Op-Ed: Why Many Africans Don’t Trust Bill Gates and His Foundation’s Philanthropy
The American billionaire plans to give nearly all of his wealth to African countries over the next 20 years, but there’s an uneasy side to all that charity.

Picture this: American billionaire Bill Gates, in the middle of a hot day, moving through the bustling roads of Nigeria’s commercial capital, Lagos, on the back of an Okada – the local slang for motorcycle. You don’t need to imagine, it’s right there in a new ad for the Gates Foundation, which features rapper/producer MI Abaga and comedians Broda Shaggi and Layi Wasabi.
Gates helping Abaga finetune a cover recording of Nigerian singer Veno Marioghae’s classic “Nigeria Go Survive” and also speaking some pidgin English – “Na together we go win” – should be innocuous on the face of it. However, a cursory scroll through the comments of the Instagram post hosting the video shows a tangible level of cynicism directed at Gates, a trend that isn’t particularly new among Africans.
Last month, the Microsoft founder announced that he would be giving away 99% of his wealth to Africa over the next 20 years. Gates said that “by unleashing human potential through health and education, every country in Africa should be on a path to prosperity.” On the surface, it’s a noble feat, an unprecedented charitable act by one of the world’s richest men, estimated to be worth $200 billion by 2045, when the Gates Foundation is expected to end its operations.
Going a little deeper, the critical question here is why? Why is Bill Gates hyper-focused on Africa?
Gates’ credentials as a philanthropist are as publicized as his role in pioneering key modern technologies. The Gates Foundation, previously known as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, has expanded its charitable work across education in the U.S., reducing deaths and complications due to childbirth, combating prominent infectious diseases, improving food security, and addressing other causes.
It all seems straightforward, but Gates has come under scrutiny for leveraging his foundation’s efforts to influence policy decisions. A decade ago, it took a Supreme Court ruling to strike out a charter school law in Washington, D.C., that failed multiple referendum ballots but still scaled through legislative hurdles due to Gates’ outsize influence and emphasis on charter schools as the ideal alternative to public education in the U.S.
Gates has been consistently criticized for approaching solutions to his chosen causes with a one-track mind, an issue that has riddled his philanthropic efforts in Nigeria with controversies. The most popular debate is genetically modified (GM) seeds, which Gates is a huge proponent of and has insisted are the ideal solution to Africa’s food security problems.
Through his foundation, Gates has funded organizations promoting the widespread adoption of GM seeds among farmers, to the point of lobbying African governments for favorable laws. In 2023, it was announced that updates were being made to a draft protocol by the trade bodies sponsoring the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), which fundamentally alter the seeds farmers in Africa are allowed to plant. The draft laws will seek to institute legal and financial punishments on farmers who don’t plant approved seeds, many of them GM seeds.
GM seeds are ideally designed to germinate despite adverse conditions, ranging from climate to other farming challenges such as pests and weeds. However, they have several drawbacks – from reduced vitality after the first yield, which means farmers need to buy new GM seeds regularly, to reduced crop biodiversity, that have fueled unflattering myths.
Also, producers of GM seeds are companies in the global north, which means enforcing their use is just another form of exploiting African countries and other developing countries in the global south.
“The companies will try to entice us by saying their seeds are ‘better.’ Then we’ll become dependent on seeds that you can’t replant,” Faustina Banakwoyem, a 35-year-old Ghanaian soya and pepper farmer, said in reaction to a seed law that imposes GM seeds on farmers across Ghana. “Our seeds are from this soil. It’s colonialism to say what seeds we can use and how to use them.”
Gates’ involvement in the GM seeds agenda has been a didactic point. In an article titled “Bill Gates Should Stop Telling Africans What Kind of Agriculture Africans Need,” Million Belay and Bridget Mugambe of the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA) state that “agroecology is what our continent needs,” a liberating approach merging indigenous farming knowledge with cutting-edge scientific tools, and is based on “farmers’ rights to choose seeds and methods of cultivation, and free of corporate interference and control.”
Belay and Mugambe argue that Gates’ fixation on recreating India’s Green Revolution in Africa, with GM seeds at the center of that push, overlooks the long-term adverse effects of that industrialized agricultural approach. The Gates Foundation has continued to fund the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), the Open Forum on Agricultural Biotechnology (OFAB), and other organizations that serve Gates’ staunch agenda.
“Gates isn’t interested in empowering the poor; he’s interested in imposing his solutions,” author Tim Schwaab wrote in a pointed essay, calling the billionaire a misanthrope. It’s a little unnerving that there’s a real possibility that giving $200 billion to African countries will lead to sweeping public policy reforms in agriculture, education, and healthcare, as directed by Gates. African leaders are not generally known for their modesty in the face of so much money.
The white saviorism of it all, as well as many of the reactions to the ad video mentioned at the top of this piece, indicate a genuine unease with Gates’ philanthropic efforts in Africa. Granted, some of the criticisms leveled, like population control and vaccine creation theories, can and have been debunked. However, the lack of trust that Bill Gates’ agenda is wholesome for Africa is rooted in a track record that’s impossible to ignore.