We spoke with Fabienne Hoelzel, founder of Fabulous Urban, a research-driven urban design, planning, and advocacy agency operating between Zurich, Lagos, and Stuttgart. With decades of experience working across cities in the Global South, Fabienne combines technical expertise with a strong commitment to communities often left on the margins of urban development.

At the heart of her work is the mobile dry diversion toilet (MDDT) – a project developed over several years to provide dignified, safe, and locally appropriate sanitation solutions for low-income communities Through co-design, testing, and iterative development, MDDT has evolved from a research prototype to on-the-ground implementation, supported by both community contributions and private philanthropy.

In this conversation, we explore the challenges of innovative philanthropic projects at the intersection of research, design, and social impact — from embracing risk and uncertainty to rethinking how philanthropy can support long-term, systemic change beyond short-term giving.

 

1. Your work is often described as philanthropic, yet your background is in urban design. How did your journey into this field begin?

People in the communities where I work sometimes call me a philanthropist, but I see myself first and foremost as an urban designer who chose a different path than many of my peers. The turning point came during my time at ETH Zurich, where I worked on a research project examining extreme forms of urbanisation, including informal settlements, refugee camps, and gated communities. That experience exposed me to realities far beyond traditional urban design practice.

Through this project, I focused on favelas in São Paulo, which brought me to Brazil and, in 2009, into the city’s slum-upgrading programme. That work shaped everything that followed. Later, I founded my own organisation, Fabulous Urban, to continue this work independently while staying connected to academic research.

Looking back, what stands out is how important female networks were at every key moment. Women who believed in the work, opened doors, created opportunities, and encouraged collaboration. Elisabete França, the then-deputy head (Secretaria Adjunta) of Housing and Urban Development Department of the City of São Paulo, Brazil, who gave me my first on-the-ground role, was a woman. Later, my work in Brazil led me to meet Monika Umunna in Lagos, the head of Lagos liaison office of the Heinrich Böll Foundation in Abuja, who invited me to bring my experience to Nigeria. These relationships were built on trust, shared values, and long-term commitment—and they have been foundational to everything I’ve done since.

 

2. Your work focuses strongly on African cities. Why did you choose to concentrate there?

One key reason is that some of the world’s fastest-growing cities are emerging there, often with very limited planning, funding, and research. At the same time, much of the global expertise and academic attention is focused elsewhere on challenges that are often less urgent. This creates a serious imbalance: the places with the greatest needs tend to have the least support and knowledge. In addition, Global North urban planning paradigms continue to gloss over Global South everyday realities.

In many African cities, challenges such as rapid urbanization, climate vulnerability, migration, and infrastructure gaps are deeply interconnected. While these issues are not created locally, their impacts are often felt most strongly there. For me it is urgent to engage, not as an act of charity, but because urbanization there is a critical arena where global inequality and environmental stress become concrete.

 

3. How do you engage others in projects that can seem challenging or underfunded?

It is surprisingly difficult to draw attention beyond people’s immediate comfort zones. There is no shortage of opinions in public debates, but when it comes to structured, long-term engagement, participation often drops. These projects offer little financial incentive and require patience rather than quick results.

I often have to explain why engagement in African cities matters. I work through two parallel paths. Academia gives me the space to explore long-term questions and new narratives — for example, rethinking refugee camps as potential future cities rather than permanent exceptions. This helps place local challenges in a global context, linking urban development to climate change, migration, and long-term resilience.

Through my professorship, I also build networks with institutions such as UNHCR, universities in Lagos, Nairobi, and Addis Abeba, and with international students who are eager to engage. The NGO then becomes the place where these ideas are tested on the ground, in close collaboration with local partners and communities.

I also use my leverage in Europe to raise awareness and engage in professional dialogue. Being recognized as a peer is essential before moving toward implementation, and that recognition takes time.

Within my organization, the approach is more practical. We focus on concrete, widely shared problems and develop solutions that are carefully tested before being scaled. Visibility helps, but credibility matters more. By working slowly, building evidence, and refining our methods, we earn trust and show that the work is serious, respectful, and grounded in real impact.

In the end, engagement grows through trust — by being honest about the challenges, thoughtful about solutions, and committed to doing the work with care and humility.

 

4. Do you see your initiatives changing how cities and local institutions think about these issues?

Yes — and no. The most visible change over the past few years has been in how the conversation is framed. We are slowly moving away from blame and short-term fixes. Poverty and lack of infrastructure are still too often seen as personal failure, when in reality they are systemic problems.

Our work starts by recognizing informal settlements and informal economies as real, functioning parts of the city. Instead of asking how to remove them, we ask how they can be supported and improved. Urbanization itself is not the problem — it is an opportunity to address inequality in a more structured and sustainable way.

Change takes time, but it does happen. One important shift has been helping decision-makers acknowledge that informal settlements exist and function, rather than trying to ignore or erase them. Millions of people live and work in these environments and sustain entire urban economies. Recognizing this reality is the first step toward better infrastructure, more effective planning, and more inclusive policies.

