A Turning Point for Global Funding Models?
On January 20, 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump, in his trademark mercurial style, issued a Presidential Executive Order (E.O.) titled Reevaluating and Realigning United States Foreign Aid, which mandated a 90-day pause in U.S. foreign development assistance to assess programmatic efficiencies and alignment with U.S. foreign policy. This move, swiftly followed by similar actions from France, Sweden, Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK, signals an emerging global trend in the funding landscape. While this freeze may be temporary, its immediate aftermath has sparked confusion and concern, especially within African research communities.
This disruption has highlighted the crucial role of Northern funding in driving development and humanitarian efforts in the Global South, revealing the extent to which many regions depend on external financial support, and, consequently, the fragility of this dependence. In response, African institutions are increasingly calling for a shift toward greater financial independence and local ownership in research funding, emphasising the need for capacity building, stronger institutions, and more diversified funding sources.
Immediate and Long-Term Consequences
Education research in Africa is a telling example of the consequences of over-reliance on external (foreign) financial aid. Over 90% of education research funding in Africa comes from international donors, leading to a dependency on external agendas and an asymmetrical relationship. This imbalance reflects the African proverb, “The hand that gives is always above the hand that receives,” which African leaders have invoked to highlight the power dynamics at play and the need for greater financial autonomy.
Think tanks, a crucial source of high-quality research and key contributors to public policy discourse, will be significantly impacted by the withdrawal of foreign funding, particularly given their reliance on external aid. According to the OTT State of the Sector Report 2025, 60% of think tank funding in low- and lower-middle-income countries comes from international sources. Further, a self-administered email survey of think tanks worldwide, conducted by OTT, has revealed project-based funding to be (overwhelmingly) the more common model of funding: 52% of think tanks rely mostly or entirely on project-based funding, while only 18% are core-funded. This pattern makes think tanks vulnerable to shifting donor priorities, limiting long-term sustainability.
In the short term, the USAID funding freeze has led to immediate disruptions, halting projects, creating funding gaps, and destabilising institutions. In the long run, it threatens to weaken the research ecosystem, reinforce dependence on external funding, and drive brain drain triggered by employment uncertainty, stalled research projects, and financial instability. With limited local funding and fewer career opportunities, skilled researchers and professionals may seek better-funded positions abroad, further weakening Africa’s research and innovation ecosystem. In West Africa, the withdrawal of foreign funding has already led to significant financial strain on key think tanks, with some losing up to 30% of their budgets and facing the challenge of sustaining human resource costs previously covered by international donors. Misaligned priorities and barriers to long-term sustainability are other critical long-term consequences.
Strengthening Local Funding Mechanisms for African Research
There is a growing opportunity to reshape Africa’s research funding landscape by strengthening local funding mechanisms, such as National Research Funds (NRFs) and Science Granting Councils (SGCs). By encouraging investment from African governments, the private sector, and philanthropic organisations, countries can create a self-sustaining ecosystem for education research.
Several encouraging examples of this model are already in existence:
Rwanda: Through its Homegrown Solutions approach, Rwanda has prioritised domestic resource mobilisation, investing in STEM education, digital transformation, and innovation hubs like Kigali Innovation City, backed by local and regional investors. In fact, the President of Rwanda has been quite vocal in his criticism of overreliance on aid and recognition of trade and investment as pillars of development.
Nigeria: The National Sovereign Wealth Fund channels oil revenues into economic stabilisation, including research. Private initiatives like the Tony Elumelu Foundation and Dangote Foundation also support local R&D and entrepreneurship.
Kenya: With R&D tax incentives and the National Research Fund (NRF), Kenya has built a strong local research ecosystem. Its tech sector, Silicon Savannah, uses public-private funding, reducing donor dependency.
South Africa: The National Research Foundation (NRF) supports government-led research, while mining revenues and corporate partnerships finance scientific innovation, creating an enabling mechanism for a self-sustaining research environment.
Ethiopia: State-led industrialisation has driven local research, particularly in agriculture, with government-funded institutes reducing reliance on foreign expertise while advancing Ethiopia’s development agenda.
Ghana: Under its Beyond Aid vision, Ghana has focused on reducing donor dependency by mobilising domestic resources, strengthening policy frameworks, and investing in research and innovation to drive sustainable growth. The Ghana National Research Fund is yet another example of a locally driven funding channel.
Côte d’Ivoire: The recently formed Science, Technology and Innovation Fund has been established at the national science council, Fonds pour la science, technologie et l’innovation (FONSTI). This is an outcome of a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between Switzerland and Côte d’Ivoire to strengthen cooperation in science, technology, and innovation.
Apart from these, several other funding mechanisms operate in West Africa’s research funding landscape, with varying degrees of success.
Reevaluating the Role of Northern Funders in Strengthening Africa’s Research Ecosystem?
All the naysaying does not imply that northern organisations have no role in the African research ecosystem. On the contrary, they have much to contribute through their decades of experience, institutional and human capacities, and easier access to financial and other resources. However, a shift in approach is required, particularly in funding mechanisms and overall outlook.
The findings of the Africa Education Researchers Funders Consortium (AERFC) and its sister project Enhancing Education Research in Africa (EERA) offer several examples of how Northern funders can play a vital role in supporting the growth of local research initiatives while empowering African institutions and researchers.
Empowering Local Ownership
- Direct, long-term Funding to Africa: Supporting national research funds like Kenya’s and South Africa’s NRFs, reducing reliance on foreign intermediaries. Funding should be sustained and have a long-term focus.
- Supporting African-Led Agendas: Involving local researchers and policymakers in setting research priorities to ensure alignment with national needs while prioritising marginalised groups.
- Encouraging Local Investment: Co-investing with African governments, businesses, and philanthropists to ensure long-term sustainability.
Building Local Capacity
- Long-Term Partnerships: Designing exit strategies that shift financial responsibility to local governments and the private sector, supported by policy reforms.
- Local Capacity Building: Investing in scholarships, mentorships, and research chairs to develop a skilled pipeline of African researchers.
- Building Research Infrastructure: Strengthening African universities and Science Granting Councils (SGCs) to attract talent and improve institutional capacity.
- Simplifying Grant Access: Simplifying application processes to increase accessibility for early-career researchers, creating a level playing field.
Facilitating Research Impact
- Translating Research into Impact: Supporting African-led platforms and conferences to integrate research findings into policy and practice.
- Early-Stage Funding: Providing seed funding for local initiatives to help build confidence among other investors.
Promoting Accountability and Collaboration
- Fostering Accountability: Ensuring transparency in fund allocation and evaluation to enhance trust and effectiveness, especially in the face of greater scrutiny
- Facilitating South-South Collaboration: Supporting knowledge-sharing between African countries and regions that have successfully reduced donor dependence.
To sum it up, Northern funders, traditionally the primary global aid and investment sources, must adapt to the idea of localisation: prioritising local actors, decision-making, and solutions. In the near future, a growing push for more equitable partnerships, where Southern nations, communities, and organisations take the lead in shaping and executing initiatives, can be expected. This is an opportune time for Northern funders to transition from a top-down approach to supporting locally driven, context-specific solutions.
Whether you’re an organisation navigating the complexities of funding freezes or a funder seeking to maximize the impact of your investment, now is the time to adapt and think strategically. We can help you make sense of these significant and challenging times in the funding ecosystem.
Contact us to explore ways to support local, sustainable research ecosystems and drive meaningful change.