Reimagining the Future of Global Development: An African Perspective

Reimagining the Future of Global Development: An African Perspective

Almost a decade ago, when I enrolled in my Master’s programme in Emerging Economies and International Development at King’s College London, the global development space was dominated by a familiar paradigm: Western aid donors pouring billions into “developing economies” to improve lives and livelihoods. I remember feeling deeply unsettled by this model, particularly coming from Nigeria, where I had witnessed firsthand how decades of aid had failed to translate into meaningful, sustained growth.

Dambisa Moyo’s Dead Aid quickly became one of my most influential reads. It articulated a conviction that was shaping my thinking as a budding development economist: that Western aid to Africa has often been economically harmful rather than helpful, and that if African countries are to experience lasting growth and development, they must pursue alternative financing mechanisms and take ownership of their futures. While Moyo’s thesis was provocative and her policy prescriptions sometimes simplistic, her core argument resonated: aid dependency creates incentives that undermine the very development it intends to support.

Fast-forward to 2026. The restructuring of U.S. foreign assistance architecture, alongside the aggressive politicisation of American aid, has placed the traditional development aid model under severe strain. At the same time, official development assistance budgets across other traditional donors, such as the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, have been reduced in response to domestic fiscal pressures and shifting political priorities. The domino effects across the development sector have been seismic, reshaping not only current realities but the future of international development cooperation.

But what does this really mean for African development?

For many practitioners, the current moment feels like the acceptance stage of grief. While nostalgia for the previous aid-heavy model still looms, it is increasingly clear that the global development landscape has fundamentally changed. Some argue that this change will have devastating consequences. Others, myself included, believe it may create space for a more sustainable and accountable development paradigm, depending on how countries, particularly in Africa, respond.

To be clear, not all aid has failed. Emergency humanitarian assistance saves millions of lives during crises. The Global Fund, PEPFAR, and Gavi have delivered measurable, life-saving impacts through targeted health interventions such as mass vaccination campaigns, HIV/AIDS treatment, and malaria prevention. These interventions, with clear objectives and strong accountability mechanisms, have transformed communities, improved life expectancy, and strengthened economies.  My critique centres primarily on long-term development aid that was intended to build institutions, strengthen governance, and catalyse economic transformation, but has too often achieved the opposite.

For too long, African countries have been passive recipients of aid. This dependency has fostered a lackadaisical approach to development, where governments have outsourced the progress of the state to NGOs and multilateral institutions, further weakening an already fragile social contract between citizens and their leaders. When governments rely on aid inflows rather than domestic revenue, accountability and transparency erode. When external partners set priorities, national ownership becomes an illusion that fails to capture the realities of the state and the context required for implementation.

The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated that crises, while deeply disruptive, can inspire long-overdue reform. Perhaps this aid crisis will do the same, but only if African countries make intentional and difficult choices about their developmental futures.

As we enter an era in which aid inflows are likely to be significantly reduced, African countries that choose the reform path must pursue several critical actions.

First, countries must clearly define what development means within their specific contexts. The phrase “Africa is not a monolith” has become so common that it risks losing meaning. Yet it remains profoundly true. While many countries on the continent face similar challenges, such as weak institutions, infrastructure deficits, and governance gaps, the symptoms and remedies are distinct. This is the moment for countries to reimagine what an effective and functioning state looks like in their specific context, rather than importing blueprints designed in Geneva or Washington.

I recently revisited Amartya Sen’s Development as Freedom, and I believe his idea that development means giving people the capability to function fully in society remains more relevant than ever. Development paradigms must move beyond simplistic GDP-centric definitions and consider what Sen terms the five instrumental freedoms: political freedoms, economic facilities, social opportunities, transparency guarantees, and protective security. And of course, in today’s world, any meaningful development framework must also centre climate resilience and environmental sustainability.

Second, African countries must set national priorities without seeking external validation. For decades, development priorities in many African countries have been shaped more by donor preferences than by citizen needs. I have witnessed this firsthand, where government planning processes often began not with asking, “What do our citizens need?” but rather, “What are donors willing to fund?”

With reduced aid dependence comes the opportunity and imperative to ask fundamental questions: What do we want? What does progress look like for us? How do we achieve it? Countries must set their own agendas instead of taking cues from development partners whose strategic priorities may not always align with national realities.

Third, innovation in domestic resource mobilisation is essential. African governments cannot allow the loss of donor funding to permanently diminish their fiscal space. Necessity is the mother of invention, and it is time to invent. The continent faces a $200 billion financing shortfall. This is not just a number, but lives lost and livelihoods at risk. The potential to fill fiscal deficits and budget shortfalls is immense across African states, but only if there is political will to do the hard work.

This means strengthening tax systems, reducing leakages, broadening the tax base beyond the formal sector, and ensuring that natural resource wealth translates into public goods rather than elite enrichment. It also means tackling the politically sensitive issue of elite capture and building fiscal capacity that can sustain long-term public investment without reliance on external funding. Countries must explore innovative financing instruments such as green bonds, diaspora bonds, debt swaps, and public-private partnerships, while ensuring these mechanisms genuinely serve national development goals rather than creating new forms of dependency or debt distress.

Fourth, building local capacity and strengthening institutions must be prioritised. The most lasting investments are those in people and systems. Countries must invest in building the technical expertise of civil servants, strengthening planning and budget institutions, and creating regulatory and governance frameworks that enable both public and private sectors to deliver.

This is where aid withdrawal will hurt most acutely in the short term. In a previous piece, I highlighted the over-reliance of African civil services on donor-funded technical assistance. As this support evaporates, a capacity gap will emerge that cannot be filled immediately.

The solution is not to reject external expertise entirely, but to prioritise knowledge transfer, invest in tertiary education and professional training, create incentives that retain talent in the public sector, and protect capable technocrats from political interference. Well-designed policies are meaningless without capable institutions to implement them.

Fifth, African governments must establish clear rules for engagement with new partners. As traditional donors depart, new actors will inevitably emerge to fill the gap. China is by far the most significant player, having provided over $170 billion in loans to African nations between 2000 and 2022.

While Chinese engagement comes with fewer explicit governance conditions, there is no such thing as a free lunch. Chinese investment has delivered critical infrastructure across the continent, but it has also contributed to debt distress in several countries. African governments should not mortgage the future of their citizens for a handout. Leaders must be prepared to identify and reject parasitic or unfair agreements that extract value without building genuine capacity or transferring knowledge.

This is particularly urgent as the commodity race for strategic minerals essential to global power and the energy transition intensifies. Engagement with China, the United States, European powers, and emerging players must be fair, transparent, and conducted on terms that serve each country's long-term development interests and not merely the resource extraction priorities of external powers. African countries must avoid repeating the mistakes of previous commodity booms, where windfalls enriched elites while leaving populations impoverished.

Finally, regional integration matters more than ever. Africa must work collaboratively to achieve shared developmental goals. The continent has the potential to mobilise and drive significant development gains, but this requires a collective understanding of what kind of future is being pursued and how to achieve it. Initiatives such as the African Continental Free Trade Area are not symbolic exercises but practical tools for unlocking scale, strengthening resilience, building regional value chains, and advancing collective development objectives.

Looking inward, moving forward

The collapse of traditional aid models is forcing a long-overdue reckoning. It is uncomfortable and disruptive, and it will create real hardship in the short term. We are already witnessing the impact, particularly for vulnerable populations dependent on aid-funded services across health, education, and social protection. Yet this disruption is also creating space for a new development paradigm rooted in agency, innovation, and accountability to citizens.

The question is not whether African countries can rise to this challenge. The question is whether their leaders will choose to. The tools exist: domestic resource mobilisation, regional integration, leveraging diaspora capital, attracting responsible private investment, and harnessing technology to leapfrog legacy systems. What has been missing is the political will and institutional strength to deploy them.

The image of the Monument de la Renaissance Africaine in Dakar feels especially resonant. Standing 171 feet tall and overlooking the Atlantic coast, the bronze family points toward the future. Controversial in its execution but undeniable in its ambition, the monument symbolises emergence, dignity, and self-belief. It reflects the aspiration that underpins this vision: an Africa that stands on its own foundations, defines its priorities, and engages the world as an equal rather than from a position of dependence.

As Kwame Nkrumah once said, “We face neither East nor West. We face forward”.