Suchergebnisse

AbstractUnrestricted or flexible funding practices are increasingly popular among funders. There is initial empirical support for the assumption that fewer donor‐imposed restrictions on funding have positive outcomes for nonprofit capacities, including the ability to better deal with external shocks such as presented by the COVID‐19 crisis. However, academic literature on the consequences of donor‐imposed restrictions is scarce, scattered, and lacks an overarching theoretical basis. In this article, we theorize how unrestricted funding may relate to nonprofit capacities and consequently effectiveness. Our theoretical propositions are derived from a review of the academic and gray literature as well as a theory‐based analysis of 20 in‐depth interviews with grantees receiving multi‐year unrestricted funding as a substantial part of their funding portfolio. We propose a conceptual model that hypothesizes how unrestricted funding may affect seven different nonprofit capacities: (1) financial management; (2) operational capacity; (3) staff management; (4) adaptive capacity; (5) strategic planning; (6) mission orientation; and (7) innovation. This framework can function as a much‐needed starting point to support academics and nonprofit leaders to better understand how unrestricted funding relates to nonprofit capabilities and consequently nonprofit effectiveness.

AbstractAre private donors willing to replace cuts in government funding? The authors conducted a survey experiment (n = 2,458) to examine how information about government funding affected decisions to donate money to a large charitable organization in the Netherlands. Providing information about actual budget cuts increased the number of donors. Most new donors were recruited among respondents who had processed the information correctly, underlining the importance of effective communication. The magnitude of the information effect was stronger for citizens with lower levels of empathic concern, who are less likely to donate but can be converted into donors. The authors conclude that policy information shapes not only attitudes but also civic engagement outside the political sphere.

Are private donors willing to replace cuts in government funding? The authors conducted a survey experiment (n = 2,458) to examine how information about government funding affected decisions to donate money to a large charitable organization in the Netherlands. Providing information about actual budget cuts increased the number of donors. Most new donors were recruited among respondents who had processed the information correctly, underlining the importance of effective communication. The magnitude of the information effect was stronger for citizens with lower levels of empathic concern, who are less likely to donate but can be converted into donors. The authors conclude that policy information shapes not only attitudes but also civic engagement outside the political sphere.

Women's philanthropy has drawn much attention during recent years, mostly in studies from the United States or the United Kingdom. Relevant issues are to what extent gender differences in charitable giving exist in another national context and how these differences can be explained. In this study, we examine female and male giving in the Netherlands, using a representative sample of Dutch households ( N = 1,692) from the 2010 wave of the Giving in the Netherlands Panel Survey (GINPS). We conduct bivariate and multivariate regression analyses to test for gender differences and the extent to which they are mediated by values, costs, solicitation, and social pressure. Females turn out to be more likely to give and to give to more different sectors, which can be attributed to their higher prosocial values of empathic concern and the principle of care. Contrary to recent findings in the United States, Dutch males donate higher amounts than Dutch females.

Building on theories from different fields, we discuss the roles that volunteers can play in the generation, implementation, and diffusion of social innovations. We present a study relying on 26 interviews with volunteer managers, other professionals, volunteers, and one former volunteer in 17 (branches of) third sector organizations in eight European countries. We identify organizational factors that help and hinder volunteer contributions to social innovation. While volunteer contributions to social innovations are encouraged by decentralized organizational structures, systematic "scaling up" of ideas, providing training, and giving a sense of ownership, they are hindered by a reluctant attitude and a lack of resources . This rich, explorative study makes it a fruitful start for further research on the relationship between volunteering and social innovation.

Giving in the Netherlands provides the macro-economic estimates of philanthropy by households, bequests, foundations, corporations and lotteries. The Center for Philanthropic Studies at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam has conducted the research since 1995. This is the 13th edition, about giving in the year 2020.

Giving in the Netherlands 2022 answers the following questions: How generous are the Dutch in their charitable giving? Who gives to which charitable causes? How has giving behavior developed over the past 25 years? In Giving in the Netherlands, we do not only examine financial contributions, but also volunteer service.

Giving in the Netherlands contributes to the visibility of the philanthropic sector in the Netherlands. This is important to legitimize an independent and rapidly growing sector.

In 2020, the Netherlands gave € 5.6 billion ($ 5.6 billion, £ 4.9 billion) which equals 0.7% of GDP. As a proportion of GDP, the Netherlands gave slightly less in 2020 than in 2018. In addition, 44% of the population was engaged in volunteer work. Corporations and households give most. Together, corporations and households are responsible for almost 80% of all philanthropy in the Netherlands. While, every source has a favorite charitable cause, health received the most in 2020.

In this article, we examine whether and how the institutional context matters when understanding individuals' giving to philanthropic organizations. We posit that both the individuals' propensity to give and the amounts given are higher in countries with a stronger institutional context for philanthropy. We examine key factors of formal and informal institutional contexts for philanthropy at both the organizational and societal levels, including regulatory and legislative frameworks, professional standards, and social practices. Our results show that while aggregate levels of giving are higher in countries with stronger institutionalization, multilevel analyses of 118,788 individuals in 19 countries show limited support for the hypothesized relationships between institutional context and philanthropy. The findings suggest the need for better comparative data to understand the complex and dynamic influences of institutional contexts on charitable giving. This, in turn, would support the development of evidence-based practices and policies in the field of global philanthropy.

In this article, we examine whether and how the institutional context matters when understanding individuals' giving to philanthropic organizations. We posit that both the individuals' propensity to give and the amounts given are higher in countries with a stronger institutional context for philanthropy. We examine key factors of formal and informal institutional contexts for philanthropy at both the organizational and societal levels, including regulatory and legislative frameworks, professional standards, and social practices. Our results show that while aggregate levels of giving are higher in countries with stronger institutionalization, multilevel analyses of 118,788 individuals in 19 countries show limited support for the hypothesized relationships between institutional context and philanthropy. The findings suggest the need for better comparative data to understand the complex and dynamic influences of institutional contexts on charitable giving. This, in turn, would support the development of evidence-based practices and policies in the field of global philanthropy. ; Peer reviewed

In this article, we examine whether and how the institutional context matters when understanding individuals' giving to philanthropic organizations. We posit that both the individuals' propensity to give and the amounts given are higher in countries with a stronger institutional context for philanthropy. We examine key factors of formal and informal institutional contexts for philanthropy at both the organizational and societal levels, including regulatory and legislative frameworks, professional standards, and social practices. Our results show that while aggregate levels of giving are higher in countries with stronger institutionalization, multilevel analyses of 118,788 individuals in 19 countries show limited support for the hypothesized relationships between institutional context and philanthropy. The findings suggest the need for better comparative data to understand the complex and dynamic influences of institutional contexts on charitable giving. This, in turn, would support the development of evidence-based practices and policies in the field of global philanthropy. ; The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Pamala Wiepking was funded for her work in this paper by The Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research grant VI 451-09-022 and by the SPP Do Good Institute—ARNOVA Global Philanthropy & Nonprofit Leadership Award. Her work at the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy is funded by the Stead Family, and her work at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam is funded by the Dutch Charity Lotteries. Femida Handy was funded for her work in this paper by the University of Pennsylvania's PURM mentorship grant. Both authors are grateful for the support and funding received.