Giving Voice beyond Her Vote: How Women Used Charitable Giving to Create Social Change after the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election

Abstract

This study fills a gap in research on the philanthropic outcomes of political events. More specifically, it provides empirical evidence to supplement anecdotal reports that nonprofit organizations experienced a substantial increase in donations following the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Based on daily transaction data from an online giving platform, the study uses random-effect panel Ordinary Least Squares models to examine whether and how charitable giving patterns changed after Election Day 2016. Overall, our analyses show no evidence of increased giving due to the election; however, gender differences are apparent. Women donated in greater amounts than men following Election Day, and they appear to have targeted relevant progressive charities with their giving.

Does the CSR Message Matter? Untangling the Relationship Between Corporate–Nonprofit Partnerships, Created Fit Messages, and Activist Evaluations

“…Second, women consider CSR more often than men do when making investment decisions (Nath et al, 2013). Third, women are more likely to make charitable donations than men across all generations (Mesch et al, 2016). Fourth, U.S. women will control two thirds of consumer wealth by 2020 (Mesch, 2010).…”

Gender and Muslim philanthropy: the role of prosociality in women’s giving intention during COVID-19

“…Even though, women contribute more to overseas aid and disaster relief causes (Bergdoll et al, 2019), the average amount of donations made by men tends to be higher (Casale and Baumann, 2015). Recent studies highlight changes in giving due to the pandemic, with single women indicating a decrease in giving during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic (Mesch et al, 2020), but overall, women are donating more frequently and in higher amounts than men (Sellen, 2021).…”

“…More generally, understanding the factors and motivations that drive charitable giving is a rich and dynamic area of research. Yet, the literature largely remains broadly focused on demographic factors such as income (Breeze and Lives, 2013), gender (Swickert et al, 2016;Einolf, 2011;Swickert et al, 2016;Mesch et al, 2020), as well as religion, education, and age (Bekkers and Wiepking, 2011). However, a closer look at charitable giving among subgroups within these demographic groups and, most notably, the ways these factors intersect and shape behaviour, remains underdeveloped.…”