In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Philanthropy and Development Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota Winona, Minnesota

By Gina L. Eisler, CFRE June 2008


M.A. in Philanthropy and Development

As administration and faculty of Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota, I have evaluated the FINAL CAPSTONE PAPER:

by Gina Lois Eisler

and recommend that the degree of Master of Arts be conferred upon the candidate.

Gary A. Kelsey Ed.D. Program Director



Acknowledgements Throughout my twenty-year career in non-profit management and revenue development, it has been an honour to work with so many wonderful mentors, selfless donors, volunteer leaders, and employees in the non-profit sector. Each of them has contributed to this work. I would like to thank my colleagues in Cohort 16, the late Tim Burchill and the Tim Burchill Scholarship Fund, the Canadian Cancer Society and the Ontario Division Gift Planning Team for their guidance, wisdom, patience and support throughout the last two years.

This Capstone Paper documents the results of a literature review to identify key influences in this rise of the non-profit sector and to identify common themes and trends to determine how globalization is affecting philanthropy outside of North America. the employees of non-profit organizations are being educated and trained with the realization of the importance the civil sector plays in democratic society. and will continue to play a critical role in advancing philanthropy around the world. and skills are taught. Technological advances are assisting organizations to raise funds. Professional networks and organizations to teach and share best practices have been established.4 Abstract Globalization has become a catchword representing a spectrum that ranges from the Internet. The research revealed that from a global perspective. it may require another generation to benefit . Long considered the domain of the United States. the last twenty-five years have witnessed the development of non-profit organizations at an unprecedented rate all over the world. organized philanthropy is poised to become even more important as borders open. Many of the same factors influencing government and business also influence organized philanthropy. In organizations around the world. the community foundation is rapidly becoming a successful method of organized philanthropy outside North America with its own support organizations and networks. At the same time. Communications technology has. Despite the tremendous progress the community foundation movement has made. knowledge is shared. rapidly expanding multinational corporations and extends beyond the stock market and boardroom into deadly airborne viruses such as SARS. communicate and learn from each other.

5 before results are felt. Countries new to democracy will only reap the rewards of organized philanthropy if government. . business and civil society work together.

.........................................................................................................................................................................19 Chapter 3: Conclusions and Recommendations .....4 Table of Contents .......................................................................................................55 References.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................49 Summary ..............7 Chapter 2: Literature Review.......................................................................................................6 Table of Contents Title Page ..........................................................................................................................................................................3 Abstract ...........................2 Acknowledgements.............................................................................................57 Annotated Bibliography..............................................................................1 Final Paper Approval Form ................................6 Chapter 1: Introduction .................................................64 .................................................................................................................

2005. As soon as the media around the world publically broadcast the tragedy. time and space are almost irrelevant.7 Chapter One Introduction Purpose The reach of civil society on a global scale became evident during the tsunami disaster of December 2004. non-profit organizations and non-government organizations mobilized to coordinate relief operations for millions of distraught people in South and Southeast Asia. It enlarges our concept of community. 7). businesses and governments around the world responded with donations to humanitarian organizations through the repeatedly televised and pod-cast tragedy. The literature review sought to find themes and trends in globalization and philanthropy and to document their impact on organized philanthropy outside of North America. This more effective philanthropy will need to rely on professionals and support organizations to deliver programs and raise funds. as well as opportunities to share best practices using technology and communications tools. …In an interconnected globalized world. making communications instantaneous and creating networks of knowledge and shared values around the world. The tsunami revealed remarkable effects of globalization. What impact does globalization have on philanthropy? It helps us to see the world in a different way. p. as people. This disaster happened in a new global world in which borders. all . globalization has radically expanded the opportunities for effective philanthropy” (Brodhead. “By collapsing time and space.

The background section of this paper will highlight and explain globalization and its history with a brief introduction to philanthropy. 2005. higher education and support organizations for non-profit managers and professional . the growth in. how philanthropic practices can be influenced and how these changes will affect non-profit organizations. shared solutions to global problems will enable organized philanthropy. as well as common themes in the literature review. Two very important factors surfaced in many books and articles: the growth of the civil sector around the world and the role philanthropy can play in this new global society. These points are documented in the first section of Chapter Two. The rapid spread of the community foundation movement to newly democratized countries is an example of a philanthropy tool that is being transported effectively. pollution spread rapidly and affect each of us no matter where they originate (Brodhead. Those charged with leading organizations will need to know what factors will impact philanthropy. and non-profit managers to play a role in changing the world in which we live.8 problems become everybody’s problems: disease. The purpose of this Capstone Paper is to define globalization as it relates to philanthropy through a review of factors that influence globalization. p. The subsequent sections of Chapter Two focus on the three core trends that surfaced as consistent themes in the review of related literature: the extraordinary impact that communications technology has on non-profit organizations. conflict. briefly review information related to philanthropy and globalization. and need for. and document the effects that were consistent. 6). More than ever. philanthropists.

It should be noted that the research and literature review focus on globalization and philanthropy.e. 2007. studying and implementing the factors that affect the globalization of philanthropy can help people share solutions faster and better. and with the rapidly growing and important civil society almost everywhere on earth. diaspora giving. . i. Although these two meanings of ‘global philanthropy’ are analytically distinguishable they are related in practice insofar as the globalization of philanthropy …. and whether or not this information can be useful and applicable for countries new to organized philanthropy. 199).9 fundraising staff. the growth of crossborder giving. Shared solutions to societal issues can benefit everyone. global philanthropy (Leat. p. if not condition for. is a necessary accompaniment. and the rapid increase and expansion of the community foundation movement around the world. Diana Leat provides a succinct explanation to differentiate between global philanthropy versus crossborder giving that can be referenced throughout the literature review: The globalization of philanthropy as the process of spreading philanthropic institutions and practices globally. transnational. not on international. friend’s organizations or the effects of globalization on international organizations. A further intention of this Capstone Paper was to determine the impact of globalization on philanthropy.

There are numerous studies of democracy and civil society. Similarly. or civil society. goods and services.10 Research Question What are the common trends affecting the globalization of philanthropy outside of North America since 1989? Background The research and literature review undertaken focused on examining the factors affecting the globalization of philanthropy in countries outside of North America since the year 1989. on a global scale. the movement of goods and services related to the economy and trans-national companies. Digital Giving author Richard McPherson stated. Lester Salamon noted that the factors responsible for globalization are those same factors responsible for the growth in the civil sector: communications technology. The literature review included research on globalization and its historical origins. A common theme emerged in the work of several respected authorities in both globalization and philanthropy and the civil sector: the globalization of civil society has been on a parallel course as the economy globalizes. p. “following the familiar path of globalization” as companies increasingly move funds. social entrepreneurs and external actors (grassroots democracy) (2005. neoliberalism and new public management. 137-140). Helmut Anheier echoed Salamon when he stated that philanthropy is. charity soon follows” (2007. as well as several papers. and the growth of the non-profit sector. an emphasis on social capital. 70). case studies from other countries and articles considering the role of philanthropy within globalization. Combined . p. “Where commerce goes.

When the telegraph was invented in 1835. and today’s era the second globalization. In 2005. while others like Philippe Legrain claim it has always existed. 89-96). 2002. the internationalization of the telephone system and major credit cards both played a role in the erosion of national boundaries. p. or. The Renaissance may be considered the beginning of globalization. 2007. p. Thomas Friedman suggested that globalization began in 1989 with the end of the Cold War. During the 1800’s the greatest international migration of people took place. . The unification of postal services made correspondence faster and easier and the invention of the radio and telephone linked people more than ever before.11 with the growing number of countries networked with international law treaties philanthropy is increasingly moving across and beyond borders (Anheier. The research to define and trace the history of globalization has shown that it is not a new concept. and many views on the beginning of globalization exist. In recent decades. The first wave of 19th century globalization may be credited to the development of canals to move goods. the ability to communicate and travel has been a major force in connecting the world. Long before 1989. and railways linking one coast of a continent to the other. steam replacing sails. 117). The Industrial Revolution (circa 1770 and on) could have marked the first period of globalization. or term. sixty million Europeans moved to the Americas (three fifths to the United States) in the early to mid1800’s and 12 million Japanese and Chinese moved to East and South Asia (Legrain. it began connecting the world in minutes rather than weeks. then continued with Vasco de Gama and Magellan sailing around the world and leading to thriving trade by 1600 (Legrain. Some historians claim that globalization began with Columbus in 1500. 82-83). 2002. p.

p. and the former Soviet Empire. For the purposes of this paper. effects on the world. or World Wide Web. but it was hard to think about having a ‘global’ policy (Friedman. Brazil. Before 1989. civil society has emerged as a beneficiary. According to Thomas Friedman there have been ten important factors that have had ‘flattening’. Two of Friedman’s claims regarding globalization have also had a significant impact on the globalization of philanthropy: the fall of the communist state and the introduction of the Internet. or globalizing. The fall of the Berlin Wall didn’t just help flatten the alternatives to free-market capitalism and unlock enormous pent-up energies for hundreds of millions of people in places like India. both as a user and dependant. a single ecosystem. as the trends documented in this paper will illustrate. It also allowed us to think about the world differently – to see it as more of a seamless whole. and a single community. In the 1920’s interconnection through travel and world trade could establish globalization. it was blocking our sight . you could have an Eastern policy or a Western policy. 53). 2005. . Because the Berlin Wall was blocking our way.12 perhaps it started at the height of European imperialism in the 1890’s when world trade was larger than in the 1990’s. p. 18). 2005. communication via television and popular culture (Grew. China. or in the 1950’s with the creation of new international organizations. Regardless of when globalization began to connect the world.our ability to think about the world as a single market. trade agreements.

p. 35). 2005. While Friedman claims globalization cannot be halted. There are examples of ‘international’ philanthropy dating back to Roman times when Herodes Atticus. leading to less expensive transportation and communications. hair stylists. Organized and strategic . British computer scientist Tim Berners-Lee created the Web in 1991 to allow science researchers to be able to share their research quickly and easily (Friedman. many versions of philanthropy have deep religious or cultural influences. and China enforces restrictions on its citizens through their use of the Internet. former special adviser to the World Trade Organization Philippe Legrain disagrees. 2003. p. He also notes few countries trade with more than their neighbours. a Greek businessman. These are documented within Chapter Two of this Capstone Paper. for instance. And he observes most consumable goods can’t be traded. 6-9). continues to close its borders to the outside world. Philanthropy is not new in any culture or country. 59). He notes globalization is a product of expansive growth in technology. techniques and practices around the world (Johnson. and cleaners cannot provide services over the World Wide Web (Legrain. He goes on to observe that accepting globalization is a political choice: North Korea. p. 2002. and contributed to the building of aquaducts in Rome (Ruffin. endowed a stadium. Friedman believes that the second most important ‘flattening effect’ is the invention of the Web.13 the examination of globalization and philanthropy will focus on globalization since the late 1980’s. p. 7). fitness clubs. This rapid growth of communications technology has enabled the sharing of fundraising concepts. as language. The terminology is often different. 2005. culture and customs will always differentiate people and their communities. restored a theatre.

Ruffin. Other support organizations are explored in Chapter Two. p. Internationally. The South African Grantmakers’ Association was created to research and help develop strategic philanthropy with a goal of enhancing grant effectiveness (Fraser. these organizations lost much of their influence and many are beginning to adopt the community foundation model. 79-81). the laws have made it difficult for people to understand the positive contribution non-profit organizations can make to society (Ruffin. p. 2007. Non-profit regulations and laws still restrict many countries from developing their civil society. 2003.14 techniques used to raise funds often credited to the United States. such as community foundations and capital campaigns (Onishi. 3). In post-communist countries. there were a number of communitybased organizations. laws controlling charitable giving date back to 1601 with the English Charitable Law of Trusts. p. For example. 8. With democratic government. . 2003. p. 10) were preceded by Japan’s first modern foundation in 1829. There are 184 nonprofit management programs in colleges and universities established outside the United States. The United States developed laws governing international giving in 1935. the Society of Gratitude (Salamon. Dozens of support organizations have been created to support the third sector. 3537). giving rise to foundations able to send resources outside the United States to support NGOs and non-profit orphanages and hospitals. p. NGOs and charities that were very political and well-organized. 1994. In Great Britain. 2007. when apartheid ended in South Africa. within the non-profit sector there is a greater level of sophistication used to both manage organizations and raise funds.

2003. 163). Many of the Eastern European community foundations organized since 1989 have received start-up funds from the Open Society Foundation. 252). 3). 2005. Comparable organizations were established in other countries. but their philanthropic practices. These trends – the growth of civil society. yet there was complete dependence on the state for service and solutions to problems (Pospíscil. 22). more people are relying on a strong. were wiped out in World War II. p. Community foundations have been a traditional North American model of strategic philanthropy. Globalization of philanthropy is real.15 According to the literature reviewed. We need to think differently about how money is given now. To prevent a return to authoritarian states. Under communism there was complete distrust of the government or anyone outside of family. no organized fundraising or philanthropic techniques have spread outside North America as rapidly and successfully as the community foundation movement. including voluntarism. European countries had a rich history of philanthropic foundations. p. and very positive. There is an opportunity for foundations because they should be the vehicle for global philanthropy (Brock. It is no longer chequebook charity. People are motivated differently than in the past. however they are now considered the fastest growing philanthropic innovation outside North America as they develop unique roles in communities around the world. 2006. Mott. the expansion of . p. responsive civil society to protect against regression (Gaberman. Ford or Rockefeller Brothers Foundations in the United States (Leat. p. Extraordinary challenges are being overcome by Central and Eastern European organizations.

transparency and benchmarking. As competition for employees. there exists a willingness to share.16 communications technology. and the successes and failures of techniques used in other countries should influence best practices. As the sector encounters challenges related to accountability. volunteers and donors continues to impact the sector. As the community foundation model was shaped to save time and effort for countries seeking ways to operate a foundation. Significance Although some scholarly material has traced a rise in the number of non-profit education and training programs. teach and help build a better society. the professionalization of non-profit employees and the community foundation movement – are all playing a significant role in the globalization of philanthropy. Awareness of trends in any sector is critical for success. effort and embrace a new global philanthropic community. Research into globalization and philanthropy can lead to opportunities. . perhaps other elements of non-profit management and fundraising can also be shared to save time. as it should be for the increasingly scrutinized non-profit sector. far less attention is paid to this when compared to other topics on globalization. For many employees within the non-profit sector. present knowledge applicable in North America and add to the growing information that exists for new practitioners around the world. having knowledge of the world-stage of philanthropic practices can benefit volunteers and staff regardless of their place in the world. or philanthropy’s role within it. being aware of the effects of globalization on philanthropy.

