Centre for Sustainable DevelopmentScotland & international development
The world that will greet the new Scottish Parliament is a more uncertain and fractured one than it was five years ago.
The multilateral rules-based order, already under strain, has been shaken further by the actions of states whose commitment to international law is openly questionable. One consequence, largely unremarked amid the noise, has been a quiet dismantling of international development ambitions. Aid budgets that were edging towards 3% of national GDP are being redirected towards defence spending and the management of the increasing challenging of international migration, even as the evidence base for development investment, including its global and national security dividend, has never been stronger.
While international development continues to be an area of policy that is reserved to the UK Government, the Scottish Parliament and UK Government has, for more than 20 years, seen Scotland’s specific contribution to international development as a valuable additional element, not least due to the innovative manner in which it has been pursued. The future expansion and intensification of this contribution is therefore a key objective at this time, as, too, are the efforts of Scottish Government to influence the use of the UK development budget. Seeking to at least maintain the funding of aid and development, and bringing pressure on the UK to focus that budget on the real development challenges in the poorest low-income countries, should be a prime responsibility of the next Scottish administration.
Against this backdrop, the 2026 Scottish Parliament elections offer a timely opportunity to assess where Scotland's political parties stand. Scotland has earned genuine credibility in this space: its progressive engagement with the UN Sustainable Development Goals, its leadership on Loss and Damage in the climate negotiations, and its focused work in Malawi, Zambia, Rwanda and Pakistan have all drawn international attention. The question is whether that track record is something the incoming government intends to build on, or quietly park.
Manifestos
A review of the five main party manifestos produces a mixed picture.
In their maniesto, the Scottish Conservatives propose cuts to the international development and climate justice budgets, a position that aligns with right-of-centre politics internationally.
The Scottish Greens manifesto offers a dedicated section committing to uphold international law and a just world order, and pledges to expand the International Development Fund, Climate Justice Fund, and Humanitarian Emergency Fund alongside an explicitly feminist and anti-colonial approach to international relations. The manifesto has no outlined financial targets or delivery mechanisms.
The Scottish Labour manifesto includes a short pledge to maintain the international development budget, with a focus on humanitarian aid delivered through not-for-profit organisations and targeted at areas where Scottish partnerships exist. The section sits within a broader framing of economic outward engagement, suggesting international development is viewed partly through a trade and soft power lens rather than as a standalone moral and strategic priority.
The Scottish Liberal Democrats acknowledge Scotland's international obligations in their manifesto but do not set out a specific international development commitment or budget position.
No reference to international development is made in Reform's manifesto.
The SNP manifesto pledges to increase the £15 million International Development Fund by at least 25% by the end of the Parliament, alongside continuation and growth of the Climate Justice Fund, and the creation of an "aid match" scheme. This is the most direct signal of intent of any manifesto.
Where does this leave Scotland's international development community?
Regardless of which combination of parties forms the next government, three lines of work are now urgent.
Firstly, the case for international development needs to be reframed for this political moment. This is not about abandoning its moral foundation, but complementing it with the security and resilience arguments that are increasingly compelling to UK Government Ministers, HM Treasury officials and Defence planners alike. The evidence that reduced development funding fuels global and national instability and insecurity, and inhibits the development of the poorer - and often conflict-ridden nations - is substantial and it needs to be put in front of decision-makers clearly and consistently.
Secondly, whoever holds the Scottish Government international development portfolio must be held to account for translating manifesto language into funded programmes with genuine community benefit. Vague commitments to "partnership" and "humanitarian values" need to be tested to provide transparency on who receives the funding, through what mechanisms, and with what evidence of impact?
Thirdly, Scotland's role as a sub-national actor with genuine international reach is rare and worth defending. In the fora where that voice is welcomed (UN processes, climate negotiations, Commonwealth networks), Scotland has the opportunity to model a different approach to international solidarity at precisely the moment when such models are most needed.
The Centre for Sustainable Development at the University of Strathclyde welcomes engagement on these issues from across the international development community as the new Parliament takes shape.