Private Donations for International Development

2009

Individuals' donations to overseas charities are an important source of funding for development assistance from rich industrialised countries. But little is known about the nature of these charitable donations. The literature on giving focuses on total donations to all causes and does not identify separately the pattern or the determinants of giving to any particular cause. We investigate giving to overseas causes using UK survey microdata that record individuals' donations to different types of charity. We establish a picture of overseas giving, comparing this with giving to other causes. Socio-economic correlates of both types of giving are analysed, including gender, marital status, occupation, education and, especially, income. We also investigate the relationship between individuals' overseas giving and their attitudes towards poverty in developing countries.

2009

We model the determinants of donations made to UK overseas development charities using panel data on charities' donation income covering a 25 year period. The paper starts by reviewing relevant theory and previous empirical work on donations to UK charities before outlining a framework in which donations are a function of fundraising, government grants, total household income, inequality in household income, disasters, Official Development Assistance, and unobserved fixed characteristics of charities. Models are estimated by the within groups estimator and also by Generalised Method of Moments (GMM). When using the GMM approach, fundraising and government grants are allowed to be endogenous. Fundraising has a powerful effect. Government grants appear to crowd in rather than crowd out donations. No impact is found from ODA. The hypothesis of a unitary income elasticity for donations cannot be rejected. Results are compared with those for nondevelopment charities.

2017

ASEAS 10(2) focuses on the evolving state of philanthropy in Southeast Asia. Collectively, the contributions provide an overview of the trends and tensions in this sector, which is being shaped by often conflicting notions of charity, development, and business. Two of the articles refer to the decreasing presence and changing nature of funding from philanthropic foundations from the United States, such as the Ford Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation. Their tradition of context-specifc strategic grant-making in the region is being challenged by the paradigmatic shift underway globally, which is being triggered by the establishment of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and other 'technocratic' foundations. Articles focusing on the entire region as well as on specifc countries (Myanmar, Thailand, and Indonesia) highlight home-grown philanthropy and how new forms of personal and institutionalized giving are emerging as a result of a growing middleclass and accumulated we...

2013

Charitable giving is an important source of funding for overseas development and emergency relief. Donations in the UK are about a quarter of the size of government development aid. There has been strong growth over time, reflecting the activities of development charities and the public response to humanitarian emergencies. The paper examines how this charitable giving has changed since 1978, using a newly constructed panel data set on donations to individual UK charities. When did the increase take place? Did the public respond to events such as Live Aid or has there been a steady upward trend? What has been the relationship with changes in household income? Which charities have grown fastest? Have new charities displaced old? How do changes in giving for overseas compare with changes in giving for other causes?

VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 2016

Using regression analysis, 41 years of charitable giving and income data was evaluated to determine if charitable giving is a luxury, normal, or inferior good, and to determine the income elasticity for separate nonprofit sectors. Total Giving to the nonprofit subsector as well as most nonprofit sectors (Religion, Education, Human Services, and Environment) is a normal good, while Arts and International giving are likely luxury goods. However, evidence suggests that Health and Public Benefit are likely inferior goods. This research makes three contributions. First, it offers quantitative data as evidence in the supply-side and demand-side debates. Second, owing to income elasticities, researchers propose the Philanthropic Sphere of Influence and postulate that as incomes rise, donors are more likely to give to causes from which they are less likely to personally benefit. Third, by evaluating charitable giving as a whole and then by each subsector, the research demonstrates that each nonprofit subsector responds uniquely to changes in income. Therefore, nonprofit sectors should be evaluated separately. Résumé À l'aide d'une analyse régressive, des dons de bienfaisance et données sur le revenu s'échelonnant sur 41 ans ont été évalués pour déterminer si les dons sont des biens de luxe, normaux ou inférieurs et mesurer l'élasticité des revenus dans divers secteurs sans but lucratif. Les dons totaux versés au sous-secteur sans but lucratif, ainsi qu'à la plupart des secteurs de bienfaisance (religion, éducation,

2000

Philologia

Global development, as a subject of academic research, is a broad concept that has historically been concerned with notions of economic development. More recently, however, the term 'development' has come to include a more holistic and multi-disciplinary sense of human development -a combination of economic growth, alleviating poverty, and improving living conditions, particularly within previously colonized or 'developing' countries. This paper analyzes the success and capabilities of private sector investment in addressing development issuesparticularly with regard to the Sustainable Development Goals, which act as a set of codified development aims established by the United Nations and ratified by all of its 193 member states.

Foundations and their equivalents, such as the al wakf system in the Islamic world, have existed for centuries as a means of bringing private resources to bear on public purposes, but they have traditionally drawn little interest. As part of a general re-appraisal of the role of the state in modern society, however, foundations were rediscovered by donors and policy makers alike and the past two decades experienced a renewed interest in these institutions in much of the developed North. This interest is held by governments, corporations, and private citizens alike. Governments use foundations for semi-privatizing tasks that are not as easily or as efficiently accomplished within the regular public administration or for leveraging private money for public purposes. Corporations also make more frequent use of foundations as part of their corporate giving and outreach strategy or to assume legal ownership of corporate assets. For private citizens, foundations are mechanisms to actively engage in the public discourse and reclaim societal space for a functioning civil society from the state.

In the face of widespread poverty, Peter Singer argues that the best response is giving money to charitable organizations that give aid to the poor. In response, much criticism has been leveled by cosmopolitan philosophers that philanthropy is unable to effectively combat poverty for many reasons: such funds fall prey to corrupt bureaucrats, the poor will waste the money, or become dependent upon donations rather than providing for themselves. In this paper, I argue that the work of the organization GiveDirectly offers an approach that can overcome the criticisms leveled against philanthropy. GiveDirectly works by providing direct cash transfers to the poor; by adopting such a straightforward method, GiveDirectly provides practical benefits to the poor, and overcomes key philosophical critiques. The poor are empowered to make choices to meet their own needs, and do not become dependent upon donations. While GiveDirectly does not constitute the solution to the problem of global poverty, it does provide an avenue by which philanthropic efforts can make a difference in the battle against poverty, in ways that best respect and promote the autonomy of the poor. In the face of widespread poverty, Peter Singer argues that the best response is for affluent individuals to give money to charitable organizations that provide the poor with basic goods. In response, much criticism has been leveled by cosmopolitans (such as Thomas Pogge, Andrew Kuper, and Paul Gomberg) claiming that philanthropy is unable to effectively combat the problem for many reasons: such funds end up being diverted by corrupt bureaucrats, the poor will become dependent upon Western donations rather than providing for themselves, or such a method will not attack the root causes of the problem of poverty. In this paper, I argue that the work of a recent organization called GiveDirectly offers a unique approach that overcomes many of the criticisms leveled against philanthropy.1 GiveDirectly works by providing direct, unconditional cash transfers (" UCTs ") from Western donors to the poor. With this simple and direct method, GiveDirectly provides practical benefits to the poor, and overcomes many key philosophical critiques made against philanthropy: its