority and the Accident Investigation Authority. However, in the regional or national context, organizations may also
include service providers, such as aircraft operators, ATS providers, approved aviation training organizations, approved
maintenance organizations and operators of aerodromes.
4.1.2 Organizational challenges need to be identified and addressed, to improve a State’s safety oversight and
safety management capabilities, and ultimately enhance safety overall. ICAO defines eight CEs of a safety oversight
system. These CEs encompass t he whole spectrum of civil aviation activities. They are the building blocks upon which an
effective safety oversight system is based. The eight CEs are presented in Figure 4 -1.
Figure 4 -1. Critical elements of a State’s safety oversight system
CE-6
Licensing,
certification,
authorization
and/or approval
obligationsCE-2
Specific
operating
regulationsCE-1
Primary
aviation
legislation
CE-3
State system
and functions
CE-4
Qualified
technical
personnelCE-5
Technical
guidance, tools
and the provision
of safety-critical
information
CE-8
Resolution
of safety
issuesESTABLISH
IMPLEMENT
CE-7
Surveillance
obligations
4-2 Global Aviation Safety Plan
4.1.3 In addition, ICAO defines audit areas ( AAs), which refer to civil aviation areas covered in the USOAP CMA
audits and validations. These AAs are defined in the Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme Continuous Monitoring
Manual (Doc 9735).
4.1.4 Through USOAP CMA, ICAO measures a State’s safety oversight capability, calculated for each CE, each
AA or as an overall measure. This measure is referred to as the “effective implementation” or “EI”. The EI is expressed as
a percentage; it is an ind icator of a State’s capability for safety oversight. The primary tool used in USOAP to assess the
level of effective implementation of a State’s safety oversight system is referred to as Protocol Questions (PQs). In addition,
Priority Protocol Questions (P PQs) are a subset of PQs that, if found not satisfactory, may indicate a lack of capability by
a State to identify and/or resolve operational safety and fundamental accident investigation deficiencies effectively, and
consequently, its inability to conduct safety oversight or a proper accident investigation. The list of PQs can be found on
the USOAP CMA online framework ( OLF) at www.icao.int/safety/CMAForum/Pages/default.aspx .
4.1.5 Deficiencies related to certain CEs and AAs are common to most States across all regions. These are
considered a top concern and are identified as global safety issues in the GASP because of their impact on the ability of
States to fulfil their safet y oversight responsibilities, which ultimately impacts aviation safety at the global level.
4.2 SUMMARY OF EFFECTIVE SAFETY OVERSIGHT CAPABILITIES AT THE GLOBAL LEVEL
4.2.1 To identify systemic issues, considered to be global organizational challenges, ICAO conducted an analysis,
guided by the criteria defined in the Standardized Framework for the Identification of ORG Challenges (refer to Doc 10131).
These criteria include, but are not limited to, aggregated status of States’ safety oversight systems and capabilities at the
global level; consideration of regional organizational challenges in setting global ones; and State safety programme (SSP)
implementation and mainte nance.
4.2.2 Information generated by the USOAP CMA OLF was used as the primary source for the analysis. Among
the main points analysed were:
a) the five lowest scoring PPQs by AA and CE combination globally, based on a consolidated global “Heat
Map”;
b) PQs used to assess the civil aviation organization & State system and functions (ORG/CE -3) at the
global level;
c) the lowest scoring PPQ globally;
d) organizational challenges that appear in several RASPs; and
e) results from the SSP self -assessment tool (on OLF) and the SSP gap analysis application (on the
Integrated Safety Trend Analysis and Reporting System (iSTARS)).
4.2.3 The main findings from the analysis included the following:
a) the five lowest scoring PPQs by AA and CE combination globally (in ascending order) were:
1) aircraft accident and incident investigation & qualified technical personnel (AIG/CE -4);
2) aerodromes and ground aids & qualified technical personnel (AGA/CE -4);
3) aerodromes and ground aids & resolution of safety issues (AGA/CE -8);
Section 4. Global organizational challenges 4-3
4) aircraft accident and incident investigation & resolution of safety issues (AIG/CE -8); and
5) aircraft operations & surveillance obligations (OPS/CE -7) – related specifically to dangerous goods;
b) for PQs used to assess ORG/CE -3:
1) PQ 2.051 (the only PPQ in this set) focuses on the establishment and implementation of a
mechanism by the State to ensure that each safety oversight authority has sufficient financial
resources to meet its national and international obligations . The global score was 67.57 per cent ,
which is below the global overall EI score at the time of this analysis;
2) PQ 2.053 looks at the establishment of a mechanism by the State to ensure that each safety
oversight authority has sufficient personnel to meet its national and international obligations –
The global score was 41.71 per cent ; and
3) PQ 2.103 focuses on each safety oversight entity/investigation authority’s ability to attract, recruit
and retain sufficiently qualified/experienced technical personnel . The global score was
53.51 per cent ;
c) the lowest scoring PPQ globally was under the AA and CE combination of primary aviation legislation
and civil aviation regulations & specific operating regulations (LEG/CE -2):
1) PQ 1.205 looks at the establishment and implementation of a process by the State to ensure the
identification and publication in the State’s aeronautical information publication (AIP) of significant
differences between the Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs )/Procedures for Air
Navigation Services (PANS)/Regional Supplementary Procedures (SUPPS) and the State’s
regulations and practices – related specifically to AIP;
d) organizational challenges appearing in several RASPs:
1) three out of six RASPs cited lack of resources and expertise, as well as human factors and
competence of personnel as regional organizational challenges; and
e) results from the SSP self -assessment tool (on the OLF) and the SSP gap analysis application:
1) it was not possible to ascertain the maturity level of SSP among States via SSP self -assessment
(due to unavailability of information at the time of this analysis); and
2) the SSP gap analysis application showed that under five per cent of States self -reported having
achieved a Level 4 (“SSP implementation completed”), as per the application’s levels.
