The Global Humanitarian Overview 2025, published yesterday by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), offers a sobering account of the crises, conflicts, and climate shocks that dominate our newsfeeds—or often, fail to make headlines. This comprehensive report highlights how interconnected challenges, from violence and fragility to climate catastrophes, are fueling humanitarian emergencies on an unprecedented scale. As a result, hundreds of millions of people now bear a label that often defines their relationship with the state, international organizations, and the world at large: being in humanitarian need.
The scale of this challenge is staggering. The number of people classified as being in humanitarian need has grown exponentially over the years, and the financial cost of addressing these needs has risen from $1.7 billion USD at the turn of the millennium to over $46 billion USD projected for 2024. These figures underscore a grim reality: an ever-increasing number of people are being pushed into vulnerability and hardship. Reflecting on 2024, we are reminded of a year scarred by violence, conflict, and climate disasters—devastating lives, displacing millions, and fracturing communities worldwide.
Yet, despite the clarity of the crisis, the global response remains deeply inadequate. As the report starkly reveals, less than one-third of the projected humanitarian burden for 2025 has been met by current funding commitments. This funding shortfall reflects a broader retreat from multilateralism in many political spheres. Elections across numerous countries have shown a narrowing of political horizons and a growing scepticism toward international cooperation. Even historically committed nations, such as the UK, have scaled back their support for overseas aid. Protracted crises, combined with limited policy progress, further erode donor willingness to sustain long-term commitments, exacerbating the plight of those trapped in cycles of aid dependency.
Take, for example, the Great Lakes Region of East Africa, home to long-standing refugee populations in camps that have seen little change in their assistance frameworks since their inception. The parallels between current aid practices and those of decades past, as highlighted by Harrell-Bond’s analyses of the late 1980s, are striking. Despite decades of international support, these communities remain caught in a web of policy inertia and funding cycles, often unable to access meaningful development opportunities.
Compounding the problem, the humanitarian system continues to face difficult choices. Policymakers at OCHA, UNHCR, and WFP must decide who receives aid and who does not—a decision most of us would find impossible to make. In Kenya, for instance, drought has gripped northern regions like Turkana and Garissa for years, decimating livelihoods and forcing pastoralist communities into desperate searches for water. Refugee populations in camps such as Dadaab and Kakuma, already heavily reliant on aid, are now grappling with reduced support. The suspension of the WFP’s Bamba Chakula e-voucher program, coupled with cuts to in-kind food assistance, has forced families to make heartbreaking choices to survive.
During my time in Kenya’s refugee camps, I witnessed firsthand the resilience and ingenuity of these communities. From homes constructed of rusted iron sheets and tarpaulin to families sharing stories of flight and survival, their experiences speak to the stark reality of life in these “humanitarian pseudo-cities.” As essential aid programs are scaled back, the struggle to provide food and security for families intensifies, leaving many facing impossible decisions.
This pattern is not unique to East Africa. Over the past year, I have visited humanitarian spaces in Rwanda, Colombia, and Mauritania, where similar funding reductions are having devastating effects. Families, often living in limbo for years, continue to share what little they have with those cut off from aid. Their stories of insecurity and uncertainty remind us that behind the numbers are real lives—children flying makeshift kites in the Sahara winds, a professor from Timbuktu speaking passionately about his city’s libraries, or a vendor selling arepas in the bustling streets of Riohacha.
To meet the immense needs outlined in the 2025 Global Humanitarian Overview, we must call for radical commitments. Addressing these challenges requires not only adequate funding for life-saving interventions but also a commitment to transition communities toward sustainable development. It is essential to recognize the intersectionality of fragility, conflict, gender, and poverty, as over half of the world’s poorest people live in fragile or conflict-affected settings.
We cannot accept the status quo of prolonged humanitarian emergencies as a permanent condition. Instead, we must view them as triage—a temporary state that paves the way for holistic, people-centered development. This requires empowering local actors, addressing the root causes of crises, and ensuring that those living in protracted need can build lives they value. Only with such a paradigm shift can we hope to fulfill our shared humanitarian obligations and honor the resilience of those we serve.
