At the end of the Second World War, mobilizations for development aid intensified mainly based on two factors: monetary flows and North American influence. The first was based on the difference in productivity between the United States and other countries; in this sense, it was necessary to export capital to poor countries to avoid a crisis like that of 1929 (Montúfar 2001). The second factor is based on the ideological issue of the postwar period, since those countries that were under North American influence used international aid as a way to oppose the dominance of the Soviet Union. Thus, development cooperation was understood in a welfare-oriented way and involved asymmetric relations between the north, holder of resources and power, and the south, lacking resources to reach the levels of development established by the countries of the western north.

In this context, organizations such as the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) – later called the World Bank –, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) were created, with the aim of promoting development worldwide, consecrating international aid as a new organizational device for the economic order after the Second World War. In parallel, developed countries began to formulate their own international aid policies, establishing their agencies to promote bilateral cooperation.

Gradually, international cooperation began to have a greater number of multilateral and bilateral organizations committed to technical assistance policies and financing programs aimed at less developed countries. With this, starting in the 1970s, the concept of cooperation evolved, losing its essentially welfare-oriented character, exclusive of the bilateral political strategy of the great powers, with which it gained a developmental connotation, consolidating the so-called International System of Development Cooperation (SICD). According to César Montúfar, "since the beginning of the seventies, a new definition of development was incubating as a result of a different perception of the international system, initially focused on the notion of interdependence and then on globalization."[2]​ In that period, the peak of international cooperation was verified in terms of its pace, spirit, dimension and results.[3]​.

Development aid was also, in the mind of the American administration, a means to combat the influence of communism. A 1994 UNDP report noted that “in fact, the aid provided by the United States during the 1980s is inversely proportional to respect for human rights. Multilateral donors do not seem to be concerned about such considerations either. They seem, in fact, to prefer authoritarian regimes, since they consider without batting an eyelid that these favor political stability and are in better conditions to manage the economy. When Bangladesh and the Philippines ended martial law, their share of the World Bank's overall lending decreased."[4]

Since then, the international cooperation system has become increasingly complex, given the multiplicity of agents, objects, rules and values ​​that make it up. For example, the agents of international cooperation can be people, national states, multilateral organizations (World Bank, United Nations, etc.), subnational states and also non-governmental entities (associations, foundations, companies and NGOs) that would act both at the national and international levels[5]​ (Salles 2007). Therefore, there is no single definition of international cooperation, much less its modus operandi.[6]​.

Among the international organizations that perform these functions are multilateral financial institutions such as: the International Monetary Fund (IMF) "International Monetary Fund (IMF)"), the World Bank (WB) or regional development banks and multilateral institutions that are not financial such as the United Nations and its specialized agencies (FAO, ILO, UNESCO...). The European Union also manages European foreign aid programs through the EuropeAid Cooperation Office. This Office works in close contact with civil society organizations, NGOs, the United Nations, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the World Bank (WB).

On 03/20/2013 the United Kingdom becomes the first power to dedicate 0.7% to development cooperation. A Conservative Prime Minister, David Cameron, delivers on an eternal progressive promise. Development NGOs celebrate it as "a great victory" on a "historic day."

The term development cooperation is not synonymous with official development assistance (ODA), although in many cases they are used interchangeably. According to the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), ODA consists of the flows that official agencies, including state and local governments, or their executive agencies, allocate to developing countries and multilateral institutions and that in each operation satisfy the following conditions: a) have as their main objective the promotion of economic development and well-being of developing countries and b) are of a concessional nature and contain a donation element of at least 25%. In addition, other modalities of cooperation are also included in the category of development cooperation, such as South-South cooperation, Triangular cooperation, decentralized cooperation, and private sector cooperation.

At the end of the Second World War, mobilizations for development aid intensified mainly based on two factors: monetary flows and North American influence. The first was based on the difference in productivity between the United States and other countries; in this sense, it was necessary to export capital to poor countries to avoid a crisis like that of 1929 (Montúfar 2001). The second factor is based on the ideological issue of the postwar period, since those countries that were under North American influence used international aid as a way to oppose the dominance of the Soviet Union. Thus, development cooperation was understood in a welfare-oriented way and involved asymmetric relations between the north, holder of resources and power, and the south, lacking resources to reach the levels of development established by the countries of the western north.

In this context, organizations such as the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) – later called the World Bank –, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) were created, with the aim of promoting development worldwide, consecrating international aid as a new organizational device for the economic order after the Second World War. In parallel, developed countries began to formulate their own international aid policies, establishing their agencies to promote bilateral cooperation.

Gradually, international cooperation began to have a greater number of multilateral and bilateral organizations committed to technical assistance policies and financing programs aimed at less developed countries. With this, starting in the 1970s, the concept of cooperation evolved, losing its essentially welfare-oriented character, exclusive of the bilateral political strategy of the great powers, with which it gained a developmental connotation, consolidating the so-called International System of Development Cooperation (SICD). According to César Montúfar, "since the beginning of the seventies, a new definition of development was incubating as a result of a different perception of the international system, initially focused on the notion of interdependence and then on globalization."[2]​ In that period, the peak of international cooperation was verified in terms of its pace, spirit, dimension and results.[3]​.

Development aid was also, in the mind of the American administration, a means to combat the influence of communism. A 1994 UNDP report noted that “in fact, the aid provided by the United States during the 1980s is inversely proportional to respect for human rights. Multilateral donors do not seem to be concerned about such considerations either. They seem, in fact, to prefer authoritarian regimes, since they consider without batting an eyelid that these favor political stability and are in better conditions to manage the economy. When Bangladesh and the Philippines ended martial law, their share of the World Bank's overall lending decreased."[4]

Since then, the international cooperation system has become increasingly complex, given the multiplicity of agents, objects, rules and values ​​that make it up. For example, the agents of international cooperation can be people, national states, multilateral organizations (World Bank, United Nations, etc.), subnational states and also non-governmental entities (associations, foundations, companies and NGOs) that would act both at the national and international levels[5]​ (Salles 2007). Therefore, there is no single definition of international cooperation, much less its modus operandi.[6]​.

Among the international organizations that perform these functions are multilateral financial institutions such as: the International Monetary Fund (IMF) "International Monetary Fund (IMF)"), the World Bank (WB) or regional development banks and multilateral institutions that are not financial such as the United Nations and its specialized agencies (FAO, ILO, UNESCO...). The European Union also manages European foreign aid programs through the EuropeAid Cooperation Office. This Office works in close contact with civil society organizations, NGOs, the United Nations, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the World Bank (WB).

On 03/20/2013 the United Kingdom becomes the first power to dedicate 0.7% to development cooperation. A Conservative Prime Minister, David Cameron, delivers on an eternal progressive promise. Development NGOs celebrate it as "a great victory" on a "historic day."