The research notes are published quarterly. Previous editions can be found at the Member Portal.
Issue VIII: September 2024
Improving Grantmaking Through Relational Philanthropy
Author(s): Janis Petzinger and Tobias Jung, School of Business, University of St Andrews, Scotland
Provided by: Zeryihun Kassa from Kingston University
In their article “In Reciprocity, We Trust: Improving Grant-making through Relational Philanthropy,” Janis Petzinger and Tobias Jung present a compelling argument. They propose that embracing relational philanthropy, which emphasises trust-based relationships between grantors and grantees, can pave the way for more effective and empowering grant-making practices. This approach, they suggest, represents a promising departure from the current dominant model of philanthrocapitalism, which often relies on rationalist, market-based strategies and strict oversight of grant recipients.
Civil Society Organizations: Legitimizing the Common Good
Author(s): Liv Egholm – Copenhagen Business School | Liesbet Heyse – University of Groningen | Damien Mourey – École Normale Supérieure Paris-Saclay
Provided by: Silva Lässer from the Karl Kahane Foundation
The authors explore the concepts of legitimacy and accountability in the academic literature. Specifically, they discuss how these concepts relate to Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) and in what ways legitimacy is constructed, understood and represented in the Civil Society sector. The key research questions addressed are: (1) In what ways is legitimacy understood and negotiated within Civil Society Organisations? (2) Does the current research and literature from other domains translate to the Civil Society sector? (3) What are the gaps in the literature?
Are foundation investment funds a solution for sustainable investing at grant-making foundations?
Author(s): Berenike Wiener – Leuphana University | Georg von Schnurbein – University of Basel
Provided by: Ana Pimenta from Blink CV
Grant-making foundations use the financial returns on their investments to pursue their charitable purposes. Foundations are usually conservative in their investment strategies and separate their investments strategy (focus on financial returns) from their spending and mission (focus on purpose). Simultaneously, investments funds are offering Socially Responsible Investing (SRI) opportunities increasing the potential of foundations to generate a social benefit also through their investments. In this article, the authors explore the characteristics of the market for foundation investment funds in Germany and whether these funds are useful for foundations pursuing an SRI strategy.
A Social Innovation: Addressing Relative Food Insecurity and Social Exclusion
Author(s): Lucas Meijs, Erasmus University Rotterdam | Femida Handy, University of Pennsylvania | Frans-Joseph Simons, Erasmus University Rotterdam | Lonneke Roza, Erasmus University Rotterdam
Provided by: Joseph Street from the Centre for European Volunteering
‘Food insecurity’ is a relative phenomenon, as the perceived applicability of the definition will vary depending on the area of the world it is being studied in. Development, whilst not as crucial to the Minority world as it is to the Majority world, should still be strived towards, even in already ‘developed’ nations. This paper focuses on the case study of relative food insecurity, manifested in the issue of Dutch children who are unable to afford the ‘culturally appropriate foods’ used to celebrate birthdays in the Netherlands, and how this can have a domino effect on such children’s mental and social wellbeing.
Exploring the role of charitable ethnocentrism and donation motives in international giving: Empirical evidence from Germany
Author(s): Marcella S. Müller – University of Freiburg | Jörg Lindenmeier – University of Freiburg
Provided by: Mårten Palmefors from the Swedish Fundraising Association
Previous research shows that people tend to donate less to international causes compared to domestic ones. However, this bias in donation behavior is unfavorable, as international donations may have a more positive effect since the beneficiaries can be part of a more vulnerable group compared to domestic beneficiaries. This bias can partly be explained by the notion of ethnocentrism, which means that individuals, to varying extents, evaluate other cultures based on their own culture and perceive that one’s own culture is superior. The authors of the study posit that a better understanding of this phenomenon in relation to donation motives could mitigate the public’s tendency to donate less to international causes.
Driven by values or results: can nonprofits do both?
Author(s): Gerhard Speckbacher – WU Vienna University
Provided by: Kate Sullivan from The Human Safety Net
Results-based management is shown to have helped for-profit companies to overcome challenges in people management when the team members have overlapping or unclear perimeters of their roles. There are often very clear organisational goals, such as profit, which can be translated into individual or team-level goals. Instead, in the case of non-profits, organisational goals are famously complex. Rather than seeing values as a means to an end (e.g. customer orientation to boost revenue), staff in nonprofits often are highly dedicated to values such as justice, human dignity and service as an end in itself. How can nonprofits be enabled to reach their goals and live up to their values given these characteristics?
Did you donate? Talking about donations predicts compliance with solicitations for donations
Author(s): Joris Melchior Schröder, VU Amsterdam | Eva-Maria Merz, VU Amsterdam | Bianca Suanet, VU Amsterdam | Pamala Wiepking, VU Amsterdam & Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis
Provided by: Andrea Goezinne from Salesforce
The research found that blood donors who talk about their donation experiences are more likely to comply with future requests. This effect is especially pronounced in new donors, suggesting that early engagement through communication can cultivate a long-term habit of giving.
Do we help our neighbours just because they will return the favour in the future?
Author(s): Marlou J. M. Ramaekers, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam | Tanja van der Lippe, Utrecht University | Belle Derks, Utrecht University
Provided by: Ines Sevilla from the Centre for European Volunteering
Understanding how the willingness to help a neighbour is influenced by reciprocity, their need for help, and the perceived helpfulness of the neighbour is essential for fostering community support, especially for those unable to reciprocate. To what extent does expecting a return influence helping neighbours? Does the neighbour’s need and perception of helpfulness balance this out?
Face-to-Face and Door-to-Door Fundraising Is Associated with Lower First Year Donations And Higher Cancelation Rates
Author(s): Cassandra Chapman – University of Queensland, Australia | James Casey – University of Queensland, Australia | Aakash Thottam – University of Queensland, Australia | Cassandra France – University of Queensland, Australia
Provided by: Sam Warden Thomas from Verdantly
Fundraising via interpersonal interactions such as face-to-face and door-to-door (sometimes labeled “chugging” or “charity mugging”), where fundraisers interact with potential donors in person, has been criticised both within the sector and by supporters. But is this criticism justified? Thousands of real-life donations, from various charities, were analysed to examine the relationships between fundraising methods, recruitment success and loyalty.
|
About the ERNOP Research Notes
More information about the Research Notes can be found here. |