Podcasts about histphil

In this episode, we sat down to talk about how we understand and measure global generosity with Pamala Wiepking,  Stead Family Chair in International Philanthropy and Associate Professor of Philanthropy at the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy at IUPUI in Indianapolis (and also Professor of Societal Significance of Charitable Lotteries at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands). Including:Is “philanthropy” a helpful word in a global context?If not, why not: do people not understand it, or do they understand it, but with particular connotations?If we use terms such as ”generosity” instead, is there still a use for “philanthropy” to denote a specific subset of that activity? (And if so, what subset?) Is there any danger that if we broaden our definitions of generosity too far in our desire to make them more universal, they will become meaningless? Do we need a “grand theory” of global generosity? What are the obvious gaps, biases and limitations in our current knowledge about generosity at a global level?Is it useful to distinguish between philanthropic giving based on traditions of charity/altruism and other forms of giving grounded in traditions of mutualism/reciprocity? Or should we blur these distinctions within a wider conception of generosity?How important is it to “decolonize philanthropy research” as well as expanding our definitions of generosity?Is the role of philanthropy academics simply to observe and analyse giving and generosity, or to encourage it?Are current measures of global generosity useful? If not, why not?Apart from the challenges of finding appropriate definitions, are there other barriers to measuring generosity at a global level?Are we in the midst of a "generosity crisis", or is the apparent decline in giving in places like the US, the UK and the Netherlands merely a reflection of the fact that the way we measure generosity has failed to evolve in step with how people actually choose to give?Should the policy mechanisms we currently use to encourage and support philanthropic giving (e.g. tax reliefs) be adapted to encompass a broader range of activities that fit within an expanded definition of generosity?Related linksPamala's personal websiteThe call for contributors to the forthcoming volume on  “Philanthropy: Key debates and contending perspectives”, edited by Pamala and Femida HandyPamala's Voluntas article on  "The Global Study of Philanthropic Behavior". Pamala's article for HistPhil, "An inclusive study of global philanthropy: how can we overcome definitional, cultural and geographical boundaries?" 2022's "Philanthropy in a Different Perspective: Voices from Ethiopia, Nigeria and Serbia", a volume edited by Pamala & Femida Handy.Rhod's WPM article asking "Is the way that we talk about philanthropy and civil society holding us back?"Rhod's WPM article "Why Are We So Bad at Measuring Giving and Why Does It Matter?"

In this episode we talk to Aaron Horvath, a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Stanford University's Center on Philanthropy & Civil Society, about his research on how nonprofits responded in an unexpected way to new regulatory reporting demands- going well above and beyond what was expected of them. Including:What is the notion of "supererogation" and how is it applied in this research to analyse the response of nonprofits to new accountability demands?Why did nonprofits choose to report more than was asked of them?Are there any risks involved in doing so?What form does supererogation take? Is it primarily narrative (i.e. nonprofits adding contextual written information to “tell their story”) or do they also create alternative quantitative measures?Is supererogation with respect to external measures a demonstration of empowerment, or does it reflect disempowerment?Why has there been an increased emphasis on measurement and metrics in the nonprofit world?Is there a danger that external metrics reinforce the tendency for nonprofits to see themselves as accountable to regulators, funders or donors, rather than to their recipients?Do rankings and ratings lead to a greater degree of homogeneity in the nonprofit world? Is the desire to have metrics that can be applied equally to all CSOs regardless of cause area fundamentally misguided?If there are elements of value in the work of civil society that we cannot capture in any of our current measurement systems, do we need to find better ways of measuring, or give up on the idea that everything is measurable?Has the tide turned against metrics and impact measurement in the nonprofit world in recent years? If so, why?Why have LLCs become popular among certain groups of elite donors? Should we believe the narratives about a greater desire for flexibility, or be sceptical about whether it is driven more by a desire to bypass mimimal transparency and accountability requirements?Do LLCs undermine the “Grand Bargain”, in which the power to influence through philanthropy is balanced by accountability to wider society? Was this Grand Bargain actually functioning in practice anyway?Related linksAaron's paper "Organizational Supererogation and theTransformation of Nonprofit Accountability"Aaron's websiteAaron's HistPhil piece "Civil society by the numbers? Nonprofits, accountability, and the creative politics of quantitative discipline"Aaron's article for Alliance (with Micah McElroy) "LLCs – Good apples from a rotten tree"Aaron's essay in the 2022 Stanford PACS Blueprint, "Counting Alone?"Philanthropisms podcast with Michael Thatcher of CharityNavigatorWPM article on the history of attempts to count charitable giving

