After peaking during the COVID-19 pandemic, global aid to developing countries has declined sharply since 2024 (see Figure 1). Amid wars and global instability, most Western countries are actively diverting resources from development towards rearmament. The US, long the world’s largest donor, has shut down its premier development agency, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and slashed its aid budget. President Donald Trump, a staunch critic of foreign aid, is guided by an “America First” principle rather than a commitment to global development. Most other developed countries, including the UK, France, Germany, and the Netherlands, are also curtailing development assistance, and public support for aid in the West is now thin. Put simply, we are entering a post-aid world, and its impact has been particularly severe for vulnerable countries and communities, notably in Africa.
Figure 1: ODA Flows and Grant-Equivalent Measures by Official Providers, 2015–25 (US$ Billion Constant 2024 Prices)
Source: OECD
Note: 2025 figures are provisional
Despite the adverse impact of drastic aid cuts, the shortcomings of the international development architecture must be acknowledged. To be sure, development aid has never been devoid of controversy. Critics have long argued that Western aid rested on rigid hierarchies between donors and recipients, lacked accountability, undermined domestic initiative, and served donors’ interests ahead of the welfare of its intended beneficiaries. African scholars such as Dambisa Moyo and Robtel Neajai Pailey are among its staunchest critics, arguing that Africa must move beyond aid. Several African leaders, including William Ruto (Kenya), Paul Kagame (Rwanda), and John Dramani Mahama (Ghana), have likewise called for an end to aid, emphasising domestic resource mobilisation, investment, and industrialisation.
A new global development financing order must therefore address valid criticisms of the traditional model, not merely seek replacement funding. The debate on a post-aid world requires agreement on who defines development priorities, how responsibilities are shared, and what makes partnerships accountable. The archaic worldview in which richer nations hand aid to poorer ones and prescribe development priorities for them has outlived its usefulness. The world now faces existential challenges of climate change and environmental degradation, on top of massive development deficits in the Global South. Meeting them demands collective commitment, mutual understanding, and deeper dialogue between cultures, communities, and countries. International development today thus needs a commitment to humanity and justice, and here the African philosophy of Ubuntu, typically conveyed through the phrase “I am because we are,” can play an important role. Ubuntu sees humanity as inherently interconnected and stresses collectivism over individualism. Despite its theoretical sophistication, the concept has not received adequate attention within the broader global development framework.
An Ubuntu-informed approach would establish reciprocal obligations: governments account for public resources; external partners make transparent and predictable commitments; businesses accept measurable responsibilities; and communities exercise meaningful oversight.
Applied to development cooperation, Ubuntu, an ethic of shared humanity, dignity, and mutual responsibility, asks partners to recognise their obligations to one another while respecting the agency of the communities concerned. An Ubuntu-informed approach would establish reciprocal obligations: governments account for public resources; external partners make transparent and predictable commitments; businesses accept measurable responsibilities; and communities exercise meaningful oversight. Such an approach would entail not just more resources for development but also a greater say for the Global South in shaping its own development plans, and the ability of citizens and communities in both donor and recipient countries to trace how public resources support agreed priorities.
The practical application of Ubuntu in development partnerships would begin with country-led development transition plans. Governments must identify projects on the basis of community needs, development priorities, costs, and realistic options for sustaining them. External partners should take part through explicit commitments, with responsibilities and review dates made public. Ubuntu also introduces a distributional test: who gains from development, whose well-being is jeopardised by the transition, who bears the costs and risks, and who has the capacity and responsibility to prevent harm. It follows that financing instruments must be chosen with care. Development finance must protect developing countries from unsustainable debt burdens. Grants should remain available for essential services, such as health and education, that cannot generate the revenue to repay a loan. Concessional borrowing should be contingent on a credible assessment of its economic benefits and the borrower’s capacity to repay. Finally, private investment proposals should state who pays, who bears the risk, and what happens if anticipated revenues fail to materialise.
For much of the developing world, mobilising domestic resources should also be an objective of cooperation. Domestic funding, however, must be seen as a shared responsibility that calls for a dedicated institutional framework, not as pressure to raise more revenue quickly, which would absolve developed countries of their historical responsibilities. Cooperation should therefore help build domestic financing capabilities through technical assistance, access to information, and risk assessment. For several mineral-producing countries in Africa, this also means building the capacity to use strategic resources for national welfare and to negotiate from a stronger position on the global stage. The key questions are simple: Is another buyer available? Can production reach an alternative market? Is financing accessible on acceptable terms? Can the government delay an agreement while it seeks better conditions? Development cooperation could help countries answer these questions through independent project appraisal, geological data, and contract analysis. Its contribution should extend to strengthening their capacity to decline unfavourable offers.
As a philosophy that places the collective above the individual, Ubuntu holds sustainability to be intrinsic, envisioning development as rooted in human interconnectedness and harmony with nature.
As a philosophy that places the collective above the individual, Ubuntu holds sustainability to be intrinsic, envisioning development as rooted in human interconnectedness and harmony with nature. As the world rethinks international development in the face of existential challenges, Ubuntu gives Africa an opportunity to bring a distinctive moral and philosophical foundation to the global development agenda.
Malancha Chakrabarty is a Senior Fellow at the Observer Research Foundation.
Tafadzwa Luke Mupingashato is a postdoctoral research fellow at the Thabo Mbeki African School of Public and International Affairs, University of South Africa.
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
Source: www.orfonline.org
