Generosity and Philanthropy: A Literature Review

Bekkers, René; Wiepking, Pamala

doi:10.2139/ssrn.1015507

Cited by 148 publications

(175 citation statements)

References 454 publications

(777 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

168

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the literature many motives for donating to charity are mentioned, see Bendapudi, Singh and Bendapudi (1996), Sargeant (1999) and Bekkers and Wiepking (2007) for reviews. The most studied motives that have relevance across multiple charities are 1) altruism 2) a feeling of joy of giving or 'warm glow' 3) feelings of guilt and 4) prestige.…”

Section: Theoretical Background and Predictions For Competitive Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do charities get more when they ask more often? Evidence from a unique field experiment

Donkers

Diepen

Franses

2017

Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AND KEYWORDS AbstractCharitable organizations send out large volumes of direct mailings, soliciting for money in support of many good causes. Without any request, donations are rarely made, and it is well known that each request for money by a charity likely generates at least some revenues.Whether a single request from a charity increases the total amount donated by an individual is however unknown. Indeed, a response to one request can hurt responses to others. The net effect is therefore not easily observable, certainly not when multiple charities address the same individuals.In this paper we alleviate these observational difficulties by carrying out a field experiment in which five large charities cooperate. With the unique data that we collect, we study the impact of sending more requests on total donations.The results indicate that there is a negative competitive effect on requests from other charities, but this effect dies out rapidly. Soon after the mailing has been sent, it is only a strong cannibalization of the charity's own revenues that prevails. This empirical finding suggests the important conclusion that not much coordination across charities is needed to increaserevenues. We also demonstrate that charities need sophisticated evaluation tools that do not ignore the effects of cannibalization. Do charities get more when they ask more often?Evidence from a unique field experiment Bas Donkers Merel van Diepen Philip Hans Franses Erasmus University RotterdamFebruary 2010 AbstractCharitable organizations send out large volumes of direct mailings, soliciting for money in support of many good causes. Without any request, donations are rarely made, and it is well known that each request for money by a charity likely generates at least some revenues. Whether a single request from a charity increases the total amount donated by an individual is however unknown. Indeed, a response to one request can hurt responses to others. The net effect is therefore not easily observable, certainly not when multiple charities address the same individuals. In this paper we alleviate these observational difficulties by carrying out a field experiment in which five large charities cooperate. With the unique data that we collect, we study the impact of sending more requests on total donations.The results indicate that there is a negative competitive effect on requests from other charities, but this effect dies out rapidly. Soon after the mailing has been sent, it is only a strong cannibalization of the charity's own revenues that prevails. This empirical finding suggests the important conclusion that not much coordination across charities is needed to increase revenues. We also demonstrate that charities need sophisticated evaluation tools that do not ignore the effects of cannibalization.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Background and Predictions For Competitive Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do charities get more when they ask more often? Evidence from a unique field experiment

Donkers

Diepen

Franses

2017

Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We include controls for several types of resources that are correlated with secular and religious philanthropic behaviour (see for example Musick & Wilson 2008;Bekkers & Wiepking 2007;Smith et al 2008, Finke et al 2006, Iannaccone 1997, and Hoge 1994.…”

Section: Analytical Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

Explaining Differences in Philanthropic Behavior between Christians, Muslims, and Hindus in the Netherlands

Carabain¹,

Bekkers²

2012

Review of Religious Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using survey data from the Netherlands, we find that Muslims have relatively high levels of religious philanthropic behaviour and relatively low levels of secular philanthropic behaviour, whereas Hindus have relatively low levels of religious philanthropic behaviour and higher levels of secular philanthropic behaviour. Results indicate that the community explanation and the conviction explanation of the relationship between religion and philanthropic behaviour are both valid to some extent when it comes to differences in philanthropic behaviour between Christians, Muslims and Hindus. Additionally, we find a relationship between group orientation in worship rituals on the relation between religion and philanthropic behaviour. The more group-oriented the worship rituals, the stronger the relation between religion and philanthropic behaviour. The results suggest that Durkheim's theory (1897) may only be valid in a Christian context.

show abstract

“…On the basis of an extensive review, Bekkers and Weipking 24 concluded that there is a need to do additional research to understand crossnational differences in philanthropy. In addition to understanding the relationship of religiosity with charitable giving, it is important to understand underlying motivations for charitable giving.…”

Section: Covariates Of Religiositymentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurement and meaning of religiosity: A cross-cultural comparison of religiosity and charitable giving

Mathur¹

2012

J Target Meas Anal Mark

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study attempts to establish measurement invariance of a scale to measure religiosity across two diverse cultures with samples from India ( N = 201) and the United States ( N = 144). A series of confi rmatory factor analyses were carried out to establish measurement invariance. Results indicate that the religiosity scale is a reliable scale and could be used in culturally diverse countries. Correlation analysis also shows that the meaning people attach to their religiosity and their behaviors might be infl uenced by their culture. Implications of the fi ndings are also discussed.

show abstract

Generosity and Philanthropy: A Literature Review

Cited by 148 publications

References 454 publications

Do charities get more when they ask more often? Evidence from a unique field experiment

Do charities get more when they ask more often? Evidence from a unique field experiment

Explaining Differences in Philanthropic Behavior between Christians, Muslims, and Hindus in the Netherlands

Measurement and meaning of religiosity: A cross-cultural comparison of religiosity and charitable giving

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About