Opinion: From cuts to common cause, how do we rethink global development?

The United Kingdom’s brutal 40% aid cut, following the United States’ lead, accompanies the global unravelling of a broader fabric. We’re watching norms that defined the post-war world collapse: European security guarantees in doubt, international law disregarded, media independence eroded, soft power dismantled. Aid hasn’t just been reduced — it’s been traduced as a relic of that old order, weaponized in the new culture wars, and abandoned in favor of a more transactional politics. We should fight to mitigate the immediate damage caused by these cuts. But we should also be asking ourselves: where do we go from here? Let’s leave behind the tired, binary argument about official development assistance, or ODA. Even after this wave of cuts, it is likely that total annual global flows will still sit at around $100 billion. That’s too much for us to ignore. Equally, every serious advocate for ODA knows its limitations. Not every program saves lives. Not every cost-saving measure will hurt the most vulnerable. We should not pretend otherwise — and be honest about what must change. The word “aid” itself has become part of the problem. It evokes handouts rather than partnerships, and charity rather than solidarity. The brand lets down the product. Both are due for a reset. We need a renewed understanding of what ODA should be and how it fits as one part of a bigger strategy for international cooperation. An ODA vision for the mid-21st century might include at least three dimensions. 1. Addressing development challenges First, ODA must offer part of the answer to development challenges, especially in the least developed countries where other resources are not yet harnessed, and in vital fundamental needs such as emergency humanitarian response and fighting preventable disease and malnutrition. And reformed ODA must be more than just an emergency service. Firefighting without fire prevention is wasteful and has a deadly cost. So ODA must be invested in supporting countries to develop and deliver the childhood vaccines that prevent disease, not just in treating that disease when it takes hold, or in strengthening the resilience of countries to the impact of climate change, not just dealing with the inevitable floods and droughts when they come. 2. Redistributing wealth Second, ODA should be a tool for the redistribution of wealth. In an increasingly interdependent world, the argument for shifting some wealth from where it has been most accumulated to where it can have the widest benefit is as strong when applied across borders as within them. National societies have always understood this not as an act of charity, but in everyone’s enlightened self-interest. Mutual international investments in sustainable growth, stability, health, and prosperity are win-win, not zero-sum. 3. Transmitting shared values Third, ODA should be an expression of who we are. It must be an authentic and contemporary channel of those instincts of humanity: for cooperation, empathy, and partnership. Transactions that are merely tools for extracting power or for gaining geopolitical advantage have no place in this definition. These transactional features were characteristic of ODA during the Cold War — and a new era of “great power dominance” risks repeating the same blueprint, with its accompanying corruption and inefficiency. Beyond ODA: How international cooperation moves forward Seen in these three ways, ODA can be a cornerstone for the future, not a crumbling relic of the past. Not the whole answer, but an essential part. What are the other elements of that wider vision for international cooperation and solidarity? 1. State where we need to go First, we must find a way to talk more about the ends of international cooperation and development, not just the means to achieve them. The 55-year-old target to see 0.7% of national income spent on ODA helps measure countries’ respective inputs. Without inputs, outcomes are impossible. But the 0.7% target fails to describe desired outcomes. In times of constrained resources, inputs must be justified by a compelling vision for what they will achieve. It has also become a too-convenient framework for the new ‘race to the bottom’ started by the American and British cuts. The 0.7% is not our destination. It is necessary fuel to help get us there. Where we are going needs to be much better stated. 2. Fair development finance Our second ‘beyond ODA’ challenge is to ensure that reformed ODA sits at the center of a modern, multilayered finance system for international cooperation. One that matches grants with fairer concessional finance, embraces nontraditional sources of funds, tackles the punitive cost of capital that holds back many economies — especially in Africa — and reforms global financial institutions to reflect today’s realities. ODA must work alongside these new forms of finance, and all these flows must be guided by the voices of those they are meant to support, as locally as possible, not dictated from afar. And at the heart of this shift must be a commitment to genuine partnership — moving from a model of giving and receiving to one of shared investment in development, particularly where there are mutual benefits. 3. Two-way flows of information Third, we need a new mutuality. In a world of intersecting crises, it’s clear we all have as much to learn as to offer. When Valencia and Los Angeles flood and burn as readily as the Sahel, the case for mutual support is only growing. Knowledge exchange, not just transfer, must define this next era. 4. Reconnecting with people And finally, we need an ambitious, sustained, people-powered movement. As division and transactional zero-sum calculation surges, we need an international campaign to insist that cooperation beats competition, that global challenges need shared solutions based on mutual interest, that we really do have more in common than that which divides us and that there are still great and hard things we can achieve when we come together as humanity. We must describe in vivid terms an end goal that can motivate and animate new generations of policymakers and the public. And alongside a new language, we need new routes to market. The media landscape has fragmented. Attention is short and polarised. Getting heard now means working differently and is not a quick or easy win. As we confront this era of fractured politics, rising needs, and global interdependence, we need an approach to development cooperation that meets the moment. That means recognizing the limits of but also the potential value of a reformed ODA, embedding it within a wider system of financial flows and mutual action, with alignment to a compelling long-term vision powered by a movement rooted in solidarity, empathy, and hope. Let’s begin.