Events

Event summary:

At a gathering co-hosted by GMTL’s Intelligence for Development service in partnership with the Nuffield Humanitarian Forum in April 2026, a small group of sector leaders discussed the role of philanthropy in an era of significantly reduced ODA (Official Development Assistance). The discussion suggested that this role should not be understood simply in terms of philanthropy filling the gap left by shrinking public aid. Rather, what is emerging is a more complex development ecosystem in which governments, philanthropies, private capital, and international non-governmental organisations (INGOs) will have to assume more differentiated yet interconnected roles.

A recurring theme was that philanthropy’s contribution may lie not only in funding high-profile initiatives, but also in supporting the less visible systems, institutions, and coordination mechanisms that make development cooperation function in the first place. It was also emphasised that, although philanthropy may have become more risk-averse, it remains particularly well placed to take risks and invest in innovation.

One line of argument held that development finance may increasingly be framed in terms of equitable partnerships, shared interests, interdependent risks, and security concerns – a form of “mutual development” – particularly in relation to long-term challenges such as sustainability, prevention, and insurance. Overall, some participants pointed towards a future in which development cooperation is likely to become more investment-based. In particular, one participant working with African civil society called on the room to stop talking about African countries as uninvestable while extraction from the same countries proceeds unimpeded. At the same time, there was also some resistance to treating an investment-based future for global aid as inherently desirable. As one former senior UN leader noted, the risks the world now faces – climate change, conflict, and pandemics – are too great for purely national responses and cannot be addressed on the basis of investing only where financial returns are possible. Several participants likewise agreed that shifts in global aid must not come at the expense of the core humanitarian principle of helping people in need.

Taken together, the discussion conveyed a sense that newer funding models should not be presented as an alternative to humanitarian commitments and public responsibility. Rather, they would have to coexist with them and remain in productive tension with them.

Organisations represented included the Gates Foundation, the Osprey Foundation, Faleye & Co, Virgin Unite, Oxfam, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, New Global Markets Consulting, Project ECHO, International Finance Corporation, The ONE Campaign, the Milken Institute, AMP Health, Financing Alliance for Health, and Impact Capital Markets.