2901. Can official development assistance be saved? The general reduction in funding means that we need to redefine our objectives
- Author:
- Louis Caudron
- Publication Date:
- 10-2025
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
- Abstract:
- Official development assistance (ODA) is in trouble. It is in crisis. In the United States, Donald Trump decided, one month after returning to the White House, to abolish the USAID programme, which managed US ODA amounting to $64 billion in 2023. While the European Union and its Member States remain the main providers of official development assistance worldwide, the European Commission is planning to reduce the funds allocated to the least developed countries by 35% for the period 2025-2027, compared to the period 2021-2024. There is no indication that the situation will improve in the new multiannual financial framework for 2028-2034 currently being prepared. A large proportion of these funds has been redirected to Ukraine over the past three years. Some Member States, such as the Netherlands, Germany, Belgium and Sweden, have also reduced their budgets for this aid. In France, President Emmanuel Macron, who had pledged in 2017 to increase it to 0.55% of GDP, has allowed his budget to be cut by a third in 2025. More than forty years ago, all countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) committed to devoting 0.7% of their GDP to official development assistance. At the time, this was seen as a duty of solidarity and a means of reducing the gap between developed and developing countries. Only a few countries have honoured the 0.7% of GDP commitment, but donors were at least trying to maintain their aid. Recent cuts show that they no longer believe in it. The most worrying thing is that these cuts in funding are hardly provoking any response from public opinion. Perceived as a simple ‘gift’ to developing countries, official development assistance has now been relegated to second place behind new or more urgent funding priorities such as European defence, innovation and climate transition. This indifference could be fatal for official development assistance, while its abolition would seriously damage our relations with the rest of the world. This is particularly true of our relations with Africa, which are so important for our future.
- Topic:
- Public Opinion, OECD, Development Assistance, and Funding Cuts
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus