A bridge to the future: Essays on a new era for global development

This compendium of essays expands on a dialogue that took place during Humentum’s Bridge to the Future strategic retreat on April 15, 2025. The event created space for deep reflection and fresh perspectives on the future of global development from a diverse set of actors – both traditional and new voices from civil society, the private sector, and local government.

A subset of attendees were invited to write essays to share their perspectives on the critical changes needed to move beyond the current system.

• Foreword by Cynthia Smith
• Essays by Jacqueline Asiimwe, George Ingram, Kim Kucinskas, Jenny Hodgson, Eshban Kwesiga, Cathy Amenya, John Coonrod, Jenna Thoretz, Dr. Moses Isooba, Golda Fania, and Aisha Tambajang

Prefer to download and read the PDF version?

Access it here

The essay compendium can be read in its entirety or selectively, depending on your interest. You may access each essay by clicking on the title.

1. Foreword: Reimagining development beyond aid

• Cynthia Smith, Senior Director, Global Initiatives, Humentum

2. Pull together and pool together

• Jacqueline Asiimwe, CEO, CivSource Africa

3. From aid to agency: Locally led development is the future

• George Ingram, Senior Fellow, Brookings Institute

4. Meeting the moment: A network weaver’s perspective

• Kim Kucinskas, Director, Global Initiatives, Humentum

5. Light in times of darkness: Community philanthropy offers a way forward

• Jenny Hodgson, Executive Director, The Global Fund for Community Foundations (GFCF)
• Eshban Kwesiga, Knowledge Weaving and Influencing Manager, The Global Fund for Community Foundations (GFCF)

6. Vision 2035: Strong local communities in a post-ODA world

• Cathy Amenya, Program Manager, Movement for Community-led Development (MCLD)
• John Coonrod, Founder and US Chair, Movement for Community-led Development (MCLD)

7. Focusing on the movement, not the map: A bridge builder’s perspective

• Jenna Thoretz, Senior Program Manager, Humentum

8. Resource on the decline: How will NGOs deliver on their mission priorities?

• Dr. Moses Isooba, Executive Director, Uganda National NGO Forum (UNNGOF)

9. Unlocking Africa’s health potential through solidarity

• Golda Fania, Global Health & Digital Transformation Strategist, Independent Consultant

10. Bridging the focus gap: A perspective from in-between

• Aisha Tambajang, Senior Program Manager, Humentum

Jacqueline Asiimwe
CEO
CivSource Africa

This week, I found myself in a space adorned with African proverbs. Two of them resonated deeply as I reflected on what I wanted to convey in this article. One states, “If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together.” The other proclaims, “One hand cannot lift a heavy load.” These sayings resonate especially in light of two financial initiatives that nonprofit leaders in Uganda established a few years ago.

One of these was the Nafasi Multipurpose Cooperative Society (NAFASI), born from a shared understanding among Civil Society Organization (CSO) staff and associates in Uganda of the necessity for a platform to promotes solidarity, financial independence, and business advancement. Founded in April 2014, Nafasi—which means “opportunity” in Swahili—was created to empower its members by fostering financial growth through enhanced savings, investments, affordable credit, housing, and retirement planning. Initially aimed at CSO workers, Nafasi has since broadened its membership to include staff from various corporate entities and business owners who align with its missions and objectives.

The founders of Nafasi were onto something significant! The math was straightforward yet impactful. At the time, it was estimated that Uganda had around 13,000 nonprofit organizations. If we assumed an average of 5 employees per organization, with each member saving a minimum of $20 a month—just think of where we could be today! We would have eased the burden on the system by creating our own resources to fulfill our needs.

The other initiative that nonprofit leaders established was named Ujasiri, Swahili for courage or bravery. Started in mid-2018, the vision behind the UJASIRI Fund was to cultivate a robust, independent, self-sustaining, accountable, and citizen-responsive civil society in Uganda. The aim was to nurture the next generation of Ugandan CSOs and proactive individual activists capable of thriving in a constantly evolving environment. Ujasiri Fund emerged as a response to the lack of an independent, locally based funding mechanism for civil society in Uganda. Its establishment demonstrated the commitment of civil society leaders to the long-term independence and viability of the sector in the country. Beyond providing an alternative funding source for member organizations, the Fund aimed to generate and supply financial resources for crucial organizations, initiatives, ideas, and individuals.

