Advancing Nuclear Energy Governance Through Strategic Pathways for Q-NPT Adoption

Abstract

This paper proposes a strategic framework to enhance nuclear energy governance by advancing the Qudrat-Ullah Nuclear Peace and Trust (Q-NPT) framework. Designed to complement existing treaties such as the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards, Q-NPT integrates principles of equity, transparency, and trust to address persistent governance challenges. The framework emphasizes sustainable nuclear technology access, multilateral cooperation, and integration with global energy transition goals. Through an analysis of institutional, economic, technological, and geopolitical barriers, the study outlines actionable pathways for adoption, including legal harmonization, differentiated financial instruments, and deployment of advanced verification technologies such as blockchain, artificial intelligence (AI), and remote monitoring. A phased implementation timeline is presented, enabling adaptive learning and stakeholder engagement over short-, medium-, and long-term horizons. Regional case studies, including Serbia and Latin America, demonstrate the framework’s applicability in diverse contexts. By linking nuclear policy to broader climate, energy equity, and global security objectives, Q-NPT offers an operational and inclusive roadmap for future-ready governance. This approach contributes to the literature on energy systems transformation by situating nuclear governance within a sustainability-oriented, trust-centered paradigm.

1. Introduction

Nuclear energy governance is at a critical inflection point, shaped by intensifying geopolitical tensions, the growing urgency of climate action, and a global push toward clean energy transition. Although nuclear energy is increasingly recognized as a low-carbon source that can support long-term decarbonization strategies, existing governance regimes struggle to ensure equitable access, transparency, and mutual trust among diverse stakeholders [1,2]. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) has historically played a central role in regulating the peaceful use of nuclear technology. However, persistent trust deficits, rising technological asymmetries, and shifting global power dynamics have revealed structural gaps in the NPT regime, particularly around fair technology sharing and multilateral verification [3,4].

To respond to these limitations, the Qudrat-Ullah Nuclear Peace and Trust (Q-NPT) framework was developed as a novel, implementation-oriented roadmap. The Q-NPT framework proposes actionable trust-building mechanisms, enhanced international cooperation, and institutional capacity building, with an emphasis on aligning nuclear governance with global sustainability goals. This paper introduces the Q-NPT framework, analyzes the barriers to its adoption, and outlines strategic pathways for integrating it into existing international legal and governance architectures.

1.1. Review of Prior Work

A wide body of scholarship has examined nuclear governance through the lenses of non-proliferation, safeguards compliance, and disarmament diplomacy [5,6]. The NPT, while foundational, has drawn criticism for its asymmetrical obligations and limited enforcement mechanisms. Studies such as those by Müller [7] and Bunn and Harrell [8] have argued that current regimes fall short in promoting both disarmament and technology equity. Trust-building efforts—such as confidence-building measures (CBMs), regional nuclear-weapon-free zones (NWFZs), and IAEA safeguard agreements—have been central but insufficient in bridging the gap between nuclear-capable states and aspirants. Moreover, prior reform proposals often lack operational detail and are rarely embedded within a broader energy transition or climate policy framework.

Emerging frameworks, such as the Humanitarian Initiative and proposals tied to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), point to a growing convergence between nuclear governance and global development agendas [9,10]. However, these remain fragmented and often symbolic. There remains a lack of integrated governance models that explicitly combine peace, trust, and energy sustainability—an area where the Q-NPT framework seeks to make a substantive contribution.

The foundational conceptualization of the Qudrat-Ullah Nuclear Peace and Trust (Q-NPT) framework is presented in Qudrat-Ullah [11], which positions the framework as a governance innovation that aligns nuclear energy policy with principles of sustainability, equity, and international trust building. That study provides the theoretical basis for the framework and outlines its systemic features but does not yet explore implementation strategies or region-specific challenges—gaps this paper aims to address.

1.2. Context and Motivation

The motivation for this work arises from three converging global dynamics. First, the accelerating demand for clean and secure energy solutions has revived interest in nuclear power, including in countries previously hesitant to pursue it. This trend is fueled by energy insecurity, net-zero commitments, and rising fossil fuel volatility. Second, there is an increasing recognition that trust is not merely a political nicety but a functional prerequisite for international cooperation in high-stakes technological domains. Trust deficits—whether between states, between citizens and regulators, or among multilateral institutions—undermine the legitimacy and enforceability of existing governance regimes [2]. Third, new technologies such as small modular reactors (SMRs), AI-enabled monitoring, and blockchain-based verification are reshaping the technical and institutional landscape of nuclear governance. These technologies present both opportunities and challenges for ensuring transparency, safeguarding sovereignty, and enabling participation from Global South stakeholders.

Against this backdrop, the Q-NPT framework is proposed not as a replacement for existing treaties but as a complementary structure that operationalizes trust, inclusivity, and sustainability in nuclear governance. By embedding trust building, capacity sharing, and technological adaptability into the core of nuclear policy design, Q-NPT offers a framework that reflects the complex interdependences of the 21st century energy and security environment.

This paper proceeds as follows: Section 2 outlines the barriers to Q-NPT adoption. Section 3 analyzes the institutional and strategic potential of the framework. Section 4 proposes strategies for implementation. Section 5 draws from case studies and international precedents, and Section 6 concludes with policy recommendations and directions for future research.

2. Barriers to Adoption of the Q-NPT Framework

The global adoption of the Q-NPT framework requires overcoming significant and interconnected challenges spanning political, institutional, economic, technological, and geopolitical domains. The competing framework complements existing agreements such as the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), and IAEA protocols, but concerns about redundancy, institutional overlaps, and competing mandates must be critically examined. This section addresses these core barriers, focusing on how they influence the feasibility of integrating Q-NPT into current nuclear governance structures.

