Global Giving

R. Bekkers
{"title":"Global Giving","authors":"R. Bekkers","doi":"10.36850/rga2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Why do citizens in some countries take more responsibility for the well-being of others than in other countries? This project seeks to understand the genesis of prosociality, investigating its biological foundations, the influence of cultural traditions, and effects of political, economic and legal structure. The dominant theory in economics views philanthropy as a solution to social illnesses that the market and the state are not solving, a view complementary to political science theory on preferences for government provision. Sociologists focus on social norms emerging from religious traditions. Cultural evolutionary theory highlights the instrumental value of trust. Still other theories have suggested a role for natural selection of genes. However, these theories have not been tested stringently nor simultaneously. Also the project includes a very important factor largely ignored thus far: political, legal and economic institutions also affect the level of giving as well as who gives to which causes. Therefore, the objectives of Global Giving are (1) to map country differences in the size and nature of philanthropy across the world; (2) to develop and test multidisciplinary theories explaining these differences; (3) to facilitate international collaboration across disciplinary boundaries in research on philanthropy. The research draws upon 200 surveys recently harmonized by the PI and on new data on philanthropy to be collected among large samples in 145 countries across all continents. Collaboration with international networks of academics safeguards the validity of the questionnaires and experiments. Appropriate multilevel regression models will be used, the lack of which caused biases in previous research. An integrated understanding of philanthropy is useful not only for theory development, but also for government policy makers and practitioners in nonprofit organizations seeking to mobilize philanthropic contributions and make them more effective. The application in practice is ensured through collaboration with a large network of practitioners.","PeriodicalId":275817,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trial and Error","volume":"93 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Trial and Error","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36850/rga2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Why do citizens in some countries take more responsibility for the well-being of others than in other countries? This project seeks to understand the genesis of prosociality, investigating its biological foundations, the influence of cultural traditions, and effects of political, economic and legal structure. The dominant theory in economics views philanthropy as a solution to social illnesses that the market and the state are not solving, a view complementary to political science theory on preferences for government provision. Sociologists focus on social norms emerging from religious traditions. Cultural evolutionary theory highlights the instrumental value of trust. Still other theories have suggested a role for natural selection of genes. However, these theories have not been tested stringently nor simultaneously. Also the project includes a very important factor largely ignored thus far: political, legal and economic institutions also affect the level of giving as well as who gives to which causes. Therefore, the objectives of Global Giving are (1) to map country differences in the size and nature of philanthropy across the world; (2) to develop and test multidisciplinary theories explaining these differences; (3) to facilitate international collaboration across disciplinary boundaries in research on philanthropy. The research draws upon 200 surveys recently harmonized by the PI and on new data on philanthropy to be collected among large samples in 145 countries across all continents. Collaboration with international networks of academics safeguards the validity of the questionnaires and experiments. Appropriate multilevel regression models will be used, the lack of which caused biases in previous research. An integrated understanding of philanthropy is useful not only for theory development, but also for government policy makers and practitioners in nonprofit organizations seeking to mobilize philanthropic contributions and make them more effective. The application in practice is ensured through collaboration with a large network of practitioners.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
全球捐赠
为什么有些国家的公民比其他国家的公民对他人的幸福承担更多的责任?该项目旨在了解亲社会的起源,调查其生物学基础、文化传统的影响以及政治、经济和法律结构的影响。经济学中的主流理论认为,慈善是解决市场和国家无法解决的社会疾病的一种方法,这一观点与关于政府提供偏好的政治学理论相辅相成。社会学家关注的是源自宗教传统的社会规范。文化进化理论强调了信任的工具价值。还有其他理论提出了基因自然选择的作用。然而,这些理论并没有得到严格的检验,也没有同时得到检验。此外,该项目还包括一个迄今在很大程度上被忽视的非常重要的因素:政治、法律和经济制度也会影响捐赠的水平以及谁向哪些事业捐赠。因此,全球捐赠的目标是:(1)绘制世界各地慈善事业规模和性质的国家差异;(2)发展和检验解释这些差异的多学科理论;(3)促进慈善研究的国际跨学科合作。这项研究借鉴了PI最近协调的200项调查,以及在各大洲145个国家的大样本中收集的有关慈善事业的新数据。与国际学术网络的合作保障了问卷和实验的有效性。将使用适当的多水平回归模型,这在以往的研究中缺乏导致偏差。对慈善事业的综合理解不仅有助于理论发展,也有助于政府政策制定者和非营利组织从业者寻求动员慈善捐款并使其更有效。通过与大量从业人员的合作,确保在实践中的应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Serendipity in Scientific Research Three Persistent Myths about Open Science The Music Must Play On: The Music Therapy Sessions that Should not Have Stopped Medical Expert Endorsement Fails to Reduce Vaccine Hesitancy in U.K. Residents A Manifesto for Rewarding and Recognizing Team Infrastructure Roles
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1