Mapping Australia's philanthropic investment in women and girls

The Australian Women Donors Network (Women Donors) partnered the Australian Centre for Philanthropy and Nonprofit Studies (ACPNS) at QUT to conduct this research. No studies exist on the size or sources of philanthropic giving in Australia directed intentionally towards the needs of women and girls. The survey aims to fill this knowledge gap and create a baseline for understanding trends and views in this area. Because the survey treads some new ground, its findings raise questions as well as giving answers. Encouragingly, 100 people from across the philanthropy spectrum completed the survey, embracing 41 individual donors and other respondents from various foundation types. Given the population difference, this response compares well with the 145 respondents to the USA-based Foundation Center’s 2009 European study (reported in 2011). The survey was designed for givers generally, not just those involved in giving to women and girls specifically. It is possible, though, that people with an interest in funding this area were more likely to participate. This potential oversampling may inflate the figures on funding women and girls to some degree. Also, because the population size of Australian philanthropists is unknown, no claims can be made that this information is generalizable to all Australian funders. Nonetheless, some patterns and themes emerge from the 100 responses.

Giving: The next generation – parental effects on donations

This paper provides a summary of what is known from social science research about the effects parents have on the donations of their children. It then goes on to summarize two on-going research projects. The first project provides estimates of the strength of the relationship between the charitable giving of parents and that of their adult children. The second provides estimates of the effect of inheritances on charitable donations. Both projects use data from the Center on Philanthropy Panel Study (COPPS); accordingly, the paper provides an introduction to these data. Finally, the paper draws implications for fundraisers from the two on-going projects, and suggests several other areas in which COPPS can generate knowledge to improve the practice of fundraising.

Domestic and international grantmaking : the comfort of codes

This paper focuses on codes of practice in domestic (in-country) and international (out of country) philanthropic giving/grantmaking, their similarities and differences. Codes of principle and practice are interesting not so much because they accurately reflect differences in practice on the ground, but rather because they indicate what is considered important or relevant, as well as aspirational. Codes tell us what people are most concerned about – what is seen to be in need of regulation or reminder.

Of Forrests and acrosn : philanthropic gift may seed other university giving

A$65 million pledge by Nicola and Andrew Forrest to all five West Australian univerisities alters the philanthropy landscape in Australia. The Forrest' donation comes less than a year after Louise and Graham Tuckwell's A$50 million donation to Australian national University.

Giving in Australia: Philanthropic Potential Beginning To Be Realized

Australia in a sense has two histories: that of its indigenous Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people based on a traditional culture of mutual dependence and reciprocal altruism (Turner, 1981) and the other from its eighteenth century colonization as a British penal outpost. These colonial overtones have proved an abiding cultural force. A dominant government presence, British legal platform, and ongoing sense that ‘the government will provide’ remain today (Liffman, 2008; McDonald & Scaife, 2011).

Print media portrayals of giving : exploring national ‘cultures of philanthropy’

In their 2010 study drawing on 500 empirical philanthropy studies, Bekkers and Wiepking identified eight consistently significant giving mechanisms. The pilot study reported here extends what is known about one mechanism, values, as a giving driver, in particular considering how national cultural values apply to giving. Personal values are not formed in a vacuum. They are influenced by the wider culture and society: thus values have a socio-cultural dimension. Accordingly, this pilot research draws on media theory and cultural studies work on national ethos to explore how these national cultural values interact with giving. A directed qualitative content analysis has been undertaken to compare US and Australian print media coverage about philanthropy. The two nations share an Anglo–Saxon orientation but differ significantly in national character and philanthropic activity. This study posits that a nation's media coverage about giving will reflect its national cultural ethos. This coverage can also shape personal values, thus implications exist for theory about the antecedents of personal giving values. Wider national values may drive or stifle giving, so this wider view of values as a driver has implications also for philanthropy promotion and fundraising.

Motives and barriers to bequest giving

Much is known about motivations for giving to charities generally. However, much less has been identified about bequestors as a unique type of charitable donor. This paper explores the motives and barriers for charitable bequest giving. Hypotheses are drawn from the general philanthropic literature and tested using survey data from Australia, a nation distinguished by very high lifetime (inter vivos) giving but low estate (post mortem) giving. The results show that belief in the efficacy of charitable organizations is requisite for leaving a bequest, as the deceased donor has no control over the enactment of the gift. This effect is mediated by the perceived difficulty of making a charitable bequest, which forms an important barrier for leaving such a legacy. Having family whose financial needs are perceived as not taken care of and the perception of financial inability to make a difference also form barriers for bequest giving. The results confirm that bequests constitute a distinctive charitable behaviour, with unique motives and barriers compared to other types of inter vivos giving. While charitable behaviour in general is driven by altruistic attitudes and political and religious values, as well as social reputation, these factors do not affect charitable bequest making as expected. Surprisingly, we find a negative relationship between financial resources and the inclination to leave a charitable bequest. The article ends with suggestions for ways charities might connect more meaningfully with their bequestors or with donors who might consider bequeathing to them.

Foundations for giving : why and how Australians structure their philanthropy

Philanthropic foundations in Australia have traditionally been labelled ‘icebergs’. Much of what they do and who they are is not apparent on the surface. Many are unknown and apart from an occasional biography, almost all are sparsely documented in terms of the very personal decisions behind establishing them. Practically and academically, scant data exist on the decision journeys people make into formalised philanthropy. This study seeks to fill that gap. It is believed to be the largest such study of foundation decision-making ever undertaken in this country. It is the latest in a series of ACPNS research into types of considered (versus spontaneous) giving in Australia. This research has been supported by the Perpetual Foundation, the EF and SL Gluyas Trust and the Edward Corbould Charitable Trust under the management of Perpetual Trustee Company Ltd.

Should tax incentives for charitable giving stop at Australia's borders?

Around the world, philanthropic gifts are increasingly crossing borders, driven by globalisation and facilitated by liberalised cross-border tax incentives. Australia is considered to have one of the strictest regimes for the tax treatment of cross-border donations. With bipartisan political support for a significant reduction in the amount and scope of Australian foreign aid, the nation’s international presence through the ‘soft power’ of aid will fall increasingly upon private philanthropy. Are the current tax incentives for Australian cross-border philanthropy and the supervision of those incentives appropriate to both facilitate and regulate international giving? To address this question, this article analyses the amount of Australian cross-border philanthropy and explains the current legislative architecture affecting the tax deductibility of cross-border gifts. It then examines the Australian Government’s proposed ‘in Australia’ reform agenda against the underlying fiscal and regulatory policy imperatives, and makes recommendations for the future tax treatment of Australian cross-border philanthropy.

Keeping giving going : charitable bequests and Australians

The potential of bequests to contribute to the sustainability of charities1 is immense, with social and economic trends opening up the bequest landscape. Yet so much is unknown about how Australians think about charitable bequests – particularly about the motivations, barriers and triggers surrounding this behaviour. Do bequestors differ from other donors? What prevents good intentions from becoming good actions? Where do charities figure in this process? This study aims at a better understanding of those Australians who make a charitable bequest and those who might. It offers individual charities, and the sector as a whole, empirical evidence to support and extend the anecdotal knowledge of those working with donors around this sensitive, but vital, area. This research has been supported by the Perpetual Foundation, the EF and SL Gluyas Trust and the Edward Corbould Charitable Trust under the management of Perpetual Trustee Company Ltd.

Good times and philanthropy : giving by Australia's affluent

This report draws upon the latest research to examine giving trends by affluent individuals in Australia and how these compare with overseas counterparts. It is driven by several factors. Giving by individuals matters enormously to the nonprofit sector, far exceeding business donations. Whether the richest of the population gives commensurate with their wealth is a question worth asking.

Leaving a legacy : bequest giving in Australia

This article considers what drives donors to leave charitable bequests. Building on theories of charitable bequest giving, we consider two types of motivations for leaving a bequest: attitudinal and structural motivations. Using unique Australian data, we show that a strong belief in the efficacy of charitable organisations has a significant positive effect on the likelihood of leaving a bequest, as does past giving behaviour and having no children. As bequests constitute an important income stream for charitable organisations, this research can help fundraisers better target their marketing strategies towards those most likely to plan their estates and motivate these people to make bequests.

Lifting the lifegiving dollar : case samples of creative practice in health and medical research philanthropy

This study aims to stimulate thought, debate and action for change on this question of more vigorous philanthropic funding of Australian health and medical research (HMR). It sharpens the argument with some facts and ideas about HMR funding from overseas sources. It also reports informed opinions from those working, giving and innovating in this area. It pinpoints the range of attitudes to HMR giving, both positive and negative. The study includes some aspects of Government funding as part of the equation, viewing Government as major HMR givers, with particular ability to partner, leverage and create incentives. Stimulating new philanthropy takes active outreach. The opportunity to build more dialogue between the HMR industry and the wider community is timely given the ‘licence to practice’ issues and questioned trust that applies currently somewhat both to science and to the charitable sector. This interest in improving HMR philanthropy also coincides with the launch last year by the Federal Government of Nonprofit Australia Limited (NAL), a group currently assessing infrastructure improvements to the charitable sector. History suggests no one will create this change if Research Australia does not. However, interest in change exists in various quarters. For Research Australia to successfully change the culture of Australian HMR giving, the process will drive the outcomes. Obviously stakeholder buy-in and partners will be needed and the ultimate blueprint for greater philanthropic HMR funding here will not be this document. Instead it will be the one that wears the handprint and ‘mindprint’ of the many architects and implementers interested in promoting HMR philanthropy, from philanthropists to nonprofit peaks to government policy arms. As the African proverb says, ‘If you want to go fast, go alone; but if you want to go far, go with others’.