On 2 April 2026, an international study was presented examining the role of religious identity in development and humanitarian partnerships. Led by researcher Sara Kinsbergen, the study explored what a shared religious identity means for the way organisations collaborate – and, in particular, how it shapes perceptions of equality within those partnerships. The findings are less straightforward than is often assumed.

The research draws on interviews and surveys with international organisations and their local partners in countries including Burundi, Ethiopia and Ukraine. It was conducted in collaboration with seven Dutch organisations working in development cooperation and humanitarian aid, among them Mensen met een Missie. Through existing partnerships, we contributed insights, reflections and practical experience that informed the analysis.

The appeal of shared values

That shared values and beliefs play a role in collaboration is hardly surprising. For many organisations, they form a core part of their identity and influence how partners are selected and relationships are built.

The study shows that a shared religious identity often acts as an accelerator in the early stages of collaboration. Partners recognise themselves in one another, effectively speak the same language, and build trust more quickly. This often leads to relationships that feel more personal and closer, with a strong sense of mutual commitment. That sense of connection can make collaboration more efficient and meaningful. Partnerships become less transactional and take on the character of a shared mission. Yet it is precisely within this strength that a potential risk emerges.

Trust as a foundation – and a distraction

Shared values may deepen relationships, but they do not automatically make them more equal. Structural tensions in international cooperation remain. The distribution of power and resources continues to be uneven. Decision-making, access to funding and strategic direction often still rest with organisations in the Global North. What changes is primarily how this inequality is experienced.

Organisations in the North tend to perceive partnerships as more equal than their counterparts do. For local organisations, dependency often remains tangible, even when the relationship itself is considered positive. A shared religious identity can ease this tension, but it can also obscure it. Trust makes collaboration more comfortable, yet it may also reduce the likelihood that difficult questions are raised.

Identity as a dynamic reality

Alongside these tensions around equality, the study highlights a second important development. In practice, religious identity is not fixed, but continuously shaped in relation to context, partner and purpose. At times, this identity is explicitly emphasised, for instance where religious networks play a significant role. In other situations, it is made less visible, such as in engagement with institutional donors or in politically sensitive contexts.

This flexibility enables collaboration across a wide range of settings, but it also raises questions. What happens when partners interpret the same values differently? And to what extent does collaboration with like-minded actors reinforce existing patterns? Religious identity thus proves not only connective, but also a subject of ongoing negotiation.

Where the conversation is missing

What this research makes particularly visible is that shared values are present in many partnerships, yet rarely become an explicit topic of conversation between partners. Collaboration is often shaped through reporting, indicators and accountability mechanisms. The beliefs that underpin these processes remain largely implicit. As a result, differences in interpretation and expectations tend to stay below the surface. The added value of a shared religious identity therefore lies not simply in the fact that values are shared, but in how they are used – as an entry point for dialogue and as a framework for addressing differences.

This raises a broader question about how partnerships are designed. Not by emphasising identity more strongly as a binding force, but by engaging more consciously with what that identity means in practice. Collaboration then becomes not only about trust, but also about making underlying dynamics explicit. Conversations extend beyond results to include assumptions and expectations. Equality does not emerge automatically from shared starting points, but from how partners engage with the complexity that follows.

Where collaboration truly takes shape

These insights connect to wider debates on power dynamics and equitable partnerships. While such discussions often focus on funding and structures, this research shows that less tangible factors are equally influential. Perceptions, mutual expectations and the way partners relate to one another all shape how collaboration is experienced. Religious identity brings this dynamic into focus, but the underlying mechanisms apply more broadly.

Later this year, the Dutch Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation is expected to present a new Africa strategy, with equitable partnership as a central principle. The findings of this study are highly relevant in this context: they reveal where collaboration encounters friction in practice, and what is needed to move beyond rhetoric and give real substance to equality.

An invitation to look more closely

For Mensen met een Missie, this research reinforces the importance of an approach that allows space for such complexity. Dialogue is at the heart of our work, especially where differences become visible – not to smooth them over, but to understand and address them.

The study underscores that these conversations do not happen automatically, even in partnerships characterised by trust and shared values. This speaks directly to our way of working. For us, dialogue is not an add-on to collaboration, but a condition for it. Not only to deepen mutual understanding, but also to make power dynamics and assumptions explicit. At the same time, the research confronts us with an uncomfortable question: to what extent do we consistently create space for these conversations ourselves? And where do tensions remain unaddressed? This calls not only for reflection from our partners, but equally from us.

The study aligns with a broader shift towards more equitable partnerships and the redistribution of power to local actors. Yet it also shows that structural changes alone are not sufficient. Equality is shaped not only by systems, but by how partners relate to one another – and by what is, and is not, openly discussed. This requires both a redistribution of resources and a different kind of conversation. What connects people can strengthen collaboration, but it also demands vigilance – especially where that connection feels self-evident.

Ultimately, the question is not whether we share values. The question is how consciously we engage with them.

Read more

The full research report and summary can be found here:
Summary
Full research report