Sumne , And ew; Klingebiel, S ephan
Wo king Pape
De elopmen coope a ion a a ipping poin : How, why
and h ough wha mechanisms do policy no ms b eak?
IDOS Discussion Pape , No. 29/2025
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen and Sus ainabili y (IDOS), Bonn
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Sumne , And ew; Klingebiel, S ephan (2025) : De elopmen coope a ion a a
ipping poin : How, why and h ough wha mechanisms do policy no ms b eak?, IDOS Discussion
Pape , No. 29/2025, ISBN 978-3-96021-274-4, Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen and Sus ainabili y
(IDOS), Bonn,
h ps://doi.o g/10.23661/idp29.2025
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/327981
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
De elopmen Coope a ion a a Tipping
Poin
How, Why and Th ough Wha Mechanisms Do
Policy No ms B eak?
Andy Sumne & S ephan Klingebiel
IDOS DISCUSSION PAPER
29/2025
De elopmen coope a ion a a ipping
poin
How, why and h ough wha mechanisms do
policy no ms b eak?
Andy Sumne & S ephan Klingebiel
Bonn 2025
Andy Sumne is P o esso o In e na ional De elopmen a King’s College in London and P esiden o he
Eu opean Associa ion o De elopmen Resea ch and T aining Ins i u es.
Email: and ew.sumne @kcl.ac.uk
S ephan Klingebiel is Head o he depa men “In e - and T ansna ional Coope a ion” a he Ge man Ins i u e o
De elopmen and Sus ainabili y (IDOS) in Bonn. He is Visi ing P o esso a Ewha Womans Uni e si y in Seoul,
Visi ing P o esso a he Uni e si y o Tu in and Hono a y Dis inguished Fellow a he Jindal School o Go e nmen
and Public Policy.
Email: s ephan.klingebiel@idos- esea ch.de
The Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen and Sus ainabili y (IDOS) is ins i u ionally inanced by he Fede al Minis y
o Economic Coope a ion and De elopmen (BMZ), based on a esolu ion o he Ge man Bundes ag, and he
s a e o No h Rhine-Wes phalia (NRW) as a membe o he Johannes-Rau-Fo schungsgemeinscha (JRF).
Sugges ed ci a ion:
Sumne , A., & Klingebiel, S. (2025). De elopmen coope a ion a a ipping poin : How, why and h ough wha
mechanisms do policy no ms b eak? (IDOS Discussion Pape 29/2025). Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen and
Sus ainabili y (IDOS). h ps://doi.o g/10.23661/idp29.2025
Disclaime :
The analyses exp essed in his pape a e hose o he au ho (s) and do no necessa ily e lec he iews o
policies o he Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen and Sus ainabili y (IDOS).
Excep o he wise no ed, his publica ion is licensed unde C ea i e Commons A ibu ion (CC BY 4.0). You a e
ee o copy, communica e and adap his wo k, as long as you a ibu e he Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen
and Sus ainabili y (IDOS) gGmbH and he au ho (s).
IDOS Discussion Pape / Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen and Sus ainabili y (IDOS) gGmbH
ISSN 2751-4439 (P in )
ISSN 2751-4447 (Online)
ISBN 978-3-96021-274-4 (P in )
DOI: h ps://doi.o g/10.23661/idp29.2025
© Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen and Sus ainabili y (IDOS) gGmbH
Tulpen eld 6, 53113 Bonn
Email: publica ions@idos- esea ch.de
h ps://www.idos- esea ch.de
P in ed on eco- iendly, ce i ied pape .
IDOS Discussion Pape 29/2025
III
Abs ac
This pape applies he concep s and heo ies o “policy no ms” o he dis up i e e ec s o he
second T ump adminis a ion on global de elopmen coope a ion. We a gue ha ecen US ac ions
ep esen mo e han a domes ic poli ical shi . They signal a ipping poin o longs anding no ms o
he de elopmen coope a ion sys em and speci ically mul ila e alism as well as no ions o global
solida i y. This pape ’s objec i e is o explain how, why and h ough which poli ical and ins i u ional
mechanisms policy no ms b eak down o a e econs i u ed in global de elopmen coope a ion. I
uses he cu en momen as a case s udy o “no m an ip eneu ship”, po en ially e en “no m
impe ialism” illus a ing he poli ical and ins i u ional s a egies h ough which policy no ms a e
cu en ly been con es ed, disman led o displaced. This pape add esses a se o ques ions: (i)
Wha a e he co e mechanisms h ough which de elopmen coope a ion no ms a e o med,
con es ed and agmen ed? (ii) How is he second T ump adminis a ion seeking o eshape
no ma i e egimes in de elopmen coope a ion? (iii) Wha esea ch agenda is needed o
unde s and no m change in a mul ipola and con es ed de elopmen coope a ion landscape?
Keywo ds: de elopmen coope a ion, no m con es a ion, policy no ms, global (dis)o de ,
na ionalis condi ionali y egime, New Washing on Dissensus
IDOS Discussion Pape 29/2025
IV
Con en s
Abs ac
Abb e ia ions
1 In oduc ion 1
2 Policy no ms and de elopmen coope a ion 2
2.1 The concep o policy no ms 2
2.2 Theo ies o policy no m change 3
3 The T ump 2.0 ipping poin : no ma i e dis up ion and de elopmen coope a ion 8
3.1 The con ex o global (dis)o de 8
3.2 No ma i e dis up ion in de elopmen coope a ion and he New Washing on Dissensus 9
3.3 No m con agion, emula ion and global e e be a ions 14
4 Compe ing no ma i e egimes in global de elopmen coope a ion 15
5 Conclusion 18
Re e ences 20
Tables
Table 1: Poli ical p ocesses o policy no m con es a ion in de elopmen coope a ion 7
Table 2: The New Washing on Dissensus: i e p inciples o he T ump adminis a ion’s
na ionalis condi ionali y egime 11
Table 3: Cha ac e is ics o compe ing no ma i e egimes o de elopmen coope a ion 17
IDOS Discussion Pape 29/2025
V
Abb e ia ions
AIIB Asian In as uc u e In es men Bank
DAC De elopmen Assis ance Commi ee
DEI di e si y, equi y and inclusion
GPEDC Global Pa ne ship o E ec i e De elopmen Co-ope a ion
ODA o icial de elopmen assis ance
MDG millennium de elopmen goal
NDB New De elopmen Bank
NWD New Washing on Dissensus
OECD O ganisa ion o Economic Co-ope a ion and De elopmen
SDG sus ainable de elopmen goal
IDOS Discussion Pape 29/2025
1
1 In oduc ion
Malcolm Gladwell (2000, p. 12) desc ibes a “ ipping poin ” as he momen when an idea o end
c osses a h eshold and sp eads quickly. The book’s discussion was abou consume ends, ye
he same concep holds o global de elopmen coope a ion oday, which is acing accumula ed
poli ical and ins i u ional p essu e and seemingly app oaching i s ipping poin (see also Sumne &
Klingebiel, 2025).1 De elopmen coope a ion appea s o be unde going a undamen al
pa adigma ic shi . Long-ges a ing poli ical, ins i u ional and no ma i e o ces a e eo de ing
de elopmen coope a ion’s idea ional a chi ec u e. The u u e o global de elopmen coope a ion
migh no be de e mined by echnical coo dina ion o bes p ac ice ans e o mo e us o be e
na a i es, bu by s uggles o e meaning, powe and legi imacy. Unde s anding how no ms b eak
is no simply an academic exe cise. I is cen al o unde s anding he eo de ing o global
de elopmen coope a ion in he mid-2020s.