Definition of Terms Civil society: an organization or group operating for the benefit of society without paying dividends to shareholders.17 This research can be of use to those practicing professionals keen for new knowledge. And philanthropy has listened (Oliviero and Simmons. 2007. Philanthropy: giving for the common good of humankind. community groups. p. charities. nongovernment organization or third sector. and to understand the profession on a worldwide stage. It is of interest and benefit to know what traditions and trends are happening in a prospective donor’s home country before engaging the person in an organization. health organizations as well as NGOs and non-profit organizations. Also considered a more positive term (rather than saying what the organization is not doing as in “not for profit”) (Perlas. service organizations. xv). The demand for change has come from the community base. this term encompasses churches. it is important to see the ‘big picture’ and to learn from those who have gone before us. . social movements. for those wishing to mentor others. p. Often used interchangeably with non-profit organization. 122-123). Philanthropic leaders who have listened to the civil society sector in emerging countries are the ones to promote systemic change and modify the impact of globalization. such as Canada. In countries with diverse populations. there is an urgent need to redefine and expand the prospect pool. In any growing field.

p. but receiving government funding. potential for further growth (Wattanasiritham. Youtube and other programs/systems that allow users to communicate immediately and share their own thoughts and daily activities online. Often receives funds from the government to operate. Non-profit organization (NPO): an organization operating for the benefit of society without paying dividends to shareholders. Refers to FaceBook. the second is business and the third sector refers to civil society or non-profit organizations. . Third sector: the first sector is government. or using the Internet and World Wide Web.0: Social interactions online. Nongovernment organization (NGO): international development agencies working in developing countries at arms length from the government. Web 2.18 Strategic philanthropy: creative/innovative philanthropy leading to significant results. 93).

Influencing factors include political reform. Asian organizations have been established because new legal regulations and governments allowed the non-profit sector to develop (Johnson and Johnson. Timothy Brodhead. et al. The growth of the community foundation movement and globalization The growth of civil society and the role of philanthropy in globalization A well-documented trend found in the literature is the remarkable increase in the international non-profit sector throughout the last 20 years. . Eastern Europe and Asia. nongovernment organizations have been created. 2004. government policy changes. In response to reductions in public sector support in Latin America and Africa. The growth of civil society and the role of philanthropy in globalization 2. Lester Salamon. and the collapse of communism in Russia. This documented growth is noted by several non-profit experts such as Helmut Anheier. 1. 67). in numerous sources utilized for this Capstone Paper.. Networks and education to support non-profit employees 4. Holt Ruffin. The impact of technology on the globalization of philanthropy 3. p.19 Chapter Two Literature Review Introduction The literature reviewed is organized under the following headings.

Other countries have seen it as a way to tap into creativity and ensure democratic support (Salamon. Foundations. official aid agencies and governments have supported and even subsidized this growth. are being created like no other time in history. and inexpensive. It is not a coincidence that organized philanthropy has expanded and grown with the demise of authoritarian states. the emergence of new global needs. is expanding and growing in Eastern Europe. 4). It does not mean that government and civil society are in opposition. “We are in the midst of a global ‘associational revolution’ that may prove to be as significant to the latter twentieth century as the rise of the nation-state was to the latter nineteenth” (Salamon. 1). p. “Information on global needs is more accessible due to the technological revolution. The World Bank. The growth of civil society from democracy. a global third sector. and to protect human rights and the environment. In countries like the United States and the United Kingdom. 1994. as civil society relies on the framework that government provides (Brodhead. associations and grassroots efforts to provide services and economic development. or civil society. 4). Africa and Latin America. 2005. 1994. p. many link the end of the Cold War with the opening of societies. Power has shifted and spread from government to NGOs. Asia. corporations and international organizations. widely available technology has created borderless networks that allow civil society to organize and speak locally as well as internationally. and .20 At the same time. p. conservative government leaders such as Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan made support for the voluntary sector a strategy to reduce government spending.

philanthropy can help give citizens a voice in the process. 111). 117). p. money. and goods have crossed borders. As people.21 a broad range of actors committed to responding to these needs has emerged due to the worldwide boom of civil society” (Frumkin. A common trend in the literature revealed that many believe there is a new opportunity for philanthropy to connect and bind governments. 2007. Simmons. Globalization and the Civil Society Sector : “A powerful citizen sector has also emerged in this process and is laying claim to an expanded voice on both the national and international stages”. While government. commercial enterprise. p. The globalization of philanthropy has followed a path blazed by corporations. p. The growth. 2007. p. Kathy Brock states that the World Wide Web and the Internet will connect citizens and. 2007. Simmons. especially through the work of foundations (Anheier. 128). and private investment remain the driving forces of globalization. 128). Philanthropy has learned from its civil society constituencies to leverage its power to bring groups together within and across sectors. 2005. “… organizations . economic strength and civil society to build alliances (Oliviero. importance and size of civic society is remarkable given how. Lester Salamon echoed this in his article. “closely they parallel the forces that have also been responsible for the parallel growth of globalization” (2005. In the context of globalization the role of philanthropy is critical to helping globalize civil society networks (Oliviero. p. 138). so too has the practice of establishing an organized process to help those in need.

If the problems are interconnected. From SARS to e-Bay. In this ‘open’ world both problems and solutions become shared because of their local and global factors. Indeed. 2003. p. engage and work together. 157). a connection is not sufficient to solve the problems facing society today. 4). AIDS to Google. Neither the third sector. that means each of us in our own organizations… has to think about the ways in which we are part of a larger world and work with people elsewhere in the world. p. “…change human evolution for the better and that it is the most important social innovation of the 20th century” (2000. can replace government or social justice (Brodhead. If globalization means that the problems of the world are now global. 82). philanthropy will play a decisive role in shaping the new international order (Hewa and Stapleton. According to Lester Salamon. 2005. people become instantly connected across borders. and causes may mobilize citizens” (2005. 9). business and civil society must cooperate. p. then the solutions have to become global too. 4). the avian flu to podcasts. the rise of the nonprofit sector is related to the coming together of historical trends related to globalization .22 may share and borrow ideas and best practices. However. then solutions have to be connected too (Greene. p. Nicanor Perlas believes the third sector has ability to. “…As the global community becomes increasingly open and interconnected. nor civil society. These problems far outweigh what one sector can do alone to manage or improve those living outside democratic countries. Governments. p. 2005.

Logically. . 188). The following sections document three areas deeply impacted and influenced by globalization. 2005. Organized philanthropy is flexible: people from all sectors can work together and donors have the ability to respond and create partnerships. 2007. p. By understanding solutions in various countries and cultures to build on historical charitable factors as well as growth areas. p. training and financial support to such organizations. played a major part in creation of civil society organizations emerging from conflict. 2007. foreign donors have tended to spread their own organizational model to the emerging local NGOs. as they appreciate the value of civil society and need local partners to implement their projects. p. expertise. Civil society organizations are not passive recipients of global influence but active players in the process (Brock. 148). but also on globalization. 158).23 and the growing international connection between organizations and people (2005. in most cases this was the ‘Anglo-Saxon’ model of the board and an executive (Leshchenko. strategies for effective philanthropy can be created. Simmons and Winder have amassed a volume of information regarding the strategic role philanthropy could play in globalization. Non-profit scholars and researchers Anheier. These are causative effects on philanthropy. and have. p. Foreign donors provide encouragement. Philanthropy can transcend borders. Philanthropic foundations could. with the greatest value added (Anheier. 137). p. v). operate without profit and respond quickly (Anheier.

In 1986. His article talked about a “revolution” in communications through the rapid distribution of computers. . satellite. core elements for using new technology (p. it has not yet been harnessed to benefit the sector and those it serves on an equitable global scale. 2005. media reports about starving Somali children. The awareness that people can change their circumstances has prompted civil groups to emerge as catalysts for improved human rights. and the Rwanda massacre were subsequently brought into western living rooms through television. Lester Salamon wrote about factors responsible for the worldwide expansion of the non-profit sector. p. Accompanying this was a growth in education and adult literacy in the developing world. In the age of transparency through technology. p. 138). 2006. Student demonstrators in Tiananmen Square. television and fibre optics to remote areas of the world. To put the reach of technology into perspective it should be noted that the first communications technology to have a profound positive impact on globalization and the third sector was television. the Soviet government had to respond to their “public relations disaster” by admitting their nuclear disaster was worse than they originally wanted to share with the world. 6). Soviet President Gorbachev was unable to prevent satellite images of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster from being broadcast internationally. the Internet helped prompt NGO and government action (Suter. All advanced through the progress of communications technology (Salamon. 40-43). Later. In 1994. freedom and protection of the environment.24 The Impact of Technology on the Globalization of Philanthropy The literature shows that although communications technology is being used in the non-profit sector.

p. vii). 119). 2005. 26). and allowing on-site face-to-face meetings has widely promoted sharing amongst organizations and foundations (Anheier and Daly.25 In the acknowledgment of Globalization. 2006. Cost reductions in telephone and fax lines. 62-63). p. but without media attention. increasing the ability to be well-organized and noticed locally and internationally (Frumkin. 2005. foundations with a lengthy history of supporting developing countries. three million were downloaded (McPherson. .S. economical Internet and cellular telephone the enabler that allowed non-profit organizations to create cross-border support. This epic disaster was brought into our homes. 2005. Philanthropy and Civil Society addresses the role of large U. p. The ‘compassion fatigue’ that television viewers experience after watching highly publicized tragedies can work against these new forms of technology as people demand solutions (Suter. p. Philanthropy and Civil Society. and hand-held devices with new communications technology. “This disaster showed that neither international agreements nor the geopolitical interests of nation-states have the capacity to mobilize the global community to the same extent as human generosity” (Hewa. dozens of equally as needy and worthy projects have been unfunded because they were not pod-cast or highly visible. 111). Peter Frumkin’s article. p. When UNICEF offered tsunami pod-casts. This positive effect was certainly evident in the tsunami disaster. “American Foundations and Overseas Funding” in Globalization. He believes the democratization of the communications industry made the widely available. 2007. offices. author Soma Hewa referred to the December 2004 tsunami that struck Asia as a remarkable event within the globalization of philanthropy.

This allows NGOs to develop low-cost networks faster than ever before. 151-154). electronic mail. 2005. In . as in the 1999 case of the Battle of Seattle. used the Internet to voice their opposition to the policies of the World Trade Organization during its summit (Legrain. and the Globalization of the Not-for-Profit Sector. highlights factors responsible for growth in the northern international non-government sector. many supporting NGOs such as the World Wildlife Fund. have forced governments to act. Voluntarism. Twenty million people around the world. 2006. Salamon (1994) and Brock (2006) state that the expansion of technology makes it faster for people to “organize and mobilize” and “authoritarian regimes that had successfully controlled their own communications networks have grown powerless to stop the flow of information” (Salamon. p. Today it is in response to people. p. Perlas. interactive and easy methods of communication compared to 20 years ago. p. 2000. 42-43). 72. 2000. 6). fast. p. that the government must answer. 203. Declining State Capacity. 474-475). p. 74). 1999. Broadcast media. Within the anti-globalization movement of some NGOs. fax. p. p. The employees of CARE instantly link to field operations in rural Ethiopia with e-mail in their jeeps (Lindenberg. and the Internet are inexpensive. satellite and Internet audio streaming will soon be readily available (Suter. Marc Lindenberg’s 1999 article. Global communications technology. and then the reach of people with Internet. 1994. 2002. Even in countries like Malaysia that have restrictions on broadcasting. the modern tools of communication can spotlight positive and negative aspects of globalization (Friedman. and not just the media.26 This new global reach has left some pondering how involved the civil sector will become when making decisions with governments and business (Perlas.).

“Whereas a majority of Americans use the Internet.K.000 supporters in 1985 to 5 million through Internet and electronic mail campaigns (Legrain. there were more than 300 such sites and the number is growing (Johnson and Johnson. By 2001. 2007. p. with their wealthier organizations. using the Internet. 2004. With extraordinary claims of 20 million people responding to an Internet call for action to block the Multilateral Agreement on Investment. 2007. it is easy to lose perspective about parts of the world without this instantaneous technology. 2002. Time. half the world has never made a phone call” (Legrain. 37). 2006. However. p. p. According to a 2000 study by the W. and philanthropy. Kellogg Foundation. p. 9). voluntarism. 2002. and geographically remote or poor areas. Limited access and exclusion in some communities and countries exacerbates the growing divide between affluent people. The World Wildlife Fund for Nature (WWF) has expanded from 570.27 South Africa. 202). p. 52). there were 140 websites dedicated to social change. co-ordinate and strategically raise funds. Former special advisor Philippe Legrain reminds readers. 4). Greenpeace has been able to plan. online applications and e-mail are common and widespread (Anheier. p. Communications and technology have allowed people to view the needs in other countries easily and participate as activists. The seemingly positive effects of both the expansion of the philanthropic sector and the increase in technology used by non-profit organizations serve to both strengthen and complicate charity (McPherson. especially if the donor expects a tax credit (Charities Aid Foundation. p. 2007. 84). 197). strategic philanthropy relies on technology. effort and . without overlapping its campaigns (Mehta. cross-border giving is still complicated.

480-482). As in North America. those without the infrastructure and hardware have been excluded from development opportunities because of poverty (Anheier. 2004. leading to increased waste. Another negative aspect of technology can be messages and information that are misinterpreted and run contrary to the values of other . computer technology and Internet services are limited by the readiness of the philanthropic sector in each country. 2007. In a creative. While environmental non-profit organizations have fought for better use of land space and less consumerism. train and educate radical extremists with often violent agendas (Friedman. human resources are required to manage a website and giving portal with appealing. 1 . 2005. Since 2002. p. 84). 160-161). p. The environmental fall-out of this technology revolution has led to increased challenges to dispose of waste left from cell phones and computers. as newer models appear at reduced prices. These same communications advances available to better the human condition have been available to recruit. innovative response to this. p. up-to-date pages (Johnson and Johnson. 2007. 2005. p. to redevelop computers and send them to schools in Kenya. Despite advancements in organized philanthropy in South Africa. a computer recycling non-profit organization was founded in England. 39).2). but depending on the location and budget. new electronic devices continue to come on-stream. informative.28 lack of technology skills also play a role in the negative aspects of the Internet (Brock. p. Technology available to non-profit organizations is also available to terrorist organizations. The Internet has expanded quickly. schools and churches throughout Africa (Global Giving Matters. Digital Links have been refurbishing and delivering computers to nongovernmental organizations.

