Funding Outcomes or Risk and Innovation? Implications for the Broader Role of Donors

Reflecting on two case studies and insights from experiences with two small grant making funds, the author adopts a practitioner's lens in arguing that donors fund risk-taking and innovation when they fund human rights activism, especially in aggressive human rights contexts such as that of Malaysia. Therefore, there are implications for the broader role of donors. Adopting the concepts of Outcome Mapping, the author first argues that human rights activists and organizations have no control over the achievement of desired outcomes, only of the levels and types of risks they take. The author points out that measures and actions taken to achieve desired outcomes are in effect to avert risk and failure. These measures and actions no doubt reflect a conscious and deliberate planning, but it is one which attempts to bring about the preconditions that are necessary before the desired outcomes can be realized. The author then argues that ideology must match practice, and donors, like human rights organizations, need to leverage their power and influence to help level the playing field for the advancement of human rights and to ensure the independence of human rights work. Drawing insights from two case studies and the practices of two smaller funds, the author suggests that donors more proactively contribute to creating a more enabling environment, and recognize the validity of risk-taking and project failure, which contribute to the learning curve of human rights activists and organizations. Contextual analyses are vital to determining the types and levels of risks to be taken.