Report on German Development Aid Budget Reductions and Implications for Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

1.0 Executive Summary

The German governing coalition has enacted an 8% reduction in the budget for the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ), decreasing it to just under €10 billion. This report analyzes the implications of these cuts, with a specific focus on their potential impact on the achievement of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The reductions are projected to significantly affect progress on key goals, including SDG 2 (Zero Hunger), SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions).

2.0 Budgetary Reductions and Official Statements

The budget for the BMZ has been reduced by approximately €910 million. Development Minister Reem Alabali Radovan acknowledged the cut, stating that in view of increasing global crises, Germany is investing less in international cooperation than is urgently needed. Concurrently, acute emergency aid provided by the Foreign Ministry has been reduced by more than half compared to 2024, from €2.23 billion to €1.05 billion.

3.0 Impact on Core Sustainable Development Goals

Aid organizations have warned that the budget cuts will have drastic consequences for several SDGs.

1. SDG 2: Zero Hunger
   • The 50% cut in German emergency aid is projected to result in over 4 million people worldwide losing access to food aid.
   • Minister Alabali Radovan cited the impact of US aid cuts on the World Food Program in Kenya, where over 700,000 refugees received only one-third of necessary food rations, leading to a dramatic increase in hunger and malnutrition. This serves as a precedent for the potential consequences of German cuts, directly undermining efforts to achieve Zero Hunger.
2. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being & SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation
   • According to Thorsten Klose-Zuber, Secretary General of the NGO Help, the German cuts will cause over 1.5 million people to lose their basic health care, a direct setback for SDG 3.
   • A similar negative impact is anticipated for SDG 6, as access to clean drinking water will be curtailed for numerous communities.
3. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions & SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals
   • The Minister warned that food shortages and instability lead to increased tensions and displacement, destabilizing entire regions and conflicting with Germany’s security interests and the promotion of peaceful societies under SDG 16.
   • A broader trend was noted wherein traditional Western donor countries are reducing financial commitments to the multilateral system, threatening the global partnerships essential for achieving all SDGs, as outlined in SDG 17.

4.0 Political Perspectives on the Budget Cuts

Divergent views on the efficacy and necessity of the development aid budget exist across the German political spectrum.

• The Greens: Bundestag lawmaker Jamila Schäfer described the massive cuts as irresponsible, stating that Germany is failing to help close the gap left by the withdrawal of other international partners.
• CDU/CSU: CDU lawmaker Inge Grässle expressed confidence that good results in development cooperation can still be achieved with the reduced €10 billion budget.
• Alternative for Germany (AfD): The party advocated for a more severe reduction to €2.5 billion, labeling much of the current spending a “waste of taxpayers’ money” and questioning support for emerging powers like India.
• Development Minister (SPD): Minister Alabali Radovan maintained that “every euro that is invested wisely worldwide promotes security and peace,” reinforcing the link between international development and the objectives of SDG 16.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 2: Zero Hunger
   • The article explicitly discusses the “dramatic increase of hunger and malnutrition” among refugees in Kenya due to cuts in the World Food Program. It also states that German emergency aid cuts will mean “over 4 million people worldwide will no longer receive any food aid.”
2. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
   • The text directly links aid cuts to health consequences, quoting an NGO secretary general who states, “Over one and a half million people will lose their basic health care due to the German cuts.”
3. SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation
   • The article mentions that the reduction in aid money has a concrete impact on access to clean drinking water, noting the situation is “similar” to the negative impact on health care.
4. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
   • The German Development Minister warns that the increase in hunger and malnutrition leads to growing tensions, forces people to flee, and destabilizes the region. This directly connects to the goal of promoting peaceful and inclusive societies. The mention of over 700,000 refugees also relates to this goal.
5. SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals
   • The central theme of the article is the reduction of international development aid budgets by major donor countries like Germany and the United States. It details the slashing of the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) budget and the withdrawal of “traditional Western donor countries” from the multilateral system, which undermines the global partnership for sustainable development.
6. SDG 1: No Poverty
   • While not explicitly named, the entire discussion on development aid, emergency assistance, and providing basic needs like food, water, and healthcare is fundamentally linked to alleviating poverty. The article mentions a total of “more than 320 million” people in need, highlighting the scale of the challenge.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Under SDG 2 (Zero Hunger):
   • Target 2.1: By 2030, end hunger and ensure access by all people, in particular the poor and people in vulnerable situations, including infants, to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round. The article highlights the failure to meet this target for refugees in Kenya who receive only “a third of the necessary food rations.”
   • Target 2.2: By 2030, end all forms of malnutrition. The article’s mention of a “dramatic increase of hunger and malnutrition” directly relates to this target.
2. Under SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being):
   • Target 3.8: Achieve universal health coverage, including financial risk protection, access to quality essential health-care services and access to safe, effective, quality and affordable essential medicines and vaccines for all. The statement that “Over one and a half million people will lose their basic health care” shows a direct regression from this target.
3. Under SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation):
   • Target 6.1: By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all. The article implies that aid cuts negatively impact progress towards this target by stating the situation is similar for “access to clean drinking water.”
4. Under SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions):
   • Target 16.1: Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere. The minister’s warning that aid cuts lead to growing tensions and regional destabilization connects to the conditions that can foster violence.
5. Under SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals):
   • Target 17.2: Developed countries to implement fully their official development assistance commitments. The article’s focus on Germany slashing its development budget by 8% and the US making massive aid cuts demonstrates a failure to meet this target.
6. Under SDG 1 (No Poverty):
   • Target 1.a: Ensure significant mobilization of resources from a variety of sources… to implement programmes and policies to end poverty in all its dimensions. The budget cuts described in the article represent a de-mobilization of such resources.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. For SDG 2 (Zero Hunger):
   • Number of people requiring food aid: The article states that German cuts will mean “over 4 million people worldwide will no longer receive any food aid.”
   • Sufficiency of food rations: It is mentioned that refugees received only “a third of the necessary food rations,” which is a direct measure of food insecurity.
2. For SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being):
   • Population with access to basic healthcare: The article provides a specific number: “Over one and a half million people will lose their basic health care,” which can be used as an indicator of service coverage.
3. For SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions):
   • Number of refugees: The article mentions “over 700,000 refugees” in Kenya affected by aid cuts. The number of displaced persons is a key indicator of instability.
4. For SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals):
   • Official Development Assistance (ODA) budgets: The article provides concrete figures that serve as indicators for Target 17.2. These include Germany’s development ministry budget being “slashed… by 8% to just under €10 billion” and the acute emergency aid budget dropping from “€2.23 billion” to “€1.05 billion.”
5. For SDG 1 (No Poverty):
   • Number of people in need of humanitarian assistance: The article puts the “total number of people in need at more than 320 million,” serving as a high-level indicator of the scale of global poverty and crisis.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: dw.com