Giving Thought

View Details

In this episode we talk to Sharna Goldseker and Michael Moody about their book Generation Impact: How Next Gen Donors are Revolutionizing Giving, which is now available in an updated and expanded 2nd edition. Including:

In what ways are Next Gen donors genuinely different from previous generations?
Do Next Gen donors give to significantly different causes than their parents’ generation, or simply give to the same causes but in different ways?
Are Next Gen donors more likely to adopt non-traditional vehicles for their giving? If so, what does this tell us about the limitations of current non-profit models?
Do Next Gen donors tend to seek advice on their giving (either at the outset, or on an ongoing basis)? If so, who do they turn to?
Whilst almost all Next Gen donors agree that they “want to see the impact of their giving”, what they mean by “impact” varies considerably- some looking for rigorous metrics and outcome measure, others for human interaction or compelling stories. How can nonprofits cater effectively to these differing notions of impact?
Are Next Gen donors more likely to take a holistic view of philanthropy, in relation to how wealth is created, how it is invested etc? What does this mean in practical terms?
What are the key differences between inherited and earned wealth and how do they influence approaches to philanthropy?
What role does philanthropy play in the planning of wealth transfer within families? (E.g. is philanthropy seen as a tool for engaging the younger generation in the family’s financial affairs? What sorts of roles are Next Gens playing with regard to their family’s giving?)
Are Next Gen donors more likely to want to blur the boundaries between philanthropy and political activity in order to pursue their aims?
Is the desire for more “hands-on” engagement from Next Gen donors an opportunity to tap into additional skills, or does it present a new challenge in terms of awkward power dynamics? (I.e. is there a danger of Next Gen donors assuming that their knowledge is “better/more important” than that of people working in nonprofits, simply because of the power dynamics that come with funding?)
Should we worry that the growing wave of scepticism, and even cynicism towards philanthropy, will have a negative impact on Next Gen donors’ willingness to give?

Related content:

More detail on the book from Sharna’s 21/64 website
Excerpt of 1st edition of Generation Impact in SSIR
More on Next Gen philanthropy from the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy

View Details

In this episode we talk to Stelio Stefanou OBE, philanthropist and Founder of the For Baby’s Sake Trust (FBST) - a charity which focuses on working with parents to address the impact of domestic violence on the early years development of children. In a wide-ranging conversation, we discussed:

Is “philanthropist” a helpful or unhelpful word?
How does a business background shape approaches to philanthropy?
Why is it important to recognise that success in business doesn’t automatically equate to expertise about social issues or the work of charities?
Why is an evidence base so crucial to the work of FBST? How has the organisation worked with academics to build that evidence base?
How important is it that philanthropy looks beyond addressing symptoms and tries to address underlying causes?
Are there challenges to combining advocacy with direct provision of services, or do the two naturally go hand-in-hand?
How has the pandemic affected the work of FBST?
What, if anything, is the USP of philanthropy in relation to the public or private sector?
Does the ability of philanthropy to work over a longer time horizon make it better suited to supporting early interventions?
Do you see yourself as having any responsibility to encourage other wealthy people to give, or is giving entirely down to personal choice?
Should philanthropists see themselves as having any responsibility to encourage other wealthy people to give, or is giving entirely down to personal choice?
Is there a danger that the growing wave of scepticism, and even cynicism towards philanthropy, will have a negative impact on people’s willingness to give?
Des fear of “failure” hold some wealthy people back from engaging in philanthropy? How should we understand failure in philanthropy (and how is this different to failure in the public or private sector?)

Related Links:

For Baby’s Sake Trust website
Info on FBST’s approach to influencing
Giving Thought podcast with Jo Kerr and Sonya Ruparel

View Details

In this episode Rhod sat down with Gemma Bull and Tom Steinberg, authors of new book "Modern Grantmaking: A Guide for Funders Who Believe Better is Possible". In a wide-ranging conversation, we discussed:

Humility & Funder Ego

Why is humility such a key part of Modern Grantmaking?
Is part of the problem that traditionally our idea of what it means to be “good at grantmaking” has revolved around attributing genius to funders and grantmakers in terms of their choices/program design, rather than on the extent to which they nurture grantees?
Do we need to redefine what counts as success and failure in grantmaking?

Diversity, Equity & Inclusion

Does grantmaking have a diversity problem?
Are funders more effective when they reflect more closely the people and communities they serve? In what ways can they achieve this?
Do some grantmaking practices exclude people from already-marginalised communities? (E.g. focus on the written-word, invitation-based grantmaking etc.)

Privilege & Power

Is traditional grantmaking paternalistic, and too often about decisions being made about communities rather than by them?
The book emphasises that modern grantmakers should see themselves as serving the people and communities they fund– what does this mean in practice?
Why is it so important for grantmakers to check their privilege, and what does this mean in practice?
How do you navigate power dynamics within a grantmaking org- e.g. between trustees and grantmakers, or between philanthropic donors and the staff of a foundation?

Participation & Movements

There is a growing amount 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?
Would all grantmaking be participatory in an ideal world? Or are there limits to participatory approaches? i.e. are there some situations in which it is better for expert funders to set aims and design programs? Or are there cause areas in which participatory approaches are not suitable for other reasons?
Would it help if more funders supported grassroots organisations and movements?

Funding practices

Are there signs that funders are changing their behaviour during the current crisis? (Moving to unrestricted funding, trust-based grantmaking etc.) Is this likely to lead to longer-term changes?

Risk and Innovation

Many have argued that a key function of philanthropic funding is to drive society forward by taking risks and funding things that the state and market cannot – but how much current philanthropic grantmaking do you think meets this criterion?
Is there a danger that “being innovative” becomes an end in itself, and results in continual chasing after shiny new things, rather than funding things that are already known to work?

Evidence and Impact

The book argues that modern grantmaking requires more of a focus on evidence-based decisions- what kinds of evidence should grantmakers be considering?
Do we need to ensure that different kinds of evidence and expertise are considered equally, in order to avoid perpetuating inequalities?
What role can data play in making grantmaking more effective and equitable?

Related Links:

Modern Grantmaking- the book
The Grant Givers Movement
Giving Thought podcast with Meg Massey & Hannah Paterson
Giving Thought podcast with Nell Edgington
Giving Thought podcast with Fozia Irfan

View Details

In this episode we're joined by Lori Bezahler, President of the Edward W. Hazen Foundation, to discuss the role of philanthropy in supporting racial justice and funding grassroots organizing or social movements. Including:

Racial Justice

Is racial injustice such a big/cross-cutting issues that it should not be seen as a cause area, but rather as something that is the responsibility of ALL philanthropic funders and nonprofits?
What does this mean in practice re racial justice issues? (E.g. supporting more grantees led by BIPOC leaders, promoting more BIPOC employees into positions of authority within foundations, acknowledging where philanthropic assets have been created in ways that exacerbated racial injustice, paying reparations etc?)
Should we be optimistic that the current recognition of the need to apply a racial justice lens across philanthropy will be maintained?

The “Movement Moment”

Is the current enthusiasm for social movements reflective of a frustration people have that traditional nonprofits have failed to move the needle on issues such as the climate crisis or racial justice?
Is the fact that participation is inherent to the approach of social movements part of their appeal, as it gives people a greater sense of agency over problems that can seem insurmountable?
Are traditional nonprofits and funders too often a reflection of existing systems and power structures to push for the kind of radical solutions we need to deal with huge global, structural challenges?
Does the ability of social movements to be more overtly political, or to employ more challenging tactics (e.g. protest, direct action), give them an advantage over civil society organisations (CSOs) that might be more constrained by legal/regulatory requirements?
Can movements that have grown to huge scale very quickly find that they are lacking some of the elements of organisations infrastructure that they might need if they are to be sustainable over the longer-term? If so, can traditional CSOs and nonprofits work with them to provide some of that infrastructure? Does this happen in practice?

Funding movements

How can a funder determine where best to allocate their resources in order to support a movement most effectively?
How big a risk is there that foundations and other funders co-opt social movements by deliberately introducing grant stipulations etc. aimed to direct the focus of the movement away from controversial areas or soften their tactics?
Can funding from donors/foundations confer legitimacy on movements as well as financial resources? Is this useful for the movements?
Can funders use their power positively on behalf of the movements they fund?
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?

Spending Down

The Hazen Foundation took the bold decision in 2019 to spend down its remaining endowment over 5 years. What was the rationale for doing this at this point, after nearly 100 years of operating?
What is the foundation aiming to fund over the coming years to ensure the foundation leaves a strong legacy?
Should more foundations should consider spending down?

Mission Related Investment

Why did the Hazen Foundation decide to take a fully mission-related investment approach? What does this mean in practice?
Does this involve going beyond screening to look for active opportunities to invest in activities that further the foundation’s mission?
How are trade-offs between financial return and social impact assessed?

Related Links:

The Edward W. Hazen Foundation
Lori’s Chronicle of Philanthropy opinion piece, “To Achieve Justice, Philanthropy Must Give Up Its Power”
Lori’s joint article with Lateefah Simon in Chronicle of Philanthropy, “How Foundations Can Grapple With the Reality That Their Wealth Was Accumulated Unjustly”
Lori’s piece for Inside Philanthropy, “Philanthropy Has a Duty to Respond Quickly to the COVID-19 Outbreak. Here’s How We Can Do It”
Our Giving Thought podcast interview with Regan Ralph
Our Giving Thought podcast interview with Megan Ming Francis
Rhod’s Medium article, “Language Barriers: why the ways in which we talk about philanthropy & civil society are holding us back”

View Details

In this episode we talk to Jo Kerr and Sonya Ruparel, from UK charity Turn2Us, about poverty, participation and the impact of the pandemic. Including:

Impact of Covid Pandemic

How has the Covid 19 pandemic affected Turn 2 Us, and the people and communities the charity serves?
What are the biggest challenges for the organisation over the coming months and longer-term post-pandemic?

Digital Transformation

Has the necessity to adapt due to the pandemic accelerated Turn2Us’s digital adoption or transformation at all? If so, how?
How important is the collection and use of data to the charity’s work? How is a focus on data incorporated into the organisation’s strategy?
To what extent is digital transformation about employment practices rather than technology? (E.g. flexible/remote working, making charity work more appealing than private or public sector). Has the pandemic presented an opportunity in this regard?
How might the charity workplace change over the next decade or so?
What are the major barriers to the charity sector when it comes to engaging with and making use of technology?

Poverty

What, for Turn 2 Us, are the key areas of focus when it comes to tackling poverty?
How have issues of poverty changed during the pandemic?
Do particular communities or geographic localities face particular challenges when it comes to the impacts of poverty? How do you combine the specificity to address these particular challenges with the generality required to work at scale?

Role of charities

What is the core role of civil society which differentiates it from either state or market provision?
A lot of the work of Turn 2 Us is about helping people to understand and claim rights and benefits provided by the state- so is it more about “justice” than “charity”?
How should we view the balance between addressing the symptoms of poverty through direct services and addressing its causes through advocating for fundamental systemic reform?

Participation & Power

Turn 2 Us’s approach is rooted in ideas of co-production and empowering those in need to determine their own solutions. Why is this so important?
What should we make of approaches such as participatory grantmaking, which seek to shift power as well as money towards recipients? Will we see more of this in coming years?

Infrastructure

Has the Covid pandemic highlighted the importance of strong civil society infrastructure?
What are the key elements of this infrastructure?
How do we ensure that infrastructure is fit for the challenges of the future?

Related Links

The Turn2Us website
Independent article about Turn2Us new benefits calculator, “The new financial tools supporting those hit hardest by Covid”
Rhod’s Giving Thought blog on “Mutual Aid, Charity & Philanthropy”
Rhod’s Giving Thought blog on “Philanthropy and Civil Society after Covid-19: Key questions for the future”
Our Giving Thought podcast series on “Covid 19: Voices From Civil Society”

View Details

In this episode we talk participatory approaches in philanthropy and social investment, with Meg Massey, co-author of “Letting Go: How Philanthropists and Impact Investors Can Do More Good by Giving Up Control” and Hannah Paterson, Senior Portfolio Manager at the National Lottery Community Fund. Including:

There is a growing amount 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?
If there is resistance to adopting participatory approaches, why is this?
What’s the core case for adopting participatory approaches: that it democratises philanthropy (and thus helps to answer various critiques) or that it results in better outcomes? Or is it both?
What different kinds of models of participatory grantmaking are there?
What kind of challenges are there for traditional grantmakers when it comes to bringing communities and people with lived experience into decision making processes?
Do participants in a grantmaking decision process need to be representative of a wider community? If so, how do you select them to ensure that representation?
How can existing grantmakers transition some or all of their grantmaking to participatory methods?
Would all grantmaking be participatory in an ideal world? Or are there limits to participatory approaches? i.e. are there some situations in which it is better for expert funders to set aims and design programs? Or are there cause areas in which participatory approaches are not suitable for other reasons?
Can participatory approaches be used outside traditional grantmaking too, e.g. in impact investing/social investment?
Does the prominence of XR, BLM and other “new power” organisations suggest an unmet demand within civil society for participation and sharing power? What lessons should traditional CSOs and funders take from this?
What should we make of criticisms that since philanthropy is to some extent a product of structural inequality, it can never truly be part of the solution? Are some donors and funders recognise the challenges and are genuinely pursuing structural change?

Related Links

Meg’s new book (co-authored with Ben Wrobel) “Letting Go: How Philanthropists and Impact Investors Can Do More Good by Giving Up Control”
Meg on Twitter
Hannah’s website
Hannah on Twitter
The Participatory Grantmaking community
Meg and Ben’s article for Pioneers Post “How philanthropists and impact investors can do more good – by giving up control”
Meg and Ben’s article for NonProfit Quarterly “Philanthropy and the Zen of Participation”
Rhod’s World Economic Forum article, “Philanthropy is at a turning point. Here are 6 ways it could go”
CAF Giving Thought podcast on participatory philanthropy with Rose Longhurst

View Details

On this episode we talk to Teddy Schleifer, Senior Reporter, Money & Influence at Recode (part of the Vox Media group), about billionaires, Silicon Valley and philanthropy. Including:

Silicon Valley Philanthropy

Do most tech billionaires see their wealth as “self-made”, or do they recognise any sense of societal debt, luck etc? How does this shape their giving?
How does the wider public view the philanthropy of modern tech billionaires?
Are tech donors particularly prone to solutionism or a desire for “moonshots” in their philanthropy?
Are many big tech donors happy with the idea of giving away power as well as money? Or are they likely to want to retain control of decision-making about their philanthropy? Does this make them any different to other big money donors?
Are donors like Mackenzie Scott, who seem to be trying to shift power as well as financial resources through her philanthropy, merely outliers; or do they signal a wider trend?

Reporting on Philanthropy

Why is it important to have journalists focussing on philanthropy?
How do you balance focussing on the individual stories of philanthropists vs systemic issues about philanthropy as a whole?
Is there an argument for more philanthropic funding of journalistic scrutiny of philanthropy?
Could increased philanthropic funding of news media actually undermine journalism’s ability to hold philanthropy itself to account? (E.g. if outlets self-censor to avoid upsetting existing or potential patrons).

Critiques of Philanthropy

Is there a danger that scrutiny can tip over into cynicism when it comes to philanthropy?
Should we worry that the growing wave of scepticism, and even cynicism towards philanthropy, will have a negative impact on people’s willingness to give?
Of the current critiques levelled at philanthropy, which are potentially misguided or overstated, and which are genuinely important to heed?
Do these critiques only really apply to big money/elite philanthropy?

Transparency in Philanthropy

Do wealthy donors deliberately use philanthropy to deflect or preclude criticism of their business dealings, tax affairs etc, or are reputational benefits merely a side-effect of genuinely altruistic behaviour in some cases?
Do foundations (and donors) need to be more transparent? If so, why and about what? Who does it benefit (the foundations themselves, their donors, grantees, taxpayers etc.)
Should we be concerned about the growing trend for elite donors to use LLCs and other vehicles that may be less transparent?

Related Links

Some of Teddy’s Recode articles:
- “What Americans really think about billionaires during the pandemic”
- Jeff Bezos will spend $1 billion a year to fight climate change
- America’s billionaire philanthropists gave away more during the pandemic. But there’s a catch
- MacKenzie Scott, the Amazon billionaire, is giving away $1 billion a month to charity
- Jeff Bezos plays it safe on his $10 billion climate giveaway
CAF Giving Thought podcast on “Mackenzie Scott and the Reimagining of Philanthropy”.
CAF Giving Thought podcast on “Jeff Bezos, Big Philanthropy and Climate Change”
Rhod’s 2020 Alliance article “Bezos’ $10bn donation should not pitch philanthropy and taxation against each other – that would be a zero-sum game”
Rhod’s 2018 Alliance article “Philanthropy should fund the media for its own sake”

View Details

In this episode we talk to Denis Mizne, CEO of Lemann Foundation - Brazil’s largest educational funder – about philanthropy in Brazil during the Covid-19 pandemic and the Lemann Foundation’s pivot to supporting vaccine trials in the country. Including:

Vaccination

How and why did Lemann Foundation get involved in Covid vaccine trials?
How does this fit with the foundations normal focus on education and leadership, and will it result in any shift of focus longer-term?
Is there a danger that ongoing controversies about the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine, and about the distribution of vaccines more broadly will have a knock-on impact on trust in philanthropy?

Education & Leadership

How has the Covid pandemic affected education in Brazil and what has Lemann Foundation done in response?
Will the pandemic have a lasting impact on children’s education in the country and how is the foundation adapting its strategy to reflect this?
A key focus of Lemann Foundation’s funding is developing leadership- what is the theory behind this?
Are their challenges when it comes to assessing the impact of leadership development, where timescales may be very long-term and outcomes may be widely dispersed and difficult to link to interventions?
Are foundations uniquely well-placed to follow these kinds of long-term/upstream strategies?

Philanthropy in Brazil

What does the landscape of philanthropy in Brazil look like? E.g. how much HNWI giving is there? How much mass market giving? What role does corporate philanthropy play? What role do foundations play?
What kind of domestic causes receive philanthropic funding in Brazil? Is there any cross-border giving to other countries?
What is the attitude of the Brazilian government towards civil society in general?
What is the attitude of the Brazilian government towards philanthropy?
What is the attitude of the Brazilian public towards philanthropy?

Philanthropy in Wider Context

What is the core role of philanthropy within society which differentiates it from either state or market provision?
Do recent critiques of philanthropy in the US and elsewhere resonate in the Brazilian context?
Why should we not see philanthropy as the “solution” to intractable social problems in isolation, and how do we get better cross-sector collaboration?

