Search results

This paper replicates and refines the finding that subsidies for charitable contributions of a rebate type are less effective than matching subsidies. A survey based field experiment with health charities was conducted among a national sample representative of the Dutch population on key demographic characteristics. The greater effectiveness of matching subsidies found in laboratory experiments is replicated. Also some evidence is provided on why matches are more effective than rebates. Matches attract a larger pool of donors, in part because donors expect more people to make donations and “join in.” Matches also increase the amount contributed among the higher educated, higher income households and larger donors. Subsidies of either type do not decrease subsequent giving in a campaign for tsunami relief. The experiment could not test whether the greater effectiveness of a matching subsidy is due to a change in the donor’s attention to the benefits of a donation to the cause. This explanation should be tested in future research. The findings imply that a given budget available to subsidize charitable contributions can be used more effectively if the subsidy is framed in the form of a match than in the form of a rebate. Nonprofit organizations can use this insight in the design of fundraising campaigns. For governments the finding suggests that the effectiveness of current subsidies for charitable contributions can be enhanced by matching them rather than providing a deduction in the income tax, which works as a rebate.

Purpose – This study seeks to answer the question of whether donations to the Dutch Heart Association are a form of solidarity of the healthy with the sick. In doing so, I test hypotheses on the origins of charitable donations in awareness of need in conjunction with dispositional empathic concern, social networks and own health.

Methodology – I report probit, tobit and multinomial regression analyses on data from the Giving in the Netherlands Panel Survey (2002–2004; n=1,246) on donations to the Dutch Heart Association and other health charities.

Findings – I find that experience with cardiovascular diseases is associated with a higher likelihood of donating to the Dutch Heart Association, especially among those with higher levels of empathic concern and social responsibility, and among those who are not in excellent health themselves. Support for the Dutch Heart Association comes from those who are aware of the need for contributions and more easily imagine themselves in a situation similar to those of heart patients.

Research limitations/implications – The results confirm the role of empathic concern, explore the role of own health and seem to reject the role of ties to family members. The study is limited to the Dutch Heart Association. Future research should test whether these results can be generalized to donations to other charitable causes.

Originality/value of chapter – This study contributes to our knowledge on charitable donations, revealing new insights on the influence of awareness of need.