In his pape , we conside he ipping poin in e ms o he policy no ms o global de elopmen
coope a ion. Ou co e a gumen is ha he T ump adminis a ion ma ks a no ma i e ipping poin
in global de elopmen coope a ion. Howe e , he T ump adminis a ion is no ea ed he e as a
na ional abe a ion. Ra he , i is unde s ood as a ansna ional poli ical p ojec . I is oo ed in
so e eign ism, ansac ionalism and an i-mul ila e alism. I c ys allises and ampli ies wide ends
al eady in mo ion. These include a shi om collec i e o sel -in e es ed amings o de elopmen
coope a ion, he ins umen alisa ion o aid o ideological policing and mig a ion con ol and he
p oli e a ion o ins i u ional o ums ha con es o sides ep es ablished no ms. In o he wo ds, he
T ump adminis a ion is igge ing a ipping poin ha accele a es no ma i e con es a ion,
ins i u ional agmen a ion and he plu alisa ion o de elopmen coope a ion egimes.
D awing e ospec i ely on Gladwell’s o iginal amewo k (2000), we use h ee analogies: i s , he
in luence o powe ul no m an ip eneu s (“ he Law o he Few”); second, a compelling, i pola ising,
ideological message (“ he S ickiness Fac o ”); and hi d, a pe missi e con ex o weakened
mul ila e alism and ising geopoli ical i al y (“ he Powe o Con ex ”). Ye , whe e Gladwell once
saw hese o ces as enable s o posi i e social con agion, his la e e lec ions econside such
dynamics as mechanisms o sys emic b eakdown (2024). In his sense, he T ump adminis a ion
e a ma ks a ipping poin . I is also a b eaking poin . Accumula ed no ma i e s ain and
disillusionmen now con e ge in o open agmen a ion and he econs i u ion o de elopmen
no ms unde i al geopoli ical logics. Long-held assump ions abou wha cons i u es legi ima e aid,
how i should be deli e ed and in whose in e es a e being openly con es ed. These shi s a e no
me ely abou unding le els o dono a igue; hey signal a deepe ac u e in he no ma i e
ounda ions o he sys em. Wha was once pe cei ed as an inc emen al e olu ion o aid no ms
owa d alignmen , e ec i eness and pa ne ship is now subjec o agmen a ion, ideological
con es a ion and ins i u ional bypass.
This pape seeks o explain how and why no ms in he a eas o de elopmen and de elopmen
policy b eak, wi h a en ion o con es a ion and s a egic econ igu a ion. No ms a e ea ed no as
s able end poin s bu as a e ac s o poli ical con es a ion. This pape add esses a se o ques ions:
(i) Wha a e he co e mechanisms h ough which de elopmen coope a ion no ms a e o med,
con es ed and agmen ed? (ii) How is he second T ump adminis a ion seeking o eshape
1 We de ine he sys em o de elopmen coope a ion as he b oade a chi ec u e o ac o s, no ms, ins u-
men s and ins i u ions ha mobilise and coo dina e esou ces, knowledge and poli ical suppo o de el-
opmen goals. Wi hin his sys em, o icial de elopmen assis ance (ODA) is a co e inancial ins umen ,
p ima ily p o ided by he O ganisa ion o Economic Co-ope a ion and De elopmen (OECD) De elop-
men Assis ance Commi ee (DAC) membe s, and unc ioning alongside o he modali ies such as Sou h-
Sou h coope a ion, clima e inance, philan h opic aid and impac -o ien ed p i a e-sec o engagemen .
IDOS Discussion Pape 29/2025
2
no ma i e egimes in de elopmen coope a ion? (iii) Wha esea ch agenda is needed o
unde s and no m change in a mul ipola and con es ed de elopmen coope a ion landscape?
In add essing hese ques ions, his pape makes ou con ibu ions. Fi s , i is a su ey o in e -
na ional ela ions, sociology, de elopmen s udies and public policy on he concep ualisa ion o
policy no ms and he mechanisms o no m eme gence, con es a ion and agmen a ion. Second,
i is an empi ically g ounded analysis o he T ump adminis a ion as a case s udy o “no m an ip e-
neu ship”, po en ially e en “no m impe ialism”, illus a ing he poli ical and ins i u ional s a egies
h ough which policy no ms a e cu en ly being con es ed, disman led o displaced. Thi d, i
p esen s he compe ing no ma i e egimes in de elopmen coope a ion. And ou h, i p oposes a
esea ch agenda.
The pape is s uc u ed as ollows. Sec ion 2 su eys he concep ual and heo e ical s udy o policy
no ms. Sec ion 3 applies hose concep s and heo ies o analyse shi s in de elopmen coope a ion
unde he second T ump adminis a ion. Sec ion 4 p esen s a ypology o compe ing de elopmen
coope a ion egimes wi hin he de elopmen coope a ion sys em. Sec ion 5 concludes wi h a
o wa d-looking esea ch agenda.
2 Policy no ms and de elopmen coope a ion
2.1 The concep o policy no ms
In in e na ional ela ions, sociology, de elopmen s udies and public policy, “policy no ms” a e o en
de ined as “collec i e expec a ions o he p ope beha iou o ac o s wi h a gi en iden i y”
(Ka zens ein, 1996, p. 5). By con as , Finnemo e and Sikkink (1998, p. 891) desc ibe no ms as “a
s anda d o app op ia e beha iou o ac o s wi h a gi en iden i y”. They also ope a e as p ocedu al
expec a ions abou how au ho i y should be exe cised and how o ganisa ions a e expec ed o
ope a e (Ba ne & Finnemo e, 2004; Eyben, 2010). They a e no me ely echnical ules. They a e
alue-laden p inciples ha speci y who se s s anda ds, how compliance is assessed and who
bea s esponsibili y (e.g., dono - ecipien models s. mu ual pa ne ship). Wha condi ions a e
legi ima e is a sepa a e no ma i e ques ion (e.g., alignmen s. au onomy). Examples o
de elopmen coope a ion policy no ms a e nume ous and include he Pa is p inciples on aid
e ec i eness (owne ship, alignmen , ha monisa ion, esul s and mu ual accoun abili y), as well as
mo e ecen no ms a ound policy cohe ence, gende equali y and clima e esponsibili y. These
no ms e ol e his o ically and a e o en embedded in ins i u ional a angemen s such as he
De elopmen Assis ance Commi ee (DAC) o he O ganisa ion o Economic Co-ope a ion and
De elopmen (OECD) pee e iews, he Global Pa ne ship o E ec i e De elopmen Coope a ion
(GPEDC) and mul ila e al lending p ac ices (Honig & Gul ajani, 2020). The c isis o he
de elopmen coope a ion sys em oday is a c isis o hese no ms. Longs anding assump ions
abou wha aid is o – and how i should be deli e ed – a e being con es ed, e amed, e oded o
ejec ed al oge he .
Sociological heo ies, especially hose g ounded in p ac ice heo y (Bou dieu, 1977; Giddens,
1984), concep ualise no ms as embedded in and ep oduced h ough social p ac ices.2 No ms a e
no exogenous cons ain s bu , as no ed, a e cons i u i e o iden i y and ac ion: hey a e
in e nalised, habi ua ed and enac ed in e e yday ins i u ional and p o essional ou ines (Be ge &
Luckmann, 1966). Public policy esea ch adds a u he lens. I examines how p oblems a e
de ined and how solu ions become accep able. This happens wi hin “policy pa adigms” (Hall,
2 P ac ice-o ien ed social heo y explains how social o de is s uc u ed and ep oduced h ough e e yday
ac ion (see also Bou dieu, 1977; Giddens, 1984).
IDOS Discussion Pape 29/2025
9
3.2 No ma i e dis up ion in de elopmen coope a ion and he
New Washing on Dissensus
De elopmen coope a ion is mo e han ma e ial edis ibu ion. I cons uc s and eshapes global
no ms and poli ical o de s (Cha u edi e al., 2021; Eyben, 2010; Mawdsley e al., 2014). The
concep ope a es as a no ma i e ool o global go e nance, shaping how de elopmen , legi imacy
and powe a e unde s ood and nego ia ed. His o ically, US de elopmen coope a ion has played
a leading ole in shaping global o de . Du ing he Cold Wa , i se ed as an ins umen o
con ainmen , embedding capi alis models and secu ing alliances (Enge man, 2003; La ham,
2011). US de elopmen coope a ion p ojec ed Washing on’s in luence in he Global Sou h. A e
2000, de elopmen coope a ion policy pa ially shi ed owa d global public goods and mul ila e al
no ms, pa icula ly unde he Obama and Biden adminis a ions, hough s a egic in e es s
emained cen al (Ca o he s & B echenmache , 2014).
Concep ually, de elopmen coope a ion can be unde s ood h ough h ee o e lapping lenses: as
so powe (Nye, 2004), as a legi imacy de ice (Sending, 2015) and as a s a egic o de ing
mechanism (Gill, 1995; Li, 2007). The so powe lens ames de elopmen coope a ion as a
means o shaping p e e ences h ough a ac ion a he han coe cion. De elopmen coope a ion
unde his logic enhances a dono ’s in e na ional s anding, builds goodwill and di uses alues such
as democ acy and sus ainabili y. The second pe spec i e ea s de elopmen coope a ion as a
legi imacy de ice. This means dono s and ecipien s pa icipa e in a pe o ma i e a chi ec u e
oge he ha signals no ma i e alignmen and echnoc a ic mode ni y (Sending, 2015). He e,
de elopmen coope a ion helps sus ain epu a ional c edibili y in global a enas, i espec i e o
domes ic ou comes. The hi d and mos ele an o he T ump adminis a ion ames de elopmen
coope a ion as a s a egic o de ing mechanism h ough no m-se ing and s uc u al dependence.
This pe spec i e d aws on G amscian no ions o hegemony and Foucauldian go e nmen ali y o
o eg ound de elopmen coope a ion’s ole in s uc u ing he ules and no ms o global go e nance
(Gill, 1995; Li, 2007).
De elopmen coope a ion in his aming is a means o embedding ins i u ional logics, economic
models and go e nance empla es ha a ou he dono ’s p e e ences. Ra he han elying solely
on pe suasion (i.e., so powe ), i wo ks h ough s uc u al dependence o push new no ms and
hei di usion. T ump’s second p esidency ma ks a shi wi hin his om hegemonic consen -
building o ansac ional coe cion (Haug e al., 2025). Unde he T ump adminis a ion,
de elopmen coope a ion is no longe a ehicle o uni e sal no ms bu an ideologically policed
ins umen o na ional in e es . The T ump adminis a ion se ou an ins umen al and exclusiona y
logic o de elopmen coope a ion ha p io i ises na ional objec i es. This s ance uses
de elopmen coope a ion as a le e o global in luence and u he seeks o weaken mul ila e al
no ms. Whe e Cold Wa de elopmen coope a ion emphasised alliances and capi alism, and pos -
Cold Wa de elopmen coope a ion ocussed on millennium de elopmen goals (MDGs) and
global public goods, he T ump adminis a ion shi s he pa adigm om consen -based hegemony
o ansac ional coe cion. The T ump adminis a ion’s policies exempli y no m an ip eneu ship:
ac i e disman ling, displacemen and con e sion o exis ing no ms (Klingebiel & Sumne , 2025).
The ideological a chi ec u e o he T ump adminis a ion’s de elopmen policy is explici , no la en .
I appea s in he 2025 ques ionnai e sen o ODA ecipien s du ing he aid e iew, in epo ing by
You ish e al. (2025), and in he 2026 budge eques s and escissions, which oge he a icula e
i e p inciples we e m he “New Washing on Dissensus” (NWD) o an exempla o a “Na ionalis
Condi ionali y Regime” (see Table 2) (Sumne & Klingebiel, 2025). The NWD’s i s p inciple
e ames de elopmen coope a ion as a ool o weaken, a he han s eng hen, global coope a ion.
US ODA ecipien s a e asked o con i m ha hei p og ammes do no ely on in e na ional
o ganisa ions such as he Uni ed Na ions. This e lec s a b oade e o o delegi imise
mul ila e alism and o e ode he no ma i e au ho i y o ins i u ions pe cei ed as cons aining US
IDOS Discussion Pape 29/2025
10
so e eign y. In e ec , de elopmen coope a ion is epu posed o dis up a he han suppo ules-
based in e na ional go e nance and o weaken no ms a ound mul ila e alism as a global public
good (Haug e al., 2025; Mawdsley, 2019).
The second p inciple o he NWD is o place ideological e ing a he co e o de elopmen
coope a ion. Recipien s o ODA mus ce i y ha hey do no engage wi h “communis , socialis o
o ali a ian pa ies” o exp ess “an i-Ame ican belie s”. Ce i ica ion unc ions as poli ical sc eening;
in e ec , lows depend on ideological loyal y, no e ec i eness o need. The T ump adminis a ion
ex ends he domes ic cul u e wa in o de elopmen coope a ion, a ge ing China, le -aligned
mo emen s and non-aligned ac o s.
The hi d p inciple o he NWD is he ins umen alisa ion o de elopmen coope a ion o dono
coun ies’ domes ic mig a ion con ol. P ojec s a e assessed on hei ole in de e ing i egula
mig a ion and enhancing bo de secu i y. T adi ional aims, such as educing po e y, ad ancing
igh s and ans o ming economies, ha e gi en way o domes ic poli ical objec i es and es ic i e
condi ionali y; in p ac ice, go e nmen s use de elopmen coope a ion o ex end immig a ion
en o cemen .
