Do NGOs really have no choice? AI adoption in the nonprofit sector

Let's not be hypocrites from the start: Yes, I use AI every day for work and personal purposes. I also drive a car, eat meat, buy cheap clothes, take airplanes and - worst of all - I really like gadgets.

I'm not sure that makes me a bad person or citizen, but I can assure you I'm trying to live consciously, mindful of my impact and the footprints I leave on the world I want to inhabit.

I don't mean this as self-therapy. I'm simply making clear I'm not speaking from moral authority or perfectionism - I'm not here to be exemplary. What I want to say is this: we're all responsible for the decisions we make and their impact on our lives and communities.

I say this because in a recent training I led, someone argued that small NGOs must fully adopt AI - they can't afford not to. "We don't have a choice."

My first reaction was: we always have a choice.

First, the nonprofit sector exists to fulfill a different logic, one that goes beyond financial gains. Most of these organizations operate on tight budgets, yet many are effective, responsible, and positively affect millions worldwide.

The logic of efficiency and optimization belongs to the for-profit sector. As a tool, AI can increase its margins by shrinking the resources once used for work that AI will likely replace. Nonprofits operate by a different logic and should take a more vigilant approach to AI adoption.

The impact of AI use must be balanced against the ethically driven mission of the nonprofit sector - not only in individual usage, but in how these organizations fight for justice and equality during a technological revolution that must be inclusive and protect the planet's natural resources.

In principle, NGOs must ask whether a specific AI application aligns with their work and mission, rather than jumping on the AI bandwagon. This will build a healthier, more trustworthy approach across all organizational levels. It will show donors where they place their values and how they elevate their mission above the temptations of societally harmful efficiency.

And, dear readers - as I said at the start - I'm not arguing that nonprofits shouldn't use AI. I believe they should, given the benefits of an ethical and reflective use of the various tools. But should they change their identities because of AI? Should they focus AI efforts on redesigning their organizations? Should they always use AI, given the harm that massive adoption is already causing to our natural resources?

How to adopt AI as organizations is now the burning question every nonprofit should ask itself. But are they aware enough of AI's impacts to ask the crucial questions?

Disclaimer: The text was copyedited using Claude LLM to check grammar and readability.

Your mission matters. Your AI choices should too. I help nonprofits navigate AI with clarity, not confusion - training teams to use AI responsibly while protecting the people you serve. Get in touch → https://www.valterhugomuniz.com/contact-8