Related links

https://fundacaolemann.org.br/en
Denis’s Alliance Magazine article “Vaccination and collaboration: what we can achieve in a divided world”
Denis’s Alliance magazine article “We must develop talent and leadership to meet the challenges of the post-Covid world”
Interview with Denis about Lemann Foundation’s vaccine trial work in Alliance magazine (£)
CAF’s Global Alliance partner in Brazil, IDIS
CAF’s 2019 Brazil Giving report
Rhod’s article for Stanford Social Innovation Review (with Paula Fabiani from IDIS) “Brazil’s New Endowment Law Could Strengthen Philanthropy and Democracy Around the Globe”

View Details

In this episode we talk to Andy Haldane, Chief Economist of the Bank of England about his long-standing interest in civil society, why he thinks it is so important yet undervalued, and what sort of challenges and opportunities the coming years may bring. We also have some analysis and additional insight from CAF CEO Neil Heslop.

Including:

The economy and charitable giving

If the UK economy is like a “coiled spring”, and once lockdown measures are relaxed we will see a significant bounce-back as people start to spend again, will we also see a corresponding rise in charitable giving?
Are there any concerns that some charities will have lost operational and fundraising capacity as a result of the pandemic, and this might limit their ability to harness any increase in giving?

The Role of Civil Society

What is the core role of the voluntary sector within society which differentiates it from either state or market provision?
As the landscape for doing good appears to be expanding (with the emergence of mutual aid networks, digital social movements, purpose-led businesses, impact investing etc) do we need to make a renewed case for the unique value of charitable organisations? If so, what is that USP?
Should we have any concerns that some of our models for engaging in civil society have become too transactional and thus may not be developing social capital in the way we might want?

Measurement

Many argue that a major challenge facing civil society is that most current systems of measurement do not capture the full value of what charities and other civil society organisations do. What should we be measuring instead?
Is this more about better measurement within civil society, or about changing the measures government uses (e.g. GDP) so that they capture a wider notion of value? Or is it both? What would this entail in practice?
Are there potential risks in putting more emphasis on measurement? E.g. that any measures become targets and thus skew activity (a la Goodhart’s Law); or that the decision about who gets to set measures introduces problematic power dynamics?

Civil Society Narratives & Influence

Andy has previously argued that “despite its crucial role, the social sector goes largely unnoticed in many policy discussions”- is this primarily due to the current lack of appropriate measurement, or are there wider issues when it comes to our understanding and narratives around civil society?
How can we get better understanding and clearer narratives about civil society and its role in the minds of policymakers?
Are there any practical barriers that are currently limiting the ability of civil society to “have a seat at the table” when it comes to policy discussions? What could we do to overcome these?

Infrastructure

The pandemic has highlighted more starkly than ever how vital it is to have strong infrastructure in civil society. Where are the greatest weaknesses or biggest gaps in existing infrastructure that we need to address?
How do we get government to think of social infrastructure alongside physical infrastructure?
What might civil society infrastructure that is fit for the future (rather than based on the structures of the past) look like?

Digital

Evidence suggest that the charity sector is currently lagging behind in its adaptation to digital technology. What are the key barriers preventing charities from harnessing digital? How can we address these?
What more could be done to match the existing supply of skills and capacity around technology in the private sector with the potential demand in civil society. How might this work? What role would the private sector, government and the charity sector need to play in making it happen?
Will the current period of enforced digitisation as a consequence of the COVID pandemic lead to more CSOs engaging with the opportunities and challenges of technology?

Civil Society in the 4th Industrial Revolution

Civil society played a key role in previous periods of rapid social and technological change - by helping people and communities to navigate challenges and opportunities, and by speaking out against any unintended harms of progress. Is civil society in a position to play this vital role in the current Fourth Industrial Revolution? If not, why not? What do we need to do to strengthen civil society capacity in this regard?
What are some of the biggest opportunities that emerging technology could bring for civil society?
Could widespread automation lead to a blurring of the boundaries between our notions of work, volunteering and leisure? Will we need to adjust our understanding and narratives of civil society accordingly?
Should civil society organisations make a case for their value as sources of knowledge and insight about the potential impacts of technology on people and communities, which can help to inform wider policy debates about technological development?

Related Links:

Andy’s speech for the Pro Bono Economics 10th anniversary lecture, “The Third Pillar and the Fourth Industrial Revolution”
FT, “Andy Haldane: Bring charities out of the technological dark ages”
Civil Society, “Charities 'underestimated and overshadowed’ says Bank of England chief economist”
Civil Society “Andy Haldane: Covid-19 has reinforced the values of community purpose and social solidarity”
The Guardian, “Andy Haldane: ‘We have allowed the voluntary sector to wither’”
Andy’s speech for Charity Finance Week 2020, “The Role of Charities in an Era of Anxiety”
Andy’s slides for his 2020 lecture, “The Health, Wealth & Happiness of Nations”
Mark Carney’s
CAF Giving Thought podcast, “Philanthropy, civil society and COVID-19: what now, what next?”
CAF’s “A Covid-19 Philanthropy Stimulus Package” policy paper, 2020
Rhod’s WEF article, “Where are the charities in the great AI debate?”
Rhod’s Alliance magazine piece, “Riding the tiger of technological change”

View Details

In this episode we talk to Nanjira Sambuli about technology, philanthropy and civil society. Nanjira is a researcher, policy analyst and advocacy strategist based in Nairobi, Kenya and in a fascinating and wide-ranging discussion we touched on:

Digital civil society

Is there any meaningful distinction between “civil society” and “digital civil society” now? I.e. is technology no longer something that should be seen as a cause area or a tool, but a cross-cutting factor that affects all CSOs?
What dangers are there for CSOs in assuming that platforms are objective or neutral public spaces? Are these problems likely to be made worse by the enforced pivot to digital for so many orgs as a result of COVID?
How do we link existing work by digital activists etc. to more traditional actors within civil society (e.g. foundations) that might be interested in engaging on technology issues?

Influencing the wider development & implementation of tech

Can CSOs play a meaningful role in ensuring that tech is designed and implemented ethically?
Is this even the right framing? Does the focus on “ethical” tech development beg the question of whether we should even do some of these things at all (and not just “do them ethically”)? Does it divert attention from the need for more traditional mechanisms of legislation and regulation?
Do CSOs from the ‘global south’ face particular challenges when it comes to influencing the development of tech?
What role can foundations and funders can play in helping nonprofits engage with technological change?

Power Dynamics

What challenges do the inherent power imbalances between CSOs and tech companies create?
Do power imbalances within civil society also pose challenges? (E.g. between funders and recipients, or between CSOs in the global north and those in the global south?)
Do we need to make philanthropy more democratic, or accountable to the people and communities it is supposed to serve? If so, how?

Automation and the Fourth Industrial Revolution

Should we take an optimistic or pessimistic view of the impact of technology on civil society?
Should we be worried that CSOs and funders are not getting to grips with either the challenges or opportunities of the fourth industrial revolution?
What role is there for CSOs in addressing the impact of algorithmic bias? Is such bias likely to affect CSOs themselves? If so, how?

The Future Role of Philanthropy in Society

What should we make of criticisms that since philanthropy is to some extent a product of existing structural inequality, it can never truly be part of the solution? Are the donors and funders who recognise these challenges and are genuinely pursuing structural change?
Does the fact that a growing proportion of philanthropic wealth comes from donors who have made their money in tech present challenges when it comes to getting philanthropy to focus on the societal impacts of technology? E.g. Are these tech donors particularly prone to “tech solutionism” or more likely to assume the inevitability of technological development?

Predictions and Foresight in civil society:

The pandemic has highlighted the importance of looking ahead to the future. How can we get more foresight and futures thinking embedded in civil society? What role could foundations and funders play?
What role should civil society and philanthropic funders be playing in developing imagined futures that are informed by the voices of people and communities on the ground around the world?

Related links

Nanjira on Twitter
Nanjira’s recent article for WINGS, “On the Patient Capital Needed from Philanthropy in Tech”.
Video of the WINGS Forum 2021 event on “Philanthropy and the Digital Revolution” that Nanjira and I were both involved in.
“What is Digital Equality?” Interview with Nanjira Sambuli” in European Sting
Rhod’s WEF articles, “Philanthropy is at a Turning Point: Here are 6 Ways it could go” and “Where are Charities in the Great AI Debate?”
Our CAF Giving Thought podcasts with Lucy Bernholz and Cassie Robinson.
Rhod’s 2018 Alliance article “Riding the Tiger of Technological Change”

View Details

In this episode we talk to Nell Edgington, President of non-profit consultancy Social Velocity, about her new book “Reinventing Social Change: Embrace Abundance to Create a Healthier and More Equitable World”. We discuss:

What is the book about, who should read it and what should they do as a result?
Why does a scarcity mind-set affect so many donors and funders? Is this particular to philanthropy?
Why is the “overhead myth” so prevalent, and why is it so problematic?
Are there signs that funders are changing their behaviour during the current crisis? (Moving to unrestricted funding, trust-based grantmaking etc.) Is this likely to lead to longer-term changes?
What misconceptions are there about what makes for a sustainable non-profit, and why do these misunderstandings persist?
How many donors are willing to give away power as well as money? (And will the current crisis put even more focus on approaches such as participatory grantmaking?)
Do we need to redefine what counts as success and failure in philanthropy?
How should we rate philanthropy’s response to the current crisis?
What is the core role of philanthropy within society which differentiates it from either state or market provision?
Why has the idea that non-profits need to be “more business-like” become so widespread? What is wrong with it?
Should we seek to measure impact better? What challenges might this bring in terms of distorting activity or creating power imbalances?
How can donors and funders use philanthropy to challenge or transform the very systems in which wealth has been created?

Related Links

Nell’s book Reinventing Social Change
Nell’s Social Velocity blog
Rhod’s WEF article “Philanthropy is at a Turning Point: Here are 6 Ways It Could Go”
CAF Giving Thought podcast with Phil Buchanan
CAF Giving Thought podcast with Kris Putnam-Walkerly
CAF Giving Thought podcast with Louise Pulford, Josiane Smith & Dame Julia Unwin
CAF Giving Thought blog “Philanthropy and Civil Society after Covid-19: Key questions for the future”

View Details

In this episode we talk to Professor Sir David Cannadine about history, philanthropy and his forthcoming book on the history of the Ford Foundation. Among David’s many public roles he is Dodge Professor of History at Princeton University, President of the British Academy, Chair of Trustees of the National Portrait Gallery and a Trustee of the Wolfson Foundation; and in a wide ranging conversation we discuss:

Involvement in philanthropy:

What insights has involvement with many charities, foundations and public institutions given about the strengths, weaknesses, challenges and opportunities of philanthropy?
What value has historical insight brought to these practical roles?
There is currently a lot of controversy over the commemoration of historical figures, including many philanthropic donors, as well as the sources of historical wealth. Why is it important for philanthropic organisations to engage with potentially problematic elements of their history, and how can they navigate some of the challenges this may bring?

Studying the History of Philanthropy:

Do academic historians think in terms of charity or philanthropy as a standalone thematic area of study, or are they more likely to think of it in the context of a particular period or a wider theme (e.g. welfare)?
If it is thought of as a thematic area in its own right, is it one that has been sufficiently well-studied?
Is the study of the history of philanthropy (even in the UK) too US-focussed; dominated by the great industrial donors of the Gilded Age? Does this lead us to under-appreciate the UK’s own history of philanthropy?
Does “archival inequality” mean that we end up focusing more on institutions and big name donors when we study history (as they tend to leave more records), at the expense of the huge numbers of ‘everyday’ donors whose giving may well go unseen? Does this skew our view of the development of philanthropy?

The History of the Ford Foundation:

Why is it worth studying the role of an institution like the Ford Foundation?
Is the history of the Ford Foundation merely the history of a single institution or does it bring to light wider truths about philanthropy?
The history of the Ford Foundation contains many fascinating characters (e.g. McGeorge Bundy or Paul Ylvisaker). Is the role of these “philanthropoids” (i.e. people who work in foundations, rather than donors) an under-researched area of the history of philanthropy?
The question of the relationship between foundations and social movements (especially in the context of racial justice) is once again a major area of debate. What, if anything, can we learn from the Ford Foundation’s experiences in this area, which have seemingly won both praise and criticism?

Related Links

David’s introduction to Pellew & Goldman (ed) 2018, Dethroning Historical Reputations: Universities, Museums & The Commemoration of Benefactors
Rhod’s blog for the British Academy, “Reshaping Philanthropy for the 21st Century”
CAF Giving Thought blog, “Past Caring: Why Study the History of Philanthropy?”
CAF Giving Thought blog, “Philanthropy and the Sins of the Pas: Statues, Slavery & Tainted Donations”
CAF Giving Thought podcast on Tainted Donations
CAF Giving Thought podcast with Paul Ramsbottom from the Wolfson Foundation
CAF Giving Thought podcast with Ben Soskis
Rhod’s book, “Public Good by Private Means: How Philanthropy Shapes Britain”

View Details

In this episode we look at the relationship between sport, philanthropy and civil society through history and up to the present day. Including:

Sportspeople as donors

Big name examples of sportspeople who give generously: David Beckham, Roger Federer, Cristiano Ronaldo, Serena Williams, Andre Agassi
What drives this high-profile giving? Altruism, or brand-management/PR?
Lance Armstrong and the potential risks of making philanthropy over-reliant on the individual
Does the fact that many sportspeople’s careers end relatively early leave them searching for purpose, and can philanthropy fill that gap?
Can philanthropy be partly motivate by a desire to create positive narrative about wealth accrued through sport?
Is sport one area where people from poor backgrounds can become rich, and what does this mean for their approach to philanthropy?

Sportspeople as campaigners

Are some sportspeople perceived as campaigners simply by virtue of who they are?
When have sportspeople campaigned for change within their sport and when have they taken on wider social issues?
After many notable examples of campaigning by sportspeople in the 1960s and 70s, why did we see a decline in the 1980s and 1990s?
Are we seeing a resurgence in campaigning by sportspeople, with figures like Colin Kapaernick, Megan Rapinoe and Marcus Rashford coming to the fore?
How do sports fans perceive campaigning by sportspeople?

Sports and Fundraising

The long history of sporting charity fundraising events and the role of charity matches in the evolution of professional football
Sportspeople fundraising: from the traditional of testimonial matches to raise money for players’ retirements to sportspeople taking on charity fundraising challenges in other sports
Has the pandemic hit sports fundraising particularly hard, and what does this mean for charities that rely on running events etc?

Sports clubs and civil society

What is the history of the relationship between sports clubs and voluntary associations?
How did the development of sporting associations helped to foster civic engagement skills and ideals of mutual aid?
What is the role of modern sports clubs as corporate donors?
Is owning sports club a form of philanthropy…?
What role do clubs play in acting as community anchors and giving people a sense of shared identity? How can this inform social action?

Related Links

CAF Giving Thought blog on Marcus Rashford, Dolly Parton & Public Perceptions of Philanthropy
CAF Giving Thought blog on mutual aid post-Covid
CAF Giving Thought podcast on mutual aid, charity & philanthropy
CAF Giving Thought podcast with Jon Dean
2013 NY Times article about Lance Armstrong’s philanthropy
HistPhil article “Giving Athletes: Why Sports Philanthropy Deserves Our Attention”
Forbes, “The New Wave of Female Soccer Players as Philanthropists”
BBC article, “Why Wealthy Sport Stars Get Passionate About Charity”
The Common Goal Initiative
The PFA page on player foundations
Kay & Vamplew, “Beyond altruism: British football and charity, 1877–1914”
Vamplew, “’It is pleasing to know that football can be devoted to charitable purposes': British football and charity 1870–1918”

View Details

In this episode we explore mutual aid: what is it, why is there so much interest in it right now and how does it relate to charity and philanthropy? Including:

Defining the distinction between mutual aid and charity
William Beveridge’s thoughts on mutual aid
Peter Kropotkin and mutual aid as a fundamental element of human nature
How does mutual aid relate to notions of solidarity and class identity?
Why has mutual aid historically been so important for marginalised groups such as immigrant communities?
Medieval mutual aid: the guilds
Why did mutual aid become so prominent in the 19th century?
What were the Friendly Societies, why were they important and why are they no longer around?
How does mutual aid fit in with the post-WWII development of the voluntary sector?
Why has mutual aid become so prominent as an idea during the pandemic?
Is this a reflection of the unique circumstances of the pandemic or will it herald any longer-term changes in civil society?
Does the enthusiasm for mutual aid networks demonstrate an unmet appetite for greater participation in addressing social causes?
Is there a dark side to mutual aid? Can solidarity become exclusionary?
Will the growth of mutual aid come at the cost of more traditional charitable giving and volunteering?
Do mutual aid networks build social capital? If so, is it merely “bonding” social capital or also “bridging”?
What is the role of technology in making mutual aid networks possible?
What can we learn from other cultures of giving around the world in which mutual aid is much more prominent?

Related Links

CAF Giving Thought blog, “Charity, Philanthropy & Mutual Aid”
CAF Giving Thought blog “Philanthropy & Civil Society post-Covid: Key questions for the future”
Excerpt from unpublished Giving Thought discussion paper on the science of giving: "Altruism, Evolution and Economics"
CAF research on giving in East Africa
NLGN report Communities vs. Coronavirus: The Rise of Mutual Aid
Guardian long read, “The way we get through this is together': the rise of mutual aid under coronavirus”
New Yorker, “What Mutual Aid Can Do During a Pandemic”
Bloomberg, "A Visual History of Mutual Aid"
Peter Kropotkin’s “Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution”

View Details

In this episode we take a look at the philanthropic giving of MacKenzie Scott (former wife of Jeff Bezos), who has garnered a great deal of attention and praise for the scale, pace and approach of her philanthropy. We ask: what are the key aspects of received wisdom about giving that she is rejecting? And will this lead to wider changes in how big money philanthropy works in future? Including:

-Rejecting the myth of the "self-made billionaire", in favour of recognition that luck, privilege & reliance on wider society are always factors in wealth creation.

-Rejecting the Carnegian idea that "it's harder to give money away intelligently than earn it", and that if you're willing to cede power & give unrestricted grants it's actually eminently possible.

-Rejecting the idea that philanthropy needs to be done slowly, or that it should aim towards perpetuity.

-Rejecting the idea that grants need to be restricted or short-term.

-Rejecting the idea that the donor has all the answers or should set the agenda

-Rejecting the idea that being "strategic" means being top-down or technocratic.

-Rejecting the idea that we need to maintain distance between donor and grantee, or avoid human connection in philanthropy.

-Rejecting the idea that philanthropy by itself can ever be a solution to inequality.

-Rejecting the idea that philanthropy needs to be secretive or opaque.

