Do Philanthropic Citizens Behave
like Governments?
Internet Platforms and the Diffusion of
Private International Aid
2009 RUBIN SYMPOSIUM
The Privatization of Development Assistance
December 4-5, 2009
NYU School of Law
Raj M. Desai
Georgetown University
Homi Kharas
Brookings Institution
1
Outline
•
•
•
•
•
•
ODA vs. private aid
Internet-based aid (GlobalGiving and
Kiva)
Comparison with official development
flows
The supply of private aid and
microfinance
The internet and donor fragmentation
Conclusions
2
3
Overview
•
•
•
•
Provision of aid from a rapidly diversifying
set of actors
Little known about cross-country and
sectoral preferences/selectivity of
philanthropic individuals
Collect data from two popular internetbased platforms for international giving
Use panel-regression and survival analysis to
demonstrate that individuals do not behave
like governments
4
New Private Aid
•
•
•
•
Mega-charities can reduce various costs
Recent growth in private aid occurring at
all levels
Proliferation of new forms of private aid
Raises questions regarding coordination
and what drives preferences of individual
citizen-philanthropists
5
Public and Private Aid
US Official and Private Giving, 2007
Total Official and Private Giving, 2007
40
Private Sources,
$60 bn.
30
US$, billions
DAC-Bilateral,
$73 bn.
Foundations,
3.3
Volunteerism,
3.5
Universities,
3.9
Non-DAC, $10 bn.
,
Corporations,
6.8
20
Religious, 8.6
10
ODA, 21.8
PVOs, 10.8
Multilateral, $28 bn.
0
Official
Private
6
Two Peer-to-Peer Platforms

GlobalGiving
•
•
•
•

Project grants
Funds channel through “partner” organizations or direct
Unlimited grant size
Unlimited time on website to attract donors
Kiva
• Loans to individuals or groups
• Funds channeled interest-free through MFI (who then onlends)
• Maximum loan size between $1,200 - $3,000
• Maximum time on website limited to 30 days
7
GlobalGiving Portal
8
Kiva Portal
9
P2P Giving Trends
Monthly Disbursements ($ millions)
Kiva and Global Giving, Monthly Disbursements
4
Kiva
2
Global Giving
0
2004m1
2005m1
2006m1
2007m1
2008m1
2009m1
10
Summary Indicators
Average
GlobalGiving
Kiva
$5,935
$725
Funding rate ($/hour)
1.19
93.68
Hours per grant/loan
11,000
52
US-based donor share
0.78
0.70
New projects, by month
(2008)
12
2,229
9.5%
100%
Amount requested
% funded, by project
(2008)
11
GlobalGiving Requested/Funded
Projects
12
Kiva Requested/Funded Loans
13
ODA vs. Private Aid Compared

GlobalGiving and Kiva disbursements vs.
“project” ODA and official microfinance

Comparison in terms of sensitivities of
allocations to country-specific factors:
log( Aid )it  ˆ 0  ˆ1 log( Population)it 1
 ˆ 2 log( GDP / capita)it 1  ˆ 3 ( Institutions)it 1
Democratic Institutions
ODA Projects
Official Microfinance
0
10
Disbursements
Disbursements
5.5
4.5
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
70
80
90
-1
-2
3.5
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
-3
90
Sample Percentile
Sample Percentile
GlobalGiving
Kiva
14
Disbursements
Disbursements
9
8
13
12
11
7
10
20
30
40
50
60
Sample Percentile
70
80
90
10
20
30
40
50
60
Sample Percentile
15
GDP per Capita
ODA Projects
Official Microfinance
0
10
Disbursements
Disbursements
5.5
4.5
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
70
80
90
-1
-2
3.5
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
-3
Sample Percentile
Sample Percentile
Kiva
GlobalGiving
14
Disbursements
Disbursements
10
9
8
13
12
11
7
10
20
30
40
50
60
Sample Percentile
70
80
90
10
20
30
40
50
60
Sample Percentile
16
Survival Analysis
•
•
•
Panel only describes if funding happens
and to what magnitude…does not
capture “duration” of a project/recipient
on the web-platform
Rate of funding reveals information about
the preferences of donors with respect to
project/recipient
Estimate the effects of covariates on the
time (duration) it takes for “failure” (i.e., a
project/loan being fully funded)
17
GlobalGiving Funding Rates
By region (ECA in bold)
By polity score category
By project size dummy (large
project in bold)
By investment grade dummy
18
Kiva Funding Rates
By region (ECA in bold)
By polity
By MFI
score
Rating
category
(1 of (-10
5 in bold)
to 5 in bold)
By project size dummy (large
project in bold)
By gendergrade
(female
in bold)
By investment
dummy
(investment grade in bold)
19
Hazard Rates
GlobalGiving
Kiva
Amount
–
–
Amount2
+
+
No. of Borrowers
+
Gender (% female)
+
Loan term (months)
–
Sovereign Risk
0
–
GDP per Capita (log)
+
+
Polity Score
0
+
ODA per Capita (log)
+
+
Dow Jones Change
0
–
20
SUR
Kiva
GlobalGiving
(1)
(2)
(1)
(2)
$/hour
Herfindahl
$/month
Herfindahl
Amount
–
–
+
–
Amount2
+
+
+
+
No. of Borrowers
0
+
Gender (% female)
+
–
Loan term (months)
–
+
Sovereign Risk
+
0
0
0
GDP per Capita (log)
–
+
0
0
Polity Score
0
0
0
0
ODA per Capita (log)
0
+
+
0
21
SUR (Funding Rates over Time)
22
Conclusions
•
•
•
Countries vs. projects vs. people: new
private aid transactions different on both
donor and recipient sides
What doesn’t seem to matter: countryspecific factors, sectors
Intermediation capabilities in the field are
important, but quality is less so
23