By Ziad Abdel Samad / Arab NGO Network for Development (ANND)1
Over the past decade, international development financing has undergone significant transformations. Political conditionality, shifting global priorities, and increasing internal pressures in donor countries have all contributed to a decline in international funding, particularly for civil society and rights-based initiatives. This article examines the consequences of these shifts on Lebanon and the Arab region, highlighting the risks of dependency on external aid and proposing alternative, locally grounded, and regionally integrated models for sustainable financing. It argues for a renewed vision of development rooted in transparency, participation, and social justice, while calling on industrialized nations to assume their historical responsibilities toward the Global South.
Towards an Alternative and Sustainable Funding Model
1. Shifting International Donor Policies and the Erosion of Development Priorities
Communities across the Arab region are facing growing challenges in development financing, especially with the recent shifts in donor policies. International aid has increasingly been used as a tool of political pressure, directed according to positions on conflicts or human rights issues rather than in line with development priorities and people’s needs. This transformation has weakened the independence of beneficiary entities and limited their ability to design programs based on national priorities. It has also made the sustainability of development projects contingent on external political and economic considerations.
2. Retreat from the Global Partnership for Development
Originally, international development plans were founded on the concept of “Global Partnership for Development”, which assigns clear historical responsibilities to industrialized countries in supporting developing and least-developed nations. This principle included a commitment to allocate 0.7% of their Gross National Income as development aid (ODA) 2, reform the international trade system to make it fairer and more equitable, and address the debt crisis in ways that relieve heavily indebted countries.
3. FfD4 and the Decline of Development Commitments
However, recent developments show that industrialized nations are backtracking on these commitments. The Fourth Conference on Financing for Development (FfD4), held in Sevilla, Spain in July 2025, reflected a clear retreat from historical responsibilities: Promises of aid faded, and no serious initiatives were launched to restructure debt or reform the global trade system. Rising military spending amid international conflicts, ongoing economic crises, the growing number of refugees and migrants, and the increasing demand for humanitarian assistance have all pushed wealthy countries to reduce resources dedicated to development and international cooperation.
4. The Shift Toward Short-Term Aid and Donor-Driven Agendas
This was accompanied by a qualitative shift in funding. Short-term humanitarian aid has replaced sustainable development programs, while funding for independent civil society, especially those playing a critical or rights-based role, has diminished. In contrast, there has been a growing focus on technical or commercial projects that serve donor interests more than local community needs.
The United States and Europe, once the primary funders of development and human rights programs, now direct most of their resources inward or toward security and strategic priorities. Development agencies and non-governmental donors have also gradually fallen under the influence of the governments that finance them, weakening their independence and reducing the space for community-led initiatives.
5. Emerging Donors and a New Bilateral, Infrastructure-Driven Model
Meanwhile, emerging donors such as China, South Korea, Turkey, and Japan have emerged. However, their contributions are mostly bilateral from government to government and largely focused on infrastructure and commercial interests rather than building an institutional culture of development cooperation rooted in partnership and transparency.3
As for Arab funding, despite its promising potential, it still needs a modernized developmental vision grounded in genuine participation, transparency, national ownership, respect for human rights, and democratic principles—ensuring that civil society is engaged as a key actor in setting priorities and evaluating programs.
6. Rethinking the Model: Toward Local and Regional Financing Systems
The decline in international funding and external support compels us to fundamentally rethink the current model and move toward more self-reliant policies. What is needed today is the creation of local and regional financing systems capable of ensuring sustainability through diversified income sources and solidarity-based tools such as community funding, public contributions, and income-generating initiatives. Partnerships between the public and private sectors and civil society can also be strengthened based on national ownership and mutual accountability, rather than subordination to external donors’ conditions.
7. Strengthening Civil Society Coordination and Collective Impact
In this context, the vital role of cooperation and coordination among civil society actors becomes evident. Instead of competing over limited resources, participatory approaches can be adopted to set collective priorities, establish joint platforms or funds for resource mobilization, and manage projects collaboratively. Developing tools to measure collective impact is equally important, as it enhances transparency and builds trust between donors and local communities.