4-4 Global Aviation Safety Plan
4.3 GLOBAL ORGANIZATIONAL CHALLENGES
Based on results from the analysis, the following five global organizational challenges were identified for the
2026 –2028 edition of the GASP. They are considered of the utmost priority, in the international context, because they
impact States’ safety oversight and safety management capabilities and, consequently, aviation safety at the global level.
The global organizational challenges for 2026 –2028 are as follows:
a) lack of sufficient financial resources for the safety oversight authority to meet its national and
international obligations;
b) lack of qualified technical personnel, primarily aircraft accident investigators and aerodrome inspectors;
c) lack of a regulatory process to address the resolution of safety issues, primarily related to aerodrome
operations;
d) low level of SSP implementation at the global level; and
e) deficiencies in safety data and safety information collection, analysis and exchange, to support safety
management activities.
______________________
5-1 Section 5
THE GLOBAL STRATEGIC DIRECTION
FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF AVIATION SAFETY
5.1 GENERAL
5.1.1 The global aviation safety plan ( GASP ) includes a series of safety goals and targets for the management of
aviation safety, as well as indicators to monitor the progress made towards their achievement. In addition, the Global
Aviation Safety Roadmap (Doc 10161) presents the safety enhancement initiatives ( SEIs ) that were developed to help
achieve each of the goals and targets described in this section.
5.1.2 The GASP goals are the results toward s which efforts in aviation safety are directed. The GASP goals are
written in a manner that describes high -level outcomes that States, regions or industry aim to achieve as part of the global
safety strategy.
5.1.3 The GASP goals contain targets. Targets are specific desired outcomes from the actions taken by States,
regions and industry to achieve the goals, at a certain point in time. The GASP targets are written in a manner that identify
who the specific act ions are directed to (for example, States).
5.1.4 Each GASP target also includes indicators to measure progress towards its achievement. The indicators
provide evidence on whether the desired outcomes occurred and measure the progress in the activities related to the
GASP targets. They are written i n a manner that references quantitative data (such as number or percentage). Ultimately,
the indicators are used to measure the achievement of the GASP goals.
5.1.5 The GASP goals, targets and indicators, for the 2026 –2028 edition of the GASP, were derived from the
analysis presented in Sections 3 and 4, which identified global safety issues that require action at the international, regio nal
and national levels, to enhance aviation safety. The following section provides detailed information regarding each of the
goals and targets, as well as the associated indicators.
5.2 GLOBAL AVIATION SAFETY PLAN GOALS, TARGETS AND INDICATORS
5.2.1 The GASP contains an aspirational safety goal to achieve and maintain zero fatalities in commercial
operations by 2030 and beyond, in line with its vision. A series of goals, targets and indicators support this aspirational
safety goal. They are pres ented in Table 5 -1. Most of the goals and targets for the 2026 –2028 edition of the GASP remain
the same as the previous two editions. This is to ensure the stability and continuity of the plan, and its impact on existing
RASPs and NASPs, as well as all the SEIs already underway at the regional and national levels. The goals and targets
for the 2026 –2028 edition of the GASP focus on the main operational safety risks and organizational challenges that
States and regions are facing and are meant to serve as catalysts to address them.
5-2 Global Aviation Safety Plan
5.2.2 Several factors were considered, when deciding which specific actions to take for each existing target
(in other words, to extend the deadline; close it out at the end of the previous GASP cycle; add a new target replacing one
being closed). The main factor for maintaining an existing target was its relevance to the newly identified global safety
issues (as presented in Sections 3 and 4). Another factor was the status of achievement of the targets, based on the
analysis of available data, primarily a ccident statistics and information available on Universal Safety Oversight Audit
Programme Continuous Monitoring Approach (USOAP CMA ) online framework ( OLF), as well as on Integrated Safety
Trend Analysis and Reporting System (iSTARS ). Additionally, the interdependency between targets was considered.
