Willingness to Donate to a Non-government COVID-19
Vaccination Initiative

Nelson Matthew P. Tan1, Rosalina Palanca-Tan2
1 Applied Math in Economics major, Harvard University
2 Professor, Ateneo de Manila University

COVID-19の感染予防対策でワクチン接種を推進するにあたり、
フィリピンでは民間NGOが人材面などで政府に協力している。
本稿では、こうした団体に対して自発的かつ利他的に寄付している人たちの属性を検証した。

Abstract

Vaccination is considered to be an effective preventive and long-term control measure for the COVID-19 pandemic
and its negative economic consequences. Up to October 2021, vaccination coverage in the Philippines was justabout 25%. Budget and government inefficiency issues pose serious challenges in the implementation of a timely
and far-reaching vaccination program for the whole country. This calls for some non-government initiatives inadministering and distributing the vaccine. NGOs have the potential to mobilise manpower and coordinate withprivate hospitals, clinics, pharmacies, and manufacturers to augment and improve the implementation of the government vaccination program. But the scope and extent of NGO assistance and support are dependent on theamount of donations these NGOs receive for their initiatives This paper looks into the viability of non-government
vaccination initiatives in the Philippines by asking Filipinos’ willingness to donate to such initiatives in a contingent
valuation survey format. Survey results indicate that about half (56.83%) of respondents are willing to make anaverage lump-sum donation of PhP8,978. Regression analysis reveals that older individuals are more likely todonate, and that the amount of donation increases with income. Further, although married respondents are lesslikely to donate, the average size of donation of a married donor is higher. The results mirror the inherent capacityof Filipinos for altruism and mutual support in times of crisis.
Keywords

altruism; covid-19 pandemic; vaccine; stated willingness to donate; determinants of charitable giving

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused unprecedented
socioeconomic devastation and a global health crisis. In
December 2019, the disease emerged from Wuhan,
China, and one of the first documented exported cases
was found in Thailand on 13 January 2020. Less than amonth after, outbreaks in ocean liners and person-to-person transmission on other forms of worldwide transportation occurred (Wu, Chen, and Chan 2020). On 6
February 2020, the World Health Organisation (WHO)documented 28,276 confirmed cases and 565 deaths in
at least 25 countries (WHO 2021). In less than a year,
the COVID-19 pandemic was linked to over a million

deaths (Ioannidis 2020).
The damage due to the pandemic extends beyond theillness and death resulting from the viral infection.
Health system disruptions leading to more losses ofhuman life and large-scale poverty have been amplified
by the pandemic (Pley, McNaughton, Matthews, andLourenço 2021). Many government measures geared
towards limiting the spread of COVID-19, particularly
nation/state-wide and city lockdowns, have contributed
to the destabilising effects of the pandemic. Aggressive
COVID-19 lockdowns have exacerbated unemployment, eliminating income sources and pushing countless underprivileged families to starvation (Ioannidis

121

Nelson Matthew P. Tan, et al.

2020). According to a joint statement by the International
Labour Organisation (ILO), the Food and Agriculture
Organisation of the United Nations (FAO), theInternational Fund for Agricultural Development(IFAD), and the WHO, “tens of millions of people are at
risk of falling into extreme poverty, while the number ofundernourished people, currently estimated at nearly
690 million, could increase by up to 132 million” by
2021. In addition to challenges posed on global food systems and employment conditions, the pandemic has disrupted vaccination schedules for other infectious
diseases and has potentially contributed to the recurrence of these diseases (Ioannidis 2020).
In the developing world, such as the Philippines, theimpacts of COVID-19 on economic life and publichealth have been severe. Countries lacking universally
accessible healthcare and facing drastic increases on
health spending are likely to face economic contraction
and recession (World Bank 2020). A study by Pley,
McNaughton, Matthews, and Lourenço (2021) argues
that the pandemic is “amplifying existing economic andpublic health inequalities.” Some of the most vulnerable
groups to this form of inequality are informal economy
workers and the agricultural sector. These groups lacksocial and labour protection, access to quality healthcare, and now the ability to earn from markets due toconfinement measures and restrictions. As livelihoods
are at risk, these people are forced to find work in unsafe
conditions, sell assets in distress, or resort to predatory
loans (WHO 2020). Since 38.3% of employed individuals in the Philippines are in vulnerable forms of employment and/or are part of the informal economy (ILO
2020), the country is especially vulnerable to the socioeconomic disruption and public health crisis of thepandemic.
As highly aggressive and disruptive measures suchas lockdowns may continue to drain household income,deplete resources, and hinder pandemic recovery, acomprehensive vaccination program is a more favourable option in dealing with the COVID-19 crisis(Ioannidis 2020). Vaccine distribution is even deemed
to be more viable compared to non-disruptive measures
such as disinfection, masks, and contact-tracing (Fadda,

