How the conservative playbook to undermine aid and reduce civil society space is working out in Sweden

NightCafe prompt "Sweden cuts development aid"

While the announcements of cuts that large INGOs like International Rescue Committee (IRC) and Save The Children International (SCI) have recently made receive attention in the sector, the developments in Sweden provide a glimpse what the “future of aid” may hold for traditional Western donors and particular their civil society.
I agree to a large extent with Will Worley’s assessment that International aid agencies pay the price for boom and bust and that “staff cuts and financial turbulence (…) follow years of aggressive growth (…), even as government aid budgets have fallen” but what we are seeing in Sweden right now is worrisome on a different level.

Just over a year ago I wrote about The worrisome shift to the right of Nordic development cooperation and the fall-out has now become quite visible in Sweden, after initially toning down feminist foreign policy and cutting development-related academic research funding.

When I spoke to DevEx’s Burton Bollag in April Why Sweden tore up its funding agreements with its NGO partners, it had already become clear that major shifts in how Sida will engage with civil society partners from 2025 are underway, but already today the impacts are felt in the sector:

SIWI - the Stockholm International Water Institute, which, among other things, is behind World Water Week, is shutting down its aid activities completely. Out of 90 employees, over 60 may quit. The future of World Water Week is also uncertain.
(...)
The board of SIWI, has decided to drastically cut the workforce and radically change the operations, something the magazine Circulation was the first to report on. Global Bar Magazine can now report that the foundation will completely cease its aid activities.
"We will keep the basic mission. We expect that thirteen people will remain and another fifteen for the work with World Water Week", says Christel Wiman acting CEO of SIWI."
(...)
Can WaterAid take over?
SIWI is also actively trying to find another actor who wants to take over the foundation's aid activities.
(...)
In August, union negotiations will begin at SIWI for the roughly 60 people who will have to quit.

(Full story SIWI lägger ned biståndsverksamheten reported by GlobalBar Magazine)

Even though some contacts have told me privately that there may be additional managerial issues to the current changing development climate in Sweden, at the end of the day a massive cut in jobs looms very large.
A commentator remarked on LinkedIn that a global event such as World Water Week should be held in the majority world, but at the same time I am worried that an autocratic country could take the opportunity to depoliticize debates around water further and turn the event into a technocratic fair...

More bad news followed shortly this summer from CONCORD Sweden, a platform made up of 80 Swedish civil society organizations:

CONCORD Sweden has already terminated employment of more than half of its 11 staff and may start 2025 with only 4 employees remaining.
"Since we are a small organization with many knowledgeable employees who have worked for a long time and who therefore have long notice periods, we are unfortunately already forced to lay off our staff - even though Sida has not yet formally terminated our agreement", notes Cecilia Nilsson Kleffner, operations manager at Concord Sweden.
"The government has said that it wants to increase transparency and efficiency in aid, but the consequence of what is happening now will be exactly the opposite, as the opportunities to review and follow up what is happening will be reduced. This goes beyond the quality of the Swedish aid", says Nilsson Kleffner.

(Full story Bistånd: Concord halverar personalen reported by GlobalBar Magazine)
 
Christoph Luettmann, Managing Director for CSSP – Berlin Center for Integrative Mediation commented on LinkedIn:

I personally think it's fair enough to reduce in the sector when others also have to do it, but doing it with a narrative of “transparency, accountability and quality insurance” or even “effectiveness” is cynical and pure populism.

And finally Sweden’s largest NGO based in the South of the country, in Lund, announced:

IM (Individuell Människohjälp - IM Swedish Development Partner) implements drastic cuts as a result of the uncertainty surrounding future funding.
Two-thirds of the staff will disappear and the number of program countries will be halved. In this way, IM will be able to cope in the future - even without Sida - says Martin Nihlgård, general secretary."
(...)
"The changes mean that IM is reducing the number of countries it works in from fifteen to six. The number of partners is also reduced to 20 compared to today's nearly 100. What remains are Guatemala, Malawi, Palestine, Moldova, Ukraine and Sweden, where IM also works, but with funding other than aid."
(...)
In total, the staff will be reduced from 70 to around 20 people.

(Full story IM skär ner – ska klara sig utan Sida-pengar reported by GlobalBar Magazine)

What is so interesting about the developments in Sweden is that we still deal with a lot of unknowns regarding changes at Sida and the overhaul of its engagement with civil society partners-perhaps some organizations will receive funding and may be able to keep more staff, but that seems unlikely and as the quote from IM suggests, strategically not even desirable.
But it is important to note that the changing political climate that has moved many political discourses to the right, including on foreign policy, migration or development aid, already has palpable effects on Swedish organizations.

Marta Martinelli, Senior Director at the Center for Civilians in Conflict, put this very eloquently in her comment to my post regarding IM on LinkedIn:

Moving towards a future of reduced diversity, reduced participation, reduced openness, increasing isolation and crises competing for priority looks like this…Many more organisations will have to grapple with the question of sustainability forcing hard choices, whilst institutional and government-centric approaches will be strengthened, in a general context of weakened accountability mechanisms...

I would like to add that these developments are worrisome and that they concern more than just jobs or a “new normal” after the cozy relationship between a handful of NGOs and Sida is challenged.
Losing jobs on this scale in a small country like Sweden means that many may have to leave the sector to find different jobs-and the sector will not only loose talent, but the advocacy of those who spoke about the complexities of humanitarian or development issues at home, their kids’ school or sport clubs. They also amplified the voices of partners around the world “at home”-the kind of lobbying that sometimes gets a bit overlooked in localization debates…

In the end, the risk is that conservative, populist or outright right-wing critics of aid have an even easier way to further their agenda, will cut budgets, divert it to more anti-immigration measures and undermine important discussions about global solidarity, inequalities and what Sweden’s role should be at home, in Europe and abroad when it comes to sustainable development.