UNLEASHING TRUST IN PHILANTHROPY WITH BLOCKCHAIN BRILLIANCE

AMITY UNIVERSITY ONLINE, NOIDA,
UTTAR PRADESH

In partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award
Master of Computer Applications

TRANSCEND GIVING - UNLEASHING TRUST IN PHILANTHROPY
WITH BLOCKCHAIN BRILLIANCE

Guide Det:
Pro. Neha Tandon
Designation: Professor

Submitted By:

Oyoo Wilfred
A9929721000139 (el)

i

ABSTRACT

In crowdfunding and any forms of traditional philanthropy, the culture of trust stands as a value
for the efficacy and sustainability of charity contributions and goodwill due to the fact that digital
channels of communication were established. Since this establishment, philanthropy, charity and
NGOs have been experienced a great exponential growth. According to reports, this sector has had
an estimated annual growth of 5.1% from $448 billion to $471 billion between the year 2019 and
2020 alone. According to the American Psychological Association, there are approximately 40,000
NGOs and Charities worldwide. Many organizations rely on donations to carry out microfinancing,
while others provide free services locally.
Selfless donors may lose trust in conventional techniques due to a lack of transparency on the
allocation of their funds, increasing the risk of potential misuse or exploitation. Looking at COVID-
19 pandemic, many forms of donations and transactions went utterly digital ranging from not only
the philanthropy sector but other sectors too, as a result, there was a peak in high scamming
activities and transaction fees rendered by financial intermediaries like banks.
In a world of big data and artificial intelligence, blockchain technology has become mature enough
for many practical applications outside the world of cryptocurrencies. In 2008, blockchain, a
sophisticated form of technology was introduced. This rapidly became very popular because of its
unique system of securely recording and storage of information, making it impossible for stored
data to be altered. Blockchain technology is being employed in a wide range of sectors right now.
Information is tracked through a chain of networked computers by placing blocks one after another
each block holds a series of transactions. A specific block is assigned a hash code which contains
a 64-digit value produced by the algorithm SHA256. In case of a cyber-attack whereby a hacker
manipulates the content of one block, there is going to be a variant between the final hash and the
original hash, which aids in detecting the attempt to altering the integrity of the stored information.

ii

A delegated feature like smart contract functionalities is set in place to automate the execution of
preprogramed agreements, hence simplifying the funds disbursement whenever a predetermined
criteria is met.
The research therefore suggests a way of integrating blockchain technology in transactions as a
viable solution for difficulties in the modern philanthropy and charity sectors. This shall act as a
transformative catalyst disrupting the philanthropic frameworks through inherent immutability,
security, and openness of blockchain technology, all completed transactions and fund allocations
are documented on a public ledger accessible to all stakeholders wherever and whenever needed.
Blockchain technology therefore gives room for verification and traceability of every donation and
allocation of fund hence reducing the negative risks associated with fraudulent activities and
operational lapses.
Blockchain based solutions have the ability to greatly improve the efficiency of fund distribution
and the transparency of financial transactions, based on user input and trial results. This can
motivate more individuals or organizations to participate in acts of generosity and charity initiatives
therefore effecting tangible and enduring societal transformations in the long run.

Keywords: Crowdfunding, traditional philanthropy framework, digital channels, donations,
transparency, smart contracts, cryptocurrencies, funds disbursement, financial transparency

iii

DECLARATION

I, Oyoo Wilfred, a student pursuing Master of Computer Application, Semester IV at Amity
University, hereby declare that the project work entitled “Transcend giving – Unleashing Trust
in Philanthropy with block chain brilliance” has been prepared by me during the academic year
2024 under the guidance of Prof. Neha Tandon, Amity University Online, Noida, Uttar Pradesh.
I assert that this project is a piece of original bona-fide work done by me. It is the outcome of
my own effort and that it has not been submitted to any other university for the award of any
degree.

Oyoo Wilfred

iv

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that Oyoo Wilfred of Amity University Online has carried out the project work
presented in this project report entitled “Transcend giving – Unleashing trust in Philanthropy
with block chain brilliance” for the award of Master of Computer Applications under my
guidance. The project report embodies results of original work, and studies are carried out by the
student himself. Certified further, that to the best of my knowledge the work reported herein does
not form the basis for the award of any other degree to the candidate or to anybody else from
this or any other University/Institution.

Ms. Neha Tandon
Professor

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- i
DECLARATION -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- iii
CERTIFICATE ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ v
LIST OF TABLES ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- vi
LIST OF FIGURES ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- vii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION TO THE TOPIC -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1
CHAPTER 2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 6
CHAPTER 3. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY ---------------------------------------------- 44
3.0 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 44
3.1 RESEARCH PROBLEM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 44
3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 45
3.3 TYPE OF DATA USED ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 46
3.4 DATA COLLECTION METHOD ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 46
3.5 DATA COLLECTION Instrument: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 47
3.6 SAMPLE SIZE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 48
3.7 SAMPLING TECHNIQUE --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 48
3.8 DATA ANALYSIS TOOL ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 49
CHAPTER 4. DATA ANALYSIS , RESULTS, AND INTERPRETATION --------------------------------------- 50
CHAPTER 5. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 56
CHAPTER 6. RECOMMENDATIONS AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY ------------------------------- 59
6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 59
6.1 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 60
BIBLIOGRAPHY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 62

vi

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Transcription & coding outcome .................................................................................. 50

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig 1 : OXFAM Uganda Percentage Investment per project ------------------------------------------ 3
Figure 2: Impact of AI in philanthropy ----------------------------------------------------------------- 13
Figure 3 : How DAO functions. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29

1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION TO THE TOPIC

The rise and advancement of information technology tool over the years has given room
for creative problem solving in various fields. Various disciplines are encompassed
within this category, such as modern philanthropy, fundraising and charity. Blockchain
technology is revolutionary in terms of efficiency, security, and transparency, making
it a game-changer in the field of innovations. The funds are distributed to the
impoverished in person (via alms, family and friends, work/study, or a civil society
initiative) and Fundraising isn’t structured in the traditional sense, and it’s also not done
regularly or with transparency. Even if they donated via a bank account, the Internet,
or a mobile phone, donors rarely know how their money was spent (via SMS).
This study aims to introduce a novel concept utilizing blockchain technology. This
concept comprises a transparent crowdfunding platform and an app designed to assist
charitable causes. Crowdfunding and philanthropic organizations can utilize blockchain
technology to address the trust gap and involve donors and supporters in innovative
ways. This may result in increased participation in philanthropic endeavors and creative
initiatives.
As a result, a donation system that assures both transparency and privacy should be
developed. Donors will not want their donations to be made public, whether they are
collected or given to the donation system. Users would be able to establish contacts and
use the system with addresses that were not instantly recognized if they used a donation
system with a blockchain that featured encryption. In a blockchain system like this,
however, the log may be inspected to determine if the same sort of address performs
the same activity over and over again. As a result of the ability to analyze the user’s
actions, a privacy issue may occur.

2

Oxfam is a global organization that fights inequality to end poverty and injustice. They
believe all lives are equal. No one should be discriminated against or live-in poverty.
Oxfam want a world in which everyone can safely speak truth to power, claim their
human rights, and build a better future for themselves. We recognize that we cannot
achieve this on our own but as a collective power. Therefore, work in partnership with
local and grass-root organizations, civil society, individuals, volunteers, the private
sector, and the Government.
The organization’s mandate is guided by the Country Strategic Framework (CSF)
(2021-2030), which is organized around four themes with specific goal sets i.e.
inclusive and accountable governance systems are in place to promote the rights of
vulnerable people, vulnerable and marginalized people are economically empowered
and have resilient livelihoods, people vulnerable to crises are safe, secure, and resilient
and enjoy dignified lives, women and girls from vulnerable communities are
empowered, enjoy their rights and live in dignity (Oxfam in Uganda Annual Report,
2022).
In Uganda, Oxfam delivers this commitment by providing quality and timely
humanitarian support for crisis-vulnerable communities, enhancing resilient
livelihoods, promoting gender justice and women’s rights, and championing inclusive
and accountable governance.
Over the years, the organization has positively impacted the lives of millions of
Ugandans. These were all achieved through a number of comprehensive programs
tailored towards poverty reductions, enhancement of food security, promotion gender
equality, and build more resilient communities.

3

Fig 1 : OXFAM Uganda Percentage Investment per project

In relation to its financing, OXFAM Uganda receives financial assistance from
individuals’ donors who support their cause. Such donations come through a number
of designated channels which include, one-time gifts, recurring donations, legacy gifts
and others. Supporters are often engaged through fundraising campaigns, online
platforms, and direct appeals.
The organization has been able to deliver its programs through funding support from a
number of donors like Oxfam Novid, Oxfam International, Oxfam America, Hewlett
Foundation, Gac, Argidius Foundation, SIDA, IRISH AID, IFAD, EU, ELECTRIC
AID, Donations from Dutch SME’s, OUS-BGR, BILL AND MELINDA GATES,
NORAD, MOFA, KFW, DGD, ECHO, IKEA, DANIDA, KLUB, Wash Innovation
Fund, UNHCR, OGB, OSF, GHT, GIRO555, Dutch Public, IBISS, YORK University,
URBAN- A.
To ensure proper resource allocation and utilization, the organization has opted for
diversification and partnerships beyond NGOs which harnessed the power of diversity
and informal social movements, women’s rights organizations, CSOs, Refugee Led
Organizations, Local Humanitarian Leadership and Community Based Organizations.

4

We continued to pursue strategic partnerships with academic institutions, Government
institutions and agencies and think tanks to generate credible evidence for policy
advocacy. We deepened the Local Humanitarian Leadership, and worked with the
Refugee Led Organization – RLOs and with Networks such as – NoSSCOU, RELON,
ARN, Uganda National Teachers Union (UNATU), West Nile and Western Uganda
Humanitarian Platforms, Platform for LNHA, ADNGON, Karamoja Humanitarian
Alliance, Refugee INGO Forum (RINGO)- Women Led organizations, Youth groups,
Faith-Based organizations, and cultural institutions (like Lugbara Kari and Cross
Cultural Foundation of Uganda according to Oxfam Uganda Annual Report, 2022.

There are some cases involving misuse of funds in operations. According to a report
filed by BBC, 2018, and investigation revealed that OXFAM staff in Haiti misused
donor funds allocated for the natural disaster relief for helping the affected residents.
Reports revealed that these funds were channeled towards activities which were not
appropriate thereby undermining the mission and damaging donor trust.
OXFAM International was publicly criticized for its non-transparency in handling the
allegations and subsequent investigations. This resulted into trust deficit among donors,
beneficiaries and the general public.
According to Civil Society, investigations into various allegations revealed that
OXFAM’s internal controls were inadequate to prevent and detect fraud and
misconduct. This was evident in the Haiti case, where staff members' inappropriate
behaviors went unchecked for extended periods. The lack of robust monitoring and
auditing mechanisms contributed to these issues.
Whereas there are few documented cases on cyber fraud, the increasing reliance on
computerized platforms for donations poses as a vulnerability for OXFAM to potential

5

cybersecurity threats with associated negative impact like financial losses and sensitive
information breach. (Cybersecurity Ventures, 2020).

JUSTIFICATION FOR WHY THIS TOPIC HAS BEEN SELECTED

Taking “Transcend Giving: Unleashing trust in philanthropy with blockchain
brilliance" as a research topic comes with unveiling a number of potential weaknesses
in the traditional philanthropy to the donators plus their intended beneficiaries. These
are as follows;
➢ To find out the concerns related to transparency. The traditional philanthropy
system has suffered from a great deal of transparency issues. Donors have got
limited to no visibility on the utilization of funds donated towards a cause
therefore leading to funds mismanagement.
➢ To find out the inefficiencies of financial intermediaries. The traditional
philanthropy often relies on numerous financial intermediaries with their
associated delays and costs.
➢ To find ways of reducing administrative overhead and ensure that donations are
used as intended. This is possible through smart contract i.e. self-executing
contracts with predefined list of conditions can automate and streamline the
disbursement of funds provided certain conditions are met.
➢ To find out ways of providing real-time updates on the impact of contributions
which enhances donor engagement and satisfaction. Donors can see the
immediate effects of their generosity, which can foster a deeper sense of
connection and stewardship.

6

CHAPTER 2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE

The word philanthropy comes from two Greek words – philein, meaning to love, and
anthropos (as in anthropology), meaning humankind refers to the voluntary act of
giving to promote human welfare.
Traditionally, undertaking philanthropy or charity was initially rooted in moral and
religious obligations seen through provision of aid to those in need whether individuals
or organizations.
Of late, things have evolved a lot with philanthropy being part of the evolution. This is
witnessed through giving via structured foundations, Non-Governmental Organizations
(NGOs), corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives not forgetting the digital
crowdfunding as seen with GoFundMe platform and others. These have greatly
impacted the shape of philanthropy landscape (Breeze, 2020).

The Evolution from traditional charity to modern day structured philanthropy.
Traditional charity. Since the dawn of time, charity initiatives were primarily personal
endeavor and heart driven act and community-based motivations. The act of giving
wasn’t formal, with no track trials needed and usually focused on a right now relief
from hardships rather than a sustainable long-term solution. (Anheier & Toepler, 2020).
Institutional philanthropy. During the industrial revolution in the 1760s, large
philanthropic institutions for instance the Rockefeller Foundation and Ford Foundation
emerged. These organizations formalized the way philanthropy or giving were done.
This was through the introduction of accountability measures and mainly prioritized
strategic long-term impact on beneficiaries (Adam, 2013).
Corporate philanthropy and corporate social responsibility. Focusing on the late 20
th

century, big corporations started implementing the act of giving back to the community

7

into their business models. Corporate social responsibility acts were aimed to balance
the derived profits with impact on the society, these resulted into creation of programs
in education, healthcare not forgetting sustainability on the environment (Porter &
Kramer, 2011).
Digital and data-driven philanthropy. As technology stepped in, it led to the rise of
digital platforms which in turn revolutionized the act of philanthropy. A number of
crowdfunding websites for instance GoFundMe, Crowdfundr, GoGetFunding and
others greatly impacted the way donor engagement and tracking contributions (Gneezy
et al., 2014). On the other hand, the application of data analytics gives organizations a
platform to measure impact in a more effective way and have a more tailored
interventions to a specific need of the community (Salamon, 2015).

Key features of contemporary philanthropy
Transparency and accountability. According to Ostrander 2007, donors usually demand
a more clear and accurate reports on how their funds are being utilized. This in turn
forces the organizations to adopt an independent audits and financial disclosures.
Strategic and impact driven giving. Unlike cases of traditional philanthropy, the modern
one emphasized the need for solving root causes rather than addressing symptoms of
societal problems. Such initiatives are aimed at poverty eradication, education reforms
and conservation of environments (Frumkin, 2006).
Technology driven giving. Charity initiatives have been enhanced by digital platforms
like Digital wallets, blockchain with a more efficient and traceable donations (Swan,
2015).

8

Traditional philanthropy and its core challenges.
Philanthropy has long been plagued by a series of fundamental challenges that hinder
its effectiveness and erode public trust. These challenges include a lack of transparency,
inefficient fund distribution, mismanagement, and fraud.
Lack of transparency. This is one of the core concerns arising from traditional
philanthropy. The opacity or visibility of how funds are collected, disseminated or used.
A number of donors have limited or no access to a real-time information on how their
contributions are being used. This transparency shortage gives room to skepticism and
thus reducing donor engagement in taking part in donation initiatives sooner or later
(Bekkers & Wiepking, 2011). Some philanthropic organization share periodic financial
reports which are often complex for an average giver to read and interpret. This in turn
leads to a reduction in trust in philanthropic institutions (Ostrander, 2007).
Inefficient fund distribution. Processes related to fund control tend to have a number of
bureaucracies which results into slow and ineffective fund distribution. A significant
share of funds donated are usually consumed in compensation cost associated with
administrative, fundraising costs and any other operational overheads rather than being
directly diverted to its intended in beneficiaries (Salamon, 2015). According to recent
papers, less than half of the donated funds actually reach the beneficiaries in need to do
these associated inefficiencies (Frumkin, 2006).
Mismanagement and poor accountability. Costs resulting from mismanagement within
philanthropic institutions is a super critical issue. Shortage of inadequate financial
oversight, underdeveloped governance structures and a weak internal control have
resulted to fund misallocations due to negative impact of waste and ineffective
programs. Not having in place, a proper evaluation metrics have made it so difficult to
measure the impact of donations hence leading to a lack of accountability (Anheier &

9

Toepler, 2020). This mismanagement discourages long-term donor participation and
affects overall credibility.
Corruption and fraud. These issues yet remain a very rampant problem in philanthropy.
Related reports from organizations for instance the United Nations Office on Drugs and
Crime (Canton, 2021) pulled an estimate of billions of dollars in aid are lost yearly as
the result of fraudulent activities inclusive of embezzlement, ghost or fake charities and
misuse of funds. Some of the high-profile cases related to misuse of donations have
further negatively impacted public trust thus discouraging potential donors from
contributing to support a given cause.
Limited donor engagement and retention. Traditional charity has failed in actively
engaging donors beyond their first time contribution. A number of philanthropic
organizations lack mechanisms to provide donors with ongoing feedback on the impact
of their contributions which in turn leads to a reduction in the donor retention rates.
Looking at research done by Charities Aid Foundation (2022) stipulated that over 40%
of contributors hesitate to contribute the second time due to a lack of clear follow-up
notification or feedback and transparency about how their funds are very utilized in
regards to the cause in question.
Geographic and political barriers. Philanthropic initiatives which are cross-border
normally faces challenges resulting from regulatory restrictions, political unrest and
inconsistent legal frameworks. Many low developing countries impose super strict
regulations on donation coming from foreign aid thus making it complicated for
international charities to have room to operate efficiently. In addition to that, political
interference and policies in some regions have a high limitation factor on all
philanthropic efforts (Adam, 2013).

10

The need for innovation in philanthropy
The increasing demand for transparency, efficiency and impact measurement in
philanthropy underscores the need for innovative solutions. Traditional models often
fail to address inefficiencies in fund distribution, accountability and fraud prevention.
Emerging technologies such as blockchain, artificial intelligence (AI) and big data
analytics present new opportunities to enhance philanthropy.
Addressing transparency and trust issues. One of the primary concerns in philanthropy
is the lack of transparency in fund allocation. Reports indicate that as much as 30% of
donations globally are lost due to mismanagement or corruption. Blockchain
technology offers a decentralized, immutable ledger that records every transaction
ensuring complete transparency for donors and stakeholders.
A real-world example is Give Track, a blockchain powered platform developed by the
BitGive Foundation. This system allows donors to track their contributions in real-time,
ensuring that funds reach intended beneficiaries without intermediaries skimming off
resources.
Enhancing efficiency in fund distribution. Traditional philanthropic channels often
involve multiple intermediaries hence leading to administrative inefficiencies and high
transaction costs. Blockchain’s smart contracts can help to automate fund disbursement
thus reducing administrative costs and ensuring timely assistance.
Preventing fraud and mismanagement. Fraud is a major issue in charitable giving with
cases of fake NGOs siphoning funds meant for disaster relief and humanitarian aid.
Blockchain can eliminate fraud by verifying transactions on a public ledger, reducing
the risk of fund diversion. AI-powered monitoring systems can further detect fraudulent
activities and flag anomalies in real-time.
Improving donor engagement and participation. Blockchain based platforms can
enhance donor engagement by providing real-time impact tracking and personalized

11

reports. AI-driven recommendation engines can also suggest causes that align with a
donor’s interests based on past giving patterns.
For example, Alice.si is a blockchain-based philanthropy platform that allows donors
to see the direct impact of their contributions. Charities receive funds only if they meet
pre-defined goals, ensuring accountability and impact measurement.
Reducing geographic and political barriers. Philanthropy often faces geographic and
regulatory barriers that hinder international donations. Cryptocurrency donations
bypass these restrictions, allowing direct peer-to-peer transactions without interference
from financial institutions or governments. A notable example is the Pineapple Fund,
which donated over $55 million in Bitcoin to charities worldwide demonstrating the
power of cryptocurrency in cross-border giving.

The role of technology in modern philanthropy
The landscape of philanthropy has evolved significantly with the rise of digital
technology. Traditional models of charitable giving often characterized by cumbersome
processes and opaque financial flows have increasingly given way to innovative digital
solutions that enhance efficiency, transparency and donor engagement. Financial
technology (fintech), artificial intelligence (AI), and crowdfunding platforms have
redefined how individuals and organizations contribute to social causes. However,
existing digital philanthropy models are not without limitations, as many are still
controlled by centralized institutions and lack real-time tracking mechanisms.
Blockchain technology with its promise of decentralization, secure transactions and
data immutability is emerging as a potential game changer in modern philanthropy.
This section explores the impact of digital disruption the shortcomings of current digital
philanthropy models and the transformative role of blockchain in shaping the future of
charitable giving.

12

The rise of fintech in philanthropy
In the field of financial technology (fintech), numerous industries have been impacted
with philanthropy being one of them. Platforms like PayPal, Venmo or even Mobile
Money services like MTN Mobile Money or Airtel Money have given an easy
playground for donors to make their donations toward a cause of choice.
Fintech programs allow supporters to instantly send financial support to different
causes around the world thus a reduction on costs and elimination of physical barriers.
This on the other hand has greatly positively impacted recurring donations giving well-
wishers room to contribute small amounts at different intervals rather one large
contribution.
Digital platforms like Donor box or GoFundMe have integrated automated payment
triggers with a focus on sustained financial support for different causes.
Despite the benefits being enlightened by fintech, more concerns are still left in the
centralized control and transparency since many platforms with CRMs inclusive are
still charging fees and controlling funds allocation which continues to raise concerns in
regards to trust and transparency.

Artificial Intelligence in philanthropy
AI has been in use in select settings since the 1950s (Anyoha, 2017). With focus to
philanthropy, predictive analysis and donor behavior modeling. This has been of great
help by leveraging data-driven insights, organizations can anticipate donor behavior,
tailor their engagement strategies, and ultimately enhance their fundraising efforts.
The IBM Watson’s Philanthropy assistant an AI powered chatbots has improved donor
engagement through the provision of personalized recommendations in regards to
donation based on past donation patterns.

13

Figure 2: Impact of AI in philanthropy
Looking at such outstanding pros, AI-powered philanthropy is yet another topic with
ethical concerns. Over reliance on artificial intelligence gives rise to bias associated
with algorithm whereby the decision making on what is recommended is slightly
influenced by hidden prejudices resided within the training data and the collected data
on the donor may raise privacy issues when sensitive personal information is involved
in any way.

Integrating social media with crowdfunding platforms
Crowdfunding, a practice enabling individuals to gather financial resources from the
public, has become a multibillion-dollar industry for over a million businesses (Appiah‐
Otoo et al., 2022).
Crowdfunding has been greatly impacted modern day philanthropy in such a way that
donors have a platform to donate directly to the causes without being mediated by any
entity. Applications like GoFundMe, Indiegogo or Kickstarter option have a unique
generated link or URL between donors and recipients with an intent of enhancing peer-
to-peer giving.

14

The alignment between social media and crowdfunding campaign type (for instance, a
public versus a private good) is more likely to play an important moderating role. The
notion of alignment has been examined in various contexts in the information systems
literature (Goodhue & Thompson 1995; Kane & Borgatti 2011; Venkatraman 1989).
For crowdfunding to drive itself to a successful lane, trust and visibility must be
paramount. When tangible records of contributions are seen by donors for instance,
medical bills paid, relief efforts supported in case of natural calamities, they are more
like to get involved. Activities related to crowdfunding are intertwined with e-
commerce, social media, and collaborative consumption. The monetization theory
suggests that crowdfunding backers engage with social media before contributing to
exchange for perks (Hapsari & Sulung, 2021).