8. Governance Challenges in Local and Regional Financing
However, advocating for local and regional financing, while essential to reduce dependency on international donors, is not without challenges. Many Arab countries face limitations in government capacity, lack of transparency, bureaucratic inefficiencies, and widespread public distrust of institutions. Simply creating local financing mechanisms without addressing these governance gaps risks reproducing inequalities, mismanagement, or elite capture of resources. Therefore, community involvement alongside government institutions is essential. Civil society and local communities must actively participate in planning, monitoring, and allocating resources, ensuring that financing systems are transparent, accountable, and responsive to real social needs. This collaborative model can help rebuild trust in public institutions while reinforcing the legitimacy of development initiatives.
9. The Promise and Limitations of Regional Funding
Regional financing can also be a valuable alternative to relying on international donors, as it allows Arab countries to cooperate and invest in shared priorities within the region. Yet, this approach does not fully solve the dependency issue, since each country has its own interests when allocating resources, which may not always align with local community needs.
10. Restoring Popular Participation in Setting Development Priorities
Equally crucial is restoring the role of popular participation in setting priorities. Communities should not merely be aid recipients; they must be active partners in financing and monitoring projects. Volunteer work can be linked to development initiatives, transforming it into a real driver for local production and capacity building.
11. Building the Institutional Foundations for an Alternative Model
The transition toward an alternative funding model also requires a flexible and effective institutional framework built on a clear vision and defined objectives: diversifying funding, strengthening partnerships, engaging communities, and building capacities. The challenge lies not only in securing funds but also in fostering a new culture that views development as a collective and participatory process—not as an externally funded project.
Toward Fair and Strategic Global Partnerships
Given the current international reality, it is increasingly necessary to launch global campaigns calling for the rights of developing countries, based on the historical responsibilities of industrial nations—from the colonial era to the present. These countries accumulated their wealth at the expense of the human and natural resources of the Global South, and they are now morally and politically obliged to repay part of this historical debt through fair and equitable commitments.
At the same time, developing countries—especially Arab ones—must begin building the foundations of self-reliance within frameworks that strengthen regional cooperation and integration and open broader avenues for intra-regional trade and investment. Independent development can only be achieved through equitable partnerships based on solidarity rather than dependency, and on shared rather than imposed interests.
A Path Forward
The challenges are great, but the opportunities remain. With enhanced strategic coordination and regional cooperation, the Arab region can turn crises into opportunities to build a new, fairer, and more sustainable development model—one that protects human rights, ensures social justice, and upholds the dignity of all peoples. The future of development lies not in charity or conditional aid but in shared responsibility, collective action, and the reaffirmation of human solidarity as the true foundation for progress.
1 The author acknowledges the support of Lea Ibrahim: Project Officer and assistant researcher at ANND.
2 ODA has been the main source of financing for development aid since it was adopted by the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC) as the “gold standard” of foreign aid in 1969.
3 Emerging donors such as China, South Korea, Turkey, and Japan increasingly rely on bilateral, government-to-government arrangements that prioritize large infrastructure projects and commercial returns over building institutional cultures of partnership and transparency. China’s Belt and Road Initiative illustrate this approach through loan-financed railways, highways, and ports implemented by Chinese state-owned companies, as seen in Kenya’s Standard Gauge Railway and Algeria’s East–West Highway. South Korea follows a similar model through its Economic Development Cooperation Fund, which supports smart-city systems and water infrastructure in countries like Jordan and Egypt, typically executed by Korean engineering firms. Turkey’s cooperation, largely channeled through TIKA, also focuses on directly negotiated construction and restoration projects—from airports in Iraq and Somalia to hospital reconstruction offers in Lebanon—implemented by Turkish contractors. Japan, although a more established donor, often ties its ODA loans to major infrastructure projects led by Japanese consortia, such as Egypt’s Grand Egyptian Museum and Jordan’s desalination initiatives. Together, these examples highlight a pattern of bilateral, commercially driven development cooperation that favors strategic interests and infrastructure delivery over inclusive, participatory, and transparent modalities.
Date of publication