Institute of Development Studies (IDS) / ALNAP Paul Harvey, Jeremy Lind, et al.
Thomas Byrnes was an Expert contributor to the Yemen country review, providing critical data on the nexus between humanitarian cash assistance and national social safety nets.
This report examines whether regulated stablecoin infrastructure can deliver meaningful treasury efficiencies for humanitarian organisations facing unprecedented funding cuts. With US humanitarian contributions down 88% from peak and 16 of 20 top donors cutting funding, the paper investigates the "Treasury Rails" model - a shift from trapped liquidity in local bank accounts to centralised reserves with instant, peer-to-peer distribution. Drawing on pilot data from Sudan, Myanmar, and Afghanistan, the report assesses evidence for three value propositions: operational resilience when banking systems collapse, cost efficiency through reduced transaction fees and settlement times, and capital optimisation through yield-bearing instruments. It examines the regulatory landscape under MiCA (EU) and the GENIUS Act (US), and provides practical implementation guidance for treasury teams. The report concludes that regulated stablecoin rails warrant serious examination as a treasury tool - not as a solution to the funding crisis, but as operational infrastructure that may help stretched organisations preserve more value per transfer in an era of contraction.
On November 6, 2025, UNHCR High Commissioner Filippo Grandi delivered his final briefing to the UN General Assembly's Third Committee, presenting figures that document the most severe contraction of the humanitarian system in modern history. This analysis examines the operational and financial implications of Grandi's briefing, synthesizing data from UNHCR internal assessments, OCHA's Financial Tracking Service (FTS), and the 2025 Global Humanitarian Overview (GHO) to document a structural break in humanitarian financing rather than a temporary funding shock. The findings reveal a 53% collapse in global humanitarian funding over two years (from 43.3 b i l l i o n i n 2022 t o 20.3 billion in 2025), with UNHCR operating at 2015 funding levels while displacement has doubled to 117 million people. The system now operates at 26% coverage—the lowest in recorded history—with critical sectors falling below operational viability: child protection (14% funded), WASH (14% funded), and camp coordination (11% funded). Geographic analysis reveals brutal prioritization, with bottom-tier contexts effectively abandoned: Honduras (10% coverage), Vietnam (5.5%), and Venezuela regional response (8.4%). This paper argues that the humanitarian system is not undergoing reform but regression, reverting to 1990s-era transactional programming while the donor architecture fractures without replacement. The analysis challenges the prevailing "efficiency" narrative, documenting how a 30% workforce reduction, consolidation of 185 offices, and systematic sector collapse represent managed decline rather than strategic repositioning. Drawing on Grandi's explicit rejection of efficiency rhetoric and extensive field testimony, this paper calls for honest acknowledgment that current funding levels cannot sustain the humanitarian model built over the past two decades. Keywords: humanitarian financing, UNHCR, refugee crisis, aid funding, system collapse, donor architecture, Global Humanitarian Overview, multipurpose cash assistance, protection programming, humanitarian reform