UK opts to disconnect development from gross national income

In 1970, the United Nations took up a commission-recommended resolution that donor nations set a target of giving no less than 0.7% of gross national income as official development assistance, or ODA, with an initial deadline of 1975. That deadline was later moved forward to 2015 — and the United Kingdom was one of the countries to squeak in under the wire, first achieving the target in 2013. But aid cuts in recent years have seen that target revised down in the U.K., first to 0.5% and now to 0.3% by 2027. But now that target no longer exists. In a letter to the Sarah Champion, chair of Parliament’s International Development Committee, development minister Jenny Chapman announced an immediate change to the way the country’s aid target is set — the budget will no longer be adjusted for changes to GNI, and the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office need not adjust its budget in line with those numbers. “The FCDO will no longer be automatically exposed to the volatility of GNI fluctuations or ODA spending by other departments, including demand-driven in-donor refugee costs, thereby increasing the predictability of our budgets and allowing us to plan with more certainty,” she wrote. In the same letter, she announced a cross-departmental review of ODA programming “to ensure it delivers on UK objectives and provides the best value for money and strategic coherence,” with final allocations for the coming years to be announced in June. She also informed Champion that this year’s aid budget would only honor “live contractual agreements,” with exceptions to allow the full allocated bilateral budget for certain regions, including Ukraine, Sudan, and Palestinian territories. In response, Champion said she’s “very nervous” but sees this as a potentially positive step, noting that “unshackling aid from percentage targets could protect aid spending from drains on its resources like reckless Home Office spending on asylum hotels at home.” Without more specifics, she said, it’s impossible to know whether this will be a step backward for the aid community.