EFFECTS OF GOVERNMENT SUPPORT TO NPIs ON PRIVATE
PHILANTHROPY
Santiago, July 24, 2015
Presented by S. Wojciech SokolowskiJHU Center for Civil Society Studies
SOURCES OF NPI SUPPORT41-COUNTRY AVERAGE
Private fees and sales;
50%Government
payments; 35%
Private phi-lanthropy;
14%
Source: JHU CCSS
2-PARTY TRANSACTIONS:NPI - BENEFICIARY
3-PARTY TRANSACTIONS:PAYER – NPI – BENEFICIARY
RESEARCH QUESTION
Is the behavior of 3rd parties supporting NPIs interconnected?
How does government support to NPIs affect private philanthropy?
POSSIBLE ANSWERSGOVERNMENT SUPPORT:
CROWDS OUT
CROWDS IN
HAS NO EFFECT ON
PRIVATE PHILANTHROPY
LEVEL OF ANALYSISMICRO (organization-level):
CROWDING OUT (Zero-sum game)
MACRO (sector-level):
CROWDING IN
CROWDING OUT
NO EFFECT
MACRO-LEVEL MODEL OF PHILANTHROPIC SUPPORT TO NPIs
Aggregate philanthropic
giving to NPIs
CV1 General socio-econ.
factors
TV Government payments to
NPIsCV2 NPI market income
Personal incomeSocial value of philanthropySocial need for philanthropy
FOUR BEHAVIORAL MODELS AND THEIR MACRO-LEVEL PREDICTIONS
ACTION ORIENTATION PURPOSE-RATIONAL VALUE-RATIONAL
TRANSACTIO
N COS
T
LOW1. Efficiency maximization
Crowding out or “philanthropic flight”
3. Solidarity expressionCrowding in
HIGH 2. Cost/loss avoidanceCrowding in
4. Strategic positioningNo effect due to cancelling out
JHU COMPARATIVE NPI DATA
Kenya
Israel
Pakistan
Australia
Belgium
ItalySlovakia
Germany
United Kingdom
Denmark
France
Sweden
Norway
The Netherlands
Finland
Austria
Switzerland Czech Republic
Poland
Romania
Russia
HungaryUnited States
Mexico
Colombia
Brazil
Chile
Canada
UgandaArgentina
South Africa
Peru
Tanzania
Ghana Lebanon India
ThailandNew Zealand
Morocco
Portugal
Spain
Ireland
Egypt
Japan
Korea
The Philippines
Turkey
GOVERNMENT AND PHILANTHROPIC SUPPORT TO NPIs 41 Countries
0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% 10.0%0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.5%
3.0%
f(x) = 0.111465038168394 x + 0.00325300353176131R² = 0.293250243510477
Government as % of GDP
Phila
nthr
opy
as %
of G
DP
Effects of Government Payments on PhilanthropyEntire NPI sector
Standardized regression coefficientsVariable Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
Per capita GDP .27 .23 -.01
Gini coefficient .34 .28 .27
Market income of NPIs .33 .19
Gov’t payments to NPIs .52
Adjusted R2 8.6% 15.1% 31.5%
Model 1: CV1 General socio-economic factorsModel 2: CV1 and CV2 General socio-econ factors and market income Model 3: Full model with TV government payments to NPIs DV: Philanthropic giving to NPI sector as percent of GDP
Hypothesis supported: Crowding – in
Effects of Government Payments on PhilanthropyService vs Expressive Activities
Variable Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
Per capita GDP .49 .26 .06
Gini coefficient .35 .28 .25
Market income of expressive NPIs .40 .35
Gov’t payments to service NPIs .39
Adjusted R2 11.7% 22.4% 37.3%
Model 1: CV1 General socio-economic factorsModel 2: CV1 and CV2 General socio-econ factors and market income Model 3: Full model with TV government payments to NPIs DV: Philanthropic giving to NPIs in expressive activities as percent of GDP
Hypothesis supported: Philanthropic flight
Standardized regression coefficients
CONCLUSION 1Government support to NPIs encourages private giving to NPIs
Reasons:
Transaction cost reduction
Expression of humanitarian values
CONCLUSION 2Government support to service NPIs boosts private giving to expressive NPIs
Reasons:
Efficiency maximization
Fulfillment of needs
FULFILLMENT OF NEEDS IN SOCIAL DEMOCRACY
Government
Philanthropy
THANK YOU
Center for Civil Society StudiesThe Johns Hopkins University
Download the paper from:
http://ccss.jhu.edu/publications-findings/?did=391
Top Related