Opinion: Afghanistan’s aid sector plagued by inefficiency and waste
Despite a sharp decline in humanitarian funding following the Taliban takeover, non-profit organisations continue to rely on costly international staff and complex subcontracting chains, resulting in negligible returns for rural communities.
An opinion piece published by Al Jazeera on 6 June 2026 has drawn attention to the persistent inefficiency and lack of accountability within Afghanistan’s non-profit sector. The article, which cites specific failures in Daikundi province, argues that despite a dramatic collapse in humanitarian funding since the Taliban takeover, NGOs have failed to improve transparency or operational effectiveness.
The author details visits to villages in Daikundi where agricultural projects have yielded negligible results. One initiative provided zero-energy storage houses that could accommodate the harvest of only two to three families in entire villages, leaving the majority of apples to decay under trees. In another instance, an NGO distributed imported vegetable seeds following extensive training and monitoring, yet the harvest yielded approximately 450 Afghans ($7) per family, with no accountability for the losses incurred by farmers.
These local failures are contextualised against a broader history of aid mismanagement. The article references estimates from the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), which indicate that between $26bn and $29bn was lost to embezzlement or wasteful spending between 2001 and 2021. While much of this funding was directed toward the security sector, the non-profit sphere also saw widespread waste, with millions of dollars failing to address the urgent needs of rural populations.
The critique identifies several structural drivers of this inefficiency. Foreign NGOs often rely on extended chains of implementing partners and subcontractors, which dilutes quality control and supervision. This layering allows organisations to prioritise securing funding through attractive proposals over delivering substantial impact. Additionally, the article highlights significant waste in remuneration, noting that international staff salaries can range from $10,000 to $20,000 for roles that could be performed by local hires at a fraction of the cost.
To salvage the sector and remain competitive for dwindling donor funds, the author recommends a shift toward local leadership and streamlined operations. Employing qualified locals would ensure projects are grounded in an understanding of market prices, field conditions, and community realities. The article further urges NGOs to eliminate extended subcontracting layers and implement direct feedback mechanisms from local communities to evaluate effectiveness during implementation.
