The Decolonisation of the Aid Sector
Two weeks ago, the head of Oxfam GB, Halima Begum stated that the aid sector needs to be decolonised. Her statement echoes years of criticism questioning the sector’s worth and importance. Often, it is not recognised that global challenges such as poverty, inequality and hunger are not just unfortunate events but direct consequences of political choices and international systems.
Many institutions, such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, which govern and influence development were established in the 1940s when much of the world was under colonial rule. Today’s society is vastly different from that of the colonial era or even the 1940s, and the aid sector must reflect this evolution. This article examines the history of the sector, its criticisms, and efforts to decolonise it.
History of the Aid Sector
The origins of the aid sector can be traced back to the 18th century, when Prussia provided military assistance to its allies. In the 19th and 20th centuries, European powers offered financial aid to their colonies, with the ultimate goal of increasing the colony’s economic output.
The modern aid structure was shaped by two significant post-World War Two developments:
The Marshall Plan - This was a US sponsored package aimed at the rehabilitation of the economies of 17 western and southern European countries.
The Bretton Wood Institutions - The creation of the United Nations, the IMF and the World Bank, all of whom played a large role in allocating international funds.
Despite the rise in international aid post-war, aid expenditures were initially lower than pre-war levels. Former colonial powers such as the UK and France continued assisting their former colonies, while during the Cold War, aid became a tool for diplomatic influence. The U.S. provided assistance to Greece and Turkey in 1947 to combat communism, and Japan implemented an extensive aid programme focused on Asia.
By the 2000s, the aid sector became target driven. An agreement to be achieved between 2000 and 2015, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were a set of 8 international goals focusing on basic needs such as reducing poverty and improving health. Although the goals did mobilise development efforts and improve the basic needs they were aimed for, its poorly selected indicators, lack of human rights focus and lack of local participation are some factors that led to its failure. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were established in 2015 with the aim of ensuring ‘peace and prosperity for the people and the planet’ by 2030. A key goal of the SDGs is tackling the climate crisis which includes working to preserve forests and oceans.
Today the aid sector is dominated by international non governmental organisations (INGOs), all working in different areas to ensure that the SDGs are met by 2030. Unfortunately, despite the work that these organisations do, they have been criticised for various reasons over the decades.
Criticisms of the Aid Sector
The aid sector has been criticised for being an outdated, elite dominated system that upholds colonial legacies. Many international non governmental organisations (INGOs) that work within this sector are headquartered in the Global North and they tend to make decisions without meaningful discussion with local actors and those worst affected by crises. This also weakens local capacity as power and resources tend to be accumulated at the top and at the expense of civil society. Skilled professionals are also often diverted from local to large organisations by offering higher salaries, something which undermines national and local NGOs that are building long term solutions. Unfortunately, this issue is exacerbated by short term, project based funding rather than long term ones which tend to be more sustainable and involve different members of the community.
Beyond structural concerns, the sector has also faced serious ethical scandals and accountability issues. As a whole, it has been criticised for financial mismanagement, with some INGOs spending disproportionate amounts on administrative costs, marketing, and executive salaries rather than direct aid. More worryingly, there have been numerous cases of sexual misconduct and exploitation within these organisations. Oxfam, for instance, faced a major scandal involving sexual abuse in Haiti and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, while Médecins Sans Frontières has been accused of racism, discrimination, and widespread sexual misconduct within its ranks. Unfortunately, these incidents are not isolated, and they highlight a culture where perpetrators of such behaviour are often shielded from accountability due to the lack of robust oversight mechanisms.
Overall, these issues collectively illustrate that the aid sector is in urgent need of reform. INGOs within the sector must transition from top-down, donor driven approaches to community led models which prioritise local knowledge, long term sustainability and ethical integrity.
Decolonising the Sector
In her Guardian article, Begum emphasises that the current aid system is broken and can only be fixed through decolonisation. The criticisms highlighted above are examples of how broken a system intended to help is. Decolonising the aid system would mean:
‘A call from many humanitarian actors for a fundamental shift in power and resources, grown out of the concerns that the current international aid system is part of a colonial construct that operates on Western terms and from Western points of view, perpetuating power imbalances between the global North and global South.’
The process of decolonisation requires solidarity over charity, bringing together a range of actors to reform the sector. One approach is localising aid, ensuring that decision making power and funding are placed in the hands of communities. While this enhances local agency, it must be implemented critically. Begum argues that INGOs should commit at least 20-30% of funding directly to local actors and that collaboration between different stakeholders must be strengthened. Governments must also be held accountable for ensuring fair and effective aid distribution.
Other practical ways that the aid sector can be decolonised include
Funding intermediaries - Organisations such as the Decolonising Wealth Project and Global Giving provide more participatory ways to channel funding to grassroots organisations. The aim of this action is to rebalance the power between the funder and those that are receiving, along with placing lasting trust in those that are carrying out the work.
Reimagining the identity of the INGO - More INGOs are rethinking their roles within the aid sector and part of this conversation is what the position of intermediaries will be. This is different for each organisation - for instance, Oxfam GB is focused on shifting towards a global social justice network while the ICRC are having discussions about racism.
Changing the narrative around aid - Highlighting local voices in storytelling and advocacy and promoting community driven solutions rather than focusing on Western led interventions.
Rethinking aid structures and colonial legacies - Reevaluate the colonial legacies of development and support mutual aid networks and community led approaches. Also, promoting South- South partnerships where power is focused in the Global South.
The call to decolonise the aid sector is not a mere critique, but a demand for a fundamental transformation. As it stands, the sector remains entrenched in outdated power dynamics that reinforce dependency rather than empower local communities. Decolonising is not just about redistributing resources; it is about reshaping the fundamental structure of the aid sector so that it is more inclusive, accountable and responsive to the needs of those it serves.
Published in the 3rd edition of Developmental Insights