Some targets call for incremental improvements or a phased approach; thus, the deadline to achieve one target directly
impacts another in some cases. For example, regions need to first ide ntify States that need assistance to address safety
issues; then they can facilitate the required assistance.
5.2.3 Goal 1 of the GASP is to achieve a continuous reduction of operational safety risks. This goal addresses
operational safety issues, which States, regions and industry should mitigate as part of their regional aviation safety plans
(RASPs) and national aviation safety plans (NASPs) . New targets were included to specifically address the G -HRCs and
the other global risk categories of occurrences (as presented in Section 3). The scope of the targets was also expanded
to encompass serious incidents, and th e use of a five -year rolling (moving) average to determine trends over a given
period1.
5.2.3.1 Target 1.1 calls for States, regions and industry to decrease the accident rate, globally and within each ICAO
region, by 2028. This decrease is measured using a five -year rolling average and the year 2025 as a baseline. Indicators
linked to this target are the accid ent rate (the number of accidents per million departures); fatal accident rate (number of
fatal accidents per million departures); and the fatality rate (the number of fatalities per billion passengers carried).
5.2.3.2 Target 1.2 calls for States, regions and industry to decrease the rate of accidents and serious incidents for
each of the five G -HRCs (identified in Section 3.3), globally and within each ICAO region, by 2028. This decrease is
measured using a five -year rolling average and the year 2025 as a baseline. Indicators linked to this target are the accident
rate by G -HRC; the serious incident rate by G -HRC; the percentage of accidents related to the G -HRCs compared to all
accidents; and the percentage of serious incidents related to t he G -HRCs compared to all serious incidents.
5.2.3.3 Target 1.3 calls for States, regions and industry to decrease the rate of accidents and serious incidents
related to the other global risk categories of occurrences (identified in Section 3.4), globally and within each ICAO region,
by 2028. This decrease is measured using a five -year rolling average and the year 2025 as a baseline. Indicators linked
to this target are the accident rate by other global risk category of occurrence; the serious incident rate by other global r isk
category of occurrence; the fatal accident rate by other global risk category of occurrence; the fatality rate by other global
risk category of occurrence; and the injury rate (that is, the number of injuries per billion passengers carried).
5.2.4 Goal 2 is aimed at States individually and seeks to strengthen their safety oversight capabilities. This goal
calls for all States to progress in their effective implementation of their safety oversight system by addressing the specifi c
issues they face. New tar gets were drafted to address those specific issues, in line with the global organizational
challenges identified in the analysis, mainly the lack of sufficient financial resources, qualified technical personnel, and a
regulatory process to addr ess the resolution of safety issues (as presented in Section 4.3). The targets address specific
critical elements ( CEs) and audit areas ( AAs), based on the analysis of USOAP results. Their objective is to focus States’
attention on specific issues to be addressed, taking into consideration their limited resources.
1. A five -year rolling average is the average calculated every year based on the data of the previous five years. It gives a more reali stic
picture by reducing the impact of outliers in the data, smoothing the trend curve. It helps identify trends otherwise h ard to detect.
For example, in 2026, the 2025 baseline five -year rolling average is calculated with data from 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 and 2025.
The following year, the 2026 rolling average will use 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025 and 2026 data.
Section 5. The global strategic direction for the management of aviation safety 5-3
5.2.4.1 Target 2.1 calls for all States to commit, through their NASPs, the allocation of sufficient financial resources
to each safety oversight authority to meet national and international obligations, with at least 70 per cent of States having
sufficient financial resour ces, by 2028. USOAP contains a specific Protocol Question (PQ 2.051), which relates to this
obligation. This deficiency was identified in the analysis of global safety issues, which confirmed a lack of sufficient fina ncial
resources for s afety oversight authorities was preventing them from meeting national and international obligations.
A 70 per cent score was selected as a minimum target, rather than 100 per cent , since it represented global average
(as the baseline) at time of the analysis. One indicator, linked to this target, is the percentage of States with a “satisfac tory”
rating for the USOAP PQ 2.051.
5.2.4.2 Target 2.2 calls for all States to improve their score for the effective implementation ( EI) of qualified technical
personnel (CE -4) for two specific areas and with specific scores: for aircraft accident and incident investigation (AIG) and
for aerodromes & ground aids (AGA), respectively, with a further commitment that no State has a score of le ss that the
baseline global average, by 2028 – calculated using year 2025 as that baseline. This is linked to findings from the analysis
of global safety issues, which identified a lack of qualified technical personnel within States, primarily aircraft acc ident
investigators and aerodrome inspectors. Indicators linked to this target are the number of States that meet the EI score
for the CE -4/AIG and for the CE -4/AGA combinations.
