Redefining Philanthropy for Urban Resilience
Less than three years into my role leading one of Canada’s largest of its 191 community foundations, I read the book “Decolonizing Wealth” by Edgar Villanueva. In the opening chapter, Villanueva sets the stage for an uncomfortable conversation about the state of philanthropy. “The field of philanthropy is a living anachronism,” he writes. “It is adamant that it knows best, holding tight the purse strings. It is stubborn. It fails to get with the times… It does not care.”
A scathing critique? Yes. A surprise? No, not if we’re being honest.
The extent to which philanthropy is out-of-touch has been part of public discourse for some time. In the simplest of terms, who gives what to whom and how are keenly debated on the basis of the relevance, responsiveness, and equity. Perhaps even more disconcerting is why these gestures of goodwill are made, period.
Instead of putting Villanueva’s book down and thinking, what did I just walk into, I grew more determined in my resolve to disrupt the status quo within the sector. What I suspected all along was made clearer: we don’t need a new name – philanthropy’s inherent concern with the love of humanity is a good thing. But we do need to redefine how we show this love.
I got an opportunity to test my theory as the chair of Toronto’s first Resilience Steering Committee.
Established shortly after Toronto was identified by the Rockefeller Foundation as one of the world’s 100 Resilient Cites, the city’s ResilientTO office and Resilience Steering Committee were charged with creating a multi-sector strategy that considered the “impacts of climate change within the context of a growing city facing challenges related to housing, mobility, and equity.”
On a global scale, the initiative was meant to provide a springboard for the 80 member cities to benchmark and create strategies to strengthen urban resilience. The term is defined as “the capacity of individuals, communities, institutions, businesses, and systems within a city to survive, adapt, and grow no matter what kinds of chronic stresses and acute shocks they experience.”
Although the Rockefeller-sponsored network comes to an end in the summer of 2019, Toronto’s urban-resilience work must go on. The release of the city’s strategy in June of 2019 emphasized that equity is a key driver of resilience. Our ability to adapt to and manage change successfully in rapidly evolving circumstances hinges on the quality of life experienced by all residents in our city’s 140 neighbourhoods.
Canada’s fourth largest city has carved a path towards building physical, social, and economic well-being for all of its residents. From the strength of our economy, to our diverse neighbourhoods and connected communities, we have a lot to be proud of.
But the path is not without hurdles. In those very neighbourhoods where diversity is celebrated, divisiveness is still a threat. While Toronto has a wealth of opportunity, we are seeing a growing divide in terms of who has access to those opportunities. Enclaves are deepening, as is income inequality. Increasingly, neighbourhoods are divided into rich and poor, with fewer mixed communities. Though we are a wealthy city, we are also a city where too many are being left behind. And we have a long road ahead to meaningfully address the systemic biases in our society rooted in racism, colonization, and oppression. As we move forward in a world of change and uncertainty, we need to work together to build a city that not only celebrates, but also lives up to its commitment to fairness.
Building fairness and greater equity means ensuring all Torontonians have access to and can capitalize on the positive opportunities on offer in our city. To do so, we need to be thoughtful stewards of what makes our city an excellent place to live.
The “new” philanthropy, as I see it, needs to play a role in getting us there. The new philanthropy is participatory. It thinks about and changes the distribution of power. It amplifies the voices of those with “living experience” of the challenges it aims to alleviate. It sets the kind of table where all can have a seat and share, in spite of the different perspectives that are on the menu. It aims to move the money equitably and disrupt giving patterns. In Canada, this means turning a statistic such as this one on its head: 66% of all donation revenue in Canada goes to 1% of charities. This pervasive trend of inequitable giving leaves work on intractable problems at the grassroots level sorely underfunded.
The new philanthropy’s equity focus can anchor our city’s work towards urban resilience.
At Toronto Foundation, we have been taking a closer look at how we could become living proof of the new philanthropy. We believe philanthropy can play an important role in not only mitigating damaging effects but, strategic investment choices can be made to create a healthier, more prosperous city for all.
Here’s what we’ve learned so far.
Build “Bridging” Social Capital
Last November, we released the Toronto Social Capital Research Study. A new body of original research, co-led by Environics Institute for Survey Research and supported by partners such as United Way Greater Toronto and Wellesley Institute, the study aimed to benchmark the levels of social capital being experienced by Toronto’s residents.
What we knew before the research: social capital is an important measure of how well residents are doing, and how well they are able to recover from setbacks and crises, both individually and as a community.
The success of Toronto’s Resilience Strategy will hinge on the vibrancy of our social networks, the extent to which people trust and rely on each other, and their willingness to collaborate on developing solutions to complex issues. Indeed, early consultations identified guiding principles that rose to the top for the plan. Those included building social capital and community, enabling social inclusion and innovation, and building capacity for individuals and organizations to think ahead, and develop connections and practices to better face challenges now and in the future. This makes it essential to have the necessary metrics in place to assess the current state of social capital, guide community investments, and to chart improvements over time.
