(Stockholm, 27 October 2026) There is a widening gap between the official development assistance (ODA) provided by major donor countries and actual development and humanitarian needs, which could have potentially serious consequences for human security and political stability, according to a new report released today by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). The gap could be closed with only a small fraction of the resources committed to new military spending.
SIPRI data show that global military spending last year reached US$2.9 trillion, the highest level ever recorded, equivalent to 2.5 per cent of global GDP. At the same time, ODA has been falling since 2024, based on figures from the Organization for Economic Development and Cooperation (OECD). The authors further show that core ODA provision started to stagnate in 2021 but this was temporarily obscured by a substantial increase in aid to Ukraine following Russia’s full-scale invasion and in ‘in-donor refugee costs’ (ODA by the donor to cover the costs of hosting refugees). The biggest decreases in core ODA spending have been on economic infrastructure and health.
‘Wealthy states in Europe and beyond have sharply increased their military spending in response to rising military threats. But this has coincided with deep cuts in other budget lines, including development and humanitarian aid. This can create widespread insecurity for people and states that rely on aid,’ said Xiao Liang, Researcher with the SIPRI Military Expenditure and Arms Production Programme. ‘All the signs are that military spending will continue to grow for several years to come, putting further pressure on ODA and other budget priorities.’
The report’s authors estimate that ODA funding needs could reach as high as $326 billion in 2028 depending on developments in a range of factors related to armed conflicts, natural disasters and more. This would leave a funding gap of $179 billion, which alone would be more than total expected ODA commitments in 2028.
‘Our findings reveal that we are in the middle of a sustained withdrawal of vital humanitarian and development assistance at a time when needs for it are growing,’ said Nan Tian, Director of the SIPRI Military Expenditure and Arms Production Programme. ‘However, it is important to stress that this funding gap is just a fraction of the extra resources being directed to military spending. Meeting future ODA needs is affordable.’
The report includes case studies of recent ODA and military spending policy in two European countries: Germany and the United Kingdom. Among other things, they show that governments have justified ODA cuts as necessary to finance higher military spending despite the fact that they make only a marginal contribution to the planned increases.
‘With the weakening of international cooperation and rising geopolitical tensions and militarization, it is understandable that states are seeking to invest in their security. But military capabilities alone do not guarantee security. Development aid can address long-term drivers of insecurity and should therefore be seen as complementing military spending, not competing with it,’ said Xiao Liang.
Rising Military Spending in the Context of Falling Development Assistance, by Xiao Liang and Dr Nan Tian, published by SIPRI, is available at www.sipri.org.