 

5. You mentioned that it’s important for you to move slowly rather than scale up quickly. Why is that?

We work with very vulnerable communities, and introducing a “perfect solution” too quickly may do real harm, even when intentions are good. Many projects celebrate a clever idea early on, but when you return a few years later, the technology is no longer used or never truly fit the local context.

Moving slowly is not a weakness — it’s how we make sure solutions actually work and last. Rapid scaling without learning often leads to wasted resources and, more importantly, broken trust.

With the MDDT project, we spent years prototyping, installing dozens of units, and closely observing what fails, what is accepted, and how people — especially women — use them in everyday life. Only after this long testing phase we do feel confident enough to scale and launch a broader campaign against open defecation, grounded in the reality that millions of people still lack access to safe sanitation.

 

6. What other challenges do you face in leading your philanthropic project, beyond limited human resources?

One major challenge is delivering the message in a way that resonates. Decision-makers have limited time and attention, so framing matters. If a problem is presented only as a crisis, people tend to turn away. When it is framed as an opportunity — for resilience, innovation, or long-term urban development — the conversation shifts. Storytelling, clear visuals, and simplicity are just as important as technical solutions.

Another challenge is that philanthropy often expects certainty. Many donors are comfortable funding finished solutions, but real innovation happens much earlier — during research, testing, and iteration. At that stage, outcomes are not guaranteed. Without support for this exploratory phase, it becomes very difficult to move from insight to real-world impact.

 

7. Let’s turn now to an area of our work and collaboration – helping families design and implement philanthropic strategies. From your experience, what do wealthy families struggle with when they want to support work like yours?

Many people with the means to give genuinely want to engage, but they often don’t know how. They may not know whom to trust, fear supporting projects that are well-intentioned but not truly impactful, and feel overwhelmed by the number of organizations and competing claims. As a result, they often gravitate toward highly visible, concrete outcomes rather than the less visible — but essential — work of research, prototyping, and long-term engagement.

At the same time, many philanthropists don’t just want to “donate money.” They want to contribute to systemic change. To do that, they need to understand not only what they are funding, but why it matters and how real change unfolds over time.

Our role is to build trust and create clarity. Clear communication and transparent structures help show what a project does, what has been learned, and what kind of impact is realistic across different time horizons.

 

8. What can philanthropists learn from their experience as entrepreneurs?

Entrepreneurship accepts failure as part of progress. In business, significant resources are invested in development, knowing that many ideas will not succeed. Philanthropy often struggles with this mindset, even though social challenges can be far more complex than commercial ones

Too often, philanthropy expects clarity, guarantees, and measurable outcomes from the very beginning. In reality, impact rarely starts with certainty. Meaningful solutions emerge through research, testing, and iteration — a phase that is inherently risky. Without funding these early stages, many promising ideas never reach the point where real impact becomes possible.

Focusing only on finished solutions ignores the years of invisible work behind them: community engagement, adaptation, and learning from mistakes. These processes may not be glamorous, but they are essential. If philanthropy wants innovation, it must be willing to support experimentation — and accept that occasional failure is part of creating lasting change.

Accepting risks does not remove the need for accountability. As in any commercial venture, thoughtful and stage-appropriate reporting remains essential, both to improve efficiency and to build trust among partners and donors.

 

9. What is essential for meaningful engagement in philanthropy?

Trust is fundamental. Real engagement takes time — getting to know the people behind a project, understanding their values, and accepting that uncertainty is part of any serious effort to create change.

Donors need to trust the people doing the work — their competence, integrity, and long-term commitment — not just a project proposal. Without that trust, philanthropy becomes overly controlled and risk averse. When trust exists, donors can accept uncertainty and focus on long-term impact instead of monitoring every detail.

 

10. What advice would you give to a wealthy family that wants to use its resources meaningfully?

Start with curiosity and patience. Be clear about what you truly care about — whether that’s women’s rights, children, health, urban environments, climate, or something else. Take the time to understand the issue, the people involved, and the realities on the ground. Not every step will lead to immediate or visible success.

Align your support with your values, and be willing to fund learning, not just outcomes. The most meaningful impact comes from long-term engagement and sustained commitment, not quick wins.

 

11. How has working in this field changed your view of wealth and philanthropy?

It reinforced a simple truth: there is a great deal of wealth in the world, and there are many urgent problems — but very little connection between the two. The issues that matter most often lack visibility, prestige, or strong advocates. Bridging that gap requires credibility, persistence, and the ability to speak both the language of impact and the language of those who control resources.

I’ve also learned that addressing these challenges isn’t only about having good projects. Accessing capital depends on trust, long-term relationships, and creating the right structures to channel funding responsibly. Even redirecting a small share of existing wealth, if done thoughtfully, could make a significant difference in basic services and long-term resilience.

To find out more about Fabienne, her work and the MDDT, watch the TV report:

Die Aarauer Architektin in der Megacity:
Die Aarauer Architektin in der Megacity | Folge 1 – Kulturplatz – Swiss Success Stories – Play SRF
Die Aarauer Architektin in der Megacity | Folge 2 – Kulturplatz – Swiss Success Stories – Play SRF

For more insights on the art of wealth planning, subscribe to Notes on Wealth Planning.