The ou h p inciple o he NWD is ha de elopmen coope a ion sys ema ically excludes clima e
ac ion and di e si y, equi y and inclusion (DEI) ini ia i es. ODA ecipien s should disa ow
en i onmen al jus ice and inclusion agendas. This ma ks a delibe a e ollback o p io
commi men s and aligns wi h domes ic opposi ion o “woke” policies. La ge a eas o socially
ans o ma i e wo k a e disquali ied om US suppo .
Finally, he i h p inciple o he NWD is ha de elopmen coope a ion is explici ly ansac ional.
de elopmen coope a ion mus show economic bene i s o he US ei he ia cos -sha ing o gains
o US indus ies and wo ke s. The su ey demands e idence o e u n on in es men , aligning
de elopmen coope a ion wi h ade and indus ial s a egy. Fo eign de elopmen coope a ion
becomes an expo and job-c ea ion ool. The e asu e o humani a ian o jus ice-based ocabula y
e lec s a b oade shi owa d ins umen al and secu i y-d i en jus i ica ions.
The NWD ma ks a delibe a e up u e wi h mul ila e alis no ms. I en ails de unding global
ins i u ions, ideological e ing o ecipien s and ejec ion o clima e and equi y agendas. The
SDGs, which we e once a uni ying amewo k, a e explici ly denounced (US Mission o he Uni ed
Na ions, 2025). While his may no esemble adi ional de elopmen coope a ion, i now de ines
US engagemen in he a ea o de elopmen coope a ion. When ac o s see Agenda 2030 and he
SDGs as h ea s o so e eign y, he issue is no c edibili y bu compe ing wo ld iews. The T ump
adminis a ion’s de elopmen coope a ion hus e lec s a s a egy o wha has been e med “no m
an ip eneu ship” (Bloom ield & Sco , 2018), ejec ing key ene s o wha has been an implici
consensus. Ins i u ionally, his means de unding he Uni ed Na ions Popula ion Fund, wi hd awing
om he Pa is Ag eemen and cu ing con ibu ions o he Wo ld Heal h O ganiza ion, he Uni ed
Na ions Relie and Wo ks Agency o Pales ine Re ugees in he Nea Eas , as well as he Wo ld
Food P og amme, he Uni ed Na ions De elopmen P og amme and he Uni ed Na ions Child en’s
Fund. These we e no jus budge a y mo es, bu discu si e ejec ions o mul ila e alism and “an i-
Ame ican” globalism. The T ump adminis a ion has p omo ed a ansac ional ision o
de elopmen coope a ion, eplacing solida i y-based amewo ks wi h ideological condi ionali y.
The eins a ed “Mexico Ci y Policy” (o “Global Gag Rule”) blocks unding o o eign NGOs in ol ed
in abo ion se ices. This expo ed domes ic cul u e wa s ia de elopmen coope a ion, con es ing
gende and heal h no ms and cons uc ing a conse a i e no ma i e o de (Wal , 2025). Execu i e
o de s unde he T ump adminis a ion eshaped policy ins umen s on mig a ion, ade and eligion
(see also Haug e al., 2025). Se e al o de s edi ec ed o condi ioned de elopmen coope a ion
h ough hese domains.
IDOS Discussion Pape 29/2025
11
Table 2: The New Washing on Dissensus: i e p inciples o he T ump adminis a ion’s
na ionalis condi ionali y egime
P inciple Ques ionnai e sen o
ODA ecipien s
Disappea ing wo ds in
ede al documen s
Budge FY 2026
eques s
Disman ling global
go e nance – an i-
UN, an i-SDGs
Does his p ojec
ein o ce US so e eign y
by limi ing eliance on
in e na ional
o ganisa ions o global
go e nance s uc u es
(e.g., UN, Wo ld Heal h
O ganiza ion)?
Remo al o SDG- ela ed
e ms (e.g., clima e c isis,
equi y, pe son-cen ed
ca e); DEI e minology
(e.g., inclusion, unde -
ep esen ed)
Majo cu s o elimi-
na ion o con ibu ions
o mul ila e al
ins i u ions (UN, Global
En i onmen Facili y,
Wo ld Heal h
O ganiza ion)
Global heal h p og ams
cu by 62%: USD
10bn/yea o USD
3.8bn/yea
Ideological policing
– loyal y es s
agains “an i-
Ame icanism”
Can you con i m ha you
o ganisa ion does no
wo k wi h en i ies … [ ha ]
espouse an i-Ame ican
belie s?
Does you o ganisa ion
ha e a clea policy
p ohibi ing any
collabo a ion, unding o
suppo o en i ies ha
ad oca e o implemen
policies con a y o US
go e nmen in e es s,
na ional secu i y and
so e eign y?
Elimina ion o ac i ism and
social jus ice e ms (e.g.,
ad ocacy, eminism,
in e sec ionali y, an i-
acism)
Elimina ion o he
Na ional Endowmen o
Democ acy (NED)
accused o suppo ing
an i-T ump o le is
o ganisa ions
De unding o
educa ional exchanges
wi h pe cei ed
ideological bias
Bo de
secu i isa ion – aid
and mig a ion
de e en
Does his p ojec di ec ly
con ibu e o limi ing
illegal immig a ion o
s eng hening US bo de
secu i y?
To wha ex en does his
p ojec s eng hen pa ne
and ally secu i y
assis ance by con ibu ing
o secu ing US bo de s,
p o ec ing Ame ican
so e eign y and
upholding na ional
secu i y?
Wha impac does his
p ojec ha e on
p e en ing illegal
immig a ion o he US?
Remo al o mig a ion and
humani a ian e ms (e.g.,
immig an s, ma ginalised,
auma, ulne able
popula ions)
Bo de secu i y-o ien ed
and mig a ion-
de e ence p og ammes
p io i ised
Cu s o mig a ion-
ela ed assis ance
Humani a ian unding
ied o domes ic
en o cemen p io i ies
Economic suppo and
de elopmen assis ance
ze oed ou ( om
app ox. USD 8bn in FY
2025)
IDOS Discussion Pape 29/2025
12
P inciple Ques ionnai e sen o
ODA ecipien s
Disappea ing wo ds in
ede al documen s
Budge FY 2026
eques s
E asu e o clima e
and DEI –
disquali ica ion o
“woke” p ojec s
Can you con i m ha his
p ojec con ains no DEI
elemen s?
Can you con i m his is
no a clima e o “en i on-
men al jus ice” p ojec o
include such elemen s?
Does his p ojec ake
app op ia e measu es o
p o ec women and o
de end agains gende
ideology as de ined in
…Execu i e O de ?
Is you o ganisa ion
complian wi h he la es
Mexico Ci y Policy?
Elimina ion o DEI, gende
iden i y and en i onmen al
e ms (e.g., ans, clima e
science, di e si y, equi y)
Funding elimina ed o
Global En i onmen
Facili y, clima e
in es men unds and
DEI- ela ed
p og ammes
No unding o amily
planning
T ansac ional
na ionalism – aid
as e u n on
in es men o US
economy
Does his p ojec c ea e
measu able bene i s o
US domes ic indus ies,
wo k o ce o economic
sec o s?
