Strategic interaction in the market for charitable donations: The role of public funding
Government financing of charities influences their fundraising and private donations. To analyze competition between charities, we modify the model of fundraising introduced by Andreoni and Payne, where there are two groups of donors and two charities. We concentrate on warm‐glow motivation for givi...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of public economic theory 2024-02, Vol.26 (1), p.1-n/a |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | n/a |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 1 |
container_title | Journal of public economic theory |
container_volume | 26 |
creator | Hagen, Rune Jansen Rattsø, Jørn |
description | Government financing of charities influences their fundraising and private donations. To analyze competition between charities, we modify the model of fundraising introduced by Andreoni and Payne, where there are two groups of donors and two charities. We concentrate on warm‐glow motivation for giving and highlight strategic interaction in the market for donations. The charities are output‐maximizing, producing services with a purchased input and in‐house managerial supervision. In the absence of public funding, fundraising by charities are strategic complement given fixed costs. We show that block grants can change the nature of the competition, making fundraising strategic substitutes if grants exceed fixed costs. A charity receiving a grant will optimally reduce its fundraising, but the level of service provision will also be affected by the fact that the competing charity will solicit more intensively. The competitor will deliver more services because it benefits from the reduction in solicitation by the grant recipient. In this setting, matching grants work much like block grants as charities in both cases will compete less intensively for donations. That is, incentives for fundraising are weaker with matching grants. However, if both instruments are used the impact of a matching grant depends on whether the block grant over‐ or undercompensates for fixed costs. An optimal funding policy must account for this interaction effect as well as the fungibility of support working through charity competition in the market for donations. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/jpet.12681 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2931513631</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2931513631</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3861-993319d458c855a1b24e1c277490f31516915966b8ff84a5f2d5fc3507983dd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1LxDAQhosouK5e_AUBb0LXpGmaxJssfrKgYA_eQpomu1lrsyYpsv_e1ArenMsMwzPvzLxZdo7gAqW42u50XKCiYuggm6GyojmnlB-mGnKaY17g4-wkhC2EEDPCZ9nba_Qy6rVVwPZRe6midX2qQdxo8CH9u47AOA_URnobZdNp0LpejlS4BnWCvEs9Z8BuaLokY4a-tf36NDsysgv67DfPs_rutl4-5Kvn-8flzSpXmFUo5xxjxNuSMMUIkagpSo1UQWnJocGIoIojwquqYcawUhJTtMQoTCDlDLctnmcXk-zOu89Bhyi2bvB92igKPs7jCqNEXU6U8i4Er43YeZue2wsExWicGI0TP8YlGEywVq634Q9lLB3CyoImBE3Il-30_h8x8fRyW0-y3zDveeQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2931513631</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Strategic interaction in the market for charitable donations: The role of public funding</title><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Hagen, Rune Jansen ; Rattsø, Jørn</creator><creatorcontrib>Hagen, Rune Jansen ; Rattsø, Jørn</creatorcontrib><description>Government financing of charities influences their fundraising and private donations. To analyze competition between charities, we modify the model of fundraising introduced by Andreoni and Payne, where there are two groups of donors and two charities. We concentrate on warm‐glow motivation for giving and highlight strategic interaction in the market for donations. The charities are output‐maximizing, producing services with a purchased input and in‐house managerial supervision. In the absence of public funding, fundraising by charities are strategic complement given fixed costs. We show that block grants can change the nature of the competition, making fundraising strategic substitutes if grants exceed fixed costs. A charity receiving a grant will optimally reduce its fundraising, but the level of service provision will also be affected by the fact that the competing charity will solicit more intensively. The competitor will deliver more services because it benefits from the reduction in solicitation by the grant recipient. In this setting, matching grants work much like block grants as charities in both cases will compete less intensively for donations. That is, incentives for fundraising are weaker with matching grants. However, if both instruments are used the impact of a matching grant depends on whether the block grant over‐ or undercompensates for fixed costs. An optimal funding policy must account for this interaction effect as well as the fungibility of support working through charity competition in the market for donations.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1097-3923</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1467-9779</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/jpet.12681</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Charities ; crowding‐out ; Economic theory ; Funding ; fundraising ; government grants ; Grants ; strategic interaction</subject><ispartof>Journal of public economic theory, 2024-02, Vol.26 (1), p.1-n/a</ispartof><rights>2024 The Authors. published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.</rights><rights>2024. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3861-993319d458c855a1b24e1c277490f31516915966b8ff84a5f2d5fc3507983dd3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5771-5531</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fjpet.12681$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fjpet.12681$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hagen, Rune Jansen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rattsø, Jørn</creatorcontrib><title>Strategic interaction in the market for charitable donations: The role of public funding</title><title>Journal of public economic theory</title><description>Government financing of charities influences their fundraising and private donations. To analyze competition between charities, we modify the model of fundraising introduced by Andreoni and Payne, where there are two groups of donors and two charities. We concentrate on warm‐glow motivation for giving and highlight strategic interaction in the market for donations. The charities