EDINBURGH, United Kingdom — The United Kingdom’s (U.K.) foreign aid contributions have steadily declined to allow for increased spending on defense and security. With a considerably smaller financial pot by 2027, the challenge becomes how to do more with less. The answer could be smart technical assistance.
A Development Reset
In 1970 the United Nations General Assembly agreed on an international Official Development Assistance (ODA) target equivalent to 0.7% of a country’s Gross National Income (GNI). In 2013 the U.K. came on board and stuck to the commitment through 2020. Then COVID-19 hit, taking a toll on the economy and prompting the government to dial back its ODA contribution to 0.5%. U.K. foreign aid spending has continued to fluctuate, mostly downward. In February 2025 the government confirmed a further reduction in ODA to 0.3% of GNI by 2027, citing the need to bolster the defense budget.
With less money in the pot, the U.K. is essentially transitioning from direct aid to systemic support, also known as “smart technical assistance.” This entails four key changes in the way it conducts overseas development:
- Becoming an investor instead of a donor.
- Providing system support instead of service delivery.
- Offering expertise instead of grants.
- Supporting local leadership instead of staging international interventions.
“It is all about the finances,” says Lee Crawfurd, senior research fellow at the Center for Global Development. “The government cannot afford to run programs that provide an actual service. It generally boils down to providing advice.”
How Do Experts Measure Advice?
The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) defines technical assistance as “the provision, outside projects, of know-how in the form of personnel, training and research.”
Historically, the approach has attracted considerable criticism. Prominent United States (U.S.) economist William Easterly described it as one of the “worst practices” in foreign aid, often “reflecting donor rather than recipient priorities.”
Measuring the impact of technical assistance can pose challenges. “Someone may listen, or they may not,” Crawfurd tells The Borgen Project. “There are also concerns around how appropriate the advice is. A U.K. subject matter expert going into Uganda will find a very different context, and what works in one region may not work in another.” The cost of sending an expert from somewhere like the U.K. may also entail considerable expense. “For the same price you could probably hire 10 locals,” he estimates.
The Recipe for Success
In theory, technical assistance could be an impactful form of U.K. foreign aid. The idea is to empower local governments to improve local policy implementation and decision making. In Crawfurd’s experience, the most effective approaches involve fully embedding a foreign adviser within the local government’s ministry.
“It is best if the adviser reports to senior leadership in the specific institution and works from a government office every day,” he explains. “That helps to better understand any barriers. It also builds trust, which is essential if people are to listen. In contrast, a United Nations advisor sitting in a fancy office across town will not have the same understanding or relationship. They are less likely to be effective.”
Two Technical Assistance Templates
Crawfurd specifically highlights Rwanda’s Strategic Capacity Building Initiative from 2011 as an example of a successful technical assistance scheme. This program was designed to help the Government of Rwanda improve the effectiveness and independence of its development procedures.
Today, Rwanda is the highest scoring low-income country on the Blavatnik Index of Public Administration. Crawfurd also flags the long-running Overseas Development Institute’s Fellowship Scheme as a noteworthy example of impactful technical assistance. This specific U.K. foreign aid program brings entry-level development experts into public sector posts in low-income countries. “The Fellowship Scheme has undergone multiple evolutions more than 60+ years, and is highly regarded,” he observes. “Many governments pay for the fellows themselves directly, which demonstrates how much they value it.”
Those Hardest Hit
U.K. foreign aid cuts are part of a wider decline in ODA contributions by wealthy nations. “We definitely see other countries cutting their budget,” says Crawfurd. Overseas aid from all OECD member countries contracted 23.1% year-on-year in 2025, marking the biggest decline on record. The organization is forecasting an additional 6.9% contraction in aid contributions for 2026.
According to the OECD, sub-Saharan Africa will take the hardest hit from the ODA reductions, along with Least Developed Countries. Notably, these are the same regions that are least prepared to withstand a decline in support. By sector, healthcare will see the biggest decline in funding. Total ODA dedicated to health is poised to fall roughly 63% from the peak in 2022. Areas like education and clean energy transitions will also take substantial hits.
A New Normal
Looking ahead, Crawfurd does not expect any significant upturn in U.K. foreign aid in the near term. “Ultimately the economy needs to really rebound and see a more solid defense budget,” he explains. “It is hard to see the fiscal situation dramatically improving soon, particularly with ever-growing pension and health care costs.”
While U.K. foreign aid contributions have fallen steadily over recent years, they have not stopped completely. “We are basically back to levels seen about 15 years ago,” he concludes. “Overall contributions were less then, admittedly, but this is not the end of all aid. Even with a smaller budget, significant value can be provided.
– Megan Sansom
Megan is based in Edinburgh, Scotland and focuses on Politics for The Borgen Project.
Photo: Flickr