Philanthropy and crises: Roles and functioning of philanthropy in times of societal upheavals
11th International Research Conference of the European Research Network On Philanthropy
29-30th June 2023, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia.
The conference proceedings are ordered alphabetically by the first author’s last name. Conference proceedings are collections of academic papers following the 2023 ERNOP conference. They serve as a record of the conference and are often works in progress because the content presented within them often represents ongoing research or preliminary findings.
Title: Organizational Identity of Endowed Foundations in the Netherlands: going at it alone?
Author(s): Petra van Aken (VU Amsterdam)
Abstract: How does the organizational identity of Dutch-endowed foundations that do not collaborate across sectors to achieve social impact differ from those that do? Collaboration between corporations, government and non-profit organizations is necessary for tackling complex social issues. Still, endowed foundations hardly collaborate with these actors to solve them and seem to miss opportunities for reaching more social results. Organizational Identity theory offers the opportunity to study values, competencies and aspirations that play a role in the collaborative behaviour of endowed foundations. The current paper reports on qualitative data collection via in-depth interviews with eleven directors and board members to investigate relationships between the independent position, organizational identity and collaborative behaviour of their foundations. In theory, their financial independence gives these foundations the freedom to operate and to opt for cross-sectoral collaboration. This study shows that, in practice, financial and founder-related perceptions and restrictions can play a role in policy development that prevents them from doing so.
Please follow this link to access the complete paper.
Title: Transparency of Research on Philanthropy
Author(s): René Bekkers (VU Amsterdam)
Abstract: How transparent is research on philanthropy, and how has it changed in the past decades? How are characteristics of research on philanthropy related to the level of transparency about data and methods? How can the degree of transparency be increased? These are the questions we seek to answer in the current project.
Please follow this link to access the complete paper.
Title: Sense of Community’s Impact on Philanthropic & Civic Behaviors
Author(s): Richard M. Clerkin (Department of Public and International Affairs, University of North Carolina Wilmington), Christopher R. Prentice (Department of Public and International Affairs, University of North Carolina Wilmington), and John F. Brennan (Department of Public and International Affairs, University of North Carolina Wilmington)
Abstract: As Putnam (2020) demonstrates, social connectedness is important for improving individual satisfaction and creating a social infrastructure that facilitates community action to solve collective challenges. In this manuscript, we explore social connectedness through an individual’s of sense of community; the feeling that “members have of belonging, of significance to one another and to groups, and a shared faith that members’ needs will be met through their relationships” (Peterson et al. 2008). A strong sense of community, especially during times of societal upheaval, is critical to sustaining philanthropy and civic engagement. How and to what extent individual’s feel connected to their community influences their philanthropic behavior (Clerkin, et al. 2012). Additionally, a strong sense of community is associated with increased levels of civic engagement, driven by a need to contribute to their community (Speller, Lyons, and Twigger-Ross 2002). We explore how an individual’s sense of community influences: (1) their donative and volunteering behavior towards secular and religious nonprofits, and (2) their voting behavior in an upcoming election.
Please follow this link to access the complete paper.
Title: Wealth Inequality and Volunteering: A null finding from the Netherlands
Authors(s): Pepijn Fraai (VU University Amsterdam) and René Bekkers (VU University Amsterdam)
Abstract: There are good reasons to believe that wealth inequality negatively affects engagement in volunteering. While an overall increase in wealth is typically associated with an increase in volunteering because citizens have more financial security, an increasingly unequal distribution of wealth is likely to increase social segregation and reduce generalized social trust. Laboratory experiments have shown the negative effects of induced wealth inequality on cooperative choices in various social dilemmas, including charitable giving in dictator games. Moreover, a body of evidence has shown that civic engagement and trust are lower in countries with higher levels of income inequality. Due to the lack of adequate panel data, however, most of the evidence on the association between inequality and charitable giving in non-experimental designs shows differences between countries but has not shown associations over time. We address these concerns by linking detailed longitudinal data from the Giving in the Netherlands Panel Study on volunteering and generalized social trust of 2,747 respondents in the Netherlands to levels of wealth and income inequality within their municipalities. We find that changes in inequality are not associated with engagement in volunteering. The likelihood of volunteering and the number of hours volunteered do not change in municipalities where wealth inequality increases. In addition, we observe no longitudinal association between changes in income inequality and volunteering. Finally, levels of generalized social trust of individual citizens do not change when income and wealth in their municipality become more unequally distributed.