In this episode we discuss the links between religion, faith and giving with David P. King, Karen Lake Buttrey Director of the Lake Institute on Faith & Giving and Associate Professor of Philanthropic Studies at the Lilly Family School on Philanthropy at Indiana University- Purdue University, Indiana. Including:How important a part does faith play in motivating and shaping approaches to giving in the modern world?What role has it played historically?When it comes to faith as a factor in philanthropy, what is most important:Observance of specific religious requirements to give (e.g. tithing, Tzedakah, Zakat)?Broader religious teachings on ethics & responsibility?Attendance at places of worship?A sense of shared religious identity?How do religious teachings on the nature of poverty and justice affect the likelihood of their followers giving and the ways in which they give?Are we seeing a decline in faith in places like the UK and the US, or simply a shift away from organised, collective religion to more informal, individual spirituality? What impact might this have on giving?Are places of worship important in maintaining cultures of giving?To what extent is this because of their religious nature and to what extent is it simply because they are community buildings that bring people together, or act as a location for grassroots/informal activity?At a time when secular community spaces are becoming fewer, do places of worship have an increasingly important role to play as community anchors? Are they  embracing this role, and how?How much of the giving that goes towards religion in the US is for the maintenance of religious institutions themselves, and how much gets passed on into wider charitable activities?What role has faith (especially missionary faith) played in shaping the field of international development and humanitarian aid?Does faith still play an important role today? (E.g. given that quite a few major INGOs have religious roots, and are ostensibly still religious orgs)Does the academic study of philanthropy and civil society need to do more in terms of taking into account the role of faith groups?What challenges does this pose? (i.e. Different literatures/concepts, specialist knowledge of the structures of religious orgs required etc?).Related Links:The Lake Institute on Faith and GivingDavid's profile page at the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, IUPUIDavid's 2017 Conversation article "Why Faith Inspires People to Give"David's blog for Lilly Family School of Philanthropy "Giving 2021: Pandemic lessons and the future of religious giving"David's HistPhil article, "Religion's Role in International Relief and Development: World Vision and the Age of Evangelical Humanitarianism".Philanthropisms podcast episode with David's Lilly Family School of Philanthropy colleague Tyrone McKinley Freeman

In this episode we talk to Tyrone McKinley Freeman, Associate Professor of Philanthropic Studies at the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, IUPUI about his book "Madam C. J. Walker's Gospel of Giving: Black Women's Philanthropy During Jim Crow" and about the history and current context of Black philanthropy. Including:Madam C. J. Walker:Who was Madam C. J. Walker, and why is she such an important figure in the history of philanthropy?Was what she represented- as a role model of an independent, successful Black woman who used her position to speak out and support others- just as significant as the monetary value of her donations?Blurred Lines Madam Walker's story highlights the fact that Black communities have often not had the luxury of distinguishing between philanthropy, commerce and politics, as they have been forced to use all tools at their disposal to further their aims. Is this blurring of the boundaries something we could learn from today?Madam C. J. Walker's giving is distinct from many other major historical philanthropists in being grounded in traditions of mutual aid rather than charity- how did this shape her approach, and what could we learn from this today?Civil RightsHow important a focus for Madam C. J. Walker's philanthropy was civil rights?  Where does she fit in the debate between accommodationists and those arguing that the goal should be equality whilst retaining a distinct Black identity?EducationWhy was education such an important part of Madam Walker's philanthropy?Does her support for Black educational institutions confuse the dominant narrative that positions many of these institutions as tools for white social control?Women's PhilanthropyTo what extent has philanthropy helped to equip Black women with skills and tools for wider civic engagement? Has this led to engagement with issues of women's rights?The Role of PhilanthropoidsHow did Freeman B. Ransom shape Madam C. J. Walker's philanthropy? Did he merely interpret her wishes and goals, or can we only understand her philanthropy by taking into account his role too?The History of Black PhilanthropyIs there a distinct field/practice of Black philanthropy? Does a proper understanding of the history of Black philanthropy require us to broaden our viewpoints and definitions about what should count as “philanthropy”? Who are the other key Black philanthropists from history that we should be paying attention to? Is there an ‘archival inequality' because a lot of philanthropy in black communities historically took place outside the boundaries of formal organisations and is thus less likely to be captured in records? Related Links:Webiste for "Gospel of Giving"Tyrone's IUPUI profile pageTyrone's HistPhil piece, 7 Ways to Read around the History of Philanthropy's Diversity Problem this Black History MonthTyrone's paper with Kim Williams-Pulfer "Liberating the Archive, Emancipating Philanthropy: Philanthropic Archival Layering as a Critical Historical Approach for Researching Voluntary Action in Marginalized Communities"Philanthropisms podcast with Maribel Morey talking about her book "White Philanthropy"