5.2.4.3 Target 2.3 calls for all States to improve their score for the EI of the resolution of safety issues (CE -8) in
AGA, with a further commitment that no State has a score of less than the baseline global average, by 2028 – calculated
using year 2025 as that baseline. T his is linked to findings from the analysis of global safety issues, which identified a lack
of a regulatory process to address the resolution of safety issues, primarily related to aerodrome operations. One indicator,
linked to this targ et, is the number of States that meet the EI score for the CE -8/AGA combination.
5.2.5 Goal 3 is aimed at States individually and calls for the establishment and management of State safety
programmes ( SSPs ), in accordance with Annex 19 – Safety Management . New targets were drafted to align with
Annex 19 and promote the effective implementation of the SSP -related Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs ),
which incorporate the notion of a continuous improvement of the SSP. The updated targets focus on States’
self-assessments to determine a baseline on SSP implementation and call for a progressive approach to the
implementation and continuous improvement of these programmes.
5.2.5.1 Target 3.1 calls for all States to assess the level of implementation of their SSP, by 2026. This is linked to
findings from the analysis of global safety issues, which identified a low level of SSP implementation at the global level.
There is a need to obtain more information from States to best understand the status of their SSP implementation and the
challenges they face when establishing the programme. To do so, the SSP self -assessment, available on the USOAP
CMA OLF, was considered the most ade quate tool. All States should complete the self -assessment, even if they have not
started implementing an SSP, as it will still provide them with valuable information. One indicator, linked to this target, i s
the percentage of States having completed their SSP PQ self -assessment, using the USOAP CMA OLF.
5.2.5.2 Target 3.2 leverages the results from completing the self -assessment in Target 3.1, and calls for all States
to establish an SSP, by 2028. This is linked to the same findings from the analysis of global safety issues, noted for the
previous target. The establishment of an SSP includes establishing a safety data collection and processing system
(SDCPS) to capture and collect, store, aggregate, process and enable the analysis of safety data and safety information.
Having an established SDCPS enables S tates to address deficiencies in the collection, analysis, and exchange of safety
data and safety information (as presented in Section 4.3) and provides the foundation for safety intelligence to support
safety management activities. Indicators linked to th is target include the percentage of States having established an SSP
and the percentage of States having established an SDCPS. In addition, another indicator focuses on the need for States
to establish means to protect data and information collected for sa fety management purposes, as a key enabler for the
establishment of an SSP.
5.2.5.3 Guidance on establishing and managing the SSP, through means such as a maturity assessment, is
presented in the Safety Management Manual (Doc 9859). A periodic maturity assessment is intended to provide the State
with assurance that as the SSP matures, it is operating as intended and is effective at achieving its stated safety objective s
and targets.
5-4 Global Aviation Safety Plan
5.2.6 Goal 4 is aimed at the regions (as defined in the GASP) and calls for them to strengthen collaboration at the
regional and national levels to address safety issues. This goal, which previously focused on increasing regional
collaboration, was expanded to encompa ss collaboration at the national level to address safety issues (in line with those
identified in the GASP). The targets under this goal are meant to empower the regions to identify and help individual States
to put in place mechanisms to addre ss safety issues. This should facilitate the achievement of GASP goals at the regional
and national levels, thus contributing to the improvement of safety globally.
5.2.6.1 Target 4.1 calls for all regions to identify States that need assistance to address safety issues, by 2026.
The year 2026 was selected because it represents the end of the first year of the current GASP cycle. This gives States,
needing assistance, sufficient lead -time to achieve the other targets in the GASP, set for 2028. Indicators linked to this
target are t he percentage of States in each region that need assistance to address each of the specific global safety issues,
as identified in Sections 3 and 4. This target is linked to Target 4.2.
5.2.6.2 Target 4.2 calls for all regions to facilitate the required assistance, to States identified under Target 4.1,
to address safety issues by 2028 – the last year in the current GASP cycle. This target is linked to Target 4.1 and presents
a two -step approach to strengthen collaboration at the regional and national levels to address safety issues identified
under that target. During the three -year GASP cycle, regions have time to provide targeted assistance to States, identified
as needing assistance u nder the previous target, so they may achieve the GASP targets, set for 2028. Indicators linked
to this target are the percentage of States in each region that receive the required assistance to address each of the
specific safety issues, previously identi fied.
5.2.6.3 Target 4.3 calls for all regions to implement a mechanism to make use of the information on operational
safety risks and emerging issues for the purpose of aviation safety planning, by 2027. This target aims to build up the
safety risk management capabilities of each RASG , to better equip them in identifying and addressing regional safety
issues. Indicators linked to this target include the number of reports received via the Secure Portal on Operational Safety
Risks and Emerging Issues; the percenta ge of SEIs completed by RASGs; and the number of regions implementing a
mechanism to make use of the information on operational safety risks and emerging issues.
