Opinion: Samuel Owusu-Boadi, founder of WellsForAll

Over the last decade, cryptophilanthropy has exploded. From a niche experiment to a transformative force directing billions towards global causes, the moment of cryptophilanthropy has arrived.

According to data from The Giving Block, cryptocurrency donations exceeded $1 billion in 2024, proving that blockchain-based giving is now a legal, more see-through (in theory), and effective alternative to classic charitable fundraising. While these numbers show momentum, scale alone does not equate to success, especially for philanthropic projects across Africa.

On the African continent, many cryptophilanthropy initiatives are designed as moments — token launches, non-fungible token airdrops, and campaigns designed to generate attention, capital, and optimism in low bursts. These noise cycles rarely explain what happens when the launch window closes. No long-term systems are being built to facilitate continued investment and oversight.

Why is this a problem? Public good projects cannot function in hype cycles. They require assets that will last for decades, with maintenance schedules, management structures and local accountability.

There is no shortage of donation campaigns for philanthropic projects in Africa. There is a lack of hard-wearing infrastructure. When philanthropy focuses on visibility rather than sustainability, the result is predictable: short-term relief followed by peaceful failure.

The illusion of transparency

Cryptophilanthropy advocates often point to blockchain’s transparency as a solution to these shortcomings. Onchain records can show where and when funds are transferred and who authorized them. While these types of insights are valuable, they are also incomplete.

Clear provisions alone do not solve much if there is no real truth in practice. The transaction summary cannot confirm that the infrastructure remains functional, that communities continue to utilize it, or that funds still exist to maintain it. Blockchain systems can record intent, but cannot verify measurable outcomes in the projects that cryptophilanthropy seeks to enable. Academic research emphasized that while blockchain can improve traceability, it does not automatically guarantee accountability or effect without additional systems sitting alongside or within it to connect the two.

Without on-the-ground presence and continuous supervision, on-chain transparency can only become performative in terms of credibility. Accountability must exist where the physical infrastructure exists, which means establishing a framework beyond the distributed ledger that allows measurable results to be tracked and measured. If impact is measured only at the transaction level, the most vital question in any philanthropic project remains unanswered: have people’s lives significantly improved?

Ignoring local ownership makes failure inevitable

This gap between digital transparency and physical reality becomes more frustrating when projects are designed without input from the communities they are intended to serve. Many cryptophilanthropy initiatives are conceived and implemented by teams that have never visited the regions affected by their decisions.

Without local leadership overseeing these projects, accountability evaporates as funding declines. Infrastructure that is not owned by the community will quickly deteriorate. Without clearly defined oversight and locally managed maintenance resources, even well-funded projects will deteriorate when initial enthusiasm fades.

Sometimes cryptocurrency-backed charitable initiatives in Africa treat local ownership as a cultural curiosity or afterthought, rather than the heart and soul of the project. Communities must co-manage and protect assets if they are to survive. Projects that treat beneficiaries as end users rather than managers will inevitably fail.

Charity tokens create dependency instead of dignity

Given these observations, it becomes quite clear that most charity tokens and crypto fundraising models are intended to provide momentary relief. They are good at mobilizing attention and capital quickly, but struggle to support systems that work year after year.

Shifting the focus towards structural infrastructure allows philanthropic projects to function as a type of economic infrastructure that gives due consideration to longevity and sustainability, rather than simply as a charitable intervention. When tidy water systems, schools, or clinics operate for long periods of time, they reduce dependency rather than boost it.

Related: Ripple donates $25 million to US school nonprofits

Dignity comes not from receiving facilitate, but from creating systems from that facilitate that truly stand the test of time and last.

Without long-term operational thinking, projects inadvertently reproduce the dependency dynamics they purport to disrupt.

Repeated failures harm the entire cryptocurrency industry

The consequences of these failures go beyond individual projects. Whenever an initiative fails or public trust in a cryptocurrency-backed charitable project erodes, not only the power of philanthropy is questioned, but also faith in the blockchain itself. In the face of these setbacks, skepticism towards future crypto-based initiatives grows even louder.

Africa suffers the most from this damage. Failed experiments leave a legacy of broken infrastructure and erode trust, making it harder for responsible models to gain support and traction. Philanthropy should never be treated as an experimental case study or demonstration of blockchain technology. When human well-being is at stake, failure is not as abstract as we like to think.

For the crypto industry, this poses a credibility challenge. If blockchain is to play a significant role in global development, it must demonstrate discipline, restraint and responsibility – not novelty in itself.

Maturity, not abandonment

Considering all this, is it time to abandon crypto-philanthropic projects? Certainly not. Cryptocurrency advocates often highlight the benefits of digital assets in philanthropy, including borderless transfers, reduced transaction costs and immutability of records. These benefits are real and largely undisputed.

For blockchain to make a significant contribution to lasting impact, it must be treated as a governance infrastructure rather than a fundraising marketing function. This means prioritizing local ownership, multi-year planning, maintenance funding and an accountability framework that goes beyond the ledger.

Until cryptophilanthropy builds systems instead of hype, it will continue to fail the communities it purports to serve.

Opinion: Samuel Owusu-Boadi, founder of WellsForAll.