Limitations of current digital philanthropy models
In spite the advancements in fintech and other donation platforms, there is a high
centralized control and transactional fees. A number of intermediaries, fundraising
channels are often great controller of donation flows and how funds are processed.
(Bénabou & Tirole, 2010).
Centralization also introduces the risk of institutional bias. Large fundraising
organizations may prioritize specific causes over others, shaping public perceptions of
which issues deserve funding while neglecting less visible social problems.
Lack of real-time tracking and transparency. One of the most critical flaws in traditional
digital philanthropy is the lack of real-time tracking for donations. Many donors
contribute to charitable organizations without knowing exactly how their funds are
spent. The absence of transparent auditing mechanisms creates an environment where
inefficiencies, administrative costs, and corruption can thrive (Transparency
International, 2021).

15

The gap in accountability and fraud. Of late, the digital donation platforms have been
overly exploited due to fraudulent scenarios not limited to fake crowdfunding
campaigns or money laundering.
A study by Chari and Kehoe highlights how cybercriminals have used donation
platforms to funnel illicit funds under the guise of charitable giving.
Additionally, accountability gaps exist in impact measurement. Many charities struggle
to demonstrate measurable outcomes from donations, leading to skepticism among
donors. This lack of impact verification makes it difficult to sustain long-term donor
engagement.

The emerging role of blockchain in philanthropy
Blockchain technology offers solutions to many of the shortcomings of digital
philanthropy by introducing decentralization, secure transactions, and data
immutability.
A shift towards decentralization. Unlike traditional philanthropic models controlled by
central organizations, blockchain enables peer-to-peer giving without intermediaries.
Donations can be sent directly from donors to beneficiaries via cryptocurrency
transactions, reducing the need for third parties and minimizing administrative fees
(Tapscott & Tapscott, 2017).
Decentralized philanthropy platforms such as Giveth and BitGive allow donors to
contribute to projects without relying on centralized institutions. Smart contracts further
automate donation agreements, ensuring funds are released only when predefined
conditions are met.
Secure and immutable transactions. One of blockchain’s most significant advantages is
its immutability once recorded. Transactions cannot be altered or deleted. This feature
enhances transparency as donors can verify every transaction on a public ledger.

16

Real-time tracking and impact verification. Blockchain enables real-time tracking of
donations, ensuring complete visibility into how funds are utilized. Platforms such as
Alice and AidChain use blockchain to record donation flows, allowing donors to see
where, when, and how their contributions are spent (Mougayar, 2016).
Additionally, blockchain can integrate IoT (Internet of Things) technology to verify aid
delivery in humanitarian efforts. For instance, RFID tags and smart sensors can track
the distribution of food, medicine or supplies hence ensuring that resources reach their
intended recipients without diversion or corruption.
In conclusion, technology has undeniably transformed philanthropy making charitable
giving more accessible and efficient. Fintech solutions, Artificial Intelligence driven
analytics and crowdfunding platforms have expanded donor engagement and improved
fundraising strategies. However, current digital philanthropy models still suffer from
centralization, transparency gaps and fraudulent risks.
Blockchain technology presents a paradigm shift by enabling decentralized, secure and
transparent philanthropic ecosystems. This is made possible by eliminating
intermediaries, ensuring real-time tracking and leveraging immutable ledgers.
Blockchain has the potential to address key limitations in modern digital philanthropy.
As adoption increases, blockchain driven philanthropy may redefine how donors
interact with charitable causes thus fostering greater trust, efficiency and impact
measurement in the sector.

Ethical and regulatory framework in blockchain-based philanthropy globally and
in the Republic of Uganda
Blockchain technology offers immense potential for transforming philanthropy by
increasing transparency, reducing fraud, and ensuring that donations reach their
intended recipients. However, its adoption in the philanthropic sector is accompanied

17

by important ethical and regulatory concerns. This includes balancing transparency
with privacy, ensuring compliance with global regulations, and addressing potential
risks and ethical dilemmas, such as fraudulent projects and accessibility issues. These
challenges are particularly significant in Uganda, where the legal framework for
blockchain is still developing, but they are also relevant on a global scale.
One of the most compelling features of blockchain technology is its transparency. Every
transaction on a blockchain is recorded and visible to all participants, ensuring
accountability. However, this transparency can raise ethical concerns, especially
regarding the privacy of donors and recipients.

Concerns about exposing donor and recipient identities
In Uganda and around the world, privacy is a major concern in charitable activities.
Donors may be reluctant to disclose personal information, fearing that their giving
habits could be exposed. Similarly, recipients particularly in vulnerable communities
may be hesitant to have their identities revealed, as it could lead to exploitation,
stigmatization, or further scrutiny.
Global Legal Frameworks on Privacy. Globally, privacy regulations are evolving to
address these concerns. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the
European Union sets a high standard for privacy protection. It requires that
organizations gain explicit consent before processing any personal data and provides
individuals with the right to access and delete their personal data. Similarly, the
California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) grants residents of California similar rights
regarding the collection and sale of their data.
In Uganda, the Data Protection and Privacy Act, 2019 mirrors international standards,
requiring organizations to safeguard personal data and seek consent before processing
it. Blockchain-based philanthropic organizations must ensure that their operations

18

comply with these laws by integrating privacy-preserving technologies into their
platforms.
Privacy-Preserving Blockchain Technologies. To address privacy concerns, blockchain
platforms can employ several technologies:
Zero-Knowledge Proofs (ZKPs). ZKPs enable verification of data without revealing the
underlying information. For example, a donor could prove they made a contribution
without revealing their identity, Privacy-focused Blockchains: Platforms like Monero
and Zcash are designed to keep transactions confidential, making them more suitable
for privacy-sensitive philanthropic transactions, Best Practice Recommendation.
Blockchain-based philanthropy initiatives should adopt privacy-preserving
technologies and work within the frameworks established by data protection laws in
Uganda and globally. This approach would ensure that both donors and recipients can
trust that their identities and personal data are protected.

Compliance and Global Regulation. As blockchain adoption grows, governments and
international organizations are starting to develop frameworks to regulate the use of
this technology, particularly in sectors like finance, philanthropy, and charitable
donations. However, the regulatory landscape is still evolving, and many countries,
including Uganda, do not yet have comprehensive regulations for blockchain-based
philanthropy.

The Republic of Uganda’s regulatory environment
The Uganda’s regulations on blockchain technology and cryptocurrencies are just at an
initial stage. As of today, there is no recognized cryptocurrency as legal tender in
Uganda and neither are there any licensed organizations in Uganda licensed to sell or
facilitate the trade in cryptocurrencies.

19

Due to the anonymity of cryptocurrency users, this can result into an increase in
criminal activities but also portrays a challenge over erosion of the tax base for the
government. In the past, the Uganda Revenue Authority (URA) and the Financial
Intelligence Authority (FIA) had a collaboration with the banking industry to present
information about account holders so as to curb criminal activity such as money
laundering, protect the tax base as well as oversee domestic resource mobilization.
The Parliament of Uganda stipulated some acts like Financial Institutions Act and
Electronic Transactions Act with an intent to provide some guidelines governing all
digital transactions, however they do not direct the exact protocols in blockchain based
philanthropy. In accordance with the statement issued by Bank of Uganda on 29 April
2022, warned the public and all payment systems licensed in money transfer business
to desist from facilitating cryptocurrency transactions or risk punishment. On the other
hand, BOU has shown interest in exploring its potential in various areas.
The country has taken initiatives in embracing digital financial tools for instance
Mobile Money which is seen as a positive indication in the widespread adoption of
blockchain in philanthropy. However, till there is a well-established protocol
streamlining blockchain operations, charity organizations and the concerned parties
must proceed with caution and ensure that they comply with the prevailing regulatory
frameworks.

Global regulations and standards
Meanwhile in the other parts of the world, a dozen of regulatory bodies is developing
frameworks that govern blockchain-based philanthropy and associated initiatives.
The Financial Action Task Force (FATF). Which is also known as Groupe d'action
financière. This is an international policy-making and standard-setting body created by
the G-7 in 1989 dedicated to combating money laundering and terrorist financing.

20

Over the years, FATF has extended its scope with inclusion of virtual assets (VAs) and
also the virtual asset service providers (VASPs) geared towards the prevention of
technology misuse in illicit activities. Further guidance has also been issued to
emphasize on treating these technologies fairly thereby safeguarding the financial
sector.
With focus locally on Uganda, alignment with the international regulatory standards is
being emphasized with an end goal of ensuring that philanthropy with blockchain is
recognized and trusted. A number of standards like anti-money laundering plus know
your customer protocols have been implemented. According to Nile Post report
published on April 22, 2024, BoU moves to enforce national ID use in mobile money
withdrawals. This was as a way of curbing the increasing rate of fraud and cybercrime
related to mobile money platform.

To wrap things up, this invention holds a great potential in transforming charity and its
associated initiatives through empowered transparency, fraud reduction and making
sure the contributions are channeled to the right beneficiaries. Meanwhile those ethical
and regulatory shortcomings can’t be left unaddressed. Cases of privacy and
compliance concerns are still being faced both in Uganda and globally. Therefore, fraud
must be addressed to ensure sustainability of this technology. In future, organizations
like Novib Uganda should ensure they adopt privacy preserving tools and make it a
must to engage with regulators to direct the future of blockchain. Thereby creating a
more transparent and inclusive philanthropic sphere for both donors and beneficiaries.

Understanding blockchain technology
Blockchain technology is so far one of the most transformative technological evolutions
of the century. It has been able to successfully dissect multiple industries inclusive of

21

finance, procurement & supply chain management and the general donations and
philanthropy. Its development incorporates infrastructure for Bitcoin. Over the years,
this has evolved into a very powerful tool seen as a way of enhancing transparency,
decentralization and security in a lot of applications (Nakamoto, 2008).
Looking at the traditional financial systems which are characterized with a centralized
intermediary or group of intermediaries, blockchain technology enables peer-to-peer
transactions secured through cryptographic algorithms and distributed ledger
mechanisms.

This section explores the fundamental concepts of blockchain, its importance in
establishing trust within digital transactions and a comparative analysis of blockchain
versus traditional financial systems in terms of efficiency, security and accessibility.

Fundamental concepts of blockchain
Blockchain is a decentralized, distributed ledger system that records transactions across
a network of computers in a secure and untampered manner. The technology operates
based on three core principles;
Decentralization. Traditional financial systems rely on central authorities such as banks,
governments or even payment processors to verify and facilitate transactions. In
contrast, blockchain removes the need for intermediaries by distributing transaction
data across a network of nodes (Buterin, 2014). Each participant in the blockchain
network maintains a copy of the ledger, ensuring that no single entity has control over
the system. This decentralization reduces the risks associated with central points of
failure, including fraud, censorship, and inefficiencies in transaction processing.
Smart Contracts. Smart contracts are self-executing agreements encoded within the
blockchain, with predefined conditions that trigger automated actions when met

22

(Gabashvili et al., 2022). The generated smart contracts eliminate the need for
intermediaries in transactions such as donations, remittances or service agreements. For
example, in philanthropy, smart contracts can ensure that donated funds are released to
a charity only when predefined conditions, such as project completion milestones, are
met (Mougayar, 2016).
Cryptographic Security. Blockchain transactions are very secured using advanced
cryptographic algorithms thus making them resistant to unauthorized alterations.
Transactions are grouped into blocks whereby each contains a cryptographic hash of
the previous block, therefore creating a chain of blocks that cannot be altered without
invalidating the entire ledger (Narayanan et al., 2016). Public key cryptography ensures
that only authorized parties can access and execute transactions. Each participant in the
network has a unique cryptographic key pair a public key for identification and a private
key for authentication (Bonneau et al., 2015).

Why blockchain matters for trust
Fraud and corruption elimination. One of blockchain’s most direct advantages is its
ability to prevent fraud and corruption in financial or philanthropic transactions. Since
all records on the blockchain are immutable and verifiable by all participants, fraudulent
activities such as embezzlement and misallocation of funds become significantly harder
to execute (Transparency International, 2021). For example, in traditional charitable
giving, contributions may be subjected to misuse due to a lack of accountability.
Blockchain based platforms like BitGive and Alice enable donors to track their
contributions in real-time, ensuring that funds reach their intended beneficiaries
(Golosova & Romanovs, 2018).
Enhancing transparency. Blockchain enhances financial transparency by allowing
anyone to audit transactions on a public ledger. Unlike traditional banking systems,

23

where transaction records are often hidden from public scrutiny, blockchain enables
full visibility of fund movements ensuring that stakeholders can verify financial
activities (Tapscott & Tapscott, 2017). An example is Binance Charity, which utilizes
blockchain to track every donation made on its platform, providing donors with a
detailed breakdown of how their funds are allocated (Howson, 2021).
Ensuring accountability. Blockchain based governance models such as Decentralized
Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) ensure that decision making in philanthropy and
financial transactions follows predefined rules encoded in smart contracts (Wright &
De Filippi, 2015). These self-executing mechanisms eliminate human discretion in fund
allocation, preventing mismanagement and favoritism in resource distribution.

Blockchain vs. Traditional financial systems
While blockchain technology presents numerous merits over conventional financial
systems, it is essential to evaluate its efficiency, security and accessibility compared to
traditional models.

Efficiency in transaction speed and cost. Traditional financial transactions particularly
cross border payments often involve high fees and lengthy processing times due to
intermediary involvement (Ganne, 2018). Banks, payment processors and
clearinghouses introduce delays and additional costs that can burden users. In contrast,
blockchain transactions eliminate the need for intermediaries significantly reducing
transaction fees and processing times. Cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum
facilitate near instantaneous payments across borders at lower costs compared to
traditional banking channels (Antonopoulos, 2017). However, blockchain networks
face scalability challenges. Public blockchains like Bitcoin and Ethereum struggle with

24

network congestion which lead to delay in transactions and increased fees during peak
usage periods (Easley, O’Hara, & Basu, 2019).
Security through fraud prevention and data integrity. Traditional financial systems are
vulnerable to fraud, data breaches and hacking attempts. Centralized databases such as
those used by banks and credit institutions can be exploited by cybercriminals leading
to massive financial losses. Blockchain enhances security through immutable
transaction records, preventing unauthorized alterations. Decentralized storage,
reducing the risk of single-point failures. Public auditability, ensuring that all
transactions remain verifiable by network participants. However, blockchain is not
entirely immune to attacks. While cryptographic security makes hacking difficult,
vulnerabilities such as 51% attacks (where a single entity gains majority control over a
blockchain network) pose risks to certain blockchain models (Bonneau et al., 2015).
Accessibility through inclusion and digital divide. Traditional financial systems often
exclude marginalized populations, particularly in developing countries, where banking
infrastructure is limited. Millions of people lack access to financial services due to
geographical, economic or political barriers (Demirgüç-Kunt et al., 2018). Blockchain
has the potential to bridge financial gaps by providing permissionless financial access
through decentralized platforms. Mobile based cryptocurrency wallets for users without
access to banking services. Tokenized assets allow fractional ownership and investment
opportunities for low-income individuals. However, blockchain adoption faces
challenges related to internet connectivity, technological literacy and regulatory
uncertainties in many developing regions (Ganne, 2018).

In conclusion, blockchain technology represents a paradigm shift in financial
transactions, governance models and trust mechanisms. Through decentralization,
cryptographic security or smart contracts, blockchain ensures greater transparency,

25

fraud prevention and accountability in digital interactions. Compared to traditional
financial systems, blockchain offers greater efficiency, enhanced security and improved
accessibility but faces challenges such as scalability issues, regulatory uncertainties and
the digital divide. As governments, businesses and philanthropic organizations explore
blockchain adoption, addressing these challenges will be critical to unlocking its full
potential in financial inclusion and trust-based economies.

Blockchain in philanthropy being a game changer
The emergence of blockchain technology as a disruptive force across various industries
is reshaping the landscape of philanthropy. Blockchain’s ability to offer transparency,
eliminate intermediaries, automate transactions and enhance governance presents
immense opportunities to transform the philanthropic sector. This section explores the
game changing potential of blockchain in philanthropy addressing transparent
transactions, smart contracts, decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) and the
prevention of corruption in aid distribution.
Transparent transactions and real-time fund tracking. One of the core issues faced by
the philanthropic sector is the lack of transparency in how donated funds are allocated
or used. Many donors express concern over whether their contributions are being
properly managed and directed toward the intended causes. In traditional charitable
organizations, donors often have limited visibility into the actual usage of funds.
Blockchain technology addresses this challenge by enabling transparent, immutable,
and traceable transactions.
Blockchain as a transparent ledger. Blockchain operates as a distributed ledger that
records transactions in a decentralized, secure and immutable manner. Each transaction
is recorded in a block and once confirmed, the block is linked to the previous one
creating a chain of records. This chain cannot be altered retroactively, making the entire

26

transaction history publicly available and auditable. In a philanthropic context, this
means that donors can follow the trajectory of their contributions, from donation to
disbursement, ensuring funds are allocated as promised.
Impact of transparency on donor trust. Transparency facilitated by blockchain has been
shown to significantly improve donor trust.
Real-time tracking of funds. In addition to ensuring transparency, blockchain
technology allows for real-time tracking of funds. Unlike traditional donation systems
where there can be delays or ambiguities in reporting, blockchain updates in real-time
providing all stakeholders with immediate access to data. This can be particularly
valuable in emergency relief situations where rapid fund allocation is critical. The
ability to track how funds are used in real time also allows donors to monitor progress
toward specific goals, further reinforcing trust and engagement with the cause.
Smart contracts for conditional giving. Smart contracts are self-executing contracts in
which the terms of the agreement are directly written into code. The contract
automatically executes when predefined conditions are met, reducing the need for
intermediaries such as banks or lawyers (Tapscott & Tapscott, 2017). In philanthropy,
smart contracts offer a powerful tool for conditional giving, ensuring that donations are
used for their intended purposes.
Automating conditional giving. Smart contracts can automate the release of funds based
on the fulfillment of specific conditions. For example, a donor may contribute to a
project with the condition that funds are only released when certain milestones are
achieved, such as the completion of a building, or the recruitment of staff for a school.
Once the conditions encoded in the smart contract are verified, the contract executes
automatically hence transferring the funds to the designated parties. This eliminates the
need for manual intervention and ensures that funds are released only when the terms
are met.

27

Reducing administrative costs. By eliminating intermediaries, smart contracts help
reduce administrative costs which can otherwise consume a significant portion of the
donation. According to Mougayar (2016), the traditional charity model often involves
a complex web of intermediaries each of whom takes a share of the funds for their
services. Smart contracts streamline this process by automating the transaction ensuring
that more of the donor's money goes directly to the cause. This can enhance the
operational efficiency of charitable organizations and lead to a more cost-effective
distribution of resources.
Mitigating fraud and misuse of funds. Fraud and misuse of funds are persistent
problems in philanthropy. The automation of transactions through smart contracts
mitigates the risks of fraud as there is no room for manual alteration of the agreement
once it has been encoded. Each transaction is executed only if the conditions are met,
and the entire process is recorded on the blockchain which cannot be tampered with.
This therefor ensures that funds are used only for their intended purpose, providing
donors with the confidence that their contributions are secure.

Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) in Charity
Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (“DAOs”) is an emerging form of
organizational structure with no central governing body and whose members focuses
on a common goal of acting in the best interest of the entity.
Decentralized autonomous organizations promise a future of democratized corporate
(or, at least, quasi-corporate) governance. This future stands in contrast to the
contemporary world of business entities, where every state corporation law separates
ownership in and control of corporations, allocating control to the board of directors.
DAOs promise to eliminate this board-level intermediation, instead allowing anybody
who purchases a governance token to vote on strategy, and to implement that strategy

28

automatically, through smart contracts. Popularized by blockchain enthusiasts, DAOs
make decisions using a bottom-up management approach.
DAOs enable digital joint self-organized communities to cooperate on shared goals
without any formal management hierarchy, centralized control, or even third-party
intervention and supervision (Sigh and Kim, 2019).

How DAOs work in philanthropy
Focusing on the field of philanthropy, DAOs randomize and democratize the decision-
making process. Stakeholders who had interest participating in the governance of
charity, voting on initiatives, organizational priorities and project funding.
Each decision recorded within a DAO is transparent, it cannot be altered with an
assurance of accountability and integrity in making a decision.
Increasing donor engagement and trust. DAOs offer a unique opportunity for increased
donor engagement. By allowing donors to actively participate in the governance of the
organization. DAOs foster a sense of ownership and community. This model could be
particularly appealing to younger tech-savvy generations who value transparency,
democracy and decentralization. As DAOs are based on blockchain technology, all
decisions and transactions are visible to everyone hence increasing trust among
participants.

29

Examples of DAO implementation in philanthropy
A DAO-based charitable organization could allow donors to vote on how funds should
be allocated which causes should be prioritized and how the impact of projects should
be measured. This level of transparency and participation could greatly enhance donor
confidence and encourage continued support. Additionally, DAOs could help reduce
the inefficiencies and corruption that can arise in traditional top-down organizational
structures, as all decisions and transactions are encoded in smart contracts and publicly
visible.

Eliminating corruption in aid distribution.
Corruption remains one of the most significant barriers to the effective distribution of
humanitarian aid. According to Transparency International (2021), billions of dollars
intended for humanitarian assistance are lost to corruption every year. Blockchain has
the potential to tackle this problem by providing an immutable, transparent ledger for
tracking funds and resources.
Figure 3 : How DAO functions.

30

Blockchain’s decentralized nature makes it resistant to manipulation or fraud. Once a
transaction is recorded on the blockchain, it cannot be altered, providing an indelible
record of all transactions. In aid distribution, this can ensure that funds are not diverted
or misused. Blockchain can be used to track the flow of funds from donors to recipients,
providing real-time data on how resources are being spent.
Corruption often occurs through intermediaries in the aid distribution chain. Blockchain
technology allows for direct transfers of funds to recipients, eliminating the need for
intermediary organizations that may siphon off resources. By cutting out these
intermediaries, blockchain ensures that funds reach their intended destinations, thus
reducing opportunities for corruption and fraud.
Blockchain’s transparent nature also allows for greater accountability in the distribution
of aid. Governments, organizations, and auditors can track the flow of resources at
every step of the process, ensuring that they are used in accordance with donor
agreements and ethical standards. This level of accountability is particularly important
in regions where corruption is rampant and where humanitarian organizations must
work to restore public trust in aid operations.

In conclusion, blockchain technology is emerging as a transformative tool in the
philanthropic sector, offering innovative solutions to challenges such as transparency,
accountability, and corruption in aid distribution. By providing transparent, traceable,
and immutable transaction records, blockchain fosters trust among donors and reduces
the risk of fraud. Smart contracts automate the disbursement of funds based on
predefined conditions, while DAOs enable decentralized governance, giving all
stakeholders a voice in decision-making. Furthermore, blockchain eliminates
corruption in aid distribution by creating an immutable record of transactions that
cannot be manipulated. As blockchain adoption grows, it has the potential to

31

revolutionize philanthropy by making charitable giving more efficient, transparent, and
secure. By embracing blockchain, charitable organizations can build stronger
relationships with donors, increase operational efficiency, and ensure that resources are
used for their intended purpose. Ultimately, blockchain holds the promise of creating a
more transparent, equitable, and effective philanthropic ecosystem, one that can meet
the growing demands of today’s complex global challenges.

Case studies of blockchain-based philanthropy
Blockchain technology penetration into a number sectors with focus on philanthropy as
a very interesting field for innovation. One of the major features of blockchain for
instance transparency, security or decentralization gives it a unique advantage for
ensuring accountability and efficiency in philanthropy and donations. This chapter
therefore gives an insight into some of the most prominent case studies of blockchain
based philanthropy with emphasis of experiences derived from implementations and a
detailed analysis on impact of donor trust versus the operational efficiency.

Global successful models of blockchain in philanthropy
A lot of organizations around the world are implementing or already have implemented
blockchain technology in projects. Many features of the technology are being brought
to live in their operations for instance efficiency, transparency or accountability.
Here are some of the successful implementations.
Binance Charity Foundation. This is a non-profit organization dedicated to building a
future where Web3 technology is used as a force for good. They have adopted
blockchain technology at a wider scale founded 2017 by Binance.
Giveth is another platform that has made a significant contribution to blockchain-based
philanthropy. Built on the Ethereum blockchain Giveth is a decentralized platform that

32

allows donors to contribute to charitable projects while ensuring complete transparency
and accountability. Giveth uses smart contracts to manage donations and ensure that
funds are allocated in accordance with donor preferences. One of the standout features
of Giveth is its Impact Tracking system which allows donors to monitor how their
contributions are being used in real time. This is crucial for building trust, as donors
can see exactly where their money is going and how it is being spent. Giveth also
provides a platform for donors to vote on which projects should receive funding thus
promoting a more democratic approach to philanthropy.
In addition to its use of blockchain for tracking donations, Giveth focuses on building
a community driven ecosystem. Donors and recipients are both part of the decision-
making process which helps to ensure that the funds are used effectively and in a
manner that aligns with the needs of the community.
While Giveth has faced challenges in scaling its operations, its focus on transparency
and community participation has helped it carve a niche as a leader in blockchain-based
philanthropy.
The BitGive Foundation, founded in 2013 is one of the earliest adopters of blockchain
technology in the philanthropic sector. The foundation operates the Give Track
platform which enables donors to track their donations in real-time on the Bitcoin
blockchain. BitGive works with a variety of nonprofit organizations to fund initiatives
in areas such as clean water access, education, and disaster relief.
Bit Give’s Track platform is designed to provide transparency and accountability to
donors. By recording donations on the blockchain, BitGive ensures that funds are used
for their intended purposes. For example, one of its key partnerships was with
Water.org, a nonprofit focused on providing clean water to underserved communities.
Through the Give Track platform, donors were able to see exactly how their funds were

33

being used to build water wells in different regions improving both donor confidence
and the overall impact of the initiative.
BitGive has faced challenges in scaling its operations as the Bitcoin network’s
transaction costs and processing times can be high particularly during periods of high
demand. However, the foundation's use of blockchain has helped it provide
transparency, build trust with donors, and reduce the risk of fraud in its philanthropic
efforts.

Case Studies of Blockchain in Philanthropy
Blockchain Technology has the potential to provide substantial benefits in the
humanitarian sector, such as protected data sharing, supply chain, donor financing, cash
programs and crowdfunding. By providing a decentralized, verifiable source of data,
Blockchain Technology can enable a more transparent, efficient form of information
and data management.
The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent (IFRC) in collaboration
with AID. Tech together with the Irish Red Cross (IRC) and Lebanese Red Cross
piloted a Blockchain project in Tripoli, Aker Refugee Camp and Beirut. The project
provided digital identities to 100 Syrian refugee families to allow them to use an
electronic voucher to purchase commodities. The pilot was considered a success
because families were able to purchase goods and services with ease and the IRC
tracked the whole process in real time.
In May 2018, KRCS in collaboration with IFRC conducted a Blockchain Open-Loop
Cash Transfer pilot project in Isiolo County, Kenya. The primary focus of this project
was to understand Blockchain Technology potential for transparency and
accountability, which is important to the humanitarian sector. This was the first of its
kind in the humanitarian sector, given that previously, the use of Blockchain

34

Technology for cash transfers by humanitarian organizations has mostly used the
closed-loop payment mechanisms such as e-vouchers, where payments are linked to
merchants’ specifics outlets. In this case, Blockchain was explored to make CTP more
effective, by promoting timely delivery of aid while strengthening transparency and
accountability to beneficiaries and donors.
In February 2018, UN Women, the UN Office of Information and Communication
Technology (UN OICT) in collaboration with Innovation Norway, held a four-day
workshop that brought together seven Blockchain Technology companies and other UN
agencies, to find a way of using Blockchain based technologies to help address
challenges faced by women and girls around the world. From the workshop, it was
evident that, humanitarian aid organizations need to embrace new technologies to
ensure that no one is left behind during crises.

The Blockchain Association of Uganda has been among the pioneers of promoters of
blockchain technology especially the emphasis on its associated good.
BAU was first introduced in 2017 with an intent to bring together blockchain advocates
under a shared vision to advance blockchain technology in the country. Through
advocacy, collaboration, and educational outreach, the association has been
instrumental in shaping Uganda’s blockchain ecosystem, enhancing public
understanding, and mitigating risks like cryptocurrency scams. One of the association’s
primary missions has been to address Uganda’s knowledge gap concerning blockchain.
It is because of the knowledge gap scams entered the market and it was very difficult
for many Ugandans to distinguish blockchain’s distinctions from cryptocurrency and
scams. (Ivan, 2018).

35

Lessons from failed or challenging implementations
Blockchain technology has proven its effectiveness in a number of philanthropic
systems but has encountered a great deal of challenges or hurdles that hindered its
ability to scale up and reach its full potential.
Scalability and transaction speed. This is one of the biggest challenges for the
blockchain philanthropy platforms. Blockchain networks, such as Bitcoin and
Ethereum, face limitations in terms of transaction speed and processing capacity. As
the number of donations grows, these networks can become congested, leading to
delays and higher transaction fees. For example, during periods of high demand,
Ethereum's network can experience slow transaction times and high gas fees, which can
make it less suitable for large-scale philanthropic initiatives.
Organizations like BitGive and Binance Charity have faced similar scalability issues
when attempting to accommodate high volumes of donations. These shortcomings are
particularly challenging in cases where timely disbursement of funds is critical such as
during natural disasters or crises.
Adoption barriers in developing countries. In Uganda, one of the main barriers to
blockchain adoption in philanthropy is a lack of technological literacy among potential
stakeholders. Many local individuals particularly those in rural areas are not familiar
with cryptocurrency and blockchain technology, in fact they consider digital money as
a scam. This lack of knowledge creates a barrier to entry for both donors and charitable
organizations that might want to leverage blockchain for fundraising.
While mobile money systems such as MTN Mobile Money and Airtel Money are
widely used in Uganda, blockchain-based platforms require a certain level of technical
expertise that may be beyond the reach of many Ugandans. Furthermore, the cost of
cryptocurrency transactions and the complexity of blockchain interfaces can deter

36

individuals from participating in blockchain-driven charitable giving (Uganda
Communications Commission, 2021).
Technological constraints. Technological constraints are yet other challenges faced by
blockchain philanthropy projects. While blockchain offers a transparent and immutable
record of transactions, it requires significant infrastructure to ensure its widespread
adoption and expansion. In Uganda specifically, the necessary infrastructure for
blockchain based charity is still developing. This includes reliable internet access,
secure wallet systems and widespread adoption of cryptocurrency exchanges that can
facilitate donations.
Blockchain based platforms also face issues with interoperability. Many philanthropic
projects require collaboration with other institutions and the lack of interoperability
between different blockchain platforms can create friction in the donation process. This
is particularly problematic when charities work across borders as different countries
have different regulatory environments for cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology
(Swan, 2015).

Impact analysis on how blockchain’s effectiveness in increasing donor trust and
operational efficiency
The impact of blockchain on philanthropy can be measured in terms of donor trust,
operational efficiency and overall effectiveness in delivering aid. Let’s examine how
blockchain technology is changing the way donations are handled and the positive
outcomes associated with its use.
Increasing donor trust. One of the key benefits of blockchain in philanthropy is the
ability to increase donor trust. Traditional charity systems are often plagued by concerns
over fund mismanagement, corruption, and a lack of transparency in how donations are

37

used. Blockchain’s decentralized nature and transparent ledger help address these
concerns by providing donors with verifiable records of where their contributions go.
For example, Binance Charity’s use of blockchain to track disaster relief donations
ensures that donors can follow the funds in real time, from the donor to the recipient.
This level of transparency has proven to increase donor confidence, as they are able to
verify that their contributions are being spent in accordance with their intentions. In
Uganda, where transparency in the distribution of foreign aid is a major concern,
blockchain has the potential to significantly improve trust in charitable organizations.
Operational efficiency and cost reduction. Blockchain’s ability to reduce transaction
costs and streamline donation processes is another significant advantage. Traditional
charity systems often involve multiple intermediaries which can add administrative
costs and delays to the donation process. By eliminating these intermediaries and using
smart contracts to automate fund disbursement, blockchain helps charities save time
and resources. In Uganda, blockchain could revolutionize the way charities manage
their operations by allowing them to reduce overhead costs. For example, blockchain
based platforms can automate the distribution of donations thus ensuring that funds are
transferred directly to the recipients without the need for manual intervention. This can
significantly improve the efficiency of charitable organizations and reduce the
administrative burden of managing donations (Iansiti & Lakhani, 2017).

Future prospects and recommendations for blockchain in philanthropy
Blockchain technology has emerged as a groundbreaking tool poised to transform many
industries. Among these is the philanthropic sector, where its potential for transparency,
traceability and efficiency holds promise for making charitable giving more impactful,
accessible and secure. While blockchain adoption is still in its early stages, emerging
trends such as the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI), the utilization of Non-

38

Fungible Tokens (NFTs) for social good and the development of tokenized donations
present exciting opportunities for the future. However, for blockchain to achieve its full
potential in philanthropy, it will require careful consideration of policy, regulation and
institutional support as well as efforts to bridge the digital divide to ensure inclusivity
across the globe. In this section, we will explore these future prospects in greater depth
propose actionable recommendations for governments, non-governmental
organizations (NGOs), corporations and other key stakeholders and later examine the
broader issues related to bridging the digital divide to ensure equitable access to
blockchain-driven philanthropy.

The future of blockchain philanthropy
Blockchain technology offers unparalleled transparency for nonprofits or even
philanthropy. By recording transactions on an immutable ledger, donors can trace their
contributions in real-time ensuring funds are utilized as intended. This level of
transparency fosters trust and accountability encouraging more substantial and frequent
donations. Moreover, the technology can streamline administrative processes which
reduces overhead costs and allowing organizations to allocate more resources directly
to their causes.
Ai integration in blockchain for philanthropy. Artificial Intelligence (AI) has already
revolutionized a variety of sectors and its integration with blockchain promises to
enhance the effectiveness of philanthropic initiatives. One of the most compelling uses
of AI within the context of blockchain based philanthropy is its ability to streamline
operations and optimize resource allocation. AI systems can analyze vast amounts of
data to identify patterns in donation behaviors which can be used to predict future trends
in charitable giving thereby assisting organizations in tailoring their campaigns to
achieve maximum impact.

39

Furthermore, AI could enable blockchain platforms to automatically verify the
legitimacy of charitable organizations. Through the use of machine learning algorithms,
blockchain systems could assess an NGO’s credibility by analyzing historical data,
social media activity, and other publicly available information. This level of automation
could significantly reduce the time and effort spent on due diligence, ensuring that
funds are directed to trustworthy causes.
Beyond operational efficiencies, AI also holds the potential to enhance decision making
through predictive analytics. For instance, AI models could be used to forecast which
causes are most likely to attract donor interest allowing philanthropic organizations to
adjust their strategies proactively. Such predictive capabilities could be especially
beneficial in times of crisis, when rapid decision-making and resource mobilization are
required.
Moreover, AI combined with blockchain can also facilitate the automation of smart
contracts. Smart contracts are self-executing contracts with terms and conditions
written into code. In the context of philanthropy, these contracts can ensure that
donations are only released when specific conditions are met such as verifying that the
intended recipient has received the aid. This reduces the risk of fraud and increases
donor confidence since funds are disbursed transparently and without human
intervention.

NFTs for social good.
Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) which have become famous for their use in the art world
are increasingly being explored for their potential in philanthropy. NFTs are unique
digital assets that exist on a blockchain representing ownership of a specific item or
piece of content such as artwork, music or even virtual real estate. In the philanthropic

40

sector, NFTs can be used to represent ownership or participation in charitable activities
thus enabling donors to receive a tangible tradable asset in return for their contributions.
NFTs have several advantages when used in philanthropy. Firstly, they provide a novel
and engaging way to raise funds for charitable causes. By creating NFTs that represent
a limited-edition piece of digital art charities can auction these items to the highest
bidder with proceeds going directly to the cause. For example, an artist could create an
NFT representing a charity’s mission and later auctions the token with all funds being
donated to the charity. Additionally, NFTs can serve as a powerful tool for donor
engagement. By issuing NFTs to donors, organizations can create a sense of ownership
and connection between the donor and the cause. These digital assets could act as a
form of recognition for the donor’s contribution allowing them to showcase their
support within their own digital networks. This social validation can encourage others
to get involved which later fosters a community of philanthropists around the cause.
NFTs also present an opportunity for the intersection of the physical and digital worlds.
Charities could create NFT-based membership or pledge programs where donors
receive NFTs representing their commitment to a particular project. These NFTs could
unlock access to exclusive events, content or experiences further incentivizing
donations. By gamifying the donation process, NFTs can attract a younger or tech-
savvy demographic and provide a modern approach to fundraising.
Despite their potential, NFTs also present challenges. The energy consumption
associated with minting and trading NFTs on certain blockchains such as Ethereum has
raised concerns about their environmental impact. For NFTs to become a sustainable
fundraising tool, it will be important for philanthropic organizations to use energy-
efficient blockchain platforms or integrate carbon-offset mechanisms into their NFT
campaigns.

41

Tokenized donations in charitable giving.
In recent years, tokenization has gained grit to revolutionize various industries. One
area where it shows potential is in the field of philanthropy or charity.
Tokenized donations consist of asset conversion on a real-time basis for instance, goods
or currency or goods into portable digital tokens used in donations. Such tokens can
abstract a large form of asset ranging from fiat money to cryptocurrencies that can be
tracked, exchanged or audited on a blockchain. This is considered more flexible in
donation towards a cause.
The potential for tokenization to enable new forms of philanthropic giving is an exciting
development in the world of social impact.
For instance, a well-wisher can put in their donations through blockchain token towards
a cause or charity. This transaction is then recorded on a public ledger to ensure with a
goal of ensuring accountability or transparency. These same tokens can also be used to
facilitate micro-donations which gives room for donors to make small contributions on
a recurring basis.
This is so advantageous when reaching a wider group of individuals inclusive of those
with intention to donate but not able to make larger contributions
The aim of the technology is to make sure that tokenized donations are very secured,
transparent and traceable when need arises hence giving donors a clear record on how
contributions are being utilized.

Corporate responsibility and blockchain adoption
Elite and corporations especially players in the technology sector have a sole
responsibility to aid the implementation of blockchain based philanthropy. This is
possible in the following ways;

42

Provision of funds and technical support. Grants and sponsorship can be channeled
towards blockchain powered philanthropy. This could include funding the development
of blockchain platforms or donating infrastructure like cloud computing services.
Promote Corporate Social Responsibility through Blockchain. Corporations can
integrate blockchain into their CSR efforts by enabling customers to donate using
cryptocurrency or tokens. Additionally, they could leverage blockchain to demonstrate
transparency in how they distribute their charitable contributions.
Foster industry collaboration. Corporations should collaborate with governments,
NGOs and other stakeholders to develop standards and best practices for blockchain
philanthropy. This will ensure that the technology is adopted ethically and sustainably
across the sector.
Ensuring universal internet access. For blockchain philanthropy to be inclusive, it is
essential to provide equitable access to the internet especially in rural or underserved
regions. Governments and international organizations must prioritize investments in
internet infrastructure and mobile networks to connect marginalized communities.
Promoting digital literacy. Increasing digital literacy is crucial to ensure that people can
fully participate in blockchain-driven philanthropic efforts. Governments and NGOs
should prioritize digital education programs, focusing on blockchain technology and its
benefits for charitable giving.
Facilitating financial inclusion. Blockchain technology can play a crucial role in
improving financial inclusion, especially in countries with large unbanked populations.
By integrating mobile payment solutions and cryptocurrencies into the blockchain
ecosystem, charities can facilitate donations from individuals without access to
traditional banking systems.
In conclusion, blockchain technology holds immense potential to revolutionize the
modern-day philanthropy with focus of improving transparency, fraud deduction and

43

increased efficiency. The future of blockchain based philanthropy will see the
integration of AI, NFTs and tokenized donations with each bringing innovative
solutions to long-standing challenges in the charitable sector. However, for blockchain
philanthropy to realize its full potential, careful attention must be paid to regulatory
frameworks, institutional support, and ensuring inclusivity for all individuals,
regardless of their digital access or literacy. By fostering collaboration between
governments, NGOs, corporations, and other stakeholders, blockchain can become a
force for good, enabling a more transparent, efficient, and inclusive global
philanthropic ecosystem.

44

CHAPTER 3. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES AND
METHODOLOGY

3.0 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
➢ Promote transparency and accountability in philanthropy. This project seeks to
establish a digital platform the utilizes blockchain through provision of
transactions in a more verifiable record.
➢ Expand accessibility and world-wide reach. This is achieved through enabling
seamless yet low-cost cross border transactions with the aim of ensuring that
the intended beneficiaries of aid get access to the funds in complete form.
➢ To empower stakeholders through real-time data insights. This is through real-
time dashboards and sophisticated tools which provide detailed impact tracking
of their donations. This in turn would promote a meaningful and informed
engagement.
➢ Strengthen trust in philanthropic systems. Having this platform in place
enhances donor confidence through the creation of a secure decentralized
transaction ecosystem with an aim of mitigating fraud thereby building a long-
lasting relationship between stakeholders.
➢ Optimize philanthropic efficiency. Donation process automation with smart
contracts makes fund disbursements, verification of desired milestones,
minimization of delays and would be cost related to administration.
3.1 RESEARCH PROBLEM

➢ Like any other societal problems in Uganda, philanthropy or donations and related
activities encounters a number of shortcomings related to transparency, trust and
accountability. Contributors normally have limited visibility into how their efforts are
being put into used, this in turn results into skepticism and reduced confidence among

45

philanthropic and charity organizations. In addition to that, inefficiencies in distribution
of donations, associated administrative costs and cases of fund mismanagement further
have impacts on these trust issues.
Blockchain technology is considered a great proposal to solving these challenges
through features like transparency, immutable records and a decentralized governance.
However, there are significant barriers to its adoption in Uganda. Such factors include
the following but not limited to limited technological infrastructure, changes in
Uganda’s regulatory framework, low digital literacy, and financial inclusion
challenges. In relation to such hurdles, it is unclear whether this technology can address
these challenges with longstanding trust issues in the sector. This study focuses on the
potential of blockchain in transforming the philanthropy in Uganda while pinpointing
the shortcomings and implementation barriers.
3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN

➢ This paper adopts a design which takes a mixture of different methods incorporating
both qualitative and quantitative directives to take a deeper dive into the role of
blockchain technology in shaping the aspect of transparency, accountability and trust
in charity initiatives in Uganda. The qualitative approach emphasizes on in-depth cases
from the different stakeholders through interviews and case studies. However, the
quantitative approach focuses on methods like structured surveys with end result of
acquiring the level of perception and adoption of blockchain technology. This approach
gives insight on comprehensive understanding of shortcomings and blockchain in the
philanthropy.

46

According to Kothari (2004), a research design comprises of the arrangement of stipulated
conditions for collection and analysis of data with an aim of combining relevance in line with
the research objectives. The approach will allow adequate investigation and triangulation of
data from various sources. The approach will emphasize on the strengths while minimizing the
weaknesses of each type of data collection technique within the charity organization of choice
(Oxfam International Uganda). The findings, conclusion and recommendation can therefore be
transmitted even to organizations who are affected with the same issues regarding transparency
in philanthropic funds allocation and utilization.
3.3 TYPE OF DATA USED

The study utilized both primary and secondary data sources.
➢ For primary source of data, forms like document, or other sort of evidence written,
created or otherwise produced during the time of conducting the study were utilized.
For instance, self-administered questionnaire, face-to-face interviews and direct
observation.
➢ Secondary data sources were mainly library research and analysis of past related
documents like review of printed media on donation financial misuse, internet sources
and newspapers. These were cited in bibliography.

3.4 DATA COLLECTION METHOD

Methodology is a foundation of broad principles from which specific methods are derived in
order to give a detailed interpretation and solve problems within the scope of a given project
research.
According to Lowder, 2018 facts gathering and presentation depends on the data collection
methods chosen. A blend of several data collection methods was applied to collect the
necessary data. This was therefore aimed at triangulating and authenticating the data collected.

47

Through this, the intrinsic biases that emerge as a result of using of a single method of data
collection was minimized.

➢ Qualitative methods
Semi-structured interviews were conducted with stakeholders composed of representatives
of charity organizations, givers and experts.
Focus groups with target stakeholders of philanthropy with an aim of gathering their
thoughts on transparency and accountability aspects.
Selected case studies on organizations who adopted and implemented this technology in
charity where available.

➢ Quantitative methods
Surveys disseminated to a number of stakeholders inclusive of donors, NGOs and
beneficiaries which was purposely directed towards capturing measurable data concerning
issues and opportunities for adopting blockchain technology.
3.5 DATA COLLECTION Instrument:

➢ Interview guides; A semi structured interview with open-ended questions were
designed to capture valuable insights on the potential of blockchain technology, its
associated challenges plus practical considerations for philanthropy.
➢ Survey questionnaires; A structured set of questionnaires were drafted to quantify
levels of trust and the readiness for how soon blockchain can be adopted. This
questionnaire included Likert scale questions, multiple choice and open-ended
sections.

48

➢ Focus group guides; A number of questions customized for group discussions to give
a tour or experiences and views of beneficiaries in regards to current practices in
philanthropy and this technology could have these concerns addressed.

3.6 SAMPLE SIZE
Any research project which interest in making inferences in regards to population, the sample
size is a vital supplement.
The sample size refers to the number of units or people that are chosen from which the
researcher wishes to gather information or data (Evans et al, 2000). For the purpose of this
study, the researcher will use a mathematical formula of Tora Yamane to determine the sample
size as illustrated below.
Where;
N – The total population of the respondents.
e – The confidence level.
N = ?????? 1+??????(??????)2

➢ Interviews. A range of 15 to 20 respondents were selected. This was inclusive of
members representing the charity organizations, government entities not forgetting the
blockchain pundits.
➢ Focus groups. About 4 to 5 groups having an average of 6 to 8 members which closely
represented the beneficiaries in philanthropic initiatives.
➢ Surveys, a sample of approximately 150 to 200 respondents were randomly picked
inclusive of donors, beneficiaries and charity organizations in Uganda.
3.7 SAMPLING TECHNIQUE

49

➢ Technique like the purposive sampling was conducted. This was applied through the
selection of interviewees and participants for the focus group based on their knowledge
and involvement in the philanthropic or blockchain sectors. This technique ensured that
the stakeholders provided a more in-depth insights about application of blockchain in
philanthropy.
➢ Convenience sampling technique was also employed during the surveys in order to
reach a wider number of stakeholders which was inclusive of donors and beneficiaries.
This on the basis of their willingness to participate and availability.
3.8 DATA ANALYSIS TOOL

According to Hyndman (2008), data processing involves translating the answers on a
questionnaire into a form that can be manipulated to produce statistics.
➢ SPSS application tool was applied in conducting both descriptive and inferential
statistical analyses. Focusing on descriptive statistics i.e. mean, median, standard
deviation were used to derived key trends however, correlation or regression analysis
as part of inferential statistics were conducted to examine the relationship between
variables like transparency level and trust in addition to blockchain adoption readiness.
➢ Qualitative analysis was conducted through thematic analysis to analyze focus group
discussions and interview transcripts. For data coding, the NVivo software came into
play to identify patterns and insights regarding the application of blockchain in
philanthropy and donation initiatives.

50

CHAPTER 4. DATA ANALYSIS, RESULTS, AND
INTERPRETATION

The research data collected is aimed at examining how the blockchain technology and features
will rail philanthropy concerns like accountability, trust and transparency in Uganda’s charity
sector through various analysis shared in this chapter. This will offer thorough insights on
possibilities and would be obstacles for adoption of blockchain through the examination of
both qualitative and quantitative data sets.
Qualitative data analysis; When representing information and concepts that were non
numerical, samples were collected from 20 semi-structured interviews, 5 focus groups and 3
case studies. For further analysis, NVivo application was employed which aided a lot in
identifying key areas related to trust, transparency and associated potential drawbacks
hindering adoption of blockchain.
a) Transcription and Coding
Results from interviews and focused group discussions were transcribed while the outcome of
the thematic coding was applied in data organization. In the process of using open coding, 47
codes were identified which necessitated further refinement during axial coding, three main
themes were realized. i.e. Trust and transparency, blockchain benefits, and challenges to
adoption.