Please follow this link to access the complete paper.
Title: Partnerships Between Government and Philanthropic Foundations: Rationales and Influence on Policy
Author(s): Galia Feit (Institute for Law and Philanthropy, Faculty of Law, Tel Aviv University)
Abstract: Partnerships between government and private philanthropic foundations are widespread in Israel and take different forms, from exchanging information and knowledge through round-table discussions on particular topics to informal collaboration around particular social projects and formal partnerships in the form of joint ventures. Some of the foundations that operate in Israel consider government partnerships to be an appropriate and desirable operating strategy. Therefore, umbrella organizations promoting philanthropy in Israel pursue the joint study and development of collaboration practices within the framework of ongoing cooperation with the government and senior professional government representatives. In the wider world as well, partnerships between government and philanthropic foundations are not a new phenomenon. However, interest in this issue has grown in light of renewed criticism of the ability of foundations to exert undue influence over government policies through these partnerships. This critique drives the effort to understand and characterize the different types of cooperation, the relative advantages they offer each side, how the parties’ roles to these partnerships are perceived and the regulatory structures within which these partnerships exist. Against this background, we conducted interviews with individuals who hold senior professional roles in government and those who hold senior positions in philanthropic foundations involved in government–foundation partnerships in Israel. We asked our interviewees about their rationales for the existence of these partnerships (that is, the collection of reasons or logical basis that leads the parties to establish the partnerships) and how they perceive the power relations within these partnerships, particularly with regard to influence over governmental policy. This article presents similar perceptions among the interviewees from the two sectors regarding the main rationales for these partnerships, based on the added-value and complementary advantages that each party brings to the partnership. Among the interviewees from both sectors, we also heard a strong claim that partnerships do not tend to influence governmental priorities and are managed in a way that keeps the authority and responsibility in the government’s hands. Alongside the similar claims, interviewees in senior professional government positions added that these partnerships exist within a regulatory framework that grants them legitimacy, such as processes that formally invite public involvement. Some of the interviewees even called for additional formalization of regulation in this field. Our analysis revealed a mechanism of self-warnings used by the parties as part of their efforts to cope with potential criticism regarding concerns of undue influence over governmental policy.
Please follow this link to access the complete paper.
Title: Bold Problems Require Bold Funders, Implementers, and Solutions: Results from Testing a New Philanthropic Model
Author(s): Lisa Frantzen (TCC Group) and Jeff Ubois (Lever for Change)
Abstract: At least 241 pledges have been made by philanthropists from 29 different countries to give the majority of their wealth to charitable causes during their lifetimes or in their wills (Giving Pledge, 2023). Most of this money, however, remains on the sidelines despite the urgency of local, national and global social and economic challenges because would-be donors have no accessible, trusted, and reliable way to choose with confidence among charitable causes, organizations, and projects (Foster et al., 2016). Lever for Change (LFC), a John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation affiliate, has unlocked roughly US$1.5 billion in the past four years through a new model of grant-making designed to address barriers to bigger, bolder giving. Through the LFC model of customized competitions open calls, and donor cultivation/support, a new market has been created where diverse and bold ideas for solving social problems can be developed and funded with the long-term aim of transforming how high-net-worth donors engage in philanthropy. Through a network of highly vetted organizations, named the Bold Solutions Network, LFC curates and shares proposals with multiple funders to generate funding beyond the original challenge award. This paper shares where the model has had success and the areas still being tested as LFC continues to evolve its work.
Please follow this link to access the complete paper.
