In the early 2010s, MAVA and Oak Foundation, two of the world’s most impactful environmental philanthropic foundations, met several times to advance their thinking about the climate and environmental crisis. In 2015, their leaders gathered for a formal retreat. Their goal? To figure out how they could work together to make a real difference to the future of the planet. Working individually had yielded some results, but change was not happening at the required rate.
That meeting led to the creation of the Partners for a New Economy (P4NE), which brought together the MAVA, Oak, Marisla, and KR Foundations to tackle the root causes of environmental degradation through shared risk-taking and the collective deployment of resources.
“There was the feeling that things were not changing or moving fast enough,” said Vinit Rishi, Special Advisor to the Oak Foundation President and Director of Oak’s India Program. He recalled that Oak Trustee Kristian Parker used the words “We are winning battles, but not winning the war, so we thought we should try something different. Working in collaboration makes us stronger and provides leverage.”
Following exploratory conversations, the funders decided to set up a high-risk, high-impact donor collaborative focusing on the economic system as the root cause. To establish a clear structure and meet legal requirements, P4NE partnered with Swiss Philanthropy Foundation, simplifying administration and pooling costs. By hosting the fund, Swiss Philanthropy Foundation alleviated the administrative burden and managed legal risks. P4NE was committed to having a board that would fulfill its purpose and leverage each other’s assets to have a greater impact than acting alone.
Since 2015, the four founders have been joined by the Laudes, Ford, and Hewlett foundations, and the Omidyar Network, while the Hoffmann-established MAVA Foundation was wound up in 2023, after 28 years of grantmaking. The impact of the collaboration is impressive today. Starting with six grants totaling $2.7m in 2016, the P4NE gave 19 grants worth $4.9m in 2022. Among many grantees are respected organizations such as CEP, IIPP, Positive Money, Law & Political Economy Europe, Economists for Future, Movement Hub, Hot or Cool Institute, and the Doughnut Economics Action Lab.
“Family foundations can take more risks than others, so why don’t we do more of it? It started with the idea of how we take risks to find big solutions to big problems. Giga problems need giga solutions,” explained Lynda Mansson, former Director General of MAVA Foundation.
“Through lots of brainstorming, we wound up deciding that systems change in the economic system was one of the underlying issues. Environmental degradation is driven by how the economy works and the value, or lack thereof, that we place on helping nature,” Mansson added.
As a result of an open-minded initial process of experimenting and learning together, the partnership decided to address issues linked to monetary policy and economics education, funding initiatives that would influence the way central banks viewed environmental risks in their modeling and decisions, and encouraging the introduction of newer economic models into the education system.
“We wanted to build an economy that values people, planet, and profit,” Mansson said. “A few years down the road, things that were previously unimaginable started happening. For example, Mark Carney, the former governor of the Bank of England, was bringing environmental standards into central bank criteria.”
Jo Swinson, a former UK government minister and former leader of Britain’s Liberal Democrats, has served as P4NE’s Director since 2020, taking over from the founding Director, Leslie Harroun. She explained: “It was about recognizing that we have an economic system that is structured in a particular way where the environment is seen to be external to the economy. The environment is a key part of our economy thriving. We need to have an economic system that recognizes the value of nature and that has that built in.”
Philanthropy is an imperfect science that requires long-term commitment and experimentation, even when it is just one family sharing some of its wealth with a few causes that individual family members are passionate about.
We have seen an evolution in philanthropy in recent decades – what we like to call the third wave of giving. In our practical guidebook to giving, Family Philanthropy Navigator, we explore how many wealthy families are increasingly looking for ways to professionalize their giving cohesively and strategically to support their family ecosystems and goals. At the same time, and faced with ever-complex social and environmental problems that need joined-up solutions, more philanthropists are seeking to scale up and collaborate to inspire systems change, optimizing the impact of their activities through the pooling of resources, including finance and know-how.
Philanthropy is an imperfect science that requires long-term commitment and experimentation, even when it is just one family sharing some of its wealth with a few causes that individual family members are passionate about. Combining the goals, cultures, and methods of more than one family or foundation, therefore, comes at a greater risk, both to recipient partners on the ground and the families involved. But in an age when decision-makers recognize the need to work together to build a more sustainable future, the P4NE initiative shows that different stakeholders can join forces without compromising on values or aims to deliver a greater impact than would be possible through the sum of their individual parts.
Healthy, constructive relationships are crucial for effective giving – but also for collaborative efforts to co-create solutions across industries. Here are five lessons we can take away from the success of the P4NE project.
“This experimental approach also opened the door for trying things that would not necessarily seem obvious, encouraging risk-taking and innovation.”
P4NE made progress early on by the different stakeholders agreeing to get up and running straight away and allowing a strategy to evolve through experimentation and learning, rather than establishing a fixed, over-arching approach that would either require significant effort to unwind or create tensions within the collective. This experimental approach also opened the door for trying things that would not necessarily seem obvious, encouraging risk-taking and innovation.