When it was first launched, Ujasiri had only a handful of subscribing members. The goal was to grow the fund by attracting more civil society leaders and organizations to contribute. Looking back, I am amazed at our foresight and courage during that time. We had created entities that would enable us to pull together by pooling our resources. I wish we had stayed committed to this path. Together, we could have traveled both far and fast in our journey of traveling together.

In these challenging times, we need these home-grown, home-owned initiatives focused on fostering both financial support and solidarity. In my opinion, and guided by the wisdom of our ancestors, both are essential.

Resources without solidarity are dry. Solidarity without resources makes us wither.

I hope this pivotal moment in history serves as another wake-up—and indeed, a shake-up—call. We often discuss radical solidarity. Now is the time to embrace it fully, “no ifs, no buts.”

I genuinely hope we rise to the occasion, for the solutions we seek have always been right in front of us.

Back to the table of contents

Kim Kucinskas
Director, Global Initiatives
Humentum

This moment demands a radical reimagining of aid, development, and global solidarity. The urgency for change is not new—but it has become impossible to ignore. From global pandemics and rising authoritarianism to climate breakdown and geopolitical volatility, we are facing interrelated, nonlinear crises that expose the limitations of a development model rooted in 20th-century thinking.

And yet, amid the collapse, cracks in foundations can also be openings. This is a catalytic moment.

I am most interested not in prescribing what the future should look like, but in how we meet this moment. There is no shortage of smart ideas about what needs to be done. Some call for radical departures from old systems; others iterate thoughtfully from what already exists. Much of the wisdom we need has long been present if we know where—and with whom—to look.

As a network weaver, this is what I know: To move forward, we must make sense of what is happening now and why it matters. We must engage in futures thinking—holding possibility alongside probability—and find practical ways to bridge the divide, asking not only “what can I do?” but “what can we do?”

We cannot ignore that this moment is also deeply personal. For some, it brings grief, identity crises, fear, and uncertainty; for others, it sparks a rallying cry for urgent and long-overdue change. Many find themselves holding both realities at once, grieving what is being lost while also embracing what could be rebuilt.

From my conversations with changemakers, leaders, and practitioners, a few truths emerge:

1. Multiple futures are possible, with parallel aid systems likely to emerge. Development must become both bigger—expanding beyond aid to include governance, justice, and structural change—and smaller, rooted in hyper-local, contextual solutions.
2. There will be different ways to name and approach the challenges ahead. Some paths may lean toward regression—renewed paternalism and self-interest—while others move toward justice, autonomy, and co-creation. Both may unfold at once.
3. Different roles will be needed across the ecosystem, from experimenters, visionaries, and disruptors to builders, guides, weavers, caregivers, and storytellers.

Most important, at the deepest level, we are more connected by shared values and purpose than we often recognize.

We are stronger together. And building the contextualized, values-aligned networks we need will be essential to any future worth fighting for.

Back to the table of contents

Cathy Amenya
Program Manager
Movement for Community-led Development (MCLD)

John Coonrod
Founder and US Chair
Movement for Community-led Development (MCLD)

In recent years, the development sector has recognized the need for change. Overall human progress ground to a halt after 2015 in the face of armed conflicts and other shocks. Project-based approaches funded by Official Development Assistance (ODA) were too piecemeal and unsustainable to achieve population-level progress. Various conversations have been underway for more locally led development, yet always as incremental change within the existing top-down, ODA framework. Now that ODA has dramatically declined, our sector requires a fundamental reimagining of development approaches. The current disruption presents a critical opportunity to address colonial legacies and top-down power imbalances in development practice and put the world on the path to achieve better lives for everyone.

Vision 2035

Instead of tinkering with the old paradigm, let’s go back to basics. Human society lives in communities. Communities need the resources, skills and organizational capacity to be resilient. In fact, resilience is fundamentally a community-level attribute – it is always people in the community who are the first responders to any shock.

We need an approach to development that supports communities everywhere to be places where every person is respected, where everyone has the opportunity to develop their full potential, and where basic human needs are met within a sustainable natural environment. We must build a post-ODA world where communities lead their own development without international dependency. That is what MCLD calls “Vision 2035,” and achieving it requires a three-pronged strategic framework.

Strategic Framework

1. Responsive, adequately funded local government

A wise politician once said, “All politics is local.” Nearly every national government has given the constitutional mandate for basic human services to decentralized local governments, yet local governments are often starved of public resources and decision-making authority. Too often INGOs or bilateral projects have bypassed local government, essentially letting local government off the hook.

