Van Gendt: ‘Charles, you are part of the generation of philanthropy professionals coming after me: we met twenty years ago when you were a young director of Pears Foundation and I led the Van Leer Foundation. You were then the Executive Editor of Alliance Magazine before joining us at World of Philanthropy. As such, you were in a strategic position observing philanthropy, foundations, impact investing, and social enterprises. In that time, the world has become even more complex, polarized and challenging in many different ways.’

What were the main developments of the last 10 years that you have observed? Both with respect to the mission of philanthropy and with respect to philanthropic practices and the craft of grantmaking?

Keidan: ‘While we must be cautious about over-generalisations, I see dramatic changes on three levels: in the world, in the philanthropy eco-system and in philanthropy practices.’

‘The economic model which sustains capitalism is under societal pressure. A growing concentration of wealth in the hands of a privileged few is accompanied by growing political instability, and the spectre of populist authoritarianism as a solution to these changes. There are risks both to our democracy and the ideals of a free society.’

‘At the same time, the growing economic power of the Gulf and Asia is striking and we should be mindful of the different set of political and cultural norms and values that dominate across these regions. I fear we might look back at the end of our lifetimes and ask what happened to the dawn of freedom in 1989 and the end of history. It looks like history has already started again and could take us to darker places – at least for those committed to liberal open societies.’

‘These trends won’t affect everyone in the same way and some see great opportunities for discovery and innovation. Billionaires have already built island refuges, private bunkers and some are busy discovering – some might say exploiting – the solar system and the opportunities of the space economy embedded within it. It’s unclear whether the rest of us will have as much agency over the fate of our families and communities.’

And how has the philanthropy eco-system changed in response to these developments?

‘There is more interest, and scrutiny of foundations, though public understanding of philanthropy is not high. But more questions are being asked within general and specialist press about how and for what purposes endowments are invested in global capital markets and where grantmaking is directed. We could call this the birth of a new curiosity about how well philanthropy is fulfilling its mission to convert private resources for public good. Fundamentally, it’s a question of whether the operating model for our field - and the logical assumptions which underpin it – are up to scratch. The question is being asked, in part, off the back of critical scholarship emanating from the US, which has the most developed philanthropy eco-system and media environment.’

‘For those of us who passionately believe in philanthropy’s net contribution to society and its positive value – and I count both you and I in this category, Rien – we will need to continue to push our field to demonstrate its value. That means the wealthy giving back much more to society than figures suggest they’ve done to date – not just crumbs off the table – and through ensuring the direction of that giving is more transparent and responds to society’s most pressing challenges. Those challenges, to my mind, are about preserving free and open societies though others may make the case for prioritizing different causes.’

Talking of causes, how has the focus shifted in your view?

‘The last decade has seen some real changes. Foremost among them is the rise of climate philanthropy – a niche concern when I was a foundation director – but one which emerged rapidly from 2016 during my early days at Alliance and continues to this day.’

‘Another is attention to mental health following he Covid pandemic which locked people inside their homes and perhaps made talking about mental health and wellbeing not just more normal but a social and public health imperative.’

‘Most recently, there are signs of European funders – mostly in Germany, Switzerland and The Netherlands - stepping up in their funding of a free and independent press – a pre-condition of a democratic society. Climate, mental health, media and democracy – these themes were barely on the agenda a decade ago but are more central now.’

‘Sadly, one area which has not taken off as I hoped is philanthropy’s contribution to peacebuilding. There are no shortage of conflicts where philanthropy could have played a role through funding community based dialogue and bridging. After the successful intervention of philanthropy in supporting peace processes in Northern Ireland, there were high hopes that funding would flow more freely into this area. If anything, funding has slipped backwards. Just look at how the Ford Foundation and the Skoll Foundation pulled out of peacebuilding work in Israel and Palestine. That conflict in particular is devastating not just the region but also de-stabilising countries across Europe. It looks like philanthropy will feel safer picking up the pieces than addressing the causes, though I acknowledge that the causes are hotly disputed.’

Finally, what about changes to the craft of grantmaking and philanthropic practices over these years?

‘There is no doubt that we have seen an explosion of philanthropy practices - and sector interest in philanthropy practices – over the past decade.’

‘There is greater recognition of the value of unrestricted funding including larger amounts given over a longer period of time and with fewer restrictions and reporting requirements. That’s visible in the practice of engaged grantmakers like the Oak Foundation as well as hands off philanthropists like MacKenzie Scott.’

‘These issues sometimes appear niche to those outside our field but funding practice is essentially a question of how donors fund, and how that funding impacts the balance of power between funder and recipient. The issues are important and the subject of impassioned debate. A series on trust-based philanthropy which we published in Alliance a few years ago generated much reaction and quite a few critics.’

‘All that said, I’m old enough to remember debates about ‘responsive philanthropy’ versus ‘strategic philanthropy’. Some of the conversation feels like pouring old wine into new bottles. New philanthropy practitioners are discovering things we already knew existed but rightly expressing novel frustration about how dysfunctional our funding system can be. For example, we’ve been talking about the value of standardizing grantee reporting for a long time but I’m not sure we’re much closer to that today than twenty years ago.’

‘Some fashionable terms circulating in philanthropy can feel invented by certain think tanks and consultants to project the appearance of thought leadership and win business. I’m not sure they always help practitioners improve their practice. But I won’t be mentioning any names though I’m sure readers can come up with a few.’

‘Overall, there’s a much larger conceptual pool of funding practice to dive into than a decade ago. The professionalization of our field is a good thing.’

I’ve seen first-hand the development of philanthropy in China and India. How has philanthropy become more global over time?

‘I think we will look back at the period between 2015-25 as the moment when the philanthropy industry became self-conscious and a global phenomenon. During this time, you and I have seen philanthropy sectors mature across Europe but positively explode into life in Asia, Africa and the Gulf and to some extent in Latin America. It is a global institution today. My first column for Word of Philanthropy is all about what the globalization of philanthropy means for the future of philanthropy in Europe.’

I believe that more than 80% of the foundations in the Netherlands are small in size (no or hardly any professional and paid staff; simple governance structures). How can these foundations transform themselves to changes in their environment and stay relevant?

‘That’s a picture mirrored across our neighbours such as Germany who also have thousands of small foundations working in specific geographic localities. My initial response is not to berate these foundations or ask them to emulate the practices of more staffed foundations. For sure, there’s opportunity for professionalization, for example by joining networks such as FIN, the Dutch Association of Foundations, and ensuring FIN meets their needs and support their development as smaller funders.’

‘But at the same time, there’s something powerful and intrinsically democratic about foundations operating at small scale and responding to the needs of local communities. There’s a rootedness in that - a potential source of strength and legitimacy – and something to celebrate. The threshold for scrutiny of these foundations is different to that of major foundations which impacts the public sphere more substantially.’