2.1. Institutional Resistance and Overlap with Existing Regimes

Institutional resistance arises not only from bureaucratic inertia and political conservatism but also from the fear of overlapping mandates. The NPT, CTBT, and IAEA already provide established legal and operational mechanisms for monitoring, verification, and technology sharing. Introducing the Q-NPT framework raises concerns among some stakeholders that it could duplicate or dilute existing institutional functions. However, Q-NPT is not designed to replace these frameworks but to bridge their normative and operational gaps—particularly in areas such as trust building, equitable access, and capacity building. For instance, while the IAEA focuses on technical verification, Q-NPT emphasizes mutual confidence and inclusive participation in decision making.

A further institutional challenge lies in sovereignty concerns. Many non-nuclear-weapon states (NNWS) worry that new governance models may impose external constraints or increase scrutiny without offering proportionate influence or benefits. The Q-NPT framework, by promoting nationally determined commitments and emphasizing capacity building, aims to balance these sovereignty concerns with global accountability. Drawing on the principle of subsidiarity, it enables states to shape their own implementation pathways within a unified global framework.

To address these challenges, legal harmonization efforts, inter-agency dialogues, and cooperative planning mechanisms will be essential. Recognizing and clarifying institutional complementarities between Q-NPT and existing treaties will prevent duplication and encourage constructive engagement.

2.2. Economic Concerns

Economic barriers to the adoption of the Q-NPT framework are multifaceted and disproportionately affect low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), which often face budgetary constraints and pressing development priorities. Unlike the NPT, which primarily focuses on non-proliferation obligations, Q-NPT proposes a broader governance architecture that includes capacity building, equitable technology access, and sustainability alignment—each of which entails financial commitments. These include not only upfront investment in infrastructure and regulatory systems, but also recurring costs related to monitoring, verification, staff training, and participation in multilateral platforms.

A key concern is that resource-constrained states may lack the fiscal space to implement even minimum safeguards, let alone adopt new frameworks. This challenge is compounded by uncertainty about long-term returns on investment in nuclear energy, especially in regions where public opinion or energy alternatives reduce the political appetite for nuclear development.

Moreover, economic asymmetries risk reinforcing existing power imbalances in nuclear governance. Without meaningful support, LMICs may perceive Q-NPT as another externally imposed burden, rather than a tool for empowerment. To counter this perception, Q-NPT explicitly incorporates a differentiated responsibility principle, allowing for nationally tailored pathways and phased financial contributions. It also calls for the establishment of a global nuclear transition fund, jointly administered by the IAEA and development banks, to subsidize the costs of adoption for less-developed states.

Multilateral financing tools—such as blended finance, technology-sharing partnerships, and sovereign co-financing models—can ease this burden while ensuring accountability. These mechanisms can also help integrate nuclear governance into countries’ broader sustainable energy strategies and just transition plans, thus aligning Q-NPT implementation with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

2.3. Technological Limitations

Technological limitations remain a critical barrier to inclusive and effective nuclear governance. Many countries—especially in the Global South—lack access to the advanced instrumentation, secure data infrastructure, and technical expertise necessary for real-time monitoring, cyber-resilient data management, and comprehensive safeguards compliance. These gaps contribute to asymmetries in verification capacity and hinder meaningful participation in global governance mechanisms. Within the context of the Q-NPT framework—which relies on transparency, reciprocity, and inclusive oversight—such disparities erode both operational feasibility and stakeholder trust.

These limitations are further compounded by the siloed implementation structures of current regimes. Existing mechanisms, particularly under the NPT and IAEA safeguards, often prioritize centralized compliance verification while treating technical cooperation as a secondary function. In contrast, Q-NPT integrates innovation diffusion, technical assistance, and capacity-building as core governance principles, not ancillary activities. Rather than replicating IAEA safeguards, Q-NPT aims to complement them by embedding technology democratization directly into trust-building processes and by emphasizing regional equity in technological development.

The framework envisions initiatives such as regionally distributed innovation hubs, open-access platforms for remote verification, and cooperative research initiatives between nuclear and non-nuclear states. These mechanisms help address both structural gaps and political sensitivities around dependence on external actors. Furthermore, by promoting the modular deployment of emerging tools—including AI-enabled anomaly detection, blockchain for immutable data ledgers, and satellite-assisted verification—Q-NPT enhances adaptability and scalability, particularly in states with limited technical infrastructure.

To operationalize this vision, Q-NPT proposes a set of multilateral technology-sharing protocols, overseen by an inclusive advisory board composed of representatives from diverse geopolitical and technical backgrounds. These protocols aim to ensure that technological support is delivered based on verified needs assessments and development goals, rather than geopolitical alignments. This helps decouple technological assistance from strategic leverage, making the Q-NPT model more politically acceptable, especially for countries wary of intrusive oversight under existing regimes. By aligning technological empowerment with global trust-building objectives and sustainable development, the Q-NPT framework offers a transformative and pragmatic approach to narrowing the global nuclear technology divide.

2.4. Geopolitical and Multilateral Trust Challenges

Trust remains both the most essential and most elusive element of multilateral nuclear governance. Historically, trust-building mechanisms such as confidence-building measures (CBMs), regional nuclear-weapon-free zones (NWFZs), and voluntary safeguards agreements have proven uneven in implementation and limited in reach [5,12]. Critics argue that these mechanisms often rely on voluntary compliance and symbolic commitments rather than robust accountability. The Q-NPT framework acknowledges these critiques and introduces operational mechanisms for enhancing mutual confidence—such as peer-reviewed transparency reports, regional verification hubs, and joint training platforms.