Related Links:

MacKenzie Scott's July 2020 and December 2020 Medium posts
Vox article on MacKenzie Scott's philanthropy
Marker piece on MacKenzie Scott's background story
Giving Thought podcast with Paul Vallely
Giving Thought podcast on Jeff Bezos, Big Philanthropy and Climate Change
Giving Thought podcast on philanthropy and structure
Giving Thought podcast on philanthropy and rationality
Giving Thought podcast on philanthropic pledges

View Details

In this episode we unpick the complex relationship between philanthropy and democracy. Does philanthropy undermine democracy, or strengthen it? Do we need to make philanthropy itself more democratic? And if so, how?

Including:

Does philanthropy automatically introduce a “plutocratic bias” into public discourse and policy?
Is lack of transparency a particular issue? Does the trend towards using structures like LLCs exacerbate this problem?
Does the ability of individuals at any level of wealth to associate within civil society lead to the dangers of “faction” - with minority groups able to exert an undue negative influence on the democratic system? How does this relate to digitally-enabled conspiracy groups like QAnon?
Does perpetuity in philanthropy result in intergenerational injustice as a result of the “dead hand of the donor”?
What role does philanthropy play in giving voice and power to marginalised groups and thus overcoming “the tyranny of the majority” in a democracy?
How does civil society campaigning and advocacy strengthen democracy?
What role can philanthropy play in the countering disinformation and online extremism that has tarnished the public sphere?
Can philanthropic support for public interest journalism bolster democracy?
Can big money philanthropy be justified on the grounds of its ability to drive innovation & “discovery”?
What role does philanthropy play in enabling a “battle of Ideas”, and is this to the benefit or detriment of democracy?
Is voluntary action a “nursery school of democracy”, as many have argued?
Do we need to democratise philanthropy itself? Does this need to be with respect to donors or recipients, or both? What models are there for doing so?

Related Links:

Giving Thought blog “Does Philanthropy Help or Hinder Democracy?”
Giving Thought discussion paper, “From the Margins to the Mainstream: Philanthropy & Social Movements Furthering Diversity, Equity & Inclusion in Society”
Rhod’s Cass Business School Master’s course lecture on “Principles of Philanthropy Policymaking”
Stanford Social Innovation Review, “How Can Philanthropy Help Rehabilitate US Democracy?”
Rob Reich’s book “Just Giving: Why Philanthropy is Failing Democracy and How it Can Do Better”
Sir Arthur Hobhouse’s book “The Dead Hand”
Giving Thought podcast interviews with Rob Reich, Lucy Bernholz, Sameer Padania, Paul Vallely and Rose Longhurst.
Giving Thought deep-dives on philanthropy and structure; philanthropy, risk and innovation; philanthropy diversity & inclusion; Effective Altruism; philanthropy and the welfare state

View Details

In this episode, at the end of a tumultuous and unpredictable year, we attempt (wisely or not!) to give some predictions for what 2021 might bring...

ECONOMIC DOWNTURN
Impact of Pandemic & Brexit: more demand, charity finances hit, less giving?
Charity closures/mergers?
Reimagining resilience?
Political Division
Ongoing division
Ongoing politicisation of charity/culture wars
Closing space for civil society
Foreign funding restrictions
Nationalism/Globalism/Localism
Will the pandemic make us think for locally, nationally or globally?
Will we see more moves towards devolution?
Philanthrolocalism
The Post-Pandemic workplace
How will changes made through necessity during the pandemic affecting the charity workplace longer term?
Will we see more orgs thinking through the optimum balance offline and online for their work as we become more aware of the strengths and weaknesses of both (e.g. efficiency and ability to reach wider geographic area vs value of offline serendipity, human connection)
Will there continue to be more adoption of remote/mixed working? Will we see orgs change how they think about the purpose of the office? Will this begin a geographic rebalancing of the charity sector workforce?
The Expanding landscape for doing good
Further expansion of space for “doing good” as we see more networked movements, informal P2P giving, mutual aid groups, corporates with purpose etc.
What is the USP of charities in this context?
Rebalancing of corporate/charity relationships as companies lay claim to purpose?
Continuing rise of networked movements
Continuing interest in Mutual Aid?
The participation premium- what can charities learn?
Cross cutting issues
Will the focus on racial justice/equality decline across wider society as we move further away from this year’s momentum around BLM?
Can civil society take a lead in maintaining that momentum?
Will we see the focus on climate renewed?
Will these issues increasingly be seen not as “cause areas”, but as cross-cutting concerns that all CSOs need to take into account?
What does this mean in practice- e.g. re investment approaches, leadership in civil society, composition of the non-profit workforce etc?
Post-pandemic Philanthropic funding trends
Unrestricted/core cost/trust based grantmaking. Will the trend continue?
More collaboration
Push for centralisation
Continuing pushback on impact measurement
More participatory approaches
New areas of funding focus:
social movements
infrastructure
digital
foresight
Journalism
Philanthropy Under Fire
Ongoing critiques:
Tainted donations (expect more examples)
Anti-democratic nature of big philanthropy
Philanthropy part of the problem re inequality
New critiques: Pace, perpetuity (e.g. US DAF legislation)
Philanthropy & conspiracy theories
Mass Giving
What is happening to giving? Long term decline or not? Giving pulled forward in response to the pandemic, or increased overall?
Will we see more big philanthropy focussed on encouraging mass giving?
Disintermediation & Platform Philanthropy
Acceleration of existing growth of online giving due to pandemic will put more emphasis on platforms, leading to:
- more focus on responsibilities of those platforms (Neutrality of platforms/advisers under greater scrutiny
Further moving away from donors giving to orgs towards P2P giving/crowdfunding
Use of payment apps (Venmo/CashApp) to give direct to individuals
More commercial platforms offering giving functionality
Awareness of Platform dependency Risks
CSOs will become more aware that platforms are not digital public space
Examples of platform dependency risks:
Terms of Service changes
Censorship
Engagement of civil society in tech issues
Will the enforced pivot to digital during the pandemic lead to wider awareness of, and engagement in, technology issues?
Growing interest in civil society alternatives to commercial digital infrastructure?
Continuing pushback on tech ethics framing?
AI trends
Further development of giving via conversational AI interfaces (and growing awareness of opportunities & challenges)?
More examples of use of AI for process automation, e.g. in grantmaking?
Immersive Tech
More supporter led fundraising using short-form video content (TikTok-style)?
VAR becomes more popular; more examples of it being used for fundraising?
Further forays into gaming and E-sports for fundraising?
Cryptocurrency & blockchain
Renewal of interest in crypto-philanthropy?
More examples of practical/ ethical challenges (e.g. anonymous donations from problematic sources, volatility of crypto-assets).
Cybersecurity & RegTech challenges
Ransomware/cyber attacks on charities increase (linked to increase in remote working?)

Related Links:

Rhod’s Alliance magazine piece on “The Ethics of Platform Philanthropy”
Rhod’s guest appearance on Zoe Amar and Paul Thomas’s Starts At The Top podcast
CAF report on global responses to supporting philanthropy and civil society during the pandemic
“The Giving Apps: How Venmo and CashApp Upended a Centuries-Old Model” OneZero Medium
“Charity, Philanthropy & Mutual Aid Post-Pandemic”, Giving Thought blog
“Philanthropy and Civil Society After Covid-19” Giving Thought blog
Our Giving Thought podcast with Louise Pulford, Josiane Smith and Dame Julia Unwin
Our Giving Thought podcast with Paul Vallely
Our Giving Thought podcast with Ingrid Srinath
Our Giving Thought podcast with Lucy Bernholz
Lucy Bernholz's 2021 Blueprint philanthropy & civil society industry forecast for Stanford PACS
Our Giving Thought podcast with Regan Ralph
Our Giving Thought podcast on The History of Philanthropy & Civil Society in Times of Crisis
Our Giving Thought podcast on Tainted Donations
“Statues, Slavery & Tainted Donations”, CAF Giving Thought blog
“How Nonprofits Can Utilize Decentralized Finance”, session at the BitGive Foundation’s DePhi conference
CAF submission to DCMS inquiry into Immersive & Addictive Technology
CAF Giving Thought paper “Machine Made Goods: Charities, Philanthropy & Artificial Intelligence”
CAF Giving Thought work on blockchain and cryptocurrency
CAF Giving Thought paper “Networking Opportunities: Rediscovering Decentralisation in Philanthropy & Civil Society”

View Details

In this episode we talk to Iqbal Nasim, CEO of the National Zakat Foundation, about Islamic giving and using technology to transform the way Zakat works. Including:

What is Zakat and how does it fit within Islamic teaching?
What does Islamic teaching say about how Zakat is to be given? (i.e. are there specific causes, should it be anonymous etc?)
Is Zakat the primary focus of giving for most Muslims, or do many give in other ways too?
What is Sadaqa, and how does it relate to Zakat?
Does most Zakat from Muslims in the UK go to international causes? Why, then, did NZF decide to focus on distributing Zakat in the UK?
How much Zakat goes to individuals and how much to organisations (charities, NGOs etc?) How does this reflect Islamic teaching?
How is Zakat viewed by givers and recipients- is it seen as a gift made through charity or a payment made as a requirement of justice?
Is there any stigma to being a recipient of Zakat?
What responsibilities are there as a digital platform towards those giving and receiving zakat? Should you aim to be a neutral intermediary, or do you have to take a more active role in informing donors, assessing recipients etc?
Disintermediation through technology brings benefits in terms of allowing more direct connection between giver and receiver, but it may also bring challenges- e.g. in individual crowdfunding there are growing concerns we are seeing biases and old-fashioned distinctions between the “deserving” and “undeserving” poor emerge. Are there similar challenges when it comes to zakat? How can they be mitigated?
Does the focus on giving to individuals make it harder to address issues at a more systemic level? (i.e. because you can’t fund campaigning or advocacy for larger-scale change)
There is a lot of interest in the wider world of philanthropy (particularly in an international development context) in tapping into Zakat as a potential new source of funding for existing causes, or aligning it with the SDGs etc. Is this feasible, or does it misunderstand what Zakat is and the motivations behind it?

Related Links:

The National Zakat Foundation
Islamic Relief UK’s guide to giving in Islam
Rhod’s Alliance magazine blog on “The Ethics of Platform Philanthropy”

View Details

In this episode we talk to Asha Curran, CEO of Giving Tuesday - ahead of this year’s event on Tuesday 2nd December -about distributed leadership, movement building and the importance of mass giving. Including:

Decentralisation & Social Movements

What is the key appeal of networked movements? Do people believe they are more effective (particularly when it comes to huge global challenges that might require radical solutions, like the climate crisis and racial inequality/injustice) or is it more about their ability to democratize participation and offer more active modes of engagement?
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?

Distributed leadership, new power and leaderlessness

GT is a combination of elements with formal structure and many informal elements - how do these different parts of the movement interact?
How much centralised input is there in shaping/setting parameters for the formal elements?
Are there necessary limits on the freedom of informal elements? (E.g. parameters/red lines on what can be associated with GT brand, even informally) How are these set and policed?
How do you manage power dynamics within a decentralised movement to prevent the emergence of hidden cliques/elites, and to ensure that everyone’s voice can be heard equally?

Mass giving

Can mass giving movements like GT help to counter concerns about the potentially anti-democratic impact of big money philanthropy?
As GT has developed into a global movement, how has this informed your understanding of what we should think of as “giving”?
Can GT help us to develop a better global perspective & understand differences and similarities between cultures of giving around the world?
Do different countries around the world place more emphasis on non-financial giving in their approaches to GT? Has this had an impact on thinking in the US?
What is the idea behind the Starling Collective? How does this fit with the wider work of Giving Tuesday?

Platforms, philanthropy & civil society

Is there an important role for movements like GT in ensuring that as more giving shifts to the online world, we have platforms and infrastructure that is driven by civil society values rather than ceding control of online giving to commercial platforms (who may wish to offer giving functionality as an add-on for users)?
What responsibilities do giving platforms have towards those giving and receiving through them? Are they ever neutral intermediaries, or do they need to accept a more active role in informing donors, assessing recipients etc?

Data

What is the Giving Tuesday Data Collaborative? How did it come about?
What have you learned about giving trends in the US (and elsewhere) so far through the GTDC?
Can we use data to drive more giving/better giving? If so, how?

Related Links:

Giving Tuesday
The Giving Tuesday Data Commons
Giving Tuesday UK
The Starling Collective
Asha’s interview with Stanford’s Digital Impact blog and podcast
Our Giving Thought podcast interview with Lucy Bernholz on digital civil society
Our Giving Thought podcast interview with Regan Ralph on funding social movements
Our Giving Thought podcast on philanthropy and structure
Rhod’s paper “Networking Opportunities: Rediscovering Decentralisation in Philanthropy & Civil Society?”

View Details

In this episode we talk to Paul Vallely, author of Philanthropy: From Aristotle to Zuckerberg about his new book and what we can learn from history that can help inform our understanding of modern philanthropy and our thinking about where it should go in the future. Including:

What value does a historical perspective bring?
Would people working in philanthropy/civil society would benefit from more historical perspective?
What is the fundamental distinction between the Greco-Roman tradition of philanthropy and that which emerged from the Abrahamic religions, and why it is still important in understanding philanthropy today?
What does history tell us about the relationship between charity and justice: i.e. do they exist in opposition, or is charity a means of delivering justice? How is this debate is reflected in the history of philanthropy, and why does it remain relevant today?
How have views on the nature of poverty shaped philanthropy? I.e. Is poverty seen as a moral failing on the part of the individual, or a structural flaw in society? Are poverty & inequality “problems to be solved” or merely part of the natural order that accords some wealth and some poverty- and what does this mean for the role of charity? As we see controversy once again about “Victorian attitudes” towards the “deserving and undeserving poor”, are these issues that we need to grapple with in thinking about philanthropy?
What can we learn from history about the question of “tainted donations”, and the extent to which the way in which wealth has been created determines the legitimacy of trying to do good through giving it away?
What is the distinction the book draws between “strategic” & “reciprocal” philanthropy?
It is clearly almost impossible to understand the history of philanthropy without understanding some theology, as religion and charity were inextricably entwined for a long time. But what role does religion play in driving and shaping modern philanthropy?
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?
What is the core role of philanthropy within society which differentiates it from either state or market provision?
The book speaks approvingly of celebrity activists (making the point that they are in some ways following the template set by the original “philanthropist” John Howard). What role can this kind of philanthropy play? Why is it often viewed somewhat cynically?

Related Links

Philanthropy: From Aristotle to Zuckerberg website
Guardian extract from Paul’s book, “How Philanthropy Benefits the Super-Rich”
Paul’s blog for NPC “Why history should matter to philanthropists and philanthropy professionals”
Paul on BBC Radio Three’s Free Thinking.
Paul’s Jewish Chronicle piece, “Tzedakah: a concept that changed the world”
Rhod’s book, Public Good by Private Means (and free PDF version)
Our CAF Giving Thought podcast with Beth Breeze
Our CAF Giving Thought podcast with Ben Soskis
Our CAF Giving Thought podcast with Andrew Rudd
Rhod’s World Economic Forum article, “Philanthropy is at a turning point. Here are 6 ways it could go”

View Details

In this bonus DVD extra mini-episode, Louise Pulford - CEO of the Social Innovation Exchange (SIX) - turns the table on our host, Rhod Davies, and asks him for his thoughts on key trends affecting philanthropy now and post-pandemic.

View Details

In this episode, we talk to Louise Pulford, Josiane Smith and Dame Julia Unwin about the findings from a new global horizon scan by the Social Innovation Exchange (SIX), looking at the challenges and opportunities facing philanthropy post-Covid. In a wide-ranging conversation we discussed:

How many trends in philanthropic funding we are seeing during the pandemic will lead to longer-term changes? How can we be more intentional about pursuing those we want to see?
How has the pandemic accelerated or altered existing debates about philanthropy?
What can we learn from historical examples of how philanthropy has responded to crises? Or from places in the world where crisis response is part of the normal role for philanthropy?
To what extent is it true that “what we did before a crisis is who we are in a crisis”? i.e. is the response of different funders a reflection of their existing ethos and practice, or have some genuinely changed what they do?
How do funders balance the immediate short-term demands of a crisis with their role in supporting issues over the longer-term?
Has the pandemic affected relationships between philanthropic funders and government around the world? If so, for better or worse?
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?
What is the core role of philanthropy within society which differentiates it from either state or market provision?
What should we 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 some donors and funders recognise the challenges and are genuinely pursuing structural change?
Should cross-cutting issues such as the climate crisis or racial justice not be seen as “causes”, but as factors that all funders need to take into account in their work?
How can we ensure funders and CSOs are in a better position to address future crises?

Related Links

Julia’s SIX provocation piece “Living in turbulent times and re-centring the conversation”
“Philanthropy, Power and New Challenges”, Insights from a global call between SIX and WINGS
“What is the power of networks in philanthropy? Reflections from SIX”
SIX Funders Node
Rhod’s article for World Economic Forum, “Philanthropy is at a turning point. Here are 6 ways it could go”,
Our CAF Giving Thought podcast series on “Covid-19: Voices from Civil Society”
CAF Giving Thought blog “Philanthropy and Civil Society after Covid-19: Key questions for the future”
Our previous CAF Giving Thought podcast with Julia Unwin
The CAF Giving Thought microsite

View Details

In this episode we talk to Ingrid Srinath, Director of the Centre for Social Impact & Philanthropy at Ashoka University about philanthropy and civil society in India and the impact of new restrictions have come in as part of the Foreign Contributions Regulation Act 2020 (FCRA 2020). (Disclaimer: the views expressed are Ingrid’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of her employer, or of CAF).

We discussed:

The FCRA 2020

What is the FCRA 2020?
Why are CSOs in India concerned about the impact it will have?
How much existing funding will be affected by the new rules?
What is the rationale from government? Does this stand up to scrutiny?
Has the Covid-19 pandemic played any role in precipitating this move on the part of the Indian government?
What is the rationale for prohibiting onward granting? Why is this a particular cause for concern?
Will this particularly harm smaller organisations and less poplar causes?
As part of the new FCRA the Indian government has stipulated that no more than 20% of a foreign contribution can be spent on “administrative expenses”. How are these defined? What is the rationale for this?
Will this new limitation on administrative expenses make it harder to invest in infrastructure, digital capabilities, governance etc.?
The new law also requires CSOs in receipt of FCRA funds to do so in a dedicated bank account at a New Delhi branch of the State Bank of India- what is the rationale for this?

