Add us as your preferred source on Google to see more of our content in Search.
Add to Preferred Sources
In 2018, the official development assistance from the 30 members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) totaled 153 billion USD. If you wonder who the biggest ODA donors of the past year were, here is our top five list.
USA – 34.3 billion USD
In 2018, the United States provided the highest volume of aid of any Development Assistance Committee (DAC) member which represented 0.17% of its gross national income (GNI). Using the old ODA methodology, 2018 net ODA was 33.7 billion USD which represented a fall of 5.0% in real terms from 2017. One-third of bilateral aid went to least developed countries (LDCs) and the largest share of the United States’ aid was concentrated in sub-Saharan Africa. The US bilateral development assistance is managed by USAID, US Department of State, Millennium Challenge Corporation and other agencies.
Germany – 25.0 billion USD
Germany is the second largest donor country in the world. In 2018, Germany provided 25 billion USD in total ODA and this represented 0.61% of the country’s GNI. Calculated by the methodology used in the past, 2018 net ODA was 25.9 billion USD which represented a fall of 3.0% in real terms from 2017. Germany provides the bulk of its ODA bilaterally (81%), relying on its main implementing agencies GIZ and KfW. Germany also provides one of the highest shares of ODA to middle-income countries.
UK – 19.4 billion USD
In 2018, the United Kingdom provided 19.4 billion USD in total ODA. This represented 0.7% of the country’s GNI. Under the old methodology, 2018 net ODA was USD 19.5 billion which represented an increase of 1.8% in real terms compared to 2017. DFID is the department that manages the largest share of the UK’s bilateral aid with the share of the bilateral aid budget managed in 2018 increasing to 74.9%, up from 71.9% in 2017. At the same time the relative share of aid that other government departments managed fell to 25.1% of total ODA. Departments with significant aid budgets in 2018 were: Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS) – 5.8% of total ODA, Foreign & Commonwealth Office (FCO) – 4.4% of total ODA, Conflict, Stability and Security Fund (CSSF) – 4.2% of total ODA and Home Office – 2.3% of total bilateral ODA.
Japan – 14.2 billion USD
In 2018, Japan provided 14.2 billion USD in total ODA. This represented 0.28% of GNI. Under the methodology used in the past, 2018 net ODA was USD 10.1 billion which represented a fall of 13.4% in real terms from 2017 due to a decrease in its contributions to multilateral institutions. In 2018, 80% of bilateral Japanese ODA was programmed with partner countries, primarily Asian countries, with almost half (49%) being allocated to economic services, principally transport and communications and energy. The Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) is the governmental agency that coordinates the ODA for the Government of Japan.
France – 12.2 billion USD
In 2018, France provided 12.2 billion USD in total ODA, ranking fifth among the members of the DAC for its ODA volume. This represented 0.43% of gross national income (GNI), similar to 2017. According to the methodology used in the past, 2018 net ODA was 12.5 billion USD which represented an increase of 4.4% in real terms from 2017. The main actor in the disbursement of bilateral ODA is the French Development Agency (AFD).
Background
The official development assistance of 2018 was calculated using the new “grant equivalent method”. Under the previous ODA calculation methodology, the 2018 ODA was $149.3 billion, a decrease of 2.7% compared to the previous year. The new OECD methodology for calculating the ODA value of concessional loans began to be applied as of 2019. Under these new rules, only a percentage of an ODA loan is counted as ODA and the percentage depends how “concessional” the loan is. The new method, also called the “grant equivalent method”, is aimed to better reflect the actual effort of the donor (loans with very low interest rates and lengthy repayment periods represent more effort than a high interest loan and a short repayment period) so consequently, the more generous the loan, the higher the ODA value. In the past, the actual cash flow between a donor and a recipient country were registered, the loans being recorded at “face value”.