Table 1: Transcription & coding outcome
b) Major themes
Trust and transparency. Trust has for a while been identified as a major issue among the key
stakeholders. A couple of participants expressed their frustration with the low level of
transparency in the philanthropy projects of recent.

51

A number of stakeholders have always raised their concerns on how their funds were being
used not forgetting instances were beneficiaries often reported cases were resources promised
by donors never reached them. Looking at one scenario where one participant from a local
NGO noted, ‘we constantly face complaints from donors about unclear reporting platform for
funds utilization.’
Blockchain benefits. Benefits associated with blockchain has been widely acknowledged by a
number of beneficiaries. A participant noted that the ability of blockchain technology to offer
a real time immutable records, trust and transparency increment. One added, ‘blockchain
could give us moral that our donations are getting channeled where they are to make impact
on lives of beneficiaries, without being tampered with.’
Barriers to adoption. Despite the enthusiasm, a number of shortcomings were raised inclusive
of low digital literacy, improper regulatory framework and inadequate infrastructure to
support blockchain technology. Most participants argued that Uganda’s digital infrastructure
will need a revamp for this technology to be successfully implemented.

Quantitative Data Analysis
Quantitative data on the other hand is in numerical form. This implies that they can be counted
or have comparison done on a numerical scale.
When collecting quantitative data, structured surveys was administered to 200 respondents
comprising of donors, charity works and the intended beneficiaries. As the result, a response
rate of 86.5% was yielded of which 173 responses were valid. To perform analysis on data,
SPSS program was used with much focus on descriptive and inferential statistics.

a) Descriptive Statistics

52

Trust in charity organizations; Utmost 38% of respondents reported a high trust level in
philanthropic organizations, looking at the majority, over 47% expressed a moderate trust level
and the remaining summing up to 15% indicated a low trust level in philanthropy.
Perceived blockchain transparency; Looking at the majority of respondents, 64% strongly
agreed that this technology could help in improving transparency, however, 23% agreed and
the remaining 13% were neutral.

b) Inferential Statistics
Correlation analysis; When a applying a Pearson correlation analysis, it was realized that there
was a negative correlation between donor’s trust in philanthropic systems and their willingness
to support blockchain adoption i.e. (r = -0.53, p < 0.05), in such regard this means those would
be donors with lower trust in the systems would have a higher chance to adopt blockchain as a
quick solution in philanthropy.
Regression Analysis; Based on the test results of numerous regression analysis, transparency
(β = 0.49, p < 0.01) and technological readiness (β = 0.34, p < 0.05) significantly predicted a
higher chance of adopting blockchain technology. This implies that concerned parties like
organizations and donors which higher expectations on transparency and able to implement the
needed technology have a high likelihood to adopt the blockchain initiatives.

RESULTS
This chapter begins with presenting the participating interview respondents and organizations
from the questionnaire. It then progresses to discusses the results of the interviews and the
questionnaire.
High rate of response denotes that the findings are representative of the target population.
Response rate could mean an extent to which all the samples collected takes care of all the

53

sample items, a ratio of the actual respondents to anticipated number of persons who responds
to the study.
Trust and Transparency Issues. The thesis pinpoints these issues as a weak foundation in the
Uganda’s charity sector. Both donors and beneficiaries have shown a great deal of discomfort
in regards to the current system in operation i.e. resource misuse or misallocation of resources
thus eliminating the intended beneficiaries from enjoying the benefits associated with that
donation. In regards to the conducted survey, about 38% of the respondents reported high levels
of trust in charity organization which isn’t a good image.
Blockchain technology has got a great potential to impact all record keeping processes
inclusive of initiation, processing, and others. The collected data suggest a broad support to
blockchain technology as a solution to issues in philanthropy. Features like ability to create
immutable records and provision of real time transaction visibility to both donors and
philanthropic organizations.
Records on organizations that have tested or piloted blockchain platforms for charity-based
projects in East Africa revealed that there was a relatively a high level of donor confidence and
a much more inline operations from the charity initiative to the beneficiary’s support. The
surveyed respondents agreed that this technology could have a greater positive impact on
transparency as noted with the 87% supporting this initiative to implement blockchain
technology in philanthropy sector.
Barriers to Blockchain Adoption. Despite the fact that blockchain technology has demonstrated
a lot of potential but its associated challenges still remain. In regards to the collected qualitative
data, a very high digital illiteracy is still alarming among beneficiaries of the intended
donations, not to par infrastructure to support blockchain specifically in rural areas with low
network connectivity and unreliable power supply, and non-clear government regulatory
framework. Concerned stakeholders also raised complaints that the technology is so complex

54

which in turn would eliminate the intended beneficiaries from receiving the help they need
since they are not so familiar to the digital tools associated with blockchain technology.
Reference to the regression analysis held up these concerns. This showed that addressing
transparency issues alone wasn’t sufficient enough to have blockchain technology
implemented, technological readiness is yet another solitary factor to consider.

INTERPRETATION
Based on the findings of this research, blockchain sets a bar for transparency and trust related
concerns in philanthropy, in regards to the same, a number of factors must be considered to
consider its implementation
Addressing trust and transparency. This paper emphasizes that transparency concerns must be
improved in order to achieve the desired goal in philanthropic initiatives. Considering
blockchain features like the ability to create verifiable transactional records could play a big
role in building trust among donors and beneficiaries. According to the responses from the
survey, the stakeholders have an open mind to innovation as long as philanthropy concerns like
transparency are addressed.
Infrastructure and digital literacy. Looking at the implementation and achievement of
blockchain technology, there mut be a great improvement on the Uganda’s information
technology arsenal.
For Uganda’s successful implementation of blockchain technology, a number of technological
aspects need to be equally improved. For instance, internet access mainly in the rural areas has
got a limited reach or spread as well as a limited level of digital literacy among the beneficiaries
and the charity organizations which has presented a huge barrier to adoption. This on the other
hand implies that for this initiative to be achieved, huge investments have to be channeled to
infrastructure and education.

55

Regulatory framework. At the moment, there is a shortage of a clear statutory regulations that
supports the implementation of blockchain in Uganda which has posed a huge challenge. This
technology is still at a young stage in the country therefore a number of philanthropic
organizations are still hesitant to adopt without having a standard framework from the
government. A better yet well to understand framework should be enacted by the policymakers
to give an encouragement on blockchain experimentation into the philanthropic sphere.
The role of early adopters. Looking at some organizations who have already established a solid
technological foundation and a core of integrity and transparency are most like to be the role
model to the other organizations through demonstration of how this technology can improve
efficiency in donation and confidence of the contributors. Benchmarking the early
implementations could give a green light to a massive spread of blockchain technology in the
country.

56

CHAPTER 5. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

FINDINGS
This research thesis gives an insight of the blockchain technology potential to address
associated concerns on trust, transparency and accountability in this sector. With emphasis on
the data analysis and the its findings, a number of results were generated;

Trust deficiency. A number of donors and associated beneficiaries have shown a lower trust
level in charity organizations as the result of no transparency on how their funds are being put
into used and allocated.
Transparency issues. Both philanthropists and beneficiaries have always expressed
dissatisfaction over shortage of visibility onto funds utilization especially focusing on remote
areas. Instances of misallocation or fund mismanagement were always reported.
Perceived benefits. Blockchain technology has been portrayed as a very great tool ventured
towards improving transparency and accountability of funds utilization through instant creation
of immutable and yet verifiable transactional records. It has been noted that the majority of
respondents making up 64% believed that this technology could impact transparency in
philanthropic activities.
Increased trust. A group of donors and NGOs had a belief that blockchain technology could
have an impact towards increase of donor confidence through enhancement of real time
tracking of funds as well as avoidance of manipulation of transactional records.
Low digital literacy. A number of beneficiaries especially those in villages and any other
remote areas have a limited digital literacy which is needed to fully understand and operate
within blockchain applications.

57

Shortage of feasible infrastructure. The established infrastructure in Uganda especially in rural
areas do not have the desired capacities to handle and support the widespread blockchain
adoption. Looking at the current internet connectivity, it still remains unreliable in many areas.
Regulatory changes and uncertainty. Looking at the current or prevailing regulatory
frameworks, that will guide blockchain technology in Uganda does not exist which raises a lot
of concerns about its long-term operation. A number of stakeholders inclusive of NGOs and
companies that have embraced technology expressed uncertainty in regards to how the
government may intervene in regulating blockchain technology in this sector.
Early adopters. Firms that have adopted and implemented this technology to prioritize
transparency are more like to use and apply blockchain. They don’t see it as a tool for enhancing
donor relations but also as a way of increasing operational efficiency and proper resource
allocation in the long run.
Correlated factors. Based on the quantitative analysis, the records showed that the level of
transparency perceived in relation to the technological readiness were significant determinants
of an organization’s willingness to the blockchain technology adoption.
Whilst blockchain technology has got a number of merits, its sophisticated technology in
relation to the low awareness among the stakeholders, with beneficiaries inclusive, this presents
a very huge threat to its implementation especially in remote areas. For this technology to be
fully implemented, players will need to have both technological and cultural barriers fully
addressed.

CONCLUSION
This thesis had clearly demonstrated that blockchain technology carries a promise towards
addressing the common issues faced in philanthropy in Uganda, especially in terms of trust,
accountability and transparency. Focusing on its immutable nature, blockchain records can

58

impact greatly on reducing issues related to mismanagement of funds, fraud or even corruption
which are so rampant and significant issues for both donors and beneficiaries.
On the other hand, this paper also reveals that blockchain technology has got some relatable
weaknesses. There are a number of challenges for its successful implementation among which
include; technology infrastructure, digital literacy and government regulatory framework.
Failure to address such concerns, blockchain technology impact to address philanthropy issues
will be limited especially in the remote areas.
In conclusion, for blockchain technology to reach its full potential in Uganda philanthropy’s
sector, a number approaches will be required;
Infrastructure development. More effort should be challenged towards digital infrastructure so
as to ensure reliable internet connectivity among the population.
Digital literacy initiatives. Training programs geared towards equipping people with computer
and internet skills should be implemented and encouraged for both NGOs and beneficiaries so
as to enhance their understanding at a deeper level of how to use and apply blockchain
technology.
Regulation support. Government bodies should create a clear and understandable frameworks
which encourage a transparent adoption and application of blockchain technology.

59

CHAPTER 6. RECOMMENDATIONS AND LIMITATIONS OF
THE STUDY

6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

➢ Collaboration among blockchain developers, charity organizations or any concerned
third party should be encouraged. Such kind of efforts can lead to process improvement,
development of standards and best practices with a goal to benefit the whole blockchain
sector.
➢ Government MDAs, particularly Bank of Uganda, Ministry of Finance, Planning and
Economic Development, Uganda Revenue Authority and Finance Intelligence
Authority should clearly define the legal status of cryptocurrencies and avoid the
ambiguity under the current regulations for e-transactions so as to be able to enforce
them on all inflows and outflows in business and personal accounts. This includes
redesigning capital controls to include flows channeled through cryptocurrencies. In the
same vein, well-structured regulation on cryptocurrencies would remove uncertainties
for other stakeholders in the private sector and thus encourage their engagement in
digital transactions involving crypto assets.
➢ Purposeful teamwork among engineers, charity groups and government bodies should
be encouraged. Having a powerful teamwork effort could lead into establishment of
frameworks and best practices which are compatible in the blockchain in philanthropy
sector.
➢ Blockchain technology should be recognized as a tool in the charity. The
implementation of this technology should also align with the long-term goals of
adopters.
➢ Donors, beneficiaries and other stakeholders should be involved when decisions are
being made. Putting in place a more decentralized model will empower the community
into participation.