Title: Philanthropy for systems change: An exploratory study
Author(s): Arthur Gautier (ESSEC Bussiness School)
Abstract: Systems thinking emerged a century ago and has permeated many disciplines, from sociology to environmental sciences. We have recently observed a rising interest in systems change among social sector practitioners aiming to tackle entrenched social problems. Relatedly, criticism has targeted grantmaking foundations for failing to support “changemakers” due to inappropriate funding practices. Recommendations for funding systems change and shifting the status quo in philanthropy are surging. However, we know little about foundation executives’ representations and practices regarding systems change. In this exploratory study combining in-depth interviews (n=15) and a survey (n=101) with leaders of large French foundations, I reveal important gaps between a marked interest for systems change and current funding practices. I present key obstacles and discuss the prospects of diffusing systems change philanthropy more widely.
Please follow this link to access the complete paper.
Title: Effectiveness is not Enough: The Total Effect of the Tax Policy toward Charitable Giving – Boundaries, Take-up, and Effectiveness
Author(s): Osnat Hazan (The Institute for Law and Philanthropy, Buchmann Faculty of Law, Tel Aviv University)
Abstract: Tax benefits for charitable giving are very common. Governments waive tax revenues aiming to encourage donors to increase their giving to nonprofits. Yet we know very little about the total effect of such policies. The effectiveness of tax benefits has been widely researched. However, while effectiveness deals with the potential upward impact of a tax benefit on donations, it is limited to benefit-eligible donations and is relevant only to donations for which the benefit is actually claimed. Based on administrative data and complementary surveys, studying Israel in 2018 as a test case, I find that donors claim a tax benefit for 36% of their total donations; that 23% of total donations are ineligible for the benefit due to its boundaries (ceilings, floor, and qualified nonprofits); And that 41% of total donations are eligible for a benefit yet a benefit is not claimed for them. Almost 70% of unclaimed tax benefits apply to individuals’ donations below NIS 20,000 (about €5,000). This pattern significantly undermines the pluralistic agenda implicit in the tax policy, leaving the privilege of allocating public resources to fewer donors, mostly those who make large donations. Thus, to reveal the total effect of the tax policy on charitable giving, it is important to study not only the effectiveness of the tax benefit but also the scope and the patterns of ineligible donations and unclaimed tax benefits. Such a comprehensive approach proposed in this paper yields a detailed picture that reflects the actual realization of the tax policy.
Please follow this link to access the complete paper.
Title: All Good Things Come to an End: Understanding Strategic Patterns during the Final Phase of Sunset Foundations
Author(s): Alice Hengevoss (Center for Philanthropy Studies, University of Basel), Georg von Schnurbein (Center for Philanthropy Studies, University of Basel)
Abstract: Sunset foundation – foundations whose closure is predefined – are gaining increased attention in the discussion on impactful philanthropy. The idea is that having a limited organizational lifespan allows for greater impact. However, there is little knowledge on how these foundations’ leaders navigate this sunset phase. In this study, we take a first step in addressing the broader questions of what defines a “successful” closure in terms of created impact and seek to understand the strategic and managerial requirements to achieve such success. We apply a multiple-case study approach to analyze an international sample of 11 sunset foundations. This allows the proposal of four distinct ideal-typical strategic patterns sunset foundations follow during their final phase. In particular, they differ in terms of the intended outcome goal at the time of closure and, consequently, in the strategic and managerial considerations that allow for achieving a set outcome goal. The proposed strategic patterns are referred to as impact accelerators, urgency responders, resource spenders, and fade-outs. This classification is a first step in better understanding what happens when a foundation closes and whether sunset foundation can contribute
to a more dynamic philanthropic sector.
Please follow this link to access the complete paper.
