The legacies of Rockefeller and Carnegie–and particularly their ethos of questioning and continual learning–were alive on the final day of the Global Philanthropy Forum’s annual conference. Attendees reflected the fruits of this legacy, with sessions that conveyed lessons learned on the importance of transparency in philanthropy – in our strategy, in our budgets, in our successes, and most importantly, in our failures.

UNICEF’s Anthony Lake shared a lesson that he learned about taking an equity-based approach to development: it is not just a moral imperative, but also the most cost-effective strategy. Caroline Anstey of the World Bank shared her insights on how the definition of development has changed in the past decade – much of what was previously in the purview of “politics” alone, such as gender and corruption, is now solidly understood as crucial to economic development. Her co-panelist, Luis Ubiñas of the Ford Foundation, emphasized that learning in philanthropy must be shared continuously, not just at the evaluation stage.

And new sources of learning and inspiration came to play in Barbara P. Bush’s story of young global health fellows in Boston working to implement a community health worker plan that was first perfected in Rwanda and Peru. This kind of borderless conversation and knowledge sharing, across geographic, language and generational barriers, is what the Global Philanthropy Forum is all about.

Jane Wales closed the conference with a reminder of what convened us: “The social contract is dynamic – it’s changing, and you are part of that change.” We thank everyone who participated in this year’s GPF, and also the philanthropic community more broadly, for the work you are doing in moving us toward increasingly strategic and effective giving. See you next year for GPF 2013 in Silicon Valley!

Watch highlights from day three of the Global Philanthropy forum below, and watch the full-length sessions on our website http://www.philanthropyforum.org/video.

Read tweets from GPF day 3 on our Storify page here.

Advertisements

“This work is not for sissies,” admitted Acumen Fund founder Jacqueline Novogratz in reference to the work that Global Philanthropy Forum members do in philanthropy and impact investing. And she’s right: the problems we face in health, environment, education and poverty are ubiquitous and persistent. These problems are incredibly complex, and they require profound patience coupled with ingenuity in the way that we marshal our resources to solve them. Tuesday’s GPF speakers emphasized again and again that it will take all of us – governments, businesses, philanthropists and individuals  – pooling our resources in new ways, with new metrics, to solve these problems.

We opened the day learning about the ways in which this is happening in Latin America, Africa and Asia – philanthropy there is not just about writing checks. Nigerian social investor Tony Elumelu called for catalytic philanthropy with a long-term view that marshals private sector time and capital to create real growth in Africa. Brazilian philanthropist Carol Civita of the Victor Civita Foundation stressed that no matter where we work, it is imperative that we find strong local partners and bring their knowledge and input to every step of the design and implementation phases.

Impact investing, one form of catalytic philanthropy, was introduced by American impact investor Ron Cordes in a later session. He posed the question that while foundations have traditionally spent 5-7 percent of their assets in grants each year, what about the other 93 percent? How can philanthropists use all of their assets, not just their grant budgets, to produce economic, social and environmental benefits?

Jacqueline Novogratz picked up on this question as she launched the new joint report from the Acumen Fund and The Monitor Group, From Blueprint to Scale: The Case for Philanthropy in Impact Investing. She called on us to pool our shared knowledge to tackle these problems – for every single source of capital is needed to address these problems, as are new metrics that focus on the lives, policies, and systems changed.

An evening plenary on Egypt underscored that we must not forget young people in this work – they too are needed if we are to build better, more accountable systems. Egyptian emeritus professor Saad Eddin Ibrahim remarked that he will feel safe in a new Egypt if young people are in charge – they will make mistakes surely, but as he said, “to make mistakes is a human right.” Egyptian heart surgeon turned satirist Bassem Youssef closed the evening with a powerful message: “We can see the difference we made starting with one camera in one room. We cannot let anyone take our voice again. This is the real revolution – that we have found our voice.”

We invite you to watch highlights from today’s sessions below, or, even better, to watch the full videos online in our GPF video archive at philanthropyforum.org/video.

Check out Tweets from GPF on our Storify page here.

“What brings us together this year is the sense that the social contract is fraying, but that it is also evolving.” So began this year’s Global Philanthropy Forum, “Towards a New Social Contract,” kicked off yesterday by GPF’s President and CEO, Jane Wales, in Washington DC.

