Financial Aftershocks after the Disaster

A Tale of Two Disasters

In February 2023, a devastating earthquake struck Turkey and Syria. Within weeks, international donors pledged over $7 billion in aid. The disaster dominated headlines for months.

That same year, Somalia faced its worst drought in decades. Eight million people needed urgent assistance. Yet, the funding appeal received less than 30% of what was requested.

We analyzed a decade (2014-2024) of disaster data to uncover a troubling biases that determine who gets help when disaster strikes.

The Growing Crisis

Over the last decade, disaster funding needs have soared while actual aid has lagged far behind. Left devastated by death and destruction, communities reach for relief,—only to be met with silence.
As the scale of their struggles expand, the world’s willingness and ability to respond is eerily diminishing.

In 2014, humanitarian appeals were funded at an average of 59%. By 2023, this dropped to just 45% - the lowest coverage on record.
The projections for 2024 were even worse, with funding expected to fall by another 11%.

A World Divided

Not all disasters are treated equally. The data reveals stark inequalities in who receives adequate help and who is left behind.
Low relief in many countries stems from ongoing instability, repeated crises and the sheer scale of vulnerable populations.
Countries with stronger systems, better infrastructure and capacity are able to secure and deliver aid more effectively.

Getting Worse, Not Better

Despite technological advances and increased global wealth, our response to humanitarian crises has deteriorated significantly over the past decade.

The reasons are complex: shrinking donor interest, shifting global priorities, crises that drag on for years and mounting economic strain.
Yet the outcome is undeniable: with each passing year, more people in need are left without the relief they deserve.

The 'Breaking News' Economy of Suffering

Our analysis reveals a strong correlation between media coverage and aid received.
Disasters that capture headlines get help. Those that don't, suffer in silence.

Sudden disasters like earthquakes, floods, or hurricanes capture global headlines and attract immediate funding, as their devastation is visible and dramatic.
In contrast, slow-onset crises—such as prolonged droughts, conflicts in isolated regions and drawn-out emergencies—unfold quietly, often hidden from the spotlight, leaving them underfunded and neglected despite their equally devastating impact on communities.

The implication is stark: In our interconnected world, your chance of receiving life-saving aid may depend more on trending hashtags than the severity of your suffering.

Breaking the Silence

This data exposes an uncomfortable truth about the way humanitarian aid is delivered: our response is often shaped less by actual need and more by what the world sees.
Disasters closer to major powers, crises tied to political interests, or tragedies amplified by media coverage receive attention and funding, while equally urgent emergencies in overlooked regions struggle to attract support.

But the truth is harsher: awareness alone does not fill empty stomachs, rebuild homes or bring back the dead.
Until we confront these patterns, countless lives will continue to be lost in silence — forgotten not because the need is small, but because the world chooses not to see.