are output‐maximizing, producing services with a purchased input and in‐house managerial supervision. In the absence of public funding, fundraising by charities are strategic complement given fixed costs. We show that block grants can change the nature of the competition, making fundraising strategic substitutes if grants exceed fixed costs. A charity receiving a grant will optimally reduce its fundraising, but the level of service provision will also be affected by the fact that the competing charity will solicit more intensively. The competitor will deliver more services because it benefits from the reduction in solicitation by the grant recipient. In this setting, matching grants work much like block grants as charities in both cases will compete less intensively for donations. That is, incentives for fundraising are weaker with matching grants. However, if both instruments are used the impact of a matching grant depends on whether the block grant over‐ or undercompensates for fixed costs. An optimal funding policy must account for this interaction effect as well as the fungibility of support working through charity competition in the market for donations.</description><subject>Charities</subject><subject>crowding‐out</subject><subject>Economic theory</subject><subject>Funding</subject><subject>fundraising</subject><subject>government grants</subject><subject>Grants</subject><subject>strategic interaction</subject><issn>1097-3923</issn><issn>1467-9779</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1LxDAQhosouK5e_AUBb0LXpGmaxJssfrKgYA_eQpomu1lrsyYpsv_e1ArenMsMwzPvzLxZdo7gAqW42u50XKCiYuggm6GyojmnlB-mGnKaY17g4-wkhC2EEDPCZ9nba_Qy6rVVwPZRe6midX2qQdxo8CH9u47AOA_URnobZdNp0LpejlS4BnWCvEs9Z8BuaLokY4a-tf36NDsysgv67DfPs_rutl4-5Kvn-8flzSpXmFUo5xxjxNuSMMUIkagpSo1UQWnJocGIoIojwquqYcawUhJTtMQoTCDlDLctnmcXk-zOu89Bhyi2bvB92igKPs7jCqNEXU6U8i4Er43YeZue2wsExWicGI0TP8YlGEywVq634Q9lLB3CyoImBE3Il-30_h8x8fRyW0-y3zDveeQ</recordid><startdate>202402</startdate><enddate>202402</enddate><creator>Hagen, Rune Jansen</creator><creator>Rattsø, Jørn</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>OQ6</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5771-5531</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202402</creationdate><title>Strategic interaction in the market for charitable donations: The role of public funding</title><author>Hagen, Rune Jansen ; Rattsø, Jørn</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3861-993319d458c855a1b24e1c277490f31516915966b8ff84a5f2d5fc3507983dd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Charities</topic><topic>crowding‐out</topic><topic>Economic theory</topic><topic>Funding</topic><topic>fundraising</topic><topic>government grants</topic><topic>Grants</topic><topic>strategic interaction</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hagen, Rune Jansen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rattsø, Jørn</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley_OA刊</collection><collection>Wiley-Blackwell Free Backfiles(OpenAccess)</collection><collection>ECONIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Journal of public economic theory</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hagen, Rune Jansen</au><au>Rattsø, Jørn</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Strategic interaction in the market for charitable donations: The role of public funding</atitle><jtitle>Journal of public economic theory</jtitle><date>2024-02</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>26</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>1</spage><epage>n/a</epage><pages>1-n/a</pages><issn>1097-3923</issn><eissn>1467-9779</eissn><abstract>Government financing of charities influences their fundraising and private donations. To analyze competition between charities, we modify the model of fundraising introduced by Andreoni and Payne, where there are two groups of donors and two charities. We concentrate on warm‐glow motivation for giving and highlight strategic interaction in the market for donations. The charities are output‐maximizing, producing services with a purchased input and in‐house managerial supervision. In the absence of public funding, fundraising by charities are strategic complement given fixed costs. We show that block grants can change the nature of the competition, making fundraising strategic substitutes if grants exceed fixed costs. A charity receiving a grant will optimally reduce its fundraising, but the level of service provision will also be affected by the fact that the competing charity will solicit more intensively. The competitor will deliver more services because it benefits from the reduction in solicitation by the grant recipient. In this setting, matching grants work much like block grants as charities in both cases will compete less intensively for donations. That is, incentives for fundraising are weaker with matching grants. However, if both instruments are used the impact of a matching grant depends on whether the block grant over‐ or undercompensates for fixed costs. An optimal funding policy must account for this interaction effect as well as the fungibility of support working through charity competition in the market for donations.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/jpet.12681</doi><tpages>28</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5771-5531</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1097-3923 |
ispartof | Journal of public economic theory, 2024-02, Vol.26 (1), p.1-n/a |
issn | 1097-3923 1467-9779 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2931513631 |
source | Access via Wiley Online Library |
subjects | Charities crowding‐out Economic theory Funding fundraising government grants Grants strategic interaction |
title | Strategic interaction in the market for charitable donations: The role of public funding |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T10%3A51%3A10IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Strategic%20interaction%20in%20the%20market%20for%20charitable%20donations:%20The%20role%20of%20public%20funding&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20public%20economic%20theory&rft.au=Hagen,%20Rune%20Jansen&rft.date=2024-02&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=n/a&rft.pages=1-n/a&rft.issn=1097-3923&rft.eissn=1467-9779&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/jpet.12681&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2931513631%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2931513631&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |