Reckoning With Development’s Future as an Eternal Optimist
It’s taken me a while to figure out what to say. Maybe it’s because it feels like everything that needs to be said has already been said – or because watching the sector unravel in real time makes it hard to put thoughts into words.
But here’s where my thinking is right now.
I don’t need to convince anyone here of the importance of international development and humanitarian aid. You already know its vital role and the return on investment.
And yet, as everything shifts beneath our feet, I can’t help but wonder (cue Carrie Bradshaw voice): where does this leave us?
I’m what you’d call a realistic eternal optimist. I’ve tried pessimism, it doesn’t look good on me. Well, that and bangs.
Watching this sector not just shutter, but be vilified in the process, is gutting. Friends, colleagues, and partners aren’t just losing jobs; they’re losing an entire way of living. This wasn’t just work. It was a life-long commitment to building something better.
And sure, funding hasn’t vanished, and international donors and foundations are – or must – step in. But the cuts are seismic, the landscape is shifting fast, and organizations are scrambling to stay afloat while still working to save lives, safeguard democracy, and maintain global security.
So I annoyingly keep asking myself, what is the lesson here? Where is the growth opportunity?
If we only focus on saving what was, we miss the chance to imagine what could be. This moment demands more than resilience – it demands moral imagination. The ability to think beyond outdated models and create something stronger, more equitable, and truly transformative.
Was the sector perfect? Absolutely not.
Was it highly impactful and necessary? Without question.
So instead of fighting over the scraps left behind, how do we reimagine – not just rebuild – this work? The old ways aren’t coming back – and maybe that’s a good thing – scary, but good. But what comes next can’t just be a rebranded version of what wasn’t working before.
How do we move beyond rhetoric and meaningfully center local leaders and actors, not just as recipients, but as decision-makers?
How do large INGOs stop competing with smaller and local organizations and instead reshape their roles to complement, uplift, and transfer power, rather than consolidate it?
How do we redefine international expertise, not as a replacement for local leadership, but as a strategic partner that supports rather than dictates?
These aren’t just theoretical questions, they are the decisions that will shape whether this sector survives in a way that actually delivers on its promise. If we’re just patching up the old system and calling it innovation, we’ve already failed. This is a moment that demands moral imagination — a willingness to think beyond what’s been done before and to build something truly different.
