Individual Crowdfunding Practices

Belleflamme, Paul; Lambert, Thomas; Schwienbacher, Armin

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2151179

Cited by 34 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Drawing on a survey among the initiators of 19 crowdfunding campaigns, Belleflamme et al (2013) analyse the general characteristics of crowdfunding campaigns in a quantitative manner. In contrast, Mollick (2014) as well as Pitschner and Pitschner-Finn (2014) use data provided by crowdfunding platforms.…”

Section: Literature Review: Theoretical Foundations and Research Objementioning

confidence: 99%

Crowdfunding for environmental ventures: an empirical analysis of the influence of environmental orientation on the success of crowdfunding initiatives

Hörisch

2015

Journal of Cleaner Production

219

192

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Literature Review: Theoretical Foundations and Research Objementioning

confidence: 99%

Crowdfunding for environmental ventures: an empirical analysis of the influence of environmental orientation on the success of crowdfunding initiatives

Hörisch

2015

Journal of Cleaner Production

219

192

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…As Mollick (2014) explains, ''even basic academic knowledge of the dynamics of crowdfunding is lacking, outside of the still-uncommon analysis of particular crowdfunding efforts'' (p. 1). What literature does exist focuses mainly on investment-based crowdfunding rather than donation-based crowdfunding (Agrawal et al 2011;Antonenko et al 2014;Belleflamme et al 2013Belleflamme et al , 2014Best et al 2013;Bradley and Luong 2014;Ley and Weaven 2011;Ordanini et al 2011;Shiller 2013), although within the research on investment-based crowdfunding there is a growing work on crowdfunding social enterprises (Lehner 2013). Much of the literature that discusses donation-based crowdfunding focuses on donations as a possible starting point for business opportunities rather than purely for social benefit (Best et al 2013;Mollick 2014;Ö zdemir et al 2015;Profatilov et al 2015;notable exceptions being Lehner 2013;Saxton and Wang 2014).…”

Section: Voluntasmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most crowdfunding takes place through structured internet platforms, although there are means to engage in the practice individually without using a preexisting platform (see for example Belleflamme et al 2013). While some crowdfunding platforms are registered nonprofit organizations that do not charge for services, such as DonorsChoose and ioby (Davies 2014), most platforms for crowdfunding are forprofit enterprises.…”

Section: Mechanisms Of Donation-based Crowdfunding Platformsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Crowdfunding and Diaspora Philanthropy: An Integration of the Literature and Major Concepts

Flanigan

2016

Voluntas

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Crowdfunding and diaspora philanthropy are two emerging areas of research that are generating excitement in the field of philanthropic studies. However, little if any research examines the shared characteristics and advantages of these two phenomena, and if and how crowdfunding might serve to strengthen efforts in the practice of diaspora philanthropy. This article reviews relevant literature on crowdfunding and diaspora philanthropy, and then analyzes overlapping characteristics, strengths, and limitations of these practices. The article then considers the potential of crowdfunding to contribute toward diaspora philanthropy, giving particular attention to the contexts and challenges faced in philanthropy in the global South.Résumé Le financement collectif et la philanthropie de la diaspora sont deux domaines de recherche émergents qui génèrent de l'engouement dans le milieu des études philanthropiques. Cependant, nulle ou peu de recherches examinent les caractéristiques et avantages communs de ces deux phénomènes et si et comment le financement collectif peut renforcer la pratique de la philanthropie de la diaspora. Cet article examine la documentation pertinente publiée sur le financement collectif et la philanthropie de la diaspora, pour ensuite analyser les caractéristiques, forces et limites chevauchantes de ces pratiques. L'article tient ensuite compte de la potentielle contribution du financement collectif envers la philanthropie de la diaspora, en portant une attention particulière aux contextes et défis qui caractérisent la philanthropie dans l'hémisphère sud.Zusammenfassung Die Gruppenfinanzierung (Crowdfunding) und die DiasporaPhilanthropie sind zwei neuere Forschungsgebiete, die den Bereich der philanthropischen Studien begeistern. Wenn überhaupt, untersuchen allerdings nur wenige Forschungsarbeiten die gemeinsamen Merkmale und Vorteile dieser beiden Phänomene und ob und wie das Crowdfunding die Bemühungen in der Praxis der Diaspora-Philanthropie stärken können. Dieser Beitrag prüft die einschlägige Literatur zum Crowdfunding und zur Diaspora-Philanthropie und analysiert sodann die überlappenden Merkmale, Stärken und Einschränkungen dieser Praktiken. Man erwägt das Potenzial des Crowdfunding, zur Diaspora-Philanthropie beizutragen, und konzentriert sich insbesondere auf die Zusammenhänge und Probleme im Bereich der Philanthropie im globalen Süden.Resumen El crowdfunding o micromecenazgo y la filantropía de la diáspora son dos áreas emergentes de la investigación que están generando entusiasmo en el campo de los estudios filantrópicos. Sin embargo, pocas investigaciones, si las hay, examinan las características y las ventajas compartidas de estos dos fenómenos, y si y cómo el crowdfunding puede servir para intensificar los esfuerzos en la práctica de la filantropía de la diáspora. El presente artículo revisa el material publicado relevante sobre crowdfunding y la filantropía de la diáspora, y analiza después las características que se solapan, las fortalezas y las limitaciones de estas prácticas. Despu...

