Suchergebnisse

In this article, I investigate the strength of intergenerational transmission of volunteering for non-profit associations in The Netherlands. Data from the Family Survey of the Dutch Population 2000 reveal that there are significant relations between current volunteering and parental volunteering in the past. While the transmission of volunteering for religious and quasi-religious (`pillarized') associations is due largely to the transmission of religion and social status from parents to their children, parental volunteering for pillarized associations has increased the likelihood of children's volunteering for secular associations, even controlling for parental and children's religion, education, wealth and personality characteristics. Consistent with a value internalization explanation, this spillover effect was not due to the direct social pressure of parents.

I study the relationships of resources and personality characteristics to charitable giving, postmortem organ donation, and blood donation in a nationwide sample of persons in households in the Netherlands. I find that specific personality characteristics are related to specific types of giving: agreeableness to blood donation, empathic concern to charitable giving, and prosocial value orientation to postmortem organ donation. I find that giving has a consistently stronger relation to human and social capital than to personality. Human capital increases giving; social capital increases giving only when it is approved by others. Effects of prosocial personality characteristics decline at higher levels of these characteristics. Effects of empathic concern, helpfulness, and social value orientations on generosity are mediated by verbal proficiency and church attendance.

Participation in voluntary associations is explained by different theories in sociology, psychology and political science. Sociologists have emphasized the effects of resources such as human and social capital. Psychologists have demonstrated the role of empathy and extraversion as aspects of personality. Political scientists have considered political values and attitudes. This paper investigates the predictive value of personality characteristics, political values and social conditions for civic engagement. Data from the Family Survey of the Dutch Population 2000 (n=1,587) show that active citizens have more human and social capital available to them, they are more interested in politics, have more postmaterialistic value orientations, prefer leftist or Christian political parties, are less conscientious persons and show more empathic concern with other people. Relations of personality characteristics with civic engagement were partly intermediated by church attendance and the level of education, and varied in complex ways with hourly wages. My results show how social, political and psychological characteristics are jointly related to civic engagement.

Given the increasing numbers of scandals, the awareness among fund-raisers that the public's trust is crucial for the nonprofit sector is growing. This study investigates the relationship between trust and charitable giving. Charitable organizations can increase the public's trust by signaling their trustworthiness. The example of the Netherlands shows how a system of accreditation can be an instrument for signaling trustworthiness to the public. Donors aware of the accreditation system have more trust in charities than those who are not aware, and they give more money to charitable causes. Charitable organizations have only limited control over the public's trust because it is also rooted in a general social trust in institutions and fellow citizens. It was shown that general social trust increases the amount people give to charitable causes, even more so when people know about the accreditation system. Finally, the conditions for introducing an accreditation system are discussed.

The research field of nonprofits and philanthropy has grown exponentially. To what extent do nonprofit scholars share a common language? Answering this question is crucial to assessing the field's intellectual cohesiveness. We studied how coauthor networks, scholarly reputation, and the prevalence of female authors influence consensus formation. We found that the degree of consensus for all major research topics in the field has increased over time—For every 10% growth in the volume of literature, shared language increased by 1.4%. A cohesive research community on nonprofits and philanthropy has been forming since the early 2000s. Female scholars are fewer in number and less cited than males; their presence did not exceed 40% for most topics. The citation counts of scholars and small-world property of networks are positively associated with consensus, suggesting that star researchers and knowledge brokers bridging different intellectual communities are key to sharing research interests and language.

This is the first of two papers in which we present a comprehensive review of the multidisciplinary academic literature on philanthropy, identifying the predictors of charitable giving by individuals and households. For each predictor, we discuss the evidence for the mechanisms that may explain why the predictor is correlated with giving. We conclude with a brief agenda for future research. In this first paper we present the evidence on the relationship of giving with religion, education, age and socialisation.

The authors present an overview of the academic literature on charitable giving based on a literature review of more than 500 articles. They structure their review around the central question of why people donate money to charitable organizations. They identify eight mechanisms as the most important forces that drive charitable giving: (a) awareness of need; (b) solicitation; (c) costs and benefits; (d) altruism; (e) reputation; (f) psychological benefits; (g) values; (h) efficacy. These mechanisms can provide a basic theoretical framework for future research explaining charitable giving.

Confidence in charitable organizations (charitable confidence) would seem to be an important prerequisite for philanthropic behavior. Previous research relying on cross-sectional data has suggested that volunteering promotes charitable confidence and vice versa. This research note, using new longitudinal panel data from the Netherlands, contradicts the suggestion generated by previous research. Volunteers indeed have more charitable confidence, but changes in one are not related to changes in the other. The authors identify generalized social trust and altruistic values as omitted variables that produce the previously observed relationship. The practical implication of this finding is that a decline in charitable confidence is unlikely to reduce volunteering. The theoretical implication is that volunteering is symbolic rather than instrumental.

In research on giving, methodology is destiny. The volume of donations estimated from sample surveys strongly depends on the length of the questionnaire used to measure giving. By comparing two giving surveys from the Netherlands, the authors show that a short questionnaire on giving not only underestimates the volume of giving but also biases the effects of predictors of giving. Specifically, they find that a very short module leads to an underestimation of the effects of predictors of giving on the amount donated but an overestimation of their effects on the probability of charitable giving. Short survey modules may lead researchers to falsely reject or accept hypotheses on determinants of giving due to underreporting of donations.

AbstractAre private donors willing to replace cuts in government funding? The authors conducted a survey experiment (n = 2,458) to examine how information about government funding affected decisions to donate money to a large charitable organization in the Netherlands. Providing information about actual budget cuts increased the number of donors. Most new donors were recruited among respondents who had processed the information correctly, underlining the importance of effective communication. The magnitude of the information effect was stronger for citizens with lower levels of empathic concern, who are less likely to donate but can be converted into donors. The authors conclude that policy information shapes not only attitudes but also civic engagement outside the political sphere.