Philanthropisms

Send us a textIn this episode we explore the way that philanthropic donations are taxed. Why do so many governments around the world choose to offer tax breaks for charitable giving? What is the history behind this? How are tax breaks for philanthropy designed and implemented, and are they effective? Including:What are the possible theoretical justifications for a government choosing to offer tax breaks on philanthropy?What are the tax base rationale, the subsidy rationale and the pluralism rationale; and why is the latter the only rationale that really works?Did tax relief on donations in the UK only come about by mistake?Why did William Gladstone learn to his cost not to mess with charity tax relief?Do we have the history of DAFs all wrong?What role did WWI pragmatism play in the introduction of the US charitable deduction?Are deduction-based or credit-based systems of tax relief more effective (or fairer)?Why does the UK have a unique (and uniquely messy...) hybrid system?Is there a case for imposing lower limits (floors) or upper limits (caps) on tax relief for donations?Which cause areas and organisation types should be eligible for tax relief?What kinds of assets can be donated with tax relief?What are the specific policy aims behind a policy of encouraging philanthropy, and are tax reliefs a good way of achieving this?Why is the US charitable deduction currently under fire?What proposals have been made to improve the UK Gift Aid system?Related Links:WPM article, "In an Ideal World, Would There Be No Philanthropy?"Philanthropisms podcast on Philanthropy and Social JusticePhilanthropisms podcast conversations with Fozia Irfan, Amy Schiller, Krystian Seibert and David ClarkeNic Duquette's paper, "Founders’ Fortunes and Philanthropy: A History of the US Charitable Contribution Deduction"The history of UK tax relief on donations in Rhod's 2016 book "Public Good by Private Means" (p. 109)Discussion of proposed measures affecting charitable donations in 1922 Finance Bill, Hansard 20 Jun 1922OECD 2020 policy report on Taxation and PhilanthropyCAF's 2016 report "Donation States: International comparison of the tax treatment of donations"

Send us a textIn this episode we talk to Lisa Greer, philanthropist and author of "The Essential Fundraiser's Handbook" and "Philanthropy Revolution", about how philanthropy and fundraising interact and what we could be doing better. Including:Have fundraisers become too reliant on the tools they use, rather than the deeper skills of relationship building? Do the incentive and reward structures in many nonprofit fundraising departments make it harder for fundraisers to focus on long-term relationship building? Should nonprofits show gratitude to donors? How can they do this in appropriate ways?Do we need to distinguish more clearly between the idea of expressing thanks towards donors and debates over public recognition and naming rights?What impact is the forthcoming intergenerational wealth transfer is going to have on philanthropy and fundraising?Do Next Gen wealth holders have distinctive characteristics when it comes to their attitudes towards philanthropy, or their methods of doing it?What can nonprofits do to develop relationships with donors from younger generations?Is there still a justification for nonprofit galas in this day and age?Why are recurring donations important, and how can nonprofits harness them effectively?Why, despite the huge growth in DAFs in the US (and elsewhere) does there remain widespread suspicion about them in the nonprofit sector?Would better awareness among fundraisers, and a norm of encouraging/enabling DAF donations potentially help to overcome concerns about money getting “warehoused” in DAFs?How can a nonprofit determine when a donor is making unreasonable demands or acting in an inappropriate way?Is it ever possible to manage these situations and keep the donor on board, or is it better simply to end the relationship?Is fundraising sufficiently recognised and valued in the nonprofit world?Why are there such high levels of burnout in fundraising (and in nonprofits generally) right now?Why has the debate between between “Donor-centric fundraising” (DCF) and “Community-centric fundraising” (CCF) become increasingly fractious? Is there room to find common middle ground?Related Links:Lisa's WebsiteLisa's Substack blog, Philanthropy451Lisa's 2021 SSIR article "Leading with Humanity" (an extract from her book "Philanthropy Revolution" with Larissa Kostoff).Philanthropisms podcast conversations with Kate Symondson on next gen philanthropy, Ian MacQuillin on fundraising ethics and Emma Beeston and Beth Breeze on advising philanthropists.Philanthropisms podcast on gratitude and recognition