10). In recent years Facebook. In organizations trying to manage and deliver programs. “Non-profits should actually dominate Web 2. answers the challenge facing many organizations – a small budget” (McPherson. 2004.75.0” are becoming daily communicating activities. the organization has relied on the Web to assist new organizations operating in a difficult environment. p. 74 . the resources to have a communications specialist with Internet and Web skills will not be the easiest position to fund with an annual salary. one of the organizations created in response to the community foundation movement. and an online resource centre. especially compared to traditional media. Through sharing advice and practical knowledge electronically. 204 .0 because it’s all about passion and interest. operate grants and raise funds.) Convio President Sheeraz Haji believes.206). For new organizations. direct mail can be too expensive and resource-dependent (McPherson. 2005. radio and Internet does not eliminate local difference and can even amplify misunderstanding” (Grew. 26). 2007. has initiated a translation fund. 2007. p. Despite the drawbacks listed above. Youtube. MySpace and scores of other interactive sites referred to as “Web 2. “Instantaneous communication by telegraph. they have initiated meetings with simultaneous translation and created a Spanish website (Leat. To support the community foundation movement the Worldwide Initiative for Grantmakers Support-Community Foundations (WINGS-CF).29 cultures. . the Internet has increased the ability for people to interact online. plus funds for face-to-face meetings. Since 1991. And the low cost of many online tools. Fifty per cent of donors checked a charity website before responding to an appeal. p. p.

2007. “Japanese fundraisers appear much more comfortable and positive in using the Internet for solicitation. online donations escalated from $10-million to $250-million. There are many positive aspects of communications technology that the non-profit sector must consider locally and globally. From a cultural perspective. p.30 E-mail has proven as an effective and emotional way of connecting donors with funds by quickly providing stewardship in unique ways not possible before the Internet and Web. Online giving is fast. The Initiative on Social Enterprise at Harvard Business School reports that from 1999-2000. however the negative arguments demand consideration. an interactive micro-financing website. Europe and Asia are further ahead than North America in using these mobile applications. p. In since they can avoid face--to-face solicitations with donors” (Onishi. convenient and appeals to the digital population. They projected that by 2010 onethird of giving will be online (Johnson and Johnson. There appear to be far more reasons to continue to invest in Web-based tools and communications technology for the civil sector. 65). Kiva. broadcasts prayers through speakers at religious sites in Israel. 2004. Pre-paid. Cell phones are going to revolutionize electronic giving. p. 21). credit cards and a 1-888 number allow people to dial from anywhere and choose their prayer (McPherson. ephilanthropy is used actively through websites and online giving. encourages feedback online and provides impact and stewardship e-mail reports from outside the United States for donors. In Tel Aviv “POIP” or Prayer Over Internet Protocol. 2007. . 37).

Training and technical assistance should receive more attention from managers in the non-profit sector (Salamon. The “Lady Bountiful” image of the nineteenth century has gone. the . NGOs are now more professional. To put this in perspective. He confirmed that the third sector now has a sizable economic presence. for a lack of technical capacity and a perceived inability to think broadly about policies. p. 2006. Globalization and Civil Society. 8). Lester Salamon echoed this in his later work. NGOs are applauded for operating with low costs. but are criticized for not being able to duplicate programs. With the number of people employed in the sector growing. it is widely acknowledged that there is a need for higher education and networking/support organizations to ensure efficiency. Some tertiary educational institutions have taken this concern for professionalization a step further by creating a specific diploma course for managing NGOs (Suter. As the sector evolves. The staff are paid and are often well qualified. 1994. He collected data in the mid to late 1990’s that accounts for 26 million full-time employees within the nonprofit sector (including religious organizations).31 Networks and education to support non-profit employees A common theme in the literature of globalization and its effects on philanthropy is the growing awareness of employees working in the non-profit sector. p. effectiveness and impact. Others disagree. 149). NGOs now provide careers for people who wish to help their fellow human beings. it becomes more important in the delivery of social programs.

In Peter Frumkin’s article on American Foundations and Overseas Funding he supported the views of Salm. and Salamon. As organizations evolve to meet these demands. 156). p. p. Brock. with training in state-of-the-art practices and thinking” (Salm. 8). Suter. p. In an examination of the sector in Canada. professionalism and leadership are necessary to operate within the globalization market. CARE and OXFAM revealed their plans to cope with the effects of globalization: they are looking internally for leaders and plan to manage all aspects of operations better. 1994. 156). As the civil sector grows and becomes a viable member at the table with government and the private sector. “These NGOs plan to invest in staff capacity. it will be of increasing importance to have professional non-profit managers (Brock. .32 expenditures for this group make it the seventh largest economy in the world (Salamon. between the informality that gives these organizations their special character and the institutionalization necessary to translate individual victories into permanent achievements (Salamon. 1999. 2007. with smaller budgets and higher service demands. p. 143-144). adopting a more policy-focused orientation and being able to speak the language of business” (2005. 2006. 99). “This entails the professionalization of staff. Non-government organizations must give greater sensitivity to the trade-offs that exist between voluntarism and professionalism. A study of Save the Children. p. including transparency and accountability. Brock says that civil society must position itself well to recruit the labour and capital needed to be sustainable.

Foundations can build the human capital in civil society by supporting training programs. p. The program offers participants the opportunity to study in New York (Ruffin. 14). all with the goal of improving the quality of leadership within NGOs (2005. 112). The literature related to globalization. In order to get a sense of the education programs. p.for the entire sector. consistently revealed tremendous growth in the non-profit sector. taking the time to invest in people . p. 2001.particularly civil society leaders . 2003. their creation.may return significant benefits. retreats. and the role of globalization in philanthropy. These opportunities allow people to learn from the knowledge and expertise learned through decades of community foundation experiences (Greene. seminars. Investing in people through professional development and training programs can be a slow and incremental approach to bringing change. as well as a need to ensure those managing the third sector have higher-education options. For example. A number of programs have been created to support local and international nonprofit professionals. professional development workshops. However.33 Having quality leaders in key civil society positions is important …. the International Fellows Program at the Center for Philanthropy at City University of New York offers a three-month program focused on community foundations for non-profit leaders and researchers. it was . and skill-building exercises. growth. 6). and focus. given the pressures and changes now being put on non-profits around the world by globalization processes.

NGOs and development. A discussion of whether civil society can be exported or will take root in certain areas of the world. financial and human resources management There has been a significant increase in programs with an international emphasis. The relevant information from a 10-year review of non-profit management education programs by Mirabella of Seton Hall University are summarized as follows: • • • 206% increase in coursework in philanthropy and the third sector The second most frequent type of course is fundraising Outside functions include philanthropy. advocacy. from five in 1998 to 36 in 2007. there were 240 universities and colleges in the U. 14S . 2007. p. The courses focus on four areas: comparative civil society. such as the Middle East. p.S. management of international nongovernmental organizations.22S). and theoretical explanations of the international third sector (Mirabella. and concludes with a section regarding civil society and the future of democracy. offering non-profit management courses.34 necessary to review available research and analysis of programs in the United States. At the time Roseanne Mirabella’s article was published in December 2007. Of note was one comparative course offered at Indiana University. 2007. 23S). considering whether or not ‘civil society’ is a universal feature of social life-and always a desirable one (Mirabella. . public policy and fundraising • Inside functions include internal management.

surveyed 62 regions outside the U. but on sustainable development (p. the programs differed from other areas. p. fundraising. In Latin America. networks and education does not stand solidly on an academic and historical framework like in the U. Asia Pacific 15%). Within the growing field of non-profit management. the need for research. 128). there have been an increasing number of organizations to support.35 Mirabella et al. as their sectors are the youngest. 37%. and even internationalization of the actions of some NGOs from developed countries”. their focus was not on the western model of learning good management theory and practice. Africa 28%. In Europe. the European Foundation Centre and the Association of Charitable Foundations noted transferring best practices. Partnerships have developed. with 189 non-profit management education programs (Britain. 2007. This growth was generated in the 1980’s through the downloading of services from government to the non-profit sector. University-based programs in Australia and New Zealand have evolved as a result of the need for recognized qualifications within the growing civil sector. such as the one . “…impact of globalization on contacts. but they have a higher number of academic programs than southern Asian countries (Mirabella. In Africa. p. 2007. Similarly. Despite these new programs and the growth of the sector in Europe it has been very hard to attract funding and full-time academic positions. 123S). 115S). educate.S. programs are being established in Europe with a focus on management and technical education. 119S). p. 2005. information sharing. An interesting contradiction exists in Japan and South Korea. (Mirabella. the increase in non-profit management programs is again attributed to democratic practices and the. not philanthropy. confer and guide sector leaders and volunteers. and lessons learned from experiences (Salamon.S.

It has initiated a donors’ forum to ensure they are complementary in allocating their resources. the Abrinq Foundation for Children’s Rights was established in Brazil. In 2001. GIFE (Group of Institutes. The Community Philanthropy Organization operates to translate philanthropic research into building local or community efforts. was established to co-ordinate the efforts of foundations. p. with India’s Society for Participatory Research in Asia (Mirabella et al. In 1989. the Peace Equity Access for Community Empowerment Foundation (PEF) was founded to help support the development of community building efforts and to support local NGOs. Business for Social Responsibility. Centre for Studies of Third Sector. 2007. Foundations and Enterprises). 71-75). p. 2007.36 between the University of Victoria in western Canada. 61). p. p. It fosters community philanthropy through sharing techniques. 120S). Institute for Development of Social Investment and Volunteer Centres. Brazil has experienced a huge rise in the number of community organizations that are credited with positively changing society. Council of Foundations and the European Foundation Centre. an organization similar to the U. applying resources to maximize impact. . Other support organizations enhance Brazilian civil society: the Brazilian Association of NGOs. It credits its success to making the decision to hire professional fundraisers to co-ordinate outreach efforts. and creating partnerships where possible and so that “no funder should reinvent the wheel” (Amott. 9-19).S. best practices and benchmarks (Kisil. 2007. The Philippines were ahead of other countries when the Association of Foundations was created in 1972 as a network of NGOs and foundations to build capacity and encourage networking (Amott.

and. In Pakistan. 59-60). 2007. The growth in the number of education programs and groups to support philanthropy in the last 25 years is a sure indicator that the industry is becoming increasingly important in its ability to attract funds. the first philanthropic support organization in the Islamic world was established in 2000 to support indigenous philanthropy and provide services to citizen organizations (Bonbright. Holt Ruffin defines this movement as remarkable. It is the result of international giving based on a clear strategic aim (to build sustainable institutions of philanthropy) a business model that adapts itself easily . has played a role in professional development for fundraisers (Winder. Community Foundations A significant trend seen in the research and review of literature related to the globalization of philanthropy is the community foundation movement outside North America. 2007. The Charities Aid Foundation in South Africa has established a Non-Profit Partnership to support the non-profit sector (Fraser. p. p. p. 84). 39).37 Mexico has also seen a significant increase in the number of organized philanthropic groups. The growth of community foundations was researched in an attempt to discover how countries have been able to successfully modify western best practices to meet local needs. The Mexican Centre for Philanthropy (CEMEFI) was established in 1988. 2007. steward donors and provide social programs. among other activities.

2006. but they are considered the newest and fastest form of philanthropy (Brodhead. Anheier. p. p. local needs. p. lending legitimacy to the community foundation movement despite the challenge of the endowment concept not being widely understood (Leat. p. 23). civic and business leaders are calling on foundations and other civil society actors to play a greater role in the public good both nationally and internationally (Anheier. 13). In the mid-1990’s there were very few community foundations outside of Canada and the United States. there were 1. 2006. Politicians. p. Leat. 2003. 2005. 117). They are shaped by their history. self-governance with a local group of interested investors. p. p. . health care and the arts (2005. 252). the changing role of government in the 1980’s has encouraged charitable giving. Daly. 255-256). most community foundations act in traditional fields such as education. 2005. Ruffin. 120-122). as does the impact globalization has on organized philanthropy” (Brock. 118). support for one geographic region. Johnson and Leat believe that “…the role of foundations in globalization remains unclear. Despite this. whether they operate their own programs or focus on making grants (Johnson and Johnson.38 to conditions in many countries (Ruffin. operating policies and procedures. In a study done by Anheier and Daly. 2005. 2003. They vary in the number of services they offer to donors.100 in thirty-seven countries (Leat. 252. p. 12). p. 2006. Community foundations generally share several common features: a pool of funds from a variety of donors. 4. 2004. By 2003. research. p. They are not as established as in North America and there are far fewer. Certainly.

p. in Thailand other forms of giving are practised but the administrative and legal system cannot yet support community foundations. Tax exemption for non-profit organizations and civil sector trusts have not been developed yet (Wattanasiritham. non-profit organizations battle left over inconsistent and vague communist laws that are open to manipulation. p. as they appreciate the value of civil society and need local partners to implement . Philanthropic foundations could. were able to create an environment conducive to civil society activity. For example. Throughout the 111 armed conflicts that became a mark of the post-Cold War world. many countries have not been able to establish charities in the same way that North America and the U. Foundations in existence before communism were suppressed by dictatorial regimes and deprived of income through inactivity. 37). and have. 2007. In Eastern European post-Soviet countries. Segregation from the belief system of western civilization has made it challenging for people to understand the role of non-profit organizations (Ruffin.K. Natalia Leshchenko conducted a study of post-conflict situations to examine the effects of the community foundation and other philanthropic strategies in order to learn how to focus efforts in the future (Leshchenko. played a major part in creation of civil society organizations emerging from conflict. Others lost capital through war and confiscated assets (Leat. 2006. expertise. 2007. 275). Foreign donors provide encouragement. p.39 Due to legal and tax implications. p. 94). 183-184). 2003. attention focused on providing humanitarian relief and support for peace accords. training and financial support to such organizations.

…Humanitarian relief organizations whose success is largely measured by quantities of food and potable water delivered. 2003. 188). such as OXFAM. creating new institutions or helping fledgling projects in their early years (Ruffin. The rapid growth of community foundations as a strategic form of philanthropy is remarkable because they had been “virtually unknown” up until the mid-1990s. p. 118). which is exactly what a community foundation aims to do. p. p.40 their projects. Organized philanthropy is a crucial source of funds for groups engaged in strategic efforts to promote systemic change. or tents and blankets provided. In contrast to non-government organizations. the community foundation model is a ‘local actor for local welfare’ (Anheier and Daly. 2007. in most cases this was the ‘Anglo-Saxon’ model of the board and an executive (Leshchenko. Red Cross. Logically. Experts such as Helmut Anheier of the Centre for Civil Society at the School of Public Policy and Social Research agreed with Gaberman. Barry Gaberman of the Ford Foundation delivered a lecture in 2003 indicating his belief that foundations and grant-making have been the resource and building blocks of the global infrastructure of philanthropy. 2005. 11). Foundations like to see their grants more as investments that will have a multiplier effect within society. and Greenpeace. foreign donors have tended to spread their own organizational model to the emerging local NGOs. When funders recognize the capacity of civil society to organize itself and .