Wha is he speci ic
inancial e u n o his
p ojec , including
measu able di idends,
cos bene i analysis and
economic impac ?
Wha impac does his
p ojec ha e in inc easing
Ame ican in luence, us
and epu a ion wi hin
o eign go e nmen s?
And among o eign
publics?
Remo al o
humani a ian/al uis ic
jus i ica ion o aid; shi
owa d ins umen al
language
C ea ion o he Ame ica
Fi s Oppo uni y Fund
(USD 2.9bn)
Sou ces: Sou ces: Based on USAID (2025) and You ish e al. (2025) (see also Kine, 2025)
Toge he , he p inciples e lec a cohe en ideological depa u e om he libe al no ms ha ha e
unde pinned de elopmen coope a ion o decades. They ede ine he pu pose, bene icia ies and
condi ions o de elopmen coope a ion in ways ha ele a e na ionalism o e mul ila e alism,
compliance o e collabo a ion and sho - e m poli ical gain o e long- e m de elopmen
pa ne ship. The T ump adminis a ion’s app oach is no simply a dis up ion. I ep esen s a
delibe a e cons uc ion o an al e na i e logic. Basic assump ions abou in e na ional poli ics a e
no sha ed, as alues play no ole and unde lying concep s like “so powe ” a e no aken in o
conside a ion (Klingebiel & Sumne , 2025). And i is no only e iden in he US as discussed in he
nex sec ion. I cons i u es an eme gen and ideologically cohe en mode o ( e)o de ing. Th ough
his lens, de elopmen coope a ion is no longe amed as a b oadly sha ed public good. I
unc ions ins ead as an ideologically policed ool o asse na ional dominance. I is a s a egic
o de ing mechanism cons i u ing a no el and in o mal o de ing p ojec , one ha depa s om
consen -based hegemony and emb aces ansac ional na ionalism. Condi ionali y has long been
a cen al ea u e o de elopmen coope a ion, his o ically used by dono s o in luence ecipien
IDOS Discussion Pape 29/2025
13
coun ies’ policies and go e nance amewo ks. The T ump adminis a ion’s app oach, howe e ,
ma ks a depa u e om p e ious i e a ions o condi ionali y in bo h o m and in en . Unde s anding
his depa u e equi es si ua ing i wi hin a longe genealogy o condi ionali y egimes.
This na ionalis condi ionali y egime b eaks wi h he Washing on Consensus e a, when dono s
ied de elopmen coope a ion o neolibe al e o ms. Second-gene a ion condi ionali y (2000s)
ocussed on go e nance, democ acy and igh s. The T ump adminis a ion’s model b eaks om
bo h, eplacing economic o libe al benchma ks wi h ideological and na ional-in e es condi ions.
This e lec s a b oade s a egy o in o mal empi e o powe wi hou ules whe e coe ci e
bila e alism eplaces mul ila e al engagemen . The T ump adminis a ion uses diso de ins u-
men ally: hollowing ins i u ions, delegi imising no ms and demanding compliance. I agmen s
global coope a ion by asse ing dominance h ough dis up ion. De elopmen coope a ion, unde
his logic, becomes a ool o asse ing unila e al dominance a he han os e ing sha ed (de elop-
men ) goals. The T ump adminis a ion’s app oach eschews o mal ulemaking o ins i u ional
inno a ion in a ou o bila e al p essu e, bu eauc a ic obs uc ion and discu si e delegi imisa ion.
This is ou de ini ion o a “na ionalis condi ionali y egime”. The s a egy mi o s wha Flockha
(2016) has desc ibed as “o de h ough diso de ” o he delibe a e weakening o mul ila e al no ms
and ins i u ions as a means o ecalib a e in e na ional o de a ound na owe , na ionalis
p inciples.
This s a egy esona es wi h b oade heo e ical pe spec i es on how powe ope a es in a
agmen ed wo ld o de . I aligns wi h he concep o in o mal empi e, whe eby hegemonic s a es
exe in luence ia ansac ional ools such as de elopmen coope a ion. In his iew, he US
abandons uni e salism no as e ea bu as a ecalib a ion o in luence unde condi ions o
declining legi imacy (Pa ma , 2018). Second, he s a egy mi o s he logic o decoupling in global
economic go e nance and agmen a ion as a means o con ol. Jus as global p oduc ion ne wo ks
a e being s a egically eo ien ed owa d secu i y goals, US de elopmen coope a ion is e amed
as a o eign policy ins umen . The aim is o p i ilege allies, punish ad e sa ies and channel
esou ces owa d ac o s whose beha iou signals ideological allegiance and geopoli ical u ili y
(Fa ell & Newman, 2019).
Thi d, he na ionalis condi ionali y egime may also be unde s ood as pa o a b oade p ocess o
au ho i a ian lea ning, whe ein s a es expe imen wi h new ins umen s o con ol, eplica e
e ec i e ac ics and adap o shi ing global cons ain s. The T ump adminis a ion’s app oach
o e s a empla e o illibe al o populis egimes o asse ex e nal in luence while unde mining
libe al ins i u ional cons ain s, sugges ing a o m o no m di usion h ough dis up ion (Kahle ,
2018). Taken oge he , “o de h ough diso de ” is no a pa adox bu a me hod: diso de is
ins umen alised o e ode i al no ms and en ench an eme gen , exclusiona y o de in he
de elopmen domain.
Pe haps he mos e iden isk o he na ionalis condi ionali y egime is no only i s immedia e
ope a ional impac (i.e., ODA cu s), bu i s po en ial o no ma i e con agion. The T ump
adminis a ion’s de elopmen coope a ion model p o ides a mode ha may be a ac i e o o he
dono s seeking o consolida e domes ic suppo , discipline in e na ional pa ne s o exi om
mul ila e al en anglemen s. The logic o ansac ionalism o aid o loyal y and aid o economic
e u ns may appeal o o he go e nmen s. A he same ime, ecipien coun ies may s a egically
ealign. I US assis ance becomes oo un eliable o coe ci e, s a es may pi o owa d al e na i e
sou ces o inance, pa icula ly om China, he EU, o egional Sou h-Sou h mechanisms. China’s
emphasis on in as uc u e, c edi lines and non-condi ionali y o e s a o m o s abili y, e en i i
gene a es deb conce ns. The EU may se e as a no ma i e coun e weigh by ecommi ing o
inclusi e de elopmen and mul ila e al channels, albei s a egically. Wha is a s ake is no simply
he u u e o US de elopmen coope a ion, bu he in eg i y o he b oade de elopmen
coope a ion egime and he collapse o a posi i e incen i e sys em. The e osion o inclusi e, ules-
based p inciples unde mines he mul ila e al ab ic ha has, howe e impe ec ly, coo dina ed
IDOS Discussion Pape 29/2025
14
collec i e esponses o global challenges. In hei place, an ad hoc and poli ically ins umen al logic
o de elopmen coope a ion h ea ens o agmen he de elopmen landscape in o compe ing
sphe es o in luence.
