Send us a text

In the eighth edition of our podcast 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:   

• Marlene Walk (University of Freiburg, Germany) and Jamie Levine Daniel (New York University Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service), about their research into how nonprofits can use social media most effectively in the context of competitive philanthropy.
• Maikel Meijeren (Radboud University, Netherlands) about his work on what motivates people to volunteer for organisations working with refugees, and whether these are distinct from general motivations for volunteering.
• Noelia Salido Andrés  (University of A Coruña, Spain) about her research into the factors that determine success in donation-based crowdfunding for charitable causes.

Related Links

• Marlene and Jamie's paper Message (in)congruence: Tweeting while competing for donations (co-authored with Cali Curley), and the ERNOP research note based on it.
• Maikel's paper Assessing the ‘Why’ in Volunteering for Refugees: Exploring Volunteer Motivations(co-authored with Marcel Lubbers and Peer Scheepers), and the ERNOP research note based on it
• Noelia's paper When the winner takes it all: online campaign factors influencing the success of donation-based crowdfunding for charitable causes (co-authored with Marta Rey-Garcia, Luis Ignacio Alvarez-Gonzalez & Rodolfo Vazquez-Casielles), and the ERNOP research note based on it.

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 supporting 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 text

In this episode we look ahead to 2025, and offer our annual set of predictions-that-aren't-really-predictions-but-more-like-thoughts-about-interesting-trends. This year we consider:

• UK Grantmaking on pause
• Implementing policies to boost giving
• Debate over tax relief for charitable giving
• US foundations under populist attack 
• Next Gen philanthropy and new models
• Continued growth of DAFs
• Closing space for civil society in the US and beyond
• More UK charities to close
• Rebalancing head and heart in philanthropy
• Population debates, pronatalism and philanthropy
• The platformisation of giving
• OpenAI and the blurred lines between profit and purpose
• The final death of X
• Social media influencers and the impatience economy
• De-teching and the importance of real-life experiences
• The resurgence of crypto
• Wearables on the rise, and AR/VR finally goes mainstream
• AI ambivalence and the rise of AI slop
• Are LLMs a dead end?
• GenAI and the erosion of authenticity.

Related links:

• Last year's Philanthropisms prediction episode, part 1 and part 2
• WPM article on "What Will 2024 Bring for Philanthropy and Civil Society?"
• WPM articles on the future of work, life extension and pronatalism, Open AI and blurred lines, Elon Musk
• WPM guides on philanthropy and: emerging tech, AI and crypto
• HBS paper, "Navigating the Jagged Technological Frontier: Field Experimental Evidence of the Effects of AI on Knowledge Worker Productivity and Quality"
• Ethan Mollick's blog on "15 Times to use AI, and 5 Not to"
• Eryk Salvaggio's blog series on "AI Slop Infrastructure"
• Future Today Institute Tech Trends 2024
• Accenture Life Trends 2025

Send us a text

In this episode we discuss social investment and impact investing with Scott Greenhalgh, Chair of Social and Sustainable Capital. Including:

• Is there a difference between social investment and impact investing? If so, what is it? Do we need to be clearer about this distinction?
• What is the relationship of ESG investing to impact investing and social investment?
• What is the current size and shape of the impact investment market in the UK (and globally)?
• How big a determining factor is govt policy in determining potential opportunities (especially around public service delivery)?
• How big a role could philanthropic foundations be playing by deploying their endowed assets for impact investing?
• Does impact investment/social investment necessarily involve sacrificing financial return for social return, or are there genuine “win-win” opportunities that deliver both?
• Even if there are such opportunities, is there a risk that emphasising or celebrating them will set unrealistic expectations about the market as a whole?
• Is it OK to use philanthropic capital or government funding as a way of subsidising returns for impact investors?
• Is this only acceptable as a temporary means to an end? I.e. as a way of making an investment appealing at the outset by de-risking it, but with a view to convincing impact investors sufficiently of its longer-term merits that they will invest alone?
• Is it difficult to ensure that the focus on social impact is maintained in the impact investing space? (i.e. is there a tendency over time to prioritise financial metrics and returns, which might lead people to invest in “safer” projects and organisations that carry less financial risk but also have lower social returns?)
• What ways are there of ensuring that impact investors and their investees maintain a focus on social returns as well as financial returns? 
• What is the principle of additionality and why is it important?
• Should we be concerned about the risk of companies engaging in “impact washing” or “purpose washing”- i.e. adopting the language and trappings of impact investing and social purpose in order to gain a reputational advantage or to offset criticism, but without actually producing any social value?
• What can we do to mitigate against this risk?

