Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T01:07:07.918Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What encourages charitable giving and philanthropy?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 October 2009

FRANK ADLOFF
FRANK ADLOFF*
Affiliation:
John F. Kennedy Institute for North American Studies, Section of Sociology, Free University Berlin, Germany.
*
Address for correspondence: Frank Adloff, John F. Kennedy Institute for North American Studies, Section of Sociology, Free University Berlin, Lansstraße 7-9, 14195 Berlin, Germany. E-mail: frank.adloff@fu-berlin.de
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In recent years, increasing public attention has been paid to voluntary action, civic engagement and philanthropy. It is in this framework that the growing numbers of childless older people are regarded as a valuable source of charitable giving. In fact, by giving to philanthropic foundations – instead of consuming their wealth or leaving inheritances – childless donors may develop into pioneers in the field of post-familial civic engagement. The article explores the circumstances under which childless older people adopt this behaviour in both Germany and the United States of America. It is found that making large donations or setting up philanthropic foundations is still an elite phenomenon, but on the other hand that establishing a foundation is attractive for childless people, both as a means of ensuring that one's name lives on, and as a way of organising bequests. Educational level, ill-health, social capital and religiosity all positively reinforce the inclination of childless people to transfer resources to charities. It is also shown that the institutional framework or organised fundraising has a large role in fostering charitable giving among the childless. The framework of charity organisations and fund raising in the country of residence plays an important role in determining the expansion and democratisation of charitable giving.

Keywords

philanthropycharitable givingchildlessnessinteractionismGermanyUSA
Type
Articles
Information
Ageing & Society , Volume 29 , Issue 8: Minimal Families: Childlessness and Intergenerational Transfers , November 2009 , pp. 1185 - 1205
Copyright
Copyright © 2009 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adloff, F. 2005a. Zivilgesellschaft. Theorie und politische Praxis [Civil Society: Theory and Political Action]. Campus, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.Google Scholar
Adloff, F. 2005b. Theorien des Gebens – Nutzenmaximierung, Altruismus und Reziprozität [Theories of giving: utility maximisation, altruism and reciprocity]. In Hopt, K. J., Hippel, T. V. and Walz, W. R. (eds), Nonprofit-Organisationen in Recht, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft [Nonprofit-Organisations in Law, Economy and Society]. Mohr-Siebeck, Tübingen, Germany, 139–57.Google Scholar
Adloff, F. 2006. Beyond interests and norms: gift-giving and reciprocity in modern societies. Constellations: International Journal of Critical and Democratic Theory, 13, 2, 407–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adloff, F. 2007. Zur Soziologie des Spendens. Empirische Befunde und theoretische Ansätze [Towards a sociology of charitable giving. Empirical findings and theoretical approaches]. In Walz, W. R., Auer, L. V. and Hippel, T. V. (eds), Spenden- und Gemeinnützigkeitsrecht in Europa. Rechtsvergleichende, rechtsdogmatische, ökonometrische und soziologische Untersuchungen [Charity Laws in Europe. Comparative Law, Legal Theory, Econometric and Sociological Analyses]. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, Germany, 613–36.Google Scholar
Adloff, F., Schwertmann, P., Sprengel, R. and Strachwitz, R. 2007. Germany. In Anheier, H. K. and Daly, S. (eds), The Politics of Foundations: A Comparative Analysis. Routledge, London, 172–85.Google Scholar
Alexander, J. 2001. Contradictions: the uncivilising pressures of space, time and function. Soundings: Journal of Politics and Culture, 16, 96–112.Google Scholar
Bielefeld, W., Rooney, P. and Steinberg, K. 2005. How do need, capacity, geography, and politics influence giving? In Brooks, A. C. (ed.), Gifts of Time and Money: The Role of Charity in America's Communities. Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham, Maryland, 127–57.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. 1986. The forms of capital. In Richardson, J. G. (ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. Greenwood, New York, 241–58.Google Scholar