Title: Evaluating Philanthropic Environment in 33 European Countries during 2018–2020
Author(s): Kinga Horvath (Indiana University, Lilly Family School of Philanthropy), Edward Vaughan (Indiana University, Lilly Family School of Philanthropy), Xiaonan Kou (Indiana University, Lilly Family School of Philanthropy) and Karly Murat-Prater (Indiana University, Lilly Family School of Philanthropy)
Abstract: This paper examines the philanthropic environment in 33 European countries from 2018 to 2020. It analyzes the economic, political, regulatory, and socio-cultural incentives and barriers to philanthropy in Europe. Understanding the conditions that foster or hinder philanthropic activities is crucial for sustainable development, especially in light of the challenges posed by the pandemic. Previous research has highlighted the importance of factors such as legal and regulatory frameworks, political stability, corruption perception, government effectiveness, economic conditions, and socio-cultural characteristics in shaping an enabling philanthropic environment. However, there is limited cross-country comparative research on these external factors and the philanthropic environment. This study aims to comprehensively examine the enabling environment for philanthropy in Europe and other regions before and during the pandemic. Expert questionnaires were used to collect data at the country and regional levels, assessing six factors: ease of operating a philanthropic organization, tax incentives for giving, cross-border philanthropic flows, political environment, economic conditions, and socio-cultural environment. The analysis reveals both positive and negative changes in philanthropy between 2014-2017 and 2018-2020 in Europe. The paper identifies key themes, provides an outlook on future developments, and compares the philanthropic environment in Europe with other regions. This study can inform policy development to support philanthropic growth by enhancing our understanding of how different factors interact at the country and regional levels.
Please follow this link to access the complete paper.
Title: Blurry boundaries: A longitudinal analysis of for-profits and non-profits mission statements
Author(s): Dominik Meier (CEPS – Center for Philanthropy Studies) and Julia Litofcenko (WU Vienna University of Economics and Business)
Abstract: Previous literature suggests that for-profits and non-profits have become increasingly aligned. These two developments are usually analyzed separately. We combine and integrate the evidence for both developments and examine the hypothesis of blurring boundaries between the first and third sectors simultaneously. We draw on a unique dataset, which allows us to analyze the mission statements of (almost) the full population of Swiss forprofits and nonprofits over the last 20 years. Applying state-of-the-art natural language processing methods, we document increasing similarity between the two sectors. The similarity is caused by a strong trend towards increased social and ecological responsibility in for-profits, but not by marketization in non-profits’ mission statements. Nonprofits’ missions do not become more similar to forprofits, though, because they become less specific over the years. Additionally, we find that the increase in common-good-orientation among for-profits is heavily driven by sectors that were formerly organized publicly. Our results contribute new perspectives to the debate of blurry boundaries between the sectors.
Please follow this link to access the complete paper.
Title: Understanding volunteering intentions with computational text analysis
Author(s): Elisabet Doodeman (VU Amsterdam), Arjen de Wit (VU Amsterdam) and John Mohan (TSRC, University of Birmingham)
Abstract: This study critiques the traditional conceptualizations of volunteering, arguing that they are restrictive and overlook a potentially larger group of contributors who do not fit the classical volunteer profile. It highlights the need to recognize and utilize this ‘altruistic surplus’. The study also points out the limitations of previous research methods, which often ignore cultural and contextual factors. To address these issues, the authors propose a new approach that combines the benefits of both quantitative and qualitative research methods. This approach explores whether pro-social actions feature spontaneously in individuals’ imagined future lives. The paper outlines the process of this ongoing project.
Please follow this link to access the complete paper.
Title: How did the pandemic crisis affect the financial, economic, and social performance of social enterprises? Insights from Italian social cooperatives
Author(s): Alessandro Montrone (University of Perugia), Elizabeth Searing (University of Texas at Dallas) and Simone Poledrini (University of Genoa)
Abstract: The Covid-19 crisis affected the world’s economic and social system in many ways. Social enterprises (SEs) play a necessary role in delivering social value during such crises (Bacq and Lumpkin, 2020; Sarma et al., 2022; Weaver, 2020). However, there is still a lack of empirical evidence that analyzes the impact of the pandemic on the performance of SEs and how that performance differs from traditional, non-social companies. Therefore, the purpose of this contribution is to fill this gap. This study compares two types of organizations in the same Italian context: social cooperatives and private limited companies. We present and compare their performance using ratio analysis in a three-dimensional perspective: economic, financial, and social, where the latter concerns the ability to create and distribute value-added to stakeholders (Riahi-Belkaoui, 1996), with particular emphasis on distributional fairness (Landis et al., 2014). In addition to policy recommendations, this study provides guidance on how to use existing accounting data to approximate social elements in business.
Please follow this link to access the complete paper.