An important aspect of social capital is the extent to which people form social connections with people who are different from themselves, referred to as “bridging” capital. This is especially relevant in Toronto given the diversity of the population – to what extent are residents “sticking with their own” versus making connections across ethnic and other boundaries?
Imagine what is possible when social networks are expanded to bring unusual actors together in a shared purpose. Imagine what could happen if relationships are formed that extend beyond the limitations of geography, experience, or income.
Engage Next Generation Philanthropists
Any gains realized as we strive towards urban resilience will impact future generations. Failing now means failing forward. Therefore, it is prudent that the next generation has an active role in this work.
Inspired by the research outlined above, we “bridged” our next generation philanthropists with resident leaders from nine neighbourhoods and issue area experts to discuss issues, share knowledge, and shape innovative solutions towards building stronger, more equitable, and resilient neighbourhoods.
We provided the right conditions for next generation philanthropists to participate in reciprocal partnerships with community leaders and those with lived experiences of the causes they care about.
A better future for Toronto is one that embraces the power of philanthropy to strengthen social capital – the underpinnings of a city’s economic and social wellbeing – and the social infrastructure which creates a resilient place to live and work.
Support the Work of Neighbourhood Champions
The financial support that the philanthropic sector can provide is a privilege. But this privilege does not mean that only the philanthropy sector knows best how money should be used to solve problems. See my introduction for a reminder on Villanueva’s point about this. Sometimes we simply need to get out of the way and take the lead from the community. And that’s just what we did.
The Toronto Neighbourhood Resilience Project is a partnership between Toronto Foundation and the City of Toronto Chief Resilience Officer. We connected our next generation philanthropists to this Project to support the ongoing work of residents in making their neighbourhoods more resilient. We invested in flagship, localized and linked up initiatives that will equip vulnerable neighbourhoods to thrive in the face of the chronic stresses and acute shocks that define today’s urban context. Our joint project was about creating bridges to lessen the divide between the haves and the have nots; those with the power, and those often not given the power to reimagine philanthropy and our future together.
Working together to remove barriers will in time produce new social networks, innovative local responses, and through these relationships, a potentially more sustainable flow of philanthropic dollars for investment.
What will inspire you to act? What will you redefine? I started with a love of my city and good read gave me a nudge. We all have to start somewhere.
Leave your comment below, or reply to others.
Please note that this comment section is for thoughtful, on-topic discussions. Admin approval is required for all comments. Your comment may be edited if it contains grammatical errors. Low effort, self-promotional, or impolite comments will be deleted.
Read more from MeetingoftheMinds.org
Spotlighting innovations in urban sustainability and connected technology
I see the outcomes of Duke Pond as a representation of the importance of the profession of landscape architecture in today’s world. Once obscured by the glaring light and booming voice long-generated by building architects, landscape architects are steadily emerging as the designers needed to tackle complex 21st century problems. As both leaders and collaborators, their work is addressing the effects of rising sea level on coastal cities, creating multi-modal pedestrian and vehicular transportation systems to reduce carbon emissions, reimagining outdated infrastructure as great urban places, and as with the case of Duke Pond, mitigating the impacts of worsening drought.
AI has enormous potential to improve the lives of billions of people living in cities and facing a multitude of challenges. However, a blind focus on the technological issues is not sufficient. We are already starting to see a moderation of the technocentric view of algorithmic salvation in New York City, which is the first city in the world to appoint a chief algorithm officer.
There are 7 primary forces determining the success of AI, of which technology is just one. Cities must realize that AI is not the quick technological fix that vendors sell. Not everything will be improved by creating more algorithms and technical prowess. We need to develop a more holistic approach to implementing AI in cities in order to harness the immense potential. We need to create a way to consider each of the seven forces when cities plan for the use of AI.
In New Zealand, persistent, concentrated advocacy and legal cases advanced by Māori people are inspiring biocentric policies; that is, those which recognize that people and nature, including living and non-living elements, are part of an interconnected whole. Along the way, tribal leaders and advocates are successfully making the case that nature; whole systems of rivers, lakes, forests, mountains, and more, deserves legal standing to ensure its protection. An early legislative “win” granted personhood status to the Te Urewera forest in 2014, which codified into law these moving lines:
“Te Urewera is ancient and enduring, a fortress of nature, alive with history; its scenery is abundant with mystery, adventure, and remote beauty … Te Urewera has an identity in and of itself, inspiring people to commit to its care.”
The Te Urewera Act of 2014 did more than redefine how a forest would be managed, it pushed forward the practical expression of a new policy paradigm.