Braun, J. and Klages, H. (eds) 2001. Freiwilliges Engagement in Deutschland [Volunteering in Germany], Volume 2, Zugangswege zum freiwilligen Engagement und Engagementpotenzial in den neuen und alten Bundesländern [Access to Volunteering and the Potential of Engagement in the New and Old German States]. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart, Germany.Google Scholar
Braun, R. 2003. Hat die Erbengeneration ausgespart? Nach der Rentenillusion droht die Erbschaftsillusion [The generation of inheritors: after the illusion of old-age pension threatens the illusion of inheritance]. In Lettke, F. (ed.), op. cit., 91–114.Google Scholar
Buschle, N. 2005. Spendenerfassung in der Steuerstatistik [Tax figures of charitable giving]. In Abstracts der Fachtagung: Spenden in Deutschland – Analysen und Projekte [Abstracts of the Conference Charitable Giving in Germany: Analyses and Projects], 18 November 2005, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung, Berlin.Google Scholar
Caillé, A. 2000. Gift and association. In Vandevelde, A. (ed.), Gifts and Interests. Peeters, Leuven, Belgium, 47–55.Google Scholar
Coleman, J. C. 1988. Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, Supplement: Organizations and Institutions, 95–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, R. and Hickman, N. 1991. Altruism and culture as social products. Voluntas, 2, 2, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curtis, J. E., Grabb, E. G. and Baer, D. E. 1992. Voluntary association membership in fifteen countries: a comparative analysis. American Sociological Review, 57, 2, 139–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curtis, J. E., Grabb, E. G. and Baer, D. E. 2001. Nations of joiners: explaining voluntary association membership in democratic societies. American Sociological Review, 66, 6, 783–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deutscher Bundestag [Federal German Parliament] 2002. Enquete-Kommission „Zukunft des bürgerschaftlichen Engagements“. Bürgerschaftliches Engagement: auf dem Weg in eine zukunftsfähige Gesellschaft [Study Commission on the ‘Future of Civic Activities’. Civic Activities: Towards a Society with a Future]. Leske and Budrich, Opladen, Germany.Google Scholar
Fine, G. A. and Brooke, H. 2004. Tiny publics: small groups and civil society. Sociological Theory, 22, 3, 341–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foundation Center 2006. The State of Foundation Giving. Foundation Center, New York.Google Scholar
Gensicke, T. 2000. Freiwilliges Engagement in den neuen Ländern [Volunteering in the new German states]. In Rosenbladt, B. V. (ed.), Freiwilliges Engagement in Deutschland [Volunteering in Germany], volume 1, Gesamtbericht [Complete Report]. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart, 176–85.Google Scholar
Gensicke, T., Picot, S. and Geiss, S. 2005. Freiwilliges Engagement in Deutschland 1999–2004 [Volunteering in Germany 1999–2004]. TNS Infratest Sozialforschung, Munich, Germany.Google Scholar
Hansert, A. 2003. Die Erbschaft im Kontext familiärer Generationenbeziehungen [Inheritance in the context of families and generations]. In Lettke, op. cit., 143–55.Google Scholar
Healy, K. 2000. Embedded altruism: blood collection regimes and the European Union's donor population. American Journal of Sociology, 105, 6, 1633–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Healy, K. 2004. Altruism as an organizational problem: the case of organ procurement. American Sociological Review, 69, 3, June, 387–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgkinson, V. A., Nelson, K. E. and Sivak, E. D. Jr 2002. Individual giving and volunteering. In Salamon, L. M. (ed.), The State of Nonprofit America. Brookings Institute, Washington DC, 387–420.Google Scholar
Jencks, C. 1987. Who gives to what? In Powell, W. W. (ed.), The Nonprofit Sector: A Research Handbook. Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut, 321–39.Google Scholar
Joas, H. 1992. Die Kreativität des Handelns [The Creativity of Action]. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.Google Scholar