Philanthropists call it ‘the best mechanism to foster philanthropy in communities’…. Mott.S.philanthropy reproduces itself through this unfolding structure…. 2004. Philanthropy researchers and advocates know of the ‘organizational versatility’ and ‘business model’ character of the community foundation (Ruffin 2003). p. 134). Australia and Eastern Europe community foundations have been funded by banks and corporations (Johnson and Johnson. such as C. laws and cultures’. they can act as the lever to transform big ideas into action (Oliviero and Simmons. Most of the growth outside the United States has been initiated by large private foundations. p.S. 642). p. 2006. 2006. 262-265).. raise profile in the community and lend legitimacy in European foundations (Leat. p. which shows a ‘capacity to adapt to different tax structures. 258). Italy. Soros . 2006. foundations. The source of start-up funds can affect a foundation’s operations. in Russia. p. 2006. Community foundations use the investments of large foundations to impact smaller organizations (Vogel. p. 641-642). for example.41 challenge both the public and private sectors. Vogel believes that the elite foundations have viewed their role on the macro level compared to the community level. Leat. 2007. Challenge grants from U. referred to as “elite philanthropy” by sociologist Ann Vogel. In Central and South-Eastern Europe support for the postconflict rebuilding was received from several foundations such as the Mott. were widely used to stimulate growth.through challenge grants… endowments…and spread the volunteering spirit (Vogel. 23.

the community foundation movement has been actively developing since 2002 and is considered an area of great potential for philanthropy. p. help in choosing competent boards. 2007. 2-3). In France. 13-16). assisted Russia and Poland in 1998 to establish their first foundations (Ruffin.K. and assistance in operating in a transparent way designed to win the trust of potential donors (Bollag. among them Community Philanthropy Initiative and the European Foundation Centre. p. a significant amount is required to set up an endowment and government approval must be sought. In Mexico. Open Society began providing training for management and staff members. 3). p. 2003. Countries in Europe still differ in terms of tax laws and the amount required to establish foundations. Despite this. to share fundraising knowledge and experiences (Anheier and Daly. 3). to strategic and developmental. p. To promote philanthropy and best practices. 2006. Africa and into Europe (Gaberman. The European movement has benefited from numerous support organizations. 2003.42 Foundation Network and King Baudouin Foundation that had been involved for at least a decade before 1989 (Bollag. 13). linked to religious bodies and charitable. The movement has spread through North America. 3840). European countries and others do not yet experience the same level of scrutiny and need to justify themselves as those in the United States (Leat. 128). p. 2005. p. Most foundations are endowed and provide operating and grant funds (Anheier. Mexico. Charities Aid Foundation in the U. Asia. new community foundations rely on technical . Germany requires lengthy approval processes. 2001. 2001. Foundations in Europe have evolved from being parochial. the United Kingdom.

13). 2005.S. p. he heard about the community foundation model. “… a spark going off in my brain. Dr. 2001. 24).43 assistance. collaboration. An example of the community foundation’s ability to transfer benefits evolved from the case of a group in Slovakia that has become a model for non-profit organizations in Eastern Europe (Bollag. 2003.S. Dr. 162). p. 2004. In a session with the Community Foundation of Greater Flint. the Community Foundation Healthy City Banska Bystrica-Zvolen . p. 2). People were expected to volunteer. 2). The Canadian community foundation development plans have been transferred to Europe and other countries because they are smaller in scale and easily transferable compared to some of the large U. If we could involve enough people. 2001. Jurag Mesik was a board member of an organization in Slovakia trying to improve the quality of life for residents in his hometown after 1989. during the former regime (Bollag. funding and their community culture. p. when a volunteer centre was opened and operated by Soros’ Czech Open Society Fund. people started to dedicate their efforts (Ruffin. p. they had failed in an attempt to build a playground. and peer-to-peer learning (Johnson and Johnson. 14). Despite being founded by the Rotary Club. 2001. German Marshall Fund. Mesik felt. Mesik travelled to the United States to study non-profit management on a bursary program through the U. 2). 2003. we could accomplish what we wanted for the community” (Bollag. rather than offered freely. Fortunately. This scepticism about community involvement exists in Eastern Europe after four decades of communist-ordered “freely donating time and labour for a public purpose” (Ruffin. In spite of the challenges of working without moral support. many refused because volunteer time was demanded. models (Brock. Dr. p. p.

Without an established track record it was difficult to attract citizens to volunteer their time and reputation to ensure that the foundation is seen as legitimate. like there is in the United States. According to Diana Leat. p. Endowment has not been an easily understood concept. Disbursements total $25. 13). so for it to compete in an overcrowded fundraising market. Not unlike other countries. The Charities Aid Foundation played a leadership role through a challenge grant program with the Mott Foundation.000 to more than 100 projects in Banska Bystrica and they have a $300. The Foundation brought local municipal leaders and community businesses to work together. Legitimacy and credibility was earned by using community foundations in the United States as examples (Leat. and changing policies placing greater responsibility on civil society. 2006. less competition from umbrella organizations like United Way. The Kenya Community Foundation discovered that raising funds for endowment was hard to do because showing immediate results and building a track record was required to gain . saving for the future through endowing money can be seen as “hoarding” funds (Leat. The obstacles faced were those faced in other countries: a lack of funds and the unknown concept of endowing funds.44 was created in 1994. 2003. in the United Kingdom there were a number of opportunities for community foundations to succeed.K. 256).000 endowment (Ruffin. p. 256-262). such as the acceptance of charitable giving. p. 2006. enlisting government support and establishing the Association of Community Trusts and Foundations. There is not a tax advantage to support a community foundation in the U. the lack of personal wealth and the need for immediate funds interfered with the endowment model used by most community foundations.

In South Africa. Bertelsmann was one of 30 European and North American funds working with the Transatlantic Community Foundation Network to promote knowledge and resource sharing among foundations (Greene. the operating foundation set up by the successful German publishing company. believed the intergenerational transfer of wealth would benefit community foundations.45 community trust. she concluded there are benefits that foundations can apply in such situations. where the Mott. 14). 2001. an attempt to create the community foundation movement has been motivated by the hope that modestly wealthy people would invest in a community fund rather than establish their own foundation. In Germany. p. 2001. Soros and King Baudouin foundations had been active in postconflict assistance for a decade. The South African Grantmakers’ Association was formed to support research and philanthropic development for all charitable organizations including grant-making NGOs. government programs and trusts and foundations. p. The findings are worth noting. Ruffin. One community foundation in Zimbabwe used a very traditional grassroots approach by collecting $1 from 7. Executives from the Bertelsmann Foundation. community foundations have become a new form of organized or strategic philanthropy. 5. p. corporate social investment. In Leshchenko’s case study of philanthropic assistance in post-war South East Europe.000 participants to broaden their base of support and ensure ownership of the Community Foundation for the Western Region (Greene. 2003. according to Beca Vuco of the Soros Foundation Network: . 3-4).

. 195). but also volunteering and participating. 126). charitable work and organization. By being present at this crucial time in this part of the world we managed to move other people to think the way we do in a sense of voluntary. p. in management meetings and on conference agendas (Anheier and Daly. 2005. We have accelerated the process of democratization (Leshchenko. We bring in a whole idea of charitable attitude. Transparency.46 We are introducing philanthropy to that part of the world which did not know about it for a long time. Many concerns facing non-profit organizations in North America have been experienced by European foundations. creativity. diversifying approaches and promoting common efforts to produce quick results. accountability and evaluation are frequent topics of discussion at the board table. ensuring sustainability. many of which could be applicable within a number of charitable scenarios such as co-operation and co-ordination. Fifteen strategic philanthropic conclusions were reached from the case study. p. 2007. Asia is set to become the next region with more open societies (2007. flexibility. Leshchenko believed that the case study has produced sufficient information for it to be applicable in areas currently in conflict. foundations build networks in newly democratic societies. not only in terms of donating.S. 195). such as Africa. p. This is important as global actors such as the large U. recommending that peace and democracy can be sustained through local and individual co-operation in building community. the Middle East and SouthEast Asia.

The benefit of electronic communication. 2007. WINGS-CF (community foundation) is a network to connect colleagues with an emphasis on sharing information and experience within the context of globalization (Leat. p. The uniqueness of WINGS-CF is in providing a “global pool of knowledge for members all over the world …. allows staff to interact and share information.47 In 2000. 203). 206-207). 2007. but strategic. in some countries they conflicted with the value system and ethics.209). while admittedly limited in some areas of the world. A key issue faced by community foundations and WINGS-CF has been that charity and giving has had a long tradition in most countries. 2007. 203). a membership network was initiated to support the community foundation movement by the Worldwide Initiatives for Grantmaker Support (WINGS). it extends their reach and impact” (Leat. p. A global support network for community foundations is in itself a way of legitimizing and reinforcing the role community foundations are beginning to play in countries around the world. Despite their independence and sustainability. This is especially true when trying to set up endowment funds. p. they may be impossible because of the financial market (Leat. In the context of globalization of philanthropy WINGS-CF is interesting in that it has focused on the development of a particular form of philanthropic institution – the community foundation – and its work more clearly illustrates some of the difficulties involved in the process of globalizing philanthropy (Leat. p. Where acceptable. . 2007. 204 . organized and institutionalized philanthropy has not.

Those faced by WINGS-CF included a lack of funds to operate. 210). 2001. Ruffin.48 Trying to establish a common identity and staying global without losing organizational efficiency and effectiveness as a support organization working towards the globalization of philanthropy poses numerous challenges. as they are driven by the passion that some U. He claims that they are able to do a lot with far less resources and opportunities. Despite the challenges faced by countries new to the community foundation movement. Emmett Carson of the Minneapolis Foundation stated he is “…continuously inspired by his colleagues from less-developed countries”. foundations have lost (Greene. .S. 2003. p. determining a common language/terminology and the lack of resources regarding technology. 15). Working in different legal and financial frameworks within already established cultures and traditions illustrates issues to negotiate (Leat. 6. p. p. 2007.

the “…civil sector has taken its place as an increasingly important. based on a variety of themes and issues uncovered in the research.49 Chapter Three Conclusions and Recommendations Introduction This final chapter documents conclusions based on the literature review conducted on the topics of globalization and philanthropy. Only in recent years has the third sector attracted media and government attention. “philanthropy in the age of globalization can effectively and economically influence progressive social change on a global level. As Suter. (but) many challenges remain” (2007. the recognition that there is a significant third sector is not yet as important as it should be. Conclusions The literature indicates that the elements of globalization have had a profound effect on philanthropy. especially since 1989. Recommendations for further study are included. and others observe. and increasingly . As globalization has progressed. Perlas. has the ability to attract volunteer labour and stimulates philanthropy to serve a community. p. 134-135). Anheier states. sometimes through publicity schemes and events such the Battle of Seattle. Little academic attention has been paid to an industry that employs thousands of people.

The advancement in communications technology has just begun to affect how non-profit organizations promote themselves. 2007. combined with appropriate training. Despite ongoing inequalities. 2005. the swift expansion of mobile technology in countries like Kenya.50 prominent. social. p. The third sector has clearly come of age on the global scene. recognize and steward donors. will allow countries to rapidly insert themselves into the digital age with the opportunities that come with this (Global Giving Matters. Philanthropy researcher and teacher Lester Salamon claimed there has been a dramatic upsurge in the organized voluntary sector that has deep roots everywhere in the world. p. Yet there is little evidence of it being as important to government and business in the opening of the world as it could be. The issues and problems humanity faces are bigger than any one sector. economic. 150). p. The Internet has changed the philanthropic . p. 2005. Non-profits should not replace government. and political force” (Salamon. therefore all three must work together – philanthropy can and should be a bridge. 4). but it must now find ways to strengthen its institutional capacities and contribute more meaningfully to the solution of major problems all without losing its popular base and flexible capacity for change (1994. Nor is philanthropy a substitute for social justice (Brodhead. they need to help make government accountable. seek and attract funds. 8). 4).

p. as with other factors of globalization non-profit organizations may wait for business to perfect the technologies before adopting and applying them. New organizations. costs and service may slow down this expansion. from Kenya to Argentina. There are now dozens of organizations in place to support non-profit organizations and fundraising. international conferences and journals are in place to offer support. Books are readily available. p. 6). e-philanthropy depends on legal and tax revisions in each country (Johnson and Johnson. perhaps with the advent of civil society in conflicted countries. The expectations placed on the third sector are enormous. yet it is still not clear how the sector can meet these needs. information is available on specific areas in the sector. the sector is vulnerable to internal forces and external constraints (Salamon. its professionalization and networking capacity will demand sharing experience and . training and the sharing of best practices. the negative will become less prevalent. 1994. online magazines. While readiness. The positive and negative effects will continue to be taken advantage of by civil society around the world. However the challenges faced by the community foundations in Eastern Europe are an example of what attempts to truly “globalize” philanthropy can face (Leat.51 landscape and made a significant impact on individual giving. 167). education sessions and conferences have grown wherever organizations are practising. Thailand to Norway. 210). p. 2006. 2005. A key factor for the future will be ensuring that the resources are in place to manage the downfall or negative influences of globalization (Brock. 39). p. 2004. There are many more applications for technology and philanthropy however. As civil society becomes more important. such as WINGS-CF.