The conference focus is on the changing nature of the global social contract – how globalization is changing the way our societies choose to divide up responsibility and allocate resources to improve the public good. GPF members are exploring the ways in which traditional roles and responsibilities have shifted over the past few years, and how they continue to shift – particularly the increasing power of the individual in the national and global arena, and how the private sector and government can and should work together to increase their impact.

USAID Administrator Raj Shah opened the conference by speaking about the role for creative public-private partnerships in enhancing development work. He pointed to specific examples where cross-sectoral collaboration made previously impossible outcomes possible, including the reduction of antiretroviral drug costs and the creation of new agricultural input markets.

Speakers from YouTube, Human Rights Watch and AllAfrica spoke about the importance of both new and old media, and how a blend of both is critical to holding our governments and businesses accountable, and also in allowing individuals to create their own truths.

Former Prime Minister Tony Blair encouraged the GPF community of philanthropists and social investors to be bold in their leadership—to be creative not passive, to seek to disrupt, and to step into the areas where government is too fearful or risk averse to go. World Bank President Robert Zoellick picked up on Blair’s theme of innovation in philanthropy during his remarks at the Conrad N. Hilton Humanitarian Prize dinner last night. He closed day one by calling for a new model to connect global players – a “modern multilateralism” – to bring together international institutions, individual countries, civil society and the private sector for social good.

Watch highlights from yesterday’s sessions here, and be sure to check out the livestream of GPF sessions on our website, and all of our GPF video archives at philanthropyforum.org/video.

In our increasingly globalized world, it is easy to expand our focus ever wider to issues and projects in all corners of our globe. Yet, philanthropy, wherever it is implemented, requires an understanding and appreciation for the local context — an awareness obtained through careful study, patience, an open mind and a listening ear. One size does not fit all in philanthropy, and many failures have stemmed from a failure to recognize this truth.

In a session last week at the 2011 GPF Conference, we turned our eyes southward to our nearest neighbors –Mexico, and the countries ofCentral America. Over the past decade, these societies have done many things right – they have built functional democracies, supported the emergence of a strong middle class, and implemented sound economic policies.  But, as Kevin Casas-Zamora of the Brookings Institution pointed out, staggering challenges remain.  “A drug-trafficking tsunami has befallen the region,” he said, resulting in widespread violence, regional instability, and enormous impediments to economic development. In 2010 alone, Mexicoexperienced more than 50,000 drug related murders, seven times the figure in 2006, and has also seen the expansion of other serious crimes including kidnapping, robbery, and extortion. 

Despite all of this, there is hope that we can reach a new moment in the region, and there is a role for philanthropy in getting there. Cristiana Falcone of the Inter-American Development Bank urged philanthropists to promote policies to protect citizen security, and to support the development of creative social justice programs focused on violence prevention for at-risk youth. Kevin also called for philanthropists to fund rigorous research into realistic options for dealing with the illicit narcotics trade – because there are options – and to then weigh these options dispassionately.  Our current approach, “the war on drugs”, has many flaws, but lacks clear alternatives.  Kevin also pointed to the need for more sophisticated use of information and communication technology in law enforcement.  The introduction of up-to-date interactive databases, GPS devices, and more would dramatically improve the ability of the security forces to maintain order and prosecute criminals.  Philanthropists should actively facilitate the adoption of this technology and technology training of police forces in Central America.

In a later session, we heard about the challenges of working post-conflict countries. Carne Ross, Founder and Director of the Independent Diplomat, spoke of the extraordinary rapidity of change in the level of influence of various players on the global stage.  It is no longer a chessboard where states move in predictable ways within clearly defined rules – it is now more of a Jackson Pollack painting, where billions of actors are interacting constantly and anyone can have an influence.  John Prendergast, Co-Founder of The Enough Project, shared examples of the ways in which philanthropists and activists have worked together to successfully implement agile advocacy campaigns that have helped to prevent or mitigate humanitarian atrocities.  In the case of South Sudan, the absence of  violence following the referendum points to the success of good old-fashioned diplomacy backed by new and dynamic advocacy.  As John said, “The fact that there was no smoking gun – THAT is the success.” 

Speaking specifically to philanthropists, Scott Gilmore, Executive Director of the Peace Dividend Trust, argued that, “whatever you’re doing now, you can do it in a conflict zone and have a bigger impact.” He pointed out the double dividends of working in conflict or post-conflict zones – that a job in a conflict zone pays twice: it not only feeds a family, but it also builds long-term stability. There is no doubt that we are at a turning point when it comes to philanthropy in areas of crisis. To be successful in these challenging parts of the world, we must be willing to take great risks. But with these risks, come great rewards.