Title: The Antecedents and Consequences of Multiple Logics in Community Foundations
Author(s): Laurie E. Paarlberg (Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis)
Abstract: This paper explores the long-term co-existence of multiple logics within the U.S. Community Foundation (CF) industry. It uses the method of ideal types to describe these logics, their dominance, and the consequences for philanthropic parity. The study reveals that the logic of “social change philanthropy” is not new within the CF industry, but rather one of four logics whose dominance has ebbed and flowed over time. The paper seeks to answer two key questions: What are the multiple logics in the CF industry and what events have influenced their ebb and flow? What macro and organizational factors are associated with the contemporary dominance of these logics? The findings contribute to the study of philanthropy by extending existing studies of the strategic orientations of CFs.
Please follow this link to access the complete paper.
Title: European Philanthropy: Socially indispensable but politically invisible. Lessons from the EUFORISTUDY
Author(s): Theo Schuyt (VU Amsterdam)
Abstract: What is the problem this paper aims to answer? Despite intensive lobbying by the European Association of Foundations, Philea, and other European Branche organizations towards the European Parliament, EU-politicians pay little attention to European philanthropy. The recently published Social Economy Action Plan also hardly shows any interest. While at the same time civil society, societal engagement, citizen-initiatives, philanthropic donations, bequests and volunteering flourish due to the social, political and economic problems Europe faces. At the same time, national governments in Europe reached the limits of their financial and policy capacities. This paper first examines reasons for the disinterest, ignorance or uneasiness among European politicians . Secondly, insights from organization – and political sciences are used to analyze how – and under what conditions – this may change . What may – according to these theories – European philanthropy expect from EU-politicians concerning recognition, acknowledgement and collaboration in the years ahead? As proof or test the policy of the EC Dept. R&I towards European philanthropy is examined over the period 2006 – 2019.
Please follow this link to access the complete paper.
Title: Digital transformation in European fundraising non-profits: Is the new normal digital?
Author(s): Livija Rojc Štremfelj (SASS School of Advanced Social Studies, Slovenia) and Tamara Besednjak Vali? (SASS School of Advanced Social Studies, Sloveni)
Abstract: The digitisation and digitisation of life and work processes have significantly impacted our lives in the last three decades. Today digital transformation is encouraged by the public and private sectors to simplify the work processes and interact with the end user more efficiently. The Covid-19 pandemic forced organisations to overcome the obstacles of social distancing by implementing digital tools in a more user-friendly way. The non-profit organisations (NPO) were in no way excluded but managed to find their way to help the beneficiaries in the field and adapt their activities to the new normal. Many NPOs have adapted digital tools to secure funds through many available digital channels. The proposed research wants to shed light on the digital transformation of fundraising non-profits in Europe over the last three years. The available scientific research findings and the abundant grey literature, some already using big data, are included. A better overview of this diverse sector is presented with the findings of in-depth interviews with nine digital experts from nine European fundraising non-profits. It enhances the understanding of what changes the digital transformation brought to the organisations and their donors as their key stakeholders.
Please follow this link to access the complete paper.
Title: Nonprofits as a Source of Regime Stability
Author(s): Yulia Skokova (HSE University, Moscow, Russia) and Irina Krasnopolskaya (The Institute for Law and Philanthropy, Tel Aviv University, Israel)
Abstract: This paper discloses the functions of the nonprofit sector in non-Western democratic national contexts. Based on recent processes that can hardly be analyzed in the normative paradigm of “good” civil society, authors pose the following question. If civil society is not always a contribution to democratization, then what other functions does it perform in nondemocratic contexts? The paper analyzes the societal functions of civil society in authoritarian regimes and argue that authoritarian political regimes use nonprofits to prolong stay in power and do so through three pillars of repression, co-optation, and legitimation, and with five patterns of regime legitimation. Based on the case of Russia and secondary data, the authors show how these pillars are applied in practice and how they affect and divide the nonprofit sector. Data illustrates that authoritarian regimes as Russian do not simply repress all nonprofits as one might expect. Instead, the regimes seek to take advantage of what nonprofits are doing and, restrain NPOs that undermine regime resilience. At the same time authoritarian regimes use nonprofits for legitimation purposes in the settings. By picturing NPOs as a facade of democracy and as a feedback mechanism, by establishing GONGOs, and by appropriating nonprofits’ outcomes, the Russian regime enhance its legitimacy in the eyes of society. Thus, we claim that authoritarian regimes do not use only traditional political institutions like legislatures, elections, and political parties for stabilization as the classical political science literature postulates. They also use the nonprofit sector.
