Show Notes
As international assistance is increasingly deployed to achieve foreign policy objectives, where does the line fall between humanitarian intent and strategic influence? This episode leads a crucial discussion on the complex concept of aid as soft power, exploring how global aid is used to persuade rather than coerce, and what these shifting motivations mean for recipient nations and the broader global development landscape.
To unpack these intricate dynamics at a time when global aid funding faces historic lows and the Sustainable Development Goals face significant setbacks, hosts Ivica Petrikova (Associate Professor in Politics and International Relations, Royal Holloway, University of London) and Melita Lazell (Associate Professor in Political Economy and Development at the University of Portsmouth) continue the Global Aid Rethink series.
They are joined by Stephen Brown, Professor at the School of Political Studies at the University of Ottawa (additionally affiliated with the School of International Development and Global Studies), and Rose Worden, a Senior Analyst and Public Affairs and Policy Advisor. Together, they explore the critical distinctions between soft power and hard power, examining the underlying political motivations behind international assistance and the long-term implications for global governance.
Read the transcript here
This is a Research Podcasts production.
Episode credits: Presenters: Ivica Petrikova, Royal Holloway, University of London and Melita Lazell, Portsmouth University Guests: Professor Stephen Brown and Rose Worden Producer: Catherine McDonald, Research Podcasts Music: MFCC via Pixabay
This podcast was generously funded by the ESRC-funded Royal Holloway Social Science Impact Accelerator Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
More from Global Aid Rethink
Given that the nations least responsible for global emissions bear the heaviest burdens of the climate crisis, how can global aid be restructured to deliver genuine climate justice? This episode interrogates the complex relationship between international environmental finance and sustainable development, exploring how major initiatives - such as the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JETPs) - navigate the structural tensions between emission mitigation and social justice in the Global South.
As traditional overseas aid drops to historic lows, is the growing reliance on private sector instruments a genuine solution or a geopolitical pivot? This episode investigates the increasing financialisation of development cooperation, exploring how aid is being channelled through development finance institutions (DFIs) to crowd in private capital, and what this structural shift means for accountability, transparency, and state capacity in the Global South.
Following the catastrophic funding drops of 2025, what does the immediate future hold for international development cooperation? This episode investigates the immediate impacts of deep aid cuts on the ground, addressing the driving forces behind fragile public support in donor nations, the severe consequences of funding withdrawals on health sectors, and how the current geopolitical environment is accelerating a shift away from traditional donor-recipient paradigms.
With global funding at its lowest in decades and the Sustainable Development Goals significantly off-track, what does the future look like for the global aid landscape? This concluding episode synthesises insights from across the series, reflecting on profound systemic shifts, the implications of recent deep aid cuts in the UK and US, and the immense challenges of rebuilding the moral and political case for international assistance.
Beyond theoretical debates, what are the tangible, on-the-ground impacts of development projects, and what barriers do practitioners face when implementing them? This episode moves into the realities of aid in practice, exploring the immediate and long-term consequences of recent aid cuts, the intricate complexities of localisation, and the actual effectiveness of varying donor approaches.