The impact? Lives can be saved, societies can cohere and democratic states can govern.

This morning a standing-room-only crowd gathered at GPF to hear a philanthropic call to action to end modern-day slavery in our time and for greater collaboration across the social sector to make this a reality. The issues of slavery and human trafficking have approached a tipping point. They are among the fastest-growing and most pressing human rights challenges of our time. Fortunately, public interest and political will in these issues are on the rise.

More than 27 million people are enslaved across the globe in forced labor and the sex trade. Slavery is growing exponentially because it is lucrative, second in profitability only to drug trafficking among illicit enterprises. Rani Hong, co-founder of the Tronie Foundation and a survivor of child trafficking, shared her moving yet hopeful story. Sold into slavery at the age of seven, she was near death a year later—physically and emotionally destroyed. No longer able to contribute to the profitability of her owner’s business, she was sold to an international adoption agency. Today Rani is a tireless advocate on the issue of slavery, causing a global shift in consciousness by exposing the human cost of slavery and advancing a collective voice among survivors.

Kay Buck, Executive Director of the Coalition Against Slavery & Trafficking (CAST), described their important work on the issue of human trafficking. Victims have a long journey to recovery.  CAST’s comprehensive approach first provides the immediate case management and supportive services they need, including legal services and housing.  Survivors then participate in a one-of-a-kind leadership development program, forming a survivor’s caucus that supports advocacy efforts. The impact of their voices on policies and public awareness has led to the development of stronger protections for victims in bothCaliforniaand Federal anti-trafficking laws.

Efforts to raise awareness are bolstered by a range of communications efforts and the contributions of celebrity voices to the cause. Justin Dillon, director of The Fair Trade Fund, Inc., created a “rockumentary” titled CALL+RESPONSE that combines critically acclaimed artists such as Moby and Natasha Bedingfield with social luminaries such as Cornell West, Madeleine Albright and Nicholas Kristoff. In addition, the Fair Trade Fund, Inc. is currently working with the State Department’s Office to Monitor and Combat Human Trafficking to create the first ever ‘Slavery Footprint’ online tool and mobile application. The tool challenges us to recognize our participation in the modern-day slavery as qualified by their consumption of items created by forced labor.

The consensus in the crowded room this morning is that this is a moment of opportunity to address the dark underside of globalization. Media attention is on the rise, political will is growing, and public awareness is increasing. Many capable organizations are ready to convert our indignation and outrage into compassionate action if they have the resources to do so. The conditions are ripe for building a social movement to end modern-day slavery and we must heed the call to action.

Jane

Jane Wales, President and Co-founder, Global Philanthropy Forum

We kicked off the second afternoon of the GPF 2011 Conference with remarks from a giant in public health: Dr. Paul Farmer, Co-founder, Partners in Health. Paul is leading the revolution in the way we think about health, not the least of which includes pushing us to think about healthcare as a human right.  Today, Paul chastised all of us – himself, the health sector, philanthropists – for our radical failure of imagination in envisioning how to provide high-quality healthcare to the poor. We must stop “low-balling” our standards for healthcare just because it’s for poor people, he argued.

With the tools we have at our disposal right now, high-quality healthcare for the poor is a realistic goal. And one that has a high return on investment.  Our inability to recognize this up until now points to one of Paul’s “five sins” in the public health debate: the untallied cost of inaction. Often we are plagued by health “sticker shock” – aversion to the costs required for implementation of health options for the poor. Yet we do not weigh these costs against the tremendous costs of inaction – the social costs of orphaning or lost income and of out-of-pocket health expenditures, among others.  These costs are significant and dramatically overshadow the costs of action.

Three speakers followed Paul, each speaking about progress in disease eradication, in the cases of polio, guinea worm, or meningitis. A common theme was the need for long-term commitment, and a willingness to look beyond returns on investment over one quarter, or one to two years.  Returns in health take time, but are worth the wait.  And in these three cases, eradication can be achieved with only an incremental expenditure.  

And so, we must usher in “long-term-ism” to replace our “short-term-ism.” Solving the problems of health and poverty, whether in Haiti or Boston, will require sustained and patient investment. A much-needed revolution in public health is happening right now – and, with Paul Farmer at the wheel, I think we are in good hands.

