The UN General Assembly takes place this month, under a cloud of concern that international cooperation for development – and the international system as a whole – is increasingly failing to protect, and improve, the lives of people in the greatest need. But from this low point is an opportunity to re-imagine and rebuild aid and development in a way that is more equitable and relevant for day to day lives.
During 2025, we have seen countries fail to uphold international law in Gaza, Ukraine and elsewhere. Many have also retreated from international development cooperation by drastically cutting back Official Development Assistance (ODA) budgets, with dire consequences. To discuss these challenges, IDS convened an international roundtable over the summer. We both participated along with representatives from different countries and regions, and from multilateral organisations, civil society and academia, who collectively raised insights and lessons which could help shape pathways for development cooperation.
Reimagining international development
With the exception of a few “bright spots” which have remained committed to development cooperation, most European countries and the US – previously by far the largest donor of ODA – have made cuts to aid budgets and can no longer be relied upon for investing in development. This leaves many questions about how to help finance essential services such as health, education and agriculture, or how to respond to the impacts of climate change, in lower-income countries.
While many grieve the loss of successful development programmes, with so much of the system broken, we believe that this is a moment to seize the opportunity to rebuild something better. We need hope more than ever, even if this comes through unexpected avenues. As shared in the IDS roundtable, ‘My barn is burning, but now I can see the moon’. Collectively we need to look to the moon and be more ambitious about what ‘aid’ and development could look like for the future.
To think of how all of us in development could work differently, we should take inspiration from examples such as the case of hundreds of international journalists – traditionally competitive and protective of their stories – working together across multiple countries in an unprecedented way to co-ordinate the release of the Panama Papers. Another example is Rare’s “Fish Forever” programme, demonstrating effective collaboration and community-led approaches with fishers to revitalise coastal fisheries; or the development of a Global Indigenous Peoples Declaration on Indigenous Peoples’ knowledge and rights regarding water care and management in response to the climate crisis.
Domestic financing for domestic priorities
We need to finally leave the traditional charity model of foreign aid in the past, and find more advocates to challenge the outdated financial architecture that perpetuates coloniality and power imbalances.
Low-income countries in the global South already work with scarcity, and have already been adapting and building resilience. Now, when traditional donor funding is even scarcer, it is important to focus on generating investment for domestic financing for domestic priorities, based on local needs. For example, one important area for this is to support – with finance and knowledge sharing – strengthening tax systems and ensure that taxes are fair and being paid to generate much needed national income. This will also require removing barriers to growth that many low-income countries face, such as debt relief and fairer tax treaties.
For other alternative funding for development ideas, participants at the roundtable discussed areas such as leveraging more private philanthropy, more South-South cooperation and trade, and mobilising more private sector funding – acknowledging the different roles that public and private finance play.
Following the Financing for Development conference in Spain and ahead of the G20, we hope that these issues will continue to get the attention they deserve on the global stage and the international cooperation they require. It is promising that South Africa, as hosts of this year’s G20, has announced a new Extraordinary Committee of Independent Experts to deliver a report on global inequality chaired by Nobel Prize-winning economist Professor Joseph Stiglitz.
COP30 is another opportunity to look for new alternatives for adapting to and mitigating against further impact of the climate crisis, and how best to support those counties who are worst affected but have contributed the least to cause climate change.
Communicating what we mean by ‘development’
Importantly, we accept that we all need to be better at communicating what we mean by ‘development’ and ‘foreign aid’, and to be much more effective at engaging the wider public on these issues. It is easy to dismiss the need for ‘development’ or ODA budgets when it is not clear what they mean, or if you cannot see the impact they have. Demonstrating impact and providing the evidence, transparently and with humility, of what has been achieved is a key part of re-engaging the public to make development more relevant and meaningful to people’s day to day lives.
We all agreed that more must be done, by all parties involved in the development sector, to show the impact of investment. People need to see where the money has been spent and what it has achieved. There should be a renewed focus on the effectiveness of funding, demonstrating value for societies and communicating impact. Aid remains essential in expanding local agency by nurturing and enabling talent.
After all, development is vaccinating children against diseases, discovering new antibiotics, preventing Mpox cases or new pandemics emerging. It is educating boys and girls, reducing violence against women and girls and ensuring LGBTQI rights.
We all have an interest in making development work
We reflected also on whether development is even the right language to use. Do we need a new term, or should we care more about making positive change, rather than engaging in endless debates about what to call the nature of this change? Ultimately, ‘aid’ or investment in global development – whatever we call it – needs to be accountable, and meaningful for those who count on it the most, as well as for those who contribute to investing in it – whether though paying tax or investing their own capital. We should all have an interest in making development work, as we all have a stake in building a liveable planet, free from injustice and inequalities.
Carlos Alvarado Quesada is Professor of Practice in Diplomacy, Tufts University and forty-eighth President of the Republic of Costa Rica. He is also an IDS alumni, studying at IDS during 2008/2009, obtaining a Master’s degree in Development Studies.