In this episode we take a look at the growing prevalence of "platform philanthropy" (i.e. giving and organising via online platforms) and the opportunities and challenges this presents. Including:The rise of the platform economy & the current state of platform philanthropyAre we seeing a shift from dedicated platforms for giving, towards commercial organisations adding giving functionality to their existing platforms?How is the growing use of direct payment platforms like CashApp and Venmo affecting philanthropy?Who owns the the platforms we use for giving and what drives them?Are there risks to our growing dependence on platforms?How do platforms shape our choices when it comes to giving?What can the recent controversies over Spotify and the Joe Rogan podcast, and GoFundMe withholding donations to the Freedom Convoy, tell us about the responsibilities that platforms bear regarding the organisations they enable people to give to?Is platform technology bringing us full-circle back to the traditional model of person-to-person giving? What opportunities and what risks does this present?Why does the history of Victorian voting charities have to tell us about the potential risks of bias in crowdfunding and P2P giving?Will perverse incentives within the "attention economy" lead to new challenges for CSOs?Will platforms and the rise of Web3 lead to more emphasis on decentralised forms of organising in civil society?Can technology overcome the known weaknesses of decentralised models, or do we risking discovering old problems in new forms?Related Links:Philanthropisms podcast conversation with Lucy BernholzRhod's 2020 piece for Alliance, "The Ethics of Platform Philanthropy"Rhod's paper presented at the 2019 ARNOVA conference, "Networking Opportunities: Rediscovering decentralisation in philanthropy & civil society?""The Giving Apps: How Venmo and Cash App Upended a Century-Old Charity Model"Rhod's HistPhil article, "Networked Social Movements and the 'Tyranny of Structurelessness'"Rhod's 2019 Charity Digital News article "Before Diving Into 'Platform Philanthropy', Charities Need to Ask Some Big Ethical Questions"

In this episode, Rhod talks to author and historian Maribel Morey about her new book White Philanthropy: Carnegie Corporation's 'An American Dilemma' and the Making of a White World Order. Including:What is "An American Dilemma" and what role has it played in the history of thinking about race in the US?What are some of the contemporary and subsequent critiques of the report?Why do we need to re-evaluate the role of the Carnegie Corporation in shaping the development and eventual narrative of "An American Dilemma"?How does the origin of "An American Dilemma" fit into the wider global context of imperialism at the time?Is the role of the people who administer philanthropic wealth (the “philanthropoids”) too often underappreciated in historical study?Were Carnegie Corporation figures like Frederick Keppel and James Betram genuinely trying to interpret Andrew Carnegie's wishes as they understood them, or were they using their roles as amanuenses to impose their own views?Can the Carnegie Corporation's support for “An American Dilemma” be interpreted as a highly successful example of “upstream philanthropy” i.e. funding research or analysis that sets the parameters for public debate and policy formation?Can we learn lessons today about how philanthropy can influence long-term change?What can the example of Carnegie Corporation and "An American Dilemma" tell us about current debates over the tension between incrementalism and radicalism in philanthropy? Would it have been better in the long run if progressive foundations that pursued assimilationist approaches or which viewed racial equality as a process that involved Black Americans increasingly conforming to White norms had simply stayed away from race as an issue altogether?How widespread and acceptable among philanthropists and foundations of the first half of the C20th was the view that eugenics and forced population control were part of the solution to the “race problem”?Does there need to be more of a reckoning with this history?What value can a historical perspective can bring to philanthropists, funders and non-profit professionals?Are there limits to the utility of historical comparison in understanding the present? Related Links:Maribel's book White PhilanthropyMaribel's personal websiteThe Miami Institute for the Social Sciences, where Maribel is Founding Executive DirectorHistPhil (where Maribel is co-Editor)"Behind the Scenes of White Philanthropy", Maribel's article for HistPhil"Julius Rosenwald Was Not a Hero", Maribel's 2017 HistPhil articlePhilanthropisms podcast with Ben Soskis"Why Study the History of Philanthropy?", Rhod's 2020 CAF blog

