The British Council is to close offices in nine countries, including Mozambique and Tanzania, becoming the latest international development organisation to scale back its global footprint amid a wider squeeze on aid funding.

The organisation, core to UK cultural influence abroad, said it had received £40 million in non-aid funding over the next three years, avoiding what it described as a “worst-case scenario” in which up to 40 per cent of its overseas network could have closed.

The decision follows years of financial strain for the British Council, which uses cultural exchange, education and English language programmes to build relationships while delivering UK-funded development projects. The Covid-19 pandemic devastated its commercial income from English language teaching and examinations, which has required a government loan in the years since that has grown to £197 million.

Under its Spending Review settlement, the British Council said it would receive an additional £40 million in non-ODA funding over the next three years. However, it said it still needed to reduce its overseas presence to become “modern, efficient and sustainable.”

However, it would end its permanent presence in nine countries, including closing its offices and withdrawing staff, in response to “the financial challenges we continue to face,” a British Council spokesperson told The Independent.

They said the decision followed a review of operating costs, UK government priorities, opportunities for growth and the lifespan of existing contracts and partnerships.

Seven of the countries have been identified as Botswana, Chile, Croatia, Mozambique, Peru, Tanzania and Trinidad and Tobago. Six receive UK aid funding, while Croatia is funded separately. They were chosen after careful consideration of a number of factors including operational costs, UK government priorities and potential for income generation, the spokesperson said.

The Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) has argued that influence does not have to depend on a physical presence. “One mistake I think we can make is to conflate physical presence with effect,” Nick Dyer, the department’s interim permanent undersecretary, told members of parliament last week.

“We need to focus on the output that we are looking to achieve, which is improved trust in Britain. Can we achieve that through a digital presence as much as through a physical presence? That is the challenge that we are now facing, as a lot of the market is moving online. We have to test that and keep on top of it as we go forward with this turnaround plan,” Mr Dyer said.

The British Council said it would continue delivering development programmes and would receive the same level of official development assistance funding as in previous years, although it declined to say whether it was likely to see further cuts or closures.

“We are currently reviewing the implications of the Spending Review for our programmes; there is nothing further to share at this stage,” the spokesperson said.

The closures come as international aid organisations grapple with the sharpest decline in official development assistance in years, after several major donors, including the UK and the US, cut overseas spending to prioritise domestic budgets and defence.

The impact is already being felt on the ground, with UN Women warning this week that at least one million women and girls had lost access to critical services after aid cuts forced organisations to scale back or shut programmes.

Support for survivors of gender-based violence, sexual and reproductive healthcare, legal assistance and livelihoods programmes had all been affected, with women’s organisations increasingly unable to meet demand.

This article has been produced as part of The Independent’s Rethinking Global Aid project