“We started without a strategy. We wanted to learn, experiment, and take risks together to fund the ideas that are hard to fund, and that people are reluctant to fund on their own, but by sharing the risk we thought we could invest in innovation in unusual things. We started with very open minds,” said Mansson.
“I am a big believer in starting, learning, and adjusting rather than sitting back trying to figure everything out.”
Rishi added that, once several grants had been made, the direction of travel became clearer: “Over time, as we worked, a more defined strategy started to emerge – more defined focus areas.”
Swinson concurred: “We’ve experimented with various ways. I’m not going to say that we have all the answers. I think part of the exciting thing for many of our founders is that this is a journey where we’re all learning together. Together, we have the benefit of multiple perspectives as well.”
It is important to make sure that people of similar rank are involved in the collaboration, both from the start and throughout the project.
It is important to make sure that people of similar rank are involved in the collaboration, both from the start and throughout the project. If one partner sends a relatively junior figure to attend meetings, it can give the impression that they are not taking the initiative seriously. It also risks a scenario where decisions are made that might not meet the approval of more senior figures back at HQ, derailing the partnership and undermining future mutually agreed decisions.
Mansson explained that P4NE set a rule for the early phase: “It had to be the principal or CEO sitting on the board.”
In addition, she added: “You have to have a dedicated coordinator who is pulling people together, harmonizing things, and identifying where people have different opinions. We needed an equal footing for all partners.”
This sounds obvious, but it’s important to select partners who share the same big-picture goals and that have a positive attitude towards collaboration and collegiality.
“The kind of donors that become involved in collaboration probably have a collaborative mindset,” said Mansson. “Choosing the right partners was important to us. We didn’t want somebody to come in and completely tip the balance in our relationships, so we were very careful about who we invited to join.”
Collaboration strengthens philanthropy by providing access to more resources and serving as a check and balance for ideas or interventions designed by individual donors. It’s a much more effective way to carry out philanthropy. Nowadays, various stakeholder groups are uniting to form strategic partnerships, enabling like-minded individuals and organizations to direct their time, resources, and expertise toward shared interests. They recognize that global challenges are too immense to tackle alone. However, donors participating in specific collaboratives need to be mindful of the boundaries when it comes to what they contribute through collaboration versus what is managed within their own organizations. Establishing clear boundaries is essential to avoid creating overlaps or misunderstandings within their organizations.
“In these attempts at collaboration, it’s been shown that it’s very much the trust and confidence among the individuals who are involved,” explained Rishi. “They need to be individuals that represent the organization at a senior enough level and have the confidence of the boards of these organizations so that they can advocate for the collaborative because as you get into these collaboratives, it dilutes the influence or control of any one foundation. Each board otherwise always wonders: what impact are we having, and how are we measuring it? Are we sticking to our own priorities?”
The fact that people are willing to work together gives you a reality check and brings more intellectual horsepower into the conversation,
P4NE is keen on supporting exceptional individuals. From the outset, P4NE explicitly outlined its willingness to take risks and provide innovative philanthropic ventures with opportunities. This also requires placing higher trust in its grantees. While donors typically seek grantees with a proven track record spanning several years, P4NE is willing to fund younger or startup groups, even those with just an idea and a determination to succeed. This approach involves taking on more risk and giving these unusual grantees a chance. Such an approach can pose challenges for individual organizations for several reasons, but P4NE chose flexibility in its grant-making, rather than insisting on strict criteria for every grant. In successful collaborations, partners must trust and support each other, be willing to compromise, and acknowledge that no one has all the answers. There is no one-size-fits-all approach to creating social change.
Therefore, it’s essential to make room for the perspectives of individual donors, especially if they come from the same field with equal experience. Their judgment is just as valid, and all donors should be given the space and voice to express their views. Respecting others’ perspectives and allowing them to voice their convictions tends to lead to successful outcomes. However, when very strong personalities push in one direction, it can become more challenging. Ultimately, the success of initiatives like P4NE depends heavily on the individuals involved, including both grantees and donors.
“The fact that people are willing to work together gives you a reality check and brings more intellectual horsepower into the conversation,” explained Rishi.
“Foundations are kind of insular cultures because they’ve got their own endowments. They display the characteristics of the people that put the money in, or the board. But what’s happened, and I’ve seen it with many foundations, is that they recognize over time that it’s more effective to work in collaboration.”
The Carvajal family’s Ana Maria Guerrero Carvajal and Isabel Carvajal Sardi on why the family’s foundation is the largest shareholder of their 121-year-old family business and how it’s the key to sustaining...
Fire, floods, relocation, and a pandemic couldn’t sink Formans, the family-run smoked salmon supplier. Here’s how they stayed afloat....
The survival of family businesses is at stake due to inadequate board management and the difficulties faced by leaders of family businesses in juggling various roles....
Tolaram, the Singapore-headquartered family business, has global interests in logistics, consumer goods, and technology. Family members Mohan Vaswani and Sajen Aswani discuss the company’s values-based system of meritocracy, the family’s move to...
Explore first person business intelligence from top minds curated for a global executive audience