In this episode Rhod talks to Ben Soskis, a Senior Research Associate at the Urban Institute's Center on Nonprofits and Philanthropy and co-Editor of the website HistPhil.org, about the big issues and themes in US philanthropy over the last few years and where things might go in the future. Including:How has the pandemic shifted perceptions of philanthropy in the US over the short term? Are those perceptions likely to get better or worse over the longer-term, post pandemic?Mackenzie Scott: What are the most interesting/encouraging things about her emergence as a major philanthropist? What are the main questions that still need answering? Has she had an impact on the general public perception of philanthropy?Elon Musk: Is he the world's first "Troll Philanthropist"? What does his emergence as a major giver mean for the norms of philanthropic discourse? Bill Gates: Has any of the controversy over the Gates Foundation's involvement in vaccine development had an effect on the overall narrative about philanthropy in the US?Have the norms around time horizons in philanthropy shifted as a result of the pandemic? i.e. will we see more calls for foundations to spend down their endowments?Why are a growing number of elite donors/institutional funders interested in supporting the growth of everyday giving? What opportunities (and potential challenges) does the involvement of big money philanthropy in developing cultures of mass giving present?Why are we seeing more emphasis on direct cash giving in recent years? Is the growth primarily driven by individual P2P giving, or by organisations employing direct giving models? If the latter, is this primarily driven by a desire to democratise/shift power or by a belief that it delivers better results in terms of outcomes?Related Links:The HistPhil websiteBen's Urban Institute paper on "Norms and Narratives That Shape US Charitable and Philanthropic Giving"The recent New York Times article "Elon Musk's Latest Innovation: Troll Philanthropy" (which Ben and Rhod were both quoted in).Rhod's blog on "MacKenzie Scott & the History of Challenging Philanthropy's Status Quo" Rhod's blog "The Edgelord Giveth: Elon Musk & a new era of discourse about philanthropy?"Rhod's previous conversation with Ben on the CAF Giving Thought podcast 

In this episode we look at the relationship between sport, philanthropy and civil society through history and up to the present day. Including:   Sportspeople as donors Big name examples of sportspeople who give generously: David Beckham, Roger Federer, Cristiano Ronaldo, Serena Williams, Andre Agassi What drives this high-profile giving? Altruism, or brand-management/PR? Lance Armstrong and the potential risks of making philanthropy over-reliant on the individual Does the fact that many sportspeople’s careers end relatively early leave them searching for purpose, and can philanthropy fill that gap? Can philanthropy be partly motivate by a desire to create positive narrative about wealth accrued through sport? Is sport one area where people from poor backgrounds can become rich, and what does this mean for their approach to philanthropy?   Sportspeople as campaigners Are some sportspeople perceived as campaigners simply by virtue of who they are? When have sportspeople campaigned for change within their sport and when have they taken on wider social issues? After many notable examples of campaigning by sportspeople in the 1960s and 70s, why did we see a decline in the 1980s and 1990s? Are we seeing a resurgence in campaigning by sportspeople, with figures like Colin Kapaernick, Megan Rapinoe and Marcus Rashford coming to the fore? How do sports fans perceive campaigning by sportspeople?   Sports and Fundraising The long history of sporting charity fundraising events and the role of charity matches in the evolution of professional football Sportspeople fundraising: from the traditional of testimonial matches to raise money for players’ retirements to sportspeople taking on charity fundraising challenges in other sports Has the pandemic hit sports fundraising particularly hard, and what does this mean for charities that rely on running events etc?   Sports clubs and civil society What is the history of the relationship between sports clubs and voluntary associations? How did the development of sporting associations helped to foster civic engagement skills and ideals of mutual aid? What is the role of modern sports clubs as corporate donors? Is owning sports club a form of philanthropy…? What role do clubs play in acting as community anchors and giving people a sense of shared identity? How can this inform social action?       Related Links   CAF Giving Thought blog on Marcus Rashford, Dolly Parton & Public Perceptions of Philanthropy CAF Giving Thought blog on mutual aid post-Covid CAF Giving Thought podcast on mutual aid, charity & philanthropy CAF Giving Thought podcast with Jon Dean 2013 NY Times article about Lance Armstrong’s philanthropy HistPhil article “Giving Athletes: Why Sports Philanthropy Deserves Our Attention” Forbes, “The New Wave of Female Soccer Players as Philanthropists” BBC article, “Why Wealthy Sport Stars Get Passionate About Charity” The Common Goal Initiative The PFA page on player foundations Kay & Vamplew, “Beyond altruism: British football and charity, 1877–1914” Vamplew, “’It is pleasing to know that football can be devoted to charitable purposes': British football and charity 1870–1918”

