Ethiopian government withdrawal from UNDP.

The president of United States of America, president Trump, on his first day of his residency at the White House has signed his executive order that his government’s plan of withdrawal from world health organisation WHO. For USA such withdrawal could save money and provide policy flexibility, the costs—particularly the loss of global influence, weakened disease response capabilities, and potential economic downsides—are significant. A more balanced approach might be to reform WHO from within rather withdrawal could save money and provide policy flexibility, the costs—particularly the loss of global influence, weakened disease response capabilities, and potential economic downsides—are significant. A more balanced approach might be to reform WHO from within rather.

What would be aspirational government such as the government of Ethiopia decide to withdraw from such global institutions like WHO or UNDP? Let’s pick UNDP, what are the cost and benefits of such move, should the Ethiopian government decide to withdraw from UNDP? Before we indulge into the costs and benefits of withdrawal from UNDP, it should be noted the Ethiopian government aspirations to be an independent and self reliance in governance and food security. Mainly on government controlled mediums it’s been glorified that Ethiopian government aspires to transform its agriculture sector into a self-reliant engine of growth—one that relies on domestic capacity and innovation rather than on long-term international aid. This vision is reflected in its national development strategies, which emphasize locally driven reforms, sustainable resource management, and enhanced market integration to achieve a resilient agricultural system. 

Ethiopia’s relationship with UNDP has historically been much more than a funding channel—it’s been a comprehensive partnership in policy advice, capacity building, crisis management, and the coordination of international donor support. Withdrawing from UNDP would mean losing several interrelated benefits critical to the country’s development progress. Here are some of the key areas at risk:

1. Loss of Technical and Policy Expertise

UNDP has supported Ethiopia’s political and economic reform efforts over decades. Its technical assistance has helped design and implement decentralisation, fiscal reform, and poverty‐alleviation strategies that underpin sustainable development. Without this expert guidance, Ethiopia would likely struggle to maintain the momentum of these reforms and may face setbacks in policy planning and institutional capacity.

Below is a list of several individuals who have been funded or seconded by UNDP as technical and policy experts working in support of Ethiopian government priorities. (Note that UNDP‐supported expertise may be delivered through projects, secondments, and partnerships and that the list below is illustrative rather than exhaustive.)

• Costanza Lucangeli – Chief Technical Advisor, Supporting Elections for Ethiopia’s Democratic Strengthening

  – In this role, she provides high‐level technical and policy advice to help strengthen Ethiopia’s electoral institutions and processes.

• A Policy and Technical Advisor on Sustainable Land Management – (position title from UNDP’s recruitment for SLM support)

  – This expert works closely with federal and regional agencies (for example, the Ethiopian Environmental Protection Authority) to mainstream sustainable land management into national development and resource mobilization strategies.

• UNDP‑funded technical advisers in peace support and governance initiatives (for example, seconded through the Peace Support Facility)

  – While individual names on these assignments may change with each project cycle, such advisers typically provide policy advice on conflict prevention, DDR (demobilization, disarmament and reintegration) and stabilisation measures supporting Ethiopia’s national reform and peacebuilding agenda.

• Technical experts deployed in support of Ethiopia’s reform agenda – for example, those who have been engaged through the “UNDP Enhances Support for Ethiopia’s Reform Agenda” initiative

  – These experts advise government counterparts on strengthening democratic governance, civil service reform, and the integration of digital tools for service delivery.

Because UNDP technical and policy expertise for Ethiopia is delivered through a range of projects and assignments over time—and names and titles may be updated as new projects are launched—please note that the examples above illustrate typical roles (with Costanza Lucangeli as one clearly identified expert from the Electoral Support Project) rather than forming a complete, current roster.

2. Reduced Donor Coordination and Access to Funding

As a well‐established international development agency, UNDP acts as a catalyst for donor funding and an intermediary in coordinating complex projects (from crisis response to long‐term climate adaptation and renewable energy initiatives). Withdrawal could signal a move away from international partnerships, undermining donor confidence and potentially reducing the flow of both grant and concessional finance critical for large-scale reform programs.

3. Diminished Crisis Response and Humanitarian Support

Over the years, UNDP has played an important role in managing and mitigating crises—from food insecurity and drought to political unrest. Its support in designing early warning systems, coordinating humanitarian responses, and building resilience at the community level has helped Ethiopia navigate shocks. Losing this support could lead to slower or less effective responses in emergencies, putting vulnerable populations at greater risk.

4. Setbacks in Capacity Building and Institutional Development

UNDP investments in training local officials, strengthening civil society, and building governance mechanisms have been central to Ethiopia’s efforts to decentralise decision‐making and improve service delivery. Withdrawal from UNDP would likely leave a gap in these capacity‐building efforts, potentially stalling progress toward improved governance and more effective public administration.

5. Challenges in Achieving National and International Development Goals

Many of Ethiopia’s long‐term goals—such as meeting the Sustainable Development Goals, building a green economy, and enhancing climate resilience—rely on the strategic frameworks and project pipelines developed in partnership with UNDP. Without that collaborative support, Ethiopia might face difficulties in mobilizing both domestic and international resources, thereby hindering progress in areas such as renewable energy development and climate finance.

In Summary

Ethiopia’s potential withdrawal from UNDP would represent a critical loss in the areas of:

   •   Expert policy and technical support that has guided reform and sustainable development.

   •   Coordinated donor engagement and funding mechanisms, essential for financing large-scale projects.

   •   Effective crisis management and humanitarian coordination, which help protect vulnerable populations.

   •   Capacity building and institutional strengthening, key to ensuring long-term, locally owned development.

   •   Progress toward national and international commitments, including those related to climate adaptation and the green transition.

Such a withdrawal could jeopardize not only ongoing reform initiatives and social development programs but also Ethiopia’s ability to attract and effectively use international assistance in an increasingly complex global environment.

Ethiopian government officials and political entities will remain interdependent of international agencies such as UNDP on financial aid and technical experts. Ethiopian government should also aspire to transform its human capital and public administration into a self-reliant engine of modernisation —one that relies on domestic capacity and innovation rather than on long-term international aid and developmental dependency.