No result found
Association for Women's Rights in Development (AWID);
In this article, Association for Women's Rights in Development (AWID) analyzes budgets of feminist organizations and foundation grants data. Included are budget size for feminist and women's rights organizations from the Global South, amount of foundation assets and total grants, money going toward gender equality, and more. Accompanying infographics summarize the data and comparisons from the article.
World Resources Institute (WRI);
Limiting global warming to 1.5°C requires far-reaching transformations across power generation, buildings, industry, transport, land use, coastal zone management, and agriculture, as well as the immediate scale-up of technological carbon removal and climate finance. This report translates these transitions into 40 targets for 2030 and 2050, with measurable indicators.Transformations, particularly those driven by new technology adoption, often unfold slowly before accelerating after crossing a tipping point. Nearly a quarter of indicators assessed new technology adoption, with some already growing exponentially. This report considers such nonlinear change in its methodology.The transitions required to avoid the worst climate impacts are not happening fast enough. Of the 40 indicators assessed, none are on track to reach 2030 targets. Change is heading in the right direction at a promising but insufficient speed for 8 and in the right direction but well below the required pace for 17. Progress has stagnated for 3, while change for another 3 is heading in the wrong direction entirely. Data are insufficient to evaluate the remaining 9.This report also identifies underlying conditions that enable change—supportive policies, innovations, strong institutions, leadership, and shifts in social norms. Finance for climate action, for example, must increase nearly 13-fold to meet the estimated need in 2030.
The Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy;
The Global Philanthropy Tracker (GPT) details the magnitude of cross-border philanthropic contributions globally. By capturing contributions made by individual and institutional donors to support charitable causes across national borders, this report aims to offer a more complete picture of global philanthropic flows. The 2020 GPT provides an updated estimate of the amount of cross-border philanthropy that occurred in 2018 or the most recent year for which data are available. It further compares cross-border philanthropy to three other cross-border resource flows: official development assistance (ODA), remittances, and private capital investment.
Tiny Beam Fund;
*This report highlights characteristics of global industrial aquaculture value chains. For example: Most producers are located in global South countries, but rely on input (e.g. feed, pest control agents) that are often in the hands of wealthy corporations in the EU and U.S. Global supply chains are buyer-driven, with massive grocery and retail food conglomerates based in the global North being the most powerful buyers. *Several key concerns related to feed are emphasized. For example: Social concerns of worker exploitation and forced labor to capture wild fish to feed farmed fish. Marine ecological concerns as wild fish stock suffers as a result of pressures to obtain "trash fish" as aquafeed. Concerns with impacts on terrestrial environment such as cutting down forests to cultivate soybean to feed farmed fish.*The prevalence of pests and diseases and the heavy use of antibiotics in industrial aquaculture operations is another concern. Intensive aquaculture also raises ethical concerns with regard to the welfare of the farmed aquatic animals.*The "displacement paradox" and the "Jevons paradox" in industrial aquaculture is explained.*The report cautions against the use of regulations that emphasize market mechanisms and new technologies as key solutions to industrial aquaculture with global value chains. It recommends instead the promotion of small-scale local supply chains, the production of species that are less reliant on intensive inputs, more in-tune with their ecological surroundings, and lower on the food chain (e.g. mussels, oysters).
Each year, the Center for Disaster Philanthropy (CDP) and Candid analyze global disaster-related funding from foundations, bilateral and multilateral donors, U.S. government agencies, corporations, and donations through donor-advised funds (DAFs) and online platforms. We analyze funding according to a taxonomy that classifies giving by type of disaster and disaster assistance strategy, allowing us to identify funding gaps and areas of opportunity, so that crisis-affected communities have resources for immediate relief and to build back stronger than before. This year's report focuses on funding in FY 2019. Philanthropy plays a crucial role in supporting the long-term recovery of individuals and communities affected by disasters. This year, and moving forward, this annual report offers specific, actionable takeaways for how donors can maximize their disaster-related giving. These insights are based on findings from the data and the latest recommendations from CDP about effective disaster funding.
Value. Voice. Collective Impact. Philanthropy networks, their leaders, members and funders alike, are looking to build a future in which these core elements are reflected in their work. How can networks define and realize new value propositions and amplify voice in a way that is responsive to members yet also shapes the field? What role can tech and data solutions play in enhancing value? What strategies in advocacy and thought leadership can elevate the voice and visibility of the sector? How can philanthropy support networks go beyond focusing solely on organizational impact to creating more collective impact across the sector? This guide combines thoughtful concepts, frameworks and practical approaches that all philanthropy networks can use to prepare their organisations for the next decade.