This week is the tenth and final episode of Philanthropy Daily's first season of Givers, Doers, & Thinkers. But don't fret, we'll be back with season two in February 2021! Today, Jeremy speaks with historian and journalist Ben Soskis. He's been featured in the Washington Post, the Atlantic, the Guardian, New Yorker online, and is the co-editor of HistPhil, an online publication on the history of the philanthropic and nonprofit sector.  Additionally, Ben is a research associate for the Center on Nonprofits and Philanthropy at the Urban Institute. Jeremy and Ben discuss the history of philanthropy, its critiques, and how it differs from charity. You'll also hear from American Philanthropic managing consultant Laura Pallares. Laura shares how to prepare and plan for the future when its crisis hits and ways to ensure your organization comes out on top once the dust settles. You can find Givers, Doers, & Thinkers here at Philanthropy Daily, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, Google Podcasts, Buzzsprout, and wherever you listen to podcasts.We'd love to hear your thoughts, ideas, questions, and recommendations for the podcast! You can shoot Katie Janus, GDT's producer, an email anytime!

In episode 75 we take a look at the key issues facing civil society and philanthropy during the covid-19 pandemic crisis and beyond. We explore the benefits of historical insight, highlight some of the main challenges civil society organisations face right now, and consider the most important questions to ask as we look ahead to the future. Including:   The history of philanthropy and civil society in times of crisis Centralization- what can we learn from C18th Hamburg and WWI in the UK about how crises lead to a desire to rationalise philanthropy? How do views on the causes of crises affect the philanthropic response? Religious views on plagues and the role of charity, and how the understanding of epidemic illness affects collectivism and mutualism. Poverty, Power & Inequality: The unequal effects of crises and the dangers- does philanthropy entrench inequality, or can it help to overcome it?   Key current trends Reduced income but increased demand. Many orgs in survival mode. Universal nature of crisis makes fundraising ask more complex (i.e. not “them”, but “us”) Enforced pivot to digital - how do you adapt to new tools and avoid pitfalls? Funder behaviour: unrestricted grants, core-cost funding, reduced reporting, trust-based grantmaking Collaboration, cooperation & coordination New digitally-enabled networks emerging alongside traditional charities     What might the future hold? Will we see a shift in public expectations of state vs philanthropic provision? Will there be a rebalancing of the mutual vs charitable tradition? Philanthro-localism or philanthro-globalism? Will the reputation of philanthropy improve or deteriorate? Are decentralised and networked organisational models an opportunity or a threat for civil society? Does the response to the pandemic highlight an unmet desire for participation? Will the current period of enforced digitisation lead to more CSOs engaging with the opportunities and challenges of technology? Is the short-term imperative to meet critical need going to lead to a longer-term desire to rationalise philanthropy? Will we see more transparency and sharing of data? Are we seeing the end of organisational ego in philanthropy? Will there be longer-term changes in attitudes to core costs, unrestricted grants and reporting requirements? Will we see a shift in perception/norms with regard to endowed assets? Will there be more recognition of the need for foresight among funders and civil society? Will the crisis create new problems for civil society to address?     Related Links Rhod’s HistPhil blog “Philanthropy in A Time of Crisis: Lessons from European History” CAF’s Philanthropy Stimulus Package proposal paper CAF's recent webinar on "Covid-19: latest insight on how charities and donors are reacting" Rhod’s Giving Thought blog “Philanthropy & Civil Society After Covid-19: Key questions for the future” Our recent CAF Giving Thought podcast series on “voices from civil society during Covid-19” Our podcast with Cassie Robinson from National Lottery Community Fund  

 In episode 64, we explore the philanthropic response to the ongoing bushfires in Australia and what it highlights about philanthropy issues and trends. We also give take a look at some of the other top philanthropy stories in the news. The Aussie Bushfires: How does the philanthropic response to the Aussie bushfires compare to the Notre Dame Cathedral fire last year? Does it tell us anything about the differences between our response to man-made vs natural disasters, or disasters affecting man-made heritage vs natural heritage? Does the fact that the Aussie bushfires are highly dispersed make a difference? Are environmental issues less likely to be perceived as “elite”, and thus philanthropy focused on them less likely to be criticised as “self-interested”? Is the response to the bushfires partly about people feeling a sense of agency over the issue of climate change, which often seems so huge that it can cause donation paralysis? Does the fact that animals as well as humans have been affected make a difference? Has the ongoing nature of the fires helped to make the relief effort itself a focus of philanthropy? What questions does the voluntary nature of the firefighting services some raise about state responsibility vs that of philanthropy? Has the response of elite philanthropists been slower than in the Notre Dame case? If so, why? Could the fact that many Aussie philanthropists have made their money in extractive industries play a part in making them reticent to engage with a problem that is clearly being linked to climate change? Celeste Barber’s Facebook fundraiser: what does her runaway success tell us about the distributed nature of fundraising in the future? What challenges does it highlight? Other fundraising efforts: “The Nude Philanthropist” and altruistic drug dealers…   In other news: MIT releases damning report into Jeffrey Epstein links- not good for the institution Is there a “war on philanthropy”? Karl Zinnsmeister’s op ed for the Wall Street Journal, and the ongoing debate in the US. Columbia Journalism Review article on challenges with philanthropic funding skewing the priorities of non-profit news orgs. Harry & Meghan: stepping away from royal duty to focus on other things, in which philanthropy likely to play large role. Does this raise potentially interesting questions about the nature of inherited vs created wealth, ownership/stewardship, and the role of philanthropy vs being a public figure.   Related links Aussie Bushfires Our Giving Thought podcast on “Notre Dame: Lessons for Philanthropy” Article in The Australian “Bushfire recovery: Donor war as Andrew and Nicola Forrest donate $70m” Former podcast guest Krystian Seibert’s Conversation Au piece on “How to Give to Bushfire Relief” Zagefka et al (2010) “Donating to disaster victims: Responses to natural and humanly caused events”, European Journal of Social Psychology, Volume 41, Issue 3, April 2011, 353-363 ABC News, “Why Celeste Barber's bushfire fundraiser is more complicated than it seems” ABC News, “Gina Rinehart hits back at Celeste Barber’s criticism over bushfires” Vox, “Nude photos raised over $1 million for the Australia fires” NZ Herald “Drug dealer promises to donate 10 per cent of cocaine earnings to Aussie bush fire appeal” CAF World Giving Index: 10 Year Trends   In other News: MIT’s report into links with Jeffrey Epstein (and check out our Giving Thought podcast on Tainted Donations) Karl Zinnsmeister’s WSJ op ed ($),a critical response in Non-Profit Quarterly (And for more context, my piece for HistPhil on the history of state vs voluntary provision) Columbia Journalism Review piece on foundation funding and non-profit journalism (and check out our Giving Thought podcast from 2019 with Sameer Padania)

Maribel Morey is Assistant Professor of History at Clemson University and one of the founders of HistPhil.org. On this episode of Groupthinkers, host Justin McCord visits with Maribel about the creation of a blog about philanthropy's history--and how it connects us to philanthropy's future. Follow Groupthinkers on Twitter/Instagram @groupthinkers. For more information visit rkdgroup.com/podcast.

In episode 56 we take a deep dive into the issue of "tainted donations". Is some money "bad", and if so can it ever be turned to good uses through philanthropy? Including: Recent versions of the tainted donation issue: Epstein & MIT Media Lab, the Sacklers, The Presidents Club The history of tainted donations: mediaeval prostitutes, Rockefeller & Carnegie in the firing line, George Cadbury, George Bernard Shaw, William Booth What do we mean by tainted? In cases where there is no clear illegality, how do we navigate much more contested ethical grey areas? Do we need to differentiate between criticisms of specific ways in which has been made (e.g. fossil fuels, arms manufacture, tobacco) and broader structural critiques of capitalism as a whole? Do the ethical concerns associated with a particular source of money relate directly to the way in which the money was made, or are they indirect? Does this affect the moral status of a donation? In a highly interconnected world, with global financial systems, does it make sense to talk of any money as ‘tainted’ or ‘pure’? Is it better for charities to refuse ethically dubious donations in order to avoid damaging themselves by association, or do they have a responsibility to take the money and put it to good uses? What level of control is a tainted donor seeking to exert over how their money is used? How does this affect the decision about whether to accept it or not? Will the donor get personal benefit from their donation- either in the form of tangible thanks or recognition, or in the form of more intangible social status and connections? Does this make accepting a gift more problematic? Does a organisation’s decision to take money always imply approval of the donor to some degree? Is it possible to counteract this implication through overt condemnation whilst still taking the money? In order to justify taking a charity accepting a tainted donation, does its work have to address a harm related to the way in which the money was made i.e. does there have to be some element of reparation? Is there a statute of limitations on tainted donations? What should we do in cases of historic wrongs that occurred so long ago that no one affected is still alive? On what legal basis can charity trustees decide to refuse a donation? How do trustees balance the potential reputational risk of accepting a tainted donation against the certainty of financial loss from not accepting it? Does public opinion actually support charities turning down donations from tainted sources? If a donation has already been made, is it even possible in charity law for it to be returned?   Related Links  -Ronan Farrow's New Yorker piece on Jeffrey Epstein and MIT MEdia Lab -CAF Giving Thought Blog, “When Should Charities Say No To Donations?” -CAF Giving Thought Blog “The Wages of Sin: Doing good with bad money” -The “Criticisms of Philanthropy” chapter from my book Public Good by Private Means -Matthew Ross’s HistPhil article about the history of donations to Notre Dame -Ben Soskis’s Atlantic article “Dirty Money: from Rockefeller to Koch” -G.K. Chesterton's attack on J.D. Rockefeller: "Gifts of the Millionaire" -Beth Breeze’s Guardian article “Should charities accept contrition cash from dubious donors?” -John Picton’s Conversation article “Sackler donations: why museums and galleries can be stuck with gifts – even if they don’t want them”  

