Send us a text

In this episode, in light of recent high-profile disasters in places like Ukraine, Afghanistan and Tigray, we take a look at the long-standing relationship between philanthropy and disaster response. Including:

History:

• The history of disaster response philanthropy: from 16th Century "charitable briefs" in response to fires and floods to the emergence of the Disasters Emergency Committee and the rise of celebrity-led disaster appeals
• What has been the relationship between one-off disaster appeals and efforts to encourage regular giving?
• How did fundraisers of the past use published donor lists to name and shame people into giving?
• Has disaster response philanthropy always been a cross-border affair?
• How has perception of victims of disasters shaped philanthropic response throughout history?
• Why has slowness in distributing funds always been a source of criticism?
• How have paternalistic and judgmental approaches to distribution led to to resentment and even riots?

Psychology & Economics

• Why does the "identifiable victim effect" mean that it is often better to focus on individual stories rather than statistics?
• Can giving people too much information about a disaster actually decrease their giving?
• What is the "bystander effect" and why does it lead people to give less when in groups?
• How does out perception of disasters as "natural" or "man-made" affect our willingness to give?

Current Context

• Why is the Ukraine war receiving more attention than other disasters e.g. Tigray, Afghanistan? Is there a racial element?
• Why do people prefer to give goods, and why don't most NGOs want this?
• Are donations of weapons philanthropy?
• How are people using technology to disintermediate disaster philanthropy (e.g. "donating" via Airbnb,  giving cryptocurrency)? What concerns should we have?
• Is it helpful to depoliticize disasters, or does it deflect attention from what is truly necessary to deal with some situations?
• Can we ever shift from disaster response to long-term development and prevention?

Related Links:

• Philliteracy thread about the history of disaster relief funds
• Reading list on history of disaster relief funds
• Roddy, S., Strange, J., & Taithe, B. (2019).The Charity Market and Humanitarianism in Britain, 1870–1912 
• Zagefka et al (2012). Eliciting donations to disaster victims: Psychological considerations. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 15(4), 221-230.
• Brown, P. H., & Minty, J. H. (2008). Media coverage and charitable giving after the 2004 tsunami. Southern Economic Journal, 75(1), 9-25.
• Eckel, C., Grossman, P. J., & Milano, A. (2007). Is more information always better? An experimental study of charitable giving and Hurricane Katrina. Southern Economic Journal, 74(2), 388-411.
• Scharf, K. A., Smith, S., & Wilhelm, M. (2017). Lift and shift: the effect of fundraising interventions in charity space

Send us a text

In this episode we talk to Sadaf Shallwani, Director of Learning and Evaluation at the Firelight Foundation, about funding systems change, supporting grassroots communities and shifting power dynamics within philanthropy. Including:

• How did the Firelight Foundation come about, what is its core mission, and what is distinctive/unique about its approach?
• Why is "traditional aid broken"?
• Why is the distinction between charity and justice or solidarity so important to Firelight's work? 
• Does a focus on justice and solidarity require taking a different approach to philanthropy? What does this mean in practice?
• How can we ensure that power and decision making within philanthropy is shifted towards the people and communities who would have been seen as the traditional ‘beneficiaries’? (E.g. through participatory means?)
• Is the strongest case for shifting power a moral one (i.e. it is the "right" thing to do), or a pragmatic one (i.e. it produces better outcomes)?
• Can “funder ego” or a “saviour mindset” present barriers to genuine efforts to share power?
• What kind of challenges are there for traditional grantmakers when it comes to bringing communities and people with lived experience into decision making processes?
• How big a risk is there that foundations and other funders co-opt social movements or grassroots CSOs by deliberately introducing grant stipulations etc aimed to direct the focus of the movement away from controversial areas or soften their tactics? How do we avoid this risk?
• Why is core-cost and multi-year funding so important when supporting movements? Are we seeing more funders recognise this and adapt the way they fund?
• Can we find forms of philanthropy that are genuinely able to support fundamental reform to the very systems in which wealth has been created? What are some of the hallmarks of this type of philanthropy?
• How can funders strike the right balance between taking a trust-based approach and not placing unnecessary reporting burdens on grantees, and having sufficient measurement to ensure they still know their funding is working?
• How can funders design impact measurement approaches with their grantees to ensure they are genuinely empowering and beneficial rather than imposing a new burden?