This will depend on support from more experienced countries to continue to share their resources. 2005. people and plans. For countries new to the community foundation movement. For the future. After 10 years in South East Europe. Leshchenko’s case study determined. The growth in the community foundation movement has translated into an organized philanthropy program transferable to countries that experienced several generations without civil society. p. and it is possible to establish strategic strengths and weaknesses of philanthropic action in this area” (2007. foundations could begin to advance the understanding of the effects of globalization and how to cope with it (Frumkin. The core values and practices of the twenty-first century are consistent with those of the underlying principles of organized philanthropy. In addition to training and financial support.52 resources. it appears that soon few countries will be without community foundations. Like other professionals. 113). p. 185). nor is it unusual for a community to band together to want to improve its situation or create a program for common good. finding the necessary resources to advance themselves has come from the large U. there are proven resources and examples to use for other countries. From the research conducted. p. “Some results are already evident.S. The methods used to raise funds are not unique to any one country. foundations that have supported Europe since World War II (Bollag. 2001. 3). it has become apparent that philanthropy does have a role to play in post-conflict society. and as the global community . those with experience must ensure that the knowledge gained in the last 20 years is passed on to the next generation.

technology is impacting the way the “business” is practised. Injustice and the environment affect us all – the globalization of philanthropy can be an international network of shared values (Brodhead. Evidence-based programs could enable countries currently without a civil society to establish efficient and effective ways to rebuild and reconnect their communities through organized philanthropy. Philanthropic leaders studying globalization have called for policies and networks to support civil society as globalization continues to impact philanthropy. Recommendations for Further Study Within the research examined. 4). and more knowledge about the sector is growing. Additional information for the development profession can assist with planning in other countries. yet it is clear that the sector is expanding outside North America. or international philanthropy policy. p. Globalization is challenging everyone to see the world differently and to respond in such a way that all communities are connected. 2005. 2005.53 becomes increasingly open and interconnected. questions about the impact of globalization on philanthropy and civil society have not yet been determined conclusively. Holt Ruffin advocates for a “global civil society”. eliminate legal limitations and boost the status and respect of non-profit organizations. p. Philanthropic researchers and practitioners are influencing other countries’ reemergence into organized and strategic philanthropy. that the positive and negative effects of globalization are shared. . to strategically work with countries to liberalize their laws to encourage the charitable transfers of funds. philanthropy will play a decisive role in shaping the new international order (Hewa. 9).

taxes and administration as they differ from country to country would be a valuable asset to the existing body of knowledge on non-profit organizations. international organizations and NGOs can work effectively to respond to the implications of globalization (2005. p. Documenting the laws governing charities. would be useful for those wishing to explore international giving and how it will be impacted in the future. 2. and transferable . As well. 39-43). with the historical implications and factors. It would be of interest to follow the transfer. Soma Hewa also believes that an administrative body to co-ordinate the efforts of philanthropic foundations. Kathy Brock states that the changing role of civil society in the era of globalization requires a coalition. There is a great deal of conversation about the intergenerational transfer of wealth. learning network and international alliance to transcend boundaries. China and Africa build. Much attention has been given to transnational companies and the movement of corporate headquarters within the non-profit sector. p. 6). comparing a country new to community foundations. such as Germany. The impact of this on gifts. documentation of the steps taken. their philanthropic cultures. lessons learned from North America. a thorough review of the laws affecting charitable giving in some countries. This kind of comparative study would be of interest to those working in the field of gift planning. As Asia. with Canada or the United States. volunteer leadership and the future of community-based fundraising should be documented and studied as the globalization of large corporations continues.54 He is not alone in his belief that a clearinghouse to track organizations and their work in all countries would be beneficial (2003. or return to.

methods to seek support have expanded through websites and the Internet. which never fails. Community foundations . to weaken local prejudices. and enlarge the sphere of benevolent feelings. there are a number of important issues to be studied and documented that will be of use now. however slight… has a kindred effect with that of seeing them as travelers. as the sector continues to work within a globalized world.55 lessons. would make a useful contribution to the study of the globalization of philanthropy. and learn from each other. New ways to engage proactively in advancing an organization’s mission can be promoted. James Madison. Summary A knowledge of the Globe and its various inhabitants. and in the future. Communications technology has allowed people to share ideas. study or volunteer opportunities outside North America. Knowledge of the impact that globalization is having on the sector in other countries is important as a source of information and best-practice as well as for those seeking employment. and donors have been acquired online and through websites. researchers and those interested in the international growth of the civil sector. Within the globalization of philanthropy. 1822 Globalization and the effect it is having on philanthropy is an important field of study for practitioners. in uncorrupted minds.

hunger.56 have become a source of philanthropic support in countries that lost their philanthropic spirit through war. The growth of the sector is of particular note as the knowledge base grows. . and the promotion of peaceful solutions to conflict. or oppressive political regimes and legal systems. the International Red Cross and Canadian Red Cross received more donations than they could use wisely to support the rescue and rebuilding effort in Indonesia after the December 2004 tsunami (Brennan. 2008. and the effects of globalization within it. Within this newly globalized civil sector. The study of philanthropy. A1). communications technologies are adopted locally and internationally and fundraising techniques are modified for other cultures .especially for countries that are emerging from conflict. Médecins sans Frontières. On the day the tsunami struck those with a link to the non-profit industry knew that globalization had just affected philanthropy more than any other time in history. will no doubt continue. p. society must be hopeful for the eradication of disease.

Simmons. New York: Springer Science + Business Media. D. Anheier.. A. Issue 1. New York. Simmons. In Hewa. (Eds. Philanthropy. (2005). H. New York: Springer Science + Business Media.H.. A.57 References Amott. Foundations in Europe: Roles and Policy Scenarios in an Age of Globalization. Winder. (2008). D. Toronto. Winder. & Stapleton. H. A. (2007). R. Bonbright. Brennan.).K. LLC. B. New York: Springer Science + Business Media... D. S. . (Eds. N. Chronicle of Philanthropy. D. Bollag. New York: Springer Science + Business Media. Anheier. (2001) Community Foundations Across Eastern Europe Advance ‘Step by Step’. Red Cross yet to spend $200M of tsunami cash.) (2007). LLC. and Civil Society Toward a New Political Culture in the TwentyFirst Century.K. Pakistan. Simmons. Vol. Innovation in Strategic Philanthropy Local and Global Perspectives. H. D. & Daly.K. Toronto Star. Winder. Anheier.) (2007). Ontario. LLC. Globalization.. (Eds.K. (2007). Inc. 14. (Eds. S.) Innovation in Strategic Philanthropy Local and Global Perspectives. March 3. Anheier. H.. Cases from the Philippines in Innovative Philanthropy: An Overview of the Philippines. Innovation in Strategic Philanthropy Local and Global Perspectives.

Kent (UK). Inc.charityvillage. S. Fraser. D.). “Community Foundations: Symposium on a global movement” keynote address is from an international conference.G. and Civil Society Toward a New Political Culture in the TwentyFirst Century. http://www. Anheier. H. Globalization. (Eds. (2001). J.html. New York: Springer Science + Business Media. (2005). Simmons. New York: Springer Science + Business Media. http://www. (Eds. Brock.. D. Innovation in Strategic Philanthropy Local and Global Perspectives.H. A. International Comparisons of Charitable Giving. Winder. (2005). Globalization. Philanthropy. Cultivating Philanthropy Overseas.. Retrieved July 25. Frumkin. & Stapleton. Chronicle of Philanthropy. Brook. Elliott.. In Hewa. D.). D. S. & Stapleton.. Retrieved January 26. New York. South Africa. LLC. Inc. CAF Briefing Paper. (2005) Globalization and the Third Sector: The Canadian Experience. Vol. Greene. New York: Springer Science + Business Media.H. (Eds.).com/cv/archive/acov/acov05/acov0502.58 Brodhead. New York.K. T. Philanthropy in the Era of Globalization. P. In Hewa.cafonline. American Foundations and Overseas Funding: New Challenges in the Era of Globalization. (2007). 14. and Civil Society Toward a New Political Culture in the TwentyFirst Century. Issue 1. 2008.. 2007. S. K. Charities Aid Foundation (November 2006). Philanthropy. .

New York: Springer Science + Business Media. S. Johnson. International Network on Strategic Philanthropy. Grew.. S. Virtual Foundation Aims to Bring International Philanthropy to the Masses. Philanthropy. In Anheier.). & Stapleton.. New York: Springer Science + Business Media. and Civil Society Toward a New Political Culture in the Twenty-First Century New York. Winder. Johnson. S. Johnson. Kisil.. (2004). Innovation in Strategic Philanthropy Local and Global Perspectives. International Network on Strategic Philanthropy. A.. LLC. Kingman. D. (Eds. Johnson.P. A. Inc. Promoting Philanthropy: Global Challenges and Approaches. Chronicle of Philanthropy.G.). (Eds. Leat.59 Greene.D. (2004). Stapleton. R. Philanthropy. (2007). H. (2000). (2007) The Infrastructure of Global Philanthropy: Wings and Wings-CF. New York. Innovation in Strategic . Paper 2.. S.. Globalization. Simmons.K. from http://www. Tools for Good: A Guide to Vehicles for Philanthropy and Charitable Giving. Paper 2.).K. D. New York: Springer Science + Business Media. (2005). Simmons.philanthropy. Globalization. Full Version. D. A. Brazil. D. 2008. M. Retrieved January 5. (2005). P.D. P.H. In Hewa. Hewa. (Eds. Inc. (eds). Global History and Globalization. Winder. S.. In Anheier.H. and Civil Society Toward a New Political Culture in the Twenty-First Century.. H.P.

The Legitimacy of Philanthropic Foundations United States and European Perspectives. Voluntarism. S.C. (Eds. R. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Sage Publications. The Legitimacy of Philanthropic Foundations. Open World:/The Truth About Globalization. Globalization. D. Simmons. New York. (2002). In Prewitt. 28. 4). LLC. Mehta. (1999). Lindenberg. Vol. Digital Giving How Technology is Changing Charity. Dogan. D. M. (2005) Globalization and Biotechnology. Leshchenko. and the Globalization of the Not-for-Profit Sector. S. Winder. New York: Springer Science + Business Media. Legrain. New York: Springer Science + Business Media. Toepler.). New York: Springer Science + Business Media. Leat. In Hewa. LLC.. McPherson. and Civil Society Toward a New Political Culture in the Twenty-First Century. (2007). (2006). Lincoln.60 Philanthropy Local and Global Perspectives. In Anheier. Philanthropy. (Eds. D...H.).K. .. S. P. (2007). H. N. M. Philanthropic Foundations’ Assistance in Post-Conflict Situations: A Case Study of Post-Communist Southeast Europe. Innovation in Strategic Philanthropy Local and Global Perspectives. Inc.. & Stapleton. London.). (Supp. UK: Abacus. Heydemann. Non-profit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. A. K. Foundation Legitimacy at the Community Level in the United Kingdom. (Eds. M. Declining State Capacity. Nebraska: iUniverse.

7. September). Center for Alternative Development Initiatives. (2000).. A. Perlas. Latin America. Non-profit and Philanthropic Studies: International Overview of the Field in Africa. N. the Pacific. New York: Springer Science + Business Media. United States. Vol. (2007). Simmons. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. (2007). (Eds. G. Sage Publications.). Cultural Power and Threefolding. D. Oliviero. The Legitimacy of Philanthropic Foundations United States and European Perspectives. Toepler.B. Canada.. Distinct View-Intervening in the Practices of the Public and Private Sector. 3.. Vol. No. M.. Innovation in Strategic Philanthropy Local and Global Perspectives. (Supp. (2007. T. G. Vol.. Shaping Globalization Civil Society. and Europe.. Onishi.K. 4). and Globalization Network for Social Threefolding. R. . (2007).36. S.M. Heydemann. Gemelli. (Eds. Simmons. Mirabella. Dogan. Philippines. Malcolm. Winder.. International Journal of Educational Advancement. Prewitt. K.61 Mirabella. M.. (Supp. R. Non-profit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. A. S.) (2006). Current Conditions and Development Strategies of Philanthropy and Fundraising in Japan: A Comparative Study of the United States and Japan. University-Based Educational Programs in Non-profit Management and Philanthropic Studies: A 10-Year Review and Projections of Future Trends. (2007). In Anheier. Asia. LLC. M. Non-profit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. Berger. 4).. 36. H.

73. (2003).K.). New York: Springer Science + Business Media. Coping With Globalization: A Profile of the Northern NGO Sector. The Synergos Institute (Sept. In Anheier. (2006). Global Giving Matters.62 Pospíscil. In Hewa. England: Hodder Education. London. Ann. (Eds. (2007). Philanthropy. Retrieved January 26. K. J. Foreign Affairs. L. Salamon. Globalization. Suter.M. United States: Duke University. vol. Globalization and the Civil Society Sector. Vol. Central and Eastern Europe. http://www. 2006.-Oct. 2007). Who’s making global civil society: philanthropy and US empire in world society? UK: Blackwell Publishing. Supplement 1999. 4. (2006). D. LLC. Salamon. 28. British Journal of Sociology. M. (Eds. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. Philanthropy in Kenya. New York: Springer Science + Business Media.). Salm. The Globalization of American Philanthropy. Issue 4. (1999).H. The Rise of the Non-profit Sector (Electronic version). North no. Innovation in Strategic Philanthropy Local and Global Perspectives. (1994). Holt. D. htm.M. & Stapleton. Winder. and Civil Society Toward a New Political Culture in the Twenty-First Century. S. Sage Publications. A. Simmons. (2005).. Ruffin. Issue 4. 2008 Vogel. Inc. H.synergos. Globalization. London School of Economics and Political Science. Inc. L. .. Volume 57.

Innovation in Strategic Philanthropy Local and Global Perspectives. D. H. (2007).K.. Simmons. LLC. (Eds.. In Anheier.63 Wattanasiritham. Winder. New York: Springer Science + Business Media.). Thailand. A. P. .

N. Of note for this capstone is the background and current situation and the case study focused on the Peace Equity Access for Community Empowerment Foundation. Anheier. H. and Civil Society Toward a New Political Culture in the Twenty- . D. Foundations in Europe: Roles and Policy Scenarios in an Age of Globalization. Cases from the Philippines in Innovative Philanthropy: An Overview of the Philippines.) (2007). A.K. New York: Springer Science + Business Media. H.. Those researching or interested in the development of philanthropy in the Philippines would find this chapter of use. Anheier. D. S. Innovation in Strategic Philanthropy Local and Global Perspectives (pp. Philanthropy. especially as a backdrop before reading the work of Nicanor Perlas. Globalization. This chapter explores the history and current philanthropic situation in the Philippines. In Hewa.). (Eds. She is currently the Senior Program Associate with Structured Employment Economic Development Corporation in New York City. & Daly..64 Annotated Bibliography Amott. 61-78). S. (Eds. LLC. Natasha Amott was a Ford Foundation consultant and Program Associate with the Southeast Asia department of the Synergos Institute.H. Simmons. (2005).K. & Stapleton. There are two case studies that offer insight into an attempt by the country to create strategic philanthropy and support organizations to enable it. Winder.

Los Angeles. London School of Economics. social service. Scholars and observers alike have written and researched the increase in civil society worldwide. Inc. Anheier and Daly’s introduction to this chapter states that on a global stage foundations and non-profit organizations are being called on by politicians and leaders to have more involvement in health care. information sharing and communications with increased worldwide technology. such as the growing civil sector throughout the world and the impact civil organizations can make in community renewal. Their work touches on points made by other authors cited for this capstone. Siobhan Daly is research manager of Visions and Roles of Foundations in Europe at the Centre for Civil Society. Anheier is the director of the Centre for Civil Society at the School of Public Policy and Social Research. research and education. of interest to this research is the role of democracy in Eastern Europe. culture. 117-135). New York. University of California. He is a founding board member of the International Society for Third-Sector Research and the founding editor of Voluntas. New York: Springer Science + Business Media. and the . They cite eight points that have opened organizational space since 1989. but the role and impact that foundations and organized philanthropy is playing remains less clear. the international journal of research on non-profit organizations. Helmut K.65 First Century (pp. and Centennial Professor in the Department of Social Policy at the London School of Economics. Her research focuses on research methodology and the comparative analysis of foundations in Europe. especially since the end of the cold war.

) (2007). Central America and Southeast Asia. Anheier.. D. Exhaustive information about potential partnerships.K. (Eds. New York: Springer Science + Business Media. non-profit management and sociology within North America and especially relevant for organizations and non-profit managers in countries investigating foundations.66 rise of private non-profit organizations that increasingly operate across borders because of resources and access. Innovation in Strategic Philanthropy Local and Global Perspectives. Amongst other work. A. This work is a thorough addition to the body of knowledge being created for students of philanthropy. He created and managed their global program to build the skills of staff and boards of grant-making foundations. Adele Simmons is President of the Global Philanthropy Partnership and founder of the Chicago Global Donors Network and serves on the board of Synergos Institute. He was responsible for Ford Foundation’s grant program in Mexico. large foundation support and innovations in smaller community foundations provides background for . LLC. H. David Winder is a program director at the Synergos Institute in New York. Simmons. the role of foundations. he has focused on philanthropy and the non-profit sector and his current research is on new organizational forms in global civil society. Winder.. their roles and best practice. Helmut K. and aspects of research on globalization. Anheier is Director of the Centre for Civil Society at UCLA’s School of Public Affairs and Professor of Public Policy and Social Welfare.

67 researchers. It specifically relates to foundations: their role.smumn. operations and potential for innovation. B.8. Issue 1. Of interest to this capstone’s research are those that related to bestpractice and foundation models with transferable and effective lessons and id=0b4b28 Retrieved January 26. Contributors began with a case analysis of seven countries to determine transnational philanthropy in the global era and its effects and potential role moving forward in their societies. current practices and global effects in countries of interest for research. Case studies provided an important comparative view for this paper as they illuminated philanthropic history. Burton Bollag was a reporter with the Chronicle of Education from approximately 2004 to 2007. Vol. practitioners and students. Burton Bollag highlights key points of interest for the topic of community foundation’s and their growth in Eastern Europe after 1989. The authors sought best practices that display innovative and strategic approaches in foundations that had potential for being shared and modified for use in other countries. 14. According to . Community Foundations Across Eastern Europe Advance ‘Step by Step’. He is a frequent contributor to journals on international matters regarding religion. http://web. Bollag. 2008. higher education and politics. Chronicle of Philanthropy. (2001). This book is a compilation of philanthropic case studies and research in developing countries.ebscohost.

David Bonbright has worked with a number of international development agencies: Ford Foundation.K. Ashoka. He is the founder and chief executive of Keystone. (2007).68 Bollag.). an initiative in the UK to foster accountability for organizational quality and sustainable development. D. New York: Springer Science + Business Media. Pakistan. It provides a different perspective from Anheier. and Aga Khan Foundation. Anheier.. This article is a good introduction to the community foundation movement in Eastern European countries. This chapter was useful in providing an overview of the first . D. A. Open Society offered training for staff and board members. 5760). Bollag documents the story of a man visiting the US courtesy of the Marshall Fund. LLC. (Eds. Vogel and Salamon. another topic of research for this capstone. as it is narrative and less technical. In Eastern Europe.. Winder. He gained valuable insight into the inner workings of community foundations. and subsequently was able to share his experience to influence his homeland. This brief chapter is an overview of the Aga Khan and Canadian International Development Agency’s initiative to create the Pakistan Centre for Philanthropy and to encourage a tax and framework system for effective philanthropy in Pakistan. the community foundation movement has been slower to develop than other forms of non-profit organizations. Simmons. Soros’ Open Society and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund have been key supporters of the movement. H. Bonbright. Innovation in Strategic Philanthropy Local and Global Perspectives (pp.

69 philanthropic organization in an Islamic country. Those interested in an overview of philanthropy in Pakistan would find this information of interest.

Brennan, R. Red Cross yet to spend $200M of tsunami cash. (2008) Richard Brennan is a journalist with the Ottawa Bureau of the Toronto Star. This article reports on the fact that three years after the tsunami millions of dollars have still not been spent to help people in Asia. Doctors without Borders (Médecins sans Frontières) stopped the campaign to support those suffering from the effects of the tsunami when they realized they had collected more than they could possibly use for that disaster.

Brodhead, T. Philanthropy in the Era of Globalization. (2005) Retrieved July 25, 2007. Timothy Brodhead is the President and CEO of the J.W. McConnell Family Foundation in Montreal, Quebec. This keynote address is from an international conference entitled, “Community Foundations: Symposium on a global movement”. Brodhead begins with acknowledgement that charity has always existed in many forms in all cultures; he defines philanthropy as being strategic and links it to community as a building mechanism. Brodhead notes the expansion of organized philanthropy with democracy in former communist countries. He extends his definition of philanthropy to voluntarism, and cites

70 Anheier’s comparison of 36 countries in Global Civil Society as an example. Brodhead’s address further notes technology as one of the key globalization factors influencing philanthropy. Examples of organizations, such as Global Giving, the Ashoka Foundation, and TakingITGlobal are lauded as newfound equalizers to aid philanthropy’s quest. While not a scholarly address, Brodhead touches on key points that are emphasized in almost every article, book and essay about the globalization of philanthropy. His position and his audience authenticate the opinions he expressed and were a valuable source for this research.

Brock, K., Brook, D., Elliott, J. Globalization and the Third Sector: The Canadian Experience. In Hewa, S. & Stapleton, D.H. (Eds.), Globalization, Philanthropy, and Civil Society Toward a New Political Culture in the TwentyFirst Century (pp. 153-174). New York, New York: Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. Kathy Brock is associate professor and head of public policy and the third sector at Queen’s University in the School of Policy Studies in Kingston, Ontario. David Brook is senior research associate at the Public Policy Forum in Ottawa, Ontario. He has organized and participated in globalization panels and roundtables. Brock and Brook surveyed national leaders on globalization. Janice Elliott is Vice President of the Public Policy Forum and international expert on citizen participation and consultation. According to the authors, it is possible to analyze the impact of globalization on international non-profit

71 organizations; however, the impact on local non-profit organizations is not known. This qualitative survey of forty Canadian leaders in the non-profit sector and several government and corporate representatives studied how globalization affected the operations, practices and relationships of the sector in Canada. Of interest is the discourse on the negative and limiting effects of the Internet, evolving corporate philanthropic practices and the growth of the community foundation movement. More than other sources, this chapter highlights the negative aspects of globalization on local charitable organizations. This study is of interest to Canadian students of philanthropy and those seeking concrete examples of the domestic effects of globalization on non-profit organizations. It is also of interest because demographics of Canada are representative of countries outside the United States.

Charities Aid Foundation November 2006. International comparisons of charitable giving. CAF briefing paper. Kent (UK). Retrieved January 26, 2008 Charities Aid Foundation is a non-profit organization in the United Kingdom committed to effective giving, providing a range of specialist services to donors, companies and charities in the UK and internationally. Their aim is to increase the level and impact of giving through their activities and work as an advocate for the charitable sector. This briefing is relevant to the topic of the globalization of philanthropy because it was a thorough survey of international comparisons of charitable giving by individuals in twelve countries whose

Comparing giving is a method of understanding how individuals are managing the needs of their own communities. The purpose of the survey was to determine whether or not giving is as high as it could be in the UK. LLC. A. Innovation in Strategic Philanthropy Local and Global Perspectives (pp. Dugan Fraser is the leader of the South Africa African Peer Review Mechanism research team in Johannesburg. D... 7992). This briefing paper is important to this paper because it assisted with putting some of the other sources about the new trend in establishing community foundations in perspective. New York: Springer Science + Business Media. Comparing international levels of giving is important as it indicates where civil society. Students of international philanthropy would find this useful. or non-profit organizations. South Africa. He has a Masters degree in Sociology and has an interest in participatory governance. (2007). D. This particular chapter provided interesting insight into a country that had civil society (during apartheid) and that actually experienced a decrease in the influence and importance of civil society as a result of democratization (the opposite of . Simmons. Winder. (Eds. could be strengthened. Fraser.). H.K. Anheier. and to assess trends such as cross-border philanthropy. what countries could learn from each other. Most countries and cultures have a history of giving and many have tax benefits for making charitable gifts. Global communications provides easy access to websites for information about charities and needs in other countries.72 wealth covers more than 50 percent of the total global economy.

73 Eastern Europe and Asia). The chapter is of relevance due to its excellent introduction to philanthropy in South Africa and the South African Grantmakers’ Association. The case studies were not important to this literature review. Students interested in furthering their knowledge about international organizations would find this chapter useful.

Frumkin, P. (2005). American Foundations and Overseas Funding: New Challenges in the Era of Globalization. In Hewa, S. & Stapleton, D.H. (Eds.), Globalization, Philanthropy, and Civil Society Toward a New Political Culture in the TwentyFirst Century (pp. 99-116). New York, New York: Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. Peter Frumkin is associate professor of public policy at Harvard University. His research interests include all aspects of philanthropy. The intended audience for this work is non-profit students, those involved with US and EU foundations and those interested in the effects of globalization on philanthropy. This chapter reviews the work of American foundations overseas to create new ways of working within globalization. Frumkin states American foundations have significantly expanded their philanthropic activity around the world due to recent world events. Of interest to this research was the expansion of foundation support to post-cold war activity in Europe through major American foundations and moving issues closer to philanthropic support such as strengthening civil society in formerly communist countries. He provides a brief overview of three major elements of globalization. The growth of civil

74 society as a result of democracy and the expansion of technology are of particular interest to the research undertaken for this Capstone Paper. This chapter concludes with Frumkin defining areas that foundation’s can take on to be of particular use within globalization and philanthropy including the support of non-profit education, training and leadership, which is also of interest within this Capstone.

Gaberman, B., Building the Global Infrastructure for Philanthropy. (2003). Waldemar A. Nielsen Issues in Philanthropy Seminar Series, Georgetown University. Retrieved July 26, 2007. Barry Gaberman recently retired from a 35-year career with the Ford Foundation. He held numerous positions with the Foundation, from program officer to senior vice president. Gaberman was the founding father of WINGS and Ford’s International Initiative to Strengthen Philanthropy. This lecture was delivered at the Centre for Public and Non-profit Leadership in Washington, DC on April 11, 2003. Gaberman provided an overview of the global infrastructure that is being built and spoke about defining civil society – recalling that it has been the not for profit, non-profit, NGO, voluntary and/or the citizens participation sector. He then set out a framework in which the sector should strive to achieve. Each of the five suggestions supports a vibrant and sustainable civil society and are components of this Capstone Paper: a

75 legal framework, positive tax structure, accountability systems, institutional capacity and sufficient resources. Gaberman identifies countries strong on each area and introduces the growth in the community foundation movement and WINGS-CF, which provide valuable sources of information for this paper. Anyone interested in the community foundation movement would find this a good document to review to gain a quick synopsis of its rapid growth, the infrastructure that has been set up (and how it could easily falter without sufficient funding), and how philanthropic organizations will have to meet the five components in order to be sustainable.

Greene, S.G., Philanthropy’s Challenges. (November 2003) Chronicle of Philanthropy, 4vt0q7 Retrieved January 5, 2008 Stephen G. Greene is a regular contributor to the Chronicle of Philanthropy, frequently writing about philanthropic topics outside of North America. This review of the annual meeting of the Independent Sector in 2003 spotlights issues and trends of concern for nonprofit organizations: specifically accountability and globalization. The information of relevance and interest to this literature review was that quoted by Greene in reference to Benjamin Barber, the University of Maryland political theorist and author of Jihad vs. McWorld.

Bertelsmann. This article reiterates their involvement and offers comments from key individuals. promote and build community foundations (e. As in other sources for this &sid=0b4b. Vol.G. . Cultivating Philanthropy Overseas. (2001) Chronicle of Philanthropy.. http://web. Greene cites endowment building as a function normally undertaken to ensure long term sustainability and its subsequent challenges in countries such as Ford. community foundations are being heralded as democratic and adaptable to almost any nation and community.76 Greene. Retrieved January 26. As noted in other community foundation sources. 1. This is a good article to use as an introduction to community foundations moving into other countries and to help those less familiar with their roots understand the movement and its purpose. Greene’s article is an introduction to the community foundation movement outside of North America with a brief paragraph on American foundations. Mott).g. S. a number of large US and European Foundations are helping to support. p. Of interest is the information provided about the International Fellows Program and exchange programs for staff. 2008.ebscohost. Several pieces of information are worth noting for this capstone including strategies to ensure ownership through grassroots fundraising. 14 Issue 1.

Turner Foundation and Open Society Institute. Global History and Globalization.77 Greene. D. Virtual Foundation Aims to Bring International Philanthropy to the Masses. Chronicle of Philanthropy. (2000). 2008. from http://www.G. (2005).H. . S. New York: Springer Science + Business Media. It is of note to those interested in borderless giving (US to other countries) and the changing face of philanthropists (gifts range from $100 to $1. the Virtual Foundation is an example of several elements of globalization (connecting people) and communications technology (email. The Virtual Foundation posts projects the Foundation Board has approved. S. (Eds. A Virtual Foundation Japan and Virtual Foundation Czech Republic are underway thanks to start up funds from Mott. & Stapleton. For those interested in international philanthropy and globalization. A few days This short review of the Virtual Foundation is an introduction to the capacity and movement of funds around the world to support people requiring small amounts of money that can significantly alter their lives and communities.philanthropy.). Internet. Inc. World Wide Web). donors choose their projects and submit their funds. Globalization. Philanthropy. 15-31). In Hewa. New York.000). Rockefeller. Progress reports are posted on Web sites. Grew. and Civil Society Toward a New Political Culture in the Twenty-First Century (pp. Retrieved January 5. R. and to support this research. the recipient receives the money.

He then reflects on three potential categories of questions within the global historical topic that are of note for this paper: global circumstances and experiences (natural disasters such as the tsunami). His focus on globalization being far more than a process .economics. when globalization began. and institutions remind the reader of the need to recall the difference between modernization and the intersection of local and global. focused on historical comparison and global history. at the University of Michigan. Grew’s definitions are of particular value to this capstone.78 Raymond Grew is Professor of History (Emeritus). Grew’s chapter in this work focuses on global history and globalization: the widespread use of the term “globalization” in everything from gender issues to religion. For those students interested in globalization. He was the editor of the Comparative Studies in Society and History journal and as a writer. the history of globalization must be examined and documented on its own. the diffusion of technologies. and his references to the Cold War. and the theories surrounding global history must too be discussed. . institutions and customs spread from place to place (the adaption and adoption of philanthropic techniques from country to country). and the growing web of connections (the Internet). Grew’s perspective on global history. European imperialism and the first/second waves of globalization are the impetus for the historical background documented in this Capstone Paper.

