From January 24, 2022, to December 31, 2024, the European Union (EU) institutions, such as the Commission and the EU Council, provided around 49 billion euros in bilateral financial, humanitarian, and military aid to Ukraine in view of the Russian invasion that started in February 2022. The highest value of allocations was recorded from the United States at over 114 billion euros. U.S. aid to Ukraine As of December 31, 2024, the value of U.S. bilateral aid allocations to Ukraine represented 0.53 percent of 2021 donor GDP. The U.S. donated the largest amount of bilateral military, financial, and humanitarian aid to Ukraine. Generally, U.S. foreign aid to Ukraine has increased since 2015. Where does military aid to Ukraine come from? The U.S., Germany, the United Kingdom (UK), and Denmark were the largest suppliers of military aid to Ukraine. In monetary terms, the U.S. bilateral military assistance to the country reached approximately 64 billion euros as of December 31, 2024. As part of that aid, the U.S. transported over 7,700 air defense missiles and over 1,600 air defense systems to Ukraine and other European partners as of January 2025. Furthermore, the U.S. delivered the most units of M777 howitzer artillery to the country.

In 2023, the United States government donated around 9.5 billion U.S. dollars in humanitarian aid worldwide. The European Commission and Germany followed with over two billion U.S. dollars. However, this only shows one part of the picture, as the largest economies are likely to be the largest donors. Another way of looking at the largest donors are by how much each country gave as a share of their gross domestic product.

The Maldives: Foreign aid and official development assistance received: The latest value from 2022 is 119.12 million U.S. dollars, an increase from 112.41 million U.S. dollars in 2021. In comparison, the world average is 1147.12 million U.S. dollars, based on data from 130 countries. Historically, the average for the Maldives from 1960 to 2022 is 29.46 million U.S. dollars. The minimum value, 0.03 million U.S. dollars, was reached in 1960 while the maximum of 311.16 million U.S. dollars was recorded in 2020.

BackgroundThe United Kingdom (UK) used to be the second largest bilateral provider of official development assistance (ODA) for health. However, in 2021 the UK government cut its annual aid budget by 30%. We aim to understand how these cuts might affect financing for health systems in UK aid recipient countries.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of domestic and external funding for 134 countries that received UK aid for the 2019–2020 budget year. We grouped countries into two cohorts: those that continued to receive aid in 2020–2021 (“budget”) and those that did not (“no budget”). Data was collected from publicly available datasets and we compared UK’s ODA, UK’s health ODA with total ODA, general government expenditures and domestic general government health expenditure to assess the donor dependency and donor concentration of budget and no budget countries.FindingsBudget countries are more reliant on external aid to finance their governments and health systems than no budget countries, with a handful of exceptions. While the UK does not appear to be a major ODA contributor among most no budget countries, it is in many budget countries. Two no budget countries in particular may be faced with health systems financing challenges given their high ratios of UK health aid to domestic government health expenditures: the Gambia (1.24:1) and Eritrea (0.33:1). Although “safe” for this budget cycle, a number of low-income countries in Sub-Saharan Africa have very high ratios of UK health aid to domestic government health expenditures, including South Sudan (3.15:1), Sierra Leone (0.48:1), and the Democratic Republic of Congo (0.34:1).InterpretationThe 2021–2022 UK aid cuts could have negative impacts in a few countries highly dependent on UK health aid. Its departure could leave these countries with rather large funding gaps to fill and create a more concentrated donor climate.

Bangladesh Foreign Aid: Disbursement: Food data was reported at 52.500 USD mn in 2023. This records an increase from the previous number of 18.960 USD mn for 2022. Bangladesh Foreign Aid: Disbursement: Food data is updated yearly, averaging 43.000 USD mn from Jun 2000 (Median) to 2023, with 24 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 142.000 USD mn in 2000 and a record low of 10.710 USD mn in 2020. Bangladesh Foreign Aid: Disbursement: Food data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Bangladesh Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Bangladesh – Table BD.F022: Foreign Aid.