Please follow this link to access the complete paper.
Title: Public perceptions and consumer preferences for B Corps – greenwashing or trustworthy novel philanthropic actors?
Author(s): Nina Sooter (University of Geneva), Maria Cristiana Tudor (University of Geneva), Ursa Bernardic (ETH Zürich), and Giuseppe Ugazio (University of Geneva)
Abstract: Hybrid enterprises such as B Corps are transforming the philanthropic landscape. Driven by both profit and purpose, these private-sector actors promote prosocial and pro-environmental practices and offer novel and convenient ways for the public to pair philanthropic activities with consumption. The present study investigates how consumers perceive these novel companies, specifically their awareness and trust of B Corps, and the probability of them preferentially choosing B Corps products and services. Findings show that, while familiarity remains low, once respondents received information about B Corps, general trust in the concept was above average, also reflected in their preferences for B Corps food and clothing. Interestingly, this preference did not extend to services, indicating a need for more research and perhaps better communication and marketing in this sector. We further explored factors which might influence this preference. We found that familiarity and trust, as well as a belief that B Corps’ higher prices are necessary and increase quality, all increased the probability of choosing B Corps, as did certain more general considerations deemed important when choosing a brand, such as a view towards better environmental practices and ethical labour. Succinctly, B Corps have potential as powerful new players promoting public good, but their ability to succeed relies on more efficient communication and positive perceptions of their activity. Moreover, while these findings shed light on current perceptions and effects of the B label, a majority of choice variance remains unexplained, indicating the importance of future studies.
Please follow this link to access the complete paper.
Title: The Contribution of Crowdfunding for Philanthropy: A systematic review and framework of donation and reward crowdfunding
Author(s): Claire van Teunenbroek (University of Twente), Carolina Dalla Chiesa (Erasmus University Rotterdam), Laura Hesse (Hamburg University)
Abstract: Which novelties do donation- and reward-based crowdfunding bring to philanthropy? Scholars interested in crowdfunding contributed to developing empirical explanations on which features impact online giving. However, the focus on theory building is limited. We developed a theoretical framework by categorising the empirical findings reported in 198 studies, which resulted in four crowdfunding features impacting giving: (1) project creator, (2) social information, (3) rewards, and (4) project description. We explain why these features impact giving by integrating them with insights from several fields of social sciences, deriving ten giving mechanisms. We conclude that with impacting donations via crowdfunding, three giving themes exist: being affected by (1) the perceived project’s quality, (2) social connections and/or (3) tangible rewards. The categorisation of mechanisms for giving allows initiators to extract best practice examples for increasing the probability of successful crowdfunding projects considering the giving mechanisms.
Please follow this link to access the complete paper.
Title: Paradox of talent management in nonprofit organizations
Author(s): Ksenia Usanova (University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg, Luxembourg), and Alexandra Telitsyna (HSE University, Moscow, Russia)
Abstract: Nonprofit organizations (NPOs) are important players in achieving societal goals. Although the research on managing human resources management (HRM) in NPOs is growing, it mainly focuses on descriptive characteristics of such management with a particular attention to the management of volunteers. Significantly less is known about the management of paid employees and the most valuable employees – high performers and high potentials, namely “talents”. Recent evolution of the sector in developing economies, trend in introducing social innovation practices, pushed NPOs to implement more professional and even business practices. However, such a business approach could have a rejected from the employees. The paradox in NPOs is operationalized in the following way. On the one hand, NPOs have an image of employers that pursue family-like practices, supportive and friendly environment. In HRM literature, this approach could be best described as “soft”. On the other hand, a trend for sustainability in NPOs, commercializing certain functions to become more professional pushes NPOs to implement business-practices, such as performance reviews, identification of key employees (“talents”) and differently managing them to maximize organizational performance. This approach could be better viewed as “hard” HRM. Based on exploratory study and in-depth discussion with twelve leaders of NPOs in Russia, we seek to find several logics that NPOs leaders use in managing their employees. In particular, we explored the attitudes of NPO leaders toward business practices, perceived barriers and ways of implementing that business logic in their HRM. As an important context for this study, we have chosen organization from nonprofit sector in Russia, due to its pre-mature stage in its professionalization. Understanding of how NPO leaders in Russia use business logics in NPOs will help to provide recommendations for the sector as well as extrapolate it into other developing economies.