Helmut Anheier. Soma Hewa is the principal research investigator on philanthropy. and Civil Society Toward a New Political Culture in the Twenty-First Century.. This book is a compilation of papers from the international conference held in 2003 at the Rockefeller Archive Centre to discuss globalization. or philanthropist. Globalization. civil society and nonprofit activities in Montreal. (eds).79 Hewa.H. philanthropy and globalization during the cold war.11). philanthropic foundations and civil society in a globalized world. (2005). interested in the impact and role philanthropy is playing in . philanthropy and education. sociology of health and sociological theory. Kathy Brock. public health. The book is a thorough introduction and examination of globalization and philanthropy. vii . Stapleton. New York. philanthropy and civil society. Inc. S. Darwin Stapleton is the executive director of the Rockefeller Archive Centre at Rockefeller University in New York. especially related to the role of philanthropy in globalization. D. Of particular note are the works by Peter Frumkin. The contents of the book were fundamental to the research undertaken for this paper: history and globalization. Lester Salamon. Philanthropy. New York: Springer Science + Business Media. Any student or practitioner in the nonprofit field. Siobhan Daly. technology. David Brook and Janice Elliott. Most had published other work on globalization and philanthropy reviewed and used for this Capstone Paper. As a researcher and writer his fields of interest include history of science. Dr. He taught sociology in both Alberta and British Columbia and is a widely published author in the fields of philanthropy. (pp.

Kingman. Centre for Studies of Third Sector. . Johnson. 7-20).) this overview of the philanthropic sector in Brazil offered an in depth view of the growth in civil society. Dr. Winder. (Eds. Brazilian Association of Grant Makers. New York: Springer Science + Business Media.. would find this volume of work essential to developing knowledge about globalization and philanthropy. Promoting Philanthropy: Global Challenges and Approaches. D. Johnson. A. With several organizations supporting philanthropic efforts (Brazilian Association of NGOs. etc.. Paper 2. K. LLC.D. Innovation in Strategic Philanthropy Local and Global Perspectives. S. Kellogg Executive Director for Latin America for 15 years. the number of organizations in Brazil provides more information than most countries. Kisil. (2004). Simmons. For students or researchers interested in background on support organizations. He was the W.P. International Network on Strategic Philanthropy.) (pp. the broad efforts to support the sector and its future in Brazil. M. This information rounded out the information necessary for this literature review to have a good sense of the history. P.K. Brazil. (2007).. H. Marcos Kisil is President of the Institute for the Development of Social Investment in Latin America (an institution to promote philanthropy).. In Anheier. A.80 globalization. current situation and growth on several continents.

Her research and work focuses on the understanding and practice of global philanthropy. He spent four years with the Charities Aid Foundation. Inc. philanthropy. suggestions on how to move the third sector forward in developing countries using known practices and the challenges facing non-profit organizations. and the strategies to promote philanthropy are well documented. Interest in this research is primarily in the capacity and infrastructure discussion and the community foundation movement. The growth and changing roles of nongovernmental organizations are noted and the influence of international foundations are highlighted. and those that may be transferable to other countries if cultural sensitivities are considered. He is responsible for managing their Africa program. His background is law. . public policy and education. although this paper provides an excellent viewpoint of global networks for philanthropy. Johnson and Kingman produced this work related to the strategies that have been used to promote philanthropy. Inc. Key elements are those used to promote philanthropy in several countries in the early 21st century. Any student of philanthropy or non-profit board member would find this an excellent source of historical data and philanthropy in other countries.81 Paula Johnson is a Research Fellow with the Globalization Equity Initiative at Harvard University and a Senior Advisor to The Philanthropic Initiative. Her current research focuses on the development of new philanthropy within specific cultures and countries and other forms of crossborder philanthropy. Johnson. Stephen Johnson is a Vice President at The Philanthropic Initiative. Andrew Kingman has been Chief Executive of Allavida since 2001.

The Infrastructure of Global Philanthropy: Wings and Wings-CF. Johnson. D. H. (2004). The paper documents the globalization situation in 2004 and then describes current methods used by charities in the US to raise funds. planned giving. An example is community foundations (particularly relevant for this capstone) and the various tax advantages for donors in the US and Canada. Innovation in Strategic Philanthropy . and the growth in the international non-profit sector are explored with their key influences. Full Version.. The pertinent information is on electronic giving tools and community foundations. donor advised funds and e-philanthropy. Tools for Good: A Guide to Vehicles for Philanthropy and Charitable Giving. There are excellent resources for further information and research at the end of the paper. An interesting section on the emerging trends in philanthropy is covered prior to the exploration of each giving method such as direct mail. the intergenerational transfer of wealth in countries such as the UK and Germany. (Eds. Within the paper the increase in wealth in democratic countries. International Network on Strategic Philanthropy... S. a comparison is performed for situations in other countries: their limitations. advantages and requirements to move forward successfully.D. Simmons.). Winder. Paula Johnson and Stephen Johnson have created a resource tool for students of philanthropy and fundraising.K.P. For each method. Paper 2.82 Johnson. A. P. In Anheier. D. Leat. foundations. and the lack of these tax structures in other countries.

the London School of Economics and Political Science Centre for Civil Society. The literature review has produced several important sources with community foundation statistics highlighting them as the fastest-growing method of encouraging philanthropy (Ruffin. Diana Leat was a research fellow at the Australian Centre for Philanthropy. granting . countries without electricity. This case study focused on Worldwide Initiatives for Grantmaker Support for Community Foundations (WINGS-CF). Other factors of interest to those wanting to learn more about WINGS-CF or community foundations would find the conclusion to this chapter worth noting as it provides ample information on the issues that are being faced by foundations as they attempt to spread endowment practices. New York: Springer Science + Business Media. an initiative to enhance the globalization of philanthropy as a means to influence change. technology costs and illiteracy. commerce.83 Local and Global Perspectives. Anheier. Few acknowledge the challenge of working in English. The second element of importance within Leat’s work is the impact of electronic communications on WINGS-CF and its weaknesses and challenges. and a Visiting Professor at the City University Business School in London. LLC. technologic inventions and worldwide communications as globalizing factors. 199-211). Salamon). (Pp. This is of particular interest to this capstone’s research as most authors consider the movement of people. Of great interest to this capstone’s research is the focus on community foundation’s and the challenges faced within the globalization of philanthropy. philanthropic terminology.

New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Dogan..). CAF aspired to create a uniquely UK model. their roles. Heydemann. This work examines the community foundation model in the US and the UK therefore it is important to this research as one of its main topics for exploration in the capstone paper. challenges. The Legitimacy of Philanthropic Foundations. (Pp. (2006). S.. government support remains a challenge in the UK for the continued growth of foundations to support local community projects.84 procedures and community benefits that have long been associated with community foundations. 252-270). Toepler. D. In Prewitt. Of note is the Charities Aid Foundation’s (CAF) role in moving community foundation’s forward as a legitimate philanthropic tool for the UK.. especially given the lack of large pools of endowment funds and tax incentives. Leat. . K. S. She explores the community foundation movement in the context of the late 1980’s and clearly articulates the opportunities. trust and legitimacy as they expand within the United Kingdom. Leat states that regrettably. Those interested in US models of community foundation’s attempting to move into other countries as a mainstream fundraising. endowment building and community support tool should review this research. Foundation Legitimacy at the Community Level in the United Kingdom. The Legitimacy of Philanthropic Foundations United States and European Perspectives. Based on the US model. and advantages. M. Diana Leat addresses the increase in community foundations. (Eds.

P. This is in opposition to Thomas Friedman’s account of globalization. The Lexus and the Olive Tree. London. (2002). He was special advisor to the director-general of the World Trade Organization and prior to that. This book is an interesting contradiction to Thomas Friedman’s first book on globalization. that globalization a process not a destination. politics and the future of poor countries. Philippe Legrain has a master in politics of the world economy from the London School of Economics. Of interest to this paper is his perspective on the world never being truly global. as Friedman suggests that globalization is not controllable. His book is a reminder that half the world has never made a phone call. the trade and economics correspondent for The Economist. While not focused on philanthropy or non-profit organizations. UK: Abacus. Legrain. products and people. and that the movement of goods and people will always be ruled by money and time. with a purposeful balance of the positive and negative effects. . it offers opinions on the factors affecting the economy. Open World:/The Truth About Globalization. It helps to stabilize this paper as it represents the viewpoint of a European looking into the United States and other areas of the world impacted by the quicker movement of information. ideas.85 The comparative information between the US and UK would benefit potential donors in the UK as well as volunteers.

This chapter focused on providing assistance to country’s exiting from conflict situations. Winder. This work was an interesting addition to the capstone research as it examined foundations on the ground in other countries. From the study. A. D. Managing at the Leading Edge a non-profit management book on best practices. Support for the post-conflict rebuilding was received from several foundations but this case study used foundations that had been involved in the country’s for at least a decade (the Charles Stewart Mott. Challenges experienced include: managing relationships with local partners. H. Leshchenko provides a brief history of South-Eastern Europe. This study is important to those . New York: Springer Science + Business Media. Simmons. Her experience includes being a researcher on the book. N.. (Pp..K. The conclusion of this chapter formulated added value that foundations could apply in post-conflict situations. and improving the effectiveness of their respective foundations. LLC. Philanthropic Foundations’ Assistance in Post-Conflict Situations: A Case Study of Post-Communist Southeast Europe. strategic and collaborative lessons are offered to provide the reader with an interesting body of knowledge to use. 183198). Soros Foundation Network and King Baudouin Foundations). The author captured positive and negative information as well as significant opportunities for improvement for each foundation. (Eds. In Anheier.).86 Leshchenko. coordinating efforts with international charities. fifteen thoughtful. Innovation in Strategic Philanthropy Local and Global Perspectives. Natalia Leshchenko is a PhD candidate at the London School of Economics.

This article is not focused on all relevant areas of the capstone’s research. Sage Publications. Lindenberg presents evidence of the rapid growth of the nongovernmental humanitarian and development organizations since the 1960’s and examines key motivating factors that have contributed to this explosion. 4). Vol. Non-profit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. pp. Marc Lindenberg is dean and professor of the Daniel J.87 considering working in non-profit organizations in Eastern Europe and prospective donors to South-East Europe as well as those interested in helping non-profit organizations in post-conflict situations. Of relevance is Lindenberg’s statement that the fall of the Berlin wall in 1989 (and his subsequent analysis of other political activity affecting international non-profit organizations) and inexpensive global communications have been two of the key factors in the expansion of northern nongovernmental organizations. Voluntarism. He was the senior vice president of programs for CARE USA from 1992-1997. Declining State Capacity. The initial ideas from this article were presented at a conference in 1995. Evans School of Public Affairs at the University of Washington. important trends and political influences. 147-167. Lindenberg. and the Globalization of the Not-for-Profit Sector. but it provides an interesting view at what is happening in countries not experiencing rapid community foundation growth. 28. The paper focuses on the structures that organizations are forming. (1999). The growth of nongovernment agencies in developing countries and amongst organizations . M. (Supp.

GlobalGiving and MySpace. . lessons learned related to the big technology trends affecting charity and how organizations can use them to increase public support. Of particular note is the newfound ability to promote. He founded McPherson Associates in 1984 and has consulted with organizations in higher education. receive funds and steward donors using technology. McPherson. R. Centre for Philanthropy and Fundraising. Numerous examples of technology impacting charity are highlighted including the popularity of Podcasts during the Tsunami. He specifically sought their strategic insight. KIVA. Lincoln. attract.C. Richard McPherson is a faculty member of New York University’s George H. He spoke to leaders in technology companies. media experts and non-profit professionals. Richard McPherson spent ten months interviewing key people in the United States to seek their perspective on technology in the non-profit sector. This is a good source for anyone in the nonprofit sector attempting to both understand how technology has opened up the charitable sector to the public and how charities must be prepared to take advantage of the reasonably low cost of social media versus traditional media.88 such as Medecins sans Frontieres and CARE provided a source of information not otherwise examined for this research topic. Nebraska: iUniverse. Directchange. conservation and the (2007). The book examines Internet giving sites such as CARE2. Digital Giving How Technology is Changing Charity. Heyman Jr. women’s rights. Donorschoose.

Philanthropy. New York. 193-204). but on the impact. and Europe. Globalization and Biotechnology. .36. M. Those interested in agricultural biotechnology and this aspect of globalization would find this chapter of interest. In Hewa. Inc. G.89 It is especially relevant to this research as it focuses not just on the worldwide web and the Internet. 4). R. D. Non-profit and Philanthropic Studies: International Overview of the Field in Africa.. Vol. Mehta. (2007). Berger. Asia. Of interest to this paper is a short paragraph speaking to Greenpeace and their use of the Internet to mobilize people. support and funds to practice strategic philanthropy. Latin America. Canada.. S. Non-profit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. G.H. & Stapleton. Mirabella. Michael Mehta is the associate professor of sociology at the University of Saskatchewan and director of the Sociology of Biotechnology program and director of the Social Research Unit. the Pacific. Gemelli. (Supp. Malcolm. the “globalized risk society” and the economics of multinational companies and food production. This chapter speaks to issues surrounding biotechnology and globalization. the online social community is having on charity as well as current on line trends. Globalization. and Civil Society Toward a New Political Culture in the Twenty-First Century (pp. (Eds.M.. New York: Springer Science + Business Media. M.).

