EssaiLabs

The New Philanthropy Shifts Focus Away From Legacy Giving

· science

The New Philanthropy: A Shift Away From Legacy Giving

The world’s wealthiest families are facing a reckoning as their next-generation heirs take control of family fortunes, pushing their elders to rethink traditional giving strategies. This seismic shift in philanthropic strategy has been underway for years but is only now beginning to sink in.

At its core, the change involves not just more money being given away – although $124 trillion by 2048 is a staggering figure – but also a fundamental shift in values and principles guiding that giving. Younger heirs are rejecting traditional legacy philanthropy’s focus on long-term goals and grand gestures, instead prioritizing targeted, community-driven approaches that seek systemic change.

This shift is driven by several factors, including the growing wealth inequality between the ultra-rich and the rest. According to a recent report from the Milken Institute, billionaire wealth has been rising rapidly over the last few years, with $18.3 trillion amassed as of 2025 alone. This has created an environment in which young people increasingly question the moral legitimacy of extreme wealth.

A Pew survey found that nearly one-third of adults aged 18-29 believe it is morally wrong to be extremely rich. While some of this sentiment can be attributed to economic realities such as soaring housing costs and student debt, there’s also a sense among young people that the wealthy have an obligation to use their resources more strategically.

The younger generation’s approach to philanthropy is characterized by a willingness to take risks and challenge traditional assumptions about effective giving. They’re no longer content with simply writing checks or awarding grants; instead, they’re seeking out innovative, partnership-driven models that prioritize collaboration between funders, communities, and experts.

MacKenzie Scott’s philanthropic efforts are a prominent example of this shift. Since distributing over $26 billion in unrestricted gifts, Scott has been hailed as an exemplar of trust-based philanthropy – an approach that prioritizes community-led solutions and partnerships over predetermined outcomes.

Stevens notes that Scott’s model “really leans into partnership with the community… rather than coming in with some predetermined solution.” This emphasis on collaboration and learning from communities is a crucial aspect of the new philanthropy. By putting trust at the center of their giving, younger heirs acknowledge the limitations of external expertise and recognize the importance of community-led solutions.

Women will play a pivotal role in shaping the future of philanthropy, projected to inherit roughly $47 trillion by 2048 – about 56% of all inherited wealth globally. Stevens expects more women to follow Scott’s example and prioritize trust-based partnerships with communities.

The personal experiences of leaders like Katherine Lorenz underscore the importance of this shift. Growing up in an ultrahigh-net-worth family, Lorenz was drawn to questions about how wealth could be used effectively. Her experiences abroad taught her that assumptions about wealth and expertise can be misplaced – often, communities have more answers than external experts.

As $124 trillion changes hands by 2048, it’s clear that the old model of philanthropy is no longer tenable. The new philanthropy demands a different approach – one that prioritizes community-driven solutions, trust-based partnerships, and systemic change. It’s time for the wealthy to rethink their giving strategies, not just in terms of speed but also in terms of values.

The writing is on the wall: this shift will either propel us toward greater social impact or exacerbate existing inequalities. One thing is certain – the philanthropic landscape will never be the same again.

Reader Views

  • TL
    The Lab Desk · editorial

    This shift in philanthropic strategy raises questions about accountability and transparency. While younger heirs are pushing for more targeted approaches, it's unclear whether they're also willing to take on greater responsibility for measuring their impact. Can we truly expect systemic change from a new generation of donors who may not have the same level of expertise or commitment as their predecessors? The article highlights the need for innovative partnerships, but we need to see more emphasis on metrics and evaluation to ensure that these efforts aren't just feel-good gestures.

  • CP
    Cole P. · science writer

    While the article accurately highlights the seismic shift in philanthropic strategy among younger heirs, it glosses over a crucial aspect: the tension between this new approach and the need for scalable impact. As more donors adopt community-driven models, there's a risk of diluted resources and fragmented efforts. To achieve systemic change, these efforts must be coordinated, not merely additive. A more nuanced examination of how to balance innovation with scalability would provide a richer understanding of this paradigm shift.

  • DE
    Dr. Elena M. · research scientist

    While the shift away from legacy giving is welcome, I worry that we're losing sight of the fact that even more effective, community-driven philanthropy can perpetuate existing power structures if not done thoughtfully. For example, younger heirs may be partnering with local organizations to drive systemic change, but are they also ensuring that these partnerships don't inadvertently co-opt marginalized voices or further entrench unequal relationships between funders and grantees?

Related articles

More from EssaiLabs

View as Web Story →