Greenpeace Philippines has downsized its 20-member staff as of end-September and expects to hire six new employees, after a funding shortfall and mounting pressure to strengthen fundraising prompted a sharp downsizing of its local operations, Eco-Business has learnt.
To continue reading, subscribe to Eco‑Business.
Access all our exclusive content and archive — with a 7-day free trial. Then just US$5/month. Cancel anytime.
- Exclusive access to training across business and policy topics
- Direct access to industry leaders at Eco-Business events
- A seat among the decision makers shaping the region's sustainable development
The move comes as civil society groups in the Global South face intensifying competition for philanthropic funding and generate less individual-donor revenue than counterparts in wealthier countries, according to an anonymous Greenpeace source, who was one of those laid off.
Last year, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), previously the world’s largest international development funder, was shuttered, disrupting funding for nonprofits. Greenpeace does not receive USAID funds, but many of its partners do, the source said, increasing competition for support from major funders.
“For the longest time the Philippine office has always been in a precarious position,” the source said. “Funders in the Global North are willing to support offices in the Global South, but the internal dynamics of who gets access and how it is allocated within the organisation, overlaid with general funding challenges makes securing that support challenging”.
However, Greenpeace Southeast Asia, which includes the offices in the Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand, said the changes reflect an “evolution” of how the organisation works across the region, shaped by “changes in campaign priorities, operational needs, available resources and the increasingly interconnected nature of our environmental work”.
“
It would be inaccurate to reduce these changes to a narrative that Greenpeace organisations in the ‘Global South’ are simply unable to raise as much funding as organisations in the ‘Global North’. Our choices involve a broader assessment of strategy, impact, capability and long-term sustainability across the four countries.
Greenpeace Southeast Asia
“It would be inaccurate to reduce these changes to a narrative that Greenpeace organisations in the ‘Global South’ are simply unable to raise as much funding as organisations in the ‘Global North’,” said Arifsyah Nasution, Programme Director, and Fabi Carino, People and Culture and Operations Director, at Greenpeace Southeast Asia.
“That framing does not reflect how the regional decisions were made. Our choices involve a broader assessment of strategy, impact, capability and long-term sustainability across the four countries,” they said in a joint statement to Eco-Business.
They added that the Philippines would remain central to Greenpeace’s regional work, with personnel and functions retained in the country as it is developed into a support hub for Southeast Asia.
The source said while Greenpeace remains a major campaigning organisation in the region, with its Philippine teams delivering environmental and climate-policy wins, it still relies heavily on fundraising, including individual donations – means of support that European offices have generally been more successful in generating.
The source described the cutbacks as particularly painful in the Philippines, among the countries most exposed to climate-related disasters. Climate and zero waste campaigns are expected to continue, although their eventual scope remains unclear with a much smaller team.
Separately, Greenpeace is appealing a US$345 million North Dakota court judgment in favour of pipeline company Energy Transfer, arising from litigation over protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline. A jury in March 2025 found Greenpeace International and US-based Greenpeace entities liable for more than US$660 million, although the award was later reduced by the court.
It was not immediately clear whether the case has affected the finances of Greenpeace’s Southeast Asia operations.