Jane

Jane Wales, President & Co-founder, Global Philanthropy Forum

Perhaps one of the most striking turning points under consideration at the GPF 2011 Conference is the dramatic broadening of the definition of philanthropy – it has shifted to include not just grant-making, but all private means of financing social goals. Philanthropists are increasingly investing in businesses that provide a social and financial return, and even working to ensure that social benefits are intrinsic to their own companies’ value chains.

Several diverse and engaging sessions over the past two days have explored this extended view of philanthropy, both in how the shift started and where it can take us.  In yesterday morning’s plenary, Antony Bugg-Levine, Managing Director at The Rockefeller Foundation, framed the inflection point at which we stand.  For decades, we’ve organized our view of philanthropy around two basic principles: one, that the only way to solve social problems is through charity or through government; and two, that the only way to create profit is through business.  But recently, these twin assumptions have begun to break down.  New philanthropists, many of them GPF members, are developing fresh approaches in response to changing philanthropic aspirations.

With these new methods, we have an opportunity to be intentional about creating an environment from which a true impact economy can emerge and thrive. It will require colleagues from whom to learn and with whom to collaborate, including members of the informal brain-trust that is the GPF. It will also require putting government policies and practices in place that welcome and encourage these innovations in philanthropy.  Sonal Shah, Director of the Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation at the White House, identified this as one of two roles for government in encouraging an impact economy: getting the policy environment right, and convening key players to promote cooperation and coordination across the worlds of business and philanthropy.

But beyond policies, we must also build a robust infrastructure for social investing including informed wealth advisors. In a breakout session yesterday evening, panelists considered microfinance, one of the earliest tools of the impact economy. Reeta Roy, President and CEO of The MasterCard Foundation, emphasized that philanthropy has a hugely valuable and honorable role to play in helping to build an ecosystem to support microfinance. Through the creation and support of technical assistance funds, partnerships with existing institutions, and capacity building, philanthropy can dramatically improve the environment in which impact economy projects take place.

Another key step in moving toward an impact economy relates back to yesterday’s conversation with Jeff Raikes of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation: we must establish clear standards for success, so that we know it when we see it.  In an afternoon session, James Mwangi of Kenya’s Equity Bank, stood up to emphasize that evaluation depends on the lens through which we think about and assess our investments. He pointed out that microfinance is a response to a market failure to be inclusive – it is not a remedy for poverty.  “Microfinance will always fail if we measure it and evaluate it through a poverty perspective, not a financial one.”

In a session this morning on distributed innovation, panelists presented several remarkable and tangible examples of how to make smart capital investments for impact. Neil Gershenfeld, Director of the Center for Bits and Atoms at MIT, and his colleague Amy Sun, Founder and Director of Fab Lab in Afghanistan, spoke of a bold idea for providing inspiration, education, and livelihood to people around the world: physically putting the tools of innovation into the hands of those who can and will use them. “Innovators are strange people,” Gershenfeld said, “and we need more projects that find the strange people and give them the tools they need.” This is exactly what their project, Fab Labs, does.  Amy spoke of the lessons we as philanthropists can learn from pyramid schemes, applied to education – teaching a few, who will then teach others. Amy also made a pitch for the merits of an exit strategy.  Fab Labs sets up labs around the world, and then “abandons” them, so that they may learn and grow on their own.  Amy’s lab in Afghanistan has been completely self-sustained and funded for the past four years.

In the private sector, far-sighted CEOs are leading efforts to ensure that social good is intrinsic to the value chain of the companies that they lead.  Chuck Slaughter spoke about the Living Goods model, which supports and trains an Avon-like network of door-to-door saleswomen who sell a variety of needed health goods at affordable prices, earning a livelihood for themselves, and improving health in their community.  Aun Rahman, the Country Director of Acumen in Pakistan, described an ambulance chain in India that, thanks to changes in government policies, was able to attract a great deal of private capital and expand dramatically, to the benefit of the poor in the region.

Overall, the double bottom-line is this: to have a true impact economy, we need the policies that enable it, the shared standards that will govern and shape it, a cadre of professionals to nurture and manage it, and the social investors that will fuel it.  Each of us can help all four of these factors come into play.