Myanmar MM: Net Official Development Assistance and Official Aid Received: 2020 Price data was reported at 1.432 USD bn in 2021. This records a decrease from the previous number of 2.870 USD bn for 2020. Myanmar MM: Net Official Development Assistance and Official Aid Received: 2020 Price data is updated yearly, averaging 275.425 USD mn from Dec 1960 (Median) to 2021, with 62 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 3.754 USD bn in 2013 and a record low of 51.020 USD mn in 1996. Myanmar MM: Net Official Development Assistance and Official Aid Received: 2020 Price data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Myanmar – Table MM.World Bank.WDI: Defense and Official Development Assistance. Net official development assistance (ODA) consists of disbursements of loans made on concessional terms (net of repayments of principal) and grants by official agencies of the members of the Development Assistance Committee (DAC), by multilateral institutions, and by non-DAC countries to promote economic development and welfare in countries and territories in the DAC list of ODA recipients. It includes loans with a grant element of at least 25 percent (calculated at a rate of discount of 10 percent). Net official aid refers to aid flows (net of repayments) from official donors to countries and territories in part II of the DAC list of recipients: more advanced countries of Central and Eastern Europe, the countries of the former Soviet Union, and certain advanced developing countries and territories. Official aid is provided under terms and conditions similar to those for ODA. Part II of the DAC List was abolished in 2005. The collection of data on official aid and other resource flows to Part II countries ended with 2004 data. Data are in constant 2020 U.S. dollars.;Development Assistance Committee of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Geographical Distribution of Financial Flows to Developing Countries, Development Co-operation Report, and International Development Statistics database. Data are available online at: https://stats.oecd.org/.;Sum;

The study uses a panel dataset available for 22 countries in the SEA and SA region from 1980- 2020. The dataset is mainly collected from the World Development Indicators Database (WDI)

This study investigates a novel dataset comprised of a universe of 537 donations in 33 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, between February 11 and June 20, 2020, which provides a high level of detail on China’s and Taiwan’s mask diplomacy. We describe who the main donors were, who the main recipients were, what was donated to each country, and which variables explain why some countries received more aid than the others. Drawing on previous literature, the article advances understanding about the political determinants of these donations. Our findings revealed that, although seemingly uncoordinated, donations made by China's central government, Chinese companies, cities, and foundations were strongly affected by two political determinants, namely the recipient’s partnership status with China and the One China Policy. Furthermore, aid provided by China’s Central Government was larger in autocracies than in democracies.

In fiscal year 2019, India spent an estimated 0.3 percent of its overall budget on various grants and loans to foreign governments as aid. However, the highest expenditure allocation on foreign aid during the measured time period was in fiscal year 2016.

This dataset is used to produce the "U.S. Overseas Loans and Grants" publication, known as the "Greenbook". The annual report to Congress on U.S foreign assistance flows is required by the Foreign Assistance Act, Section 634 and is the authoritative dataset of U.S. foreign assistance. The annual update of the dataset contains data of United States Government (USG) foreign assistance since 1945. Foreign assistance is categorized as either economic assistance or military assistance. Foreign assistance is reported by recipient country and organized by geographic region, without distinction between developed and developing countries. Any country which has received cumulative economic or military assistance over $500,000 since 1945 and is considered an "Independent State" by the U.S. Department of State merits an individual country reporting.

Series Name: Total assistance for development by recipient countries (millions of current United States dollars)Series Code: DC_TRF_TOTLRelease Version: 2020.Q2.G.03 This dataset is the part of the Global SDG Indicator Database compiled through the UN System in preparation for the Secretary-General's annual report on Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals.Indicator 10.b.1: Total resource flows for development, by recipient and donor countries and type of flow (e.g. official development assistance, foreign direct investment and other flows)Target 10.b: Encourage official development assistance and financial flows, including foreign direct investment, to States where the need is greatest, in particular least developed countries, African countries, small island developing States and landlocked developing countries, in accordance with their national plans and programmesGoal 10: Reduce inequality within and among countriesFor more information on the compilation methodology of this dataset, see https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/

The survey charts Finnish opinion on the objectives, resources, targets and policies of the country's development cooperation. Respondents were asked which geographical area of the world should be the main target of Finnish development aid, and why. Opinions on the most important goals and areas for development aid were surveyed. Respondents evaluated the importance of development cooperation to Finnish foreign policy. Further questions covered the main information sources on this issue. Respondents were asked to estimate how much Finland spends on development cooperation annually (as per cent of the GNI), and how much should be spent. Views were probed on whether development cooperation of voluntary/non-governmental organizations is more successful than government-to-government cooperation. One theme focused developmental partnerships: is bilateral aid provided by the Finnish government more effective than multilateral aid channelled through the UN or other international organizations. Respondents were also asked where and what kind of development aid they would provide, if they themselves could decide. Background variables included respondents' age, gender, economic activity, occupational group, education, household gross income, type of the place of residence, region of residence, and whether the respondent had ever visited developing countries.

