With the recent news on USAID, we are witnessing another development agency being shuttered and some of its budget and activities absorbed into a Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA). While the speed and callousness of USAIDs demise is unprecedented, this shift is not new and typically happens when a right-leaning government comes into power.

There may be various underlying motivations to do so:

  • Budget control is definitely one of the biggest factors. MFAs often want development agencies under their umbrella to exert greater control over aid spending and ensure it aligns with national interests. Development budgets often dwarf the budgets available to MFAs. 
  • Governments don’t want development agencies operating too independently and seek to centralize political control, seeing aid as a major tool for diplomacy. By controlling the budget, MFAs can prioritize aid spending on countries and sectors that serve strategic foreign policy goals.
  • MFAs also may not like development agencies having to act independently, having the freedom to focus on sectors that are not geopolitical priorities.
  • There may also be domestic political pressure from the public to cut development aid and spend the money on national issues. A reduction in development aid is the typical result.
  • There may also be more benevolent reasons to integrate development budget and activities into the MFAs purview, including increasing efficiency, impact, and return on investment. Though these tend to be secondary to those outlined above.

Here’s an overview of development agencies that have disappeared over the past 20 years.

Danish International Development Agency (DANIDA) – Denmark

Why it Disappeared:
DANIDA has been gradually integrated into the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark since the early 2000s, with full absorption completed in the mid-2010s. The restructuring aimed to centralize foreign aid under the government’s diplomatic and economic policies.

Impact:

  • Loss of independent decision-making on development aid.
  • Shift toward aid projects aligned with Denmark’s trade and geopolitical interests.

Timeline:

  • 2003-2015: Progressive integration of DANIDA into the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
  • 2015: The restructuring is fully implemented.
Irish Aid – Ireland

Why it Disappeared:
In 2008, Irish Aid was integrated into the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade as part of a broader restructuring effort to streamline foreign aid under Ireland’s diplomatic framework.

Impact:

  • Reduced independence for aid decision-making.
  • Realignment of funding priorities to serve national interests.

Timeline:

  • 2008: Irish Aid is formally absorbed into the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.
Netherlands Development Cooperation (NEDA) – Netherlands

Why it Disappeared:
In 2012, the Dutch government merged NEDA into the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to align development funding with Dutch foreign policy and economic diplomacy.

Impact:

  • A significant decrease in humanitarian aid funding.
  • Job losses among development specialists.
  • Merger of NEDA into the Ministry of Foreign Affairs led to a significant decrease in humanitarian aid funding and job losses among development specialists.
  • Prioritization of economic diplomacy over traditional development goals.

Timeline:

  • 2012: The Dutch government announces the merger.
  • 2013: Full integration into the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID)

Why it Disappeared:
In 2013, AusAID was integrated into the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) by the Abbott government. The move aimed to streamline Australia’s aid, trade, and diplomatic efforts but resulted in a significant reduction in the aid budget.

Impact:

  • Large-scale job losses, especially among development specialists.
  • Shift in funding priorities toward geopolitical interests.
  • Cuts to foreign aid programs, particularly in the Pacific and Southeast Asia.
  • Richard Moore, a former deputy director of AusAID, Australia’s former aid agency, noted that when AusAID merged with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade in 2013, it resulted in the loss of 2,000 years of collective development experience.

Timeline:

  • September 2013: Australian government announces the integration.
  • October 2013: AusAID is formally absorbed into DFAT.
Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA)

Why it Disappeared:
In 2013, the Canadian government merged CIDA into the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT), rebranding it as the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development (DFATD), later renamed Global Affairs Canada. The move aimed to integrate development aid more closely with trade and diplomacy.

Impact:

  • Loss of CIDA’s independent focus on poverty alleviation.
  • Significant job losses, particularly among development experts.
  • Shift toward aid projects aligned with Canada’s trade and diplomatic interests.

Timeline:

  • March 2013: Canadian government announces CIDA’s merger.
  • June 2013: The merger is finalized through the federal budget.
  • 2015: The department is rebranded as Global Affairs Canada.
Department for International Development (DFID) – UK

Why it Disappeared:
In 2020, DFID was merged into the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) to form the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO). The UK government justified the move by stating that it would better align development aid with foreign policy and security objectives.

Impact:

  • Major job losses among DFID staff, particularly experts in development finance and humanitarian aid.
  • Reduction in the UK’s global leadership in development and poverty reduction.
  • Budget cuts leading to abrupt funding withdrawals from key programs.
  • A report by the National Audit Office highlighted that the number of expert development adviser roles decreased by 14% between 2019 and 2022 during the period of  DFID merging into the FCDO.

Timeline:

  • June 2020: UK government announces the merger.
  • September 2020: DFID is officially dissolved, and FCDO is formed.
Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA) – Sweden

Why It Changed (partial restructuring):
Unlike other agencies that were fully absorbed, SIDA has undergone partial restructuring rather than a complete merger. While it remains an independent government agency, Sweden has integrated its development policies more closely with foreign affairs, leading to changes in funding priorities and operational structures.

Impact:

  • Increased Political Oversight: Greater alignment between Swedish foreign policy and development aid, reducing SIDA’s autonomy in decision-making.
  • Budget Adjustments: More resources are redirected toward strategic geopolitical interests, such as migration management and climate-related aid.
  • Operational Restructuring: Stronger coordination with the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, leading to shifts in focus areas and project priorities.

Timeline:

  • 2015-2020: Gradual policy shifts aligning SIDA‘s work more closely with Sweden’s foreign policy.
  • 2023: Increased government oversight and adjustments in budget allocations.
  • Ongoing: Further restructuring discussions, with potential changes in SIDA’s role in global aid distribution.

While SIDA has not been fully absorbed by other agencies, these changes reflect a broader trend of integrating development agencies into foreign policy frameworks, influencing how aid is distributed and prioritized.