Geopolitically, divergent threat perceptions between nuclear and non-nuclear states continue to hinder consensus on reform. While nuclear-armed states may see Q-NPT as redundant or even threatening strategic autonomy, non-nuclear states often perceive current governance regimes as unequal and opaque. These perceptions reinforce mistrust and stall cooperative engagement. Q-NPT attempts to recalibrate this dynamic by shifting the focus from control to collaboration, from deterrence to inclusion, and from hierarchy to mutual benefit.

2.5. Rationale for Empirical Studies Selected

Table 1. Barriers to nuclear governance: empirical evidence and sources.

Barrier Type	Empirical Evidence	Sources
Economic Concerns	Global: The IAEA’s comprehensive verification program costs approximately USD 150 million/year. Modern nuclear safety upgrades in Japan post-Fukushima reached JPY 4.8 trillion (~USD 44.2 billion).	[10,16]
	Regional: Estimated annual compliance costs for Sub-Saharan Africa: USD 1.2 billion, with 30% unmet funding needs.	[17]
	Per-Country: Developing states like Nigeria and Kenya allocate less than 2% of their energy budgets to nuclear governance.	[18]
Technological Limitations	Global: Approximately 60% of low-income countries lack adequate nuclear monitoring systems.	[10]
	Regional: Southeast Asia exhibits a 40% technology gap, with only 3 of 11 countries meeting minimum monitoring standards.	[2]
	Per-Country: Nations like Bangladesh and Sudan rely on outdated systems, with less than 25% compliance in IAEA safeguards inspections.	[19]
Regional Cost Comparisons	Middle East and North Africa (MENA): High-security costs due to geopolitical tensions, with compliance expenses averaging USD 10 million/state annually.	[18]
	Eastern Europe: Compliance costs are offset by EU funding initiatives, providing up to EUR 30 million/project.	[20]
	Latin America: Costs remain low (~USD 3 million/year), supported by established nuclear-free zones like the Treaty of Tlatelolco.	[20,21]
Per-Country Ratings	High Capacity: France (97%), South Korea (92%)—advanced monitoring infrastructure.	[22]
	Medium Capacity: India (76%), Brazil (68%)—progressing in nuclear safety and safeguards.	[22]
	Low Capacity: Nigeria (32%), Sudan (21%)—significant gaps in monitoring and compliance.	[18]

presents a curated selection of empirical studies that inform the diagnostic analysis of nuclear governance challenges relevant to the Q-NPT framework. Selection criteria prioritized peer-reviewed sources published between 2003 and 2023 to ensure temporal relevance and account for recent geopolitical and technological developments. The studies represent a diverse range of geopolitical settings—including both nuclear-armed and non-nuclear states—and draw on multiple methodological approaches, such as qualitative policy analyses, system dynamics modeling, and comparative regional assessments. This diversity ensures robust analytical coverage of key dimensions, including disarmament equity, verification gaps, institutional mistrust, and economic feasibility. By integrating methodologically rigorous and regionally representative findings, the evidence in Table 1 establishes a solid empirical foundation for understanding the barriers to Q-NPT adoption and guiding responsive policy design [2,13,14,15].

3. Potential for Adoption of the Q-NPT Framework

The Q-NPT framework presents significant potential for global adoption, grounded in its congruence with prevailing international energy objectives, the rising demand for equitable nuclear energy policies, and technological advances that facilitate its practical implementation. These factors collectively underscore the framework’s relevance and provide a credible pathway for its integration into global nuclear energy governance.

Critically, the Q-NPT framework both builds upon and extends the foundational obligations enshrined in the original Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) [22]. In particular, it reinforces Article IV, which guarantees the right of all states to access nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, and Article VI, which mandates the pursuit of nuclear disarmament [23]. Unlike the NPT’s dichotomous division of nuclear-armed and non-nuclear states, the Q-NPT introduces a more nuanced, equity-centered governance model that fosters inclusive participation across all states, thereby addressing the persistent challenges of mistrust, limited technology sharing, and inequitable burden distribution [14,15]. This inclusive and dynamic approach reflects the evolving geopolitical and energy landscapes while reaffirming the core principles of peaceful use and disarmament.

3.1. Alignment with International Frameworks

The Q-NPT framework demonstrates strong alignment with established international policy frameworks, including the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the mandates of IAEA [10] SDG 7 prioritizes ensuring access to affordable, reliable, and sustainable energy, while SDG 16 emphasizes the promotion of peaceful and inclusive societies through effective and accountable institutions [23]. By facilitating equitable governance and fostering cooperation in nuclear energy policy and security, the Q-NPT framework directly supports these objectives [2,24].

Moreover, the IAEA’s mandate to assist member states in strengthening sustainable nuclear energy policies synergizes with the principles underpinning Q-NPT, empowering states to develop robust, security-conscious energy strategies grounded in sustainability [24]. This synergy enhances the framework’s legitimacy and broadens its appeal among policymakers and a diverse array of stakeholders invested in sustainable energy transitions.

3.2. Demand for Equitable Disarmament

The growing international advocacy for equitable disarmament and sustainable nuclear solutions highlights the urgency of addressing the disproportionate risks experienced by non-nuclear weapon states. The Q-NPT framework’s inclusive participation paradigm offers a pragmatic mechanism that accommodates the strategic and energy interests of both nuclear-armed and non-nuclear states, thereby mitigating tensions and promoting multilateral cooperation [14,15].

