OECD: International Aid Plummets in 2025

International aid from member countries and associates of the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) fell in 2025 by 23.1% in real terms compared to 2024, the largest annual drop in the history of official development assistance (ODA), according to preliminary data collected by the OECD.

This contraction brings ODA to levels last seen in 2015, when the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development was adopted. ODA by DAC member and associate1 countries amounted to USD 174.3 billion in 2025, representing 0.26% of these countries' combined gross national income (GNI), down from USD 214.6 billion or 0.34% of GNI in 2024.

The five largest providers in 2025 were Germany (USD 29.1 billion), which has become the largest provider of ODA for the first time, followed by the United States (USD 29.0 billion), the United Kingdom (USD 17.2 billion), Japan (USD 16.2 billion), and France (USD 14.5 billion). This was the first year on record in which the top five providers all reduced their ODA, accounting for 95.7% of the total decline in ODA overall. ODA provided by the United States declined by 56.9%.

Eight out of the 34 DAC members maintained or increased their ODA, while four countries exceeded the United Nations' target of 0.7% ODA to GNI: Denmark (0.72%), Luxembourg (0.99%), Norway (1.03%) and Sweden (0.85%).

"Fiscal pressures on developing countries are growing, and the ongoing conflict in the Middle East represents a significant risk for global growth and food security" OECD Secretary-General Mathias Cormann said. "In this challenging environment, the significant decline in official development assistance highlights the need to maximise the impact of available resources, and to use them more effectively to unlock new sources of investment."

Bilateral ODA to Ukraine fell by 38.2% in 2025 to USD 10.3 billion; however, when including outflows from European Union institutions, it increased by 18.7% to USD 44.9 billion. This is the largest volume of ODA ever provided to a single country, exceeding total bilateral ODA by DAC members to all Least Developed Countries or to all countries in sub-Saharan Africa combined. In recent years, members have increasingly relied on the multilateral system to support least developed countries and offset cuts to bilateral aid. Final 2025 data, forthcoming in December 2026, will confirm if this trend is maintained.

Bilateral ODA for core development programming - excluding in-donor refugee costs, humanitarian aid, and debt relief - fell by 26.3%, the largest decline on record and suggesting that aid cuts extended beyond more variable elements of bilateral aid. Humanitarian aid and ODA to cover the costs of refugees within donor countries also fell by 35.8% and 22.1%, respectively.

"It's deeply concerning to see this huge drop in ODA in 2025, due to dramatic cuts among the very top donors. Other DAC members are also facing budgetary, security-related or political pressures, while a few are countering the trend." OECD DAC Chair Carsten Staur said. "We are in a time of increasing humanitarian needs; strong pressures on the poorest and most fragile countries; and facing growing global uncertainties and massive insecurity. In this situation, the world needs more ODA, not less - to help fight extreme poverty, improve resilience and mobilise more private resources - and also to further the green transition and underpin the multilateral system. I can only plead that DAC donors reverse this negative trend and start again to increase their ODA. It's needed more than ever, also for longer-term global security. "

Based on a survey of DAC members and official, published information, the OECD projects a further 5.8% decline in ODA in 2026.

More detail on ODA statistics including the breakdown for 2025 available on this link: https://www.oecd.org/en/data/insights/data-explainers/2026/04/a-historic-decline-in-foreign-aid-preliminary-2025-oda-data.html.

/Public Release. This material from the originating organization/author(s) might be of the point-in-time nature, and edited for clarity, style and length. Mirage.News does not take institutional positions or sides, and all views, positions, and conclusions expressed herein are solely those of the author(s).View in full here.