Giuliana Gemelli is a professor of history of scientific and cultural institutions in the Department of History at the University of Bologna and Director of the Master in International Studies in Philanthropy program. It contains significant information of interest as it reports on the current academic programs from Canada through Asia. Gabriel Berger is the Director of the graduate program in non-profit organizations. The article . research and write within the non-profit or civil society sector in both civilized and developing countries. the United States has 240 universities and colleges offering non-profit management programs. Africa and Europe. By comparison.90 Roseanne Mirabella is the Executive Director of the Centre for Community Research and Engagement. and tracking nonprofit management education programs since 1995. The research includes the similarities and differences of programs as they relate to the overall growth of the non-profit sector internationally. Margy-Jean Malcolm is the Program Director of the Graduate Diploma in Nonprofit Management in the School of Health and Community Studies in New Zealand. an associate professor in the Political Science Department at Seton Hall University. the Director of the Centre for Social Innovation and associate professor in the Department of Administration at the Universidad de San Andres in Argentina. This article is a thorough review of the non-profit programs outside the United States for people wishing to work. Information was collected from 189 universities in 62 countries with educational programs in non-profit management outside the United States using a World Wide Web survey. the lead researcher on Nongovernmental education study since 2002.

and of special note are the countries with high growth in community foundations. Questions arise regarding the role of advocacy in organizations and universities that are now incorporating this function into their teachings. such as policymaking. courses and degrees offered. 36. R. The relevant information on fundraising and philanthropic studies is represented. Mirabella’s research tracks the growth of non-profit management programs in the United States since the mid-1990s to report on available programs. and external.91 examines where the non-profit studies are located within faculties at colleges and universities however. as well as the evolving need for professionally trained non-profit managers on a global scale. this was not as relevant to this Capstone Paper. an international emphasis on nongovernmental organizations and development. Sage Publications. the differences between programs and their growth in the last ten years would find this research beneficial. 4). Vol. University-Based Educational Programs in Non-profit Management and Philanthropic Studies: A 10-Year Review and Projections of Future Trends. sustainable development and the third sector . (2007). such as fundraising. Based on the research collected. management of nongovernmental organizations. Mirabella. their location. (Supp. Those interested in non-profit management courses. Of interest to the researcher and to this capstone are courses focused on internal functions. Non-profit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly.

M. In their conclusion the authors state that the role of philanthropy can be similar regardless of the challenge. global corruption. They are not advocating. Distinct View-Intervening in the Practices of the Public and Private Sector. an international consultant with Development Alternatives Inc. (Eds. Simmons. H. 136). LLC.B. New York: Springer Science + Business Media. “One size fits all philanthropy. This chapter focused on the role that philanthropic foundations have played with private and public sector issues of accountability. (Pp.92 internationally are areas of growth within the 240 college and university programs. A number of programs focus on partnerships and alliances. Winder. Simmons. 121-137).” however experience. Innovation in Strategic Philanthropy Local and Global Perspectives. A. understanding.K. government and philanthropic leaders forging alliances to solve major problems on an international scale.. D. Melanie Beth Oliviero is an advisor with Strategies for Social Change. A. p. and good judgement are effective practices to solve challenges facing a community or country (Oliviero. and coalition building through building relationships that truly represent forward thinking solutions to some of the most challenging problems facing the world and the effect of globalization. corporate social responsibility. In Anheier.. research.). . teacher and advisor for global social justice. Oliviero. Other case studies showcase the market. The Funders Network for Trade and Globalization is an excellent example of a network set up to assist charitable organizations throughout the globalization process.. and an advocate..

7. but legal structures and organized philanthropy are new within legislation for civil society organizations. commerce.93 This thought-provoking article provides ample information on a variety of challenges solved through foundation. September 2007. This paper would be . He received funding from the Association of Fundraising Professionals and the Matsushita International Foundation to conduct this research. charity and civil society are not new. interviews and comparative US data. 205-225. No. 3. Tamaki Onishi is a PhD candidate at the Centre on Philanthropy at Indiana University. International Journal of Educational Advancement. Vol. (2007). social sciences or non-profit management would find this work worth reading several times as it presents complex situations with novel alliances that should be incorporated into future global challenges. advocacy. p. Students of political science. Current Conditions and Development Strategies of Philanthropy and Fundraising in Japan: A Comparative Study of the United States and Japan. government. philanthropy. Like other countries. This paper is a comprehensive examination of the current philanthropic environment in Japan from surveys. business and government coalitions. Of great interest in this work as an example of old charitable customs is Onishi’s reference to Kanjin. The relevant materials for this capstone relate to Japan’s methods of raising funds and cultural implications. an eighth century Buddhist method of raising funds for temples that invited gifts based on the donor’s capability. Onishi. T.

education and networking recommendations are studied in Onishi’s research and relevant to this capstone. Perlas. corporations and other countries.94 useful for philanthropy students tracing historic methods transplanted to North America. government and business working together for sustainable development. (2000). speaker and resource on sustainable development and threefolding. The most important chapter in the book relative to this capstone paper focused on the role non-profit organizations are playing in advocacy and social movements to bring attention to global matters such as the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) and its defeat. Cultural Power and Threefolding. This is an essay about what he calls ‘threefolding’ or civil society (non-profit and nongovernment organizations). Nicanor Perlas is President of the Center for Alternative Development Initiatives (CADI) in the Philippines. Philippines. Shaping Globalization Civil Society. This paper is of particular interest as the information presented specific to a country very different from North America that was not seen in other sources. Similar to other countries there new growth in the third sector both in terms of people organizing themselves and funds flowing from individuals. There are numerous references to the growth of the civil sector and its potential to impact . Perlas was awarded the UN Environment Program Global 500 Award for Sustainable Agriculture and The Outstanding Filipino Award. N. E-philanthropy. and Globalization Network for Social Threefolding. US. Center for Alternative Development Initiatives. He is an author.

This essay is written for those familiar with.95 globalization in a positive way for sustainable development. and interested in. . The book further discusses examples of boycotts and the Battle of Seattle. The Seattle situation was highlighted in numerous sources as the culmination of what voluntary action can accomplish when coordinated. threefolding. close examination of transnational corporate globalization and sustainable development. as well as the impact the Internet and email had on its success.

Foreign models have been implemented and revised to suit the needs of the Czech environment. A.. (Pp. Innovation in Strategic Philanthropy Local and Global Perspectives. LLC. Winder.96 Pospíscil. In Anheier. the Environmental Partnership Organization and the Healthy City Karviná. he founded the Centre for Non-profit Sector Research in Brno and is currently their director. Simmons. Mirosalv Pospíscil has worked in the Czech Republic’s civil sector since 1989. New York: Springer Science + Business Media. H. 21-36). Central and Eastern Europe. Both organizations rely on partnership. He provides an overview of the years since the 1989 and the efforts to rebuild civil society. D. In 2003. This chapter offered applicable research from two organizations with funding and operations challenges that could place them in a host of community’s.K.). . (Eds. Two organizations are studied. Their solutions and practices could be transferred to community’s developing their civil society and seeking foundation advice and expertise. primarily foundations.. thousands of non-profit organizations have been created since then. M. Despite a lack of wealth and loss of philanthropic practices and fear of the former regime. This chapter is relevant as it depicts countries impacted by the fall of communism in 1989. alliances and stakeholder/volunteer involvement.

Civil Society International wrote this paper to analyze the globalization of American philanthropy to find trends in crossborder funding between the US and other countries and to suggest how this could be more meaningful in the future. Ruffin goes on to state that he believes the non-profits in this global world need international philanthropic policies. Ruffin examines two features of globalization: the spread of community foundations to other countries around the world and the other is the internationalization of the community foundation. the distinguished Fleishman Fellow in Civil Society at Duke University and the Director. North Carolina. The paper addresses six key areas on this topic. Holt. The second important link to this research is his analysis of the important elements of globalization that Thomas Friedman writes about in The World is Flat specifically the Internet and the impact of the democratization of former communist countries. Ruffin calls for higher education in the Southern hemisphere to ensure appropriately educated and trained graduates to work in non-profit organizations. Ruffin. non-profit policy makers and globalization looking for more about these topics would find this paper of interest. United States: Duke University. Mr. Scholars of community foundations.97 Ruffin. . The Globalization of American Philanthropy. two of which are relevant to this research. Within the research on community foundations. (2003).

In Hewa. This article written by Lester Salamon fourteen years ago is a must-read for every student and volunteer interested in philanthropy and a concise image of third sector growth within the last twenty years. Salamon initially questions whether this surge of new organizations is due to a new movement. http://www. and Civil Society Toward . Canada and Europe for providing moral support to countries new to philanthropy. The Rise of the Non-profit Sector. (1994).M. Globalization and the Civil Society Sector. and solve major problems plus provide training and technical assistance to its managers to ensure long-term support. 73. He foreshadows research written thirteen years later by stating that the non-profit sector will need to find ways to function. or a sector ignored for a long time gaining attention and momentum. L.M.H. Globalization. Philanthropy. The combination of literacy with technology is a unique point highlighted by Salamon of interest to this capstone. Salamon credits the Salamon. (Eds.html Retrieved January 12. Foreign Affairs. 109-122. Vol. Issue 4. (2005). & Stapleton. D. S. Prior to other popular sources of “globalization” Salamon was examining the key forces at play generating massive growth in the non-profit sector and alerting people to the impact that this could have on the non-profit industry and the world. Salamon. p.). L. 2008.

4. This work is relevant to this capstone paper due to its exploration of the workforce within the civil sector and the subsequent impact the sector has played in globalization. 28. 150). Her focus was on international development and nonprofit management.99 a New Political Culture in the Twenty-First Century (pp. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. J. Salamon is professor and director of the Center for Civil Society Studies of the Institute for Policy Studies at the Johns Hopkins University. challenges commonly held beliefs about the international non-profit or civil society sector (p. Evans School of Public Affairs at the University of Washington. improve awareness of the institutions and build capacity for future work. The chapter contains a review of the findings that according to Salamon. Inc. the Johns Hopkins Comparative Non-profit Sector Project to document the scope and role of civil society in more than forty countries. Salm. Inc. In 1991. Lester M. This article provides an introduction of ten high . New York: Springer Science + Business Media. Sage Publications. Janet Salm graduated from the Daniel J. vol. no. to explain the variances. He is a leading expert on alternative tools of government action and on the nonprofit sector in the United States and around the world. Coping With Globalization: A Profile of the Northern NGO Sector. Supplement 1999. 137-152). Sokolowski and Associates of Global Civil Society. he began work on an international research project. to assess their impact. (1999).

successful. Those interested in learning more about working with NGOs. autonomy. Globalization. Very brief founding principles of each organization are stated. England: Hodder Education.100 profile. London. This book is an excellent introduction and overview of globalization’s impact on transforming the international economics and politics. and future opportunities for adapting. (2006). Five core external challenges are listed: globalization. Anyone interested in . advocacy and changing north-south relations. sharing coping strategies. Internal challenges include how boards are made-up. The paper is built on the Bellagio Conference discussions that included identifying common challenges rated to globalization. writer and broadcaster. government alliances. nongovernmental organizations and their reaction. the private sector and southern NGOs. how they are dealing with globalization and organizations needing examples of non-profits looking inward to improve should carefully review this article. Suter. challenges and techniques for managing the effects of globalization. The paper’s documentation about being on the cutting edge and becoming more effective with technology and managing operations better was of use to this capstone’s focus on technology and the higher education for employees of non-profit organizations. then programs and staffing are documented. Keith Suter is a foreign affairs analyst in Australia and an internationally renowned social and economic commentator. competition and cooperation. K. Of note beyond these challenges are the need to reform and professionalize.

the Cold War.101 a broad overview of globalization would find this a useful source of information. within the topic of philanthropy and globalization such as the impact technology has made and the increased dependence on a professional non-profit sector to work with government and business to democratize situations. Philanthropy in Kenya. 2008 In 1987 Peggy Dulany founded the non-profit organization Synergos (‘Working Together ‘in Greek) to bring people together to build leadership networks to address poverty and increase equity around the world. They work . He provides an overview of the United Nations. http://www. Global Giving Matters. Retrieved January 26. Globalization includes an in depth look at the forces that have shaped what Suter claims is a borderless era. Suter focuses on three core factors of globalization: the necessity of governments to work together. This book is of particular importance to this research given its wide historical examination of globalization and its focus on nongovernment organizations. Suter’s work supports claims by Anheier. consumerism and anti-globalization. htm. free trade.synergos. The Synergos Institute (September-October 2007). al. et. Ruffin. the ever-growing importance of transnational corporations as the driving force in economic policy and their ability to reach the entire world and (most relevant to this paper) people mobilizing themselves through nongovernmental (non-profit)

but work in several South American countries and Mexico. They refurbish and deliver computers to nongovernment organizations. British Journal of Sociology. 2006. It speaks to the need for alliances between organizations as well as the overwhelming importance of technology in the next phase of globalization. London School of Economics and Political Science. co-founder of Digital Links. Students of innovative charitable acts and partnerships in non-profits would find this article interesting. Mr.102 with civil society leaders. Dulany. Who’s making global civil society: philanthropy and US empire in world society. Volume 57. Personal communication. UK: Blackwell Publishing. and a staff of forty are headquartered in New York. Issue 4. philanthropists. This article relates to the capstone research as it highlights technology in developed countries. a computer recycling non-profit based in London. (2006). His partner is a seasoned non-profit professional. UK. capacity and institutions that can sustain their initiatives. community based groups. Synergos attempts to build partnerships to facilitate developing local leadership. government. Vogel. the potential partnerships and opportunities in less developed countries as well as the entrepreneurship brought to many non-profits from the business sector. This work focuses on the work of Chris Mathias of the Synergos Institute’s Global Philanthropists Circle. that piloted in Kenya in 2002. A. . the Chair. schools and churches throughout Africa. international organizations and foundations. Mathias spearheaded the organization after becoming aware of the waste from computers.

P. Of note is a paragraph referencing the growth of university programs. A. Included are the exploration of the international community foundation movement. think tanks and systems for students of philanthropy to seek higher education and networking opportunities. teaching and promoting its philanthropic tools as a further method of injecting the US value system onto the new culture of philanthropy in developing countries. LLC. New York: Springer Science + Business Media. . (2007). that of the US participation in sharing.. Within Vogel’s essay she explores four aspects of US international grant making. This view of the globalization of philanthropy from a sociology scholar introduced a new viewpoint. D. Winder. Simmons. 93-106). In Anheier. she was with the Department of Sociology and Philosophy at the University of Exeter. which is of relevance to this capstone as several new ideas are presented including the role that the large US foundations have played and their impact on the movement as being “elite philanthropy”.).103 Ann Vogel is currently teaching at the Singapore Management University.K. Thailand. Vogel’s work is an interesting addition to the topic’s literature review and research as it approaches American philanthropy as an “exported good or service” to other countries. Innovation in Strategic Philanthropy Local and Global Perspectives. (Eds. At the time she wrote this paper. Wattanasiritham. social impact and financing of US philanthropy. The article also explores the history. (pp.. H.

save the information that community foundation’s are not yet exist in Thailand (there are a few community based efforts and institutions). This chapter provides a thorough overview of the culture of philanthropy and giving in Thailand. Very little was of importance to this literature review. Other than providing some history and current information.104 Paiboon Wattanasiritham is the Chair of the Moral Promotion Centre. gift forms. this chapter does not really offer much for philanthropy students. Advisory Chair of the Community Organizations Development Institute and Chair of the Thai Fund Foundation. Of interest is the type of giving that exists in Thailand but not in other countries: that of giving to the Royal Family for them to disperse funds to those projects and people in need. the legal environment and two case studies. .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful