A more philanthropic society?

Did a new lecture this week looking at the development of Civil Society and how Philanthropy might help along the path to a more Civil Society. I was immediately reminded of The Spirit Level by Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett. If you haven't read it do look at the TED talk with Wilkinson summarising the whole thing in a quarter of an hour and it might just change the way you look at the world!

In a nutshell, using widely available health,GDP,and other indices of well-being they have shown incontravitably that our life expectency and well being is governed not by our absolute wealth but by the degree of inequality between the richest and the poorest in any particular society. I find it terrifying that inequality in the UK is increasing fairly dramatically after nearly half a century of the gap getting wider.I am outraged that in 2013 in the 7th largest economy in the world the Trussell Trust is needed to set up food banks because poverty has increases to the point that large numbers of people really do not have enough to eat. And yet our government continues to cut benefits.

How can we possibly hope to address these issues? The UK GDP is £1400bn. Government spends £800bn. Civil Society in the UK raises and spends perhaps £50bn. Francis Beckett (What have the Baby Boomers done for us) asks where are the UK philanthropists to match Buffett and Gates? He has a point. A number of wealthy people are giving £millions to good causes but as yet I can't see many of the Billionaires joining the club.

However perhaps the time has finally come for "Social Investment". We know micro finance works in developing countries so why not here? Instead of Wonga.com and interest rates of 4000% we could have syndicated social enterprises lending money at sensible rates and getting not only a social return on investment but a modest financial return for their philanthropic backers who would appreciate the multiplier effect. The Banksters aren't going to do it. The Bank of Dave is doing his bit but we need some serious similar investment all over the country. What about it?

What is the future of fundraising?

Great meeting of the consultants group last week. If Michael O'Toole is to be believed the future is "contracting". Yes well we know that CAF reckon individual giving is down £1.7bn and that government cuts have knocked another £2bn out of the budget, but, his view in the light of Government preference is that there are still great opportunities to bid for work. But is it work we want to do?

If the techies are to be believed then the future is in crowds, or to be precise, crowd sourcing. Ryan Bromley couldn't come but Vicky from Chameleon did a great job of explaining the applicability of it to fundraising. Crowdfunding if you prefer, though it was pointed out that social enterprises and small businesses are doing a great job of raising capital through crowdfunding which is interesting because it came up again at a Third Sector Research Centre seminar this week.

Here academics and practitioners were looking more at the supply and demand of/for social investment and crowdfunding does seem to be a viable option. However the more interesting debate ranged around where philanthropy ends?

That is, a gift from an individual or a grant from a trust is clearly philanthropy and nobody expects to get any of their money back. It is, in risk terms, a 100% certainty. No risk, no financial return on investment though givers are increasing asking for a social return on investment. However the moment that some of the money is to be returned, as interest or capital repayment, risk rears its head. What price the feel good factor? Where does a social investment fit in the philanthropist's portfolio? Some tricky questions that, of course, the academics suggested needs more research.

Well it does and I'll be adding some investment questions to my "nature of philanthropy" interviews so watch this space for some interim ideas.

Meanwhile what do you think is the future of fundraising? Same old same old, digital,or increasingly back to basics? Tell me what you think, please!And don't forget the champagne is still on offer (see October's challenge).

Free Champagne for Social Enterprise

Been at the ISRPM conference in Dublin this week presenting a paper on Social Investment and listening to a number on Social Enterprise(SE). Lots of discussion about what SE is and isn't but between a large number of academics no agreed definition save you know one when you see it.

So I'm offering a bottle of champagne to the best definition in 30 words or less!

We generally agreed that SE is somewhere on the spectrum between a purely "altruistic" charity and a "red in tooth and claw" commercial company but where and what does that mean?

Come on have a go, but be warned I'm hard to please and four professors have failed so far to satisfy me. Incidentally Stephen Barber, also at LSBU, gave a very whitty run down on the "Big Society" and likened it as liable to be ditched by Cameron if things get too hairy in the same way as Blair ditched the Stakeholder Society when it started biting him. I still reckon that if we mention BS at all it needs to be as the Bigger Society, since we've had a very successful Big Society, in the guise of the work of charities and community organisations for more than 100 years.