Giving Thought

Happy New Year! In episode 63, we gaze into our crystal ball and proffer some predictions for what the first year of the new decade might hold for philanthropy and civil society. Including:

Politics & Economics

• Greater UK political stability? (i.e. political landscape now fixed for 5 yrs)
• Increased or reduced division? (i.e. post-Brexit healing, or ongoing animosity?)
• Focus on service delivery rather than campaigning?
• International development & aid under fire?
• Localism and devolution?
• US election- big impact, whatever the result

Environment

• Increasing focus and sense of urgency
• UK hosting 2020 UN Climate Summit (Glasgow)
• More prevalent sense that environmental issues are cross-cutting and therefore the concern of all CSOs/funders
• Increasing pressure on charities/funders to demonstrate environmental commitment

Tech

• More commercial platforms adding giving functionality
• Deepfakes and challenges to online authenticity
• Surveillance tech and civil liberties/human rights
• Centralised cryptocurrencies (e.g. Libra)
• Blockchain continue to bubble under surface
• Less magical thinking around AI (more focus on what it actually is, and what it can do)
• Optimizing for voice controlled interfaces
• Pushback on "AI ethics"- more focus on traditional mechanisms of legislation and regulation
• CSOs & funders ramping up efforts to engage in "fourth industrial revolution" issues
• Continued growth of networked digital movements and decentralised organisational structures
• Rediscovering the downsides of decentralisation?

Philanthropy & Civil Society

• Addressing the decline in charitable giving
• How do traditional forms of giving/charity interact with new possibilities (social investment, cause-related marketing, networked social movements, crowdfunding etc)?
• Continuing criticism of philanthropy
• Scrutiny of sources of wealth
• Pushback on criticism of philanthropy
• More focus on power & participation in philanthropy
• Trust & accountability to public opinion
• Focus on volunteering (as a result of Olympics, Euro 2020 etc)

Related Resources

• Lucy Bernholz's Blueprint 2020: Philanthropy & Digital Civil Society annual industry forecast for Stanford PACS
• Future Today Institute 2019 Tech Trends report
• CAF Giving Thought discussion paper Networking opportunities: rediscovering decentralisation in philanthropy and civil society
• CAF Giving Thought discussion paper Machine-Made Goods: Charities, Philanthropy & Artificial Intelligence
• CAF Giving Thought discussion paper Giving a Sense of Place: Philanthropy and the future of UK civic identity
• Rhod's Third Sector article about the decline in giving (with Dan Fluskey of the Institute of Fundraising)
• Rhod's Third Sector article Why civil society is a vital missing cog as we enter the Fourth Industrial Revolution
• Rhod's WEF article Philanthropy is at a turning point. Here are 6 ways it could go
• Rhod's blog for Stanford Digital Impact, When Nobody Knows You're a Dog: Tech, Civil Society, and the Fight for Authenticity
• Giving Thought podcast on AI & digital transformation with Beth Kanter
• Giving Thought podcast on participatory philanthropy with Rose Longhurst
• Giving Thought podcast on place-based philanthropy with Jim Minton
• Giving Thought podcast on responding to criticisms of philanthropy with Phil Buchanan
• Giving Thought podcast on tainted donations
• Giving Thought podcast on civil society futures with Dame Julia Unwin

In episode 62, we chat to Andrew Rudd from the University of Exeter about representations of charity and philanthropy in literature and how literature and the humanities can inform practice. Including:

• Which famous authors and poets have written about charity issues?
• What are some of the main positive themes about charity & philanthropy that can we identify in literature?
• What are some of the key critical themes about charity & philanthropy that can we identify in literature?
• What have famous writers said about the distinction between charity and justice?
• The tension between head and heart, between an emphasis on empathy and rationality, has long been a major source of debate within charity. What has literature had to say about it?
• What was Dicken's notion of "telescopic philanthropy" and why does it remain pertinent to debates about international aid today?
• The idea of poorly-aimed, 'indiscriminate' charity that perpetuates poverty and reliance has been a huge source of concern for many throughout history. How is this reflected in literature?
• Has any literature notably influenced public discourse, politics or the way charities operate? If so, how?
• Does the study of literature and the humanities currently play a significant role within the wider academic study of philanthropy? If not, why not?
• Can philanthropists and people who work in the charity/non-profit sector learn anything from literature? If so, what?
• How can practitioners best find and make use of insights from literature?
• Which current issues facing charities and philanthropy would most benefit from some literary insight?

Related Links:

• Andrew's profile page at the University of Exeter
• Mary Woolstonecraft's A Vindication of the Rights of Woman
• William Blake's Songs of Innocence and Experience, including the two versions of "Holy Thursday"
• Charles Dickens Bleak House and A Christmas Carol
• Henry Fielding's A History of Tom Jones, A Foundling
• William Langland's poem "Piers Plowman"
• Rhod's book Public Good by Private Means: how philanthropy shapes Britain

In episode 61, Rhod reports back on a recent trip to the 48th annual ARNOVA conference in San Diego - one of the main global events for philanthropy and non-profit researchers. Including:

• What were the key themes being discussed at the conference?
• What came up in the main plenary debate on "promises and perils of philanthropy in a polarized world?"
• Highlights from other paper sessions and debates, including:
  • Findings on public trust
  • Young people's attitudes to charity representations on social media
  • A fascinating historical example of radical movement funding
  • How representative bodies can shape our understanding of what the charity sector is.
• How much do US non-profit issues and critiques apply elsewhere?
• What can we do to connect the academic study of philanthropy better with practice and policy?
• How can academics get better at disseminating their work to practitioners, and how can practitioners get better at paying attention to academia?
• Is there an important role for non-profit "think tanks" in bridging the gap?
• What does the academic study of philanthropy encompass?
• Does philanthropy suffer from cutting across traditional academic disciplines?

Related Content:

"When White Philanthropy Funded Black Power", SSIR article on Claire Dunning's research in Boston

Previous Podcast episodes:

Participatory Philanthropy, with Rose Longhurst Giving done right, with Phil Buchanan Philanthropy, civil rights and movement capture, with Megan Ming Francis Studying and teaching philanthropy as an academic discipline, with Beth Breeze Philanthropy, democracy and inequality, with Rob Reich Learning from the history of philanthropy, with Ben Soskis

In episode 60 we look at the relationship between philanthropy, diveristy and inclusion, and in particular at what we can learn from the historic role that philathropy has played in campaigns for social change about some of its strengths and weaknesses when it comes to driving greater diversity and inclusion. Including:

• Overcoming the 'tyranny of the majority': philanthropy and civil society plurality as a means of giving voice to minorities
• Is philanthropy particularly good at accepting the political and reputational risks required to support unpopular or marginalised causes and bring them into the mainstream?
• Does philanthropy have a longer-term time horizon than the public or private sector, and does this make it better at sticking with issues?
• Does the fact that philanthropy is not accoutable to voters or shareholders make it able to take the risks necessary to drive social change?
• Why should we be alarmed about suggestions that philatropy should be measured against public opinion?
• Can appreciating the historic campaigning role of philanthroypy and civil society help us to counter current political anitpathy and the worrying "closing space for civil society" around the world?
• Why is the process of philanthropy important, as well as the outcomes it produces? Can it teack people vital civic skills, or create greater social cohesion?
• Is philanthropy too paternalistic, and too often about decisions being made about marginalise communities rather than by them?
• Can philanthropy obscure the need for more radical reform?
• Why is the disctinction between charity and justice so important?
• Can philanthropy lead to 'hyper-pluralism', where vast range of smaller idenitiy groups emerge and end up obscuring the bigger picture of an issue?
• The history of the anti –slavery movement: long-termism and creating a borad base of support
• The fight for civil rights: how did philanthropists go against the status quo, and how do institutions interact with movements?
• Women's rights: what role did philathropy play in paving the way for universal suffrage, and did it also work against women's fight for the vote?
• LGBTQ+ rights: the battle between pragmatism vs idealism, and does mainstream funding bring legitimacy as well as financial support?
• Disability Rights: "nothing about us without us" and the importance of giving marginalised communities power to claim their rights, rather than relying on charity.