122

Alabanese, and Suggs 2020). However, the Phillippine
government vaccination program has suffered significant delays due to inefficiencies in securing supply andconcluding deals with most major manufacturers of
COVID-19 vaccines. For instance, the Philippine government struggled to guarantee 161 million doses for its
vaccination program with one of the latest hurdles being
the delay of 117,000 doses of Pfizer vaccines in February
2021 (Aspinwall 2021) and 525,600 doses of
AstraZeneca’s vaccine in March 2021 (Lema andMorales 2021). Moreover, since distributing vaccineswith a national-level program can be a significant financial burden on the limited Philippine government
budget, private sector actors such as non-governmentalorganizations (NGOs) can play a significant role inadministering and distributing the vaccine. NGOs andthe private sector have the potential to mobilise manpower and coordinate with private hospitals, clinics,
pharmacies, and manufacturers to augment and improve
the implementation of the Philippine vaccination program (Reliefweb 2020). With funding, NGOs and othernon-profit private actors may procure vaccines, medical
supplies and peripheral support for frontline healthworkers such as meals, transport, and temporary shelter,
which may vastly improve vaccination in the Philippines(Give2Asia 2021). But the scope and extent of NGO vaccination initiatives are dependent on the amount of
donations these NGOs and other non-profit organizations receive for their initiatives (Choi and DiNItto2012).
Hence, this study assesses support for a non-government COVID-19 vaccination program in terms of voluntary monetary contributions from the people. The study
will explore how much people are willing to donate forthis program and what factors influence their decision to
donate and the amount they give. Information and analysis of the characteristics of potential donors and theirmotivations as well as their capacity and constraints for
altruistic behavior are relevant inputs for developing
strategies for fund-raising activities for an NGO vaccination initiative. Although there has been extensive literature on the characteristics of prospective donors, theparticular context and culture, as well as current

6th AFC Best Papers (2022)

circumstances affect people’s charitable giving behavior
and decisions, thus, making this study in the context of
the Covid-19 pandemic imperative.

Conceptual Framework andMethodology

In a study by Araña and León (2002), it is argued that
altruism can have a positive impact in reducing publichealth risks such as the flu. However, a contribution
towards a vaccine program may not be purely altruistic
as increased vaccination rates can prove valuable to thedonor. Support for having a robust and effective vaccination program may also come from the motivation tofree ride from the positive externality of a vaccinatedcommunity (Hershey et. al 1994). This is a form of
impure altruism wherein the donors themselves benefit
directly from the program, or they derive some utility or“warm glow” from the act of giving (Andreoni 1990).
The model of impure altruism is thus a more accurate
representation of donation to a COVID-19 vaccination
program since donors may be concerned about ending
the pandemic and their own personal safety.
Questions about altruism and generosity go back to
the founding fathers of economics and sociology such as
Adam Smith (1976 [1759]) and Auguste Comte (1973[1851]). In most of recent literature, the willingness todonate or charitable giving is defined as the “voluntary
donation of money to an organisation benefiting others
beyond one’s own family”; and this willingness, a formof altruism, can be influenced by the person’s awarenessof the need, the exposure to solicitation, the costs andbenefits associated with donation, reputational impacts,
psychological benefits of contributing, and the efficacyof the program receiving the funding (Bekkers andWiepking 2011). These mechanisms that drive charitable giving are used to support hypotheses regarding thecharacteristics of givers. For instance, individuals withhigher education are more likely to be donors because(1) they have greater awareness of needs that give thema greater sense of social responsibility, (2) they havehigher level of exposure to information that enable themto assess the efficacy and efficiency of the charitableorganizations, and (3) they receive more solicitation