Its flexibility across diverse geopolitical and energy contexts enhances its attractiveness as a governance model. In regions characterized by asymmetries in nuclear capability and energy infrastructure, the framework’s equity-driven governance provisions serve to reconcile competing interests and foster mutual confidence [2]. By embedding equity and inclusivity into nuclear energy policymaking, the Q-NPT framework addresses long-standing governance deficits and supports a more stable nuclear order.

3.3. Advances in Monitoring and Verification Technologies

Technological innovation significantly bolsters the feasibility of frameworks such as Q-NPT. Cutting-edge tools—including satellite remote sensing, blockchain-enabled data integrity systems, and real-time analytics—facilitate rigorous compliance monitoring and verification, enhancing transparency and objectivity in nuclear energy oversight [24].

Further, developments in simulation modeling and risk assessment methodologies empower policymakers to anticipate implementation challenges and dynamically adapt governance strategies [13]. These technological capabilities not only address prior shortcomings in nuclear governance but also render the Q-NPT framework a pragmatic and appealing solution for diverse stakeholders.

In summary, the Q-NPT framework’s congruence with global sustainability goals, its responsiveness to calls for fairness in nuclear policy, and its integration of advanced verification technologies collectively position it for widespread adoption. Leveraging these strengths, the framework can catalyze enhanced cooperation and trust among nations, advancing a more inclusive and sustainable approach to nuclear energy governance. With sustained commitment and innovation, Q-NPT holds promise as a pivotal element in balancing sustainable energy demands with global security imperatives.

3.4. A Dynamic Model for the Adoption of the Q-NPT Framework

Figure 1 depicts a causal loop diagram (CLD)-based dynamic model illustrating the Q-NPT adoption process. The model identifies five reinforcing feedback loops (R1–R5) that jointly facilitate framework uptake, highlighting interactions among technological progress, trust building, equity considerations, and institutional congruence, as detailed below:

• Technological Feedback Loop (R1): Enhancements in monitoring and verification technologies enhance institutional confidence among stakeholders, which strengthens alignment with international norms, thereby accelerating Q-NPT adoption. Adoption further stimulates technological investment, sustaining a virtuous cycle of innovation.
• Demand and Equity Loop (R2): Rising demand for equitable disarmament and sustainable nuclear policies builds confidence and inclusivity among states. This trust underpins technological development, easing Q-NPT implementation. Adoption reinforces equity imperatives, amplifying disarmament demand.
• Institutional Legitimacy Loop (R3): Alignment with international frameworks enhances the Q-NPT framework’s credibility, stimulating demand for equitable nuclear policies and promoting adoption. Subsequent adoption consolidates institutional alignment, reinforcing legitimacy among decision-makers.
• Resistance Mitigation Loop (R4): Increasing demand for equitable nuclear governance motivates investment in verification technologies, supporting credibility through transparency. Enhanced trust facilitates alignment with sustainable energy policies and international frameworks, improving adoption prospects. Adoption mitigates resistance, sustaining positive momentum.
• Technology–Demand–Framework Integration Loop (R5): Advances in monitoring technologies invigorate demand for equitable governance, promoting deeper integration with international frameworks. This integration accelerates Q-NPT adoption and catalyzes further technological innovation.

Figure 1 represents a conceptual systems-thinking model designed to elucidate the reinforcing dynamics that can influence the global adoption of the Q-NPT framework. While grounded in literature-based insights and policy logic, the model is intended as a heuristic tool rather than a validated simulation. Future work could empirically calibrate this framework using regional data or case studies (e.g., emerging nuclear energy programs in Southeast Asia or Eastern Europe), thereby translating these qualitative systems maps into a decision-support tool for policy evaluation and implementation design.

4. Strategies for Promoting Uptake of the Q-NPT Framework

The successful promotion and adoption of the Q-NPT framework depend on strategic actions that address key barriers and leverage existing opportunities. This section outlines actionable strategies for fostering global acceptance and implementation while highlighting the framework’s relevance to nuclear energy policy and sustainable energy transitions.

4.1. Building International Consensus

Building an international consensus is essential for the widespread adoption of the Q-NPT framework. Establishing multilateral forums where nations can openly discuss concerns and negotiate solutions is critical. These forums foster dialogue that cultivates mutual understanding and addresses misconceptions, ultimately aligning nations around shared benefits such as enhanced global security and equitable access to nuclear energy [2,25].

A relevant example of such consensus building is the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, adopted in 2015. The agreement succeeded in uniting 196 countries under a shared commitment to combat climate change by leveraging multilateral platforms like the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Through transparent dialogue and tailored commitments, it aligned global objectives with national priorities, demonstrating the power of collaborative frameworks in addressing global challenges. Similarly, the Q-NPT framework could utilize multilateral platforms to foster trust, enable accountability, and encourage nations to align their nuclear energy policies with shared international goals.

Additionally, emphasizing the Q-NPT’s alignment with international objectives—such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and IAEA mandates—reinforces its legitimacy. Highlighting the framework’s role in advancing shared global priorities, including sustainable energy policy and energy transitions, encourages participation and collaboration [24]. Collectively, these consensus-building efforts, informed by the success of agreements like the Paris Accord, lay the foundation for broad, cooperative engagement with the Q-NPT framework.

4.2. Leveraging Technology for Transparency

Technological advancements are pivotal to enhancing transparency within the Q-NPT framework. Blockchain technology offers secure and immutable record-keeping, ensuring that compliance data remains tamper-proof and reliable. This innovation mitigates concerns of biased enforcement and promotes fairness across participating nations [13].

