A call to invest in social cohesion

At Architects of Diversity, we have worked to create spaces where young Malaysians can cross the invisible lines that so often divide us. We have seen what is possible when trust is nurtured intentionally, when conversations happen across differences, when relationships are built slowly, carefully, and honestly. But through this work, we have also come to realise that we cannot do it alone.

Social cohesion is not the result of one initiative or one organisation. It is an ecosystem. It requires many roots, many branches, many different types of work happening in concert. One tree, no matter how strong, cannot sustain a forest. If we are serious about rebuilding trust in Malaysia, we must think beyond projects and programmes.

Read our full report on Investing in Social Cohesion that aims to capture the realm of possibility and where blanks need to be filled.

Social cohesion is a Common Good, vulnerable to depletion without intentional investments

Social cohesion is not simply a sense of “feel good”-ness. Strong social cohesion is found to foster economic progress by enhancing workforce productivity, promoting inclusive growth and reducing transaction costs associated with distrust and social fragmentation.

In order to facilitate the journey of Malaysia in determining its future, social cohesion plays a vital role in ensuring that our society does not devolve into a state of violence and social dissolution in the process. Only when individuals and communities trust each other, participate in public discourse and consider opposing views in good faith can disagreements be transformed into resolution.

In contrast to economic equality and social mobility that seek to increase the provisions and distribution of private goods (such as wealth and property) to individuals, social cohesion shares more similarities to the environment as a common good. Bad actors can exploit social relations for their own benefit by depleting social cohesion and producing social divisions. For instance, a racially divided Malaysia benefits political parties that rely on racial narratives and the sole promotion of own-race interests.

While Malaysia has found some successes in building social cohesion, the landscape faces significant challenges and gaps

Statist Reliance and Underinvestment from Private Sector

Malaysia’s social cohesion landscape has historically been dominated by state-led interventions. While Malaysia hosts over 100 active foundations and corporate giving arms, we found that less than a handful have visibly and consistently invested in programmes aimed at racial integration, interfaith dialogue, or community bridging. This reliance on the government as the primary actor carries structural limitations. Governments are constrained in the types of activities they can pursue, especially initiatives perceived as politically sensitive, those requiring agile experimentation, or efforts demanding long-term narrative change that outlast electoral cycles. Despite the centrality of social cohesion to Malaysia’s national vision, financial commitment remains modest. In Budget 2025, the Ministry of National Unity remains the smallest ministry in terms of federal funding, only receiving 0.17% of the total federal budget.

Limitations in Data and Understanding

Efforts to strengthen social cohesion in Malaysia are significantly constrained by fundamental gaps in data availability and the breadth of independent research. For instance, there is no publicly available dataset breaking down school enrolment by race at the individual school level across Malaysia, limiting assessments of ethnic segregation within the education system. Malaysia also lacks a robust ecosystem of independent research institutes dedicated specifically to the study of social cohesion. While the Institute of Ethnic Studies (KITA) at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) is the country’s primary academic centre focused on ethnic relations and integration, it operates within a government-linked university structure. While KITA has produced important scholarship, the concentration of expertise within a single, government-affiliated institution limits diversity of thought, critical inquiry, and the independent generation of alternative policy models.

Chilling Effect and Feel Good-ism

Public discourse around race, religion, and national identity in Malaysia has long been shaped by a restrictive legal and political environment. These legislations contain broad and ambiguous language within these legislations, particularly provisions criminalising speech that could “sow ill-will” between different communities. The fear of social backlash, reputational risks, or regulatory scrutiny discourages innovative, daring work that is often necessary for genuine social change. As a result, conversations on social cohesion tend to remain within safe boundaries, rarely challenging entrenched narratives or proposing bold reforms. One major consequence of this chilling effect is the entrenchment of “feel- goodism” in social cohesion initiatives. This focus on safe, celebratory expressions of unity risks promoting an overly fragile model of cohesion.

Difficulty in Shaping a Common Culture

Efforts to foster shared identity through cultural interventions face growing challenges in Malaysia’s increasingly fragmented media and entertainment landscape. Pop culture, once seen as a potential unifying force, has broken into distinct linguistic and communal spheres. Malay-language media dominate the mainstream mass market, while Mandarin, Tamil, and English-language productions largely serve segmented, community-specific audiences. The combined effect of linguistic segmentation and the dominance of foreign streaming content has weakened the existence of a “common culture” in Malaysia. Shared cultural touchpoints that transcend ethnic, religious, and linguistic divides—previously found through mass media events, national cinema, or popular music—have become rarer.

Malaysia stands at an inflection point. The fractures in our social fabric are becoming increasingly visible, but so too are the opportunities to strengthen cohesion, trust, and a shared sense of belonging.

Investments can be channelled into establishing independent research centres, expanding existing academic programmes on intergroup relations, and funding non-profit think tanks dedicated to studying social cohesion, identity, and belonging. Beyond building institutions, there is also a need to prioritise the types of research that can catalyse smarter, longer-term action.

knowledge production

Investing in structured contact initiatives, particularly among youth, offers a scalable and sustainable pathway toward building long-term trust. Large-scale interventions in education, sports, and cultural exchange programmes have demonstrated potential globally and locally. These initiatives, if properly designed and resourced, create repeated, meaningful encounters that go beyond superficial exposure.

contact opportunities

Malaysia’s current policymaking landscape often lacks dedicated infrastructure for addressing cross-cutting social cohesion issues in a systematic and anticipatory way. Institutions equipped to convene stakeholders, model new frameworks, and advocate through formal policy channels would add critical capacity to the ecosystem. Investments should focus on addressing deeply felt but often unaddressed policy grievances that affect perceptions of fairness and belonging.

legal and policy advocacy

Strategic investments in education can yield compounding returns over time, particularly if focused on strengthening teacher capacity and innovating pedagogical approaches. There is an opportunity to strengthen social cohesion outcomes by investing in partnerships with existing organisations already working within the education ecosystem. Organisations such as Pemimpin GSL and Teach For Malaysia have extensive experience in teacher development, leadership training, and classroom innovation.

education

Whether television, film, web-based series, or large-scale cultural events, cultural interventions remain one of the most powerful mediums for shaping narratives, building empathy, and reaching mass audiences beyond traditional civic spaces. Notably, these interventions carry the added advantage of financial sustainability. Successful projects can generate revenue through ticket sales, streaming rights, merchandise, and sponsorships, aligning with impact investment models that seek both social and financial returns.

media and culture

By supporting interfaith partnerships between religious groups, such as mosques, churches, temples, and gurdwaras, investors can catalyse initiatives that are embedded within existing communal life. Action-based interfaith work tends to create stronger bonds than dialogue alone, particularly in contexts where words must be backed by lived collaboration. Existing grants on social issues can incorporate interfaith requirements to encourage joint projects.

interfaith dialogue

We offer this report with the hope that it serves not just as a set of ideas, but as an invitation to build together, to invest with care, and to imagine a Malaysia where every community feels truly at home.

If you are an investor, philanthropist or resource provider, and would like to join us in this journey, reach out to us at contact[at]aodmalaysia.org.