requests due to more memberships in organizations.
Bekkers and Wiepking (2011 and 2012) reviewed andsummarized the extensive empirical literature on charitable giving, suggesting that the “typical” donors areolder, more educated, have more income and wealth,own a house, are married and with children, and haveprosocial personality characteristics such as empathy.
They, however, found mixed evidence on gender, race,and political preferences.
In this paper, two indicators of charitable giving wereused: (1) decision or willingness to give or donate and(2) the level of giving or amount of donation. Data used
for the analysis were obtained from a survey conductedin April-May 2021 by college students of Statistics at
the Ateneo de Manila University. A sample of 539
respondents was generated following a snowballing
approach in online platforms such as email andfacebook.
A two-stage regression procedure was undertaken to
identify the willingness to contribute and the amount ofcontribution of Filipinos to a non-government covid-19
vaccination program to ensure a timely and widespread
vaccination coverage particularly for the most vulnerable low-income communities in the country. The firststage was a binary logit regression model specifying thedecision or willingness to contribute as a function ofindividual and household characteristics. In the second
stage, the amount of donations of the sub-sample ofrespondents who are willing to donate were regressedwith donor characteristics using ordinary least squares(OLS). The econometrics software STATA was used to
run these regression models.

Results

Table 1 presents the socio-demographic and economic profile of respondents. The average respondent is
39 years old. Respondents are almost equally divided
between male and female. Majority (79%) of respondents have reached tertiary (college) education. Just alittle over half (54%) resided in Metro Manila at the timeof the survey, while the majority (72%) are Catholic.
More than half (57%) of the respondents are married anda higher proportion (88%) have child dependent/s in the123

Nelson Matthew P. Tan, et al.

household. Respondents’ average monthly income is
PHP 68,414 (USD1,368). About 63% of respondents
own the house where they currently reside.
Table 1. Respondents Profile

Age
Gender – male
Education – with
ElementaryHigh School
College
Post-college
NCR resident
Catholic
Monthly income
With own house
Marital status
Married/with partner
SingleSeparated
Widow
With child dependent/s

Mean/Std deviation or
proportion of all respondents
39.3 years/12.5 years
49.7%
0.2%
8.0%
78.8%
13.0%
54.4%
71.6%
PHP68,414/PHP65,204
63.1%
56.6%
39.5%
2.2%
1.7%
87.9%

Answers to questions related to Covid-19 vaccination
are summarized in Table 2. About 29% of the respondents have at least one member in the household vaccinated for Covid-19. A substantial 72% of respondents(388 out of 539) are willing to purchase Covid-19 vaccine/s for oneself and household members if vaccines
become commercially available. Of those not willing topurchase covid-19 vaccines, the majority (51%) thinkthat the government must provide the vaccine for free toeveryone, and the remainder indicated they are “afraidof vaccines” (27%) or they “do not have sufficient funds
to buy the vaccine” (22%) as the major reason.

124

Table 2. Covid-19 Vaccination
With Covid-19 vaccinated household
members
Willing to purchase the vaccine
Reason for not purchasing the vaccine
1. No sufficient funds to buy the vaccine
2. Afraid of vaccines
3. G overnment must provide the vaccine
for free to everyone
Willing to donate/contribute for an NGO
vaccination program
Amount of donation
Mean
Std deviation
Reasons for not donating
1. No sufficient funds to donate
2. Government must provide freevaccines for those who cannot afford