As of September 2023, Ukraine had received over 1.7 billion U.S. dollars in development aid via humanitarian response programs (HRP). Syria recorded the second highest sum, reaching nearly 1.5 billion U.S. dollars in HRP alone, and another 627 billion in regional response programs (RRP). Yemen received the third highest sum.

Myanmar Budget: NTR: Foreign Aid Grants data was reported at 388,703.728 MMK mn in 2021. This records a decrease from the previous number of 434,488.760 MMK mn for 2020. Myanmar Budget: NTR: Foreign Aid Grants data is updated yearly, averaging 411,596.244 MMK mn from Sep 2018 (Median) to 2021, with 4 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 708,560.627 MMK mn in 2019 and a record low of 220,226.400 MMK mn in 2018. Myanmar Budget: NTR: Foreign Aid Grants data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Central Bank of Myanmar. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Myanmar – Table MM.F002: Government Budget (Annual).

This study examined the impact of Official Development Assistance (ODA) on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) by aid type, which has been largely overlooked in previous studies. Using the Generalized Method of Moments with a gravity model, five major donor countries (France, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States) and 63 recipient country pairs from 1996 to 2020 were analyzed. Granger causality tests, impulse response analyses and variance decomposition analyses using a panel vector autoregressive model were conducted to identify causal relationships in the time series and to quantitatively capture the impact. The results suggest that ODA Loans from Germany, Japan, and the United Kingdom promote FDI. Their ODA Loans have a high proportion of economic infrastructure and productive-sector support. Hence, their ODA Loans may attract FDI to recipient countries by developing infrastructure in recipient countries such as transportation, telecommunications, energy, and finance. This study contributes to an academic community by highlighting the differences of aid type in attracting FDI and provides practical implications for policymakers and practitioners in the field of international development.

Worldwide, Ukraine was, by far, the country that received the highest amount of net official development aid (ODA) from official donors in 2022, reaching 29 billion U.S. dollars. This comes as a result of the Russian invasion of the country in February that year. Syria followed in second with 8.2 billion dollars, with Egypt in third. In terms of regions, Sub-Saharan Africa received the highest net sum.