Related Content

-Rhod's Presentation slides on Philanthropy, Diversity & Inclusion

-"Does Philanthropy Help or Hinder Democracy?", Giving Thought blog

-"Innovation, discovery and the legitimacy of philanthropy" Giving Thought blog -"Working on Commission: Some thoughts on the Charity Commission's new strategic plan" Giving Thought blog - Our Giving Thought podcast interview with Megan Ming Francis on "Philanthropy, Civil Rights & movement capture" (and Megan's paper "The Price of Civil Rights: Black Lives, White Funding and Movement Capture") -Our GT podcast on "Philanthropy & Women" -Our GT podcast interview with Rob Reich

-Kristin Goss's paper on philanthropy and the feminist movement

-LGBT Funders paper on "40 Years of LGBT Philanthropy 1970-2010"

-The British Library, "A short history of LGBT rights in the UK"

-Merseycare, "A Disability History Timeline"

In episode 59 we talk to speaker, author and expert on all things non-profit digital, Beth Kanter, about the impact of technology on non-profits and the challenges and opportunities that Artificial Intelligence (AI) will bring. Including:

• Has social media changed the game for nonprofits in terms of how they communicate?
• Have some of these tools levelled the playing field between big and small (or well-known and obscure) organisations?
• How well-equipped are nonprofits to take advantage of the potential of digital? If some organisations are struggling, what are the key barriers?
• Is there a danger that social media and online discourse create perverse incentives to sensationalise or simplify issues, because everyone is competing for scarce attention? Does this present a particular challenge for nonprofits?
• If digital tools enable people to form groups easily and organise in new ways, does this make traditional nonprofits less relevant as people look to networked models of social change?
• How can traditional nonprofits embrace some of the benefits of networked or decentralized approaches? Does this require a major change of structure, or just mindset?
• Is it better to focus on bringing existing non-profit leaders up to speed with technology and digital, or to focus on supporting the development of future leaders who might be more naturally comfortable with tech? Or do we not need to make this choice?
• To what extent is digital transformation actually about employment practices? (E.g. flexible/remote working, making nonprofit work more appealing than private or public sector) How many nonprofits are actually doing this well at the moment?
• Do nonprofits need to play a role in addressing the impact of social media on mental health and social interactions? If so, how?
• Why is AI a big deal for nonprofits?
• What impact will AI have on philanthropy and charitable giving?
• Are there good examples of nonprofits using conversational AI and chatbots in smart ways?
• Are there good examples of nonprofits using AI to improve their own processes (e.g. data entry, financial risk monitoring, grant applications etc.)?
• What barriers do nonprofits face when it comes to using AI?
• Do more nonprofits need to think about partnering with tech companies? What are the opportunities and challenges of doing so?
• Can nonprofits play a meaningful role in ensuring that tech is designed and implemented ethically? How far are we from making this happen in reality? What can we do to close the gap?
• What role is there for nonprofits in addressing some of the negative impacts of technology that we are seeing (e.g. algorithmic bias, automation replacing jobs etc.)?
• How is the nonprofit workplace going to change over the next decade or so?

Related Content:

-Beth's website

-Book site for The Happy Healthy Nonprofit

-Beth's article (with Allison Fine) for Stanford Social Innovation Review, "Leveraging the Power of Bots for Civil Society"

-CAF's Giving Thought micro site on AI

-CAF's Machine Made Goods report

-Rhod's blog on "Charity 2037: 13 Jobs we might all be doing in 20 year's time"

-Crisis TextLine's use of AI

In episode 58 we talk to Jim Minton, CEO of Toynbee Hall- the UK's oldest university settlement and an East End of London institution that has also played a key role in wider social reforms. We discuss the role of local civil society organisations and the opportunities and challenges that come with place-based philanthropy. Including:

• The history of Toynbee Hall
• Are enough charities today playing a role as drivers of social reform?
• Have recent changes such as the Lobbying Act or the use of advocacy clauses in grant contracts made this harder?
• Can the successes of place-based initiatives inform activities or policymaking at a regional or national level? How can organisations based in one place ensure they 'influence upwards'?
• Is "place" more complex than it is sometimes presented? I.e. at what geographic level do we feel a sense of belonging or identity?
• How do you coordinate philanthropy and voluntary action in a particular place without stifling it?
• Are place-based organisations particularly well-suited to adopting participatory approaches?
• What is the particular importance of shared physical space and community buildings in a local area?
• Does taking a place-based, rather than cause-based approach make it easier to address the multiple, cross-cutting needs of people and communities?
• Do you think people and communities always have the best answers to their own problems, or do they sometimes need organisations to act for them in their own best interest?
• What role can philanthropy and voluntary action play in building bridging social capital, bringing diverse communities together or fostering wider civic engagement?

Related Links

• Toynbee Hall
• Asa Briggs and Anne McCartney's 1984 book Toynbee Hall: The First Hundred Years
• London's Giving
• Trust for London
• The Bromley-By-Bow Centre
• CAF's Giving for the City project on civic philanthropy

In episode 57, we talk to Rose Longhurst about participation in philanthropy and her experience of radical approaches to grantmaking with Edge Fund (and others). Including:

• What is Edge Fund, how did it come about, and what are its aims?
• Where does Edge Fund fit in the wider landscape of participatory grantmaking?
• How does its approach help to overcome some of the concerns about existing models of philanthropy? i.e. that they are undemocratic, that they fail to redistribute power, that they are incapable of addressing structural inequality?
• Could more traditional funders replicate the Edge Fund approach? Which elements? And what would they need to change in order to make this happen?
• There is a lot of focus on participatory approaches to grantmaking at the moment as part of the solution to the criticisms being levelled at philanthropy. How much of the rhetoric is reflected in reality?
• Are there limits to participatory grantmaking? i.e. are there some situations in which it is better for expert funders to set aims and design programs?
• Edge Fund itself has adopted a fairly radical, non-hierarchical structure. What is the rationale for this?
• What are the strengths of non-hierarchical or decentralised structures? What are the weaknesses or challenges?
• Does a flat structure without clear leaders limit a non-hierarchical organisation's ability to maintain sustained influence?
• How do you prevent the emergence of hidden elites, or some groups prospering at the expense of others within a non-hierarchical network? (i.e. "Tyranny of Structurelessness" objections).

Related Links

• Rose's LSE Atlantic Fellowship bio
• EDGEFund
• FundAction
• Edge Funders Alliance
• GrantCraft Participatory Grantmaking report
• Rhod's World Economic Forum blog "Philanthropy is at a Turning Point: Here are 6 ways it could go"
• Rose's blog on participatory approaches to grantmaking for Lankelly Chase
• Rose's Alliance article on "5 Reasons to Support Participatory Grantmaking"

In episode 56 we take a deep dive into the issue of "tainted donations". Is some money "bad", and if so can it ever be turned to good uses through philanthropy? Including:

