Philanthropic foundations have emerged as significant non-state actors in global governance. Their financial strength, intellectual resources, and convening capacity grant them a unique influence over international policy agendas. Large foundations such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Welcome Trust, and the Rockefeller Foundation have gone beyond traditional charitable giving; they now shape priorities in health, education, and climate change at both national and global levels (McGoey, 2015). Unlike corporations, foundations are not primarily motivated by profit, and unlike governments, they are not bound by electoral cycles. This positioning enables them to act with agility, direct resources toward high-risk innovations, and sustain long-term initiatives.

Yet, the very features that empower foundations also present dilemmas. Their influence is often asymmetrical compared with state actors, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Foundations can determine funding flows, define technical priorities, and shape the discourse on what constitutes “progress.” Such power raises concerns about legitimacy, transparency, and democratic accountability. In global health, for example, foundation-driven agendas have sometimes privileged vertical interventions targeting specific diseases while leaving systemic health infrastructure underfunded (Birn, 2014). Thus, the political shaping of foundations carries both opportunities and risks in the pursuit of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

The Expanding Power of Foundations

The United Nations and its specialized agencies increasingly recognize the importance of foundations as partners in achieving global goals. Foundations contribute not only financial resources but also networks of expertise, data, and advocacy channels. For instance, the Gates Foundation holds observer status in the World Health Organization (WHO) and contributes significantly to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria (WHO, 2022). The UN Foundation itself, created in 1998 with a USD 1 billion donation from Ted Turner, illustrates how philanthropic capital can be institutionalized within the UN system to strengthen multilateral action (UN Foundation, 2023).

This ability to direct global priorities, however, is double-edged. In many low- and middle-income countries, foundation resources outweigh national budgets for health programs. As a result, foundation priorities may set the terms of debate, sometimes emphasizing technological fixes over systemic reforms (Birn, 2014). This creates an ongoing tension between opportunity and accountability.

Foundations and the UN: Partners and Tensions

The United Nations has embraced foundations as indispensable partners. Their funding and expertise are central to initiatives such as the Global Fund and Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. The Gates Foundation, for example, contributes directly to WHO programs and holds observer status at key meetings (WHO, 2022). The UN Foundation, created by Ted Turner’s endowment in 1998, is itself a symbol of how philanthropy has been woven into multilateralism (UN Foundation, 2023).

Beyond the UN, foundations collaborate with civil society organizations, universities, and private corporations, creating multi-stakeholder coalitions. These arrangements often blur the line between public and private authority, contributing to what some scholars describe as “hybrid governance” (Abbott & Snidal, 2009). While hybrid models enable innovative solutions, they also complicate the accountability chain, raising fundamental questions about who ultimately sets priorities and who is answerable when outcomes fall short. This blurring of the boundaries also create subtle erosion of the democratic principles of participation and public will.

The Diplomacy of Partnership

Operating in this crowded governance landscape requires more than financial resources. Foundations increasingly practice what scholars call business diplomacy, a branch of the new diplomacies, i.e., strategically managing relationships with governments, corporations, civil society, and communities (Saner & Yiu, 2014). Such diplomacy is not merely about funding—it is about influencing the policy processes of countries and international organisations through coalition-building, legitimacy, and mastery of the international governance architecture.

The 2030 Agenda highlights this imperative through SDG 17 on partnerships (United Nations, 2015). The relation with non-state actors are expressively stated in the SDG Target 17.17, i.e., “Encourage and promote effective public, public-private and civil society partnerships, building on the experience and resourcing strategies of partnerships”. Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals requires coordinated, multi-sectoral action. Here, foundations can serve as conveners, bringing diverse actors together and bridging the gap between science and policy. Additionally, it can also support the development of civil society organisations’ capacities and contribute to their sustainability.
But this convening role and development partnerships carry responsibility: to respect local priorities, avoid top-down imposition, invite meaningful participation in decision making and ensure that marginalised voices are included in agenda-setting.

Case in Point: WHO PABS Negotiations

The ongoing negotiations for a Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing (PABS) system under WHO illustrate the influence of foundations in practice. The PABS framework seeks to ensure rapid international sharing of pathogens with pandemic potential, coupled with equitable access to the vaccines and technologies derived from them (WHO, 2023).
While states are the official negotiators, foundations shape the environment in subtle but powerful ways. They fund laboratories, support surveillance systems, and convene technical experts who feed into negotiations (Fidler, 2023). Their interventions have promoted rapid technological solutions—such as vaccine platforms—but sometimes at the cost of broader equity issues like local production capacity and the sustainability of local primary healthcare systems.

Accountability and Governance Deficits

The growing influence of foundations highlights a persistent governance gap. Their hybrid nature—private institutions with public missions—places them outside traditional accountability structures. Unlike governments, they are not elected; unlike corporations, they have no shareholders. Leadership is often limited to a small circle of trustees, frequently drawn from donor families or networks (Reich, 2018).