Jane

Jane Wales, President & Co-Founder, The Global Philanthropy Forum

On GPF 2011’s opening day, Jeff Raikes of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation reminded us that successful philanthropy takes not only a strategic focus and leveraging of core competencies, but also great partnerships. This is one of the new fundamentals we are exploring at GPF 2011: aligning philanthropic investments to achieve greater impact. The scale and complexity of the challenges we seek to address exceed the capacity of any one foundation, or sector, alone.

As a result, donors are working together to align their investments in new ways. On Thursday, Brizio Biondi-Morra, President of Fundación AVINA, and Sally Osberg, President and CEO of the Skoll Foundation, shared reflections on the robust partnership formed between their two organizations to address climate change. Together, they focus on deforestation of the Amazon. With this issue, as with so many, collaboration is necessary given the scale and complexity of the problem. Commonality of vision and values, complementarity in skills and expertise, and strong trust between partners can enable them to achieve dramatic results.

With so many institutions and actors comfortable with—and in many cases supportive of—the status quo in the Amazon, Brizio explained that the project felt insolvable. But to do nothing was unthinkable, as huge swaths of the Amazon rainforest are destroyed each day. The collaboration was an intelligent gamble and took advantage of the key strengths of both organizations, such as the Skoll Foundation’s ability to raise the visibility of the issue and Fundación AVINA’s deep local knowledge and networks inLatin America. The partnership between the two organizations took time to build—and even included a shared journey into the Amazon—but the benefits have been worth the time spent. Together they have shifted the conversation inBrazilabout the Amazon and ensured that the negative effects of deforestation are reflected in public discourse and in policy.

“Networked” giving approaches are another way that donors can amplify the impact of their investments. Philanthropists are joining forces with fellow donors and partnering across sectors to achieve greater impact. Work to empower women and girls across the developing world exemplifies this approach. An impressive and growing body of evidence on the subject indicates that such investments have a significant multiplier effect.  Here, there is a real opportunity for philanthropists to achieve impact. The Nike Foundation, for example, is engaged with the NoVo Foundation and the British aid agency, DFID, partnering across sectors and core competencies to empower women and girls.

Last, we were reminded by Ruth Levine, Deputy Assistant Administrator in the Bureau for Policy, Planning and Learning at USAID that philanthropists can and should leverage each others’ resources through alignment on data and evaluation. When donors support the standardization of data, it permits analyses and comparisons across programs, people and geographies, which can foster learning and continuous improvement across the field. Ruth encouraged us to consider supporting adherence to existing data standards instead of developing them anew. This contributes to the common good and gives donors a “free ride” on the investments that supported the development of those standards.

As philanthropists, we must invest in becoming smart users of data that demonstrates program impact. Standardized, rigorous evaluation methods will enable comparisons of results across studies and promote greater confidence in the level of impact.

Over the last decade at GPF, we have built a community of donors that shares a vision and values and is committed to international causes. As we mark our 10th anniversary, I am struck by the degree to which aligning for greater impact has become fundamental to the way GPF members pursue their mission.

Jane

Jane Wales

President & Co-founder, Global Philanthropy Forum

This afternoon at the GPF Conference, we welcomed Ben Affleck for a conversation with Laurene Powell Jobs. The actor, writer, director, activist, and philanthropist, premiered a short film he created to show both the tremendous tragedy and the incredible hope and resilience he’s seen in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). The film opened with a Congolese proverb — “No matter how long the night, the day is sure to come” – that perfectly captured the essence of the film.

At Laurene’s prompting, Ben shared the history of his involvement in the region.  After being asked to lend his support for advocacy efforts regarding the crisis in Darfur, he sought to educate himself about the region. He was shocked by the tremendous level of human suffering in the eastern Congo, about which he had not known enough. He spent the next year making multiple trips to the conflict-torn republic learning all that he could about the issues and the actors involved. He jokingly reported that he set out to get a graduate degree in the region without having completed college.

Undaunted by the larger challenges of working in a failed state that have kept other donors away, Ben decided to make the DRC a focus of his philanthropy. He reached out to smart, seasoned philanthropists, such as Howard Buffet, Pam Omidyar, and Cindy McCain, to devise a strategy that combines advocacy with philanthropic investment. In March 2010, Ben founded the Eastern Congo Initiative (ECI), the first US-based advocacy and grant-making initiative wholly focused on working with and for the people of the eastern Congo. ECI grants directly support innovative Congolese-led community-based organizations that are working to create a vibrant, sustainable civil society in the long-troubled region.