Proportion
28.8%
72.0%
22.1%
27.2%
50.7%
64.5%
PHP8,978PHP23,462
38.3%
61.7%

Respondents who are willing to purchase the vaccine
were asked if they would be willing to donate to a
non-government vaccination program for vulnerable
low-income communities to ensure a speedy and comprehensive vaccination nationwide. Only 245 (64.5% of
the 380 respondents who replied to the question)
expressed willingness to make a one-time lump-sum
contribution. On the average, each prospective donor iswilling to contribute PHP8,978 (US$180). The standard
deviation of the amount of donation (PHP23,462 or
US$469) is much higher than the mean contribution
amount, reflecting the very wide range of donation
amounts stated by respondents. This may be due partially to the wide-ranging financial capacities of those
who are willing to contribute.
Majority (62%) of respondents who are not willing tocontribute to the vaccination program think that it isgovernment’s responsibility to provide free vaccines tothose who cannot afford. Only 38% of those not willingto donate indicated lack of financial resources to donate
as the primary reason.
Answers to questions about the Community Pantry
initiative that has sprung in the midst of economic difficulties experienced by the vulnerable poor in the country reflect recent history of altruistic behavior of
respondents as well as their awareness and opinions of6th AFC Best Papers (2022)

the pandemic efforts of the government and its efficiency (to serve as proxy variables for respondent’s trustand confidence in the government), which will be usedin the econometric model of predictors of charitablegiving undertaken in this paper. Table 3 summarizes the
respondents’ answers. Almost all respondents (95%)
have heard about the community pantry. The very few
who have not heard are likely from areas outside Metro
Manila that have not been reached by the movement at
the time of the survey. While 22% of respondents havecontributed goods to the pantries, only 6% have received
goods from the pantries, indicating that the sample’s
study consists more of benefactors than beneficiaries, as
likewise reflected in the high mean income of respondents reported earlier in the paper.
Table 3. Community pantry: Altruism and government trust
Awareness and exposure
Have heard about theCommunity Pantry
Have contributed goods
Have received goods
Statement(1) The Community Pantry
addresses the inability of thegovernment to provide
assistance during theextended community
quarantine.
(2) The community pantry
project reflects the lack oftrust and confidence of theFilipinos in the government.

Proportion of respondents
95.1%

Agree
69.4%

6.2%
23.3%
Neutral Disagree
21.3%
9.3%

43.2%

33.8%

23.0%

Responses to the two opinion statements on theCommunity Pantry initiative reveal a rather diverseview of the efficacy of the Philippine government inresponding to the needs of the people during the covid19 pandemic. Respondents are almost equally spreadover agreeing, being neutral and not agreeing with statement (2): the community pantry’s reflecting the lack oftrust and confidence of Filipinos in their government,with a third of respondents indicating neutral and with
only a 10 percentage-points difference between the proportions of those who agree and disagree. However,with regards to statement (1), there is a much greater
proportion of respondents, almost 70%, who agree,
implying the preponderance of perceptions of inabilityof the current administration to adequately provide pandemic assistance.
Predictors of charitable giving.
Table 4 summarizes the results of the binary logit
regression run that identifies the likely characteristics ofprospective donors to a non-government vaccination
program. Only three variables turn out to be statisticallysignificant.
Respondents who are married and have child dependent/s are less likely to donate. This is in contrast withthe literature review of Bekkers and Wiepking (2011)
which concluded that “typical” donors are married andwith children. We contend that our results may bereflecting the extra-ordinary circumstances of this time
– the severeness of the current economic difficulties
inflicted by the pandemic on Philippine households.
Due to economic uncertainties, individuals who havefamilies to take care of are more cautious and hence lesswilling to take on additional expenses. Further,
Andreoni, Brown, and Rischall (2003), arguing that
donation may also be a household decision and not
simply an individual decision, found that married households tend to bargain over both which charity to donate
to and the amount of donation, with bargaining reducing
the amount of gift or donation by around 6%.
The third significant variable in this study is past actsof giving, proxied in this paper by contribution to theCommunity Pantry effort. The study finds that those
who have contributed to the community pantries are
more likely to donate as well to a non-government vaccination initiative.
Our first-stage binary logit regression results revealthat age, gender, education, asset ownership (particularly, house ownership), current place of residence (particularly, being a resident of National Capital Region
where the covid-19 pandemic is most severe), and having
or not having trust in the government do not influence
Filipinos’ decision to contribute or not to contribute to a
non-government vaccination program. It appears that125