Transparency and reporting vary widely. Some foundations publish detailed grant portfolios and evaluations, while others disclose little. Given the tax advantages many enjoy, this lack of standardized accountability is problematic (Toepler, 2018). Without stronger monitoring, foundation influence risks eroding public trust.

International frameworks could help. The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, and the ILO’s MNE Declaration all stress responsible engagement and community development (ILO, 2017). Adapting such norms for philanthropic actors could build legitimacy and safeguard inclusivity.

Looking Ahead: Universal Health Access—Dream or Possibility?

The current negotiation on access to pathogens and sharing of benefits, which goes beyond financial return but also the ability of many countries of the Global South to respond to pandemics. It is a global public health test case for a catalyst role of the foundation in promoting global solidarity and partnerships as envisioned in the 2030 Agenda. The ultimate test of foundations’ influence is whether it advances or hinders universal access to health products and services. Foundations have been critical to scaling up vaccines, advancing diagnostics, and investing in pandemic preparedness. Yet, the COVID-19 crisis revealed deep inequalities: access was fastest and most comprehensive in wealthy nations, while many low-income countries waited months for essential supplies. While the Pandemic Preparedness Treaty has been signed into place to frame this PABS negotiation, gaps remain to reach an agreed arrangement to operationalize this treaty. Foundations will have a meaningful role to play.

Foundations are now permanent actors in global governance. The challenge is not whether they should be involved, but how they can be engaged responsibly. If accountability gaps are addressed and inclusive partnerships built, foundations may help turn the aspiration of universal health coverage into a shared global achievement.

Practical Implications

To maximize positive impact, three priorities need to be considered (1) create accountability frameworks so that foundation funding aligns with national priorities and global norms; (2) encourage foundations to act as conveners of inclusive, multi-stakeholder coalitions rather than agenda-setters only, and (3) balance their focus on technological solutions with support for systemic social infrastructure. Applying these three priorities, foundations can become a catalyst for equity and resilience rather than a source of dependency or distortion.

Philanthropic foundations have served as much-needed intermediary actors generating multi-stakeholder solutions and platforms for greater scale and impact in operationalizing the SDG agenda (Saner & Yiu, 2024). Through New Diplomacy methods, foundations will be able to build trust, align diverse stakeholders, and integrate ethical accountability with technical expertise to bridge traditionally adversarial relations and long-standing mistrust and achieve transformative power dynamics and collaborations (Saner & Yiu, 2012).

1 Centre for Socio-Eco-Nomic Development
2 Diplomacy Dialogue, Geneva/Basle University, Basle.

References

Abbott, K. W., & Snidal, D. (2009). The governance triangle: Regulatory standards institutions and the shadow of the state. In W. Mattli & N. Woods (Eds.), The politics of global regulation (pp. 44–88). Oxford University Press.

Birn, A.-E. (2014). Philanthrocapitalism, past and present: The Rockefeller Foundation, the Gates Foundation, and the setting(s) of the international/global health agenda. Hypothesis, 12(1), e8. https://doi.org/10.5779/hypothesis.v12i1.229

Edwards, M. (2008). Just another emperor? The myths and realities of philanthrocapitalism. Demos/Young Foundation.

Fidler, D. P. (2023). Sharing pathogens, sharing benefits, and pandemic preparedness. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 51(S1), 30–38. https://doi.org/10.1017/jme.2023.8

International Labour Organization (ILO). (2017). Tripartite declaration of principles concerning multinational enterprises and social policy (MNE Declaration) (5th ed.). ILO.

Martens, J., & Seitz, K. (2015). Philanthropic power and development: Who shapes the agenda? Brot für die Welt, Global Policy Forum, Misereor.

McGoey, L. (2015). No such thing as a free gift: The Gates Foundation and the price of philanthropy. Verso.

OECD. (2018). Private philanthropy for development. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264085190-en

Reich, R. (2018). Just giving: Why philanthropy is failing democracy and how it can do better. Princeton University Press.

Saner, R., & Yiu, L. (2012). The new diplomacies and humanitarian work psychology. In S. Carr, M. MacLachlan, & A. Furnham (Eds.), Humanitarian work psychology (pp. 127–143). Palgrave Macmillan.

Saner, R., & Yiu, L. (2014). Business diplomacy competence: A requirement for implementing the OECD’s guidelines for multinational enterprises. Business and Politics, 16(1), 42–62. https://doi.org/10.1515/bap-2013-0020

Saner, R., & Yiu, L. (2024). Philanthropy, the 2030 Agenda and UN Diplomacy, Nonprofit Policy Forum, De Gruyter, https://doi.org/10.1515/npf-2023-0109

Stone, D. (2021). Making global policy. Cambridge University Press.

Toepler, S. (2018). Philanthropic foundations and global governance. In T. Davies (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of NGOs and international relations (pp. 211–224). Routledge.

United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. United Nations.

United Nations Foundation. (2023). About the UN Foundation. https://unfoundation.org

World Health Organization (WHO). (2022). Contributions by the Gates Foundation to WHO programmes. WHO.

World Health Organization (WHO). (2023). Pandemic prevention, preparedness and response accord: Zero draft. WHO.