In episode 53, we look at structure and philanthropy. Exploring how philanthropy and civil society has become structured over time, what the drivers for this are, and what new possibilities the future may hold. Including:  The reformation and the dismantling of medieval catholic infrastructure for giving Urbanisation, poverty and associated philanthropy The charitable/philanthropic tradition vs the mutual/cooperative tradition in the UK Concerns about 'faction' and voluntary association in the US Benefits of structure: coordination, economies of scale, setting and maintaining strategy, separating the individual from their role, making rules explicit Structure and power: formalisation as a form of social control? Endowed structures: foundations, trusts and waqfs Nonprofit and charity structures in the UK and US Donor Advised Funds and Charitable Remainder Trusts Non-traditional structures: LLCs, B Corps etc. Disintermediating giving: direct cash transfers and crowdfunding Network social movements and the "Tyranny of Structurelessness     Related Links: -My book, Public Good by Private Means: How philanthropy shapes Britain -Dobkin Hall, P. (1999) “Resolving the Dilemmas of Democratic Governance: The Historical Development of Trusteeship in America, 1636-1996” in Condliffe Lagemann (ed) Philanthropic Foundations: New Scholarship, New Possibilities -Morris, R.J. (1990) “Clubs, Societies & Associations” in Thompson (ed) The Cambridge Social History of Britain vol 3. -Morris, R.J. (1983) “Voluntary Societies and British Urban Elites, 1780-1850: An Analysis”, The Historical Journal, vol 26, No. 1 -Davies (2014)“Give Me a Break: Why the UK should not aspire to a ‘US-style’ culture of charitable giving”, Giving Thought discussion paper -My piece for HistPhil on “Networked Social Movements and the “Tyranny of Structurelessness””    

In episode 37, we explore the relationship between philanthropy and the notion of a Welfare State. We look at the role philanthropy played in the origins of state welfare, what economics and other sciences can tell us about the relationship between the two, and how we should view the role of philanthropy in relation to the state today. Including: -The history of the back-and-forth relationship between philanthropy and state in the UK -Why did some think the birth of the Welfare State should have spelt the end for philanthropy? -Is there a relationship between the size of the state and levels of giving? -Does state welfare provision necessarily "crowd out" philanthropy? Or could it actually "crowd it in"? -The importance of charitable campaigning within the welfare state -The emergence of outsourcing and public service commissioning -Are we now seeing a backlash against public service delivery by charities?   Links: My piece on “The UK Civil Society Strategy and The History of State vs Philanthropic Welfare Provision” for HistPhil.org Davies, R (2016) Public Good by Private Means: How philanthropy shapes Britain, Ch 2 “Philanthropy and Welfare” CAF (2016), Gross Domestic Philanthropy: An international analysis of tax, GDP & giving Andreoni & Payne, (2009) Is crowding out entirely due to fundraising?, Journal of Public Economics 95 Andreoni & Payne, (2003) Do Government Grants to Private Charities Crowd Out Giving or Fund-raising?, American Economic Review No 93 vol 3. Andreoni (1993) An Experimental Test of the Crowding Out Hypothesis, The American Economic Review No 83 vol 5. CAF Giving Thought blog (2018) ‘Initial thoughts on the Civil Society Strategy”