Related Links:

• Firelight Foundation's website
• Firelight's report on Community-Driven Systems Change
• Sadaf's Alliance Magazine article on Community-Drive Systems Change
• Sadaf's personal website
• Rhod's article "Language Barriers: why the ways in which we talk about philanthropy & civil society are holding us back"

Send us a text

In this episode we talk to Teddy Schleifer, Senior Reporter at Puck News, about what is going on in big money philanthropy in the US, and the challenges of reporting on philanthropy. Including.

• Why is it important to have journalists focussing on philanthropy?
• Does the trend towards independent media outlets (substacks, specialist outlets etc) make it easier to report on elite philanthropy, or harder?
• How do you balance focussing on the individual stories of philanthropists vs systemic issues about philanthropy as a whole?
• How hard is it to penetrate the world of the super-rich?
• What are the most interesting/encouraging things about Mackenzie Scott’s emergence as a major philanthropist?
• What are the main questions that still need answering?
• What should we make of Melinda French Gates’s increasing desire to distance her philanthropy from that of her ex-husband, Bill Gates? 
• Is Elon Musk actually serious about philanthropy? What do we know so far about what kind of philanthropy he might do?
• If he brings his existing online persona to his philanthropy, what is that going to mean for philanthropic discourse overall?
• How have the last few years and the evolution of Facebook into Meta affected Zuckerberg’s philanthropy?
• Who are the big Silicon Valley donors that most of us haven’t even heard of? What are they into?
• How seriously should we be taking crypto wealth?
• Is cryptophilanthropy any different to traditional philanthropy (other than being done using crypto?) If so, how?
• Why are so many Silicon Valley donors into Effective Altruism? Given the likely profile of billionaire wealth in coming years, is EA going to become a bigger part of philanthropy overall?

Related Links:

• Sign up for Puck's Newsletter
• Follow Teddy on Twitter
• Teddy's recent article on Sam Bankman-Fried
• Philanthropisms podcast episode with Ben Soskis
• Rhod's blog on "MacKenzie Scott & the History of Challenging Philanthropy’s Status Quo"
  Rhod's blog "The Edgelord Giveth: Elon Musk & a new era of discourse about philanthropy?"
•  New York Times article "Elon Musk’s Latest Innovation: Troll Philanthropy" (which Rhod was quoted in). 
• Teddy's previous appearance on the CAF Giving Thought podcast

Send us a text

In this episode we talk to Cassie Robinson, a leading philanthropy thinker, connector and innovator, and formerly Deputy Director of Funding Strategy at the National Lottery Community Fund. We discuss the current state of philanthropy, how it needs to change, and what those working in the field can do to transform it. Including:

-What are the best and worst things about working in institutional philanthropy and being a "philanthropoid"?
-How much power do philanthropoids have to shape the institutions they work in?
- If you were going to design a foundation from scratch, what would it look like?
-For those looking to make an impact on the big challenges facing us today, is philanthropy the best option or are there more effective alternative routes?
-Are the dividing lines between "nonprofit" and other approaches increasingly artificial?
-Should we be thinking less about institutions and more about networks when it comes to the future for philanthropy?
-What can philanthropy learn from fungi...?
-Is there sometimes a risk that in giving away power, it gets lost rather than transferred? Do we therefore also need to think about how funders use their power more effectively?
-What role can art and fiction play in helping to develop "social imagination"? What can philanthropy do to harness this and encourage better foresight and thinking about the future?
-Does institutional philanthropy take enough risks?

