When the Lifeline Fades - How Aid Cuts Are Deepening Hunger Crises in 2025-26

1st January 2026

Humanitarian and food aid have long been the safety net for vulnerable populations caught in conflict, economic collapse, climate disasters, and displacement.

But in recent years, that lifeline has begun to fray. As major donor governments tighten budgets and reprioritise spending, funding for life‑saving programs has declined sharply just as global hunger reaches record levels.

One of the most striking trends is the decline in overall humanitarian funding. The World Food Programme (WFP), the largest global food aid agency, warned that it expects about 40 % less funding for 2025 than the previous year—a fall from roughly $10 billion in 2024 to about $6.4 billion.

Because of these shortfalls, millions of people who once received assistance are now facing reduced rations or being left out entirely, pushing more people from crisis to emergency levels of hunger. Cuts to aid funding have already forced ration reductions, shortened program durations, and in some cases suspended assistance entirely.
World Food Programme

Major Donor Cuts: Who Is Reducing Aid?

Several wealthy countries that have historically provided the bulk of humanitarian assistance are now cutting back significantly:

United States

The U.S. has historically been the single largest contributor to global humanitarian aid. However, under recent policy shifts:

Funding for international assistance programs has been slashed by billions of dollars, and major programs like USAID have seen dramatic reductions or pauses in funding.

One assessment described U.S. cuts affecting hundreds of millions of dollars in food security and nutrition assistance in countries like Sudan, South Sudan, Haiti, and Palestine, where the U.S. previously contributed a substantial share of humanitarian funding.

This retrenchment means that food aid and nutrition programs that many vulnerable communities relied on simply no longer have the money to operate at scale.
publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu

United Kingdom

The UK government has announced plans to cut its official development assistance (ODA) from 0.5 % of gross national income to 0.3 % by 2027—a reduction of billions of pounds. This shift is intended to free up domestic spending but comes at the cost of international aid programs, including those targeting food security, health, and nutrition.
NRC

Germany

Germany has significantly reduced its humanitarian emergency aid budget, with estimates indicating a cut of over 50 %, down to around €1 billion for 2025. Germany has also refocused funding priorities, leaving less available for traditional crisis responses.
NRC

France and the Netherlands

Both countries have announced notable reductions:

France is cutting public development assistance by more than €2 billion, representing a near 40 % reduction in some aid lines.

The Netherlands has committed to substantial cuts over the next five years, including a €2.4 billion reduction in development spending.

Other smaller donors like Belgium and Switzerland have also reduced their aid budgets.

Sweden

Sweden has shifted development aid funding away from several African and Latin American countries in order to prioritise support for Ukraine. This means phasing out assistance to nations such as Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Liberia, Tanzania, and Bolivia, while redirecting those resources — more than 2 billion Swedish kronor — to Ukraine‑related priorities.

How Aid Cuts Translate into Hunger and Famine Risk

The cumulative effect of these reductions is palpably severe in regions already teetering on the brink:

In Afghanistan, severe cuts in international support have left millions without food assistance; in 2025 only about one million people received food aid, down from 5.6 million the previous year, creating a massive gap in crisis response.

Agencies such as WFP are reporting major pipeline breaks in six critical operations — Afghanistan, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Haiti, Somalia, South Sudan, and Sudan — where funding gaps are forcing reductions in rations and caseloads. For example, in the DRC assistance was scaled down from targeting 2.3 million people to just 600,000, with the risk of complete suspension if funds do not arrive.

In Haiti, food programs like hot meals for displaced people have been suspended and monthly rations cut in half, even as acute insecurity and displacement rise.

Across Sudan, where famine has actually been declared in some areas, many life‑saving programs risk closing due to only a fraction of the required funding being received. This leaves millions dependent on scarce resources and increases the chance that food insecurity will spread further.

Why Cuts Now Are Especially Dangerous

Humanitarian needs are at historic highs, driven by overlapping crises — conflicts in Sudan, Yemen, and Gaza; climate disasters like droughts and floods; economic downturns, and rising prices for staple foods. At the same time, aid budgets are shrinking as wealthy nations shift spending toward defence or domestic priorities. These funding shortfalls mean that agencies are forced to make brutal choices — cutting rations, suspending services, closing nutrition centres, and reducing operations. Without adequate funding, even basic services like distributing food, providing clean water, and treating malnutrition become impossible at scale.

The Human Cost

Cuts to humanitarian aid are not abstract numbers — they translate directly into human suffering. Reduced rations mean children do not get the calories or nutrients they need to grow. Health programs falter, worsening disease and mortality. Families who once had a chance to survive a crisis are left without a safety net. In contexts where famine and catastrophic hunger are already a reality or imminent, these cuts can and do push people over the edge into starvation and death.

While food aid saves countless lives during crises, it can also have unintended consequences for local economies. Large-scale distributions of free or imported food, if not carefully managed, can undercut local farmers, whose crops suddenly cannot compete with the influx of aid. Prices for staples drop, smallholders lose income, and long-term agricultural production may decline, leaving communities vulnerable once aid ends. Recognizing this, modern humanitarian programs increasingly focus on cash transfers, local procurement, and targeted assistance, allowing vulnerable families to meet immediate food needs while supporting local markets. This approach aims to balance life-saving relief with the long-term health of the communities it seeks to protect, ensuring that aid does not unintentionally weaken the very systems it is meant to sustain.

World Food Programme