3.3 No m con agion, emula ion and global e e be a ions
Al hough hese de elopmen s o igina ed in US de elopmen coope a ion, hei in luence ex ends
beyond US policy. The T ump adminis a ion has ca alysed a b oade no ma i e ecalib a ion o
di e ing ex en s among a ange o dono s, mul ila e al ins i u ions and de elopmen ac o s.
Among a numbe o adi ional dono s, elemen s o he T ump adminis a ion’s logic can be ound.
Fo example, he Uni ed Kingdom me ged he Depa men o In e na ional De elopmen in o he
Fo eign, Commonweal h and De elopmen O ice in 2020. The me ge eo ien ed de elopmen
policy owa d o eign-policy objec i es, and he change has no been e e sed by he go e nmen
elec ed in 2024. Fu he , he UK go e nmen will educe ODA om 0.5 pe cen o 0.3 pe cen o
g oss na ional income by 2027 (o 0.17 pe cen excluding in-dono e ugee cos ), ci ing he need
o inc ease UK de ence spending.
The p e ious UK go e nmen ’s In eg a ed Re iew (Cabine O ice, 2021) amed aid in e ms o
na ional in e es , de elopmen inance o ade and secu i y p io i ies, including he ex e nalisa ion
o mig a ion con ol o pa ne coun ies. This shi aligns wi h he ansac ional and secu i ised
de elopmen pa adigm e iden in he T ump adminis a ion. Al hough he go e nmen has
changed, his aming is s ill e iden . Fu he , al hough in p inciple clima e change is a co e heme
shaping p io i ies, he Fo eign Sec e a y has made e e ence o he Fo eign, Commonweal h and
De elopmen O ice c ea ing UK jobs and UK g ow h (FCDO, 2024).
Simila ly, he Eu opean Union’s ex e nal ac ion s a egy inc easingly ies aid o mig a ion
de e ence, especially h ough he EU Eme gency T us Fund o A ica (Eu opean Commission,
2021). This ep esen s a no ma i e hyb id: blending de elopmen objec i es wi h secu i y,
su eillance and con ol agendas. While he o ically dis inc om he T ump adminis a ion’s
“Ame ica Fi s ”, he unde lying no ma i e logic is simila in he sense o ins umen alising de elop-
men o domes ic p io i ies.
Mul ila e al ins i u ions, hough no o igina o s o such shi s, ha e also adap ed o changing
no ma i e e ain. To main ain dono suppo , o ganisa ions like he Wo ld Bank ha e inc emen ally
adjus ed hei aming and discou se (no leas because he US appoin s he Wo ld Bank p esiden
by his o ical p ecedence). These changes we e no d i en solely by he second T ump adminis a-
ion. Ye hey con ibu ed o a shi owa d ansac ional goals and away om edis ibu ion o
igh s-based agendas.
In his con ex , non-Wes e n ac o s ha e been empowe ed o con es no ms o e he pas wo
decades. Fo ins ance, China’s de elopmen coope a ion, which is o ganised p ima ily h ough
bila e al channels and he Bel and Road Ini ia i e, p omo es a so e eign y-based, mu ual bene i
na a i e. By challenging he legi imacy o long-s anding Wes e n de elopmen no ms and
ins i u ions, he US c ea es space o al e na i e app oaches o ake hold. Recipien coun ies
inc easingly engage in “ o um shopping”, seeking ins i u ional a enas and pa ne s ha con e
ecogni ion, esou ces, o s a us in e ms o concessional inance, in as uc u e in es men , o
e en symbolic ecogni ion (Zü n, 2018). Sou he n-led ins i u ions, such as he New De elopmen
Bank (NDB), Asian In as uc u e In es men Bank (AIIB) and China’s Sou h-Sou h Coope a ion
Fund, ha e u he con ibu ed o his di e si ica ion. These ins i u ions p omo e dis inc no ma i e
logics such as demand- esponsi eness, in as uc u e-led g ow h and s a e-led de elopmen ha
s and in con as o he go e nance and igh s-based no ms o adi ional dono s (Es e es &
Klingebiel, 2021). The esul is no he wholesale displacemen o exis ing no ms, bu he
IDOS Discussion Pape 29/2025
15
eme gence o a polycen ic and plu alis no m en i onmen in which mul iple, and some imes
con adic o y, s anda ds coexis .
This agmen a ion is u he exace ba ed by coali ions o no m an ip eneu s. Wi hin mul ila e al
se ings, alliances be ween he US, A gen ina, Hunga y and o he s ha e challenged sexual and
ep oduc i e heal h no ms, gende language and clima e a ge s. Such coali ions can e ec i ely
block consensus, in oduce al e na i e language and demand “so e eign y clauses” in ou come
documen s. This e ec i ely ins i u ionalises con es a ion wi hin global go e nance. E en whe e
consensus is achie ed, he esul ing ex s a e dilu ed.
These changes ha e had a ma ked e ec on de elopmen coope a ion. The na a i es o “Agenda
2030” o “global solida i y”, which we e once hegemonic, a e now compe ing wi h na a i es o
sel - eliance, managed mig a ion and economic e u ns. Al hough he de elopmen coope a ion
sys em has no collapsed, i s no ma i e a chi ec u e is inc easingly polycen ic and con es ed.
No m agmen a ion has a isen no only om no ma i e decay bu also om he p oli e a ion o
ins i u ional al e na i es, discu si e ea icula ions and poli ical ealignmen s. The T ump
adminis a ion, in his con ex , is bo h a cause and a ca alys by ac i ely unde mining exis ing
no ms and hus opening space o al e na i e ones. I s legacy may be he b oade ealignmen o
de elopmen coope a ion as a ield o geopoli ical s a egy and domes ic poli ical signalling. The
implica ions o no ms a e hus long- e m and may shape he de elopmen coope a ion well
beyond he second T ump p esidency hough i compe es wi h se e al o he egimes o
de elopmen coope a ion, which we u n o nex .
4 Compe ing no ma i e egimes in global
de elopmen coope a ion
The T ump adminis a ion’s NWD is a o m o a na ionalis condi ionali y egime and is one o a se
o compe ing egimes o de elopmen coope a ion wi hin he de elopmen coope a ion sys em as
a whole. To map his landscape, we p opose a ypology o ou con empo a y egimes, each
e lec ing dis inc logics. D awing on ecen compa a i e schola ship (Cha u edi e al., 2021;
Es e es & Klingebiel, 2021; Mawdsley, 2019), we use examples om he US, EU and Sou h-Sou h
coope a ion. We g oup he ou egimes along wo dimensions: how much in e na ional
coo dina ion hey seek and how a hey commi o de elopmen in he Global Sou h. These
gene a e ou ideal ypes, which a e summa ised in Table 3. The ypology enables an analy ical
aming o ongoing shi s in he no ma i e a chi ec u e o global de elopmen coope a ion. Each
egime exhibi s dis inc assump ions ega ding he pu pose o de elopmen coope a ion, he basis
o legi imacy and he app op ia e ole o no ms.
