There are many valid perspectives from which to criticise the development sector. A lot of the work in the space, for example, fails to achieve the intended expectations. One could also argue that for all the years of development work, poverty persists. Or even that sometimes the interventions of development cause further complications rather than solve problems. All these and more would be legitimate grounds for critiques of international aid and development. In fact, many people within the space have grappled with finding better ways to achieve the common goal: creating a world that is equitable, just, and provides fairness for all within the planetary constraints–while putting humans, their behavior, and their ability to change for the better centre stage. 

The past few months have upended our notions of what it means to support, share and live together as a global community. The funding cuts for international aid—spearheaded by the dramatic dismantling of USAID, the siege on non-partisan funded organizations such as the US Institute for Peace (USIP) and the US government’s rejection of any consideration of inequality, exclusion or unconscious bias—have stopped a lot of help for people who find themselves in the most dire of situations: displacement, disease, hunger, or insecurity. While the US has definitely grabbed the headlines, these funding cuts are a Global North phenomenon with similar, but maybe less dramatic cuts happening (or proposed to happen) in the Netherlands, France, the UK, Belgium, Australia and Germany. 

With these cuts has come a swath of job cuts across the sector with companies and organizations cutting back or even shutting down. The extreme limitation placed on good faith actors in this way, coupled with a removal of one of the few safety nets that the most vulnerable had, paints a bleak picture. Further, it remains unclear whether the landscape will reset to its previous form. For those who have spent their lives dedicated to working on solutions to these problems, it’s easy to focus on the setbacks and forget one simple fact: the work is not done. 

Crucial questions remain such as how to set priorities, how to give ownership to those who are supposed to benefit from development programs, how to listen to different types of knowledge, how to advance on the greater goals of a global community, and how to measure that advancement. Another question is how to stay committed to continue our learning: to understand how history, human behavior, and structures continue to make achieving the goals of development challenging. These questions remain unanswered, and this work is not done. 

Many organizations remain with development-oriented missions that haven’t been achieved, from small implementing NGOs to large-scale commercial business. Academic researchers working on single case studies to multi-year, multi-country large scale research programs still have unanswered questions. And, most importantly, poverty and inequality persists. The work is far from done. 

This work, inevitably, requires resources. Monetary resources can, however, also skew a conversation: if one conversation partner has money and the other side needs it, even conversations about overcoming power relationships can be overshadowed. The current—undeniably dramatic—situation, however, also opens up the question: what arguments, learning and knowledge will come to the fore if conversations on development can be had with fewer resources available and are driven from the Global South? What would a conversation unveil that allows Global South countries to think about how to not be vulnerable to political moods in the Global North?  This work is also not done. 

Through the work is not done we are dedicating ourselves to convening, encouraging, inviting to, and leading (but not owning) this collaborative conversation and community. We’re calling on our partners, friends and allies to use this moment as what  Yuen Yuen Ang calls ‘polytunity’ to tackle—and then shift—what Mareike Schomerus has referred to as  the ‘transactional economic growth mental model’ in international development.  Ken Opalo argues that this is also a moment ‘to imagine something different…growth, development and self-sufficiency’, particularly when it comes to understanding how mutual aid might also change the way the work is done.

As a first step, we would like to extend two invitations:

We start by noting down what is happening: around us and inside us by journaling the work. The Journal is asking you to reflect on a simple question: “what is going on?” We ask you to write your reflection in an anonymous Google Form here – in whichever format you choose. We will collate these and share to understand events, thoughts, emotions and ideas. 

The second invitation is to join us for a conversational, community-building webinar. The purpose of these is to connect, to understand what we are learning and what the community might need to develop its ideas and connections. Come as you are, with or without ideas. 

We have scheduled three for the respective time zones: 

• In Africa? Join us on May 19 from 4pm – 5pm EAT by signing up here
• In Asia? Join us on May 20 from 4.30 pm – 5.30 pm IST by signing up here
• In the Americas? Join us on May 22 from 11am – 12am EDT by signing up here

We cannot afford to lose our values, constructive critiques of doing development work, and the goal of supporting everyone in the world equitably, mindful of past injustices and future challenges.

We’re not sure what will come of these conversations, and are even less sure of what the right way forward will be. What we do know is that the work will not be defined by the presence (or absence) of Global North funding but by its necessity and by the continued efforts of good faith actors. We also know that, as long as the work needs to be done, we intend to move forward; join us – with ideas, reflections, listening, energy, and presence.

References

U.S. Agency for International Development, Office of Inspector General. (2019). USAID’s award oversight is insufficient to hold implementers accountable for achieving results (Audit Report 9-000-19-006-P). https://oig.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/2019-09/9-000-19-006-P.pdf

Biewen, M. Poverty persistence and poverty dynamics. IZA World of Labor 2014: 103 doi: 10.15185/izawol.103

Finckenstein, V. (2021). How international aid can do more harm than good: The case of Lebanon. LSE IDEAS. https://www.lse.ac.uk/ideas/Assets/Documents/updates/LSE-IDEAS-How-International-Aid-Can-Do-More-Harm-Than-Good.pdf

OECD/UNDP (2019), Making Development Co-operation More Effective: 2019 Progress Report, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/26f2638f-en. 

Hinda, E. (2025, February 16). 30 Kenyan companies risk shutdown after Trump withdrew funding. The Kenya Times.

Ang, Yuen Yuen. 2024. Doing development in the polycrisis. https://www.undp.org/blog/doing-development-polycrisis: UNDP.

Schomerus, Mareike. 2023. Lives Amid Violence: Transforming Development in the Wake of Conflict. London: Bloomsbury.

Ken Opalo, LinkedIn summary of https://www.africanistperspective.com/p/american-aid-cutsdisruptions