Credibility as Currency: How AI and Communications Can Strengthen Trust in Development

Imagine if beneficiaries were not just recipients of aid but custodians of their own progress, able to flag challenges, report successes, and become active participants in their own narratives? Trust in what we do, today, is not a given. It is a currency. And it must be minted not in words, but in the lasting, verifiable transformations we leave behind.

By Florence Kim

In a village near Gao, Mali, a local elder told me something that has stayed with me ever since: "We do not measure promises. We measure whether the wind changes after you leave." It was a quiet but powerful truth, one I have carried across every high-level summit, every project launch, and every advocacy campaign since. In fragile contexts — and increasingly across the global development landscape, trust is not granted based on presence or promises. It is earned through the tangible shifts that remain after the banners are taken down and cameras are turned off.

Today, we live in an age where trust is more fragile than ever, yet we have more tools at our disposal than any generation before us. Artificial intelligence, blockchain, satellite imagery, real-time analytics: these technologies offer us the possibility not only to deliver change but to prove it, to make credibility visible, and to rebuild public trust where it is eroding. If we choose to use them wisely, these tools could become the very infrastructure that underpins the future of development partnerships.

Traditional UN communications have long focused on visibility. Press releases, media coverage, project visits: the goal was often to show presence, to demonstrate that work was happening. But today, visibility without credibility widens the trust deficit. It is no longer enough to be seen. The question is not "Are we visible?" but "Can we prove that what we said would happen has actually reshaped reality?"

Artificial intelligence offers transformative opportunities in this regard. We can track environmental changes through before-and-after satellite imagery, use predictive analytics to identify where reintegration programs might falter, and adapt interventions in real time based on social or economic indicators. Through natural language processing, AI can amplify authentic voices, analyzing patterns in community feedback across different languages and dialects, helping us listen better to those we serve.

Imagine if returnees in rural areas could update their reintegration status themselves, through simple mobile interfaces powered by AI-driven translation and accessibility tools.

Imagine if beneficiaries were not just recipients of aid but custodians of their own progress, able to flag challenges, report successes, and become active participants in their own narratives.

Trust is not built through declarations. It is built when those at the heart of development are given the tools to own and shape the story of their own lives.

Blockchain technology further deepens the possibilities. Through blockchain-based financial tracking, donors and communities alike could trace the flow of funds — from pledges at international conferences all the way down to individual community projects — in real time, with no room for opacity. Smart contracts could release funding based on independently verifiable milestones, creating a system where success is not declared, but demonstrated. Ownership of results could be radically decentralized, strengthening local governance structures and community trust in a way that traditional reporting cycles never could.

By integrating blockchain and AI thoughtfully, we can move from episodic visibility to continuous, living proof of impact.

Visibility could evolve beyond social media posts and glossy brochures. Instead of static project evaluations, we could offer real-time dashboards showing live progress on agricultural yields, school attendance, policy adoption, or economic reintegration rates — accessible to anyone, anywhere. Satellite imagery could tell the story of reforestation or urban recovery as it unfolds. Search analytics could reveal which questions citizens are asking online about development programs — allowing organizations to adapt communications, services, and policies based on real information gaps rather than assumptions.

The possibilities are enormous. But so are the risks.

Technology must serve the people it is designed to help. It must empower communities, not surveil them. It must build trust, not extract compliance. Without rigorous ethical frameworks, even the best-intentioned innovations could deepen inequality or amplify existing power imbalances.

The purpose of AI, blockchain, and all emerging technologies in development cannot be simply to monitor or to promote. It must be to democratize trust: making information more accessible, impact more visible, and accountability more real.

The elder in Mali did not ask for statistics. He asked for something far more difficult: Proof that life would feel different when we were no longer there. If we are serious about rebuilding trust in development, we must hold ourselves to that standard. AI and blockchain are not silver bullets, but they offer a chance — if we use them thoughtfully — to move beyond promises into a new era of radical transparency, co-ownership, and measurable impact.

Trust, today, is not a given. It is a currency. And it must be minted not in words, but in the lasting, verifiable transformations we leave behind.