Philanthropy in China and Singapore have achieved impressive milestones, driving regional development and addressing critical needs. Yet the way it operates often reveals a deeper tension between wealth, influence, and the communities it claims to serve.

Philanthropy in China closely follows the state’s lead. National strategies like the Belt and Road Initiative determine where funds are directed, while corporate giving tends to prioritize economic visibility and ESG goals over real engagement with local communities. This alignment with state and corporate agendas can leave little room for local voices to shape the work that directly impacts their lives.

Philanthropy in Singapore, on the other hand, is pragmatic and precise, a reflection of the nation’s business-first mindset. Data and measurable outcomes define success – how many schools were built; how many healthcare services were delivered. On paper, these numbers look great, but when efficiency becomes the goal, something vital gets lost: the human connection. Long-term impacts, like building trust, fostering resilience, or empowering local leadership, often get sidelined because they don’t fit neatly into a spreadsheet.

The result? Both approaches risk missing what really matters: the deeper inequalities – whether economic, geographic, or social – that keep communities from thriving. Decision-making stays concentrated at the top, leaving communities with little choice but to conform to donor priorities if they want access to support.

Comparing Philanthropy in China and Singapore

Philanthropy in China: Scale Without Grassroots Agency

China’s ability to mobilize resources for large-scale initiatives, such as poverty alleviation and education reform, is unparalleled. Corporate giants like Tencent and Alibaba lead ambitious philanthropic projects, channelling billions into regional development. However, these efforts align closely with state and corporate priorities, creating a system where philanthropy reinforces national strategies and corporate-driven initiatives while sidelining grassroots organizations and community voices.

A key issue lies in the lack of transparency and level of local engagement. While China implemented massive projects in the areas of poverty, education, and healthcare, the channel to accessing these resources often remain unclear to local practitioners. These projects are typically designed in China, and then introduced to the local partners, either via Chinese embassies or equivalent government agencies in the recipient countries.

Read the full article about philanthropy in China and Singapore by Rui Wang and Sharon Low at Alliance Magazine.