Co-authored by Miski Abdi, Lydia Darby, Oliver Fiala & Callum Northcote.
Every month, the Global Systems Reform team brings you our latest insights and reflections on the issues shaping the world today and affecting children globally, sharing our takes on what we've read or written.
What we’re writing
Lydia
On Monday 7th September I published a new report outlining the six reforms needed for the G20 Common Framework for Debt Treatments, the main international mechanism for restructuring unsustainable sovereign debt. This is endorsed by 11 organisations with a foreword from the African Union.
The Common Framework has failed to deliver timely and adequate debt relief. The countries that have applied have faced lengthy negotiations and uncertainty. Fixing the ‘G20 Common Framework’ is a collective action problem for the G20. We will be using this report to advocate to the British government now and over the course of their 2027 Presidency to take forward these reforms. With growing consensus amongst members, international institutions and civil society, the time for action on this is now. Success could contribute to the broad conditions needed for greater global stability – with positive effects that ripple down to local postcodes, across both G20 and non-member countries. You can find the full report here and a blog here. Please consider sharing this LinkedIn post too.
What we’re reading:
Oliver
Do finance ministries care about social spending on health, education and social protection? ODI Global recently published results from a survey (which we initiated and co-financed) of 142 finance ministry officials across 32 low- and middle-income countries. Based on what policymakers told us, education, health and social protection were the sectors most often prioritised in recent budgets. When offered different scenarios, officials chose equity-enhancing over efficiency-improving investments in health (61%) and education (54%). Poverty and unemployment topped the cross-cutting concerns, well ahead of climate and gender.
For advocacy, the door is more open than we would often assume. Long-term arguments on debt sustainability and returns to social investment seem to get traction. And interestingly, officials rank civil society the most influential non-government actor on budgets, ahead of other development partners.
Read more: What makes finance ministry officials tick? (summary blog at VoxDev, which I co-authored) and the full ODI policy brief.
Callum
Being the 'saver of last resort' may seem more appropriate for a Marvel movie than a government department, but the FCDO has played this role, alongside being the spender of last resort, for the aid budget until recently. In short, that means if the government isn’t going to hit its aid target it gives money to FCDO to spend (spender of last resort). If it is going to overshoot its aid budget it makes FCDO cut spending (saver of last resort).
Does this changed status matter? Bond suggests it does, and they link this change to aid cuts effectively more than doubling in 2025. Why? The government says it is because the money they spend on in-country refugee costs has reduced (amongst other things) and so they have spent less aid. As the FCDO is no longer the spender of last resort, this freed up cash had nowhere to go and was likely just absorbed back into the broad funding pots. ODA in 2025 was supposed to be 0.5% of GNI, it was only 0.43%.
We have called for the FCDO to be re-established as the spender of last resort in our submission to the budget. It is a great example of how a seemingly technical change can impact the flow of millions of pounds for development.
Read more: How UK ODA cuts were effectively more than doubled to at least £1.2bn in 2025
Read more: Security means more than military spending
Miski
Is there a crisis of faith in politics and international cooperation? This is a question that I’ve been pondering over recently. We’re constantly seeing online videos of destruction and calamity, man-made and natural, and everywhere there are unprecedented levels of need. Yet, the rhetoric we see in the mainstream news can be rather populist, with far-right leaders and messaging gaining traction, and aid levels at a historic low.
What has gone so wrong? Like most things in life, the answer isn’t simple, but rather a concoction of variables at play. One aspect that has fascinated me is the so-called ‘culture wars’, which emphasise differences rather than similarities. This rather stark “us versus them” binary can, at times, feel inescapable and ubiquitous in the media. But how true are these divisions and how deep do they run?
According to the latest polling data from Global Nation and Ipsos, which surveyed 22,000 people across 31 countries, four in ten people identify more as a citizen of the world than of their own country. Most of the participants who agreed also felt patriotic about their country. Additionally, more than four in ten people want their taxes to help solve global problems, and nearly two-thirds think international institutions should have the right to enforce solutions for certain problems, such as environmental pollution. Gen Z were found to be, by far, the most internationalist generation. So, perhaps, as Global Nation and IPSOS so aptly titled their paper, “At its darkest hour, is internationalism back?”
