Maša Elezović is a feminist and activist whose job is communications and design. She holds a Masters in Gender Studies from University College London (UCL) with Chevening scholarship from British government. With the MEXT scholarship of Japanese government, she did research at Kyoto University. She worked as a coordinator and then regional manager of women’s program in Trag Foundation where she developed programs of support to organizations working on gender-based violence, gender justice and strengthening the feminist movement in the Western Balkans.
In her work, she connects strategies of communication, visual storytelling, design and technology researching the ways in which feminist ideas can shape space, digital landscapes and social narratives. She is particularly interested in intersection of feminism and technology – how do digital tools, platform and algorithms refer to gender and power, and also how technology can be used to strengthen feminist movement.
Philanthropy is a strange sphere of work and acting. It is strange because rules are a bit absent in clarity and public decision making, unlike organizations that have clear and transparent procedures. What has attracted you to work in foundation? How did this work surprise or disappoint you? How does your work differ from traditional philanthropy?
For me, the work in philanthropy means I can contribute to topics that interest me, that are important to me and that I fight for from position where I think that my skills can best be used. Philanthropy demands building networks and work one-on-one to explain better why there needs to be funding in the Balkans, especially in these years where Balkans is no longer interesting to donors. For me, that work was important within the system where I thought I could contribute and help the most. It is also communication as a space where I can help. I am simply not a good person to work in the field, with victims of violence since I don’t have those skills.
I agree that we don’t have clear rules and procedures. Much depends on relationship we create and how we communicate our needs and explain why certain topics matter. I would not say that I have disappointment since I had not expectations but it is clear to that much happens in fine interhuman communication and much depends on relationships we build.
I would also name my work traditional but I was lucky to work in women’s program that was supported by OAK foundation, and that gave us flexibility to work. Even though Trag tries, it is not always possible to maintain flexibility. But, because of Oak, we could nourish trust-based philanthropy. Especially in fast changing context, such as Serbia, flexible management of resources is very important. Our approach gave us a two-way trust and made possible to solve problems together. I am not going to pretend we are all equal, we know where power is, but we managed to build trust. The more trust we have, the better the work. When there is no trust, we tend to make up or impose our own thing and that is not good. Now, because we have a wider picture, we could see some trends before organizations. I think it is makes us responsible toward the movement because when we focus on ecosystem, we can return information, knowledge and skills to the movement. It is important that we share that information. We give them opportunity to see trends. And at the end of the day, it is our job, to see trends and monitor the situation in the movement.
Your specific focus is on Balkans. How did the work of organizations change over the years? What do you see as main obstacles and challenges?
Serbia is now in specific situation. I think there is a kind of exhaustion and we see that in communication with the groups. We saw decreased capacities and also a lack of space for anything else besides the main work. There was too much information. As well as Trag. We are constantly hit by the news in our everydayness. However, I think that fluidity between countries is better and that there is more cooperation. There is more clarity in exchange, and more activities that are being enlarged.
Situation is daring since there is withdrawal of funds, and I think we need to create new mechanisms of solidarity. It will be hard to advocate for the Balkans. Many donors are withdrawing and shifting responsibility to Europe. And European money is draining since there is center-right in power. And it seems that women’s organizations are falling through the cracks. There is a need for enlargement, sharing of paces and staff, new mechanisms of work and solidarity as the only way to succeed. I also see a danger in competition but I saw enlargement and that makes me happy.
This year is challenging, and it seems that syntagm crisis without precedent is what explains the current chaos in philanthropy caused by Trump’s revenge but also a fact that major donor countries are withdrawing, such as USA, Britain and Japan. How do you see the forthcoming crisis and what are the main challenges?
I think that partly I answered the question. I will accentuate that it is very important to organize and support local giving. The way we formulate calls for grants, and to support cooperation. We need to look at it as an ecosystem and not individually. UN and European funds are trying to do just this in order not to double dip. It is important to make chains, weaving or networks of support. It is a complicated work but it can spur cooperation. So we don’t go to competition.
I am afraid that we are about to see more complicated procedures. We have an expensive money now that has too many procedures and administration. That way, we are increasing administrative costs and burdens. On the other hand, we are likely to see foreign agents law in Serbia which means reallocation of organizations. We can see many organizations slipping away with lack of capacities. It will be challenging to build trust when we have administrative burden and a big chunk of energy will go in that direction. But if we can create a sense of reality and support capacity building, then we can survive that part. I see this as a space of growth.
If solidarity is part of trust and community, given your background and context, what would you like to see happen within solidarity in years to come?
Solidarity is a wide term. I think we will have to look for resources locally from communities, organizations and local philanthropy. The challenge is that the base is not very strong. Trag and Reconstruction are doing it for years but that muscle is not sufficiently strong. However, with these protests, I think it’s growing stronger. Maybe that way we can redistribute support.
As far solidarity, I think the main problem is trust. And I am talking about the level of sharing information and understanding that only together we can survive. And that’s why I think trust is crucial. Those bridges that we built and keep on building, that will be important. And we manage to stand on those bridges, we can survive and be stronger.
Interview: Đurđa Trajković