Note. — Additional information on the Secure Portal on Operational Safety Risks and Emerging Issues is
found on the ICAO website at https://www.icao.int/safety/GASP/Pages/Secure -Portal.aspx .
5.2.7 Goal 5 is aimed at States and regions and seeks to strengthen aviation safety planning. This new goal and
its targets are in line with Assembly Resolution A41 -6 and serve as the basis for the development, revision and
implementation of a safety strategy at the n ational and regional levels, in line with the current edition of the GASP.
5.2.7.1 Target 5.1 calls for all regions to publish an updated RASP, taking into consideration the 2026 –2028 edition
of the GASP by 2026, the end of the first year of the current GASP cycle. RASPs address regional operational safety risks
and organizational challenges. The publication of a current RASP, as the document containing the region’s strategic
direction for the management of aviation safety at the regional level, allows for the allocation of resources dedicated to
SEIs, through the development and implementation of that plan. It is important to note that all regions have published a
RASP, but it should be updated to align with the latest edition of the GASP to demonstrate long -term sustainability and
continuity of the regional planning process. This gives regions sufficient lead time to revise the regional safety strategy
and the related action plan(s) to achieve the other targets in the GASP, set for 2026 –2028. Indicators linked to this target
are the number of regions having published an updated RA SP; the number of RASPs developed in consultation with
industry; and the number of regions reporting provision of safety information by industry to assist in the development of
RASPs.
Section 5. The global strategic direction for the management of aviation safety 5-5
5.2.7.2 Target 5.2 calls for all States to publish an updated NASP, taking into consideration the 2026 –2028 edition
of GASP and their corresponding RASP, by 2027. It is important to note that States having published a NASP should
update it to align with the latest editions of the corresponding RASP and the GASP. While ideally, both the RASP and the
NASP sho uld be revised once the latest edition of the GASP is published, the year 2027 was selected for this target,
to allow for sufficient time for the update d RASPs to be published, as per Target 5.1. Indicators linked to this target are
the number of States that published an updated NASP; number of NASPs developed in consultation with industry; and
number of States reporting provision of safety information by industry to assist in the development of NASPs.
5.2.8 Goal 6 is aimed at industry (as defined in the GASP) to expand the use of industry evaluation programmes
and safety data sharing programmes. This goal acknowledges the value of such programmes in assisting service providers
to enhance their safety performance an d their readiness when undergoing compliance audits. While industry evaluation
programmes do not replace the need for safety oversight by States, ICAO recognizes their benefits and positive effect on
operational safety among service providers.
5.2.8.1 Target 6.1 calls for industry to maintain an increasing trend in its use of industry evaluation programmes and
safety data sharing programmes, by 2028. Indicators linked to this target are the number of service providers participating
in the corresponding ICAO -recog nized industry assessment programmes, as well as those participating in industry safety
data sharing programmes.
5.2.8.2 For the purpose of the GASP, ICAO -recognized industry evaluation programmes refer to the following:
a) Airports Council International (ACI) Airport Excellence (APEX) in Safety programme;
b) Civil Air Navigation Services Organisation (CANSO) and European Organisation for the Safety of Air
Navigation (EUROCONTROL) Standard of Excellence in Safety Management Systems measurement ;
c) Flight Safety Foundation (FSF) Basic Aviation Risk Standard (BARS);
d) International Air Transport Association (IATA) Operational Safety Audit (IOSA);
e) IATA Safety Audit for Ground Operations (ISAGO);
f) International Business Aviation Council (IBAC) International Standard for Business Aircraft Operations
(IS-BAO); and
g) IBAC International Standard for Business Aircraft Handling (IS -BAH).
5.2.8.3 Further guidance and examples of industry safety data sharing programmes can be found in Global Aviation
Safety Roadmap (Doc 10161).