Joas, H. and Adloff, F. 2006. Transformations of German civil society: milieu change and community spirit. In Keane, J. (ed.), Civil Society: Berlin Perspectives. Berghahn, New York, 103–38.Google Scholar
Jürges, H. 2005. Gifts, inheritances and bequest expectations. In Börsch-Supan, A., Brugiavini, A., Jürges, H., Mackenbach, J., Siegrist, J. and Weber, G. (eds), Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe: First Results from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe. Mannheim Research Institute for the Economics of Aging (MEA), Mannheim, Germany, 186–91.Google Scholar
Klein, H. J. 1998. Vereine [Associations]. In Schäfers, B. and Zapf, W. (eds), Handwörterbuch zur Gesellschaft Deutschlands [Compendium of German Society]. Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen, Germany, 676–87.Google Scholar
Kohli, M. 1999. Private and public transfers between generations: linking the family and the state. European Societies, 1, 1, 81–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kohli, M. 2004. Intergenerational transfers and inheritance: a comparative view. In Silverstein, M. (ed.), Intergenerational Relations Across Time and Place. Annual Review of Gerontology and Geriatrics 24. Springer Publishing Company, New York, 266–89.Google Scholar
Kohli, M., Künemund, H., Vogel, C., Gilles, M., Heisig, J. P., Schupp, J., Schäfer, A. and Hilbrich, R. 2005. Zusammenhänge und Wechselwirkungen zwischen Erbschaften und Vermögensverteilung [Interrelations and Interdependencies between Inheritances and Wealth Distribution]. Gutachten für das Bundesministerium für Gesundheit und Soziale Sicherung [Report for the Ministry of Health and Social Security], Bundesministerium für Gesundheit und Soziale Sicherung, Bonn, Germany.Google Scholar
Kohli, M., Künemund, H., Schäfer, A., Schupp, J. and Vogel, C. 2006. Erbschaften und ihr Einfluss auf die Vermögensverteilung [Inheritances and their influence on wealth distribution]. Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung, 75, 58–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lettke, F. (ed.) 2003. Erben und Vererben. Gestaltung und Regulation von Generationenbeziehungen [Inheriting and Bequeathing: Designing and Regulating Generational Relations]. Universitätsverlag Konstanz (UVK), Constance, Germany.Google Scholar
Monroe, K. R. 1994. A fat lady in a corset: altruism and social theory. American Journal of Political Science, 38, 4, 861–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Odendahl, T. 1990. Charity Begins at Home: Generosity and Self-Interest Among the Philanthropic Elite. Basic, New York.Google Scholar
Offe, C. and Fuchs, S. 2001. Schwund des Sozialkapitals? Der Fall Deutschland [Reduction of social capital? The case of Germany]. In Putnam, R. D. (ed.), Gesellschaft und Gemeinsinn. Sozialkapital im internationalen Vergleich [Society and Community Spirit. Social Capital in International Comparison]. Bertelsmann Stiftung, Gütersloh, Germany, 417–514.Google Scholar
O'Herlihy, M. A., Havens, J. J. and Schervish, P. G. 2006. Charitable giving: how much, by whom, and how? In Powell, W. W. and Steinberg, R. (eds), The Nonprofit Sector: A Research Handbook. Second edition, Yale University Press, New Haven, Connnecticut, 542–67.Google Scholar
Oliner, S. P. and Oliner, P. M. 1988. The Altruistic Personality: Rescuers of Jews in Nazi Europe. Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
Ostrower, F. 1995. Why the Wealthy Give: The Culture of Elite Philanthropy. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.Google Scholar
Priller, E. and Sommerfeld, J. 2005. Wer spendet in Deutschland? Eine sozialstrukturelle Analyse [Who is Donating in Germany? A Social-Structural Analysis]. Discussion Paper, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB), Berlin.Google Scholar
Putnam, R. D. 2000. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. Simon and Schuster, New York.Google Scholar
Rosenbladt, B. V. 2000. Freiwilliges Engagement in Deutschland [Volunteering in Germany], volume 1, Gesamtbericht [Complete Report]. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart, Germany.Google Scholar
