For decades, Sweden has been one of the foremost actors in international aid, often proudly allocating 1 percent of its gross national income (GNI) to aid. This has been part of Sweden’s self-image as a humanitarian powerhouse, but is it still a reasonable strategy in today’s economic and political climate?

The U.S. Withdrawal and Sweden’s Response

Recent developments in the U.S., where previous administrations have reduced aid and current signals suggest further cutbacks, have led to discussions about whether Sweden should increase its aid to compensate. But is it realistic or even reasonable for Sweden, a country of 10 million people, to take on a heavier burden when the world’s largest economy withdraws?

How Many Countries Provide Aid in Relation to GNI?

The international aid target is to allocate at least 0.7 percent of GNI to international aid, a guideline adopted by the UN as early as the 1970s. In practice, however, few countries actually reach this. According to OECD aid statistics from 2023, only five countries met or exceeded this target:

• Luxembourg: 1.05%
• Norway: 1.02%
• Sweden: 0.99%
• Germany: 0.71%
• Denmark: 0.71%

Most other countries, including economic powerhouses such as the U.S., China, and Japan, fall far below this level. The U.S., which in absolute terms provides the most aid in dollars, allocates only about 0.2 percent of its GNI. Many other EU countries hover around 0.3–0.5 percent.

Sweden’s Economic Situation and Internal Needs

While Sweden continues to provide one of the world’s highest levels of aid relative to GNI, the country faces significant economic challenges. Inflation, housing shortages, a strained healthcare sector, and increasing household debt make domestic resources more needed than ever. It has become more difficult to finance welfare, and taxpayers are feeling increased pressure.

Many believe that aid is a good thing, but the question is when it is right to prioritize it. If Sweden is forced to cut back on education, healthcare, and law enforcement while aid remains at high levels, it risks creating frustration and division in society.

Time to Reevaluate Aid Policy?

The question is whether Sweden should have a more flexible aid policy that adapts to the domestic economy. Some argue that aid should decrease in tougher times to allocate more resources to domestic problems, while others claim that it is precisely in times of crisis that international aid is needed the most.

At the same time, one can question the effectiveness of aid. Does it really have the positive impact that proponents hope for? Or should Sweden review how aid is distributed and prioritize more effective initiatives?

Conclusion

Sweden has a long tradition of generous aid, but in a world where many other countries contribute significantly less, while we ourselves struggle with economic difficulties, it is relevant to ask: Is it time to reassess Sweden’s aid policy?

Aid is an important part of international solidarity, but a nation struggling to stay stable itself cannot be a reliable long-term donor. Instead of striving to replace the U.S.’s reduced aid, Sweden may need to focus on balancing its own needs with its international ambitions.

According to the latest available data from 2023, only five countries meet or exceed the UN target of allocating at least 0.7 percent of their Gross National Income (GNI) to international aid. Below is a table showing these countries along with their aid in percentage of GNI and the total aid amount in billions of US dollars:

Country	Aid (% of GNI)	Aid (billion USD)
Norway	1.09%	5.4
Luxembourg	0.99%	0.6
Sweden	0.91%	5.7
Germany	0.79%	36.7
Denmark	0.74%	3.1

Source: CONCORD Sweden

It is important to note that while some countries, such as the United States, contribute large absolute amounts in aid (66 billion USD in 2023), this represents a much smaller share of their GNI—approximately 0.2%.

Sweden has historically aimed to allocate 1% of its GNI to aid, but with current budget frameworks, this share is expected to decrease to around 0.67–0.68% by 2028. This would mean that Sweden will no longer meet the international target of 0.7%.

Source: CONCORD Sweden

In summary, very few countries meet the UN aid target, and Sweden’s future aid levels are expected to fall below this threshold.