Suchergebnisse

PurposeThere appears to be a puzzle associated with the observation that individuals both donate and volunteer to charity. If the purpose of a giving individual is to maximize the effect of his/her donation, then he/she should give as effectively as possible. This implies that an individual should donate either time or money but not both. Yet, simultaneous volunteering and donating money is extremely common. Indeed, it may be viewed as the rule rather than the exception. This paper aims to offer a solution to this puzzle.Design/methodology/approachThis theoretical paper models giving behavior by individuals and takes into account the disutility of volunteer and income related work.FindingsBy modeling the difference between an individual's volunteer and income‐related work, it can be understood why individuals' giving behavior of donating money and volunteering.Research limitations/implicationsFuture research should test these findings empirically.Originality/valueTheoretical contribution to our understanding of giving behavior as to why individuals donate money and time even if is not economically efficient to do both.

The legal owner of a stolen good generally puts a higher value on that good than does the thief. There are therefore potential gains from trade between a legal owner and a successful thief. However, by trading with a thief, the legal owner is encouraging theft for 'ransom'. Should then negotiations between legal owners and thieves be outlawed? In this paper we suggest a framework for answering this question. We find that allowing such negotiations to take place may enhance the ex ante expected utility of owners.