Schervish, P. G. 2000. The Modern Medici: Patterns, Motivations and Giving Strategies of the Wealthy. Center on Wealth and Philanthropy, Boston College, Boston, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Schervish, P. G. and Havens, J. J. 1997. Social participation and charitable giving: a multivariate analysis. Voluntas, 8, 3, 235–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schervish, P. G. and Ostrander, S. A. 1990. Giving and getting: philanthropy as a social relation. In Til, J. V. (ed.), Critical Issues in American Philanthropy: Strengthening Theory and Practice. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, California, 67–98.Google Scholar
Schulte, K. 2003. (Ver-)Erben aus psychologischer Sicht. Einstellungen, Emotionen und Verhaltensabsichten von Erblassern [Inheriting and bequeathing from a psychological perspective: attitudes, emotions and intentions of bequeathers]. In Lettke, F. (ed.), op. cit., 205–32.Google Scholar
Schulze, E., Steffens, T. and Meyer, S. 2004. Privilegierte Lebenslagen – Gesellschaftliche Eliten – Gemeinwohlorientiertes Engagement [Privileged Conditions of Life – Social Elites – Civic Engagement]. Abschlussbericht [Final Report], Berliner Institut für Sozialforschung GmbH, Berlin.Google Scholar
Sigmund, S. 2000. Grenzgänge: Stiften zwischen zivilgesellschaftlichem Engagement und symbolischer Anerkennung [Walking on the border: establishing foundations between civic engagement and symbolic recognition]. Berliner Journal für Soziologie, 3, 333–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silber, I. 1998. Modern philanthropy: reassessing the viability of a Maussian perspective. In James, W. and Allen, N. J. (eds), Marcel Mauss: A Centenary Tribute. Berghahn, New York, 134–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sokolowski, S. W. 1996. Show me the way to the next worthy deed: towards a microstructural theory of volunteering and giving. Voluntas, 7, 3, 259–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sprengel, R. 2001. Statistiken zum deutschen Stiftungswesen [Statistics on German Charitable Foundations]. Ein Forschungsbericht [Research Report], Maecenata Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
Steinberg, R. and Wilhelm, M. 2003. Patterns of Giving in COPPS 2001. Center on Philanthropy, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana.Google Scholar
Strachwitz, R. 2001. Country report: Germany. In Schlüter, A., Then, V. and Walkenhorst, P. (eds), Foundations in Europe: Society, Management and Law. Directory of Social Change, London, 133–44.Google Scholar
Stutz, H. and Bauer, T. 2003. Erben und Vererben in der ökonomischen Theorie [Inheriting and bequeathing in economic theory]. In Lettke, F. (ed.), op. cit., 75–87.Google Scholar
Szydlik, M. 1999. Inheritance and inequality: theoretical reasoning and empirical evidence. European Sociological Review, 20, 1, 31–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timmer, K. 2005a. Stiften in Deutschland [Establishing charitable foundations in Germany]. In Strachwitz, R. and Mercker, F. (eds), Stiftungen in Theorie, Recht und Praxis. Handbuch für ein modernes Stiftungswesen [Charitable Foundations in Theory, Law and Practice: Manual for a Modern Foundation Sector]. Duncker and Humblodt, Berlin, 46–54.Google Scholar
Timmer, K. 2005b. Stiften in Deutschland: Die Ergebnisse der StifterStudie [Charitable Foundations in Germany: Results of the StifterStudie]. Verlag Bertelsmann Stiftung, Gütersloh, Germany.Google Scholar
Titmuss, R. M. 1997 [1970]. The Gift Relationship: From Human Blood to Social Policy. Expanded and updated edition (Oakley, A. and Ashton, J. eds), New Press, New York.Google Scholar
Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L. and Brady, H. E. 1995. Voice and Equality. Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wenzel, H. 2001. Die Abenteuer der Kommunikation. Echtzeitmassenmedien und der Handlungsraum der Hochmoderne [The Adventures of Communication: Real-Time Mass Media and the Space of Action in High Modernity]. Velbrück, Weilerswist, Germany.Google Scholar
Wuthnow, R. 1999. Mobilizing civic engagement: the changing impact of religious involvement. In Skocpol, T. and Fiorina, M. P. (eds), Civic Engagement in American Democracy. Brookings Institute Press, Washington DC, 331–63.Google Scholar
Wuthnow, R. 2001. Der Wandel des Sozialkapitals in den USA [The change in social capital in the USA]. In Putnam, R. D. (ed.), Gesellschaft und Gemeinsinn. Sozialkapital im internationalen Vergleich [Society and Community Spirit. Social Capital in International Comparison]. Bertelsmann Stiftung, Gütersloh, Germany, 655–749.Google Scholar