The wider context for Civil Society & Philanthropy in India

What is the overall makeup of the Indian civil society sector, in terms of formalised vs informal orgs, large vs small, different cause areas etc.?
What is the attitude of the Indian government towards civil society in general? What is the attitude towards CSO advocacy and campaigning?
How has the Covid pandemic affected Indian civil society?
What is the infrastructure for civil society in India like? Are there gaps, and if so where?
What is the history and current context for philanthropy in India? E.g. how much HNWI giving is there? How much mass market giving? What role does corporate philanthropy play? What role do foundations play?
What kind of domestic causes receive philanthropic funding in India?
What is the attitude of the Indian government towards philanthropy?
What is the attitude of the Indian public towards philanthropy?
What kind of philanthropic responses to the covid-19 crisis have we seen in India?
Do recent critiques of philanthropy in the US and elsewhere resonate in the Indian context? (E.g. re that philanthropy exacerbates inequality, that it is anti-democratic, that some source of wealth are “tainted” etc.).

Related links:

Ingrid’s blog on “How the Proposed FCRA Amendments Hurt India’s Development and Democracy”
Times of India interview with Ingrid, “FCRA Law could dry up money for less popular causes, shut smaller NGOs down”
Ingrid’s article with Smarinita Shetty for Alliance Magazine, “Bleak prognosis for Indian civil society following new foreign funding bill”
Ingrid on Twitter
CAF India briefing on FCRA 2020
CAF America’s recent webinar on “India’s Amended Foreign Contribution Regulations: What You Need to Know”
CAF’s 2019 India Giving report
CAF’s 2017 paper Do As I Say, Not As I Do: UK Policy & The Global Closing Space for Civil Society
The Council on Foundations (US) latest guidance on FCRA and funding in India for US organisations

View Details

In this episode we talk to Lucy Bernholz, Director of the Digital Civil Society Lab at Stanford University’s Center on Philanthropy & Civil Society (Stanford PACS) about how technology is reshaping civil society and the challenges and opportunities this will bring. Including:

Digital civil society

Is there any meaningful distinction between “civil society” and “digital civil society” now?
Has the current period of enforced digitisation as a consequence of the COVID pandemic led to more CSOs engaging with tech and tech issues?
What dangers are there for CSOs in assuming that platforms are objective or neutral public spaces? Are these problems likely to be exacerbated by the enforced pivot to digital for so many orgs as a result of COVID?
Are funders (e.g. foundations) getting to grips with the challenges and opportunities of the fourth industrial revolution?

Influencing the wider development & implementation of tech

Can nonprofits play a meaningful role in ensuring that tech is designed and implemented ethically?
Does the focus on “ethical” approaches to tech risk diverting attention from the need for more traditional mechanisms of legislation and regulation?
Are the inherent power imbalances between CSOs and tech companies too great for the latter to influence the former, or can asymmetric methods be used to overcome them?
What role can foundations and funders play in helping nonprofits engage with technological change?

Trust & Accountability

DO CSOs face new challenges to their authenticity in a digital world (deepfakes, astroturfing etc)?
Will perverse incentives within the online attention economy present a particular challenge for CSOs when it comes to maintaining trust?
Do we need to make philanthropy more democratic, or accountable to the people and communities it is supposed to serve? If so, how?

Social movements & new forms of organising

If digital tools enable people to form groups easily and organise in different ways, does this make traditional nonprofits less relevant as people look to networked models of social change?
What is the major appeal of networked movements? Do people believe they are more effective, or is it more about their ability to democratize participation and offer more active modes of engagement?
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?
Do the affordances of technology genuinely overcome the known weaknesses of structureless, leaderless or non-hierarchical organisational models, or will we simply end up rediscovering some of these weaknesses in the digital context?

Data & Automation

Could CSOs take a lead on modelling ethical approaches to the collection, storage and usage of data? Or is this too far out of their hands?
Is AI is a big deal for nonprofits? If so, why?
As the internet shifts from being something we access via specific interfaces to a universal digital substrate all around us (via the growth of IoT, edge computing etc), what new opportunities and challenges might this create for CSOs?

Predictions and Foresight in civil society:

What role can historical insight play in shaping our thinking about the future of civil society?
How can we get more foresight and futures thinking embedded in civil society? What role could foundations and funders play?
Should CSOs be seen as a valuable source of potential knowledge and insight to guide wider attempts by governments and others to identify future trends and scenarios?

Related Content:

Stanford Digital Civil Society Lab
The Digital Impact blog
Stanford PACS
Lucy’s own blog, “Philanthropy 2173”
Lucy’s recent 5-part Chronicle of Philanthropy series on “Reimagining Philanthropy”
Blueprint (Lucy’s series of annual predictions for civil society)
Rhodri’s Alliance piece on “The Ethics of Platform Philanthropy”
CAF Giving Thought’s work on “the future of doing good”
CAF Giving Thought discussion paper “Networking Opportunities? Rediscovering decentralisation in philanthropy & civil society”
Rhodri’s piece for Digital Impact, “When Nobody Knows You’re a Dog: Tech, Civil Society, and the Fight for Authenticity”

View Details

In this episode we talk to Regan Ralph, President and CEO of the Fund for Global Human Rights, about her experience of funding right-based movements around the world and what she has learned about the challenges and opportunities of funding social movements through philanthropy. Including:

What does philanthropic funding for social movements look like? i.e. what are the various elements of an overall movement that can be funded- e.g. grassroots organising/movement building, policy work, advocacy, legal challenges etc?
How can a funder determine where best to allocate their resources in order to support a movement most effectively?
Are traditional nonprofits and funders too often a reflection of existing systems and power structures to push for the kind of radical solutions we need to deal with huge global challenges like the climate crisis and racial inequality/injustice? Is that why more people seem to be looking towards social movements?
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 big a risk is there that foundations and other funders co-opt social movements by deliberately introducing grant stipulations etc aimed to direct the focus of the movement away from controversial areas or soften their tactics?
Is there also a danger that even well-intentioned funders inadvertently skew the direction of movements by virtue of the choices they make about what to fund and what not to fund? How can we avoid this risk?
Does a desire for “measurable impact” from funders limit their willingness to fund social change movements, because the success of their work may not be easy to attribute or quantify?
Can funding from donors/foundations confer legitimacy on movements as well as financial resources? Is this useful for the movements?
Can funders play an important role by taking a “helicopter view” and helping to share knowledge and insight between social movements that might otherwise never come into contact? How do they ensure they do this within becoming directive?
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?
There is a lot of focus in global philanthropy and civil society at the moment on “shifting power”- from funders to recipients, from the global north to the global south etc. Why is this so important, and how do you ensure through your work that power is transferred at the same time as financial resources?
Are there limits to empowering the grassroots? I.e. are there situations in which it is better for expert funders and organisations to set aims and design programs to deliver outcomes that are in the best interests of communities? Or is it always better to empower people to seek their own solutions, even when those solutions might be less “effective”?
We are seeing particular focus right now on the idea of “leaderless” movements, with decentralised or non-hierarchical structures (e.g. XR, #MeToo etc). Are there particular challenges for traditional funders in engaging with such movements?

Related Links:

The Fund for Global Human Rights
Regan’s Alliance article “Dismantling inequality must be part of the pandemic response”
Regan’s piece for Thomson Reuters Foundation News, “Community activists and action are key to the COVID-19 response”
Giving Thought podcast on “Philanthropy, Civil Rights & Movement Capture” with Megan Ming Francis
Giving Thought podcast on Social Change philanthropy with Julie Broome from Ariadne Network
Giving Thought podcast on “Diversity, Equity & Inclusion”
Rhodri’s Alliance article “The history of philanthropy & social movements for diversity, equity and inclusion”
CAF Giving Thought discussion paper, ‘From the Margins to the Mainstream: Philanthropy and social movements for diversity, equity & inclusion in society”
Rhodri’s paper, “Networking Opportunities: rediscovering decentralisation in philanthropy?”

View Details

In this episode we chat to Rob Cope, Director of Remember A Charity, about charitable legacy gifts and legacy fundraising: what they are, what role they play in the overall charity landscape and how they have changed during the COVID pandemic. Including

How big a part of the landscape for charitable giving in the UK are legacies? How has this changed over time?
If legacies have been a growth area in recent years (as many figures suggest), why is this? Is there greater awareness, more fundraising, or are people simply more likely to leave wills?
What particular role do legacies play in the overall funding mix for charities? (i.e. what is their unique value?)
Why do people leave legacies? How to fundraisers tap into some of the complex psychological drivers?
How do legacy gifts relate to other forms of giving at an individual level? (i.e. do most legacy gifts come from people who already give in other ways, or do they come instead of other gifts?)
Does discomfort when it comes to talking about death present an ongoing barrier to legacy fundraising?
Does uncertainty about the legal status of legacy gifts (and a number of high-profile cases of legal challenge) present a risk?
How has the COVID crisis affect the charitable legacy market?
Has increases awareness of mortality resulted in more will-making (and consequently more legacy gifts?)
Have there been issues with existing legacy gifts during the crisis? (Either in terms of sustaining them, or finalising them in some cases).
What effect has the impact of the pandemic on normal end-of-life processes such as funerals had on legacy giving? (E.g. has it resulted in more in-memory gifts from those who have been unable to commemorate the loss of loved ones properly?)
How has new legacy fundraising been affected by lockdown measures and restrictions on physical interaction?
Have fundraisers had to be more sensitive to the challenges of discussing legacy gifts at a time when many older people have felt particularly nervous or afraid as a result of the pandemic?
What impact might the short and medium term economic downturn caused by the pandemic have on the legacy market?

Related Links:

Remember A Charity’s website
Remember A Charity on Twitter
Civil Society article: The Wombles to feature in this year’s Remember A Charity Week campaign
Our CAF Giving Thought podcast episode “Philanthropy, Death & Taxes Part 1”
CAF Giving Thought blog, “Millions Now Giving Will Never Die: Life Extension, Whole-Brain Emulation and Philanthropy”

View Details

In this episode - the fourth in our mini-series on “European philanthropy during and after COVID” – we speak to Carola Carazzone, Secretary General of Assifero, about philanthropy in Italy and beyond. Including

What is the history and current context for philanthropy in Italy?
How does this differ from the cultures, histories and legal/policy environments for philanthropy in other places across Europe?
Are there commonalties? I.e. is it meaningful to talk about “European philanthropy”?
What is the balance between local, regional, national and international approaches in Italian philanthropic funding?
What is the attitude of the Italian government towards philanthropy?
What kind of philanthropic responses to the covid-19 crisis have we seen in Italy? What challenges have they faced?
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 and the need to coordinate responses effectively increased awareness of the value of infrastructure?
What elements of infrastructure are required for a healthy culture of philanthropy and a vibrant civil society?
Do we need to make a renewed case for the value of infrastructure and the need to ensure it is properly funded?

Related Links:

Assifero
The data mapping of the philanthropic response to COVID-19 I Italy (“Le risposte della Filantropia al COVID-19”
Carola’s 2020 Alliance article “Flexibility and freedom of foundation funding can boost third sector during Coronavirus crisis”
Carola’s 2018 Alliance article “Debunking two myths to avoid agony in Italian civil society”
Carola’s 2020 piece for WINGS “Questions are the answer”. This is our time to shape the world we want- everyone can be a change maker.’
Our recent CAF paper on European policy responses to COVID-19

View Details

In this episode - the third in our mini-series on “European philanthropy during and after COVID” – we talk to Julie Broome, Director of the Ariadne network about philanthropic funding for social change and rights issues now and in the future. Including:

What is social change funding? What are its particular features?
Is it limited to a niche subset of funders, or something that all can do to some extent?
What is the history and current landscape for social change and rights-focussed philanthropy across Europe?
How do the cultures, histories and legal/policy environments for philanthropy vary across Europe? How does this affect the work of social change funders?
What kind of responses have we seen from social change funders across Europe to the challenges posed by covid-19?
Has Covid-19 (and government responses to it) exacerbated existing rights issues?
Will we see new rights issues emerge as the political imperatives of the pandemic lead to governments either accidentally or deliberating introducing new measures (e.g. on data collection and usage) that could further close the space for civil society in the future?
What is the role of infrastructure and support organisations in helping civil society organisations and funders navigate and adapt to a rapidly-changing environment?
Has the Covid-19 pandemic and the need to coordinate responses effectively increased awareness of the value of infrastructure?
What elements of infrastructure are required for a healthy culture of philanthropy and a vibrant civil society?
Do we need to make a renewed case for the value of infrastructure and the need to ensure it is properly funded?
Major challenges like the climate crisis, global inequality or the impact of technological development raise 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. How do social change and rights funders approach this thorny problem?
We are seeing particular focus right now on the idea of social change movements, many of which have decentralised or non-hierarchical governance models (e.g. XR, #MeToo etc). Are there challenges for traditional funders in engaging with such movements? How can social change funders with experience in this area help others to navigate the challenges?
Why is core-cost funding so important when supporting social change movements?

Related Links:

Ariadne
Ariadne 2020 Forecast
Rhod’s Alliance article on “The history of philanthropy & social movements for diversity, equity and inclusion”
Our Giving Thought discussion paper From the Margins to the Mainstream: Philanthropy and social movements for diversity, equity & inclusion in society
Our recent CAF paper on European policy responses to COVID-19

View Details

In this episode - the second in our mini-series on “European philanthropy during and after COVID” – we talk to James Magowan from The European Community Foundation Initiative about the unique role of Community Foundations (CF) in the pandemic response and beyond. Including

What is ECFI and what does it do?
What is the history and current landscape for CFs across Europe?
How do the cultures, histories and legal/policy environments for philanthropy vary across Europe? How does this affect the make-up of CFs in different places?
Does this present any challenges in terms of positioning CFs as a coherent “movement”?
Are there commonalties? I.e. is it meaningful to talk about “European philanthropy”?
What kind of philanthropic responses have we seen across Europe to the challenges posed by covid-19? What role have CFs played?
Has the focus on CFs during the pandemic been too transactional (i.e. focused on their role as distributors of funding), and does this risk undermining their other roles as community anchors and advocates?
What is the role of infrastructure bodies in helping civil society organisations and funders navigate and adapt to a rapidly-changing environment?
What elements of infrastructure are required for a healthy culture of philanthropy and a vibrant civil society?
Should CFs be considered as “infrastructure”?
Has the Covid-19 pandemic and the need to coordinate responses effectively increased awareness of the value of infrastructure?
Do we need to make a renewed case for the value of infrastructure and the need to ensure it is properly funded?

Related Links:

The European Community Foundation Initiative (ECFI)
UK Community Foundations (UKCF)
The Association of Charitable Foundations (ACF)
CAF Giving Thought podcast with Fozia Irfan, CEO of Community Foundation for Bedfordshire & Luton
CAF Giving Thought podcast with Rob Williamson, Community Foundation for Tyne & Wear and Northumberland
Our recent CAF paper on European policy responses to COVID-19
Rhod’s blog, “Awkward Places: Austerity, democracy and the challenges of civic philanthropy”

View Details

This episode kicks off a mini-series on European philanthropy during and after COVID-19 pandemic, exploring how philanthropic funders have responded to the crisis and how it might affect philanthropy longer term. Our first conversation is with Max von Abendroth, Director of DAFNE, and Rosa Gallego, Director of International Relations at the Spanish Association of Foundations. In a wide-ranging chat we covered many fascinating topics including:

The rich and varied history of philanthropy across Europe and how this has shaped the cultures of philanthropy and the legal and regulatory environments we see today.
Are there more similarities or differences between philanthropy in different parts of Europe? To what extent does it make sense to talk about “European philanthropy”?
How much philanthropy takes place at a local, national or international level in Europe?
What has the philanthropic response across Europe to the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic been like?
What particular role have community foundations played?
What are funders doing to address the stark inequalities that have been laid bare by the pandemic?
Are funders and CSOs collaborating more as a result of the crisis? How can we build on this longer term?
Will the short-term shift towards funding core costs result in longer-term changes?
How can philanthropic funders make better use of data?
Are new laws and restrictions imposed by governments to address the public health challenges of the pandemic resulting in a furthering shrinking of civic space in some countries? How concerned should we be?
Has the crisis highlighted the importance of philanthropic infrastructure?
What are the elements of a healthy ecosystem of philanthropy infrastructure?
Should philanthropy support organisations merely reflect the views and interests of their members, or can they play a leadership role and provide constructive challenge?
How do we ensure that infrastructure is sustainable over the longer term?

Related Links:

DAFNE
Spanish Association of Foundations
PEX
ACF Stronger Foundations project
WINGS paper on Perspectives on Arab and Global Philanthropy: Roles and Approaches
WINGS paper on “What Makes a Strong Ecosystem of Support for Philanthropy?”
McKinsey Report on “Reimagining European Philanthropy”
Candid
Giving Thought blog on Philanthropy and Civil Society after Covid-19: Key questions for the future
Our CAF Giving Thought podcast Philanthropy, civil society and covid-19: what now, what next?
Our Giving Thought podcast series on “COVID-19: Voices from Civil Society”

View Details

In this episode we talk to Matthew Bowcock and Cath Dovey, founders of the Beacon Collaborative, about developing the UK’s culture of philanthropy both pre- and post-Covid. Including

What is the Beacon Collaborative?
What was the UK culture of philanthropy like pre-Covid?
How does this perhaps differ from the culture in other countries (e.g. the US?)
What do we know about the barriers that prevent more wealthy people giving?
What has the response from wealthy philanthropists to the Covid-19 crisis been like?
How have attitudes to collaboration among philanthropists and funders changed as a result of the current context?
How do we balance the emphasis on centralisation/coordination of philanthropy necessitated by the crisis with the choice and freedom that is likely to motivate donors over the longer term?
Why are many donors moving from restricted to unrestricted funding right now? Is this going to herald a longer-term shift?
Should we expect anything in philanthropy to change fundamentally as a result of what we are going through? If so, what?
Are we likely to see a more positive or more negative narrative about philanthropy post-Covid?

Related Links

The Beacon Collaborative website
The Beacon Collaborative Manifesto
CAF's Coronavirus Hub
Our CAF Giving Thought podcast interview series on Covid-19: Voices from Civil Society
Our CAF Giving Thought podcast on Questioning the philanthropic response to Covid-19, with Kris Putnam-Walkerly
Our CAF Giving Thought podcast Philanthropy, civil society and covid-19: what now, what next?
Rhod’s blog on Philanthropy and Civil Society after Covid-19: Key questions for the future

View Details

In this episode we talk to Simon Burton, founder and CEO of the Charity Film Awards, about how charities can use film to portray and amplify their work. Including:

-What is the aim of the Charity Film Awards and how did it come about?

-In what interesting ways have charity entrants to the competition been using video?

-Why is storytelling important for charities?

-Positive vs negative representations of charities and the people they serve: do upbeat messages work? Or are tragic images still the norm?