A real-world example of such technological integration is the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) Remote Monitoring Systems [25]. These systems use surveillance cameras, radiation detectors, and secure data transmission technologies to facilitate real-time monitoring of nuclear facilities. By transmitting data directly to the IAEA, these systems enhance the ability to verify compliance with international safeguards agreements, reducing the need for frequent on-site inspections and increasing global confidence in nuclear transparency [26].

Artificial intelligence (AI) and the Internet of Things (IoT) further facilitate real-time monitoring and compliance verification. By enabling continuous tracking of nuclear materials and activities, these technologies provide actionable insights while reducing the risk of undetected non-compliance [25].

To ensure that emerging technologies do not infringe upon national sovereignty, Q-NPT incorporates safeguards such as data anonymization, geofenced data-sharing protocols, and voluntary participation thresholds. These privacy-preserving approaches respect national autonomy while enabling cooperative verification, balancing transparency with sovereign prerogatives.

4.3. Incentivizing Participation

Incentivizing participation is crucial for encouraging nations to adopt the Q-NPT framework. Financial and technological support mechanisms address economic constraints and promote equitable engagement. For instance, international funding initiatives can subsidize compliance costs for resource-constrained nations, while technology-sharing programs provide access to essential tools and expertise [13].

A real-world example of this strategy is the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. The Protocol established a Multilateral Fund to provide financial support to developing countries, enabling them to phase out ozone-depleting substances (ODS). In addition, technology transfer initiatives facilitated access to advanced, ozone-friendly technologies, helping nations meet their obligations. The Protocol also leveraged economic incentives by linking market access to compliance, effectively encouraging near-universal adoption [27]. Similarly, the Q-NPT framework could employ financial mechanisms and technology-sharing programs to address economic and resource disparities among nations. Funding mechanisms for Q-NPT adoption:

• Climate Finance Instruments: Nations may tap into climate-related funding sources (e.g., Green Climate Fund, Global Environment Facility) to support Q-NPT-aligned energy transitions.
• Green Bonds: Issuing sovereign or multilateral green bonds tied to clean nuclear infrastructure may attract ESG-aligned investors.
• IAEA-Coordinated Nuclear Transition Fund: A pooled financing mechanism could subsidize adoption costs, especially for low- and middle-income countries, modeled after the Montreal Protocol’s Multilateral Fund.

Offering additional incentives, such as preferential trade agreements or access to advanced nuclear technologies, can further strengthen participation. These benefits not only attract initial adopters but also reinforce long-term commitments to the framework [2]. Such incentives create a positive feedback loop, enhancing both uptake and sustained engagement, while promoting alignment with nuclear energy policy and sustainable energy goals.

4.4. Strengthening Capacity and Training

Capacity-building initiatives are integral to the effective implementation of the Q-NPT framework. Comprehensive training programs tailored to the needs of policymakers, regulators, and technical personnel ensure that stakeholders are equipped to fulfill their roles effectively [24].

A proven example of this strategy is the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Regional Training Centers (RTCs) and Regional Cooperative Agreements (RCAs). These programs provide localized, context-specific training and foster collaboration among countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. By facilitating hands-on workshops, technical assistance, and shared expertise, these centers have significantly enhanced regional nuclear governance capacities and harmonized safety and security standards [10,27].

Regional centers of excellence can further enhance localized implementation by providing accessible resources and expertise. These centers serve as hubs for knowledge sharing, technical assistance, and collaborative problem solving, fostering regional cooperation and strengthening the global adoption of Q-NPT [28]. Investing in capacity and training ultimately empowers stakeholders to confidently uphold the framework’s standards and objectives while ensuring alignment with sustainable energy policy and global energy governance goals.

4.5. Facilitating Legal Harmonization

The successful integration of the Q-NPT framework into national and regional regimes requires legal compatibility and mutual reinforcement. Legal pathways for harmonization:

• Voluntary Adherence Mechanisms: Countries may opt into Q-NPT provisions via memoranda of understanding (MOUs) or national policy declarations without requiring full treaty ratification.
• Model Legislation Templates: Q-NPT governance bodies can provide template laws that nations can adapt to local contexts, streamlining legislative uptake.
• Regional Protocols: Building models like the Treaty of Pelindaba (Africa) or the Bangkok Treaty (Southeast Asia), regional legal instruments may incorporate Q-NPT norms within existing nuclear-weapon-free zones.

These legal tools reduce transaction costs, promote policy coherence, and accelerate the diffusion of Q-NPT principles across diverse governance environments.

Table 2. Strategic actions for promoting uptake of the Q-NPT framework.

Strategic Action	Key Aspects	Relevance to Energy Policy and Sustainability
Building International Consensus	- Establish multilateral forums for trust building and negotiation - Emphasize shared benefits like equitable energy access and global security	Aligns nuclear governance with global energy transitions and climate objectives
Leveraging Technology for Transparency	- Use blockchain for secure, immutable record-keeping - Integrate AI and IoT for real-time monitoring - Safeguard privacy and sovereignty through data protection protocols	Enhances transparency, trust, and responsible data governance
Incentivizing Participation	- Provide financial support (e.g., grants, subsidies, multilateral funds) - Offer access to advanced nuclear technologies - Use climate finance and green bonds as funding sources	Supports equitable engagement and accelerates sustainable energy development
Strengthening Capacity and Training	- Develop regional training centers and cooperative agreements - Localize programs for diverse regulatory and technical audiences	Boosts technical readiness and policy alignment in emerging nuclear energy markets
Facilitating Legal Harmonization	- Promote voluntary adherence, model laws, and regional protocols	Encourages national policy convergence and regulatory synergy

presents a summary of strategic actions for the promotion of the adoption of the Q-NPT framework.

