Alliance Online - December 2007

Who influences giving to international development?

Cathy Pharoah

Private donor support for international development has been growing steadily. UK donors now give around Ł1 billion per annum, equal to one-quarter of the Government’s Ł4 billion in ODA, yet we know little about what influences levels of giving to global issues. With strong competition for the international donor’s pound between conflicts such as the one in Darfur, natural disasters like the Pakistani earthquake, basic Millennium Development Goals and global environmental concerns, new research has looked at key influences on donor decision-making. It reveals the powerful influence of public communication on donor attitudes.

The research is part of a programme funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), the UK’s academic research funding body. It has involved analysis of UK data on giving and legacies to international NGOs, as well as donor focus groups exploring attitudes and perceptions.

Who gives to international causes?

Giving data shows that public support for international causes is high in the UK. One in ten donors give to overseas causes, and gifts are very much larger than to other causes.

More women than men give, and people with managerial or professional backgrounds are more than twice as likely to give to overseas causes as manual or unskilled workers. There were three other findings of particular significance for those targeting potential international donors:

The giving gap between social groups is higher for overseas causes than others.
Only 6 per cent of international donors have no educational qualifications, compared with 40 per cent of all donors.
81 per cent of those with a degree express concern about developing world poverty compared with 65 per cent of those without qualifications.

These results indicate that values and perceptions play a particularly strong role in motivating people to give to overseas causes. Possibly higher education institutions transmit such values more strongly than other social institutions. If so, they will be important places for focussing international fundraising and campaigning.

Who influences giving to development?

Governments are key development funders. Donor focus groups explored whether increased government aid creates a sense that the job has been done and there is no need for further contribution or affirms that development is a pressing cause. Cynicism about the (ending) Blair administration and anger about the Iraq war were found to have had a negative effect on views of broader foreign policy, including overseas development.

Overall, however, there is quite a low level of awareness of government activity. Most of the credit for the 2005 Gleneagles G8 conference was given to Bob Geldof and NGOs. A remark by one donor – ‘It’s almost like Bob Geldof walks out of Number 10 and Tony Blair shuts the door and says “It’s OK! He’s gone now!”’ – indicates the feeling among respondents that there is a lack of genuine government commitment. Scepticism was also expressed about government claims. ‘There’s always small print that’s in there,’ said one donor. ‘It’s like say America give $10 billion to global warming, it won’t actually be instant; it’s over ten years.’

Suspicions about the politicization of aid were also voiced. ‘Pakistan for instance, I’m sure will be getting more aid than other countries, now that they’re on the Taliban’s case,’ remarked a donor, while others were sceptical about indications of what aid had achieved, one donor commenting, ‘until we know that that money has gone directly to those NGOs and made an actual effect in these countries, then frankly it’s meaningless.’ Another remarked: ‘We keep giving money. Where’s it all going? How long do you have to keep doing this before it is put right?’

But in spite of cynicism, government can have some effect in raising awareness, as the following remark shows: ‘When they have these G8 summits and all the governments say “we’ll put x amount to global warming, x amount to Africa,” you can think “they’re doing something; maybe I should do something.” It’s tugging at your heartstrings to do more.’

Celebrities also emerged as influential figures in transmitting values about international giving. ‘You don’t even think of him [Bob Geldof] as a pop star any more,’ said one, ‘he’s gone beyond that … but we need more Bob Geldofs.’ Families also seem to be influential. ‘I always give to the Red Cross and that’s just a tradition. Because my grandparents gave to it, and then my parents,’ said one. ‘If you grow up with people giving to Oxfam, you in a way take it on yourself,’ said another. Fundraisers have a huge opportunity to grow international giving through supporting shared family values.

Ingrained attitudes

In spite of some understanding of disasters in countries such as Pakistan, Thailand and Sri Lanka, UK donors tended to focus primarily on Africa in their discussion of international aid, and their perception of it as a developing country doomed to poverty influenced their general views of development need. They particularly focussed on government corruption; the lack of strategic development solutions is a particular concern. ‘It worries me about giving to them,’ said one, ‘because there are so many corrupt governments out there. I wonder how much is actually going to get to the starving.’

Worryingly, donors tended only to refer to people and media who confirm their views. For this reason, discussion on development issues is sometimes uncomfortable because it involves discussion of views that run counter to the entrenched views of respondents. This poses a huge challenge for fundraisers who are trying to retain donors or reach out to new ones.

Tangible solutions and first-hand experience

A number of positive influences also emerged. The experience of travel to a developing country is particularly strongly related to support for international causes and for tsunami relief in particular. ‘If you’ve been to places in Africa and you’ve met people, and you see the resilience, it makes it much harder to dismiss it as just a news story,’ said one respondent, encapsulating this attitude.

Seeing a practical option and hearing of progress seems to have a highly positive effect on attitudes. Tangible gifts have a strong appeal and image: I like that you can give something real – whether it’s fertilizer or things for plants … That way it will be making a contribution for years to come.’

It is not the aims of development assistance that are doubted, but its effectiveness. Knowing that a real difference has been made, however small, has a powerful effect. NGOs need to build on this. Instead, some are themselves the source of confusion and disillusion. ‘Last year, I got someone one of these goats from Oxfam,’ remembered one respondent. ‘And then this week, I look in the paper and it’s “Don’t give these animals! It’s bad news, they can’t feed them, they can’t look after them. Don’t do it.”’

In overseas giving, NGOs play a vital intermediary role in bridging gaps. The above quotation shows the disastrous effects of loss of donor faith and trust. This problem is compounded by the lack of differentiation between countries, and the tendency to tar all with the same brush.

Conclusions and messages

Overseas aid, both public and private, is increasing but still falls well short of what is required. The research suggests that, if more is to be raised at a time of public scepticism over governments’ international policy, NGOs and others must communicate clear and positive messages to supporters. In particular, the following ideas might profitably be considered by those interested in raising more resources for development:

exploring the positive role that non-governmental figures and organizations can play in communications where government influence seems limited or negative;
developing government policy, NGO campaigning, messages from iconic figures, and discussion with peers and media as a network of interlocking influences;
depoliticizing government messages about development activity and facilitating direct connections between donors and developing country recipients;
encouraging donors to look beyond Africa and differentiating the experience of developing countries;
encouraging ways of giving direct aid, individual to individual;
developing new ways of reporting on progress, enabling people to discover needs and the impact of interventions for themselves, possibly through websites;
providing more vivid information on achievements, using a variety of media;
highlighting practical actions, with a focus on solutions not problems;
challenging received ideas through more open debate.

As we have seen, the research shows that international donors tend to be more highly educated and professional. Such donors can also be critical and demanding. Fundraisers and NGOs need to take a strong lead in creating positive perceptions and must ensure that potential donors are properly and reliably informed about needs and the impact of their support. New and attractive ways of engagement need to be developed, particularly through new media opportunities. Governments could be valuable partners in such initiatives.

Cathy Pharoah is Visiting Professor of Charity Funding, Centre for Charity Effectiveness, Cass Business School, London, and a member of the research team. Email cathy.pharoah@thirdsp.co.uk

For more information
For those who would like a full account of the research to date, two reports are available: R Atkinson (2007) Public Attitudes to Overseas Giving: Does government make a difference? http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/48324/0 J Micklewright and S V Schnepf (2007) Who Gives for Overseas Development? http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/48329

Click here to send this article to a friend

Why should I subscribe to Alliance?

Subscribe now to Alliance magazine and receive:

4 issues of Alliance to your door
8 issues of Alliance Bulletin to your inbox
Access to all back issues (since 1998) in PDF format
Click here for more information or call +44 20 7239 1405.