Related Links:

• Cassie's personal website
• Cassie on Medium
• More on Joseph Rowntree Foundation's work on social imagination
• Rhod's Medium blog "Language Barriers: why the ways in which we talk about philanthropy & civil society are holding us back"
• Rhod's previous conversation with Cassie for the CAF Giving Thought podcast

Send us a text

In this episode we talk to Mihaela Giurgiu, a philanthropy expert from Romania who works as a mapping, research and peer-learning expert for the European Community Foundation Initiative and as an international network consultant for The Funding Initiative. Including:

• What is the history and current context for civil society in Romania and across Central and Eastern Europe more broadly?
• What is the general attitude of governments in CE Europe towards civil society and philanthropy?
• What is the balance between local, regional, national and international approaches in philanthropic funding across CE Europe?
• What kind of domestic causes receive philanthropic funding in Romania and other CE European countries?
• What is the attitude of the public towards philanthropy in CE European countries?
•  Do recent critiques of philanthropy in the US and UK resonate in the CE European context? Or do they feel less relevant?
• Why have community foundations played such an important role in developing civil society and philanthropy in countries where the State previously crowded them out?
• Does the diversity of forms and approaches shown by community foundations sometimes make it difficult to position them as part of a coherent movement?
• Do community foundations tend to get forgotten in wider discussions about foundation philanthropy? If so, why?
• What is the role of infrastructure bodies in helping civil society organisations and funders navigate and adapt to a rapidly-changing environment?
• Has the Covid-19 pandemic increased awareness of the value of infrastructure? Will this result in more sustainable long-term funding?
• What role can giving circles play in developing a culture of philanthropy?

Related Links:

• The European Community Foundation Initiative (ECFI)
• The Funding Network
• Philanthropy Europe Association (Philea)
• CAF Giving Thought podcast with James Magowan from ECFI
• Rhod's recent Alliance Magazine piece "What's Ahead? Predictions for philanthropy in 2022 and beyond"

Send us a text

In this episode we take a look at the growing prevalence of "platform philanthropy" (i.e. giving and organising via online platforms) and the opportunities and challenges this presents. Including:

• The rise of the platform economy & the current state of platform philanthropy
• Are we seeing a shift from dedicated platforms for giving, towards commercial organisations adding giving functionality to their existing platforms?
• How is the growing use of direct payment platforms like CashApp and Venmo affecting philanthropy?
• Who owns the the platforms we use for giving and what drives them?
• Are there risks to our growing dependence on platforms?
• How do platforms shape our choices when it comes to giving?
• What can the recent controversies over Spotify and the Joe Rogan podcast, and GoFundMe withholding donations to the Freedom Convoy, tell us about the responsibilities that platforms bear regarding the organisations they enable people to give to?
• Is platform technology bringing us full-circle back to the traditional model of person-to-person giving? What opportunities and what risks does this present?
• Why does the history of Victorian voting charities have to tell us about the potential risks of bias in crowdfunding and P2P giving?
• Will perverse incentives within the "attention economy" lead to new challenges for CSOs?
• Will platforms and the rise of Web3 lead to more emphasis on decentralised forms of organising in civil society?
• Can technology overcome the known weaknesses of decentralised models, or do we risking discovering old problems in new forms?

Related Links:

• Philanthropisms podcast conversation with Lucy Bernholz
• Rhod's 2020 piece for Alliance, "The Ethics of Platform Philanthropy"
• Rhod's paper presented at the 2019 ARNOVA conference, "Networking Opportunities: Rediscovering decentralisation in philanthropy & civil society?"
• "The Giving Apps: How Venmo and Cash App Upended a Century-Old Charity Model"
• Rhod's HistPhil article, "Networked Social Movements and the 'Tyranny of Structurelessness'"
• Rhod's 2019 Charity Digital News article "Before Diving Into 'Platform Philanthropy', Charities Need to Ask Some Big Ethical Questions"

Send us a text

In this episode, Rhod talks to author and historian Maribel Morey about her new book White Philanthropy: Carnegie Corporation's 'An American Dilemma' and the Making of a White World Order. Including:

• What is "An American Dilemma" and what role has it played in the history of thinking about race in the US?
• What are some of the contemporary and subsequent critiques of the report?
• Why do we need to re-evaluate the role of the Carnegie Corporation in shaping the development and eventual narrative of "An American Dilemma"?
• How does the origin of "An American Dilemma" fit into the wider global context of imperialism at the time?
• Is the role of the people who administer philanthropic wealth (the “philanthropoids”) too often underappreciated in historical study?
• Were Carnegie Corporation figures like Frederick Keppel and James Betram genuinely trying to interpret Andrew Carnegie’s wishes as they understood them, or were they using their roles as amanuenses to impose their own views?
• Can the Carnegie Corporation’s support for “An American Dilemma” be interpreted as a highly successful example of “upstream philanthropy” i.e. funding research or analysis that sets the parameters for public debate and policy formation?
• Can we learn lessons today about how philanthropy can influence long-term change?
• What can the example of Carnegie Corporation and "An American Dilemma" tell us about current debates over the tension between incrementalism and radicalism in philanthropy? 
• Would it have been better in the long run if progressive foundations that pursued assimilationist approaches or which viewed racial equality as a process that involved Black Americans increasingly conforming to White norms had simply stayed away from race as an issue altogether?
• How widespread and acceptable among philanthropists and foundations of the first half of the C20th was the view that eugenics and forced population control were part of the solution to the “race problem”?
• Does there need to be more of a reckoning with this history?
• What value can a historical perspective can bring to philanthropists, funders and non-profit professionals?
• Are there limits to the utility of historical comparison in understanding the present? 

Related Links:

• Maribel's book White Philanthropy
• Maribel's personal website
• The Miami Institute for the Social Sciences, where Maribel is Founding Executive Director
• HistPhil (where Maribel is co-Editor)
• "Behind the Scenes of White Philanthropy", Maribel's article for HistPhil
• "Julius Rosenwald Was Not a Hero", Maribel's 2017 HistPhil article
• Philanthropisms podcast with Ben Soskis
• "Why Study the History of Philanthropy?", Rhod's 2020 CAF blog

Send us a text

In this episode Rhod talks to Edgar Villanueva, author of "Decolonizing Wealth: Indigenous Wisdom to Heal Divides and Restore Balance" about why many of our current models of philanthropy reflect structures and approaches that disempower and disadvantage minoritised communities and how things need to change to address this problematic legacy. Including:

• Why is it important that philanthropy acknowledges and addresses the fact that it almost always reflects structures and systems that contain racial bias and that have historically disadvantaged marginalised communities? What do those working in philanthropy need to do in practice? And are there signs of the kinds of change that is needed taking place?
• Is racial injustice such a big/cross-cutting issue that it should not be seen as a cause area, but rather as something that is the responsibility of ALL philanthropic funders and nonprofits?
• In trying to convince philanthropic funders of the need to acknowledge issues of racial justice, is it better to make a moral case (i.e. that they should do it because it is “the right thing to do”) or a practical one (i.e. that it will make them more effective as grantmakers to reflect and share power with the people and communities they are trying to support)?
• Should we be optimistic that the current recognition of the need to apply a racial justice lens across philanthropy will be maintained?
• What does it mean to say that “money can be medicine”? What do philanthropists and funders need to do to ensure their money heals rather than harms?
• How can foundations use all of their assets (including investments, property etc) to work towards decolonization?
• What is the importance of story as medicine? 
• How can we ensure that decision making within traditional forms of philanthropy is shifted towards the people and communities who would have been seen as the traditional ‘beneficiaries’? (E.g. through participatory means?)
• Does it present a challenge to decolonizing philanthropy if  those who agree with your arguments feel defensive about their implications? How do we overcome this challenge?
• A lot of the recent focus when it comes to addressing racial justice issues has been less on traditional nonprofits, and more on things like mutual aid networks and networked social movements. Is part of the enthusiasm for these new forms of giving down to frustration with traditional nonprofit approaches, which are often perceived not to have changed quickly enough? 
• Why is the mainstream nonprofit world not good at learning from other giving cultures (does it reflect an exceptionalist mindset)? And how can we get better?
• The book argues for a pragmatic approach to improving philanthropy (i.e. working with existing structures to improve them),rather than “burning everything to the ground” as some more radical voices argue we should. Why is that the case? Is it sometimes difficult to maintain pragmatism?