5. Case Studies and Precedents

The uptake and effectiveness of global governance frameworks, including those related to nuclear governance, energy economics, and sustainable energy transitions, can be better understood by analyzing prior international agreements and regional initiatives. This section examines lessons from key global treaties and regional efforts, providing insights applicable to the Q-NPT framework.

5.1. Lessons from Global Agreements: The Paris Agreement and CTBT

The Paris Agreement (2015) achieved broad international participation through its flexible approach, allowing countries to submit nationally determined contributions (NDCs) aligned with their capacities and priorities [3]. This flexibility fostered global buy-in despite diverse economic and political interests. However, enforcement and verification remain challenges due to the decentralized accountability model that relies heavily on peer pressure rather than binding sanctions [4]. For the Q-NPT framework, this underscores the need to design a system that balances flexibility with robust and transparent verification and enforcement mechanisms to maintain credibility and compliance. The Q-NPT framework can learn from the Paris Agreement by integrating advanced monitoring technologies and establishing clear, incentivized compliance pathways, minimizing the risks of non-compliance and free-riding.

The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) illustrates the impact of technological innovation on verification through its International Monitoring System (IMS), which provides near real-time data to detect nuclear tests [28,29]. However, the treaty’s full entry into force is hindered by geopolitical dynamics, as key nuclear states have not ratified the treaty. This highlights the necessity for Q-NPT to incorporate continuous diplomatic engagement and confidence-building measures, ensuring geopolitical sensitivities are addressed proactively. The framework might overcome this barrier by fostering incremental adoption strategies and regional coalitions to build momentum and isolate resistance.

5.2. Regional Successes in Nuclear Governance

The Treaty of Tlatelolco (1967), which established Latin America as the first nuclear-weapon-free zone, demonstrates the power of shared regional concerns and strong political will in achieving nuclear governance goals. Its success relied heavily on consensus-building among member states and transparent verification protocols, which were supported and reinforced by international actors [13]. The Q-NPT framework can adopt a similar regionally tailored approach by empowering regional bodies to lead localized governance initiatives, fostering ownership and accountability. By embedding regional mechanisms within the global framework, Q-NPT can address diverse security and energy policy concerns while promoting harmonized standards.

In contrast, the Six-Party Talks in East Asia have struggled due to enduring geopolitical tensions and divergent national interests, demonstrating the difficulty of achieving consensus in high-stakes nuclear diplomacy [15]. This example warns that Q-NPT must be adaptive to complex regional dynamics and incorporate flexible confidence-building mechanisms sensitive to local political contexts. Effective implementation will require ongoing dialogue, trust building, and mechanisms to manage impasses without derailing the entire framework.

5.3. Energy Transition Initiatives and Nuclear Governance

Successful energy transition initiatives provide further insights for Q-NPT adoption. The IAEA’s capacity-building programs have helped member states develop nuclear energy capabilities for sustainable development, demonstrating the importance of pairing governance frameworks with practical technical support and training to overcome economic and institutional barriers [10]. Q-NPT can emulate this by embedding dedicated capacity-building pillars that enhance national competencies essential for compliance and governance.

The European Union’s integrated energy policies exemplify how supranational governance structures can harmonize diverse national interests through joint funding mechanisms, common legal frameworks, and coordinated policies [13]. This model underscores the value of institutionalized cooperation for advancing shared goals in energy economics and sustainable energy transitions. Q-NPT could leverage such supranational approaches by encouraging the formation of coalitions or blocs within the framework, facilitating pooled resources and shared standards that drive collective progress while respecting sovereignty.

5.4. Serbia as an Emerging Test Case for Q-NPT

Serbia represents an increasingly relevant case for testing the applicability of the Q-NPT framework. Following the adoption of a new Energy Law in November 2024, Serbia formally revoked its long-standing moratorium (1989) on nuclear power plant construction, thus re-opening the legal and policy space for civilian nuclear energy development. This marks a significant shift in national energy policy and aligns with broader regional and European trends toward low-carbon energy diversification.

While Serbia currently does not possess operational reactors, research reactors, or nuclear fuel from the former Yugoslav era, it has actively begun to re-explore nuclear energy as part of its green energy transition. According to recent legislative analysis [30] and recent research [31,32], Serbian policymakers are considering regional partnerships, including potential investment in Hungary’s Paks II nuclear power plant (5–10% share). These developments signal not only renewed interest, but also a willingness to participate in transboundary nuclear cooperation—a key principle of the Q-NPT model.

Given this policy shift and regional engagement, Serbia could serve as a pilot context for phased Q-NPT adoption, particularly in the areas of trust building, legal adaptation, and stakeholder inclusion [33]. The Q-NPT framework could support Serbia’s transition by

• Enhancing early-stage public trust through transparent dialogue and community consultations aligned with IAEA stakeholder engagement guidance (e.g., NG-G-5.1).
• Supporting legal alignment with international non-proliferation norms and model legislation, thereby strengthening regulatory credibility.
• Facilitating technical and civil society capacity building, including the creation of national trust indices, public outreach platforms, and expert training hubs.
• Assisting in regional diplomacy and transparency, especially regarding Serbia’s potential partnership in Paks II and its broader nuclear positioning within Southeast Europe.

