Does One Contribution Come at the Expense of Another? Empirical Evidence on Substitution Between Charitable Donations (original) (raw)
Related papers
Does One Charitable Contribution Come at the Expense of Another?
2010
Abstract This paper defines, discusses, and measures “expenditure substitution” in charitable giving. Motivated by a model of conditional demand, I consider the extent to which a “temporary shock” that increases an individual's donation to one cause by a particular amount displaces her gifts to other charitable causes. I use the 2001-2007 waves of the PSID/COPPS, the first data set of its kind, to identify this. Households that give more to one type of charity tend to give more to others.
Substitution Among Charitable Contributions: An Experimental Study
2010
Abstract The question of whether charitable gifts are complements or substitutes, and the extent to which charities are rivals, is unresolved in the economic literature. The answer is relevant to charities and policymakers, as well as to economic models of altruism. Identifying this using observational data is difficult: there is a lack of independent price variation and few observable shocks that can be claimed to specifically affect giving to one charity.
Substitution effects across charitable donations
Economics Letters, 2011
This paper examines substitution effects across charitable donations, specifically the effect of 2nd collections on 1st collections at Catholic Masses. While 2nd collections increased total donations by 17.8%, 18.4% of 2nd collection donations came from 1st collections which fell 4.3%.
Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 2012
Using household-level data, we explore the relationship between donations to the victims of the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami disaster and other charitable donations. The empirical evidence suggests that donations specifically for the victims of the tsunami are positively associated with the amount previously donated to other charitable causes, which accords with complementary rather than substitution effects. This relationship exists when we decompose overall charitable donations into different types of philanthropy, with charitable contributions to caring, needy and religious organizations having the largest positive association with donations to the victims of the tsunami.
An Econometric Analysis of Charitable Giving with Interdependent Preferences
Economic Inquiry, 1998
Many economists and social scientists have conjectured that individual gijh to charity may be interdependent. This paper explores empirically how an individual 5 * We thank the National Science Foundation and the La Follette Institute of Public Affairs for financial support. Andreoni also thanks the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. We are grateful to Gary Becker, Anne Case, William Gale, Robert Haveman, John Pepper and some anonymous referees for helpful comments, and to Joel Tomski for expert research assistance. Any errors are the responsibility of the authors.
The Price Elasticities of Charitable Contributions: AMeta-Analysis
2000
Tax deductibility has been recognized as a motive for charitable donations. The current paper considers charitable donations as purchases made by consumers and examines the effects of changes in the tax deductibility (i.e., the price of donating) on charitable donations. The meta-analysis includes almost four decades of estimates of the price elasticity of charitable giving. Implications for policymakers and the marketers of charities are discussed
The price elasticity of charitable giving: New experimental evidence
Economics Letters, 2018
h i g h l i g h t s • Measurement of price elasticity of charitable giving under rebate and matching subsidy mechanisms. • Amazon Mechanical Turk was used to conduct an online survey. • Intensive elasticity was calculated only for donors' subsample: donors are less responsive to price changes. • Extensive elasticity was calculated: the probability of giving increases monotonically along with subsidy rates. • Contributions under matching subsidies are significantly higher than contributions under rebate subsidies.