• Recent versions of the tainted donation issue: Epstein & MIT Media Lab, the Sacklers, The Presidents Club
• The history of tainted donations: mediaeval prostitutes, Rockefeller & Carnegie in the firing line, George Cadbury, George Bernard Shaw, William Booth
• What do we mean by tainted? In cases where there is no clear illegality, how do we navigate much more contested ethical grey areas?
• Do we need to differentiate between criticisms of specific ways in which has been made (e.g. fossil fuels, arms manufacture, tobacco) and broader structural critiques of capitalism as a whole?
• Do the ethical concerns associated with a particular source of money relate directly to the way in which the money was made, or are they indirect? Does this affect the moral status of a donation?
• In a highly interconnected world, with global financial systems, does it make sense to talk of any money as 'tainted' or 'pure'?
• Is it better for charities to refuse ethically dubious donations in order to avoid damaging themselves by association, or do they have a responsibility to take the money and put it to good uses?
• What level of control is a tainted donor seeking to exert over how their money is used? How does this affect the decision about whether to accept it or not?
• Will the donor get personal benefit from their donation- either in the form of tangible thanks or recognition, or in the form of more intangible social status and connections? Does this make accepting a gift more problematic?
• Does a organisation's decision to take money always imply approval of the donor to some degree? Is it possible to counteract this implication through overt condemnation whilst still taking the money?
• In order to justify taking a charity accepting a tainted donation, does its work have to address a harm related to the way in which the money was made i.e. does there have to be some element of reparation?
• Is there a statute of limitations on tainted donations? What should we do in cases of historic wrongs that occurred so long ago that no one affected is still alive?
• On what legal basis can charity trustees decide to refuse a donation?
• How do trustees balance the potential reputational risk of accepting a tainted donation against the certainty of financial loss from not accepting it?
• Does public opinion actually support charities turning down donations from tainted sources?
• If a donation has already been made, is it even possible in charity law for it to be returned?

Related Links

-Ronan Farrow's New Yorker piece on Jeffrey Epstein and MIT MEdia Lab

-CAF Giving Thought Blog, "When Should Charities Say No To Donations?"

-CAF Giving Thought Blog "The Wages of Sin: Doing good with bad money"

-The "Criticisms of Philanthropy" chapter from my book Public Good by Private Means

-Matthew Ross's HistPhil article about the history of donations to Notre Dame

-Ben Soskis's Atlantic article "Dirty Money: from Rockefeller to Koch"

-G.K. Chesterton's attack on J.D. Rockefeller: "Gifts of the Millionaire"

-Beth Breeze's Guardian article "Should charities accept contrition cash from dubious donors?"

-John Picton's Conversation article "Sackler donations: why museums and galleries can be stuck with gifts – even if they don't want them"

In episode 55, we talk to Julia Unwin CBE, Chair of the Independent Inquiry into Civil Society Futures, former CEO of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation and Joseph Rowntree Housing Trust and prolific thinker and writer on issues affecting civil society. As part of a wide-ranging conversation, we discuss:

• What is the Civil Society Futures Inquiry & how did it come about?
• What is the PACT framework and how is it intended to guide civil society orgs in the future?
• There is a lot of interest at present in 'place-based' approaches. Why is this, and what is the power of place?
• We are seeing the emergence of new organisational models within civil society, including many that look less like traditional hierarchies and more like networks. What opportunities and challenges might this bring?
• We are also seeing new approaches such as participatory grantmaking, which seek to shift power as well as money towards recipients, gain traction? Will this be a big trend in coming years?
• Do charities and funders need to be more transparent? If so, why and about what? Who does it benefit?
• Is declining trust is an issue for civil society? If so, is this merely part of a wider decline in trust in traditional institutions, or do charities and CSOs face particular challenges? How can we reverse this trend?
• What is the core role of philanthropy within society which differentiates it from either state or market provision?
• What role can philanthropy and voluntary action play in building bridging social capital, bringing diverse communities together or fostering wider civic engagement? Does this value of charitable giving and volunteering as an activity rather than simply the outcomes it produces need to be a more prominent part of the narrative about its importance to society?
• What do you make of criticisms that since philanthropy is to some extent a product of structural inequality, it can never truly be part of the solution? Do you think some donors and funders recognise the challenges and are genuinely pursuing structural change?
• A challenge like the global climate crisis raises difficult questions about whether a pragmatic approach of working with existing systems can ever be enough; or whether we need to embrace more radical, transformative change efforts. Do you think philanthropy is well-suited to the latter?
• The freedom that philanthropy and civil society have to run counter to the status quo or the policies and public opinion of a particular time has been a key part of driving historic social change. How do we preserve this freedom, whilst also answering concerns that unchecked philanthropic power could end up being anti-democratic?
• Has the policy focus in the UK over the last 20 years on the idea of charities as delivery agents for public services resulted in the importance of the sector's campaigning role being downplayed? Has this contributed to some of the challenges we now see such as the Lobbying Act and the use of advocacy clauses in grant contracts? How do we rebalance things, and ensure that civil society is able to play its role in speaking necessary truth to power?