Nelson Matthew P. Tan, et al.

the perceived need for a timely and widespread vaccination transcends socio-demographic factors in giving,and even political inclinations (trust in the current
administration), except for current economic constraints(respondents who are married and/or with child dependent/s face).
Table 4. Willingness to contribute to the covid-19
vaccination program, Binary logit regression
Explanatory variable
Age
Gender
Education
Married
WithChildDependents
WithOwnHouse&Lot
CommunityPantryContributor
GovernmentTrust
NCRresident
No of observations
Log likelihood
LR chi2

Coefficient
0.0162-0.0298
0.1210-0.5943*-0.4110*0.24450.6460**-0.0565-0.3460367-228.7297
15.95

Asterisks after coefficients denote level of significance: * for 0.10,** for 0.05, and *** for 0.01.

OLS regression results (Table 5), on the other hand,reveal that the amount of donation significantly increases
with income. Specifically, our result suggests that a
respondent whose monthly income is higher by PHP1,000
would contribute PHP120 more. Married respondents’contribution is lower by PHP9,675 compared to unmarried respondents. This is consistent with Andreoni,
Brown, and Rischall (2002) which found that bargaining
between spouses reduced the amount of donation.
Table 5. Amount of contribution, Ordinary least squares
Explanatory variable
IncomeAge
GenderMarriedConstant
No of observations
F-statAdj R2

Coefficient
0.1235***233.221500.80-9674.53***-5133.97
228
10.33
0.1412Asterisks after coefficients denote level of significance: * for 0.10,** for 0.05, and *** for 0.01.

126

As in the case of the decision to donate, the socio-demographic variables - age and gender - have no statistically significant influence on the amount of contribution
to a covid-19 vaccination program.

Conclusions

This study assesses the viability of a non-government vaccination program that depends on people’s voluntary donations. Using a contingent valuation survey
format, Filipino respondents were asked if they would
be willing to donate to such a non-government vaccination initiative, and respondents who answered “yes”
were asked to state a one-time lump-sum contribution
they would be willing to make. Survey results mirror
the inherent capacity of Filipinos for altruism andmutual support in times of crisis. More than half
(56.83%) of respondents are willing to make a lumpsum donation, and on the average, each prospective
donor, would contribute about PhP8,978.
Regression analyses were conducted to identify thefactors that influence the decision to contribute to thenon-government vaccination initiative in the Philippines.
It appears that in this time of economic difficulties andhigh economic uncertainties due to the Covid 19 pandemic, the main constraints to charitable giving arehouseholds concerns and responsibilities, in addition to
current income, rather than people’s demographic andsocio-economic backgrounds. Our findings do not conform with the “typical” donor characteristics – older,
more educated, married and with children, having more
wealth, and owning a house – found in previous literature surveyed and summarized by Bekkers andWiepking (2011 and 2012). Instead, we found that
respondents who have spouses and dependent children
to worry about in this Covid 19 pandemic-induced economic crisis and uncertainties are less likely to donate.

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the researchsupport from the Ateneo de Manila University Researchand Creative Work (RCW) faculty grant.