-Is it possible for organisations with limited resources to use video effectively as a tool?

-Will we see more charities engaging with video as a result of the enforced digital transformation brought about by Covid-19?

-Have any charities used short-form video and platforms like TikTok effectively?

-Are any charities using virtual and augmented reality or 360 video?

-How did the CFA turn itself into a virtual event in such a short space of time?

-Will we see virtual events becoming more the norm after the coronavirus situation is over?

-Are charities well-represented in mainstream screen media?

-Are there any good TV programmes, films about charities or philanthropy? If not, why not?

Related Links:

The University of Liverpool’s Charity Law & Policy Unit
John’s blog for The Conversation, 'Sackler donations: why museums and galleries can be stuck with gifts – even if they don’t want them'
John’s blog for The Conversation, 'Supreme Court Legacy Ruling: Leaving A Gift To Charity Can Be Egoistic As well As Altruistic'
John’s Third Sector article 'Purely Academic: The Rare, Gruesome Nature Of Failed Charitable Gifts By Will'
Picton, A. J. (2017). Egoism and the Return of Charitable Gifts. In R. Hickey, & H. Conway (Eds.), Modern Studies in Property Law (Vol. 9, pp. 175-194). Oxford: Hart.
CAF Giving Thought podcast on “Tainted donations”
CAF Giving Thought podcast on “Philanthropy, Death and Taxes”
CAF Giving Thought blog, “When should charities say no to donations?”

View Details

In episode 64, we explore the philanthropic response to the ongoing bushfires in Australia and what it highlights about philanthropy issues and trends. We also give take a look at some of the other top philanthropy stories in the news.

The Aussie Bushfires:

How does the philanthropic response to the Aussie bushfires compare to the Notre Dame Cathedral fire last year?
Does it tell us anything about the differences between our response to man-made vs natural disasters, or disasters affecting man-made heritage vs natural heritage?
Does the fact that the Aussie bushfires are highly dispersed make a difference?
Are environmental issues less likely to be perceived as “elite”, and thus philanthropy focused on them less likely to be criticised as “self-interested”?
Is the response to the bushfires partly about people feeling a sense of agency over the issue of climate change, which often seems so huge that it can cause donation paralysis?
Does the fact that animals as well as humans have been affected make a difference?
Has the ongoing nature of the fires helped to make the relief effort itself a focus of philanthropy?
What questions does the voluntary nature of the firefighting services some raise about state responsibility vs that of philanthropy?
Has the response of elite philanthropists been slower than in the Notre Dame case? If so, why?
Could the fact that many Aussie philanthropists have made their money in extractive industries play a part in making them reticent to engage with a problem that is clearly being linked to climate change?
Celeste Barber’s Facebook fundraiser: what does her runaway success tell us about the distributed nature of fundraising in the future? What challenges does it highlight?
Other fundraising efforts: “The Nude Philanthropist” and altruistic drug dealers…

In other news:

MIT releases damning report into Jeffrey Epstein links- not good for the institution
Is there a “war on philanthropy”? Karl Zinnsmeister’s op ed for the Wall Street Journal, and the ongoing debate in the US.
Columbia Journalism Review article on challenges with philanthropic funding skewing the priorities of non-profit news orgs.
Harry & Meghan: stepping away from royal duty to focus on other things, in which philanthropy likely to play large role. Does this raise potentially interesting questions about the nature of inherited vs created wealth, ownership/stewardship, and the role of philanthropy vs being a public figure.

Related links

Aussie Bushfires

Our Giving Thought podcast on “Notre Dame: Lessons for Philanthropy”
Article in The Australian “Bushfire recovery: Donor war as Andrew and Nicola Forrest donate $70m”
Former podcast guest Krystian Seibert’s Conversation Au piece on “How to Give to Bushfire Relief”
Zagefka et al (2010) “Donating to disaster victims: Responses to natural and humanly caused events”, European Journal of Social Psychology, Volume 41, Issue 3, April 2011, 353-363
ABC News, “Why Celeste Barber's bushfire fundraiser is more complicated than it seems”
ABC News, “Gina Rinehart hits back at Celeste Barber’s criticism over bushfires”
Vox, “Nude photos raised over $1 million for the Australia fires”
NZ Herald “Drug dealer promises to donate 10 per cent of cocaine earnings to Aussie bush fire appeal”
CAF World Giving Index: 10 Year Trends

In other News:

MIT’s report into links with Jeffrey Epstein (and check out our Giving Thought podcast on Tainted Donations)
Karl Zinnsmeister’s WSJ op ed ($),a critical response in Non-Profit Quarterly (And for more context, my piece for HistPhil on the history of state vs voluntary provision)
Columbia Journalism Review piece on foundation funding and non-profit journalism (and check out our Giving Thought podcast from 2019 with Sameer Padania)

View Details

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

View Details

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

View Details

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

View Details

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”

View Details

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

View Details

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

View Details

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”

View Details

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”

View Details

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

View Details

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”

View Details

In episode 53, we look at structure and philanthropy. Exploring how philanthropy and civil society has become structured over time, what the drivers for this are, and what new possibilities the future may hold. Including:

The reformation and the dismantling of medieval catholic infrastructure for giving
Urbanisation, poverty and associated philanthropy
The charitable/philanthropic tradition vs the mutual/cooperative tradition in the UK
Concerns about 'faction' and voluntary association in the US
Benefits of structure: coordination, economies of scale, setting and maintaining strategy, separating the individual from their role, making rules explicit
Structure and power: formalisation as a form of social control?
Endowed structures: foundations, trusts and waqfs
Nonprofit and charity structures in the UK and US
Donor Advised Funds and Charitable Remainder Trusts
Non-traditional structures: LLCs, B Corps etc.
Disintermediating giving: direct cash transfers and crowdfunding
Network social movements and the "Tyranny of Structurelessness

Related Links:

-My book, Public Good by Private Means: How philanthropy shapes Britain

-Dobkin Hall, P. (1999) “Resolving the Dilemmas of Democratic Governance: The Historical Development of Trusteeship in America, 1636-1996” in Condliffe Lagemann (ed) Philanthropic Foundations: New Scholarship, New Possibilities

-Morris, R.J. (1990) “Clubs, Societies & Associations” in Thompson (ed) The Cambridge Social History of Britain vol 3.

-Morris, R.J. (1983) “Voluntary Societies and British Urban Elites, 1780-1850: An Analysis”, The Historical Journal, vol 26, No. 1

-Davies (2014)“Give Me a Break: Why the UK should not aspire to a ‘US-style’ culture of charitable giving”, Giving Thought discussion paper

-My piece for HistPhil on “Networked Social Movements and the “Tyranny of Structurelessness””

View Details

In episode 52, we take a look at the relationship between philanthropy and public space. How has philanthropy shaped our understanding of public space, and what role does public space play in driving philanthropy? Including:

Philanthropy and rural public space
The role of philanthropy and voluntary action in shaping the development of national parks in the UK and US
The history of the National Trust and what it can teach us about the tension between preservation and access
Urban parks & greenspace in the UK
Public parks philanthropy in the US- success and controversy.
How do we ensure that public spaces near where rich people live aren’t supported at the expense of those in less well-off neighbourhoods?
Non-green urban public space: sport facilities and community buildings
Public space and bridging social capital
Does the emergence of quasi-public spaces owned and controlled by the private sector raise new challenges for philanthropy and civil society?
Philanthropy and the concept of the public sphere
Digital platforms: are they really public spaces? Or do we risk handing control to unaccountable gatekeepers, and what might this mean for civil society freedoms?

Related links

Historic England, “History of Public Park Funding & Management”
Our CAF report “Giving a Sense of Place: Philanthropy & the future of UK Civic Identity”
“Philanthropy and the National Parks in the 20th Century”, US National Parks Service
Morris, (1983) “Voluntary Societies and British Urban Elites, 1780-1850: An Analysis”
Cannadine, D. (1999) “The First Hundred Years” in Newby (ed) The National Trust: The Next Hundred Years
The Challenges of Civic Philanthropy, CAF Giving Thought
The History of Civic Philanthropy in the UK – CAF Giving Thought
“When Nobody Knows You’re a Dog: Tech, Civil Society, and the Fight for Authenticity”, guest article for Stanford Digital Impact blog

The National Trust: The Next Hundred Years

View Details

In episode 51, we explore philanthropic pledges: what are they, do they work and how have they been used to drive more and better giving? Including:

Mackenzie Bezos’ recent decision to join the Giving Pledge has been widely reported. But how successful has this initiative been overall?
Who are the notable signatories and the notable absences from the Giving Pledge? Why have some people not signed?
Has the Giving Pledge shifted the level of giving by the ultra wealthy? Has it had any impact on overall levels of giving?
What can we learn from the pledge letters of GP signatories?
Does the GP lack the tools to hold signatories to their pledges? Should it?
Is the GP’s scope less radical than it might have been, and why?
What of other pledge initiatives like the Founders Pledge?
Does a pledge represent an expectation that a certain level of wealth comes with responsibilities to give, or is it entirely voluntary?
What does academic research tell us about the economics and psychology of pledges?
Why are the concepts of “warm glow”, “pain of payment” and “psychological distance” important in understanding how to design effective pledges?
How does crowdfunding relate to philanthropic pledges?
Could the future be about “conditional donations”, where conditions are set and then donations automatically executed if they are met?

Related content:

Marc Gunther’s article “Has the Giving Pledge Changed Giving?” for The Chronicle of Philanthropy
com article on the Founders Pledge
Sadeh, Tonin & Vlassopolous (2014) Why Give Away your Wealth? An Analysis of the Billionaires' View
Meyvis, T., Bennett, A. & Oppenheimer, D. (2011). "Precommitment to Charity" in Oppenheimer, D. ed. (2016) The Science of Giving: Experimental Approaches to the Study of Charity, Routledge.
Cotterill, John & Richardson (2012) “The Impact of a Pledge Request and the Promise of Publicity: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Charitable Donations”
Fosgaard & Soevtevent (2018) “Promises undone: How committed pledges impact donations to charity”
Elsden, Trotter, Harding, Davies, Speed & Vines (2019) "Programmable Donations: Exploring Escrow-based Conditional Giving".

View Details

In episode 50, we talk to Phil Buchanan- founding CEO of the Center for Effective Philanthropy and author of a new book: Giving Done Right: Effective Giving and Making Every Dollar Count. We discuss current debates about philanthropy and what we need to do to ensure a positive narrative about the value of giving in our society as we head into the future. Including:

What is the core role of philanthropy within society which differentiates it from either state or market provision?
A key strength of philanthropy is often argued to be its ability to drive society forward by taking risks and funding things that the state or market cannot - but how much current philanthropy actually lives up to this billing?
Why has the idea that non-profits need to be “more business-like” become so widespread, and why is it wrong?
One of the effects of taking an “investment approach” is that donors can then be reluctant to fund core costs or to give unrestricted funding- why is this such a problem?
Is part of the problem with the “overhead myth” that donors want some measure of the effectiveness of their giving, and in the absence of compelling evidence they are forced to rely on unhelpful financial measures like overhead ratios? What can we do to provide them with better metrics?
Is there a danger that the growing wave of scepticism, and even cynicism towards philanthropy, will have a negative impact on people’s willingness to give?
Of the current critiques levelled at philanthropy, which are potentially misguided or overstated, and which are genuinely important to heed?
Some argue that since philanthropy is to some extent a product of structural inequality, it can never truly be part of the solution – but do some donors and funders recognise this challenge; and how are they genuinely pursuing structural change?
The freedom that philanthropy has 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?
Do we need to make philanthropy more democratic, or accountable to the people and communities it is supposed to serve? If so, how?
Is there a challenge in balancing long-term innovation against the needs of the present? i.e. when does "big bet" philanthropy become wasteful or self-indulgent, and how much wasted philanthropic effort are we as a society prepared to accept in the name of "discovery"?

Related Content:

Phil’s Book, Giving Done Right: Effective Giving & Making Every Dollar Count
The Center for Effective Philanthropy
Phil’s recent Financial Times opinion piece, “Philanthropy’s blighted reputation threatens global giving
“Stop trying to treat nonprofits “like a business””, FastCompany
Giving Thought blog, ‘Innovation, Discovery & Philanthropic Legitimacy’
Giving Thought blog, ‘Philanthropy Anti-Democratic and Proud of It?
Giving Thought blog, ‘”Winners Take All”, Philanthropy & Inequality’

View Details

In episode 49, we explore some of the issues brought to light by the recent devastating fire at Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris and the immediate philanthropic response. Including:

-Does the Notre Dame response demonstrate there is untapped philanthropic potential out there?

-Why will people respond so readily to a damaged building, but ongoing efforts to address issues of human poverty and suffering remain hard to fundraise for?

-Does this story illustrate that philanthropy is inherently irrational? If so, what should our conclusion be?

-What is it about the Notre Dame disaster that has brought about such an unprecedented response?

-Should we be grateful to the mega-donors who have pledged millions to Notre Dame, or ask what they are getting in return in terms of social status and legitimacy?

-Do we need to scrutinise the source of wealth of these mega-donors, and whether they have paid their fair share of tax, and balance this against their desire to do good through giving?

-If we agree that rebuilding Notre Dame constitutes a public good, should the French government pay for it through taxation and public spending?

-Is it right for mega-donors to get tax breaks on their gifts to Notre Dame? Should they even get bigger tax breaks, as some have suggested?

-What lessons can we take from this story for the wider debates about philanthropy?

Related Content

-My mammoth Twitter thread on Notre Dame (and a nice one-page version)

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

-Another extract from my book, about Arts & Culture philanthropy

-"Everything Old is New Again", Alliance Magazine

-TAXING QUESTIONS: WHAT DO RUTGER BREGMAN'S DAVOS CRITICISMS MEAN FOR PHILANTHROPY?, CAF Giving Thought Blog

-Meet The Philanthropists: A good pint - the brewing industry’s race to give

-Previous Giving Thought podcast on "Is Philanthropy Rational?"

-Neil Evans 1982 paper "Urbanisation, Elite Attitudes & Philanthropy in Cardiff 1850-1914"

View Details

In episode 48 we talk to Megan Ming Francis, Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Washington, about her recent paper “The Price of Civil Rights: Black Lives, White Funding and Movement Capture” and her wider work on the role of philanthropic funders in supporting the civil rights movement. Including:

Is “movement capture” something that reflects a deliberate desire on the part of funders to change the goals or strategic focus of grantees, or is it just an inevitable consequence of the power imbalance in the funder/recipient dynamic?
Does the legitimacy that funders are able to offer to radical causes add to the power imbalance?
Is the imbalance between funder and grantee particularly striking in the case of the NAACP in the early C20th, given the racial division and the background context of Jim Crow?
Can grantees be “victims of their own success” if they make headway on radical causes using novel techniques (as the NAACP did on the issues lynching using legal challenges), and funders want to replicate that success on other causes?
Is funder ego (i.e. funders wanting to see themselves as “having the answers”) a barrier to getting genuine shifts of power from funders to grantees?
Does a spend-down strategy for a foundation impose time constraints that can drive foundation staff to demand a greater degree of say over how money is used?
How much of movement capture is due to the overt influence of funders and how much s due to grantees tailoring applications or plans based on their perception of funders’ priorities and preferences?
Where else in the history of philanthropy should we look for other examples of movement capture?
Informal networks and movements are less likely to keep archives or records than institutional funders: is there a danger that this asymmetry will make it harder to assess other instances of movement capture?
In a modern context where there is an increasing emphasis on networked social movements to drive change, and interest from funders in how to support them, do we need to be particularly aware of the dangers of movement capture?
Are looser, non-hierarchical network-based organisations more likely to be susceptible to movement capture than those with some modicum of structure?
What value can a historical perspective bring to philanthropists, funders and non-profit professionals?
Are there limits to the utility of historical comparison in understanding the present? What should we take into account or be aware of?

Related Content

Megan’s Paper “The Price of Civil Rights: Black Lives, White Funding and Movement Capture”
Megan’s Website and her book, “Civil Rights and the Making of the Modern American State”
My HistPhil article on “Networked Social Movements and the ‘Tyranny of Structurelessness’”

View Details

In episode 47 we talk to Paul Ramsbottom, CEO of the Wolfson Foundation, about foundations and endowed philanthropy. Including:

What is the core role of philanthropy within society which differentiates it from either state or market provision?
What is the particular role of foundations/endowed philanthropy in that mix?
Is the ability to take a long-term view that comes with endowment better than the sense of urgency that comes with taking a spend-down approach, or are they just different? If there is room for both approaches, what criteria might determine the choice of approach?
Do foundations need to be more transparent? If so, why and about what? Who does it benefit (the foundations themselves, their donors, grantees, taxpayers etc)
Are there arguments against transparency?
What tensions or power dynamics can there be when a foundation has been established by an individual or single family (and they are still involved), between those founders and the staff of the organisation?
Does the way in which money has been made present obstacles in terms of doing good through giving it away? Does this only apply to money made in ways that are universally agreed to be “bad” (e.g. slavery), or more broadly to ways of making wealth that are legal but which many criticise for their social or environmental impact?
What should we make of the growing focus on place-based approaches to funding?
What value does a historical perspective bring?
What do you make of the current wave of criticisms of philanthropy coming from the US? Do these resonate in the UK context? Which do you feel is most acute or difficult to answer?

Related Links:

The Wolfson Foundation
The Wolfson History Prize
My recent blog on “Philanthropy, Innovation & Discovery”
Paul’s article for ACF on foundations and transparency
My Twitter thread on the Sackler donations controversy

View Details

In episode 46, we talk to Sameer Padania about Philanthropy & Journalism. We ask why the media is looking to philanthropy as a source of funding; why philanthropic funders are interested in supporting journalism; and what challenges and opportunities this might bring. Including:

Why has journalism come to the attention of funders and philanthropists recently?
How are funders and CSOs using journalism to further their causes?
How many funders see journalism and a free press as an important public good in and of themselves, and are thus willing to fund general journalism?
What role could philanthropic funding for news media play in addressing problems like targeted online misinformation and the erosion of public discourse online?
What should we make of the rise of non-profit newsrooms like ProPublica?
Is the reader voluntary subscription model taken by the Guardian etc. is better than relying on a single major donor?
What approaches are philanthropic funders taking to supporting news media?
Is there a challenge in maintaining editorial independence when receiving philanthropic funding?
Is the way in which philanthropic funding can take pressure off news media outlets to generate revenue a good thing, or is there a danger that it will lead to them losing focusing on what is of interest to an audience, and thus become less sustainable in the long term?
Does philanthropic funding of news media undermine journalism’s ability to hold philanthropy itself to account (as many feel it should)?
Can ownership of news outlets exacerbate the distorting effect that philanthropy already has on democracy?
Is there a danger that in encouraging philanthropic support for news media, we make journalism a “charity case” and thus undermine people’s willingness to pay for it in the long term?