Related Links

• The Civil Society Futures Inquiry
• Julia's Personal website
• My Giving Thought blog on the why the way in which we justify charity tax may affect the legitimacy of charity campaigning
• My HistPhil article on the historical importance of charity campaigning

In episode 54, we take a look at Effective Altruism. Why has this approach to philanthropy based on utilitarian philosophy gained so many admirers - and so many critics - over the last few years? Including:

-What is Effective Altruism (EA)?

-How is it informing new approaches to philanthropy?

-Why are so many tech philanthropists EA advocates?

-Could the emergence of data-driven, AI approaches to philanthropy put EA in the driving seat?

-What is the historical lineage of Utilitarian thinking?

-What role did religion play in giving birth to the idea that philanthropy needs to be effective?

-How did the Charity Organization Society and the Scientific Philanthropy movements take this idea forward, and are they the intellectual forebears of EA?

-What, if anything, is genuinely new about EA?

-Is EA merely theoretical because it doesn't reflect how philanthropy actually works or what motivates donors?

-Does the focus on outcomes come at the expense of other considerations such as justice, democracy or individual agency?

-Do EA metrics favour short-term, tangible interventions over longer-term campaigns for social change?

-Does EA dictate working within existing structures and systems, rather than driving the reforms to those structures and systems that many believe are needed for real change?

-Does EA lead to a bias against local giving in favour of giving overseas? And can this have unintended consequences in terms of how other perceive us?

-Existential threats and "Pascal's Mugging"

Related Content

EA organisations:

• https://www.effectivealtruism.org/
• https://www.givingwhatwecan.org/
• https://80000hours.org/

The History of Utilitarianism & Rationality in Philanthropy

• "The History of Utilitarianism", Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy
• Peter Singer's seminal paper "Famine, Affluence & Morality"
• Schneewind, J.B. (1996) "Philosophical Ideas of Charity: Some Historical Reflections" in Schneewind (ed) Giving: Western Ideas of Philanthropy
• Roberts, M.J.D. (1998) "Head vs Heart: Voluntary Associations and Charity Organization in England, c. 1700-1850" in Cunningham & Innes (eds) Charity, Philanthropy and Reform: From the 1690s to 1850
• William Rathbone's memoir Social Duties
• Simey, M (1992) Charity Rediscovered: A Study of Philanthropic Effort in 19th Century Liverpool

Criticism of Effective Altruism

• Schambra, W. (2014) "The Emerging Threat of Effective Altruism" in Breeze & Moody (eds) The Philanthropy Reader
• Berger & Penna (2013) "The Elitist Philanthropy of So-Called Effective Altruism" in Stanford Social Innovation Review
• Ashford, E. (2018) "Severe Poverty as an Unjust Emergency" in Woodruff (ed) The Ethics of Giving
• Acemoglu, D. (2015) "The Logic of Effective Altruism", Boston Review
• Dylan Matthews 2015 Vox article "I spent a weekend at Google talking with nerds about charity. I came away … worried."
• Law, Campbell & Gaesser (2019). Biased Benevolence: The Morality of Effective Altruism, journal pre-print on PsyArXiv
• Nick Bostrom's paper on "Pascal's Mugging"
• The chapter on "Criticisms of philanthropy" from my book, which contains a subsection on "telescopic philanthropy"