For over a decade, up until 2024, multilateral organisations (MOs) saw steadily rising budgets and resources, with much of this growth in the UN coming from voluntary, earmarked contributions by Member States. Between 2012 and 2022, earmarked funding grew sharply: Development Assistance Committee (DAC) members’ earmarked contributions increased from USD 2.7 billion in 2000 to USD 16.1 billion in 2010 and USD 24 billion by 2018 (OECD, 2020[4]). In the UN system, the share of earmarked funding rose from about 51% in 2010 to around 61% in 2023 (Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation, 2025[5]). However, 2025 saw a dramatic shift in the funding landscape. UN organisations in particular have experienced funding cuts of up to 50%, driven primarily by significant reductions in funding from US and European donors to their foreign aid budgets. These reductions, as reported by UN agencies and other sources, are concentrated in the voluntary funding, which had increased substantially in prior years. Nevertheless, most UN agencies are now also anticipating cuts to core budgets in upcoming funding cycles. These challenges are not confined to the UN system. The replenishment of vertical funds, particularly those working on Global Health, is also showing significant shortfalls. Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) have faced flat contributions to their concessional windows for more than a decade, prompting greater reliance on balance sheet optimisation and financial innovation to sustain and expand lending capacity.
The tightening funding environment presents major challenges for the multilateral system. Despite rising global challenges and growing humanitarian needs, multilateral organisations are being forced to adapt, some by seeking out efficiencies to preserve operations, others by scaling back activities in particular areas. This report maps and analyses the funding reductions and shortfalls facing MOs, associated vulnerabilities, and policy and operational implications, including an analysis of the programmatic areas and core functions most affected.
This mapping was carried out by conducting a survey of 31 multilateral organisations that are on MOPAN members’ High Priority list of MOs and that MOPAN has assessed in the past2, as well as collating public announcements by multilateral organisations and relevant secondary media sources. The brief contextualises the data with some background information on multilateral funding trends. It concludes with some analysis of the likely implications of funding reductions for multilateral organisations, their global operations and their ability to fulfil their mandates.
Methodology
Data on trends in multilateral funding were drawn from a variety of existing datasets. Multilateral ODA figures were taken from the OECD CRS dataset and analysis by Our World in Data3; forward projections for 2024 and 2025 were calculated from an OECD policy brief (OECD, 2025). Agency revenue data were sourced from the UN System Chief Executives Board for Co-ordination website under “Revenue by Entity” (UNCEB, 2025[6]). Staff data were also drawn from the UN System Chief Executives Board for Coordination website (UNCEB, 2025[7]), using “Personnel by Location of Duty” spreadsheets collected for each year.
The review of publicly available sources involved collecting public announcements by 31 MOs and undertaking structured thematic analysis to examine the funding cuts they are facing and how they are responding. The information was taken from agency websites and press releases, financial reports, funding proposals and plans, system-wide documentation, and reporting from international media outlets such as Devex and Reuters. Where only secondary media sources were used for specific information, the information is caveated accordingly. The search was time-limited and focused primarily on reductions experienced in 2025, with some reference to reductions in 2024 and anticipated cuts for 2026 and subsequent years.
The survey instrument was distributed to 31 MOs, and 18 responses were received (a response rate of 58%), including 14 UN agencies, 3 multi-stakeholder partnerships or funds, and an international financial institution. Findings from the public-data mapping and the survey were triangulated and synthesised through thematic analysis in this report to ensure robustness and comparability across all institutional cases. Where information is drawn from public announcements or official agency documentation, this is explicitly indicated. Likewise, analysis based on survey responses is clearly identified.
Limitations
For MOs who did not respond to the survey, the methodology relies substantially on publicly available information and secondary sources, which may be incomplete, inconsistently reported or subject to interpretation. Variations in data quality and reporting format across agencies may affect comparability. Moreover, survey results and the analysis in this report should be taken as a snapshot of an evolving situation, intended to highlight key themes and trends based on the information available at the time of mapping. Findings reflect the situation as of 15 September 2025.
Evidence collected through both the survey and the review of public announcements does not capture the underlying rationale or decision-making processes behind the measures adopted by individual organisations. As such, it does not allow for a systematic analysis of why institutional reactions vary across the same overall funding landscape. The survey was designed to document observable measures and trends rather than to explore internal decision-making rationales or donor-specific funding shifts, limiting the ability to identify causal factors behind divergent adaptation patterns across entities.