1. 1 Challenges for Comparative Research on Philanthropy in Europe René Bekkers Center for Philanthropic Studies, VU University Amsterdam,The Netherlands R.Bekkers@vu.nl 12 July 2012 ISTR Conference, Siena

2. 2 Research Questions 1. How large are differences in philanthropy (incidence, amounts, causes) between nations in Europe? 2. How can these differences be explained? 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

3. 3 What we have… Lots of data on volunteering, but much less on charitable giving Several datasets on giving using  Different definitions of philanthropy  Different questionnaire modules to measure philanthropy  Different survey methods 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

4. We’re in big trouble. How many people report donations to various causes varies from one dataset to another. Even differences in giving within the same country vary from one dataset to another. Finally, differences between countries are explained by different variables in the two datasets. 412 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

5. 512 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

6. What now? Let’s start all over again. And do it better. 612 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

7. 7 Prospects for Data Access Tax data: legal definitions, thresholds, privacy issues Survey data on corporate philanthropy difficult to gather Foundations even more difficult to get access to Getting survey data on households least problematic  let’s do this! 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

8. 8 What we need… New data on giving, using:  A clear definition of philanthropy.  A validated, cross-nationally adequate instrument to measure philanthropy.  One single method of data collection; online is the only feasible option. 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

9. 912 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

10. 10 Definitions Should be operationalized. Definitions should identify a clearly delimited set of phenomena Easy way out:  Exclude memberships and fees.  Exclude informal giving.  Avoid the word ‘voluntary’. 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

11. 11 Conceptual model SourceChannelDestination DonorOrganizationCause MoneyServices Households, individuals, corporations Churches, charities, foundations Groups, Ideals 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

12. 12 The questionnaire should identify Units of analysis: individuals, AND/OR households, OR foundations, OR corporations Channels: churches, charities, foundations, other nonprofit organizations Destinations: causes and services Resources: money, goods, labor 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

13. 13 European Social Survey E1-12 a) CARD 43 For each of the voluntary organisations I will now mention, please use this card to tell me whether any of these things apply to you now or in the last 12 months, and, if so, which. E1-12 b) Do you have personal friends within this organisation? a)CODE ALL THAT APPLY FOR EACH ORGANISATION b) NoneMemberPartici pated Donated money Volun- teered Personal friends? E1.…Firstly, a sports club or club for out- door activities? YesNoDKDK 01234128 E2… an organisation for cultural or hobby activities? 01234128 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

14. 14 WARNING DATA FROM THESE MEASURES MAY BE *VERY FAR* FROM THE LIKELY TRUE VALUES 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

15. 15 Questionnaires on household giving The Gold Standard: the ‘Method + Area Module’ (e.g., GINPS) Incomplete coverage: ‘Area’ (ESS2002, EB 62.2) Severely limited: (Very) ‘Short’ “Methodology is Destiny”: shorter questionnaires yield (strong) underestimates of giving volume and bias parameter estimates Source: Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P. (2006). ‘To Give or Not to Give…That’s the Question’. Nonprofit & Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35 (3): 533‐540. 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

16. 16 Donors per sector (%) NLUS a religious or church organization19 humanitarian aid, human rights, minorities, immigrants205 environmental protection, peace or animal rights235 science, education, or teachers and parents25 cultural or hobby activities43 sports club or club for outdoor activities84 social club, club for the young, the retired/ elderly, women34 political party25 trade union21 business, professional, or farmers’ organization12 consumer or automobile organization21 any other voluntary organization42 Donates money to at least one sector4529 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

17. 17 Donors per sector in the Netherlands in two data sources (%) ESSGINPS a religious or church organization1939 humanitarian aid, human rights, minorities, immigrants2021 environmental protection, (peace) or animal rights23(7) healthNA13 science, education, or teachers and parents22 cultural or hobby activities42 sports club or club for outdoor activities85 social club, club for the young, the retired/ elderly, women310 political party2NA trade union2NA business, professional, or farmers’ organization1NA consumer or automobile organization2NA any other voluntary organization44 Donates money to at least one sector4582 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

18. 18 Philanthropy European Social Survey, 2002 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

19. 19 Giving is under- reported in the ESS Direct Q Matrix No 88% Yes 12% No 97% 2947307 Yes 3% 1389 Cross tabulation of ESS direct question on political giving and marking ‘donated’ for ‘political party’ in the matrix question (US+NL) 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

20. 20 Correlates of giving ESSGINPS Age 35-651.191.13 Age>651.82**0.80 Secondary education1.60**1.05 Tertiary education3.50**1.30 Big city0.890.55** Suburb0.79(*)0.75(*) Generalized social trust1.20**1.34** Right wing political self-placement1.25*1.50** Volunteered last year3.33**1.76** Coefficients in bold are significantly different from each other (p<.05) 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

21. 21 What we don’t know… How are France, Germany, Italy, Denmark, Switzerland doing? How much is donated to charity? How do countries differ in the composition of philanthropy? How do countries differ in the characteristics of donors? Where do all these country differences come from? 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

22. 22 Philanthropy EuroBarometer 62.2, 2004 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

23. 23 Donors per sector in the Netherlands in two data sources (%) EBGINPS a religious or church organization2939 humanitarian aid, human rights, minorities, immigrants4121 environmental protection, (peace) or animal rights40(7) Patients organization [and health]30[13] Education (arts, culture)132 Recreational organization [and sports]205 Leisure organization for the elderly3NA Rights for the elderly3NA political party5NA trade union4NA business, professional, or farmers’ organization1NA consumer or automobile organization2NA any other voluntary organization74 Donates money to at least one sector8182 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

24. 24 Giving is likely to be overreported in EB 5% report giving to a ‘political party or organization’; but only 2.5% is a member and only a fraction donate 40% report giving to an environmental organization; at best, 28% is a member Humanitarian aid is way too high (41%) 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

25. 25 Correlates of giving EBGINPS Big city0.60*0.55** Suburb0.780.75(*) Age 35-652.41**1.13 Age>652.66**0.80 Secondary education1.85**1.05 Tertiary education1.561.30 Generalized social trust1.21*1.34** Right wing political self-placement0.871.50** Volunteered last year3.33***1.76** Coefficients in bold are significantly different from each other (p<.05) 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

26. 26 Why do countries differ? EBESS Individual level variablesYES Country level variablesNOYESNOYES Country level variance3.27%5.45%3.27%9.97% Secondary education1.321**1.305**1.4911.555** % Secondary education0.031**25.744* Generalized trust1.075 1.1091.120** Mean Generalized trust2.096**1.098 NS Observations16,279 32,905 Countries17 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

27. 27 What we want… Giving Europe, using:  A clear definition of philanthropy.  A validated, cross-nationally adequate instrument to measure philanthropy, based on GINPS.  One single method of data collection; online is the only feasible option. 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

28. Thanks, says René Bekkers Head of Research Center for Philanthropic Studies VU University Amsterdam r.bekkers@vu.nl Twitter: @renebekkers http://renebekkers.wordpress.com 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena 28

29. 29 Correlates of giving ESSGINPS Age 35-651.161.09 Age>651.59**0.64* Secondary education1.71**1.07 Tertiary education3.84**1.35 Big city0.970.56** Suburb0.840.80 Catholic1.25(*)2.18** Protestant2.02**2.27** Other Christian1.210.46 Other religion0.904.66 Church attendance (times per year)1.01**1.01 Generalized social trust1.19**1.33** Right wing political self-placement1.121.40* Volunteering3.15**1.55** 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena

30. 30 Volunteering European Social Survey, 2002 12 July 2012ISTR Conference, Siena