60

➢ An efficient and rather detailed report system should be created with an aim of
providing information about resource utilization and results.
➢ In order for stakeholders to stay abreast of evolving regulations on blockchain in the
different regions, experts should engage with each other to ensure compliance
effectively.
➢ Finances should be injected into testing and auditing of smarts with intent of
pinpointing potential loopholes. Industry best practices of programing should be
employed to protect against exploits of blockchain systems.
➢ Cases of scalability should be addressed by using blockchain networks having a higher
transaction throughput which will improves efficiency and minimize costs.
➢ Manuals and educational resources for individuals and organizations should be offered
and made available. This will give users a better understanding of this technology which
in turn will benefit its implementation and adoption.

6.1 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

➢ Limited technological infrastructure has hindered internet accessibility in rural areas.
Uganda being an LDC with substandard infrastructure remains a barrier, most
philanthropic organizations are actively operating in rural areas, with low internet and
electricity penetration, the population’s ability to interact with blockchain platforms are
hindered.
➢ Low digital literacy. For this technology to be successful, it calls for a fair knowledge
of users to understand the digital technology. In Uganda, IT literacy is relatively low
which makes it hard for citizens, donors or even the organizations to effectively
implement this platform and its associated merits.
➢ Unreliable regulatory framework surrounding blockchain in Uganda. The GOU has
previously expressed caution on cryptocurrencies and additionally, the lack of a clear

61

protocol governing their use in charity. This has also limited the adoption and
implementation of blockchain based platforms in philanthropy.
➢ Whilst blockchain is seen as a way of improving the financial industry, Uganda still
doesn’t have a solid foundation in this area. As of 2021, 87% of Ugandans aged 10
years and above lack functional bank account. This could further impact the blockchain
based initiatives especially if digital wallets are used for making transactions.
➢ Ugandans still show resistance to new technology especially those with less to no
exposure to digital tools. In such scenario, blockchain still stands as a relatively new
and complex technology which created a lot of skepticism from the stakeholders.
➢ Blockchain brings a lot of significance with transaction costs reduction and
improvement on transparency, the high initial costs to be incurred in the implementation
stage still prohibits many local organizations to take it up. In other words, many small
organizations with low funds would struggle to sustain this technology.

62

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Tobias, J., Jenny, H., Susan D. (2019). The Routledge companion to philanthropy. Routledge.
Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P. (2011). A literature review of empirical studies of philanthropy:
Eight mechanisms that drive charitable giving. Nonprofit and voluntary sector
quarterly, 40(5), 924-973.
Demirguc-Kunt, A., Klapper, L., Singer, D., Ansar, S., & Hess, J. (2018). The Global Findex
Database 2017: Measuring financial inclusion and the fintech revolution. World Bank
Publications.
Breeze, B. (2020). Individual giving and philanthropy. In The Routledge Companion to
Nonprofit Management (pp. 391-409). Routledge.
Ventures, C. (2019). 2019 official annual cybercrime report. Sprawozdanie finansowane
Herjavec Group, 16.
Frumkin, P. (2006). Accountability and legitimacy in American foundation philanthropy. The
legitimacy of philanthropic foundations: United States and European perspectives, 99-122.
Gneezy, U., Keenan, E. A., & Gneezy, A. (2014). Avoiding overhead aversion in
charity. Science, 346(6209), 632-635.
Canton, H. (2021). United Nations Office on drugs and crime—UNODC. In The Europa
Directory of International Organizations 2021 (pp. 240-244). Routledge.
Nakamoto, S. (2008). Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. Retrieved from
https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
Ostrander, S. A. (2007). The growth of donor control: Revisiting the social relations of
philanthropy. Nonprofit and voluntary sector quarterly, 36(2), 356-372.
Kramer, M. R., & Porter, M. (2011). Creating shared value (Vol. 17). Boston, MA: FSG.
Salamon, L. M. (2015). The resilient sector revisited: The new challenge to nonprofit America.
Brookings Institution Press.
Swan, M. (2015). Blockchain: Blueprint for a new economy. O'Reilly Media, Inc.
Tapscott, D., & Tapscott, A. (2017). How blockchain will change organizations. MIT Sloan
management review, 58(2), 10.
UNODC (2021). Corruption and aid: Tracking funds for better impact. Retrieved from
https://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/corruption/2021_corruption_aid.pdf
Zheng, Z., Xie, S., Dai, H., Chen, X., & Wang, H. (2017). An overview of blockchain
technology: Architecture, consensus, and future trends. 2017 IEEE International Congress on
Big Data, 557-564.

63

European Union. (2018). General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). https://gdpr.eu
National Information Technology Authority - Uganda (2019). Data Protection and Privacy
Act, 2019. Retrieved from https://www.nita.go.ug/sites/default/files/2021-
12/Data%20Protection%20and%20Privacy%20Act%20No.%209%20of%202019.pdf
Financial Action Task Force. (2020). FATF Guidelines on Virtual Assets and Virtual Asset
Service Providers. https://fatf-gafi.org
National Payment Systems Act (2020). Retrieved from
https://bills.parliament.ug/attachments/National%20Payments%20Systems%20Act,%202020.
pdf
Appiah‐Otoo, I., Song, N., Acheampong, A. O., & Yao, X. (2022). Crowdfunding and
renewable energy development: What does the data say? International Journal of Energy
Research, 46(2), 1837–1852.
Civil Society Media (2011). Oxfam publishes internal report from 2011 about Haiti. Retrieved
from https://www.civilsociety.co.uk/news/oxfam-publishes-leaked-haiti-report.html
The Financial Institutions Act (2004). Retrieved from www.parliament.go.ug/acts/acts-2004
New Vision (2021). 87% of Ugandans lack bank accounts — survey.
https://www.newvision.co.ug/category/news/87-of-ugandans-lack-bank-accounts-survey-
NV_149445
Howson, P. (2021). Crypto‐giving and surveillance philanthropy: Exploring the trade‐offs in
blockchain innovation for nonprofits. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 31(4), 805-820.
Goodhue, D.L. 1995. Understanding User Evaluations of Information Systems. Management
Science 41(12) 1827-1844.
Goodhue, D.L., R.L. Thompson. 1995. Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance. MIS
Quarterly 19(2) 213-236.
Iansiti, M., & Lakhani, K. R. (2017). The truth about blockchain. Harvard business
review, 95(1), 118-127.
Stratford, J. S., & Stratford, J. (1999). Data protection and privacy in the United States and
Europe. Iassist Quarterly, 22(3), 17-17.
Hapsari, N. S., & Sulung, L. A. K. (2021). The Role of Social Capital and Reward Factor in
the Success of Crowdfunding Project Fundraising: Case Study of Emerging Market Countries.
Asia-Pacific Research in Social Sciences and Humanities Universitas Indonesia Conference
(APRISH 2019), 591–599.
The New Vision. (2022). BOU further warning on the use of cryptos in Uganda. Retrieved
from https://www.newvision.co.ug/category/business/bou-further-warning-on-the-use-of-
cryptos-in-NV_132990
Uganda Communications Commission. (2021). Internet Usage and Accessibility in Uganda.
Retrieved from https://www.ucc.co.ug

64

Ivan, N. (2018). Developing Countries and Blockchain Technology: Uganda’s Perspective.
The Nile Post. (2024). BoU moves to enforce national ID use in mobile money. Retrieved from
https://www.nilepost.co.ug/nilepost/196612/bou-moves-to-enforce-national-id-use-in-mobile-
money-withdrawals
Mougayar, W. (2016). The business blockchain: promise, practice, and application of the next
Internet technology. John Wiley & Sons.
Mungiu‐Pippidi, A. (2023). Transparency and corruption: Measuring real transparency by a
new index. Regulation & Governance, 17(4), 1094-1113.
Antonopoulos, A. M. (2014). Mastering Bitcoin: unlocking digital cryptocurrencies. " O'Reilly
Media, Inc.".
Bonneau, J., Miller, A., Clark, J., Narayanan, A., Kroll, J. A., & Felten, E. W. (2015, May).
Sok: Research perspectives and challenges for bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. In 2015 IEEE
symposium on security and privacy (pp. 104-121). IEEE.
Buterin, V. (2014). A next-generation smart contract and decentralized application
platform. white paper, 3(37), 2-1.
Ganne, E. (2018). Can Blockchain revolutionize international trade? (p. 152). Geneva: World
Trade Organization.
Gabashvili, N., Gabashvili, T., & Kiknadze, M. (2022). From paper contracts to smart
contracts. Sciences of Europe, (107), 124-127.
ICHA, (2018). Blockchain Technology in Humanitarian Programming. Retrieved from
https://cash-hub.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2020/10/Blockchain-Technology_Pilot-
Project-in-Kenya_2018.pdf
Singh, M., & Kim, S. (2019). Blockchain technology for decentralized autonomous
organizations. In Advances in computers (Vol. 115, pp. 115-140). Elsevier.
Hyndman, R. J. (2008). Stochastic population forecasts using functional data models for
mortality, fertility and migration. International Journal of Forecasting 24(3), 323-342.
Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research methodology: Methods and techniques. New Age
International.
Lowder, B. T. (2009). Choosing a methodology for entrepreneurial research: a case for
qualitative research in the study of entrepreneurial success factors. Available at SSRN 1413015.
Adam, T. (2013). Philanthropy in America: A History. Journal of Interdisciplinary
History, 43(3), 499-500.
Wright, A., & De Filippi, P. (2015). Decentralized blockchain technology and the rise of lex
cryptographia. Available at SSRN 2580664.
Bénabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2010). Individual and corporate social responsibility. Economica,
77(305), 1-19.

65

Evans, Jonathan St BT, Simon J. Handley, Nick Perham, David E. Over, and Valerie A.
Thompson. "Frequency versus probability formats in statistical word problems." Cognition 77,
no. 3 (2000): 197-213.
Brunson, Samuel D. (2025). Robot Philanthropy: DAOs and the De-Humaning of Charity.
Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=5086352 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5086352
Anheier, H. K., & Toepler, S. (Eds.). (2020). The Routledge companion to nonprofit
management. London: Routledge.
Easley, D., O'Hara, M., & Basu, S. (2019). From mining to markets: The evolution of bitcoin
transaction fees. Journal of Financial Economics, 134(1), 91-109.
Golosova, J., & Romanovs, A. (2018, November). The advantages and disadvantages of the
blockchain technology. In 2018 IEEE 6th workshop on advances in information, electronic and
electrical engineering (AIEEE) (pp. 1-6). IEEE.
Anyoha, R. (2017, August 28). The history of artificial intelligence. Science in the News,
Harvard University. https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2017/history-artificial-intelligence/
CRYPTOCURRENCY AND REGULATION IN UGANDA, (2019). Retrieved from
https://cipesa.org/wp-
content/files/briefs/Crypto_Currency_Regulation_and_Implications_on_CSOs_in_Uganda_P
olicy_Brief.pdf

UNLEASHING TRUST IN PHILANTHROPY WITH BLOCKCHAIN BRILLIANCE

About This Presentation

Slide Content

Tags

Categories

Download

Quick Actions

Statistics

Related Slideshows

UNLEASHING TRUST IN PHILANTHROPY WITH BLOCKCHAIN BRILLIANCE

About This Presentation

Slide Content

Slide 1

Slide 2

Slide 3

Slide 4

Slide 5

Slide 6

Slide 7

Slide 8

Slide 9

Slide 10

Slide 11

Slide 12

Slide 13

Slide 14

Slide 15

Slide 16

Slide 17

Slide 18

Slide 19

Slide 20

Slide 21

Slide 22

Slide 23

Slide 24

Slide 25

Slide 26

Slide 27

Slide 28

Slide 29

Slide 30

Slide 31

Slide 32

Slide 33

Slide 34

Slide 35

Slide 36

Slide 37

Slide 38

Slide 39

Slide 40

Slide 41

Slide 42

Slide 43

Slide 44

Slide 45

Slide 46

Slide 47

Slide 48

Slide 49

Slide 50

Slide 51

Slide 52

Slide 53

Slide 54

Slide 55

Slide 56

Slide 57

Slide 58

Slide 59

Slide 60

Slide 61

Slide 62

Slide 63

Slide 64

Slide 65

Slide 66

Slide 67

Slide 68

Slide 69

Slide 70

Slide 71

Slide 72

Slide 73

Tags

Categories

Download

Quick Actions