Opinion: To truly walk the talk is to decolonize philanthropy

Localization is the current buzzword in philanthropy. We frequently hear talk from across the sector to increase funding to local or proximate leaders. That is, funding for leaders who are a part of the community affected by the issue that the funds aim to address. But how can funders actually walk the talk and fund these leaders?

Where we are

Despite the talk of localization, there is little evidence to suggest that funders are backing this shift. In my observation of the field, I find that support is mostly given to a minority of proximate leaders who are already well known on the international stage. Meanwhile, the large majority of those who are working on the front line are not receiving support from the global funding community.

This disconnect between talk and action does not necessarily mean that funders do not want to make the shift. The U.S. Agency for International Development publicly set a target to allocate 25% of its funding to local organizations and 50% to include local voices — although it is currently still making sense of these numbers.

USAID Administrator Samantha Power’s bold and ambitious commitment versus the agency’s reported 6% investment in local organizations in 2021 demonstrates how immense this shift is for international funders. The difficulty of this task is partially tied to the challenge of identifying local partners, as well as the bureaucratic systems underpinning funders’ giving.

Social entrepreneur Ndidi Okonkwo Nwuneli highlights how this challenge affects African innovators, who are often overlooked in favor of initiatives led by their European and U.S. counterparts. Research by the African Philanthropy Forum and the Bridgespan Group found that in 2017, just 0.4% of total international humanitarian assistance received across Africa was allocated to locally led organizations. That is to say, 99.6% of international funding was allocated to international organizations that likely lack an Africa-based decision-making “locus of power.”

The sum of these failures is the exclusion of communities from their own development; a reality we have been forced to witness through colonialism.

Groups in the sector have noticed this structural failure repeatedly. Proximate-led campaigns like Africa Forward aim to target both the challenges of being a social innovator on the continent and how the ability of innovators to scale, access funding, and control their own narrative is hindered by the current funding mechanisms in place. In my experience, this issue is not unique to the African region but is happening globally.

Challenges for philanthropy

Ultimately, the systems and structures which are established to increase philanthropic funding of proximate leaders are not fulfilling their purpose. As a social entrepreneur with more than thirty years of experience in the sector, I have seen firsthand the impact that current funding practices have on our collective development.

To give one example, having worked with both international NGOs and proximate leaders to implement projects, funding that is directed through INGOs can cost over twice as much as the same project led by local groups. Beyond a loss of critical resources, the greatest cost here is the loss of knowledge and community engagement due to the exclusion of local groups.

There are two key considerations that are keeping the philanthropic sector from shifting its practices to better support those working on the front lines:

1. Funders face issues of due diligence when identifying local partners. Despite their commitment to funding “local,” they struggle to know which organizations are working on the issues they seek to address; which of those can be trusted; and then which of that group have the financial and legal structures in place to absorb and deploy funding.

2. The funding system we operate in is one with an entrenched history of implicit structures of power and neocolonial approaches to development. Funders’ prioritization of international organizations demonstrates their resistance to transferring power to proximate leaders.

To truly walk the talk is to decolonize philanthropy. Funders must reflect on and address the impact their funding approaches have on the communities they aim to support. This requires asking important questions like:

• Are we adequately addressing power dynamics and shifting our philanthropic practices accordingly?

• Are we listening to proximate leaders and responding to their needs, or are we making assumptions based on our beliefs?

• Are we considering the biases that influence who we fund and why?

• Are we genuinely taking action to fund ‘locally’ and supporting this shift in the wider philanthropic sector?

• Are the necessary structures in place to fund proximate leaders, or do we need to create them?

So, now what?

I am committed to collaborating to make the shift happen. Working with like-minded proximate leaders and their allies, we believe that organizing collectively and overcoming competition are crucial in order to realize our shared vision.  

For example, social practitioners at Catalyst 2030 are coming together and tackling the issues in the sector by providing the infrastructure for local ecosystems of leaders to emerge and supporting funders to acknowledge the system they operate in and shift their behaviors accordingly.

By working together across sectors, change-makers and philanthropists have the power to shift funding practices and co-create a world grounded in equity, peace, and partnership.