Source: Fortune.com
Summary
A new report by the Bridgespan Group highlights how Asia’s wealthy families approach philanthropy differently from their Western counterparts. The report, presented at the Philanthropy for Better Cities Forum in Hong Kong, found that 94% of Asian families studied are in their first or second generation of wealth, with many still controlling their businesses. Unlike Western donors who often establish independent foundations, Asian families tend to give through their companies or operate their own foundations. The report also notes that Asian philanthropists are more likely to collaborate with governments and track outputs, such as the number of schools built or teachers trained.
Our Reading
The numbers tell one story.
Asian families stay hands-on with their giving, mirroring their business control.
Most use their companies or operate foundations, not independent ones.
They track outputs, not just outcomes, and work with governments more than Western donors.
Philanthropy is seen as a way to fill gaps, not just a charitable act.
Author: Evan Null
Working with the state
More than three-quarters of Asian family philanthropies partner with the government, versus 58% outside Asia. This reflects their familiarity with government agencies through their business dealings. Western donors, by contrast, are more cautious about government involvement, preferring to influence policy through advocacy rather than direct collaboration. Asian families often fund pilot programs, proving concepts before handing them over to the government for broader implementation. This approach allows them to experiment more freely, leveraging their business acumen in the philanthropy space.
Asian philanthropists are more transparent, reporting on outputs like schools built or teachers trained. Over 80% do so, compared to 45% in high-income economies elsewhere. However, few track actual outcomes, such as how a program changed lives. This gap in measurement reflects a broader challenge in philanthropy, where donors often want results without wanting to pay for the evaluation.
The report also notes that Asian families are more likely to manage their own programs, especially in middle-income countries. This contrasts with higher-income economies, where external organizations handle the work. The hands-on approach is rooted in the legacy of Asian business conglomerates, which built sprawling enterprises with little overlap. When they turned to philanthropy, they saw similar gaps and filled them with their own structures.
Western philanthropists, by contrast, rely on established civil-society groups and prefer to fund through grants. This reflects a more mature ecosystem, where nonprofits are already in place. Asian families, however, are more willing to step in and run programs themselves, using their business experience to manage charitable efforts.
Despite these differences, both Asian and Western philanthropists face challenges in measuring impact. The report highlights that while many track outputs, few report on actual outcomes, a gap that limits the effectiveness of their efforts. This issue is not unique to Asia but is more pronounced in regions where philanthropy is still evolving.
The world’s largest givers
The Hong Kong Jockey Club tops Asia’s corporate philanthropy rankings, giving an average of $774 million a year between 2020 and 2024. This places it ahead of tech giants like Tencent, which gave $404 million annually. Globally, the Jockey Club ranks eighth, behind companies like Johnson & Johnson, which gives $3.8 billion yearly. The Jockey Club’s funds are primarily funneled through the Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust, which gave $705 million annually, placing it among Asia’s top philanthropies.
The Gates Foundation leads the world in institutional giving, with $6.5 billion annually. Asian philanthropies, while significant, still lag behind their global counterparts. The top 20 Asian philanthropies together gave $2.7 billion a year, compared to $21.4 billion from the global top 20. This disparity highlights the scale of the challenge in filling Asia’s development funding gap, which is estimated at $26 trillion through 2030.
The reports were commissioned by the Bridgespan Funders’ Council, which includes major philanthropists like the Gates and Rockefeller foundations. They were released at the Philanthropy for Better Cities Forum, organized by the Hong Kong Jockey Club. The event brought together leaders to discuss how philanthropy can address critical development needs, especially in the wake of shifting global aid policies.
The Trump administration’s dismantling of USAID has had a major impact on development funding in Asia. Cuts to the agency’s programs have led to significant reductions in aid, especially in countries like Indonesia and the Philippines. Estimates suggest that aid financing to Southeast Asia could drop by over $2 billion, creating a funding vacuum that philanthropy is being asked to fill.
Despite the scale of the challenge, no single entity can plug the gap left by reduced government aid. Lim acknowledges that neither governments nor philanthropy alone can address the shortfall. She emphasizes that the “Asian decade” will require local philanthropists to step up and support their own communities, highlighting the growing role of family philanthropy in shaping the region’s future.
The first line of risk
According to AVPN, a network of Asia-based social investors, the region faces a development funding shortfall of $26 trillion through 2030. Filling that gap will be a tall order. “We call philanthropy the first line of risk,” Lim says. “Philanthropic giving fills the spots where corporates may be too nervous to invest. And family philanthropy is even more at the vanguard of giving.”
Yet the gap Asian philanthropy is being asked to fill keeps growing. The Trump administration’s dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development canceled roughly 83% of the agency’s programs, gutting development budgets in a region where USAID once spent about $860 million a year; in Indonesia and the Philippines, program values fell by 95% or more. Aid financing to Southeast Asia could drop by more than $2 billion, according to estimates from the Lowy Institute.
Nobody, Lim concedes, can plug the hole left by Washington. “Governments can’t fill the gap. Philanthropy can’t fill the gap. There’s not enough money,” she says. Still, in the “Asian decade,” Asia’s philanthropists will need to find some way to pick up the slack. “This is the decade where our own people have to help our own people,” she says.
As the region faces a growing need for development funding, the role of family philanthropy is becoming more critical. With governments reducing their aid budgets and corporations hesitant to invest, philanthropy is stepping in to fill the void. However, the scale of the challenge remains daunting, and the effectiveness of these efforts will depend on how well philanthropists can measure impact and scale their efforts.
The report underscores the unique position of Asian philanthropy in the global landscape. While Western donors have well-established systems, Asian families are still shaping their approach, often guided by their business experience. As the region moves forward, the ability of philanthropists to adapt and innovate will be key to addressing the growing development needs of the region.
