In our efforts to understand the African philanthropic sector, we met with a number of influential local organizations. One that stood out was WACSI (West Africa Civil Society Institute), which makes the “shift of power” a key strategic priority. Although its name implies that it is dedicated to the West African region, its action and impact go far beyond and has gradually contributed to a movement that aims to transform the relationship between international and local organizations in Africa. We invited Nana Afadzinu, the Executive Director of this organization, to share this experience. Passionate about social justice and human rights, Nana has long worked with civil society organizations before joining WACSI in 2010. In this interview, she explains how WACSI has been implementing strategies to shift power within the philanthropic ecosystem in Africa.
Who is Nana Afadzinu, the Executive Director of WACSI?
Nana Afadzinu (NA): I am a lawyer by profession, and I usually say that I fell into this work by accident, but really it isn’t by accident. I did a bit of private practice in commercial law in Ghana, my home country, but then I got the opportunity to work in Gambia with the African Commission on Human Rights as a young lawyer. I worked with them on their promotional activities, which meant that I was the one who was liaising with civil society organizations that wanted observer status with the commission. I got to know a lot about what the organizations were and what they were doing. I could see the law being used in a way that was actually affecting people’s lives. They talk about human rights, things affecting people, and the commission making recommendations on what needs to be done. I found it absolutely fascinating, and then decided: “This is my place.”
What is the core mission of WACSI?
NA: WACSI was set up in 2005 by the Open Society Initiative for West Africa (OSIWA) that I worked with. OSIWA had been supporting civil society organizations for many years at that time. They were concerned that while civil society organizations were passionate about what they were doing and had knowledge about what they were doing, there was some capacity gap when it came to management, operations and sometimes governance issues. OSIWA had been set up as a grant-making foundation purely, so they didn’t see themselves as having the mandate to fill that gap. And they have combed the region but could not find any institution that could do that. They had a discussion with civil society organizations, came up with the idea of WACSI and have been very supportive since its establishment.
Thus, WACSI was set up to strengthen civil society, which translates into institutional strengthening focusing on governance, management, operations, partnerships and resourcing of organized civil society. It also includes research and knowledge promotion of civil society, advocacy and influence, technological capacity building and other means. For example, we have published papers on civil society’s contribution to development in West Africa, civil society sustainability and issues around civic space, civil society and democracy, and civil society and digital security. Policy advocacy and influencing is an important area for us. We need to engage policy-makers and engage funders and other people who hold the levers of power to change their systems to enable equitable and sustainable development. In this respect, one of the projects we are working on is to shift power at the global level.
Why “shifting power” is a strategic priority for WACSI?
NA: Philosophically and from the conceptual positioning, we believe that our international development system is a (neo)colonial one that looks at organizations working in the global South or global majority, as some people prefer to call it, as those that need pity or help: “They cannot really help themselves. They need to be supported. They don’t have the knowledge. Their knowledge is inferior. They don’t have the capacity to respond to their issues and have very poor systems and structure…” That is how development and the aid architecture have been built. Because it’s structural, you can see how the practices, processes, and policies within it are influenced by that mindset. This thinking is evident at every level—international, national, local, and even subnational. For example, if an [international foundation] or bilateral institution gives money to an international NGO, the NGO perpetuates the same systems to national NGOs. National NGOs, if they are subgranting to subnational NGOs, perpetuate the same ills. It is a systemic flaw that needs to be addressed now. WACSI is particularly concerned because this system directly impacts the sustainability of civil society.
The partnerships are often paternalistic, with the party providing the funding acting as if they know everything. They dictate what must be done. The people who are directly experiencing the problems, with the lived experience and understanding of the context, are often excluded from decision-making. They are not involved in setting benchmarks for what the successes of a project or intervention should be. They are seen as risky, and there is a risk-averse dynamic in the relationship, with no shared responsibility for risk. Risk is viewed solely from the donor’s perspective, without considering the partner they are working with. Local partners are seen as implementing partners, just instrumentalized without being a core part of what is being done. They are not in a position of leadership to address their own issues and to manage the resources that they bring to the table.
Also, I think very often, models that we are working with, within the development system, are Western models. A lot of the time when we are teaching board governance, we are looking at corporate governance models, and many of them are from the West. Yet, we have traditional institutions that have existed for many years. What kind of governance systems are they using? We are not being trained in those because they have not been researched or properly documented. This is one area where we really want to do more work, as it highlights the challenge with the current system.
