Hvordan frigjøre handlingsrom i norsk bistand etter USAS kutt
In the report to the Storting on peace and conflict resolution, expected in August 2025, the think-tank Long Term below has answered two indicative questions from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
We urge the government to ensure that Norway makes an early pledge of binding support for Gavi at the same level as before.
How to organize Norwegian aid? Part 2 of 4.
Now we have a finance minister who understands security policy better than most. Someone who knows that defending Norway is more than bullets and gunpowder.
With cuts to USAID, the world needs greater and more effective investments in sexual and reproductive health and rights.
A former aid adviser criticizes both aid organizations, Norad and Long Term for defending themselves rather than providing answers. But without truthful stories, there is little to answer.
The United States and several European countries are turning their backs on the world. Is this the beginning of the end for aid as we know it?
Shutting down aid is as knowledgable as shutting down health care.
Tighter budgets and new crises make it even more important to have knowledge-based and cost-effective aid. Norway is already doing a lot to make this happen, but we have more to go on. A working group has presented a report with new recommendations.
Lead in food and paint causes health damage to millions of children every year. Poor countries in particular have a long way to go.
In 2023, 31.7 billion Norwegian kroner (54% of Norway's aid budget) was allocated through multilateral organizations, with the UN system and the World Bank Group being the two main recipients. This note presents recommendations to the government, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Norad on how the foreign service can become a more effective and coordinated donor to Norway's largest partners. We focus on the UN system and the World Bank in this first note of the series.
We are in a race against the clock.
We have looked at the parties' alternative aid budget. Here's what we found.
We need more humility from leading voices.
Through adjustments to Norway's new state guarantee scheme, Norway can trigger tens of billions in climate finance without paying a penny.
The principles of Norway's new humanitarian strategy are unsuitable for making budgetary priorities. It's a democratic problem.
Effective, global climate policy is not outdated. That's the future.
The electric car subsidies cost too much and seem too little. Replace them with more effective climate action abroad.
Norway contributes less than we claim and “aid-washes” profitable investments.
Certain measures, even aid skeptics may not dispute that have the desired effect. Childhood vaccination is a well-known example -- measures against lead poisoning could be next.
The Oil Fund can ensure more responsible AI development.
The Red Cross doesn't want to pit good causes against each other. But true humanity requires hard priorities.
The assistance is exempt from the state's assessment guidelines, which require alternatives to be considered before decisions are made. It shouldn't be, even if Ingvar Olsen at Norad thinks so.
Why do politicians engage for crises in the global north but look a different path when the crises happen in the south?
And the Minister of Health decides what treatment should be given.
Billions of dollars are dusting down, rather than solving society's challenges. Foundations should provide more and faster.
It's the animals, farmers, taxpayers and future generations who pay for the meat you eat.
Biological design will turn society upside down. Whether we like it or not.
Framtidige generasjoner er avhengige av dagens valg, men er ikke representert i dagens politikk. Derfor taper de alltid.
Norway closes its eyes while the world burns. It is both unpatriotic and short-sighted.
Store samfunnstrusler med lav sannsynlighet for å inntreffe i løpet av en valgperiode, eller med konsekvenser først langt frem i tid, blir systematisk neglisjert i politikken. Må det være slik?