A thoughtful, informed and committed philanthropist, Ben made a persuasive case. When asked how the lessons he has learned might inform the work of the many donors in the room, he spoke of the lack of shared learnings in philanthropy as one of its greatest failings. “It’s almost inexcusable,” he said. We must do better at transferring knowledge so that each does not have to reinvent the wheel. Convenings like the GPF and constant building of our learning networks are crucial for advancing philanthropic practice.

To conclude, Ben introduced the musical group Maisha Soul, four brothers from the DRC ranging in age 13 to 22. Prince, Eric, Achilles and Innocent chose music – a combination of R&B, blues, hip hop and traditional song – as their means of overcoming the pain in their lives. Their moving performance embodied the hope and promise of the youth of the DRC, and the future they will usher in for their country.

Jane

Jane Wales
President & Co-Founder, Global Philanthropy Forum

One of the turning points we are exploring at GPF 2011 is connective technology. On a scale previously unimagined, the expansion of connective technology has enhanced communication within and among societies and empowered individuals previously isolated by geography, poverty or politics. This has enabled many to engage in commerce and to access information and services, improving their lives and livelihoods. But technology also can be a force for ill depending on the choices that we take. We explored this duality over several conference sessions.

There are five billion mobile phones globally and approximately one billion are smart phones. Mobile telephony has become the primary means of communications in the developing world, providing an infrastructure to reach those who were previously invisible. With this connectivity we have a vast untapped platform for creating employment opportunities, advancing economic activity, and building wealth.

The adoption of mobile telephones is altering markets in unforeseen ways. Reuben Abraham, Executive Director of the Center for Emerging Market Solutions at the Indian School of Business shared with us how Indian fisherman are using cell phones to monitor prices across markets, make production decisions based on real time information, and manage their fishing practices to reduce time spent idle. As a result, high price dispersions have been reduced.

But Abraham cautioned that the majority of the benefits in this example are accruing not to the fishermen but to other supply chain actors—the boat owners and the commission agents. The technology also has enabled those at the top of the supply chain to coordinate attacks on the fishermen.

Leila Chirayath Janah, founder and CEO of Samasource, explained how connective technology is enabling her organization to bring dignified, digital employment to otherwise marginalized people around the world. Samasource disaggregates large contracts for content moderation and data entry into smaller tasks that can be executed by workers anywhere. Janah posits that micro-work is the reinvention of economic development and digital work centers are the factories of the future, enabling us to regard marginalized people as producers for the first time. To date Samasource has received contracts for more than $1.5 million in work from high profile companies, 85 percent of which goes to the workers themselves.

We also have seen the tremendous power of connective technology to provide a platform for the expression of popular discontent and political mobilization, unsettling and even helping to topple governments. Ken Roth, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch, noted that the use of technology in Egypt, Tunisia and elsewhere has enabled the modern human rights movement; access to information has been essential for advancing change. Facebook and Twitter made an enormous difference in these cases, permitting “leaderless” revolutions and creating the opportunity for people to stand up and be counted, but with a sense of safety in numbers.

But in the face of the challenge to authority this technology allows, some governments have sought to limit access to information.  The Libyan government closed access to the Internet, but soon discovered this thwarted communications among its own security forces.  The Syrian government welcomed Facebook to allow for a higher level of monitoring of individual and collective behavior. The Chinese government is cracking down on access to information in ways that have not been seen in over a decade and it is clear they have the resources to overwhelm any uprising.

Is access to information itself a right and what is our responsibility as the connective network grows ever stronger? Social norms have not kept pace with technology. As a result, the rights and expectations of users are unclear.

Tim O’Reilly, founder and CEO of O’Reilly Media, cautioned that we are giving up more and more information about ourselves, whether through our mobile phones tracking our movements, voluntary “check-ins” via applications such as Foursquare, or an ever-expanding presence of surveillance cameras. He warns that technology is becoming ubiquitous and inescapable, and repressive regimes will use this information to their benefit.

Throughout these discussions at GPF 2011 we have seen that connective technology is both a goldmine of opportunity and a potentially powerful tool for harm. This is truly a turning point for philanthropy and the choices individuals make will dictate whether technology is a driving force for good or for ill.

Jane

Jane Wales
President & Co-Founder, Global Philanthropy Forum