According to research by the Activity Learning Network for Accountability and Performance (ALNAP), government funding for humanitarian aid is projected to contract by 34% to 45% by year-end 2024. This marks a significant decline from prior years, stemming largely from policy shifts initiated by U.S. President Donald Trump in early 2025, when he enacted an 80% cut to contracts overseen by the U.S. Agency for International Development. Trump’s “America-first” strategy prioritized domestic spending and reflected a broader skepticism towards overseas aid. Concurrently, European nations have redirected funding away from humanitarian efforts towards defense budgets due to the escalating threat posed by Russia, particularly following its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
ALNAP notes that the cuts began in 2024 after more than a decade of increasing aid levels, creating a widening gap between humanitarian needs and available funding. Since 2021, an estimated 70 million individuals have been in dire need of aid, emphasizing the urgency of the situation. The substantial humanitarian funding boost experienced immediately following the Ukraine invasion, often referred to as the “Ukraine effect,” has significantly diminished, contributing to current budgetary constraints. This trend indicates a critical turning point for humanitarian assistance as global crises and conflicts multiply, yet funding stabilizes or declines.
In terms of recipients, the Palestinian territories emerged as the largest beneficiary of international humanitarian assistance in 2024, receiving $2.9 billion, a 51% increase from 2023 figures. Following closely, Ukraine received $2.8 billion—however, it faced a 25% decline in funding for the second consecutive year. The U.S. topped the list of countries reducing humanitarian aid, slashing its contributions by 10.4% compared to 2023. European Union institutions also saw a significant reduction of 12.7% in humanitarian funding, indicating a trend where, despite some individual countries (like Germany and Norway) cutting aid by more than 20%, others such as the UK and Sweden increased their contributions by notable margins.
The overall picture reveals that 16 of the 20 largest donors have cut humanitarian funding, with private contributions also decreasing. The result is a concerning snapshot of the sector: a reliance on a small number of major donors continues to dominate the funding landscape, with the top 10 donors contributing 84% of all public humanitarian assistance in 2024, only slightly above 83% in 2023. This pattern positions the sector in a precarious situation, where shocks—like drastic cuts from major funders—can lead to significant setbacks in humanitarian efforts globally.
Germany and Norway, amongst the largest European donors, made substantial cuts, while individual countries like France also reduced their contributions. These divergences highlight the complex and often conflicting interests driving aid decisions, especially in response to geopolitical tensions. At the same time, despite these budgetary challenges, the international community must grapple with increasing humanitarian crises, underscoring the urgent need for innovative funding solutions and collaboration among nations to sustain assistance levels.
The contrast between the needs for aid and the dwindling resources is stark, as the humanitarian sector prepares for potentially transformative challenges ahead. The interplay of military threats, national priorities, and international response mechanisms will need to be navigated carefully in the coming years. As funding continues to decline amidst escalating needs, the call for accountability, strategic funding management, and broader inclusivity in donor contributions grows louder. Without concerted action, millions of vulnerable individuals may face dire consequences as humanitarian efforts struggle to keep pace with the crises unfolding globally.
