From rethinking ODA and leveraging new resource flows to strengthening collaboration among donors, Lawrence Haddad reflected on a challenging year for development cooperation—and shared reasons for optimism in 2026. Read and watch the interview to hear his insights on the path forward for agriculture, nutrition, and food systems investment.
Michelle Tang/GDPRD: It’s been a very challenging year, with global discussions focusing on reforms to official development assistance (ODA) and the international financial architecture. What are your takeaways, and what lessons should we take forward?
Lawrence Haddad/GAIN: In many ways, our bluff has been called this year. Many of us say we want to work ourselves out of a job. We know that ODA is sunsetting, and we want countries to eventually not have to rely on development cooperation. But the way in which development cooperation has been rapidly butchered — almost in a vandalistic way — has been a shock.
In many ways, we’ve begun to rise to the challenge. We have the CAADP process, which I’m optimistic about. We have UN reform, which I hope will make the UN function better, be more efficient, supportive and connected. Donors are exploring ways to coordinate and collaborate more. And the IFIs and DFIs are stepping up, like during the Nutrition for Growth Summit, for example. The community is responding and responding well.
We’re beginning the fight back, seeing ourselves as agents of the future and not just recipients. I see lots of green shoots. The fight back has begun.
Michelle: As a member of the Donor Platform’s High-Level Advisory Group, what made the group meaningful? What are your reflections on the development and contributions of the group-led White Paper “Financing Agrifood Systems for People, Planet and Prosperity”? And how should the donor community act on the recommended action areas?
Lawrence: It was a real privilege to be part of the group. The discussions were open and transparent and helped me clarify my own thoughts about financing food, food security, nutrition and agriculture.
Some people won’t even consider investing in agriculture, food and nutrition — we need to understand why. Others do invest but invest in the wrong things — we need to figure out how to convince them to change. And some invest in the sector and in the right things, but at too small a scale — so how do we scale up?
The group discussions really helped me clarify my thinking. The White Paper also made the case for investing in agriculture and food security more clearly than I’ve ever seen it done before, zeroing in on a few key areas where we can do more.
And I like the fact that the IFIs and the DFIs were involved in the high-level panel. They may not reach the poorest of the poorest or the most fragile, but they reach large numbers of people who are experiencing hunger. Their resource flows are less volatile than ODA because they have the capacity to generate at least some of their income.
There are sparks of light. [2025 challenges] has forced us to think about how we do development cooperation differently. Not how we do more with less, but how to do better with less.
Lawrence Haddad speaking at the High-Level Session on “Evolving Roles in a Fragmented Aid Landscape” during the 2025 Annual General Assembly.
Donors need to take forward the actions: leverage larger resource flows, catalyse investments, and align efforts. That is easier said than done — mechanisms, reporting requirements, organizational silos often get in the way. We tell governments to break down the silos to support agrifood systems, but we donors have to do the same thing internally.
In addition, donors have to take more risks. To leverage the private sector, financial institutions, climate and public resources, not everything will succeed. We need to make the case for why agriculture and food systems matter — to promote prosperity, security, and safety.
If you are going to leverage the private sector, financial institutions, climate, and public resources, you need to take a few more risks and that means not everything you do will succeed.
Michelle: And now’s the moment to start doing that.
Lawrence: Yesterday was the moment to start doing that, so we need to accelerate.
Donors have to take more risks. To leverage the private sector, financial institutions, climate and public resources, not everything will succeed. We need to make the case for why agriculture and food systems matter — to promote prosperity, security, and safety.
Michelle: What value does the Donor Platform’s informal coordination space offer in today’s unpredictable and rapidly changing environment?
Lawrence: Informality is always good because it allows people to speak more freely. You can interact. Much of communication is not what you say, it’s the non-verbal part. Informal dialogue speeds up solution generation and sparks creativity.
Michelle: What are some hopeful signals you see for 2026?
Lawrence: My wife, a child psychologist, talks about the four responses to trauma. And let’s face it, we’ve been through some trauma this year. The responses are freeze, fawn, which is acceptance, flight or fight. We’re beginning the fight back, seeing ourselves as agents of the future and not just recipients. I see lots of green shoots. The fight back has begun.
Learn more about the 2025 Annual General Assembly on “Investing in the Future of Agrifood Systems: New directions for development finance”.