5-6 Global Aviation Safety Plan
Table 5 -1. GASP goals, targets and indicators
ICAO aspirational safety goal “zero fatalities by 2030 and beyond ”
Goal Target Indicators
Goal 1:
Achieve a
continuous
reduction of
operational
safety risks 1.1 By 2028, States, regions and industry to
decrease the accident rate, globally and
within each ICAO region2 – Accident rate (n umber of accidents per
million departures )
– Fatal accident rat e (number of fatal
accidents per million departures )
– Fatality rate (number of fatalities per
billion passengers carried )
1.2 By 2028, States, regions and industry to
decrease the rate of accidents and serious
incidents for each global high -risk category
of occurrence (G -HRC), globally and within
each ICAO region2 – Accident rate by G -HRC
– Serious incident rate by G -HRC
– Percentage of accidents related to
G-HRC compared to all accidents
– Percentage of serious incidents related to
G-HRC compared to all serious incidents
1.3 By 2028, States, regions and industry to
decrease the rate of accidents and serious
incidents related to the other global risk
categories of occurrences, globally and
within each ICAO region* – Accident rate by other global risk
category of occurrence
– Serious incident rate by other global risk
category of occurrence
– Fatal accident rate by other global risk
category of occurrence
– Fatality rate by other global risk category
of occurrence
– Number of injuries per billion passengers
carried (injury rate)
Goal 2:
Strengthen
States’ safety
oversight
capabilities 2.1 By 2028, all States to commit to national
aviation safety plans that allocate to each
safety oversight authority sufficient
financial resources to meet national and
international obligations, with at least
70 per cent of States having sufficient
financial resources – Percentage of States with a “satisfactory”
rating for the Universal Safety Oversight
Audit Programme (USOAP) protocol
question (PQ) 2.0513
2.2 By 2028, all States to improve their
effective implementation (EI) score for
qualified technical personnel (CE -4) for
aircraft accident and incident investigation
(AIG) and for aerodromes and ground aids
(AGA), respectively, with a further
commitment that no State has a score of – Number of States that meet the EI score
of equal or greater than the baseline
global average for CE -4/AIG
– Number of States that meet the EI score
of equal or greater than the baseline
global average for CE -4/AGA
2. Using a 5 -year rolling average and year 2025 as a baseline .
3. PQ 2.051: Has the State established and implemented a mechanism to ensure that each safety oversight authority has sufficient
financial resources to meet its national and international obligations?
Section 5. The global strategic direction for the management of aviation safety 5-7
ICAO aspirational safety goal “zero fatalities by 2030 and beyond ”
Goal Target Indicators
less than the baseline global average4
2.3 By 2028, all States to improve their EI
score for the resolution of safety issues
(CE-8) in AGA with a further commitment
that no State has a score of less than the
baseline global average4 – Number of States that meet the EI score
of equal or greater than the baseline
global average for CE -8/AGA
Goal 3:
Establish and
manage State
safety
programmes
(SSP s) 3.1 By 2026, all States to assess the level of
implementation of their SSP – Percentage of States having completed
their SSP PQ self -assessment, using the
ICAO online framework (OLF)
3.2 By 2028, all States to establish an SSP – Percentage of States having established
an SSP
– Percentage of States having established
a safety data collection and processing
system (SDCPS)
– Percentage of States having established
a framework for the protection of safety
data and safety information
Goal 4:
Strengthen
collaboration
at the regional
and national
levels to
address safety
issues 4.1 By 2026, all regions to identify States that
need assistance to address safety issues – Percentage of States in each region that
need assistance to address the lack of
sufficient financial resources for the
safety oversight authority to meet its
national and international obligations
– Percentage of States in each region that
need assistance to address the lack of
qualified technical personnel, primarily
aircraft accident investigators and
aerodrome inspectors
– Percentage of States in each region that
need assistance to address the resolution
of safety issues, primarily related to
aerodrome operations
– Percentage of States in each region that
need assistance to address a low level of
SSP implementation
– Percentage of States in each region that
need assistance to address deficiencies
in safety data and safety information
collection, analysis and exchange, to
support safety management activities
– Percentage of States in each region that
need assistance to address operational
4. The global average is calculated using year 2025 as a baseline .
5-8 Global Aviation Safety Plan
ICAO aspirational safety goal “zero fatalities by 2030 and beyond ”
Goal Target Indicators
safety risks, including HRCs
– Percentage of States in each region that
need assistance to address other safety
issues
4.2 By 2028, all regions to facilitate the
required assistance, to identified States, to
address safety issues – Percentage of States in each region that
receive the required assistance to
address the lack of sufficient financial
resources for the safety oversight
authority to meet its national and
international obligations
– Percentage of States in each region that
receive the required assistance to
address the lack of qualified technical
personnel, primarily aircraft accident
investigators and aerodrome inspectors
– Percentage of States in each region that
receive the required assistance to
address the resolution of safety issues,
primarily related to aerodrome operations
– Percentage of States in each region that
receive the required assistance to
address a low level of SSP
implementation
– Percentage of States in each region that
receive the required assistance to
address deficiencies in safety data and
safety information collection, analysis and
exchange, to support safety management
activities
– Percentage of States in each region that
receive required assistance to address
operational safety risks, including HRCs
– Percentage of States in each region that
receive the required assistance to
address other safety issues
4.3 By 2027, all regions to implement a
mechanism to make use of the information
