Do philanthropic citizens behave like governments?
Subtitle: Internet-based platforms and the diffusion of international private aid
By: Raj M. Desai, Homi Kharas
Contributors: Kharas, Homi J., 1954-; Wolfensohn Center for Development; Brookings Institution. Global Economy and Development
Series: Working paper / Wolfensohn Center for Development -- 12; Working paper (Wolfensohn Center for Development) -- no. 12.
Publisher: Wolfensohn Center for Development at Brookings
Published: 2009
Place of publication: Washington, DC
Language: eng
Format: [electronic resource] :
Number of pages: 28
Subjects: Charities; Computer network resources; Economic assistance; GlobalGiving (Washington, D.C. : Organization); Kiva (San Francisco, California : Organization)
Other titles: Internet-based platforms and the diffusion of international private aid
Description: Until recently, most aid from rich to poor countries was transmitted through official bilateral and multilateral channels. But the rapid growth in private development aid from foundations, charities, and philanthropic individuals raises a host of questions regarding the allocation of aid and its selectivity across recipient countries. We analyze determinants of the supply of private aid from two large internet-based non-profit organizations that bundle contributions from individuals and transfer them as grants or loans to developing countries: GlobalGiving and Kiva. We compare the allocation of funds from these organizations to official development assistance. We find that the selectivity of private aid is less oriented toward country-specific factors, and more toward frontline projects and individuals in developing nations. Survival analysis examining the funding rate of projects on these two Web sites confirms the lower relevance of country-specific characteristics and risks, suggesting that philanthropic individuals behave unlike official aid donors. This indicates that private aid and official aid are complementary: official aid supports countries, private aid supports people. With different preferences, formal coordination between these different donors may not be needed. Instead, each needs to understand when and how it can partner with the other to meet differing objectives -- abstract (p.1)

Until recently, most aid from rich to poor countries was transmitted through official bilateral and multilateral channels. But the rapid growth in private development aid from foundations, charities, and philanthropic individuals raises a host of questions regarding the allocation of aid and its selectivity across recipient countries. We analyze determinants of the supply of private aid from two large internet-based non-profit organizations that bundle contributions from individuals and transfer them as grants or loans to developing countries: GlobalGiving and Kiva. We compare the allocation of funds from these organizations to official development assistance. We find that the selectivity of private aid is less oriented toward country-specific factors, and more toward frontline projects and individuals in developing nations. Survival analysis examining the funding rate of projects on these two Web sites confirms the lower relevance of country-specific characteristics and risks, suggesting that philanthropic individuals behave unlike official aid donors. This indicates that private aid and official aid are complementary: official aid supports countries, private aid supports people. With different preferences, formal coordination between these different donors may not be needed. Instead, each needs to understand when and how it can partner with the other to meet differing objectives.
Notes: Cover title from title screen (viewed on October 6, 2009).

"October 2009."

Includes bibliographical references (p. 25-26).
Table of contents: title: Abstract; title: Introduction; title: Official development assistance and private aid. Collective action constraints. Transaction costs. Agency costs; title: GlobalGiving and Kiva; title: Data, methods, and results. Descriptive analysis. Comparisons with official development flows. Survival analysis. Internet platforms and donor fragmentation; title: Conclusions.