Related links

Sameer’s paper for Ariadne Network “An Introduction to Funding Journalism and Media”
A recent report from the Reuters Institute on "Polarisation and the News Media"
The paper by Rasmus Kleis Nielsen and Richard Fletcher questioning the truth of online filter bubbles: “Are People Incidentally Exposed to News on Social Media? A Comparative Study”
My Alliance magazine article (co-authored with my significantly better half, Fran Yeoman) on why “Philanthropy should fund the media for its own sake”
The Cairncross Review

View Details

In episode 45, we chat to Beth Breeze- Director of the Centre for Philanthropy at the University of Kent- about studying and teaching philanthropy as an academic discipline. Including:

-Why is it important for philanthropy to be seen as a subject of academic study?

-What does a philanthropy researcher actually do?

-Does philanthropy suffer from being cross-disciplinary, so that it doesn’t fit neatly into traditional academic siloes?

-How can the academic study of philanthropy effectively influence practice and policymaking?

-Why is teaching philanthropy important? What is the profile of a typical student, and what do they learn?

-Why has the fundraising side of the philanthropy equation been so overlooked?

-What makes a good fundraiser?

-Does the UK need more professionalised major donor fundraising if we are to drive more philanthropy?

-Do the current critiques of philanthropy in the US ring true in the UK? Is there a danger that they will exacerbate a negative perception of philanthropy?

-Is “Philanthropy” even a helpful word?

Related links:

The Centre for Philanthropy at the University of Kent
Beth’s latest book, The New Fundraisers
The Coutts Million Pound Donor Report

View Details

In episode 44, to celebrate International Women’s Day on the 8th March, we take a look at “Women and Philanthropy”. Exploring famous female philanthropists past and present, the role that charitable work has played in the emancipation of women, and the ways in which philanthropy has been used as a tool to fight for women’s rights. Including

Fascianting female philanthropists from history: Angela Burdett Coutts, Octavia Hill, Olivia Russell Sage, Beatrix Potter, Jenny Lind and Madam CJ Walker
The importance of philanthropy as a bridge between the domestic sphere and the public sphere and the role it therefore played in changing women’s perceptions of their own capacities & changing mens’ perception of the role of women.
Philanthropy as an outlet for the misery and frustration of Victorian women
Is there such as a thing as “feminine” philanthropy?
Philanthropy and the women’s suffrage movement
Philanthropy and the women’s anti-suffrage movement
Philanthropy, women’s liberation & feminismn in the 1960s/70s- how effective is philanthropy at addressing structural inequality? Can traditional funders support non-hierarchical networks and groups without subverting them?
Women in philanthropy today: self-made millionaries & husband and wife teams.
SDG 5 and global women’s issues
Philanthropy and the #MeToo movement
Gender equality in the nonprofit world?

Related Links

Francis, Megan M, “The Price of Civil Rights: Black Lives, White Funding & Movement Capture”
My HistPhil blog, “Networked Social Movements and “the Tyranny of Styructurelessness””
Smithsonian Museum, “Madam CJ Walker’s Philanthropy”
Samples, “The Humbug & The Nightingale: PT Barnum, Jenny Lind and the Branding of a Star Singer for Amercian Reception”
Public Good by Private Means (my book)
Prochaska, The Voluntary Impulse
Prochaska, Women and Philanthropy in Nineteenth Century England
Simey, Charity Rediscovered: A study of philanthropic effort in nineteenth century Liverpool

Charity Rediscovered: A Study Of Charitable Effort In Nineteenth Century Liverpool (Utp Correspondence James Polk)

Public Good By Private Means: How Philanthropy Shapes Britain

View Details

Episode 43 is an Oscars special! We explore philanthropy at the movies: what films there are about philanthropy (if any), what insight they can offer, and some ideas for future films that could be made. Topics covered include:

Why aren’t there any genuinely great portrayals of philanthropy or the big questions it raises on film?
Fictional philanthropists in movies
The philanthropist as plot device or cinematic shorthand
Do comic book adaptations offer the most insightful portrayal of philanthropy issues in the movies?
- Is Tony Stark (Iron Man) an example of the challenge of doing good with tainted money?
- What does X Men’s Charles Xavier tell us about enlightened self-interest?
- Is The Marvel Avengers: Civil War storyline really about the tension between philanthropic liberty and democratic accountability?
- Does Black Panther highlight the challenges of issue-based vs place-based identity in philanthropy?
- Is Thanos an effective altruist?
Pitching some of the great philanthropic stories we could tell on film:
- Carnegie, Rockefeller and the Walsh Commission
- Julius Rosenwald and the Civil Rights Movement
- Angela Burdett-Coutts and Charles Dickens: the philanthropic odd couple
- William Rathbone: head vs heart
- James Oglethorpe and the founding of the State of Georgia
- John Howard: the grumpy Indiana Jones of philanthropy

Related content:

Lights, Camera, Altruism: Philanthropy in movies, Giving Thought blog
Meet The Philanthropists: the Indiana Jones of philanthropy, John Howard, (excerpt from my book Public Good by Private Means)

View Details

In episode 42 we chat to Krystian Seibert, an Industry Fellow at Swinburne University of Technology in Melbourne, Australia. We discuss the current wave of critiques of philanthropy, why criticism is important, how to make that criticism constructive and what the response from policy and lawmakers should be. Including:

How do we criticise ‘well’?
Is some criticism in danger of ‘preaching to the converted’?
To what extent does personal philosophy or ideology dictate how receptive you are to certain criticisms?
Which criticism of philanthropy is hardest to answer?
How much do the current US-focussed critiques resonate elsewhere (e.g. the UK or Australia)?
Is there an argument to change how philanthropy is regulated by the state?
How do we balance the freedom to make individual philanthropic choices with the responsibility to ensure philanthropy doesn’t create greater inequality?
In the US the focus has been on the potential for philanthropy to subvert democracy by offering a means of influence outside the electoral system. Yet in many other places, the concern is the opposite: that the ability of civil society (funded by philanthropy) to campaign is being stifled. How do we square these two concerns?
Should more philanthropic funders support journalism or other mechanisms that can hold philanthropy itself to account?
Is there an inherent power imbalance in philanthropy, between those who have the assets and those that require them? Can we address this balance, and if so how?
Do we need to make philanthropic decisions more democratic? If so, how?
Do we need to make philanthropy more accountable to the people and communities it is supposed to serve? If so, how?

Related Links

Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World by Anand Giridharadas
Just Giving: Why Philanthropy is Failing Democracy and How it Can Do Better by Rob Reich
The Givers by David Callahan
Decolonizing Wealth by Edgar Villanueva
Dark Money by Jane Mayer
The Prize by Dale Rusakoff
Rob Reich on the Giving Thought podcast
Krystian’s article in Stanford Social Innovation Review on “Cultivating Legitimacy in Philanthropy”
My Giving Thought blog on “Winners Take All”

View Details

In episode 41 we chat to Vinay Nair, co-founder and CEO of social good tech startup Lightful about how charities can use technology to tell their stories more effectively, and some of the key opportunities and challenges. Topics covere:

Why is storytelling important for charities?
Has social media changed the game for charities 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?
Is there sometimes a tension between focusing on individual stories/emotions and focusing on objective metrics/measures of success? Or can the two be successfully combined?
How well-equipped are charities 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 charities?
Social media and other new communications technology is enabling people to form communities of interest/purpose much more easily than before. Can charities harness this potential, or is there a threat that it will make them less relevant as people look to networked models of social change?
Giving Tuesday
Harnessing data and machine learning

View Details

In part 2 of our bumper end of year special (episode 40), we make some predictions for what 2019 might hold...

2019 Predictions:

Politics & Economics

BREXIT (or not…?)
General Election?
UK voluntary reporting on SDGs
Ongoing impact of austerity
Local government funding and Local Authorities running out of money
Populism & ongoing challenges for democracy
Another global financial crash?

Philanthropy & Civil Society

More critiques of big philanthropy; general default more critical (also in UK?)
Focus on think tanks, dark money etc
Austerity: debating role of charity vs state
Further closing space issues, including digital angles (misinformation, astroturfing etc)
Networked models for social change
Line between civil society and politics will come under increasing strain
Shifting power; democratising philanthropy
Next big fundraising/charity scandal?

Technology

Continuing tech backlash?
More funders focussing on algorithmic bias
Pushback on AI ethics- criticism that it frames the debate in the tech industry’s terms and allows them to avoid discussion of regulation etc.
Divergence of cryptophilanthropy and blockchain efforts
Blockchain will continue to bubble under surface and back office blockchain use case will be demonstrated
Self Sovereign Digital Identity will come to the fore
Charity RegTech applications will emerge
Machine Learning and Natural Language Processing for data collection and analysis on charity finances, philanthropy data
More giving by conversational AI
More commercial platforms adding giving functionality
eSports growth, digital “skins” and giving via gaming platforms (e.g. Twitch)
Deepfakes and challenges to online authenticity
More awareness of personal data bargain
Charity Data fines

View Details

In an end of year special, bumper 2-part episode 40, we look back over 2018 and ahead to 2019.

In part 1, we review some of the biggest stories and themes affecting philanthropy and civil society over the year and look at how we got on with our predictions from the start of the year.

Topics covered include:

Stories and themes:

Trust, power & accountability
The Presidents Club Dinner scandal
Safeguarding and international development
The rise of networked social movements, New Power etc.
All change at the Charity Commission
The Civil Society Futures Inquiry
A big year for books critiquing philanthropy:
- Winners Take All: The elite charade of changing the world by Anand Giridharadas
- Just Giving: How philanthropy is failing democracy and how it can do better by Rob Reich
- Decolonizing Wealth by Edgar Villanueva

Reviewing 2018 predictions

US tax bill controversy re deduction & Focus on theoretical justification for tax breaks (linked to devolved Scottish powers)
More focus on advocacy and campaigning (Johnson Amendment)
More controversy re UK situation re advocacy & campaigning
More closing space for CS
Rebalance from service delivery to campaigning
Non-standard structures for philanthropy
Move away from impact
More focus on SDGs
More awareness of personal data bargain
GDPR and big fines?
Open Data and charities
AI- more ML for social good?
More bots for advice/customer services
Conversational AI
More focus on AI ethics, machine bias etc
VAR resurgence
Impact of virtual environments on behaviour
More crypto-philanthropy
More blockchain-based giving platforms and tokens
New digital assets, cryptokitties

View Details

In episode 39 we look at the relationship between philanthropy and empathy. Including:

-What does neuroscience tell us about the link between empathy and altruism?

-The importance of physical proximity

-Does empathy lead us to prioritise giving to those who are sufficiently “like us”, at the expense of others?

-How do our unconscious biases affect our empathy? The identifiable victim bias and victim blaming.

-Is empathy in tension with rationality when it comes to philanthropy?

-Historical examples of approaches to philanthropy that lacked empathy: home visitations, voting charities and “telescopic philanthropy”

-Rationality vs empathy throughout history: from the Charity Organization Societies to Effective Altruism?

-What impact will technology have on our ability to be empathetic in future?

-How can Virtual Reality be used to drive empathetic responses from donors and supporters?

-Will tech-enabled ‘filter bubbles’ negatively affect our ability to empathise?

-Rationality vs Empathy 2.0? Will philanthropy in the future be shaped by VR and experiential technologies, or by AI and data-driven decision making?

Related Content

Zagefka et al (2010) “Donating to disaster victims: Responses to natural and humanly caused events”, European Journal of Social Psychology, Volume41, Issue 3, April 2011, 353-363
Decety (2015) “The Neural Pathways, Development and Functions of Empathy”, Science of Philanthropy Initiative
Kraus et al (2012) Social Class, Solipsism, and Contextualism: How the Rich Are Different From the Poor, Psychological Review, 119 (3) 546-572.
Gose & Gipple (2012) “Rich Enclaves Are Not as Generous as the Wealthy Living Elsewhere” Chronicle of Philanthropy
“Virtual reality can boost empathy”, Psychology News, 17th October 2018
Giving Thought blog (2016) “3 ways augmented and virtual reality could change charity”
Giving Thought blog (2016) “Is technology making us care less about each other?”
Giving Thought blog (2017) “Future Imperfect: 10 new problems technology will create for charities”
Giving Thought blog (2017) “Automatic for the people: What might a philanthropy algorithm look like?”
Ken Liu, "Byzantine Empathy"- short story reproduced in Breaker Mag

View Details

In episode 38 we talk to Professor Rob Reich from Stanford University about his new book, Just Giving: Why Philanthropy is Failing Democracy and How it Can Do Better and about his wider work exploring the political philosophy of philanthropy.

In a wide-ranging conversation, we cover:

-What motivated him to write the book?

-Why has philanthropy been largely ignored as a subject of study by political philosophers and political theorists over the years?

-Does he see his book as part of a growing trend of criticism of elite philanthropy at the moment?

-Why does philanthropy potentially subvert democracy?

-Is elite philanthropy a plutocratic exercise of power? And can this ever be justified?

-Does mass market philanthropy represent a powerful means of decentralising power and choice about public goods? Or is this always undermined by the disproportionate influence of those with large amounts to give?

-Do tax breaks for philanthropy exacerbate inequality? How could we structure them differently?

-How should we understand the role of foundations?

-If one of the key benefits of foundation philanthropy is innovation and 'discovery', how do we ensure this is at the heart of what they do?

-Why are endowed structures that exist in perpetuity a particular problem?

-What has been the response from policymakers, philanthropists and foundation leaders to his arguments? And what would ideally like them to do?

Related content

Rob's new book Just Giving: Why Philanthropy is Failing Democracy and How it Can Do Better
Reich, Cordelli & Bernholz (2016) Philanthropy in Democratic Societies: History, Institutions, Values
Rob's profile page at Stanford
My book
My blog "Philanthropy: Anti-Democratic and Proud of it?"

View Details

In episode 37, we explore the relationship between philanthropy and the notion of a Welfare State. We look at the role philanthropy played in the origins of state welfare, what economics and other sciences can tell us about the relationship between the two, and how we should view the role of philanthropy in relation to the state today. Including:

-The history of the back-and-forth relationship between philanthropy and state in the UK

-Why did some think the birth of the Welfare State should have spelt the end for philanthropy?

-Is there a relationship between the size of the state and levels of giving?

-Does state welfare provision necessarily "crowd out" philanthropy? Or could it actually "crowd it in"?

-The importance of charitable campaigning within the welfare state

-The emergence of outsourcing and public service commissioning

-Are we now seeing a backlash against public service delivery by charities?

Links:

My piece on “The UK Civil Society Strategy and The History of State vs Philanthropic Welfare Provision” for HistPhil.org
Davies, R (2016) Public Good by Private Means: How philanthropy shapes Britain, Ch 2 “Philanthropy and Welfare”
CAF (2016), Gross Domestic Philanthropy: An international analysis of tax, GDP & giving
Andreoni & Payne, (2009) Is crowding out entirely due to fundraising?, Journal of Public Economics 95
Andreoni & Payne, (2003) Do Government Grants to Private Charities Crowd Out Giving or Fund-raising?, American Economic Review No 93 vol 3.
Andreoni (1993) An Experimental Test of the Crowding Out Hypothesis, The American Economic Review No 83 vol 5.
CAF Giving Thought blog (2018) ‘Initial thoughts on the Civil Society Strategy”

View Details

In episode 36, we look at the relationship between risk, innovation and philanthropy. The ability to take risks and innovate is often claimed to be on of the key strengths of philanthropy, but is this really true? How does philanthropy innovate? Why can it take risks? And what makes it different to state or private sector approaches? Topics we cover include:

What kinds of risk can philanthropy take?

-Why is it able to take these risks?

-Does philanthropy find innovative new ways of achieving social outcomes?

-What is the exit for philanthropic innovation once it has been proven to work?

-Is philanthropy losing its control of social innovation to the public and private sector?

-How has philanthropy itself innovated over time? From the rise of associational philanthropy in the 18th century to the development of mass-market giving in the 20th century.

-Social investment and blended approaches

-Micro donations and automated philanthropy

-Innovation in causes: philanthropic campaigning and public opinion

When does innovation become self-indulgence? Silicon Valley philanthropy and private space travel.

Related content

A timeline of modern British philanthropy
The longer-than-you-might-think history of social investment
The Stars My Destination: philanthropy and the future of space exploration

View Details

In episode 35, we look at the the relationship between religion, faith and philanthropy. Including:

1) Faith as a factor in individual giving

-Evidence from behavioural science

-The role of places of worship in bring diverse communities together and making people aware of issues

-Religious identity, communities of purpose and giving circles

-Religious obligations to give: tithing, Tzedakah and Zakat

2) Organised religion and the evolution of charity

-1601 Statute of Charitable Uses: why wasn't religion included?

-The 1891 Pemsel Case and the "four heads of charity"

-US religious causes and closed congregations

3) Religion, philanthropy and civil society today

-Is religion still the most popular cause?

-Obligations to fund the monastic life in Myanmar and Thailand

-The deep relationship between international aid and religion

-Places of worship as community focal points and welfare providers

-Is the world getting less religious or more?

-Religious persecution

View Details

In episode 34, Rhod chats to Connie Gallippi, Founder and CEO of the BitGive Foundation (the first US nonprofit to accept cryptocurrency donations). They discuss:

What is the potential for cryptophilanthropy?

-What are some of the practical challenges to taking donations in cryptocurrency?

-Is the current crypto bear market likely to result in more or fewer donations of crypto?

-What is the wider potential of blockchain for the nonprofit sector?

-What does radical transparency bring for donors and beneficiaries?

-How might we solve the blockchain last mile problem?

-Should nonprofits be concerned about the environmental cost of existing blockchain tech?

Related links:

https://www.bitgivefoundation.org/

https://www.givetrack.org/

View Details

In episode 33, Rhod chats to Zoe Amar about digital transformation in the charity and non-profit world, and how organisations can get to grips with the opportunities and challenges presented by new technology.

Topics covered include:

-What role does leadership play in digital transformation?

-Is new technology perceived as too risky? How can we overcome this barrier?

-How will our workplaces need to change in response to developments in tech?

-Is there a danger of a "digital brain drain" if non-profits cannot offer appealing opportunities for tech-savvy young professionals?

-Can new technologies benefit small organisations as well as larger ones?

-What role can charities play in the design of new technology to ensure it is human-centred?

-Should charities be concerned about the mental health and social impacts of social media and other tech tools?

-Can charities play a wider role in addressing the negative impact of technology?

-Why should the non-profit world wake up to AI?