on operational safety risks and emerging
issues for the purpose of aviation safety
planning – Number of States registered to the
Secure Portal on Operational Safety
Risks and Emerging Issues
– Number of reports received via the
Secure Portal on Operational Safety
Risks and Emerging Issues
– Number of studies or analyses conducted
by regional aviation safety groups
(RASGs) based on reports received via
Secure Portal on Operational Safety
Section 5. The global strategic direction for the management of aviation safety 5-9
ICAO aspirational safety goal “zero fatalities by 2030 and beyond ”
Goal Target Indicators
Risks and Emerging Issues
– Percentage of safety enhancement
initiatives completed by RASGs
– Number of regions having a mechanism
that make s use of the information on
operational safety risks and emerging
issues
Goal 5:
Strengthen
aviation safety
planning 5.1 By 2026, all regions to publish an updated
regional aviation safety plan (RASP ),
taking into consideration the 2026 –2028
edition of the GASP – Number of regions having published an
updated RASP
– Number of RASPs developed in
consultation with industry
– Number of regions reporting provision of
safety information by industry to assist in
the development of RASPs
5.2 By 2027, all States to publish an updated
national aviation safety plan (NASP),
taking into consideration the 2026 –2028
edition of the GASP and their
corresponding RASP – Number of States that published an
updated NASP
– Number of NASPs developed in
consultation with industry
– Number of States reporting provision of
safety information by industry to assist in
the development of NASPs
Goal 6:
Expand the
use of industry
evaluation
programmes
and safety
data sharing
programmes 6.1 By 2028, industry to maintain an increasing
trend in its use of industry evaluation
programmes and safety data sharing
programmes – Number of service providers participating
in the corresponding ICAO -recognized
industry evaluation programmes
– Number of service providers participating
in industry safety data sharing
programmes
5.3 ADAPTING THE GLOBAL AVIATION SAFETY PLAN GOALS,
TARGETS AND INDICATORS TO THE REGIONAL AVIATION SAFETY
PLAN AND NATIONAL AVIATION SAFETY PLAN
5.3.1 The goals and targets presented in this section should serve as the basis for the regional and national goals
and targets, to be included in a RASP and NASP, respectively. The RASP and NASP should include the regional and
national safety goals and targets for the management of aviation safety, respectively, as well as a series of indicators to
monitor the progress made towards their achievement. These should be tied to the applicable goals, targets and indicators
listed in the GASP and include additional sa fety goals, targets and indicators, as appropriate. As part of the plan, a RASP
or NASP should explain how the regional or national safety goals, targets and indicators are linked to the GASP (this may
be accomplished by referencing the GASP goals, targets and indicators). Guidance related to the development of RASPs
and NASPs is provided in the Manual on the Development of Regional and National Aviation Safety Plans (Doc 10131).
5-10 Global Aviation Safety Plan
5.3.2 When the GASP is adapted at the regional and national levels, respectively, regions and States may use the
GASP indicators to develop regional and national indicators found in the RASP and NASP. However, not all indicators
presented in the GASP need to be duplicated in a RASP or NASP. Guidance for the development of RASP and NASP
indicators, based on the GASP indicators, is provided in the Manual on Monitoring Implementation of Regional and
National Aviation Safety Plans (Doc 10162).
5.4 ADAPTING THE SAFETY ENHANCEMENT INITIATIVES TO THE REGIONAL
AVIATION SAFETY PLAN AND NATIONAL AVIATION SAFETY PLAN
5.4.1 The global aviation safety roadmap presents SEIs for States, regions and industry to address each of the
goals and targets described in this section. It provides a flexible approach to implementing a NASP or RASP, in line with
the GASP, by providing an action plan to address operational safety risks and organizational challenges.
5.4.2 ICAO developed a series of SEIs that include actions that seek to eliminate or mitigate the operational safety
risks listed in Section 3. These SEIs form the operational safety risks (OPS) roadmap, contained in the Global Aviation
Safety Roadmap (Doc 10161). ICAO also developed a series of SEIs that include actions to address the organizational
challenges listed in Section 4. These SEIs form the organizational challenges (ORG) roadmap, also contained in
Doc 10161.
5.4.3 At the regional and national levels, SEIs in RASPs and NASPs should be implemented through the working
arrangements of the RASG activities, and by the existing safety oversight capabilities of States and their service providers’
safety management systems (SMS), respectively.
5.4.4 As a minimum, States and regions should identify appropriate SEIs to address their respective safety issues.
The SEIs may be derived from the global aviation safety roadmap, to achieve the regional and national safety goals
presented in RASPs and NAS Ps, respectively. Some of the regional or national SEIs should be linked to overarching SEIs
at the global level and help to enhance aviation safety at national, regional and global levels.
Note. — The manuals listed in this section are found on the ICAO website at www.icao.int/gasp .
5.5 EMERGING ISSUES AND SAFETY RISKS
5.5.1 Emerging issues may stem from new concepts of operations, new technologies, changes to public policies,
new business models or ideas that might impact safety in the future, for which insufficient data exists to complete typical
data-driven analysis. Due to the lack of data, emerging issues cannot automatically be considered as operational safety
risks. For example, the increased use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in automation and in safety -critical activities may allow
for easier adoption of innovations i n the field, but its integration also introduces potential new hazards in the aviation
system. It is important that the international aviation community remain vigilant on emerging issues to identify hazards,
collect and share relevant data, and proactivel y develop mitigations to address any associated risks. Leveraging “big data”
and predictive analytics can help in proactively identifying operational safety risks before they lead to occurrences.