What are your key initiatives to promote this shift of power?
NA: Local philanthropy is one of the agendas we are pushing hard because we have become so dependent on external donors. Yet Africans give, we give all the time. So how do we look at channelling African resources to support the social justice and development work that we have been doing? This means that African communities need to take ownership of the projects we are implementing. For example, people tithe because they believe it’s God’s word, and it strengthens their relationship with God. There is something personal in it for them. If we want Africans to contribute financially to the work we are doing, they need to believe in it. They must feel a sense of ownership. That kind of relationship needs to be cultivated. We also need local infrastructure that supports local philanthropy, like a tax system that takes into account the incentives that we have and the data that is available. All of those things are important.
We also have to look at our partnerships. And so, as part of the power shift, we host “RINGO,” which is Reimagining the International NGOs. For a long time, NGOs have been part of this (neo)colonial system, and many of them are vehicles through which funding is passed. They are intermediaries for this funding that comes to us, and they have perpetuated this (neo)colonial way of working with their partners. So, they need to reimagine their own role within the system, and that includes the partnerships they have with organizations in the global South. All these things are critical to the ecosystem issues affecting civil society. We have been very active in this area, which is why shifting the power is such a strategic priority for WACSI. It addresses these various challenges.
RINGO is experimenting with prototypes because we believe in taking action, not just talking. One example is the “reverse call for proposals” prototype. Typically, INGOs or Bilaterals make the call for proposals and ask civil society organizations to apply. The Reverse Call flips the process, allowing civil society organizations that are embedded in the context and understand the issues to define what they want to achieve. They issue a call for partnerships, inviting those interested to come forward. They would then evaluate potential partners to determine if they are a good fit for collaboration. That is one of the prototypes. Additionally, we adopted the Pledge for Change, initiated by ADESO, another African organization working on shifting power, as one of our prototypes. All the major NGOs have made a pledge to change the way they work within their humanitarian system. We also have a decolonizing advisory community, primarily composed of advisors from the Global South, who possess the expertise to assist organizations in navigating the process of decolonization. As I mentioned, they are ‘prototypes’ and are currently being tested.
We are also working on this shift the power program with different partners such as Star Ghana, the Tilitonse Foundation in Malawi, Zambia Governance Foundation, Comic Relief in the UK and FCDO (Foreign Commonwealth Development Office) of the UK government to look at particular projects in these countries. We are part of the global power-shifting movement led by the Global Fund for Community Foundations that discusses some of the key issues on shifting power. We are also part of the Africa Philanthropy Network, which looks at African philanthropy and aims to transform the narrative around philanthropy in Africa.
What are your main achievements and challenges?
NA: “Shift the power” is more like a slogan that has caught on, but it encompasses various aspects. At its core, it is about making international development equitable and decolonizing international development. Some people say we should call it “power sharing” or “taking power.” Whatever, a shift of power is needed. Even for us, working in the Global South, it’s important to recognize our own power and use that power and agency. That’s what « shift the power » is all about.
I believe there is still much to be done. I don’t believe in complacency—when you stop learning, you stop growing. There’s always more we can accomplish. We have done well, we have come far, but I think there is a lot more we can do. I mean just speaking about shifting power, I can say for example that there is now a lot of information on shifting power out there. It has gained some ground, especially amongst NGOs. And the Bilaterals, I mean the FCDO (Foreign Commonwealth Development Office) of the UK government, USAID recently talked about it, and some of them call it “Localization.” USAID talked about giving a quarter (25%) of their funding to Localization. You hear all these things, but it’s essential that they move from mere talk to actual action. Apart from that, we also need more leadership from the global South organizations, activists and actors. We need to make a connection between the global and the local because what is happening at the global level is affecting us locally. And sometimes we are so engrossed in our local problems that we lose sight of the bigger picture. And shifting power is one of those areas where we truly need to make those crucial connections.
One area where we need to do a lot more is local philanthropy and domestic resource mobilization. I think we have progressed a bit there, but there is still a long way to go. We need “mindset shifts,” for any of us within this space to even understand why we need to stop being so dependent on external donors and really start looking at alternative sources of funding, lessening the dependency that we have on external donors and finding different ways of resourcing.