Related links:

• The Decolonizing Wealth Project website (including links to Decolonizing Wealth, 2nd Edition)
• The "Rewriting the Rules of Philanthropy" event, hosted by Giving Tuesday, which Edgar and Rhod both took part in.
• Abigail Echo-Hawk,  chief research officer of the Seattle Indian Health Board, on "decolonizing data"
• Rhod's blog "Language Barriers: why the ways in which we talk about philanthropy

Send us a text

In this episode we take a look at some of the key issues and trends affecting philanthropy and civil society right now and offer some thoughts on what to watch out for over the coming year. Including:

• Ongoing pandemic uncertainty/"normalisation" rather than an ending
• Will changes in norms re remote/flexible working become established? What will this mean for civil society in terms of both opportunities and challenges?
• Individual burnout and organisational closure
• The climate crisis: do all CSOs/funders need to be doing more?
• Racial justice: will the focus continue, or is there a danger of it being seen as a "moment" that has passed?
• Political hostility towards civil society around the globe- further closing of civil society space, new restrictions on foreign funding etc?
• Is there a decline in giving? Are we increasingly reliant on a smaller pool of donors?
• Are people giving in new ways that we are failing to count? Does this matter?
• Will we see more elite philanthropy supporting efforts to develop everyday giving?
• Impact measurement scepticism
• Core cost funding, trust-based philanthropy
• Debate over timeframes (immediacy vs long-term view) 
• Scrutiny of sources of wealth.
• Continuing criticism of philanthropy, pushback on criticism; more division within philanthropy
• The "platformisation" of giving?
• New cybersecurity threats
• AI implications: productivity tools, new ways of giving, new challeges to address, need for civil society to have a voice in debate over AI development.
• Cryptocurrency & blockchain: Rise of cryptophilanthropy (who are crypto-donors, what makes them tick?), can CSOs harness the NFT market (or is it a dangerous bubble?)
• The Metaverse: what opportunities & challenges might it bring for CSOs?

Related Links:

• Rhod's essay for the Law Family Commission on Civil Society
• Rhod's blog about Elon Musk's philanthropy
• Rhod in the New York Times talking about Elon Musk
• Rhod's blog on philanthropy, civil society & the Metaverse
• Rhod's blog on Mackenzie Scott
• Rhod's article for Catalyst on how AI will affect  charities
• Rhod's article for the World Economic Forum "Where Are Charities in the Great AI Debate?"

Send us a text

In this episode Rhod talks to Ben Soskis, a Senior Research Associate at the Urban Institute's Center on Nonprofits and Philanthropy and co-Editor of the website HistPhil.org, about the big issues and themes in US philanthropy over the last few years and where things might go in the future. Including:

• How has the pandemic shifted perceptions of philanthropy in the US over the short term? Are those perceptions likely to get better or worse over the longer-term, post pandemic?
• Mackenzie Scott: What are the most interesting/encouraging things about her emergence as a major philanthropist? What are the main questions that still need answering? Has she had an impact on the general public perception of philanthropy?
• Elon Musk: Is he the world's first "Troll Philanthropist"? What does his emergence as a major giver mean for the norms of philanthropic discourse? 
• Bill Gates: Has any of the controversy over the Gates Foundation’s involvement in vaccine development had an effect on the overall narrative about philanthropy in the US?
• Have the norms around time horizons in philanthropy shifted as a result of the pandemic? i.e. will we see more calls for foundations to spend down their endowments?
• Why are a growing number of elite donors/institutional funders interested in supporting the growth of everyday giving? What opportunities (and potential challenges) does the involvement of big money philanthropy in developing cultures of mass giving present?
• Why are we seeing more emphasis on direct cash giving in recent years? Is the growth primarily driven by individual P2P giving, or by organisations employing direct giving models? If the latter, is this primarily driven by a desire to democratise/shift power or by a belief that it delivers better results in terms of outcomes?

Related Links:

• The HistPhil website
• Ben's Urban Institute paper on "Norms and Narratives That Shape US Charitable and Philanthropic Giving"
• The recent New York Times article "Elon Musk’s Latest Innovation: Troll Philanthropy" (which Ben and Rhod were both quoted in).
• Rhod's blog on "MacKenzie Scott & the History of Challenging Philanthropy’s Status Quo"
•  Rhod's blog "The Edgelord Giveth: Elon Musk & a new era of discourse about philanthropy?"
• Rhod's previous conversation with Ben on the CAF Giving Thought podcast