Related Links

Zoe's website
The Charity Digital Code of Practice
The Charity Digital Skills Report

View Details

In episode 32 we chat to Chris Willis Pickup, Partner at Taylor Vinters law firm and former Head of Litigation for the Charity Commission for England & Wales. charity law. We discuss a whole host of topics including:

-What does charity law actually entail?

-Defining charitable purposes

-Dormant trusts, the Cy Pres doctrine and the National Fund

-Campaigning and charity law

-What is the role of a charity regulator?

-Developing digital skills in charities

-Charity RegTech

-What role can lawyers play in promoting philanthropy?

View Details

In episode 31, we take a look through the recently published UK government Civil Society Strategy. We explore what it means for charities, businesses and communities in the UK, and how it fits in with wider global trends affecting civil society. Including:

-The value of having a strategy

-Broadening the definition of civil society

-Place and civic philanthropy

-Civic engagement and direct democracy

-The importance of civil society campaigning

-Welfare and the lines between state and voluntary provision throughout history

-Getting to grips with technology

-Responsible business

-The UK's ambitions to be "the world leader in philanthropy services".

View Details

In episode 30, Rhod chats to Fran Perrin- founder and Director of the Indigo Trust, founder of 360 Giving, former government policy advisor and member of the famously philanthropic Sainsbury family - about promoting transparency in philanthropy. Topics touched on include:

-Why transparency is valuable

-When transparency might not be such a good thing

-Are foundations and philanthropists resistant to transparency?

-How can technology help people and communities, and how can it cause harm?

-Does philanthropy take enough risks?

-How do you address the imbalance of power between donor and recipient?

-What policy changes are needed to boost the culture of philanthropy?

-The value of “meta-philanthropy” (i.e. philanthropy aimed at supporting more philanthropy)

-The role of upbringing in instilling a sense of philanthropic 'duty'

View Details

In this episode (number 29), I chat to Ben Joakim and Paul Currion from Disberse - a fintech startup applying blockchain technology to the international development and aid sector. We had a wide-ranging chat about the challenges they have found in getting beyond the hype surrounding blockchain, and the genuine opportunities they believe the technology has to offer. Including:

-Why blockchain? What can you do with a blockchain in an aid context that you can't do with another, simpler technology?

-The last mile problem: how do you get money and goods to where they are actually needed when using blockchain, assuming that people and communities on the ground are not themselves using the technology?

-Regulation: how are governments and regulators approaching blockchain technology? What challenges does this present for those trying to use it in a civil society context?

-Cryptocurrency: Why have Disberse chosen not to work with existing cryptocurrencies? What are the opportunities and pitfalls of doing so?

-State of blockchain for good: How much of what has been said about blockchain tech's potential in the civil society space is merely hype, and how much reflects true potential to do this differently or better? And where do things go next?

Related Material:

Disberse
CAF's work on blockchain tech
CAF's Future:Good project
Could blockchain be the future for cross-border giving? (My article for European Fundraising Association)

View Details

In episode 28, Rhod is joined by Ben Soskis, a Fellow at the Urban Institute and editor of HistPhil.org, for a wide-ranging (and quite long!) chat about the history of philanthropy and what it can teach us about the big challenges facing charities and donors today. They talked about all sorts of things, such as:

-Why is studying the history of philanthropy worthwhile, and what are the limitations of historical comparison?

-What are the most telling criticisms of philanthropy that have been seen through the ages?

-Which supposedly “new” developments in philanthropy actually have historical precedents? What, if anything, is genuinely new?

-Is philanthropy anti-democratic? Can that sometimes be a good thing?

-Why have power dynamics always been such a challenge for philanthropy, and what efforts have been taken to overcome this challenge?

-What are the biggest challenges facing philanthropy in the US right now?

Related content:

histphil.org
George Soros and the Demonization of Philanthropy (An article by Ben for The Atlantic)
The Importance of Criticizing Philanthropy (An article by Ben for The Atlantic)
New Realities for Philanthropy in the Trump Era (An article by Ben for the Chronicle of Philanthropy)
Dirty Money: From Rockefeller to Koch (An article by Ben for The Atlantic)
The History of the “Giving While Living” Ethic (Report by Ben, commissioned by Atlantic Philanthropies)
Philanthropy: Anti-democratic and proud of it? (Rhod)
Philanthropy and Inequality: Part of the solution or part of the problem? (Rhod)
Public Good by Private Means: How Philanthropy Shapes Britain (Rhod’s book)

View Details

In episode 27 of the podcast Rhod chats to Rachel Rank, CEO of 360 Giving (www.threesixtygiving.org)- an initiative promoting and supporting an Open Data approach among UK grantmakers. Topics covered include:

-The background and rationale to 360 Giving

-What challenges has 360 Giving faced in terms of getting grantmakers to adopt an open data approach?

-How are organisations using the information that is being published?

-Where does the work of 360 Giving fit within the wider move towards open data and transparency?

-What is the potential for applying new techniques and tools such as machine learning to the data being opened up on grantmaking?

-Will there be new challenges when it comes to making data more accessible in the light of GDPR and the growing unease about data privace and usage?

View Details

In episode 26, Rhod looks at the impact Artificial Intelligence (AI) is going to have on philanthropy and civil society. Topics covered include:

-What are we talking about? We look at what AI actually means and why it has come to prominence in recent years, and consider 3 broad ways in which AI is going to affect civil society.

-AI for Good: How is AI being put to use to deliver social and environmental benefits, and where could this go in the future? We touch on fascinating projects using machine learning for medical research and environmental protection, and explore the use of chatbots and voice-activated assistants.

-The wider operating environment: AI seems set to disrupt the way that organisations, and even entire industries, operate. Civil society organisations could harness the benefits of automation, but will also need to address the wider challenges that it poses to the future of the workplace. Regulation could also be transformed, and CSOs will have to adapt. And the ways in which we are able to give in the future might look radically different.

-Negative consequences of AI: We are now aware that AI poses risks as well as opportunities, and civil society seems certain to play a role in addressing many of these new challenges. We explore the dangers of algorithmic bias and the growing tide of fake news and targeted propaganda- including the emergence of “deepfakes”. We also look at the ways in which interaction with AI could affect human behaviour and the challenges this might pose.

Related Content

-Machine-Made Goods: Philanthropy, civil society and artificial intelligence (forthcoming discussion paper, so watch out for it on our Future:Good pages)

-CAF Submission to House of Lords Select Committee on AI Call for Evidence

-"Where are Charities in the Great AI Debate", World Economic Forum blog

-Civil Society article on charities and AI ethics

-5 ways AI is already having an impact on charity

-Robotic Alms: Is AI the future of philanthropy advice?

-Future Imperfect: 10 new problems that technology will create and charities will have to deal with

-Automatic for the People: What might a philanthropy algorithm look like?

View Details

In this episode (number 25) Rhod chats to Dan Fluskey, Head of Policy and External Affairs at the UK's Institute of Fundraising about the asking side of the philanthropy equation. Topics covered include:

-Is there actually a crisis of public trust in charities?

-What has the impact of a number of fundraising scandals been on the charity world?

-How do fundraisers balance the short term appeal of using techniques that work in terms of raising money against the danger of longer-term damage to the relationship with supporters?

-Is fundraising supposed to make us feel uncomfortable?

-How are fundraisers using new technology like virtual reality (VR)?

-What impact might new approaches like crowdfunding have on traditional charity fundraising?

View Details

Episode 24 of the Giving Thought podcast is our first ever interview! And it is a cracker. Rhod speaks to Jeremy Heimans, co-author of bestselling book "New Power".

We discussed Jeremy and his co-author Henry Timms' thesis on why the nature of power has changed in the 21st Century and what this might mean for philanthropy and civil society.

We covered a whole range of issues including:

-the challenges of giving away power

-the benefits and downsides of decentralisation

-whether giving control to the crowd could marginalise unpopular causes

-Changing organisational culture to embrace technology

-Whether New Power provides a use case for blockchain

-Is New Power an opportunity or a threat for existing philathropic organisations?

View Details

In this episode, Rhod looks at whether philanthropic giving is always a choice on the part of the donor, or whether it can sometimes be compelled. Topics covered include:

-Compelled by your peers: We look at the part peer pressure plays in philanthropy, both at a micro level (i.e. the effect that "being watched" has on prompting giving) and a macro level (i.e. the notion of a social contract). We also consider a bit of history (including a scathing attack on the culture of giving in Victorian England).

-Compelled by a higher authority: We consider the role governments have played a role in shaping philanthropy through charity law: from the 1601 Statute of Charitable Uses to the emergence of "GONGOs" in modern China. We look at the idea of "percentage philanthropy", and whether it should be seen as philanthropy at all, or merely a form of tax. We also touch on obligations to give in various major religions and what role these play in driving philanthropy.

-Compelled by your own mind: We explore unusual cases of "pathological generosity", where people with brain damage find themselves compelled to give to such a degree that it can adversely affect them and their families.

Related Material

Public Good by Private Means: How Philanthropy Shapes Britain
Eye Images Increase Charitable Donations: Evidence From an Opportunistic Field Experiment in a Supermarket
So are the conditions for philanthropy improving in China or not? CAF Future World Giving blog
Explaining Percentage Philanthropy, International Centre for Nonprofit Law
Could zakat plug the gaps in humanitarian or development aid?
The Man Who Couldn’t Stop Giving, The Atlantic

View Details

In episode 22, we explore whether philanthropy is progressive: i.e. is it a means for moving society forwards or a tool for defending the status quo? Including:

The case for: On what grounds can we claim that philanthropy is progressive? We look at cause areas associated with progressive ideals, and the rich history of philanthropic support for campaigning. And could the very process of philanthropy also be seen as a tool for social progress?

The case against: We ask whether conservation and heritage causes are, by definition, not progressive. We also consider the long traditional of opposition to progressive causes being supported by philanthropy; and highlight evidence that wealthier people are more likely to hold conservative political views. We also ask whether philanthropy itself undermines progress by adding to inequality and power imbalance in our society.

Remedies: What can we do to ensure philanthropy is progressive? Should this actually be a goal, or should we simply accept that philanthropy reflects the balance of views of donors? Are there ways in which we can change the mechanics of philanthropy in order to make it more democratic and thus more reflective of the views of wider society?

Related Material

-HistPhil series on philanthropy and conservatism

-“Suffragettes & Campaigning” (Extract from Public Good by Private Means: How philanthropy shapes Britain)

-PGPM Cass MSc course lecture SLIDES and NOTES

-Philanthropy: anti-democratic and proud of it?

-Democracy and the Policy Preferences of Wealthy Americans

View Details

In episode 21, we look at "New Money vs. Old Money", and what the difference between inherited and created wealth means for philanthropy. Topics covered include:

Attitudes to Wealth: We explore historical and contemporary evidence to see what differences there might be in the attitudes towards wealth of those who have made or inherited money. We look at the crucial distinction between stewardship and ownership, the role of social status, and the recognition of the element of luck and the existence of a social contract.

-Future Money & Precommitment: We look at economic evidence about the power of making pledges or commitments to give at a later date, and how these best work. We highlight practical examples or pledges, such as the Giving Pledge, or the 1-1-1 corporate giving model. We also touch on the curious story of the gambling philanthropist, Baron Hirsch.

-Cryptophilanthropy? We consider whether the money being made by early adopter of cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin could be harnessed for philanthropy. Does this represent a totally new form of wealth, with its own characteristics? And could this present challenges for charities trying to tap into it? What wider lessons might we learn for future fundraising?

Related material

From HODL to GIEV? The opportunities and challenges of cryptophilanthropy -Public Good by Private Means: How philanthropy shapes Britain

-If you’re so smart, why aren’t you rich? Turns out it’s just chance. (MIT Technology Review article)

Meyvis, T., Bennett, A. & Oppenheimer, D. (2011). "Precommitment to Charity" in Oppenheimer, D. ed. (2016) The Science of Giving: Experimental Approaches to the Study of Charity, Routledge.

View Details

In this week's episode (no. 20) - the second of our "Death & Taxes" two-parter, we look at the link between tax and philanthropy. Topics covered include:

Importance and Controversy: Why does tax relief on donations matter to understanding the role of philanthropy, and why has it proved controversial over the years? We touch on the current US situation in light of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and look at previous political attempts to meddle with tax breaks on donations, such as Gladstone's one-man crusade in the late C19th and George Osborne's ill-fated 2012 Budget.

Justifying Philanthropic Tax Breaks: We explore three possible theoretical justifications, based on the work of Stanford academic Rob Reich, and conclude that only one works. We then see whether any of these has been used in practice, and compare the deliberate introduction of the US Charitable Deduction with the accidental introduction of donation incentives in the UK.

Do Philanthropic Tax Breaks Work? We look at whether tax incentives on donations are actually effective. We see that there is evidence they are correlated with greater generosity, but room for debate about how they are structured and at what level they are offered. We consider the difference between credit and deduction systems. We also look at recent findings from the University of Birmingham that Gift Aid might not be that effective as an incentive, and ask what this might mean for policymaking.

Related Giving Thought (and other) content

-The Justification for Charitable Tax Breaks

-Donation States: An international comparison of the tax treatment of donations

-Gross Domestic Philanthropy: An International Analysis of GDP, Tax & Giving

-Tax Incentives for Giving are Effective, Even in Low Income Countries

-The NAO on Gift Aid and Tax Relief on Donations

-Principles of Philanthropy Policymaking lecture (SLIDES) and (NOTES)

-Unversity of Birmingham paper on price elasticity (working paper and blog)

View Details

In episode 19, the first of a two-parter on "Philanthropy, Death and Taxes", Rhod looks at the influence of mortality on giving. Topics covered include:

-The History of Death & Philanthropy: how has mortality shaped modern philanthropy? We look at the pheonomenon of competitive eulogies in Tudor England, and the impact of the 1736 Statute odf Mortmain on creating a pluralist charity sector. We also consider the problems that can result from the "dead hand of the donor".

-Giving while living vs. Waiting til you are gone: We look at the shifting balance between legacy giving and giving during one's lifetime. Have recent years seen a shift towards the latter, with a growing number of spend-down foundations, the establishment of the Giving Pledge and the rise of a breed of young billionaires from Silicon Valley?

-The Future of Death: Life Extension, Digital Emulation & Wills on the Blockchain: We consider some of the ways in which new technology might solve traditional problems for philanthropy when it comes to death, but also the new challenges it might bring.

Related Giving Thought content

-Millions Now Giving Will Never Die: Life Extension, Whole-Brain Emulation and Philanthropy -Future Imperfect: 10 new problems that technology will create and charities will have to deal with Public Good By Private Means: How philanthropy shapes Britain (BOOK)

A Timeline of Modern British Philanthropy

View Details

In episode 18 of the podcast, Rhod takes a look at the relationship between philanthropy and technology. Including:

Supporting technology: How has philanthropy has supported the development of new technologies over the years? We look at the rich history of the Rockefeller Foundation’s Department of Natural Sciences and the growth of the open source movement. We also consider the blurred lines between long-term tech investment and philanthropy, and the “moonshot” approach of Silicon Valley figures like Elon Musk.
Harnessing Technology: How have philanthropic organisations used new technologies to further their missions? We consider some current examples of “Tech for Good”, and take a brief detour into the history of Victorian chimney sweeps to see how similar approaches have been used in the past.
Challenging Technology: New technologies may have negative as well as positive impacts, and charitable organisations are often required to play a part in addressing these problems. What new social and environmental challenges might disruptive technologies pose in the future, that charities will be called upon to help solve? What role can philanthropy play now in helping to avoid some of the potential downsides of new technology?

Related Giving Thought content

Tech Support: Why should philanthropic funders care about disruptive technology and what to do about it?
Charity 2037: 13 jobs we might all be doing in 20 years' time
5 ways AI is already having an impact on charity
Future Imperfect: 10 new problems that technology will create and charities will have to deal with
Giving in a World Without Work
The Stars My Destination: philanthropy and the future of space exploration

View Details

In episode 17, Rhod will be asking whether philanthropy is rational,and what lessons we should take from our answer to this question. Topics covered include:

-The micro/macro philanthropy paradox: Philanthropy is both about individual voluntary acts of generosity and about the large scale redsitribution of private assets for public good. But while the former is largely irrational, the latter needs to be rational. What can policymakers and philanthropists do about this?

-Rationalising philanthropy: There have been efforts to rationalise philanthropy in the past, such as the "scientific philanthropy" movement of the Victorian era. There is also a growing focus on the role data can play in helping donors make more informed decisions. Bringing these together, the Effective Altruism proposes a scientific approach to philanthropy based on data- but is it truly objective?

-Social Impact prediction markets: could new technologies like blockchain make it easier to measure and record social impact data accurately? And could token incentives be used to create prediction markets for social impact in the future.

Related Giving Thought Material

LEDGER GOOD DEEDS SHINE: USING BLOCKCHAIN TO MEASURE, RECORD AND PREDICT SOCIAL IMPACT

AUTOMATIC FOR THE PEOPLE: WHAT MIGHT A PHILANTHROPY ALGORITHM LOOK LIKE?

Public Good By Private Means: Principles of Philanthropy Policymaking Lecture (SLIDES and NOTES)

ARE SOME CAUSES BETTER THAN OTHERS? The effective altruism debate

View Details

In episode 16, "2018 Predictions", Rhod gives some thoughts on the challenges and opportunities facing charities, donors and civil society organisations around the globe over the coming year.

Guesses Predictions include:

-A renewed focus on tax relief for donations,

-An increasingly difficult environment for advocacy,

-A divergence of opinion over impact measurement

-Greater use of non-traditional models for philanthropy

-More focus on data, in terms of balancing privacy concerns with the need for open data

-Using machine learning to determine trends in social data

-Even more interest in addressing the ethical challenges of AI and other technologies

-More donations of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies from those who have made large amounts through increases in value.

-New digital assets being created and donated.

Related Giving Thought material

-Closing Space or Open Season? What will President Trump's latest move mean for civil society campaigning?

-Philanthropy: anti-democratic and proud of it?

-Not a measured approach?

-Automatic for the People: What might a philanthropy algorithm look like?

-Knowing Me, Knowing You: Self-sovereign digital identity and the future of charity

-Ledger Good Deeds Shine: Using blockchain to measure, record and predict social impact

-Tokens of Goodwill: crypto-tokens, ICOs & blockchain philanthropy

View Details

In episode 15 of the Giving Thought podcast, “Hollywood philanthropy”, Rhod and Adam (in his last appearance) look at the relationship between philanthropy and celebrity. Topics covered include:

Where are the great movies about philanthropy? The history of philanthropy is full of colourful characters and inspiring stories, yet there have been very few if any movies about the great philanthropists. Why is this? Could the new ‘Golden Age of Television” heralded by Netflix, Amazon Prime et al change this?
The film biz and philanthropy: Who are the great film star philanthropists? Does the modern tendency to highlight charitable activity through PR risk undermining credibility? Can films themselves be used to further philanthropic aims?
Is celebrity support a double-edged sword? For charities, having a big name star on board can be a real blessing if they are genuine and committed, but what if that person turns out to be a poor ambassador. Recent scandals over the historical misconduct of many celebrities have also and highlighted the long-term risks that can come with partnering with celebrities. What does this mean for charities looking to use star power?

