To better understand the many facets of this shift, the workshop "Evidence-Based Benevolence? The Role of Philanthropic Organizations in Global Public Policies" which took place March 27-29 at ZiF brought together different disciplinary perspectives. The workshop was convened by Evelyn Moser (Bonn), Mölders (Bielefeld), Oliver Razum (Bielefeld) and Holger Straßheim (Bielefeld).

The panel "Organizing Philanthropy in a Differentiated Society" kicked off the workshop. Ian G. Jones (York) and Taylor Stephens (Baltimore) showed from a historical perspective that it facilitates the implementation of philanthropic projects if donors and their target contexts have a common language – a shared habitus – precisely because not everything can be bought with economic capital. That said, the best intentions do not guarantee the best outcomes at any historical point in time.

Dana Brakman Reiser (Brooklyn) analyzed the complex interrelationships between new legal forms of organized philanthropy (DAF, LLC) and expanded opportunities for action and giving compared to traditional foundations. Seth Abrutyn (Vancouver) presented a promising sociological view of contemporary philanthropy with the concept of "institutional entrepreneurs" as evolutionary forces challenging old institutions in favor of new ones.

The discussion on "Democratic Implications of Global Philanthropy" began with a multi-layered "Defense of Philanthropy" by Beth Breeze (Kent), who argued for reflection on the praise and criticism of philanthropic foundations. Tatiana Cary (Edinburgh) pointed to the growing importance of advisory organizations in the immediate environment of philanthropy. “Elite philanthropists” in particular are using such services to help them achieve the best possible impact. For the comparatively young field of environmental philanthropy, Pascal Goeke & Galina Selivanova (Bonn) showed how impact is successfully marked by using the resilience narrative in organizational programs.

In the session on "Politico-Epistemic Practices and Paradigms," Katherine Smith (Strathclyde) illustrated that the concept of evidence-based action does not at all lead self-evidently to success. Numbers may be descriptive, but they do not automatically convince. The fact that organizational activity is needed to turn the idea of evidence-based policy into political practice was also addressed by Saana Jukola (Twente) from a philosophical perspective, using the example of health policy and, in particular, randomized controlled trials, to which, despite much criticism, the authority of a 'gold standard' is still attributed.

Especially in the field of global health, the data collections strongly supported financially by philanthropic organizations can have a cross-border control and coordination effect, as Annabelle Littoz-Monnet (Geneva) pointed out. Overall, the presentations underlined that the conditions for the emergence and impact of evidence-based benevolence can only be explored through interdisciplinary approaches that focus on both the epistemic and political dimensions of philanthropic knowledge production. 

In many cases, it became clear that organizations – philanthropic as well as those surrounding them – leave as little as possible to chance in order to promote the supposedly most effective courses of action. The session "Philanthropy and (Global?) Public Health" also followed this track. Jimoh Amzat (Sokoto) used the example of "Polio-Philanthropy in Africa" to show that in some places ("Global North") what is functional can have a dysfunctional effect on the ground ("Global South"). Remco van de Pas (Berlin) therefore argued for a truly global, even planetary, view of philanthropic endeavors.

The idea of evidence-based charity may lead to (unintended) side-effects, dysfunctionalities, and dispersions of all kinds. The workshop showed – as health scientists Victoria Saint (Bielefeld) and Clare Littleton (Adelaide) pointed out in their conclusion – that interdisciplinary scientific monitoring should not make things too easy for itself in the future, however, if only because philanthropic organizations and their networks will not cease to systematically influence the world (society) in this sense.