In episode 28, Rhod is joined by Ben Soskis, a Fellow at the Urban Institute and editor of HistPhil.org, for a wide-ranging (and quite long!) chat about the history of philanthropy and what it can teach us about the big challenges facing charities and donors today. They talked about all sorts of things, such as: -Why is studying the history of philanthropy worthwhile, and what are the limitations of historical comparison? -What are the most telling criticisms of philanthropy that have been seen through the ages? -Which supposedly “new” developments in philanthropy actually have historical precedents? What, if anything, is genuinely new? -Is philanthropy anti-democratic? Can that sometimes be a good thing? -Why have power dynamics always been such a challenge for philanthropy, and what efforts have been taken to overcome this challenge? -What are the biggest challenges facing philanthropy in the US right now?   Related content: histphil.org George Soros and the Demonization of Philanthropy (An article by Ben for The Atlantic) The Importance of Criticizing Philanthropy (An article by Ben for The Atlantic) New Realities for Philanthropy in the Trump Era (An article by Ben for the Chronicle of Philanthropy) Dirty Money: From Rockefeller to Koch (An article by Ben for The Atlantic) The History of the “Giving While Living” Ethic (Report by Ben, commissioned by Atlantic Philanthropies) Philanthropy: Anti-democratic and proud of it? (Rhod) Philanthropy and Inequality: Part of the solution or part of the problem? (Rhod) Public Good by Private Means: How Philanthropy Shapes Britain (Rhod’s book)  

In episode 22, we explore whether philanthropy is progressive: i.e. is it a means for moving society forwards or a tool for defending the status quo? Including:   The case for: On what grounds can we claim that philanthropy is progressive? We look at cause areas associated with progressive ideals, and the rich history of philanthropic support for campaigning. And could the very process of philanthropy also be seen as a tool for social progress?   The case against: We ask whether conservation and heritage causes are, by definition, not progressive. We also consider the long traditional of opposition to progressive causes being supported by philanthropy; and highlight evidence that wealthier people are more likely to hold conservative political views. We also ask whether philanthropy itself undermines progress by adding to inequality and power imbalance in our society.   Remedies: What can we do to ensure philanthropy is progressive? Should this actually be a goal, or should we simply accept that philanthropy reflects the balance of views of donors? Are there ways in which we can change the mechanics of philanthropy in order to make it more democratic and thus more reflective of the views of wider society?   Related Material   -HistPhil series on philanthropy and conservatism   -“Suffragettes & Campaigning” (Extract from Public Good by Private Means: How philanthropy shapes Britain)   -PGPM Cass MSc course lecture SLIDES and NOTES   -Philanthropy: anti-democratic and proud of it?   -Democracy and the Policy Preferences of Wealthy Americans

 On this week’s Past Present podcast, Nicole Hemmer, Natalia Mehlman Petrzela, and Neil Young discuss Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan’s philanthropic gift, the history of baby names, and “prayer shaming.” Here are some links and references mentioned during this week’s show:Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan announced they would donate 99 percent of their Facebook shares to charity, totaling some $45 billion. Some observers have been critical of the couple's decision. Niki pointed to Napster founder Sean Parker’s manifesto, “Philanthropy for Hackers” as a precursor to this debate. Natalia mentioned that books like Matthew Bishop’s Philanthrocapitalism have applauded the way billionaires are devoting themselves more to charitable giving and thereby reshaping the world. We recommend reading the history of philanthropy blog, HistPhil, for more. As a starting point, check out Benjamin Soskis’s essay on the Ford Foundation and the Gospel of Wealth.The most popular baby names of 2015 have been released, and gender-neutral options and names inspired by Instagram filters have made the list. Natalia reminded us that the bestseller Freakonomics has a chapter devoted to the economic consequences of what parents name their children. Niki shared the baby name generator that allows you to see what your name would be if you had been born at different points in history.In the wake of the San Bernardino shooting, the New York Daily News devoted its cover page to attacking Republican politicians who offered “thoughts and prayers” instead of political solutions to the nation’s gun crisis. Conservatives lashed back, decrying the rise of liberal “prayer shaming.” But Neil argued against the false dichotomy of a religious right and secular left in this debate, pointing out many liberals had offered their prayers while several Christian conservatives had criticized the thoughtless habit of extending “thoughts and prayers” on social media. In our regular closing feature, What’s Making History:Natalia discussed Witness Against Torture’s viral video, Thanksgiving at Guantanamo.Neil recommended the hit BBC television show, The Great British Bake Off. Niki shared Mason B. Williams’s essay in the Atlantic, “The Crumbling Monuments of the Age of Marble.”