Related Giving Thought content:

-Lights, Camera, Altruism: Philanthropy at the movies

-Killing Them With Kindness: Philanthropy as a Weapon

-The Life Philanthropic: Angela Burdett-Coutts

-Ice, Ice, Baby: Is the Ice Bucket Challenge bad for charity?

View Details

In episode 14, Rhod and Adam take a look at the field of behavioural economics and how it affects philanthropy. Topics covered include:

Classical Economics and charity: classical economics assumes we are all rational and self-interested, so it cannot explain behaviour that is apparently irrational and purely altruistic. Hence new explanatory mechanisms have arisen- in particular the “warm glow” theory which posits that all altruism is in fact “impure” because donors actually get a benefit from their giving. Subsequent neurological experiments have also backed this idea up. So what does this mean for efforts to encourage philanthropy?
Nudge, Nudge, Wink, Wink: Richard Thaler recently received the Nobel Prize for Economics for his work on so-called “nudge theory”. This proposes that small changes in the way information is presented or choices offered can have a significant effect on outcomes at a macro level. Can we harness this insight to drive more charitable giving? What kind of nudges could we use?
Fast & Slow Thinking: Another economist Daniel Kahneman, won the Nobel Prize for his theory of “System 1 and System 2 thinking” which distinguishes between the roles that deliberative (“slow”) thought and less-deliberative thought based on heuristics (“fast thought”) play in our decision making. What lessons could this offer for philanthropy? Are there tensions between the desire to make giving more strategic and evidence that appealing to “fast thinking” may be more effective in eliciting donations?

Related Giving Thought material

Is Our Approach to Encouraging Charitable Giving Totally Wrong?
Reciprocity & Altruism

View Details

In episode 13, Rhod and Adam ask whether we could ever see the end of charities? Topics covered include:

Achieving the mission: Is the best possible end result for a charity to make itself redundant by solving the social or environmental problem it was founded to address? And does this ever happen in practice? We look at the importance role that criticisms of there being "too many charities" have played in the history of philanthropy, and ask whether evolution is more likely than dissolution for most organisations.

-Direct cash transfers: The long-term trend in philanthropy has been towards ever-greater intermediation and professionalisation; but in recent years we have seen new technology-driven models that might take us back to a model of direct person-to-person philanthropy. Where could this model bring advantages, and could it even disrupt the whole marketplace for philanthropy?

-Blockchain & DAOs: Blockchain technology could bring many benefits and challenges for philanthropy. One intriguing possibility is that governance structures themsleves could be decentralised, so that people can come form networks to work together but without the need for a centralised structure. What could this mean for the notion of a charitable organisation and the options for us all to take social action?

Related Giving Thought content:

-Public Good by Private Means (BOOK)

-A Timeline of Modern British Philanthropy

-Crisis and Response: What history tells us about the challenges facing UK charities

-The Rise of Direct Giving in Development Philanthropy

-The Decentralisation of Good: Blockchain, DAOs and the Future of Charity

-What Opportunities Does Blockchain Offer?

View Details

Who doesn’t love a bit of healthy competition? In this episode, Rhod and Adam ask which country is the most generous in the world. Topics covered include;

2017 World Giving Index: Every year CAF publishes the world’s most comprehensive analysis of charitable activity. This year’s index reveals a global fall in giving with the exception of Africa which is witnessing a remarkable rise.

The potential of middle class giving in emerging economies: A new campaign by CAF called Groundwork for Growing Giving reveals the staggering potential ($319bn annually) of growing middle classes in the developing world to supercharge global charitable giving over the next generation.

Is giving related to the size of the state?: We explore whether the evidence supports the idea that charitable giving can only thrive in small state / low tax environments.

Related Giving Thought material:

Report: 2017 World Giving Index
Blog: World Giving Index shows Africa is the exception in a less generous world
Video: CAF World Giving Index
Microsite: Groundwork for Growing Giving
Report: Gross Domestic Philanthropy: An international analysis of GDP, tax and giving
Report: Give Me a Break: Why the UK should not aspire to a “US-style” culture of charitable giving

View Details

In this episode, Rhod and Adam look at the relationship between place and philanthropy. Topics covered include:

-Does charity still begin at home?: Has the relationship between place and philanthropy become weaker over time, and what if anything can we do to reverse this downward trend? Can philanthropy be used to boost civic identity and pride, or does it rely on people having an existing sense of place?

-The Dark Side of Civic Philanthropy: When does philanthropic action within a local area start to become a problem? We consider examples like Detroit, where philanthropic funders stepped in to cover vital services when the city went bankrupt, and what these highlight about the potential risks.

-A new sense of place?: What does 'place' actually mean to each of us? In a highly connected, mobile world, do traditional notions of geographic locality have any relevance when it comes to philanthropy? Should we instead be thinking of new dispersed communities of interest or identity, such as diaspora communities? Or has technology actually made us think more locally than ever?

Related Giving Thought material:

Giving a Sense of Place: Philanthropy and the future of UK civic identity

Chain Links: The role of mayors in building a culture of civic philanthropy

The History of Civic Philanthropy in the UK: What can we learn from it? Philanthropy and the City of London Big Apple turnover: does the election of New York’s new mayor spell tough times for philanthropy?

View Details

In this episode, Rhod and Adam explore the question of "bad money" and the challenges this poses for philanthropy and charities. Topics covered include:

-Dubious donations: what should charitable organisations do when they are offered donations from sources whose ethics or morals are run counter to their own? In cases where no law has been broken, who decides on what is "good" or not? Can saying no to donations actually bring risks beyond the obvious financial loss?

-Money laundering and Terrorism Financing: Some money is from sources that are obviously bad, so what can charities and donors do to avoid being used by those with criminal intentions? Could efforts to address these challenges be causing disproportionate problems for legitimate organisations? And could they even be making the problems they seek to address worse in some cases?

-Charities and ethical investment: We look at how charities invest their own money. Although ethical investment is now a mainstream thing, it is still not the default in the charity world- why not? Is the responsibility of charity trustees merely to maximise investment returns to spend on their own cause, or do they have wider responsibilities?

Related Giving Thought Material:

-When should charities say no to donations?

-The Wages of Sin?- Doing good with “bad” money

-Killing them with kindness: philanthropy as a weapon

-International body removes assumption of CSO terror financing risk

-What should civil society expect from the UK Anti-Corruption Summit?

-Should charities invest ethically?

-Doing well and doing good: can charities be social investors?

View Details

In episode 9 of the Giving Thought podcast, Rhod and Adam look at some of the psychological motivations that drive philanthropy, including:

Social Status: Is a desire for enhanced social status part of the “warm glow” that people get from giving? How has the relationship between philanthropy and social status played out through history? Does highly visible giving place greater expectations on the donor, as well as bringing improved social status? And what impact will social media have on the way we feel about promoting our own giving?
Proximity: We look at the “proximity effect” - the idea that actual physical proximity and contact with the symptoms of social problems is an important determining factor in people’s willingness to give. Does increasing physical distance between rich and poor communities undermine the philanthropic instinct? And will new technologies like conversational interfaces and augmented/virtual reality distance us even further from the world around us and thus make us less likely to give?
Victim Blaming: Does our perception of whether the victims of social and environmental disasters can be held as partly to blame for their own misfortune affect our willingness to give We look at the difference between responses to “man made” and “natural” disasters, and what this tells us about how charities should talk about their work.

Related Content from Giving Thought:

Philanthropy and the City of London
Uncomfortable reality: 3 ways Augmented and Virtual Reality could change charitable giving
Is technology making us care less about each other?
Reciprocity and Altruism
WhDonors prone to blaming the victims of man-made humanitarian disasters

View Details

In episode 8 of the Giving Thought podcast, Rhod and Adam look at the long and complicated relationship between philanthropy and education, including:

Charitable status of UK public schools: we look at the ongoing controversy over the charitable status of fee-paying schools in the UK. What is the history behind the definition of “educational purposes” in charity law? How do we interpret “public benefit” for public schools?
The US Charter School movement: we explore the role that philanthropy has played in the growth of the charter school model in the US, and why this has raised questions about philanthropic legitimacy. We look at the controversial intervention of donors like Mark Zuckerberg in the New Jersey school system, and what we can learn from it.
Universities: we look at the rich history of the relationship between philanthropy and universities. We consider the role that giving played in opening up higher education to the masses, and the current landscape of giving to universities in the US and UK, in which mega-donations are becoming the norm.

Related content from Giving Thought

Public Good by Private Means: How Philanthropy Shapes Britain
A Timeline of Modern British Philanthropy
The 11 best books on the history of philanthropy (plus a free bibliography)
Why the Criticism of Mark Zuckerberg’s Philanthropy is Both Wrong and Right

View Details

In episode 7 of the Giving Thought podcast Rhod and Adam take a look at the origins of philanthropy, including:

Altruism and Evolution: why does the existence of altruistic behaviour continue to present a significant challenge for evolutionary theory? Can this add to our understanding of philanthropy, and if so how?
A Brief History of Western Philanthropy: we attempt to cover the 450 or so years since the birth of modern philanthropy in roughly 3 minutes. Including: the Reformation and its role in the emergence of secular forms of giving, the development of associational philanthropy and the charitable organisation, the use of social research and the role of philanthropy in shaping state provision of welfare.
Non-western philanthropic traditions: we look at some of the other traditions of giving around the world, and ask whether efforts to develop a philanthropic culture should do more to build on these existing forms of generosity and altruism.

Related content from Giving Thought:

Public Good by Private Means: How Philanthropy Shapes Britain
A Timeline of Modern British Philanthropy
The 11 best books on the history of philanthropy (plus a free bibliography)
Future World Giving: Unlocking the potential of global philanthropy
Pakistanis should be proud of their charitable culture, but not complacent
Is Burma a global leader in charitable giving?
Study shows how a western concept of charity undervalues South African generosity

View Details

Episode 6 of the Giving Thought podcast looks at the issue of transparency of civil society organisations and philanthropy. Rhod and Adam take a tour through the following topics:

The case for transparency: it has long been said that philanthropy needs to become more transparent in order to identify gaps, duplications drive efficiency, identify trends and increase accountability. Furthermore, advances in technology mean that philanthropy ‘Big Data’ could present powerful new opportunities for strategic giving. In addition, it has been recognised that when the powerful and the wealthy use their philanthropy to exert influence anonymously it can lead to a democratic deficit.
In defence of anonymity: philanthropy is often a very personal and emotional act and in some cultures and religions, donors are expected to give without taking credit. In other words, to give transparently may undermine the emotional rewards of giving. There are also situations where transparency could put philanthropy - and beneficiaries in particular - at risk. A trend for restricting foreign funding to advocacy and human rights groups could mean that calls for transparency by some governments are being used to flush out and silence critical voices in society. Finally, some wealthy philanthropists believe that the only way to fund grass roots movements which are challenging the current system is to do so anonymously in order to break the link between donor (necessarily a beneficiary of the system) and charity.
Blockchain and radical transparency: By ensuring that all transactions of cryptocurrencies or other non-fungible assets are recorded on a public ledger which is distributed across a shared global network, blockchain technology could create a transparency so total that it revolutionises the very concept. Such could be the impact of blockchain on philanthropy, it might mean an end to regulation, intermediary organisations or even the notion of charities themselves as we currently understand them.

Related content from Giving Thought:

Blog: Knowing Me, Knowing You: Self-sovereign digital identity and the future of charity
Blockchain technology microsite:
Giving Unchained: Blockchain technology is seen as potentially revolutionary.
Block & Tackle: Could blockchain technology transform the way charities are created and regulated?
Video on the impact of blockchain on regulation
Philanthropy Infrastructure: A boring name for something on which civil society’s future rests

View Details

Episode 5 of the Giving Thought podcast looks at the role of business when it comes to doing social good, and what this means for philanthropy in general. Rhod and Adam take a tour through the following topics:

Why should businesses do good? We ask what theoretical grounding there is for expecting companies to show social responsibility or perform philanthropic acts is. Is there a social contract that places responsibilities on companies just as it does on individuals, or does it always come down to self-interest in some form or another? And is that merely the pragmatic self-interest of wanting good PR or employee satisfaction, or can it be a more enlightened self-interest that recognises the longer-term value of a healthy civil society?
We also look at the emergence of new business models that combine social purpose and commercial focus. We ask whether the idea of combining a commercial purpose with a social one is actually far older than we often think, and whether we could learn something from the business philanthropists of the past.
The impact of the SDGs: We look at the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and ask whether the prominence of businesses in plans to meet these goals could result in philanthropy getting sidelined.
Beyond Integrity: we take a look at a report CAF published last year in collaboration with the LSE, highlighting cases where companies have taken action to defend the basic freedoms of civil society, often at apparent odds with their own commercial self-interest. We explore whether these cases represent a wider trend, or whether they are best understood as examples of best practice that other companies should aspire to.

Related content from Giving Thought:

Beyond Integrity: why civil society needs to engage business in defending civic space
Appealing to the enlightened self-interest of partners to reinforce civil society
Philanthropy and the Global Goals: a brave new world?
How can global business improve society?
Philanthropy and the SDGs: no-brainer or Faustian pact?
Meet The Philanthropists: sweet charity - how Cadbury, Rowntree and Fry gave us some of our greatest philanthropists

View Details

Episode 4 of the Giving Thought podcast attempts to assess whether philanthropy supports or undermines democracy and whether that question even makes sense. Rhodri and Adam cover the following themes:

Philanthropy is anti-democratic: We highlight recent examples of the long-standing controversy over the anti-democratic nature of philanthropy (e.g. Chan-Zuckerberg Initiative, George Soros and the Koch brothers). But we ask: is being undemocratic in fact a strength to be celebrated? We look at various arguments and examples, including the historical role of philanthropy in promoting unpopular causes, the story of Julius Rosenwald and the current US foundation movement to oppose Trump administration.
Philanthropic power enhances democracy: Exploring the value of pluralism and civic freedom in enhancing minority voices in democracy. Does philanthropy take the blame for the effect of inequality?
The eye of the beholder: The use of aid and philanthropy as a soft power tool to spread democracy (Eastern Europe after the cold war and the Arab Spring)

Related content from the Giving Thought blog:

Philanthropy: Anti-democratic and proud of it?
Does philanthropy undermine democracy?
Philanthropic Power: The Awkward Consequence of Pluralism
Closing Space or Open Season? What President Trump’s latest move means for the future of civil society campaigning
Is advocacy and campaigning by not-for-profits undemocratic?
Brave New World: What role can philanthropy play in the age of Brexit and Trump?
Has Mark Zuckerberg just announced the death of the charitable foundation?
Why the Criticism of Mark Zuckerberg’s Philanthropy is Both Wrong and Right

View Details

Welcome to episode 3 of the Giving Thought Podcast, brought to you by the Charities Aid Foundation's in house think-tank Giving Thought.

In this episode, we tackle the thorny subject of inequality and ask; is trying to address inequality with philanthropy possible, advisable or even legitimate and if so, how should it be done?.

As always, we have broken the issue into three segments:

Can philanthropy challenge inequality? How can philanthropy overcome the paradox of addressing inequality with the proceeds of an unequal system.
Focus on Egypt: Can philanthropy act as a pressure gauge for social dissent? History has shown us that a lack of representation of social dissent can fuel unrest.
Automation, the future of work and universal basic income: As machines and algorithms increasingly replace human workers, a very small number of people will own the means and proceeds of production. What will this mean for inequality and philanthropy?

Below are links to blog posts and publications on issues discussed in the podcast:

Inequality and Philanthropy: part of the solution or part of the problem?

Giving in a World Without Work? Automation, Universal Basic Income and the future of philanthropy

By trying to control civil society, the Egyptian government could fuel more social unrest

Is addressing inequality through philanthropy a paradox?

Philanthropic Power: The Awkward Consequence of Pluralism

View Details

Welcome to episode 2 of the Giving Thought Podcast, brought to you by the Charities Aid Foundation's in house think-tank Giving Thought.

In this episode, we look at the role that Artificial Intelligence (AI) could play in accelerating new, data-driven approaches to philanthropy.

We explore:

The rise of algorithms, and what this might mean for philanthropy in terms of creating new challenges and opportunities
The "Effective Altruism" movement and how this links to the growth of AI
Silicon Valley and the focus on "big bet" philanthropy

Below are links to blog posts and publications on issues discussed in the podcast:

-Robotic Alms: AI and the future of philanthropy advice

-Algorithm is Gonna Get You: what the rise of algorithms means for philanthropy

-Are Some Causes Better than Others? The Effective Altruism Debate

-The Stars My Destination: Philanthropy and the Future of Space Exploration

-Has Mark Zuckerberg Just Announced the Death of the Charitable Foundation?

-Why the Criticism of Mark Zuckerberg's Philanthropy is Both Wrong and Right

View Details

Here goes nothing! We are pleased to launch the Giving Thought Podcast, brought to you by the Charities Aid Foundation's in house think-tank Giving Thought.

In our first episode, we will be looking at the interplay between philanthropy, charity and politics. Given recent political events around the world and the trend for civil society activism to singled out for special scrutiny for its political influence this seems timely.

We have decided to look at this issue from three interesting angles;

Scrapping the Johnson amendment: What if President Trump follows through on his pledge to "destroy" the Johnson amendment which restricts the political lobbying of non profits and religious organisations?
The emerging legal environment for Chinese civil society: New laws have made life much easier for donors and charities to operate ... as long as you agree with the government.
Fake News: The proliferation of false stories targeted at specific audiences online raises problems for charities in getting their message across but also new needs for them to address.

Read related content from Giving Thought

Closing Space or Open Season? What President Trump's latest move means for the future of civil society campaigning.

The Johnson Amendment prevents US nonprofits from electoral campainging, but Donald Trump wants to abolish it. Why?

Algorithm Is Gonna Get You: what the rise of algorithms means for philanthropy

Algorithms are the automated decision processes that increasingly govern many aspects of our lives and the choices we make.

Truth Decay: Philanthropy and the battle against misinformation and fake news

Does philanthropy have a vital role to play in combating the widely-publicised threat of “fake news”?

Giving Thought: Recent Episodes