6th AFC Best Papers (2022)

References
1) Andreoni, J. (1990). Impure altruism and donations to public
goods: A theory of warm glow giving. The Economic Journal,
100, 464-477.
2) Andreoni, J., Brown, E. and Rischall, I. (2003). Charitable givingby married couples: Who decide and why does it matter? The
Journal of Human Resources, 38(1), 111-133.
3) Araña, J. and León, C. (2002). Willingness to pay for health risk
reduction in the context of altruism. Health Economics, 11, 623–
635. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.687.
4) Aspinwall, N. (2021, February 13). Philippines vaccine program
hindered by delays, public distrust. The Diplomat. https://thediplomat.com/2021/02/philippines-vaccine-program-hinderedby-delays-public-distrust/.
5) Bekkers, R. and Wiepking, P. (2011). Who gives? A Literature
review of predictors of charitable giving I – Religion, education,age, and socialization. Voluntary Sector Review, 2(3), 337-365.
https://doi.org/10.1332/204080511X6087712.
6) Bekkers, R. and Wiepking, P. (2012). Who gives? A literature
review of predictors of charitable giving. Part two: Gender, marital status, income, and wealth. Voluntary Sector Review, 3(2),217-245. https://doi.org/10.1332/204080512X649379.
7) Choi, N.G. and DiNitto, (2012). Predictors of time volunteering,
religious giving, and secular giving: Implications for nonprofit
organizations. The Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare,39(2), 93-120.

infection. BMJ Global Health, 6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh2020-004275.
16) ReliefWeb. (2020, December 21). Public and private sectors join
forces to support logistics of COVID-19 vaccine program Philippines. OCHA Services. https://reliefweb.int/report/philippines/public-and-private-sectors-join-forces-support-logisticscovid-19-vaccine-program.
17) Smith, A. (1976 [1759]). The Theory of Moral Sentiments.
Oxford: Clarendon Press.
18) World Bank. (2020). Poverty and Shared Prosperity 2020:
Reversals of Fortune.
19) World Health Organization (WHO). 2020. Impact of COVID-19
on people’s livelihoods, their health and our food systems. (2020,
October 13), WHO. https://www.who.int/news/item/13-10-2020impact-of-covid-19-on-people%27s-livelihoods-their-healthand-our-food-systems.
20) World Health Organization (WHO). 2021. Coronavirus disease(COVID-19) situation reports. (n.d.). WHO | World HealthOrganization. Retrieved July 24, 2021, from https://www.who.
int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/situationreports21) Wu, Y., Chen, C. and Chan, Y. (2020). The outbreak of COVID19: An overview. Journal of the Chinese Medical Association,
83(3), 217-220. https://doi.org/10.1097/JCMA.0000000000000270.
22) probabilities for risk analysis. Journal of Asian Architecture andBuilding Engineering, 1 (1), 77-82

8) Comte, A. (1973 [1851]). System of Positive Polity, Volume 1:
Containing the General View of Positivism & Introductory
Principles (J. H. Bridges, Trans.). New York: Burt Franklin.
9) Fadda, M., Albanese, E., and Suggs, S. (2020). When a COVID19 vaccine is ready, will we all be ready for it? International
Journal of Public Health, 655, 711-712. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s00038-020-01404-4(0123456789().,-volV)(0123456789,-().
volV).
10) Give2Asia. (2021, June 15). Support COVID-19 coronavirus
response in Philippines – Give2Asia. Retrieved July 24, 2021,
from https://give2asia.org/covid-19-pandemic-response-philippines/.
11) Hershey, J. C., Asch, D. A., Thumasathit, T., Meszaros, J., andWaters, V. V. (1994). The roles of altruism, free riding, andbBandwagoning in vaccination decisions. Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 59, 177-187.
12) International Labour Organization. (n.d.). Informal economy in
the Philippines (ILO in the Philippines). https://www.ilo.org/
manila/areasofwork/informal-economy/lang--en/index.htm.
13) Ioannidis, J. P. (2020). Global perspective of COVID-19 epidemiology for a full-cycle pandemic. European Journal of Clinical
Investigation, 50(12). https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.13423.
14) Lema, K., and Morales, N. J. (2021, March 1). Philippines starts
coronavirus vaccinations but supply, demand uncertain. U.S.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-philippinesvaccin-idUSKCN2AT17N.
15) Pley, C. M., McNaughton, A. L., Matthews, P. C., and Lourenço,
J. (2021). The global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on theprevention, diagnosis and treatment of hepatitis B virus (HBV)

127