A sustainable future for communities must be built on democratic local governance, within a national system that follows principles of subsidiarity – moving decisions as close to people as is practicable. The principle of subsidiarity is indeed the only form of social organization consistent with human dignity.

Local governments must possess either sufficient tax authority to meet basic needs, or sufficient devolved funding from the center that is transparent and predictable. Outside funders who wish to support countries must partner with countries in strengthening the capacities of local governments as the foundation for sustainable progress.

Wherever we witness successful progress out of poverty – be it Kerala, Brazil or Kenya – we see a significant shift in resources and decision-making to local government, often involving participatory planning and budgeting and mandatory mechanisms for social accountability.

2. Civil society resilience

Civil society is under attack globally through restrictive legislation, shrinking civic space, and disinformation campaigns. Yet, again, where we see successful societies, we see a thriving partnership between local government and local civil society.

Civil society is the only way historically marginalized groups — women, men, ethnic and religious minorities — can ensure their basic human rights. Civil society is not merely a “watchdog” to government – it is a profoundly important implementing partner for local governments – mobilizing local energies for local solutions in health, education, nutrition security, family incomes and environmental protection.

Civil society will only thrive when it is able to carry out activities with its own resources. Groups must create domestic resource mobilization (DRM) models, develop protective mechanisms for civic space, foster connected networks, and counter misinformation that undermines civil society legitimacy. To combat misinformation civil society must develop and disseminate counter-narratives to challenge false news, launch campaigns both online and offline to raise awareness of the dangers of disinformation, and provide guides for verifying information sources.

3. Community mobilization

Responsive local government and vibrant civil society are the pathways through which citizens achieve their aspirations. Tools like Citizen Charter and regular public accountability forums depend both on mandates on local government and the energies of local civil society to mobilize participation of their members.

Both local governments and local civil society organizations can “federate upwards” through existing networks for mutual support and empowerment. Many of these associations have online tools that enable community-to-community exchanges and mutual capacity strengthening.

Implementation approach

For community mobilization to be achieved, all relevant stakeholders will need to focus on that goal while avoiding dependency-provoking actions that undermine it. We see that a future of vibrant communities can be built on four pillars:

• Shared vision: This vision of vibrant communities must become widely shared, not just among funders and civil society organizations, but among governments. In 2023, the UN finally came to realize that the majority of its targets can only be met through local action and established Local 2030 as a vehicle to accelerate its efforts. The African Union Charter on decentralization has come into force, but there is little national advocacy for decentralization. Those standing for this change need to generate a much more powerful communications campaign at all levels to make Vision 2035 a reality.
• Strong local and regional networks: The current crisis in ODA has revealed the utter necessity of working through networks from the local to the global, rather than as competing individual entities. Every country in the world has existing civil society networks, many of which are able to not just support the communities where they work but to co-create national strategies to promote the changes needed. These networks need to be identified and nurtured.
• Strategic investment: Until the first three pillars are firmly established, there is a strategic role for external support – through ODA, multilateral institutions or philanthropy. This support needs to focus on strengthening civil society for supporting community mobilization, rather than projectizing them to bypass and take over the service delivery responsibilities of local governments.
• Metrics: What doesn’t get measured, doesn’t get done. If we are serious about Vision 2035, not only do we need a roadmap to it, but we need metrics to measure progress. For example, in 2015, MCLD adopted a target first proposed in the 1992 UN Human Development Report: that 20% of public resources should reach the grassroots. Various organizations have tried to track this from time to time, but now it is time to make it a reality.

Back to the table of contents

Dr. Moses Isooba
Executive Director
Uganda National NGO Forum (UNNGOF)

The last couple of months have witnessed a seismic shift in internationalism. The USAID freeze which was triggered by President Trump’s Executive order turbocharged a domino effect which saw other Western donor countries roll back their budgets – all under the wrap of wanting to bolster their military and defense capabilities.

The disdain which many hold against aid is no secret. Yet this does not lessen the impact which upending eight decades of internationalism and humanitarian aid is having on the development sector.

These are difficult times for the sector, especially when European capitals have all joined the race to the bottom.  While President Trump and his coterie decided to feed USAID to the woodchipper, the UK Premier became an energetic entrant in the race to the bottom by slashing and rolling back the development aid budget so as to boost the UK’s defense and military capabilities. As many have argued, making the world’s most vulnerable people pay for UK’s defense is not only reprehensible but callous.

While we have always known and pointed out that aid was not always for us in the Global South but for the furtherance of donor interests, what has happened in the last couple of months is an unashamed, naked, unapologetic and callous display of these interests.