Goal 8Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for allTarget 8.1: Sustain per capita economic growth in accordance with national circumstances and, in particular, at least 7 per cent gross domestic product growth per annum in the least developed countriesIndicator 8.1.1: Annual growth rate of real GDP per capitaNY_GDP_PCAP: Annual growth rate of real GDP per capita (%)Target 8.2: Achieve higher levels of economic productivity through diversification, technological upgrading and innovation, including through a focus on high-value added and labour-intensive sectorsIndicator 8.2.1: Annual growth rate of real GDP per employed personSL_EMP_PCAP: Annual growth rate of real GDP per employed person (%)Target 8.3: Promote development-oriented policies that support productive activities, decent job creation, entrepreneurship, creativity and innovation, and encourage the formalization and growth of micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises, including through access to financial servicesIndicator 8.3.1: Proportion of informal employment in total employment, by sector and sexSL_ISV_IFEM: Proportion of informal employment, by sector and sex (ILO harmonized estimates) (%)Target 8.4: Improve progressively, through 2030, global resource efficiency in consumption and production and endeavour to decouple economic growth from environmental degradation, in accordance with the 10-Year Framework of Programmes on Sustainable Consumption and Production, with developed countries taking the leadIndicator 8.4.1: Material footprint, material footprint per capita, and material footprint per GDPEN_MAT_FTPRPG: Material footprint per unit of GDP, by type of raw material (kilograms per constant 2010 United States dollar)EN_MAT_FTPRPC: Material footprint per capita, by type of raw material (tonnes)EN_MAT_FTPRTN: Material footprint, by type of raw material (tonnes)Indicator 8.4.2: Domestic material consumption, domestic material consumption per capita, and domestic material consumption per GDPEN_MAT_DOMCMPT: Domestic material consumption, by type of raw material (tonnes)EN_MAT_DOMCMPG: Domestic material consumption per unit of GDP, by type of raw material (kilograms per constant 2010 United States dollars)EN_MAT_DOMCMPC: Domestic material consumption per capita, by type of raw material (tonnes)Target 8.5: By 2030, achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men, including for young people and persons with disabilities, and equal pay for work of equal valueIndicator 8.5.1: Average hourly earnings of employees, by sex, age, occupation and persons with disabilitiesSL_EMP_EARN: Average hourly earnings of employees by sex and occupation (local currency)Indicator 8.5.2: Unemployment rate, by sex, age and persons with disabilitiesSL_TLF_UEM: Unemployment rate, by sex and age (%)SL_TLF_UEMDIS: Unemployment rate, by sex and disability (%)Target 8.6: By 2020, substantially reduce the proportion of youth not in employment, education or trainingIndicator 8.6.1: Proportion of youth (aged 15–24 years) not in education, employment or trainingSL_TLF_NEET: Proportion of youth not in education, employment or training, by sex and age (%)Target 8.7: Take immediate and effective measures to eradicate forced labour, end modern slavery and human trafficking and secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour, including recruitment and use of child soldiers, and by 2025 end child labour in all its formsIndicator 8.7.1: Proportion and number of children aged 5–17 years engaged in child labour, by sex and ageSL_TLF_CHLDEC: Proportion of children engaged in economic activity and household chores, by sex and age (%)SL_TLF_CHLDEA: Proportion of children engaged in economic activity, by sex and age (%)Target 8.8: Protect labour rights and promote safe and secure working environments for all workers, including migrant workers, in particular women migrants, and those in precarious employmentIndicator 8.8.1: Fatal and non-fatal occupational injuries per 100,000 workers, by sex and migrant statusSL_EMP_FTLINJUR: Fatal occupational injuries among employees, by sex and migrant status (per 100,000 employees)SL_EMP_INJUR: Non-fatal occupational injuries among employees, by sex and migrant status (per 100,000 employees)Indicator 8.8.2: Level of national compliance with labour rights (freedom of association and collective bargaining) based on International Labour Organization (ILO) textual sources and national legislation, by sex and migrant statusSL_LBR_NTLCPL: Level of national compliance with labour rights (freedom of association and collective bargaining) based on International Labour Organization (ILO) textual sources and national legislationTarget 8.9: By 2030, devise and implement policies to promote sustainable tourism that creates jobs and promotes local culture and productsIndicator 8.9.1: Tourism direct GDP as a proportion of total GDP and in growth rateST_GDP_ZS: Tourism direct GDP as a proportion of total GDP (%)Target 8.10: Strengthen the capacity of domestic financial institutions to encourage and expand access to banking, insurance and financial services for allIndicator 8.10.1: (a) Number of commercial bank branches per 100,000 adults and (b) number of automated teller machines (ATMs) per 100,000 adultsFB_ATM_TOTL: Number of automated teller machines (ATMs) per 100,000 adultsFB_CBK_BRCH: Number of commercial bank branches per 100,000 adultsIndicator 8.10.2: Proportion of adults (15 years and older) with an account at a bank or other financial institution or with a mobile-money-service providerFB_BNK_ACCSS: Proportion of adults (15 years and older) with an account at a financial institution or mobile-money-service provider, by sex (% of adults aged 15 years and older)Target 8.a: Increase Aid for Trade support for developing countries, in particular least developed countries, including through the Enhanced Integrated Framework for Trade-related Technical Assistance to Least Developed CountriesIndicator 8.a.1: Aid for Trade commitments and disbursementsDC_TOF_TRDCMDL: Total official flows (commitments) for Aid for Trade, by donor countries (millions of constant 2018 United States dollars)DC_TOF_TRDDBMDL: Total official flows (disbursement) for Aid for Trade, by donor countries (millions of constant 2018 United States dollars)DC_TOF_TRDDBML: Total official flows (disbursement) for Aid for Trade, by recipient countries (millions of constant 2018 United States dollars)DC_TOF_TRDCML: Total official flows (commitments) for Aid for Trade, by recipient countries (millions of constant 2018 United States dollars)Target 8.b: By 2020, develop and operationalize a global strategy for youth employment and implement the Global Jobs Pact of the International Labour OrganizationIndicator 8.b.1: Existence of a developed and operationalized national strategy for youth employment, as a distinct strategy or as part of a national employment strategySL_CPA_YEMP: Existence of a developed and operationalized national strategy for youth employment, as a distinct strategy or as part of a national employment strategy

Series Name: Total resource flows for development by recipient and donor countries (millions of current United States dollars)Series Code: DC_TRF_TFDVRelease Version: 2020.Q2.G.03 This dataset is the part of the Global SDG Indicator Database compiled through the UN System in preparation for the Secretary-General's annual report on Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals.Indicator 10.b.1: Total resource flows for development, by recipient and donor countries and type of flow (e.g. official development assistance, foreign direct investment and other flows)Target 10.b: Encourage official development assistance and financial flows, including foreign direct investment, to States where the need is greatest, in particular least developed countries, African countries, small island developing States and landlocked developing countries, in accordance with their national plans and programmesGoal 10: Reduce inequality within and among countriesFor more information on the compilation methodology of this dataset, see https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/