Moreover, insights from [30] suggest that public attitudes toward nuclear energy in Serbia remain cautiously open, especially when framed within climate goals and regional stability. By integrating trust metrics, civil society engagement mechanisms, and adaptive legal instruments, Q-NPT can help Serbia navigate its early-stage nuclear ambitions while reinforcing international confidence and social legitimacy.

In this light, Serbia does not serve merely as a follower in nuclear development, but as a strategic “entry-point” case for demonstrating how trust-centered governance can guide newcomer states toward peaceful, secure, and publicly supported nuclear futures. This case could serve as a replicable model for other non-nuclear countries exploring nuclear energy in similarly transitional contexts.

5.5. ASEAN: Regional Cooperation with Nuclear Diversity

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) offers another instructive example, marked by energy interdependence, legal diversity, and varying levels of nuclear readiness. While most ASEAN member states do not possess nuclear weapons or energy infrastructure, countries such as Vietnam and Indonesia have expressed strong interest in developing civilian nuclear capabilities. At the same time, the Bangkok Treaty [34] affirms ASEAN’s commitment to a nuclear-weapon-free zone and peaceful nuclear cooperation. The Q-NPT framework could complement ASEAN’s regional strategy by

• Promoting multilateral trust mechanisms, including joint research and regional transparency hubs.
• Supporting differentiated obligations, allowing states at different stages of nuclear development to adopt tailored compliance pathways.
• Aligning with the ASEAN Plan of Action for Energy Cooperation (APAEC) by embedding Q-NPT principles into shared infrastructure and legal frameworks [35].

The ASEAN case illustrates how Q-NPT’s flexible and inclusive design could adapt to regions with heterogeneous nuclear aspirations—bridging the gap between collective security goals and national development trajectories.

In summary, these case studies and regional examples offer valuable lessons that the Q-NPT framework can adopt to overcome challenges in enforcement, geopolitical dynamics, legal reform, and regional governance. By integrating flexible mechanisms, fostering sustained diplomacy, supporting emerging adopters like Serbia, and enabling cooperative frameworks like ASEAN, Q-NPT can enhance its legitimacy and viability on the global stage. A comprehensive summary of challenges addressed and lessons for the adoption of the Q-NPT framework (

Table 3. A summary of challenges addressed and lessons for the adoption of the Q-NPT framework.

Source/Precedent	Key Challenge Addressed	Lessons for Q-NPT Framework
Paris Agreement	Enforcement and compliance with diverse national interests	Couple flexibility with tech-enabled transparency and incentivized compliance to reduce reliance on peer pressure.
CTBT	Geopolitical obstacles and reluctance of key states to participate	Employ confidence-building and phased adoption strategies; invest in diplomacy.
Treaty of Tlatelolco	Regional security and governance ownership	Promote regionally anchored models with transparent verification.
Six-Party Talks	Diplomatic impasses and regional tensions	Build adaptable frameworks that can continue through diplomatic deadlocks.
IAEA and EU Energy Governance	Capacity building and policy harmonization	Provide training and supranational support to harmonize compliance.
Serbia	Legal reform, energy ambition, and public trust	Pilot Q-NPT tools through transparency protocols and capacity building within a reforming legal framework.
ASEAN	Regional diversity in nuclear readiness	Use differentiated obligations and regional hubs to enable cooperative governance.

).

6. Policy Recommendations, Future Directions, and Conclusion

The adoption and implementation of the Qudrat-Ullah Nuclear Peace and Trust (Q-NPT) framework necessitates a holistic and strategic approach that integrates legal sovereignty, technological readiness, and international cooperation. By aligning nuclear governance with global energy and climate goals, the framework emphasizes trust, transparency, and equity—making it a timely and transformative tool for fostering international collaboration. This section presents actionable policy recommendations, a phased adoption strategy, broader implications for global governance, directions for future research, and concluding reflections on the framework’s long-term significance.

6.1. Actionable Policy Measures

To overcome persistent barriers such as sovereignty sensitivities, institutional fragmentation, and verification asymmetries, the Q-NPT framework must prioritize a combination of diplomatic, technological, legal, and financial instruments. Trust-building mechanisms are central, including joint verification exercises, multilateral transparency protocols, and regional nuclear reporting hubs, modeled in part after the International Monitoring System of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization [29]. These initiatives aim to alleviate fears of external interference while building confidence in the framework’s fairness and accountability.

Technological innovations will play a pivotal role in enhancing compliance and verification capabilities without compromising national sovereignty. Blockchain technologies can offer immutable and tamper-proof audit trails of nuclear data, while artificial intelligence (AI) and the Internet of Things (IoT) can enable real-time surveillance and anomaly detection in nuclear facilities [10,13]. These tools are designed to support decentralized verification and reduce the need for intrusive inspections, thus aligning compliance practices with principles of state sovereignty.

In terms of legal integration, Q-NPT supports several pathways toward harmonization with existing treaties and national systems. These include voluntary adherence to core principles through declarative endorsements, the adoption of model legislation tailored to regional legal contexts, and the development of supplementary protocols that align Q-NPT commitments with those already embedded in the NPT, CTBT, and IAEA safeguard regimes. These legal innovations are intended to foster coherence, prevent redundancy, and allow flexibility for national adaptation.

Financing mechanisms are equally critical to ensure equitable participation and avoid exacerbating global inequalities in nuclear governance. The establishment of a Global Nuclear Transition Fund, jointly administered by the IAEA and international development banks, could support infrastructure upgrades, training programs, and initial compliance costs for low- and middle-income countries [2]. In addition, the Q-NPT framework proposes leveraging green bonds, blended finance instruments, and climate-linked funding to incentivize participation and embed nuclear energy governance within the broader climate and sustainable development finance architecture.

