The European Research Network on Philanthropy (ERNOP) is hosting its bi-annual post-Covid-19 highly anticipated conference in the picturesque city of Zagreb. Providing leading scholars and practitioners a much-needed platform for knowledge exchange, thought-provoking discussions, and a safe space for trust-building. The wealth of sessions and panels does not allow for a comprehensive summary of the complete experience, but I am happy to share some reflections:

The keynote speaker, Dr. Michael Meyer focused his attention on structures and functions that enable philanthropic organizations to stay resilient through crisis. A question arises though: is this framework for resilience relevant in government-inflicted crises – such as the erosion of democracy and the shrinking space for civil society?

In any case, it seems crisis is the global new-normal therefore the panel sessions throughout the day spotlighted the relevant roles, opportunities and mechanisms for philanthropy to carry on and enhance the common good.

One critical conversation was about the intersection of philanthropy and AI. As AI continues to advance rapidly, it poses both exciting opportunities and ethical challenges. The panel explored the potential AI holds to promote philanthropic efforts and philanthropy research; though it seems both practitioners and researchers are yet to fully realize this potential. A thought-provoking discussion also raised questions regarding the role philanthropy should embrace in shaping the ethical boundaries for AI regarding matters such as privacy, fairness, bias, transparency, accountability, and the potential for unintended consequences.

Another more-recurring theme is the noticeable need for comprehensive data to enhance research on giving. Whether it is individuals, corporations, or foundations, robust data plays a pivotal role in understanding the impact and effectiveness of philanthropic endeavors. The dearth of accurate, comprehensive administrative data hinders us – researchers and practitioners – from making informed decisions, identifying trends, and effectively addressing societal challenges.

‘Regulation’ also comes up as an important aspect for research and practice; one of the panels was devoted to exploring if legal forms and definitions could actually support the development and growth of the social enterprise market. I am under the impression that – as long as they are opt-in – legislative efforts will not be enough to nudge corporates to promote and care for ‘people’ and ‘planet’ over profits. Another panel explored the need to remove barriers and replace them with jump engine regulations to support and expand cross-border giving. Both panels emphasized the importance of cross-country collaborations among practitioners and researchers alike to succeed in implementing strategy and change.

All these topics and conversations reveal the most two important takeaways for me, which go hand in hand: collaborations between research and practice are a must as they lay the ground for the promotion of policies to protect, enable and support philanthropy as an anchor for the democratic-liberal common good. These basic understandings are not new; they have probably been center stage for ERNOP and Philea in recent years. But this time around we had the extraordinary opportunity to discuss the role these collaborations should have in the process of promoting policies by philanthropic organizations and for philanthropy. This topic made conversation in the pre-conference ‘safe spaces’, bringing up sensitive and critical questions regarding the legitimation of private philanthropy to engage in policy-making.

Indeed an exceptional aspect that stands out through the conference is the creation of a safe space for scholars and practitioners to come together and build trust. Often, there is a perceived gap between research and practice in the philanthropic sector. Scholars delve into rigorous academic research, while practitioners navigate the complexities of on-the-ground implementation. However, this conference’s unique environment fosters meaningful interactions, constructive discussions, and the exchange of knowledge between two vital pillars of the philanthropic ecosystem. The setting, the thoughtful organizing of the conference and the collegial atmosphere fostered a sense of belonging to a broad and vital philanthropic community.

Galia Feit, Institute for Law and Philanthropy, TAU