Please follow this link to access the complete paper.
Title: Exploring the Intersection of Political, Economic, and Philanthropic Trends: A Panel Data Analysis of the Global Philanthropic Sector
Author(s): Edward Vaughan (IUPUI)
Abstract: The philanthropic sector has been rapidly evolving in recent years, with new players entering the market and new forms of giving emerging. While much of the research on philanthropy has focused on individual donors or single-year snapshots of giving, there is a growing recognition of the need to understand the broader trends and patterns in the sector at a global level. This project uses a fixed-effect panel data analysis to examine potential connections between national giving levels and factors of the political, economic, and philanthropic environments of the respective countries. The giving data come from the Global Philanthropy Tracker, while the Global Philanthropy Environment Index, the World Bank World Governance Indicators, and the Heritage Foundation’s Index of Economic Freedom provide the measures for the different environment factors. The data covers the years 2020, 2018, and 2014. The results show limited support for connections between international giving patterns and political, economic, and philanthropic environment factors, although limitations in the data warrant further research on the topic.
Please follow this link to access the complete paper.
Title: Understanding the Changing Landscape for Global Philanthropy through Panel Data Analysis
Author(s): Edward Vaughan (IUPUI)
Abstract: The philanthropic sector has been rapidly evolving in recent years, with new players entering the market and new forms of giving emerging. While much of the research on philanthropy has focused on individual donors or single-year snapshots of giving, there is a growing recognition of the need to understand the broader trends and patterns in the sector at a global level. This project uses a fixed-effect panel data analysis to examine potential connections between national giving levels and factors of the political, economic, and philanthropic environments of the respective countries. The giving data come from the Global Philanthropy Tracker, while the Global Philanthropy Environment Index, the World Bank World Governance Indicators, and the Heritage Foundation’s Index of Economic Freedom provide the measures for the different environment factors. The data covers the years 2020, 2018, and 2014. The results show limited support for connections between international giving patterns and political, economic, and philanthropic environment factors, although limitations in the data warrant further research on the topic.
Please follow this link to access the complete paper.
Title: How Households in India Give: 2020-21- Measuring Generosity
Author(s): Shaivya Verma (Centre for Social Impact and Philanthropy, Ashoka University, India)
Abstract: Giving is not a new phenomenon for Indians and it has been a part of their everyday lives for ages. Existing estimates of the total volume of giving in India range between INR 12-21.5 thousand crore. While existing studies are foundational, they do not present an overall overview of giving trends. To offer a more representative view of giving in India, the study is the first holistic attempt to understand household-giving patterns across geographies, socio-economic groups, demographics, and forms of giving. The study was conducted twice within a one-year period and is represented by a panel comprising ~81,000 households across different socio-economic categories in urban and rural India. The study examines three forms of donations: ‘cash’, ‘in-kind’ and ‘volunteering’ made to ‘religious organisations’, ‘non-religious organisations’, ‘family and friends’, ‘household staff’, and ‘beggars’. Characteristics such as gender and age influence giving to recipient groups. The most prominent form of donation was ‘cash’, followed by ‘in-kind’ donation, and ‘volunteering’. The largest market size is captured by ‘religious organisations’ and ‘beggars’. Among the households who did not donate cited ‘lack of resources’, and nobody had approached’ as important reasons for not donating
Please follow this link to access the complete paper.
Are you missing a paper? It could be that they are not part of the conference proceedings. The conference papers presented at the conference are available for (associated) members through the member portal.