Together, these policy measures form a robust and integrated strategy that balances the technical, political, and institutional dimensions of nuclear governance. They underscore the Q-NPT framework’s capacity to address longstanding governance gaps through pragmatic, inclusive, and forward-looking reforms.

6.2. Phased Adoption Timeline

A phased implementation strategy, as shown in Figure 2, is essential for ensuring the structured and scalable adoption of the Q-NPT framework. In the short term, covering the first one to three years, the emphasis should be on foundational engagement with early adopters. This would include the launch of pilot programs, national-level consultations, and targeted diplomatic dialogues to test the framework’s viability and demonstrate its benefits. These initiatives would be accompanied by initial capacity-building investments and technical feasibility assessments designed to lay the groundwork for broader implementation.

During the medium-term phase, spanning years four through seven, the focus would shift toward expanding the framework’s reach and deepening its institutional infrastructure. Regional centers of excellence would be established to provide training, facilitate legal harmonization, and support the deployment of verification technologies adapted to local contexts. In this phase, cross-border coordination mechanisms and standardized protocols would be introduced to strengthen operational alignment across regions with diverse nuclear energy and security priorities.

The long-term phase, projected for years eight through fifteen, envisions near-universal adoption of the Q-NPT framework and its integration into global disarmament, energy, and development platforms. This stage would involve embedding the framework within broader international commitments such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), as well as aligning it with multilateral instruments under the IAEA, UN, and regional energy communities. By linking nuclear governance with global sustainability objectives, the long-term phase ensures that the Q-NPT framework remains resilient and responsive to evolving international priorities.

This phased strategy is designed not only to build trust incrementally but also to allow adaptive learning, regional customization, and convergence around shared standards over time. It provides a clear roadmap for advancing the Q-NPT framework from conceptualization to operationalization and eventual institutionalization at the global level.

6.3. Broader Implications for Global Governance

The Q-NPT framework represents a paradigmatic shift in how nuclear governance can be conceptualized and operationalized in the twenty-first century. It integrates peace, energy equity, and sustainability in ways that transcend traditional non-proliferation discourse and align with broader trends in global governance reform. By embedding trust, transparency, and multilateral equity into its foundational logic, the Q-NPT framework holds potential not only for transforming nuclear governance but also for inspiring innovation in adjacent domains such as cybersecurity, climate finance, and emerging technology governance.

Regional models offer compelling validation for this integrative approach. The Treaty of Tlatelolco demonstrated how regional political cohesion and shared security interests can drive successful denuclearization and verification [15] (Solingen, 2007). Similarly, the European Union’s energy integration strategy illustrates the value of supranational governance structures that harmonize national policies through joint institutions, shared funding mechanisms, and legally binding coordination [1]. The Q-NPT framework draws upon these lessons by advocating for regional leadership within a globally coherent architecture.

Importantly, the Q-NPT model fosters a shift from top-down deterrence logic to a more cooperative, stakeholder-driven vision of governance [36]. This change is aligned with broader global efforts to address complex, interdependent challenges through inclusive, multi-level, and technologically supported policy frameworks. As such, Q-NPT offers not only a solution for nuclear trust deficits but also a blueprint for institutional innovation in global governance writ large.

6.4. Future Research Directions

Continued interdisciplinary research is vital to support and refine the Q-NPT framework’s implementation and impact. One key area is the evolving role of verification technologies. As AI, blockchain, and remote-sensing technologies become more advanced, empirical studies are needed to assess their effectiveness in diverse geopolitical contexts, their affordability for low-income states, and their implications for sovereignty, privacy, and cybersecurity. A particular focus should be placed on comparative evaluations of how different technological architectures perform under the Q-NPT model.

Another priority area involves regional adaptation and piloting. Empirical case studies of initial Q-NPT adoption in countries such as Serbia, Indonesia, or South Africa can shed light on how legal, institutional, and technical dimensions interact in practice. These trials can also reveal political economy dynamics, path dependencies, and stakeholder responses that inform further model refinement.

Further research is also needed on stakeholder engagement, especially the roles of civil society, academia, and the private sector in promoting transparency, accountability, and capacity building. These actors can provide independent monitoring, public education, and innovation resources that strengthen the legitimacy and effectiveness of the Q-NPT framework. Understanding how to institutionalize these multi-sector partnerships and foster sustained dialogue will be critical for long-term success.

Lastly, metrics and monitoring frameworks should be developed to assess the Q-NPT’s performance. This includes indicators for trust levels, compliance quality, equity in technology access, cost-effectiveness, and alignment with SDGs. Rigorous evaluation methods will ensure that the framework remains accountable, transparent, and evidence-based.

6.5. Conclusions

In conclusion, the Q-NPT framework offers a bold and pragmatic reimagining of nuclear governance. It draws on the successes and shortcomings of prior global efforts—such as the Paris Agreement, the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, and the Treaty of Tlatelolco—to develop a model that is flexible, technology-enhanced, and equity-driven. By proposing actionable strategies, phased implementation, and research-backed pathways, the framework directly addresses the trust deficits and technological asymmetries that have long hindered global cooperation in this domain.

Through its integration with sustainable energy transitions, emphasis on regional ownership, and commitment to inclusive innovation, the Q-NPT framework not only strengthens global nuclear peace and governance but also contributes to broader efforts to build a secure, sustainable, and just international order. Its adoption could mark a critical turning point—transforming nuclear governance from a domain of strategic distrust into a platform for shared progress and planetary stewardship.