Related Links

• Social and Sustainable Capital
• Scott's blog series for Beacon Collaborative, "What is Impact Investing?", "The UK Social Investment Market", and "Impact Investing and the 3 Dimensions of Capital".
• "What Do Impact Investors Do Differently?" Harvard Business School paper
• Impact Investing Institute, "The UK impact investing market: Size, scope, and potential".
• WPM article, "Is 'Purpose' Always a Good Thing?"
• Philanthropisms podcast conversation with Farahnaz Karim
• Philanthropisms epsiode on "P

Send us a text

In this episode we talk to Milos Maricic (entrepreneur and founder of the Altruist League) and Giuseppe Ugazio (Edmond de Rothschild Assistant Professor of Behavioral Philanthropy at the Geneva Finance Research Institute),  the co-editors of the newly published Routledge Handbook of Artificial Intelligence and Philanthropy. We discuss:

• How the book came about, what is in it, and what the aim of it is.
• What are some of the key opportunities that AI might bring for philanthropy and civil society?
• What are some good examples of AI being used to address social and environmental issues?
• Are these examples skewed towards any particular geographic regions or cause areas? If so, how can we overcome any inequalities?
• How are philanthropic organisations using AI to improve their own operations? (e.g. Efficiency, accessibility, impact measurement, grant applications/grant making?)
• How much work is there to be done in terms of getting the datasets required to make philanthropy applications of AI feasible?
•  Is there a skills and knowledge gap in the nonprofit sector when it comes to AI?
• If nonprofit engagement with AI requires partnership with tech companies, how do we ensure genuine partnerships (i.e. overcome power imbalances etc)?
• Is there a danger that people and organisations from the tech sector are prone to “tech solutionism” (i.e. assuming that all problems, including complex, long-standing social ones, can be solved by technology)? How can civil society mitigate against this tendency?
• Should we take concerns about AI-driven automation making human workers redundant seriously? Or, will AI merely open up opportunities to focus on different things?
• Does the voice of civil society organisations (and the people and communities they serve) get heard enough in current debates about AI?
• What new laws and regulations might be required to ensure that AI is developed in a way that benefits society? What role can philanthropy and CSOs play in ensuring this?
• What do we still not know? i.e. where are the most urgent gaps for further research in philanthropy and AI?

Related Links:

• The Routledge Handbook of Artificial Intelligence and Philanthropy (open access)
• Rhod's chapter for the handbook, "Guided Choices: the ethics of using algorithmic systems to shape philanthropic decision‑making"
• University of Geneva Philanthropy and AI project
• The Altruist League
• WPM to Philanthropy and AI
• Philanthropisms episode on "Philanthropy, Civil Society & AI"
• Philanthropisms podcast conversation with J Bob Alotta from Mozilla Foundation
• WPM article "Philanthropy & Civil Society in a Post-Work Future?"

Send us a text

In 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 Justice
• Philanthropisms podcast conversations with Fozia Irfan, Amy Schiller, Krystian Seibert and David Clarke
• Nic 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 1922
• OECD 2020 policy report on Taxation and Philanthropy
• CAF's 2016 report "Donation States: International comparison of the tax treatment of donations"

Send us a text

In 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 Website
• Lisa's Substack blog, Philanthropy451
• Lisa'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 text

In 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 internationally

Related Links

• ERNOP's latest set of research notes
• Georg's paper (with Berenike Wiener) "Foundation Investment Funds for Grant-Making Foundations in Germany: Do They Facilitate Sustainable Investing?" and the ERNOP research note version
• Joris'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 text

In 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 Atlantic
• FT, "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-Hastings
• Philanthropisms podcast episodes on tainted donations, pluralism, the philosophy of philanthropy, and gratitude & recognition.

Send us a text

In 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 England
• Reformation, industrialisation and the slow secularisation of charitable foundations
• "Zombie" foundations in C19th London and calls for reform
• The 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 Act
• The "Dead Hand of the Donor" and critiques of perpetual endowments
• Do 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 links

• 3 part Why Philanthropy Matters essay series on philanthropic foundations: Part 1 - Defintions; Part 2 - History; Part 3 - Current Debates
• Philanthropisms podcast episode on pluralism
• Philanthropisms podcast episode on gratitude and recognition
• Philanthropisms podcast episode on tainted donations
• Fozia Irfan's "Transformative Philanthropy" paper
• Rhodri on the "What Donors Want" podcast talking discussing whether UK foundations should be subject to a minimum payout requirement
• Tobias Jung's chapter, "The Nonprofit Sector’s ‘Rich Relations’?
  Foundations and their grantmaking activities"

Send us a text

In 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 links

• Pamala's personal website
• The call for contributors to the forthcoming volume on  “Philanthropy: Key debates and contending perspectives”, edited by Pamala and Femida Handy
• Pamala'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?"