Community philanthropy as infrastructure: Sustaining democratic resilience in wartime Ukraine

The culture of philanthropy in Ukraine has deep historical roots.It began at the community level: if someone lost their home in a fire, the whole community would come together to rebuild it, each contributing what they could. Support revolved around churches, education and mutual aid.

In the 19th and early 20th centuries, as entrepreneurship developed on Ukrainian territory, a new wave of philanthropists emerged – families such as Tereshchenko, Chykalenko and Symyrenko. They grew successful businesses while investing significant resources into education, medicine, culture and urban development.

Vasyl Symyrenko once said:
 “I wouldn’t work so much if Ukraine didn’t need so much money.”

Yevhen Chykalenko famously stated:
 “Ukraine should be loved not only to the depths of the soul, but to the depths of your pocket.”

These philanthropists were building both private wealth and public good – strengthening Ukraine and contributing to broader regional development.

However, seventy years of Soviet occupation destroyed this ecosystem. Entrepreneurs were dispossessed, property was nationalised, churches were suppressed and trust eroded. Local philanthropy and mutual aid nearly disappeared.

With 35 years of independence, Ukraine has been rebuilding its philanthropic culture. The Revolution of Dignity in 2014 and the full-scale invasion in 2022 became powerful catalysts.

In 2014, communities united resources to support democratic transformation. Citizens funded independent media, anti-corruption initiatives, youth participation and cultural projects promoting active citizenship.

One notable example is ProZorro, the electronic public procurement system. Launched in 2014 by volunteers, IT specialists, business leaders and reform-minded officials, ProZorro aimed to make public procurement transparent and competitive. Initially piloted on a volunteer basis in cooperation with the Ministry of Economy, it later became a national reform. By the end of 2016, the system had generated nearly 6 billion UAH in savings – demonstrating the transformative anti-corruption impact of civic-driven innovation.

Since 2022, local philanthropic resources have again become essential – this time for national defence and the protection of freedom and independence. Ukrainian citizens mobilised unprecedented private donations to support the army, humanitarian response and technological innovation in the defence sector. During periods of delayed international military support, locally funded research and piloting of defence technologies helped sustain Ukraine’s resilience. Some of these innovations are now contributing to new economic sectors that strengthen the national budget.

Philanthropy, however, does not happen only at the national level. It lives – and often begins – at the level of community.

By community philanthropy, we mean the mobilisation of diverse local resources – not only financial, but also knowledge, relationships, volunteer time, local business contributions, social capital and civic activism – invested in long-term, strategic change within a specific territory.

When multiple resources flow from different sources, coordination becomes essential. Philanthropy infrastructure is needed to ensure that energy is not fragmented but channelled toward systemic impact. In Ukraine, community foundations have increasingly become such infrastructure organisations – pooling local resources, coordinating volunteers and often responding faster than national or international systems can.

A powerful example comes from Kherson, six months before the full-scale invasion.

The Kherson community foundation noticed rising anxiety among residents due to the region’s proximity to occupied territories. People were afraid of a potential escalation. Instead of waiting for a crisis to unfold, the foundation initiated a mapping of bomb shelters across the community. This simple action triggered something larger: residents began visiting shelters to assess their condition. Most were poorly maintained and unusable.

The foundation then organised educational sessions to help citizens learn how to mobilise local resources and engage local government in improving shelter conditions. What started as a mapping initiative evolved into a civic movement. People cleaned shelters, businesses donated materials and local authorities were pressured to allocate funds.

This example illustrates what community philanthropy truly means: not only providing grants, but activating financial resources, knowledge and civic agency through trusted local channels.

After 24 February 2022, similar processes unfolded across multiple communities. Community foundations distributed funding among active local groups to equip shelters. But funding was only one element of the equation. Residents contributed labour. Businesses provided materials. In one town, a local internet provider connected all shelters to free internet for an entire year. Community philanthropy multiplied resources by building on trust and proximity.

Yet this model faces structural limitations.

Ukraine does not have large community endowments or intergenerational wealth that can continuously finance local needs and long-term development. Five years into full-scale war, local philanthropic capacity is under strain. Economic resources are shrinking. Psychological exhaustion is growing. Local donors continue to give – but they are tired.

This is precisely the space where cross-border philanthropy has proven essential.

The greatest value lies in funding that helps to scale and sustain local philanthropy ecosystems. This means flexible support that can address emerging and underfunded needs, rather than narrowly restricted project grants. It means investing in the stability of local infrastructure – community foundations and trusted local intermediaries – instead of creating parallel structures that may unintentionally weaken existing ones. Such support preserves what is most critical in times of prolonged crisis: a sense of agency and ownership within communities.

When people feel that initiatives are theirs, not externally imposed, they invest more than money – they invest commitment, creativity and long-term responsibility.