Send us a textIn the seventh edition of our partnership with the European Research Network on Philanthropy (ERNOP), we hear from more academics whose work is featured in the latest batch of short, practitioner-focused ERNOP Research Notes. In this episode we hear from:  Georg von Schnurbein (Centre for Philanthropy Studies, University of Basel), on research looking at specialist "foundation investment funds" in Germany and whether they facilitate sustainable investing.Joris Schröder  (Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam), on research exploring the impact of talking about donations and receiving word of mouth solicitations on people's willingness to donate blood.Jörg Lindenmeier (Universität Freiburg), on research into whether "charitable ethnocentrism" reduces the likelihood of some donors to give internationallyRelated LinksERNOP's latest set of research notesGeorg's paper (with Berenike Wiener) "Foundation Investment Funds for Grant-Making Foundations in Germany: Do They Facilitate Sustainable Investing?" and the ERNOP research note versionJoris's paper (with  Eva-Maria Merz, Bianca Suanet, and Pamala Wiepking) "Did you donate? Talking about donations predicts compliance with solicitations for donations", and the ERNOP research note version. Jörg's paper (with Marcella S. Müller) "Exploring the role of charitable ethnocentrism and donation motives in international giving: Empirical evidence from Germany" and the ERNOP research note version.If you would like to contribute to making academic work accessible and more relevant for people working in, with or for philanthropy, then why not consider becoming an ERNOP practitioner expert and help translate academic work on philanthropy into research notes in close collaboration with the authors of the original work.  https://ernop.eu/information-for-practitioner-experts/Or, if you or your organisation might be interested in supportiong ERNOP's wider mission to advance philanthropy research and make it accessible to those working in, with, and for philanthropy, then why not consider joining as a member: https://ernop.eu/member-portal/subscription-plan/

Send us a textIn this episode we take a deep dive into the relationship between philanthropy and social justice. Does philanthropy necessarily deliver social justice; does it only do so under certain conditions, or does it sometimes actively get in the way of social justice? Including:Philanthropy as an individual act vs philanthropy as a societal mechanism, and why this creates a tension between emphasis on individual liberty and emphasis on justice.How changes in the understanding of property during the Enlightenment changed our understanding of charity.The emergence of a radical new notion of social justice and a critique of charity.The growth of contrasting ideas about property ownership that led to a new notion of "discriminating charity", and why this became so influential during the C19th.The influence of these ideas on Andrew Carnegie's "Gospel of Wealth" and why that was so pivotal.Philanthropy as "riot insurance".Does justice demand that we replace philanthropy with taxation, or can the two coexist?Why are some philanthropist campaigning for higher taxes?The history of the philanthropist as "agitator"Philanthropy and social movements: recipe for justice, or uneasy bedfellows?Radical philanthropy: history and current context.Related Links:WPM article, "In An Ideal World, Would There Be No Philanthropy?"WPM article, "Philanthropy and the “Undeserving Poor”"WPM article, "MacKenzie Scott & the History of Challenging Philanthropy’s Status Quo"WPM article, "Radical Philanthropy: Some thoughts on the recent New Yorker profile of Leah Hunt-Hendrix"Darren Walker's recent article on Julius Rosenwald for The AtlanticFT, "The new (radical) rich who can’t wait to give away their fortunes"Philanthropisms podcasts with Fozia Irfan, Amy Schiller, David Clarke, Elizabeth Barajas-Roman and Emma Saunders-HastingsPhilanthropisms podcast episodes on tainted donations, pluralism, the philosophy of philanthropy, and gratitude & recognition.

Send us a textIn this episode we take a deep dive into the world of philanthropic foundations. What are they, how did they evolve, and what light can their history shed on continuing debates about the role of foundations in our society today? Including:What are the key features that define philanthropic foundations? Are these consistent around the world and across time periods?Why do foundations often act as a lightning rod for wider concerns about philanthropy?The historical origins of western foundations: ancient Roman fideicommissium or Islamic waqf?The growth of the charitable trust in medieval EnglandReformation, industrialisation and the slow secularisation of charitable foundations"Zombie" foundations in C19th London and calls for reformThe birth of the giant general purpose foundations in 20th century America: why was this so surprising, and why has it proven so influential?Growing concerns about foundation abuses in mid C20th US, and the passage of the 1969 Tax ActThe "Dead Hand of the Donor" and critiques of perpetual endowmentsDo foundations deserve their tax advantages? Should they be made to work harder for them?Do endowed foundations have a unique role to play in taking risks and driving innovation when it comes to addressing society's needs? How much of what foundations currently do lives up to this ambition?Are foundations an important expression of philanthropic pluralism? Why is the legitimacy of this pluralism being questioned more than ever before?Do foundations need to be more open and transparent? If so, about what?Are foundations "repugnant to the whole idea of a democratic society", or can they play a positive role in strengthening democracy?How do concerns about "tainted" wealth affect the legitimacy of foundation philanthropy?Related links3 part Why Philanthropy Matters essay series on philanthropic foundations: Part 1 - Defintions; Part 2 - History; Part 3 - Current DebatesPhilanthropisms podcast episode on pluralismPhilanthropisms podcast episode on gratitude and recognitionPhilanthropisms podcast episode on tainted donationsFozia Irfan's "Transformative Philanthropy" paperRhodri on the "What Donors Want" podcast talking discussing whether UK foundations should be subject to a minimum payout requirementTobias Jung's chapter, "The Nonprofit Sector’s ‘Rich Relations’?Foundations and their grantmaking activities"