In the triad of “development, defense and diplomacy”, development had been sacrificed at the altar of defense. With it, the varied communities that have depended on the development sector for survival, sustenance and hope are now on their own. The result will be worsening social indicators.  Those who depend on food parcels will in, all likelihood, starve to death. Cases of malnutrition amongst children will worsen. The same will happen with vaccinations, whose lifesaving and life changing benefits are unlikely to reach millions of children that have depended on aid to access them. Young people, men, women, persons with disabilities and others whom donor funding had supported to organise into social movements and other critical groups — those that challenge local corrupt and exclusionary practices which perpetuate poverty and inequality — will have to find a way to do this without relying on donors from the West.

We witnessed similar abandonment not long ago. When the COVID-19 pandemic broke out, the West went into an overdrive of selfishness and decided to starve the Global South of vaccines. They forget one thing, when we are not safe, they are not safe. Well, the pandemic is over, and we are here. The development aid cut is no different from the vaccine apartheid we witnessed during the pandemic days.

Yet the effects of this abandonment and betrayal will have a negative effect on Western donor countries as well. Unlike aid from countries which only relate with governments, Western aid has had the positive attribute of working directly with affected people, thus building a direct relationship of mutual respect, understanding and empathy between peoples. With the abandonment, the soft power which the West has nurtured via this approach will likely be lost.

Where does this leave us? True, chopping development finance and assaulting internationalism in this age of global connectedness is a poor and reckless decision. Yet, this does not mean it’s a doomsday or an apocalypse for our communities.  We are resilient people. As for Civil Society Organizations (CSOs), sector strength and resilience are our greatest collective assets. We shall rise from the ashes!

Rising from the ashes!

We are acutely aware that it shall not be business as usual and, as a sector, we are already starting to make some tough decisions.

We have always known that communities have assets such as resources (albeit small), skillsets, knowledge and relationships. It is now going to be imperative to leverage these resources as a way of triggering community voice and power. With increased citizen agency, communities will start working differently with their local governments in the provision of public services. As a sector, our survival will depend on our ability to leverage local resources to drive the community development agenda. Local philanthropy shall not be an add- on but the main menu in resource mobilization.

How do we ensure resilience among the affected entities? We may not have a one-size-fits-all answer to this, but as a sector, we are steaming ahead to find cost-sharing and cost-cutting approaches. For example, sharing spaces with entities that may have difficulties affording rent may be an option. With sharing resources comes sharing of utilities and this will drastically plummet the organizational operation costs, enabling the different organizations to stay afloat.

As the headwinds beat against development financing and with USAID — the largest aid apparatus now resting in the aid cemetery — CSOs must change their modus operandi and learn new rules of engagement with donors. The sector shall not die but will rise from the ashes.

Back to the table of contents

Aisha Tambajang
Senior Program Manager
Humentum

At this point in the sector’s evolution, I often find myself navigating two parallel conversations.

In many global spaces — particularly among large INGOs and donors — the conversation is centered on sector transformation: how to rethink models, shift power, and “do more with less.” These discussions are timely and important. They reflect a recognition that the current development architecture is no longer fit for purpose.

At the same time, I live in The Gambia and have worked alongside civil society actors in areas like governance, transitional justice, and public health. In these spaces, work continues — not because systems are in place, but often despite their absence. Funding has declined, institutional support has shrunk, and yet communities remain engaged. Awareness campaigns, citizen participation, and movement-building efforts haven’t stopped. They’ve adapted.

For those of us who sit in between — globally engaged but locally rooted — this moment brings both clarity and responsibility. The shift in donor priorities and the fragility of international systems have shown that local actors are not only capable but already leading. The work being done is grounded, relevant, and often more responsive than the frameworks that once tried to guide it.

So perhaps the real task isn’t to rebuild what was, but to reframe what we value. The opportunity lies in amplifying what already exists, supporting what has endured, and resisting the urge to recentralize power in new ways. This isn’t about co-creation on old terms — it’s about acknowledging that many in the Global South have carried the work forward, with or without external backing.

As the sector shifts, it’s becoming increasingly clear that how we show up needs to evolve. Across different contexts, people have continued the work — often with fewer resources, and often without external support. The role of traditional institutions and donors is changing. Supporting progress today means recognizing what’s already in motion, and choosing to engage differently — with humility, intention, relevance and respect for what’s already working.

Back to the table of contents