Matching Versus Raffles as a Fund-Raising Device

IF 1.1 4区 经济学 Q3 ECONOMICS Journal of Public Economic Theory Pub Date : 2024-12-10 DOI:10.1111/jpet.70009
Paul Pecorino
{"title":"Matching Versus Raffles as a Fund-Raising Device","authors":"Paul Pecorino","doi":"10.1111/jpet.70009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Matching is a commonly used fund-raising tactic, whereby small donors have their donation to a charity matched via a fund established by large donors. I developed a model in which a single large donor decides whether to establish a matching fund or contribute to the public good via the voluntary contributions mechanism (VCM). The credibility of the matching fund is an endogenous component of the model. For a match to be credible, the organizer must have a credible promise not to top up the contributions of the small donors. If the number of small donors is sufficiently large, there always exists a matching fund that is both credible and leads to a Pareto improvement relative to the VCM. When the matching fund needs to satisfy an endogenous credibility constraint, all of the outcomes that are eliminated due to this constraint are outcomes under which small donors are worse off relative to the VCM. The matching fund is also compared with a raffle mechanism. As the number of small donors grows large, public good provision under the two mechanisms converges. However, the matching function outperforms the raffle when there is a finite number of small donors.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47024,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Economic Theory","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Economic Theory","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jpet.70009","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Matching is a commonly used fund-raising tactic, whereby small donors have their donation to a charity matched via a fund established by large donors. I developed a model in which a single large donor decides whether to establish a matching fund or contribute to the public good via the voluntary contributions mechanism (VCM). The credibility of the matching fund is an endogenous component of the model. For a match to be credible, the organizer must have a credible promise not to top up the contributions of the small donors. If the number of small donors is sufficiently large, there always exists a matching fund that is both credible and leads to a Pareto improvement relative to the VCM. When the matching fund needs to satisfy an endogenous credibility constraint, all of the outcomes that are eliminated due to this constraint are outcomes under which small donors are worse off relative to the VCM. The matching fund is also compared with a raffle mechanism. As the number of small donors grows large, public good provision under the two mechanisms converges. However, the matching function outperforms the raffle when there is a finite number of small donors.

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
配对与莱佛士作为筹款工具
配对是一种常用的筹款策略,小额捐赠者通过大型捐赠者建立的基金将其捐赠给慈善机构。我开发了一个模型,在这个模型中,单个大型捐赠者决定是否建立匹配基金或通过自愿捐款机制(VCM)为公共利益做出贡献。匹配基金的可信度是该模型的内生成分。为了使比赛可信,组织者必须有一个可信的承诺,不增加小额捐助者的捐款。如果小额捐助者的数量足够大,那么总会存在一个匹配的基金,它既可信,又能导致相对于VCM的帕累托改进。当匹配基金需要满足一个内生的可信度约束时,所有由于这个约束而被消除的结果都是小捐助者相对于VCM更差的结果。配对基金还与抽奖机制进行了比较。随着小额捐助者数量的增加,两种机制下的公共产品提供趋于一致。然而,当小额捐赠者数量有限时,匹配功能优于抽奖。
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
36.40%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: As the official journal of the Association of Public Economic Theory, Journal of Public Economic Theory (JPET) is dedicated to stimulating research in the rapidly growing field of public economics. Submissions are judged on the basis of their creativity and rigor, and the Journal imposes neither upper nor lower boundary on the complexity of the techniques employed. This journal focuses on such topics as public goods, local public goods, club economies, externalities, taxation, growth, public choice, social and public decision making, voting, market failure, regulation, project evaluation, equity, and political systems.
期刊最新文献
Social Norms Drivers on Public Good Contributions Persuasion in Networks With Strategic Substitutes How to Deal with Exchange Rate Risk in Infrastructure and Other Long-Lived Projects Deliberation and Voting: A Matter of Truth or Taste Corrigendum: Heterogeneity, Impatience, and Dynamic Private Provision of a Discrete Public Good
×
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