Send us a textIn this episode, we sat down to talk about how we understand and measure global generosity with Pamala Wiepking,  Stead Family Chair in International Philanthropy and Associate Professor of Philanthropy at the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy at IUPUI in Indianapolis (and also Professor of Societal Significance of Charitable Lotteries at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands). Including:Is “philanthropy” a helpful word in a global context?If not, why not: do people not understand it, or do they understand it, but with particular connotations?If we use terms such as ”generosity” instead, is there still a use for “philanthropy” to denote a specific subset of that activity? (And if so, what subset?) Is there any danger that if we broaden our definitions of generosity too far in our desire to make them more universal, they will become meaningless? Do we need a “grand theory” of global generosity? What are the obvious gaps, biases and limitations in our current knowledge about generosity at a global level?Is it useful to distinguish between philanthropic giving based on traditions of charity/altruism and other forms of giving grounded in traditions of mutualism/reciprocity? Or should we blur these distinctions within a wider conception of generosity?How important is it to “decolonize philanthropy research” as well as expanding our definitions of generosity?Is the role of philanthropy academics simply to observe and analyse giving and generosity, or to encourage it?Are current measures of global generosity useful? If not, why not?Apart from the challenges of finding appropriate definitions, are there other barriers to measuring generosity at a global level?Are we in the midst of a "generosity crisis", or is the apparent decline in giving in places like the US, the UK and the Netherlands merely a reflection of the fact that the way we measure generosity has failed to evolve in step with how people actually choose to give?Should the policy mechanisms we currently use to encourage and support philanthropic giving (e.g. tax reliefs) be adapted to encompass a broader range of activities that fit within an expanded definition of generosity?Related linksPamala's personal websiteThe call for contributors to the forthcoming volume on  “Philanthropy: Key debates and contending perspectives”, edited by Pamala and Femida HandyPamala's Voluntas article on  "The Global Study of Philanthropic Behavior". Pamala's article for HistPhil, "An inclusive study of global philanthropy: how can we overcome definitional, cultural and geographical boundaries?" 2022's "Philanthropy in a Different Perspective: Voices from Ethiopia, Nigeria and Serbia", a volume edited by Pamala & Femida Handy.Rhod's WPM article asking "Is the way that we talk about philanthropy and civil society holding us back?"Rhod's WPM article "Why Are We So Bad at Measuring Giving and Why Does It Matter?"

Send us a textIn the sixth edition of our partnership with the European Research Network on Philanthropy (ERNOP), we hear from more academics whose work is featured in the latest batch of short, practitioner-focused ERNOP Research Notes.In this episode we hear from: René Bekkers (Vrije University, Amsterdam), about his work on measuring coherence and consensus within the growing field of nonprofit studiesTara Bryan (University of Nebraska, Omaha) & Vladimír Hyánek (Masaryk Universtiy, Brno), about their work on the impact of migration caused by the invasion of Ukraine on resilience in Czech NGOs.Julia Litofcenko (Vienna University of Economics and Business), about her work on the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on charitable giving in Germany and Austria.If you would like to contribute to making academic work accessible and more relevant for people working in, with or for philanthropy, then why not consider becoming an ERNOP practitioner expert and help translate academic work on philanthropy into research notes in close collaboration with the authors of the original work.  https://ernop.eu/information-for-practitioner-experts/Or, if you or your organisation might be interested in supportiong ERNOP's wider mission to advance philanthropy research and make it accessible to those working in, with, and for philanthropy, then why not consider joining as a member: https://ernop.eu/member-portal/subscription-plan/Related Links:The ERNOP Research Note for René's paperThe ERNOP Research Note for Tara and Vladimír's paperThe ERNOP Research Note for Julia's paperRené's paper (with Ji Ma), "Consensus Formation in Nonprofit and Philanthropic Studies: Networks, Reputation, and Gender"Tara and Vladimir's paper (with Monica Lea), "Resilience, Ambiguous Governance, and the Ukrainian Refugee Crisis: Perspectives from NGO Leaders in the Czech Republic"Julia's paper (with Michael Meyer, Michaela Neumayr & Astrid Pennerstorfer)   "Charitable Giving in Times of Covid-19: Do Crises Forward the Better or the Worse in Individuals?" Previous editions of the Philanthropisms podcast partnership with ERNOP: Edition 1, edition 2, edition 3, edition 4 and edition 5.

Philanthropy and social change experts Mandy van Deven and Chiara Cattaneo discuss the importance of narrative power in civil society, challenges in shifting prevailing narratives about philanthropy, significance of ecosystem approach in resourcing narrative work, and tensions between urgency of social issues like climate crisis and patience required for narrative change. They emphasize the value of inclusive perspectives and intentional resourcing in narrative work within philanthropy.

Send us a textIn this episode we talk to Kate Symondson, Head of Philanthropy at the Symondson Foundation, about family foundations, grantmaking & next gen philanthropy. IncludingHow do the various members of a family foundation agree on what to fund and how?Which aspects of giving as a family are most rewarding, and which most challenging?Does doing philanthropy together have an impact on inter-family dynamics?Do Next Gen wealth holders have distinctive characteristics when it comes to their attitudes towards philanthropy, or their methods of doing it?Is it even helpful to talk about Next Gen philanthropy?How easy is it for younger philanthropists to develop networks with like-minded peers?How can funders strike the right balance between trust and measurement?What kind of due diligence do donors need to do on small charities in order to fund them in a trust-based way?  How do you mitigate the power imbalance between funders and grantees? Is philanthropy a duty or a choice? Is it OK for philanthropists to get a reward from their giving?Is growing scrutiny of where philanthropic wealth has come from a good thing?Should foundations’ missions be reflected in their investments as well as their grants?Is it important to scrutinise or critique philanthropy? If so, whyIs it a challenge to get nuanced or balanced discussion about philanthropy issues in an increasingly polarised environment?Related Links:The Symondson FoundationKate's blog for NPC, "Why Funders Need to Champion Small Charities"Kate's blog for Alliance, "How a UK Funder is Responding to the Cost of Living Crisis"Kate's blog for Beacon Collaborative, "Why Taking a Considered Approach Towards Philanthropy Matters".Philanthropisms podcast with Mary Rose GunnPhilanthropisms podcast with Dr Ewan KirkPhilanthropisms episode on gratitude and recognitionPhilanthropisms podcast episode on the cost of living crisis (with Angela Kail from NPC)WPM short guides on measuring impact and core cost funding.

Send us a textIn this episode we talk to Ian MacQuillin, Founder and Director of the fundraising think tank Rogare about the promise and perils of disintermediation in the charity sector, what a theory of fundraising ethics looks like, and why knowing more about the history of fundraising is important. Including:How did Rogare came about?What are the aims of the organisation, and what are its key themes/areas of interest currently? What is the current state of academic research on fundraising and charities? How much of this influences practice? What barriers are in the way of this happening more?DisintermediationWhat is disintermediation and why is it an important trend ?What are the different ways in which disintermediation can apply to the work of charities?What benefits and risks can disintermediation bring for donors and charities? If people are able to give in disintermediated ways instead of via traditional charities, does this matter? Should we just accept it as a natural evolution, or is something in danger of being lost? What, if anything, can the various examples of controversy that have arisen around crowdfunding and other forms of disintermediated giving tell us about the value of the role that traditional charities play?What is "normative fundraising ethics"?Does normative fundraising ethics need to go above and beyond what is allowable in legal or regulatory terms? If so, what is the basis for the normative principles?  Is there a danger that the purpose-driven nature of charities brings about a form of (perhaps subconscious) consequentialism in fundraising (i.e. the end justifies the means, because the cause I am fundraising for is “worthy” or “good”)? Is it part of the nature of fundraising to be challenging? (e.g. making people uncomfortable in order to elicit an empathetic response, pushing them to give more than they might do if left to their own devices). Or does this raise ethical issues about the undermining of individual choice and agency?Tainted DonationsWhy are tainted donations such a perennial challenge for charities and fundraisers?How could a normative ethics framework help to inform our thinking about tainted donations?Community-Centric & Donor-Centric FundraisingWhat is the distinction between Donor-centric fundraising (DCF) and Community-centric fundraising (CCF), and why has it become such a point of controversy and debate? Are the arguments in favour of DCF solely pragmatic ones (i.e. that it works), and conversely are the arguments in favour of CCF solely principled ones (i.e. that it is the “right” thing to do) or are there principled and pragmatic arguments for both?Is it possible to balance the demands of DCF and CCF?Why is a historical perspective on fundraising valuable?Related LinksIan's paper on "A Typology of Disintermediated Giving & Asking in the Nonprofit Sector" (with Rita Kottasz, Juniper Locilento & Neil GallaifordRogare paper on Normative Fundraising EthicsRogare History of Fundraising projectRogare paper on CCF & DCFPhilanthropisms podcast with Martha Awojobi