Comments on: Profitable Philanthropy http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2006/12/profitable-philanthropy Fri, 21 Nov 2008 19:27:31 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: MV http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2006/12/profitable-philanthropy#comment-25 MV Wed, 13 Dec 2006 17:45:32 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2006/12/07/profitable-philanthropy/#comment-25 Interesting topic. I have often wondered about a related paradox: the intersection of philanthropy and socially responsible investing (SRI), or the lack thereof. If you use the returns of tobacco stocks to fund your Lung Association bequest, are you doing good or not? Interesting topic.

I have often wondered about a related paradox: the intersection of philanthropy and socially responsible investing (SRI), or the lack thereof.

If you use the returns of tobacco stocks to fund your Lung Association bequest, are you doing good or not?

]]> By: Jessica Stannard-Friel http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2006/12/profitable-philanthropy#comment-24 Jessica Stannard-Friel Mon, 11 Dec 2006 14:01:10 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2006/12/07/profitable-philanthropy/#comment-24 The New York Times Magazine ran a brief article entitled For-Profit Philanthropy yesterday -- you can read it here: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/magazine/10Section2a.t-1.html The New York Times Magazine ran a brief article entitled For-Profit Philanthropy yesterday — you can read it here: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/magazine/10Section2a.t-1.html

]]> By: Phil http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2006/12/profitable-philanthropy#comment-23 Phil Sun, 10 Dec 2006 02:55:15 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2006/12/07/profitable-philanthropy/#comment-23 Helping need not be philanthropy. Jailing people can help society. Torture can help reduce terrorism, maybe. Propaganda can help reduce the possibility of civil unrest, as can tear gas, death camps, and a secret police system. We have to preserve some sense of philanthropy, charity, and giving that distinguishes it from all the other ways of "helping." Relinquishing dominion and control, without a contractual or binding quid pro quo, seems like a part of a decent definition of giving. Helping need not be philanthropy. Jailing people can help society. Torture can help reduce terrorism, maybe. Propaganda can help reduce the possibility of civil unrest, as can tear gas, death camps, and a secret police system. We have to preserve some sense of philanthropy, charity, and giving that distinguishes it from all the other ways of “helping.” Relinquishing dominion and control, without a contractual or binding quid pro quo, seems like a part of a decent definition of giving.

]]> By: Sean Stannard-Stockton http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2006/12/profitable-philanthropy#comment-22 Sean Stannard-Stockton Fri, 08 Dec 2006 14:32:51 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2006/12/07/profitable-philanthropy/#comment-22 Just because a solution is "market based" does not make it a good solution. Frankly, in many cases an outright grant is probably the best approach. I see hybrid approaches as worthy of exploration because they depend on people pursuing their own best interest rather than relying on people giving something away. To the extent that we can realign reward structures, so that positive social good comes out the pursuit of personal interest, so much the better. But I agree with you completely that we must not delude ourselves into thinking that market based solutions are somehow automatically a better approach to every problem. Giving is often an attempt to correct a perceived inefficiency in our market based economic system. It seems to me that correcting that system through market based solutions gets at the root of the problem and therefore is very much in the spirit of "philanthropy". But that doesn't mean that each and every attempt is a good one. Just because a solution is “market based” does not make it a good solution. Frankly, in many cases an outright grant is probably the best approach. I see hybrid approaches as worthy of exploration because they depend on people pursuing their own best interest rather than relying on people giving something away.

To the extent that we can realign reward structures, so that positive social good comes out the pursuit of personal interest, so much the better. But I agree with you completely that we must not delude ourselves into thinking that market based solutions are somehow automatically a better approach to every problem.

Giving is often an attempt to correct a perceived inefficiency in our market based economic system. It seems to me that correcting that system through market based solutions gets at the root of the problem and therefore is very much in the spirit of “philanthropy”. But that doesn’t mean that each and every attempt is a good one.

]]> By: Albert Ruesga http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2006/12/profitable-philanthropy#comment-21 Albert Ruesga Fri, 08 Dec 2006 14:18:58 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2006/12/07/profitable-philanthropy/#comment-21 Thanks for your post, Sean. I largely agree with your argument, but I also think we need to guard against being too fetishistic about so-called "market solutions" to social problems. The logic of the market can sometimes be put to good use in the charitable sphere, as you point out. But there are cases where, short of harvesting the organs of the poor, there is no device for generating profit from the philanthropic act. There's a raft of social entrepreneurial projects that depend essentially on subsidies from foundations and other donors, all claims of a "market-based solution" to the contrary. Thanks for your post, Sean. I largely agree with your argument, but I also think we need to guard against being too fetishistic about so-called “market solutions” to social problems. The logic of the market can sometimes be put to good use in the charitable sphere, as you point out. But there are cases where, short of harvesting the organs of the poor, there is no device for generating profit from the philanthropic act. There’s a raft of social entrepreneurial projects that depend essentially on subsidies from foundations and other donors, all claims of a “market-based solution” to the contrary.

]]>