Fi s , he “libe al mul ila e alism egime” e lec s high coo dina ion and high commi men , g ounded
in sha ed ules, pooled esou ces and inclusi e go e nance. I is exempli ied by he pos -2000
de elopmen coope a ion e ec i eness agenda. In con as , he “na ionalis condi ionali y egime”
ep esen s a agmen ed and low-commi men logic, whe e de elopmen coope a ion is deployed
ansac ionally and condi ioned in alignmen wi h dono in e es s, o en subo dina ing de elopmen
goals o domes ic poli ical impe a i es. The “plu alis de elopmen coope a ion egime” e lec s
high commi men bu low coo dina ion, o en seen in Sou h-Sou h coope a ion o di e en ia ed
bila e al ini ia i es ha espec na ional so e eign y while s ill pu suing de elopmen al goals. The
“s a egic mul ila e alism egime” in ol es coo dina ed ac ion bu low de elopmen al commi men
and ypically ins umen alised o geopoli ical o comme cial ends.
We can elucida e each egime u he . The “libe al mul ila e alism egime” ep esen s he
con inua ion o pos -2000 no ma i e a chi ec u es, including he MDGs, Sus ainable De elopmen
Goals (SDGs) and he b oade de elopmen coope a ion e ec i eness agenda. Roo ed in a
IDOS Discussion Pape 29/2025
16
uni e salis logic, his egime p omo es collec i e ac ion, pee accoun abili y and de elopmen
concei ed as a global public good. I is ins i u ionalised h ough bodies such as he Uni ed Na ions
De elopmen P og amme and he OECD-DAC. O he o a include he Uni ed Na ions Economic
and Social Council De elopmen Coope a ion Fo um and he GPEDC. Key no ma i e ea u es
include a s ong commi men o mul ila e alism, pooled esou ces, an emphasis on anspa ency,
e alua ion and cohe ence and he o ical alignmen wi h p inciples such as “lea e no one behind”.
No m change occu s p ima ily h ough laye ing, whe eby new p io i ies (e.g., digi al inclusion,
clima e inance) a e added wi hou displacing exis ing ones, and d i , whe eby p inciples a e
e ained he o ically bu weakened in p ac ice as poli ical p io i ies and budge a y alloca ions shi .
An illus a i e case is he OECD-DAC pee e iew sys em, which o mally con inues bu has seen
i s in luence diminish as dono s inc easingly bypass mul ila e al mechanisms in a ou o
ea ma ked o bila e al a angemen s (Honig & Gul ajani, 2018).
The “na ionalis condi ionali y egime” na owly e ames de elopmen coope a ion as an
ins umen o o eign policy le e age. I is bila e al, pu ely in e es -d i en and condi ional in na u e.
The second T ump adminis a ion exempli ies i s key ea u es: ideological o secu i y-based
condi ionali ies, emphasis on na ional so e eign y and explici ejec ion o mul ila e alism as
ine icien o poli icised. He e, no m change o “no m impe ialism” mani es s h ough displacemen
and con e sion: olde no ms a e ein e p e ed o c owded ou as new p io i ies ake hold. Domes ic
poli ical en ep eneu s and sympa he ic hink anks hen ansla e hese shi s in o ope a ional
guidance used by de elopmen coope a ion agencies o ad ance domes ic ideological agendas.
Fo example, US de elopmen policy unde T ump (bo h adminis a ions, he second e en mo e
so) has in ol ed de unding mul ila e al ins i u ions, eins a ing he Global Gag Rule and
condi ioning de elopmen coope a ion on suppo o US mig a ion and ideological goals.
The “plu alis de elopmen coope a ion egime” is d i en by eme ging powe s, such as China,
India, B azil and he en i e BRICS+ g oup, and egional pla o ms, including he NDB, he AIIB and
he India, B azil, Sou h A ica Dialogue Fo um. These ac o s ejec DAC no ms, pa icula ly
condi ionali y, and p omo e al e na i e alues based on so e eign y, mu ual bene i and s a egic
alignmen . No m change occu s h ough localisa ion and ins i u ional displacemen whe eby new
o ganisa ions a e c ea ed wi h hei own epo ing and e alua ion sys ems. The NDB o e s a clea
example: i suppo s clima e and in as uc u e inance based on pe o mance c i e ia, a he han
DAC-s yle p ocedu al compliance (G ay & Gills, 2018).
Finally, he “s a egic mul ila e alism egime” e lec s a mode o coope a ion in which mul ila e al
ins umen s a e e ained, bu hei use is inc easingly subo dina ed o he geopoli ical o
comme cial p io i ies. Unlike libe al mul ila e alism, whe e coope a ion is amed as a collec i e
e hical obliga ion, s a egic mul ila e alism le e ages mul ila e al pla o ms o se e selec i e
na ional o egional in e es s o en h ough ea ma ked unding, go e nance in luence and dono -
domina ed agenda-se ing. This egime e ains o mal mul ila e alism bu wi h weake no ma i e
commi men o sha ed goals. Ins i u ions like he Wo ld Bank emain cen al bu a e inc easingly
shaped by sha eholde geopoli ics. In his egime, no m change occu s mainly h ough con e sion
and d i : uni e salis commi men s emain on pape bu lose subs ance in p ac ice. Fo example,
ini ia i es such as he Pa ne ship o Global In as uc u e and In es men and he EU’s Global
Ga eway a e amed as al e na i es o China’s Bel and Road Ini ia i e (S upczewski, 2021). Thei
na a i es emphasise anspa ency, deb sus ainabili y and s a egic alignmen wi h pa ne s.
S a egic mul ila e alism ealigns no ms and s ee s coope a ion owa d compe i ion, con ainmen
and ansac ional alignmen .
Each egime has dis inc mechanisms and ins i u ional ac o s ha uphold o con es no ms. In
libe al mul ila e alism, no m d i and laye ing a e d i en p ima ily by echnical agencies and
de elopmen minis ies. The na ionalis condi ionali y egime is cha ac e ised by an ip eneu ship
and displacemen , o en led by execu i e b anches and o eign policy appa a uses. In he plu alis
de elopmen coope a ion egime, ac o s localise and di e en ia e ins umen s while keeping
IDOS Discussion Pape 29/2025
17
modali ies lexible; hey coo dina e and s anda dise weakly, and inance minis ies and egional
de elopmen banks lead decisions on alloca ion, ins umen choice and implemen a ion.
S a egic mul ila e alism is shaped by majo dono go e nmen s wo king h ough mul ila e al
ins i u ions o ad ance selec i e geopoli ical o comme cial objec i es. No m change in his egime
occu s h ough con e sion and d i , as adi ional de elopmen no ms a e epu posed o
dep io i ised wi hin exis ing ins i u ional amewo ks. Na a i e con es a ion cu s ac oss hem:
e ms like “mu ual bene i ” o “s a egic pa ne ship” compe e wi h uni e salis SDG discou ses.
Mul ila e al no ms a e no ejec ed ou igh bu ende ed con ingen and subo dina e o na ional o
geopoli ical p io i ies.
