Last year, a longtime colleague from GNP+—an organization that supports communities of people living with HIV globally—approached me with an idea: could UNDP co-host a session on Web3 and blockchain technologies to explore their potential in the global HIV response?

At first, it sounded niche. But I already knew a bit about blockchain—through my earlier work on domestic violence prevention, from UNDP Innovation colleagues, from partners supporting NGOs in Ukraine with rapid crypto-based fund transfers, and from conversations about how technology might help deliver resources during crises when traditional systems fail.

In today’s volatile financial environment, where NGOs and key population groups often face barriers accessing funds or services, any technology that offers speed, transparency and anonymity deserves attention. So I said yes.

And at last July’s International AIDS Conference (IAC) we held a session that really delivered.

We walked through some of blockchain’s core principles: immutability (once data is entered, it can’t be altered), decentralization (no single authority controls it), transparency (all entries are publicly verifiable), and smart contracts (transactions that self-execute under set conditions). These principles may seem abstract—but in global health, they’re deeply practical. We've been talking for years about digital vaccination records, cross-border health IDs, and secure supply chains. Blockchain could help solve for all of these—especially in fragile or fast-changing settings.

Take immutability, for instance—when thoughtfully applied, this principle can support health systems by ensuring that once key information is entered—such as a vaccination date or a batch number for a medicine—it can’t be altered. That kind of data integrity is especially useful for tracking immunization campaigns or monitoring the distribution of essential medicines, where errors or manipulation can have serious public health consequences. For more sensitive areas like HIV care, immutability must be balanced with privacy, using approaches that protect identity while still preserving the reliability of the underlying data.

Next, decentralization, - an absolute game-changer in humanitarian and cross-border settings, where centralized systems either don’t exist or can’t be accessed or trusted.  Typically, health records are managed by national systems or humanitarian actors- but when someone crosses a border or loses access to those institutions, their health history often doesn’t follow. In a decentralized model, no single government or organization "owns" the data. Important information—like treatment history or eligibility for services—can be securely accessed from multiple places, without needing to go through a single government or institution. Individuals could control their own health data, sharing it only when and where it’s needed. That kind of flexibility can make a real difference in the world where 1 in 20 people are on the move, either as migrants, refugees or displaced persons, and navigating health services in different countries. 

Transparency is of course also critical in contexts like procurement or aid disbursement, where visibility into who gets what, when and how can deter corruption and ensure faster, fairer distribution of commodities like ARVs or essential diagnostics. And smart contracts? They open the door to automating fund releases or inventory restocks when preset conditions are met—something that could dramatically streamline supply chains and make last-mile delivery more responsive and resilient.

These principles could shift how health and social services are delivered, especially to the most vulnerable communities —but they remain unfamiliar to many of the very people who could benefit from them most. For NGOs and community-led organizations working at the frontlines of health and humanitarian response, blockchain still feels distant, even abstract. That’s why engagement—and co-creation—is so essential.

At IAC, we also had some of my Innovation Team colleagues, who met directly with a number of NGOs. Many were intrigued by the idea of crypto for fundraising—but few had ever heard of blockchain beyond that. And that’s when it hit me: we need more of these spaces. Spaces where different communities come together, push limits and imagine bold solutions.

Of course, not everyone was convinced. One colleague dismissed blockchain as a passing fad. Another raised legitimate concerns about its environmental footprint, pointing to the energy used by traditional proof-of-work systems. And others asked questions about data privacy which is especially critical for sensitive health information like HIV status or treatment history. Blockchain isn’t automatically private, but it can be designed to protect privacy in new ways. For example, smart contracts could allow someone to share just enough information with a health provider to access services—without revealing everything. 

Like any technology, it all depends on how it’s built and who it’s built for. Innovation always comes with iteration and hard questions—and that’s part of the process.

As a public health practitioner, I’ve spent years convincing skeptics, making systems work with very little, and looking for tools that save lives. So I enrolled in a Blockchain for Development course organized by the UNDP Innovation team.

For the past three months—mostly after hours—I’ve been digging deeper into the applications of blockchain for global development. And like red cars on the highway, once you see it, you see it everywhere. An NGO partner pitched a brilliant blockchain-based idea to improve medication access. In one of our climate and health projects, we began exploring how blockchain could help preserve data integrity across decentralized sources. 

As the ideas keep coming, one thought remains clear: we need more space, more dialogue and more collective imagination to fully understand how technologies like blockchain can serve public good. UNDP’s most recent Human Development Report rightly notes that today’s biggest challenge is not developing new technologies -it's ensuring they are governed inclusively and designed to expand human freedom, not limit it. Tech, after all, is not the answer to everything—but the right tech, shaped by the right communities, can be part of something transformative.