show abstract

“…In other words, instead of raising the money from a very small group of sophisticated investors, the idea of crowdfunding is to obtain it from a large audience (the "crowd"), where each individual will provide a very small amount. This can take the form of equity purchase, loan, donation or pre-ordering of the product to be produced [56]. An empirical investigation of important properties of crowdfunding has been given in [56].…”

Section: Crowdfunding For Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…This can take the form of equity purchase, loan, donation or pre-ordering of the product to be produced [56]. An empirical investigation of important properties of crowdfunding has been given in [56]. Hence, in the spirit of "Research 2.0" [57], research projects that do not fit the current research trends or other patterns may benefit from the collective wisdom (or needs) of the masses by receiving funds that large institutions would not provide.…”

Section: Crowdfunding For Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

Theoretical and technological building blocks for an innovation accelerator

Harmelen¹,

Kampis

Börner

et al. 2012

Eur. Phys. J. Spec. Top.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Modern science is a main driver of technological innovation. The efficiency of the scientific system is of key importance to ensure the competitiveness of a nation or region. However, the scientific system that we use today was devised centuries ago and is inadequate for our current ICT-based society: the peer review system encourages conservatism, journal publications are monolithic and slow, data is often not a e-mail: frank.van.harmelen@gmail.com 184The European Physical Journal Special Topics available to other scientists, and the independent validation of results is limited. The resulting scientific process is hence slow and sloppy. Building on the Innovation Accelerator paper by Helbing and Balietti [1], this paper takes the initial global vision and reviews the theoretical and technological building blocks that can be used for implementing an innovation (in first place: science) accelerator platform driven by re-imagining the science system. The envisioned platform would rest on four pillars: (i) Redesign the incentive scheme to reduce behavior such as conservatism, herding and hyping; (ii) Advance scientific publications by breaking up the monolithic paper unit and introducing other building blocks such as data, tools, experiment workflows, resources; (iii) Use machine readable semantics for publications, debate structures, provenance etc. in order to include the computer as a partner in the scientific process, and (iv) Build an online platform for collaboration, including a network of trust and reputation among the different types of stakeholders in the scientific system: scientists, educators, funding agencies, policy makers, students and industrial innovators among others. Any such improvements to the scientific system must support the entire scientific process (unlike current tools that chop up the scientific process into disconnected pieces), must facilitate and encourage collaboration and interdisciplinarity (again unlike current tools), must facilitate the inclusion of intelligent computing in the scientific process, must facilitate not only the core scientific process, but also accommodate other stakeholders such science policy makers, industrial innovators, and the general public. We first describe the current state of the scientific system together with up to a dozen new key initiatives, including an analysis of the role of science as an innovation accelerator. Our brief survey will show that there exist many separate ideas and concepts and diverse stand-alone demonstrator systems for different components of the ecosystem with many parts are still unexplored, and overall integration lacking. By analyzing a matrix of stakeholders vs. functionalities, we identify the required innovations. We (non-exhaustively) discuss a few of them: Publications that are meaningful to machines, innovative reviewing processes, data publication, workflow archiving and reuse, alternative impact metrics, tools for the detection of trends, community formation and emergence, as well as modular publications, c...

show abstract

Individual Crowdfunding Practices

Cited by 34 publications

References 16 publications

Crowdfunding for environmental ventures: an empirical analysis of the influence of environmental orientation on the success of crowdfunding initiatives

Crowdfunding for environmental ventures: an empirical analysis of the influence of environmental orientation on the success of crowdfunding initiatives

Crowdfunding and Diaspora Philanthropy: An Integration of the Literature and Major Concepts

Theoretical and technological building blocks for an innovation accelerator

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About