This no ma i e agmen a ion may open space o mo e inclusi e and co-de eloped s anda ds.
Whe he plu alism o de elopmen coope a ion app oaches leads o enewal o incohe ence
emains un esol ed. The coexis ence o compe ing egimes educes p edic abili y o ecipien
coun ies, who ace di e gen expec a ions and epo ing obliga ions. Fu he , ins i u ional weaken-
ing occu s as pa allel sys ems e ode he agenda-se ing capaci y o adi ional mul ila e al
amewo ks and accoun abili y gaps widen as no ma i e plu alism makes i mo e di icul o en o ce
common s anda ds. A he same ime he agmen a ion con ibu es o geopoli ical pola isa ion, as
de elopmen no ms become en angled wi h bloc compe i ion. The decline o DAC no m hegemony
may open po en ial space o mo e inclusi e and nego ia ed s anda ds. Whe he his plu alism will
ul ima ely suppo a ai e no ma i e o de o exace ba e ins i u ional incohe ence emains an
un esol ed ques ion. Table 3 summa ises he ou de elopmen coope a ion egimes and hei
no ma i e o ien a ion, key cha ac e is ics and dominan policy na a i es.
Table 3: Cha ac e is ics o compe ing no ma i e egimes o de elopmen coope a ion
Regime ype No ma i e
o ien a ion
Key cha ac e is ics Dominan policy
na a i es
Libe al mul ila e alism Uni e salism, global
public goods, mu ual
accoun abili y
Pooled unding, pee
e iews, SDG
alignmen , esul s-
based managemen
“Lea e no one
behind”; global
solida i y
Na ionalis
condi ionali y egime
S a egic in e es ,
ideological
condi ionali y, na ional
so e eign y
De elopmen
coope a ion ied o
mig a ion con ol,
ade deals o poli ical
alignmen
“Ame ica Fi s ”;
“de elopmen
coope a ion as
le e age”
Plu alis de elopmen
coope a ion
Mu ual bene i , non-
in e e ence, ho izon al
pa ne ships
In as uc u e and
ade ocus; no
s anda dised ODA;
pe o mance o e
p ocedu e
“De elopmen h ough
pa ne ship”; “ espec
o so e eign y”
S a egic
mul ila e alism
Selec i e
mul ila e alism;
geos a egic
alignmen ;
ins umen al use o
global ins i u ions
Ea ma ked unding;
go e nance in luence;
secu i ised and
comme cial logics
wi hin mul ila e al
se ings
“Values-based
pa ne ships”; “Secu e
and open
de elopmen ”
UK and EU’s new
ocus on own in e es s
and main enance o
mul ila e al
app oaches
Sou ce: Au ho s
IDOS Discussion Pape 29/2025
18
5 Conclusion
We ha e a gued ha global de elopmen coope a ion has eached a ipping poin , d i en by he
T ump adminis a ion’s policies and a wide decline in consensus-based mul ila e alism. In sho ,
he e u n o Donald T ump o he p esidency ma ks a p o ound dis up ion in he no ma i e
a chi ec u e o de elopmen coope a ion. Bu his dis up ion is no simply a depa u e o a e ea ;
i cons i u es a delibe a e ac o no ma i e eo de ing o “no m impe ialism”.
The T ump adminis a ion is seeking o de ine he pu pose, con en and condi ions o de elopmen
coope a ion along na ionalis lines. I e ames de elopmen coope a ion as an ex ension o
domes ic poli ical p io i ies and o eign policy le e age, disman ling mul ila e al no ms in a ou o
coe ci e bila e alism, ideological loyal y and ansac ionalism. The implica ions ex end well beyond
US o eign de elopmen coope a ion. Wha we also e m he NWD signals a mo e away om he
libe al mul ila e al consensus o he pos -2000 pe iod and owa d a ac u ed global de elopmen
landscape. This landscape is shaped by compe ing no ma i e egimes, each g ounded in di e en
assump ions abou wha de elopmen coope a ion is o , who i se es and how i should be
go e ned.
The T ump adminis a ion is bo h a symp om and an accele a o o his agmen a ion. I
exempli ies how diso de can be ins umen alised as a mechanism o global (dis)o de -making. In
ac , al hough he T ump adminis a ion may be unusual in i s blun ness, i is no unique. The
di usion o na ionalis and ansac ional no ms whe he om he US o o he coun ies poses a
sys emic es o he a ea o de elopmen coope a ion. How de elopmen coope a ion ac o s
espond in his momen o con es a ion will shape he ajec o y o global o de i sel . The no ms
ha ha e his o ically go e ned de elopmen coope a ion, such as he aid e ec i eness agenda,
mul ila e al solida i y and SDG-aligned cohe ence, a e no longe me ely e oding h ough d i o
ins i u ional a igue. Ins ead, hey a e being ac i ely con es ed, displaced and econs i u ed h ough
new poli ical coali ions, ins i u ional o ums and discu si e ames.
The implica ions o hese shi s a e p o ound o he go e nance o de elopmen coope a ion. Fi s ,
no ma i e agmen a ion unde mines he e y idea o a sha ed de elopmen agenda. I “owne ship”
means s a egic alignmen in one con ex , and subo dina ion in ano he and i “ esul s” e e o
de elopmen al ou comes in some cases and dono poli ical di idends in o he s, hen policy
coo dina ion becomes inc easingly di icul . Second, he di usion o powe ac oss ising Sou he n
dono s, populis go e nmen s and al e na i e ins i u ions challenges he no ma i e monopoly once
held by OECD-DAC dono s and he UN sys em. Go e nance becomes inc easingly nego ia ed,
wi h shi ing alliances and compe ing s anda ds. Thi d, as no m con es a ion in ensi ies, so oo
does he poli ical na u e o de elopmen coope a ion. Ques ions o whose no ms p e ail, how hey
a e en o ced and h ough which ins i u ions a e no longe implici bu openly deba ed. Fo he b oad
ield o de elopmen coope a ion, he challenge is no simply o es o e us o unding le els, bu
o g apple wi h he deepe no m di e gence eme ging wi hin in e na ional coope a ion. In his
con ex , no ma i e plu alism may lead o ei he adap i e ein en ion o o incohe ence and
disengagemen . De elopmen ac o s, whe he mul ila e al, bila e al ODA p o ide s o Sou h-Sou h
p o ide s, mus na iga e his con es ed e ain by a icula ing and de ending he no ma i e
assump ions embedded in hei own p ac ices.
Fu he , wha is a s ake is he u u e meaning o in e na ional coope a ion i sel . I de elopmen
coope a ion becomes na owly de ined as le e age o loyal y en o cemen , he space o inclusi e,
igh s-based and public goods-o ien ed coope a ion con ac s. Ye agmen a ion may also open
oom o nego ia ed al e na i es, especially om ac o s in he Global Sou h and pa s o he EU
seeking o ea i m de elopmen as a global public endea ou .
This momen calls o a e- heo isa ion o global de elopmen coope a ion no as a domain
go e ned by consensus, bu as one s uc u ed by no ma i e con lic . The pape ’s ypology o
