Trading Our Birthright: Rethinking African philanthropy

What if the aid meant to empower communities quietly kept them dependent?

In rural villages across Africa, donor-funded schools, clinics, and clean water projects arrived with resources but without control.

Communities watched as outsiders defined progress, while their own potential remained untapped.

This paradox of well-intentioned philanthropy sustaining dependency was central to Brian Kagoro, the Managing Director of Programs at the Open Society Foundations, Africa, keynote at the 6th Africa Philanthropy Conference in Kigali, Rwanda.

The conference brought together philanthropists, policymakers, and civil society leaders to explore African-led solutions to social, economic, and environmental challenges.

Kagoro, however, went beyond the typical conversation, framing philanthropy not as charity but as a vehicle for liberation and structural transformation.

“When you started doing this, you were doing philanthropy, and the last couple of months and weeks have assured you that you are now in the business of liberation. So you are liberation fighters or freedom fighters,” he told the audience.

Beyond Charity: Confronting Historical Limits

Kagoro traced philanthropy’s historical trajectory to Victorian-era ideals, where giving was framed as either a moral duty or social engineering.

Wealthy individuals or nations were expected to “share” with those less privileged or “teach a man to fish.”

In many contemporary African contexts, these strategies had become ineffective because the “rivers had dried up,” both literally and metaphorically.

“It won’t matter whether you are teaching me how to fish or giving me a fish.

There is nowhere to do either,” Kagoro said, highlighting how climate change, environmental degradation, and systemic inequities had rendered old models inadequate.

Traditional interventions, such as scholarships, youth programs, or small infrastructure projects, offered temporary relief but rarely transformed communities into wealth creators.

Without structural change, philanthropy risked perpetuating dependence, ensuring that generations continued to rely on external aid rather than their own capacities.

Kagoro stressed that the task at hand was reimagining philanthropy itself, moving away from charity toward empowerment and systemic transformation.

The Case for Reparative Philanthropy

Kagoro highlighted examples from Rwanda, such as the Girinka (One Cow per Poor Family) Program, which prioritized community ownership, shared wealth, and dignity.

“The owners of critical minerals, the communities within which these critical minerals sit, watch critical minerals being developed and they themselves are bypassed.

Their philanthropies are only happy for them to get free, prior, and informed consent to stay in servitude, never to become core key owners,” he explained.

For Kagoro, reparative philanthropy ensured that African communities directly benefited from their resources, human capital, and intellectual potential.

It turned assets into generative wealth for local populations rather than merely redistributing aid.

“Your foray into the rural area has not been to build Africa’s potential to become the next growth pole. But you have been fixated… with fixing poverty and misery,” he noted.

Addressing Structural Inequities

Also central to Kagoro’s argument was the coloniality of power, a mental framework persisting long after formal colonialism.

“The coloniality of global power is a mentality that you accept your assigned place as a dependent in the global division of labor, Incapable of creating knowledge that is alternative, independent, and emancipatory,” he said.

This mentality was evident in the philanthropic sector, where external actors often dictated priorities, leaving African communities as passive recipients.

Africa’s youthful, technologically savvy population faced barriers preventing full participation in wealth creation.

Over 52% of Africa’s rural population lacked access to technology, and women and girls were disproportionately excluded.

Without deliberate structural interventions, these communities remained underserved, underinvested in, and underrepresented in development decisions.

From Radical Imagination to Radical Action

Kagoro urged philanthropy to embrace radical imagination coupled with radical execution.

“Outrage is not enough to keep freedom. Imagination, radical imagination, is what’s needed. Performance is not enough. Radical execution and implementation but you can’t implement if you don’t have skills,” he emphasized, highlighting the need for reskilling and upskilling in areas like artificial intelligence, regenerative technologies, and systems thinking.

to stop making superficial “poverty tours” of villages, visiting only to observe hardship, take photos, and leave—without creating real, lasting change.

“We’re intervening… Do something more radical,” he urged.

Philanthropy had to move beyond optics and build structures that allowed communities to thrive autonomously.

Integrating Gender, Justice, and Equity

Kagoro stressed gender-responsive philanthropy and intersectional approaches.

Women’s labor, particularly in care work and social provisioning, often went unrecognized in national accounts despite being critical to nutrition, education, and economic stability.

Philanthropy had to invest in women as creators of wealth and agents of social change, not merely as beneficiaries of aid.

“If we are to redefine prosperity for those who are feminists, prosperity for those who are pro-justice, pan-Africanist, what does that prosperity look like? How do we ensure our people are not just participants, they are owners, and they hold equity and equity for themselves and future generations?” he asked.

Rethinking the Metrics of Development

Kagoro urged philanthropists to go beyond standard metrics and “quick fixes” to reimagine African development.

He highlighted the risks of relying solely on foreign aid or corporate social responsibility, which often left local populations underpowered:

“When you get external resources, and you have no transformative strategy of turning your people from purpose to wealth holders, wealth owners, wealth creators, then what you are simply doing is worse than the traditional chiefs were forced to do,” he said.

Without deliberate reparative approaches linking resource ownership, local innovation, and structural investment, Africa risked perpetuating the very inequalities philanthropy claimed to address.

A Call to Transformative Philanthropy

Kagoro framed the future of African philanthropy as a call to action.

It was no longer enough to give; philanthropists needed to create systems, build skills, and invest in structural transformation.

While the Africa Philanthropy Conference provided a platform to explore these ideas, Kagoro’s insights transcended the event.

His message was clear: African communities had to own their development, control their wealth, and reclaim their birthright.

“You represent the struggle of people who refuse to die. Celebrate yourselves, but respect is not enough to keep freedom,” he said.

Philanthropy had to move beyond admiration and outrage; it needed to embrace radical imagination, strategic execution, and reparative action.

Only then could Africa’s potential be fully realized not as a recipient of external generosity, but as a driver of its own liberation and prosperity.

Help us tell more untold stories of African Philanthropy!