The Global Health Aid Architecture is Collapsing, but the Faith Economy Offers New Opportunities

The global health aid architecture is facing a collapse, but the faith economy is emerging as a potential solution. The Trump administration's recent announcement of nearly $2 billion in funding for faith-based groups, including $1.4 billion for health services, is a significant signal to the public health and humanitarian relief community. This funding will support 2,500 faith-based hospitals and clinics across 17 countries, demonstrating the potential of faith-based organizations as delivery mechanisms for health services.

## The Faith Economy as a Source of Capital The concept of the faith economy refers to the capital generated, governed, and invested through religious obligations, institutions, and financial systems. This capital is distinct from traditional development finance and has the potential to provide a significant source of funding for global health initiatives. In parts of sub-Saharan Africa, faith-based providers deliver a significant share of health care, with some countries relying on them for 30-40% of their health services.

## Islamic Finance as a Model Islamic finance offers a clear illustration of the potential of the faith economy as a source of capital. The annual zakat pool is estimated to be around $200 billion to $1 trillion, and Islamic finance instruments such as waqf and sukuk can provide financing for public goods and infrastructure. The UN Refugee Agency's Refugee Zakat Fund is an example of how Islamic philanthropy can be standardized and made usable at scale. Other organizations, such as UNICEF and GiveDirectly, have also built mechanisms for zakat and Islamic philanthropy.

## Building the Architecture for Faith-Based Capital The key to leveraging the faith economy as a source of capital is to build the necessary architecture to receive, aggregate, and deploy faith-based capital. This requires agreement on standards for eligibility, disclosure, and performance across different financial systems. The U.S. State Department's recent announcement is a useful test of this concept, but it is still dependent on American appropriations and political choices. Building the architecture for faith-based capital is infrastructure, and it requires a different approach than simply funding faith-based organizations.

The opportunity to leverage faith-based capital is not without its challenges, including the potential for exclusion and reinforcement of existing inequities. However, ignoring this capital does not make it disappear, and it will continue to move through communities whether global health and development institutions engage with it or not. The case for building the architecture around faith-based capital is that it can widen the pool of capital available for health and direct more of it toward better health outcomes rather than deeper inequity. The people who build this architecture will decide who it serves, and it is essential to ensure that it is designed to promote equity and inclusion.