Managing risks associated with the development of new techno logies and business models helps their adoption and
fosters innovation. The use of new technologies, procedures and operations should therefore be encouraged. Integrating
advanced analytics in safety risk management processes holds the potential to improve both aviation safety and
operational efficiency, for legacy airspace users as well as new entrants.
Section 5. The global strategic direction for the management of aviation safety 5-11
5.5.2 ICAO developed a dedicated site on its secure portal to collect information from States, regional and
international organizations on emerging issues and operational safety risks, thereby contributing to the improvement of
safety by facilitating the s haring and exchange of safety information. This site is called the Secure Portal on Operational
Safety Risks and Emerging Issues. Stakeholders should provide information on this site on a regular basis. The information
collected will guide future editions of the GASP. Details on how regional entities and other stakeholders may use this
information for regional and national aviation safety planning is found on the ICAO website at
https://www.icao.int/safety/GASP/Pages/Secure -Portal.aspx .
______________________
6-1 Section 6
MONITORING IMPLEMENTATION
6.1 INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION PROCESS
TO MONITOR IMPLEMENTATION AND MEASURE SAFETY PERFORMANCE
6.1.1 The safety performance of the global aviation safety plan ( GASP ) is measured by indicators, to determine
the progress made by States and regions in achieving the plan’s goals. ICAO does not monitor the implementation of
individual safety enhancement initiatives ( SEIs ) at the global level; this is done regionally, based on each regional aviation
safety plan ( RASP ). Each RASG monitors the implementation of the SEIs listed in the corresponding RASP and measures
the safety performance of the regional civi l aviation system to ensure the intended results are achieved.
6.1.2 In addition to the above, ICAO reviews the GASP every three years, to keep the identified global operational
safety risks, organizational challenges and SEIs (found in the roadmap) updated and relevant. ICAO periodically reviews
the safety performanc e of the initiatives listed in each RASP to ensure the achievement of the goals. If required, ICAO will
seek the support of the RASGs, regional safety oversight organizations ( RSOOs ), international organizations and expert
groups to ensure the timely imple mentation of SEIs to address safety issues.
6.1.3 ICAO uses the indicators listed in Section 5 of this plan (as well as the guidance provided in Doc 10162) to
measure the safety performance of the international civil aviation system and monitor each GASP target. An annual Safety
Report is published to pro vide relevant up -to-date information on the progress made in achieving the GASP goals.
6.1.4 If the GASP goals are not met, the contributing factors will be presented to stakeholders. If ICAO identifies
critical operational safety risks, reasonable measures will be taken to mitigate them as soon as practicable, possibly
leading to an earlier revision of the GASP.
6.2 PROCESS TO REVISE GLOBAL AVIATION SAFETY PLAN CONTENT
Any proposed corrections or adjustments to the GASP will be initiated by the ICAO Secretariat, in coordination with the
GASP -SG, and submitted thereafter for consultation with stakeholders following the GASP development and review
process presented in Sect ion 1.
6.3 STANDARDIZED APPROACH TO PROVIDE INFORMATION AT THE GLOBAL LEVEL
ICAO adopted a standardized approach to facilitate reporting of information from individual States and other stakeholders
at the global level, and to improve the provision of information to the RASGs. Methodologies used include: (1) the Universal
Safety Oversight Audit Programme Continuous Monitoring Approach (USOAP CMA ) online framework (OLF), as the
primary platform for States to input their information; (2) Accident/Incident Data Reporting (ADREP ) for the reporting of
accidents and incidents (as per Anne x 13 – Aircraft Accident and Incident Investigation provisions); (3) the use of
CAST/ICAO Common Taxonomy Team (CICTT ) to classify occurrences; and (4) the Secure Portal on Operational Safety
Risks and Emerging Issues to raise concerns at the RASG level. This allows ICAO to receive information and assess
operational safety risks and organizational challenges, using common methodologies.
6-2 Global Aviation Safety Plan
CONTACT INFORMATION FOR INQUIRIES OR FURTHER INFORMATION
Any questions regarding the GASP and its initiatives, and further requests for information, may be addressed to the
following:
Air Navigation Bureau
International Civil Aviation Organization
999 Robert -Bourassa Boulevard
Montr éal, Quebec, Canada H3C 5H7
gasp@icao.int
www.icao.int/gasp
— END —
Fly GACA is an independent educational platform. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or operated by the General Authority of Civil Aviation (GACA) or the Government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The official and authoritative source for all civil aviation regulations, publications, and aeronautical information is always GACA. Always verify against the latest official GACA publication at gaca.gov.sa.