This report offers a behind the scenes look into the design, build, and test phases of The Mesa and discusses the ways in which the social impact space - especially at the major gift level - can use technology to better collaborate and connect for good. It features interviews with their pilot partners, who provide first-hand accounts on what it takes to run a growing impact-focused community. They dive into how to create effective, meaningful online communities that prompt greater giving from wealth holders. If you're serving clients, members, or donors, this publication can collaborate on discussing what role you can play in revolutionizing philanthropy through technology and community.
This guide illustrates how the climate crisis impacts funding portfolios and highlights where there are co-benefits with taking climate action. It looks at five key areas that we call 'climate intersections.'The findings and suggestions in this report are meant to shine a light on how you as a funder can increase your impact by applying a climate lens to existing work. You know your portfolio best, and are therefore well placed to think through what these intersections mean for your work. The report is also interspersed with case studies on funders and select NGOs who are already applying this lens to their work.
International Forum for Democratic Studies;
Civil society organizations (CSOs) play a central role in addressing disinformation's growing impact on democracy. Given the vast scope of the global disinformation challenge, the landscape for CSOs working in this space has evolved rapidly in recent years. Established efforts to combat disinformation have incorporated the new challenges posed by social media into their agendas, while new initiatives have emerged to fill gaps in research, monitoring, and advocacy. The work of these organizations in the disinformation fight is critical for positively shaping policy making, improving platform responses, and enhancing citizen knowledge and engagement.Yet, CSOs face ongoing challenges in this complex and fast-changing field. How has civil society grown in its understanding and response to the digital disinformation challenge and what should be done to further empower this work?To acquire insights into these questions, this paper draws on two methods—a mapping exercise of civil society initiatives and a survey of leading CSOs working in this field. This approach reveals that CSOs bring a wide range of skill sets to the problem of digital disinformation. Some organizations focus on digital media literacy and education; others engage in advocacy and policy work. Another segment has developed expertise in fact-checking and verification. Other organizations have developed refined technical skills for extracting and analyzing data from social media platforms.This research yielded several clear observations about the state of CSO responses to disinformation and, in turn, suggests several recommendations for paths forward.
Freedom in the World 2021 evaluates the state of freedom in 195 countries and 15 territories during calendar year 2020. Each country and territory is assigned between 0 and 4 points on a series of 25 indicators, for an aggregate score of up to 100. The indicators are grouped into the categories of political rights (0–40) and civil liberties (0–60), whose totals are weighted equally to determine whether the country or territory has an overall status of Free, Partly Free, or Not Free.The methodology, which is derived from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, is applied to all countries and territories, irrespective of geographic location, ethnic or religious composition, or level of economic development. Freedom in the World assesses the real-world rights and freedoms enjoyed by individuals, rather than governments or government performance per se. Political rights and civil liberties can be affected by both state and nonstate actors, including insurgents and other armed groups.
In the wake of recent events – a pandemic, worldwide protests, new elections – 2018 may feel like a world away. As we look at the 2018 data, it's important to understand that many of the human rights issues we currently face grew out of this context. Even responses to COVID-19 cannot be divorced from the foundational issues that shape how governments, social movements, and funders address – or compound – human rights abuses. Writing in a year of so much global unrest, we see this report as a baseline and an offering, a trajectory of the trends that helps identify places where philanthropy can better meet the needs of human rights movements around the world.
International Center for Journalists;
This report presents the initial findings from the first large-scale global survey of journalists since the COVID-19 crisis began. The survey was conducted by the Journalism and the Pandemic Project - a collaborative research initiative from the International Center for Journalists (ICFJ) and the Tow Center for Digital Journalism at Columbia University. We launched the project in April 2020 to study the impacts of the coronavirus crisis on journalism worldwide. We also wanted to assess our field's most critical needs, and to make evidence-based recommendations to inform the post-pandemic recovery, recognizing that professional journalism is an essential pillar of vibrant democracies.The first 30 findings from our English-language survey are both startling and disturbing. Based on an analysis of 1,406 vetted survey completions during the pandemic's first wave, we can conclude that many journalists covering this devastating human story, at great personal risk, were clearly struggling to cope. Seventy percent of our respondents rated the psychological and emotional impacts of dealing with the COVID-19 crisis as the most difficult aspect of their work. A similar number (67%) identified concerns about financial hardship as a significant difficulty, while the intense workload was ranked the third biggest challenge, ahead of social isolation and the risk of actually contracting the virus.