IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ecogov/v13y2012i4p365-386.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Serving the many or serving the most needy?

Author

Listed:
  • Christoph Starke

Abstract

Free, subsidized, or cost-covering? The decision on how much to charge for a good or service is fundamental in social business planning. The higher the fee paid by the recipient, the more people in need can be served by the additional revenues. However, charging a fee simultaneously excludes the very poor from consumption. This paper argues that the entrepreneur’s trade-off between both effects is governed by her level of poverty aversion, i.e., her preference intensity for the service of needy people with different incomes. Additionally, we account for the possibility of excess demand for the provided good and assume that applicants are rationed by non-price-allocation mechanisms. We therefore contribute to the extensive literature on the pricing and rationing behavior of nonprofit firms. Within our theoretical model, we find ambiguous reactions of the entrepreneur to a cut in donations. Given a sufficiently low level of status-quo donations, entrepreneurs with relatively high poverty aversion tend to increase the project volume, whereas those with relatively low poverty aversion do the opposite. Copyright Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Suggested Citation

  • Christoph Starke, 2012. "Serving the many or serving the most needy?," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 365-386, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:ecogov:v:13:y:2012:i:4:p:365-386
    DOI: 10.1007/s10101-012-0116-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10101-012-0116-8
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10101-012-0116-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. C. Du Bois & R. Caers & M. Jegers & C. Schepers & S. De Gieter & R. Pepermans, 2004. "Agency problems and unrelated business income of non-profit organizations: an empirical analysis," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(20), pages 2317-2326.
    2. repec:bla:econom:v:42:y:1975:i:165:p:32-42 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. John A. List & David Lucking-Reiley, 2002. "The Effects of Seed Money and Refunds on Charitable Giving: Experimental Evidence from a University Capital Campaign," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(1), pages 215-233, February.
    4. Alderman, Harold, 1987. "Allocation of goods through non-price mechanisms : Evidence on distribution by willingness to wait," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 105-124, February.
    5. James Andreoni, 2006. "Leadership Giving in Charitable Fund‐Raising," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 8(1), pages 1-22, January.
    6. Arthur C. Brooks, 2005. "What do nonprofit organizations seek? (And why should policymakers care?)," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(3), pages 543-558.
    7. Kulshreshtha, Praveen, 2007. "An efficiency and welfare classification of rationing by waiting in the presence of bribery," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 530-548, July.
    8. Nichols, D & Smolensky, E & Tideman, T N, 1971. "Discrimination by Waiting Time in Merit Goods," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 61(3), pages 312-323, June.
    9. Rose-Ackerman, Susan, 1987. "Ideals versus Dollars: Donors, Charity Managers, and Government Grants," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 95(4), pages 810-823, August.
    10. Glazer, Amihai & Niskanen, Esko, 1997. "Why voters may prefer congested public clubs," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 37-44, July.
    11. Fisher, Franklin M, 1977. "On Donor Sovereignty and United Charities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(4), pages 632-638, September.
    12. Jerald SCHIFF & Burton WEISBROD, 1991. "Competition Between For-Profit And Nonprofit Organizations In Commercial Markets," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(4), pages 619-640, October.
    13. Richard Steinberg, 1986. "The Revealed Objective Functions of Nonprofit Firms," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(4), pages 508-526, Winter.
    14. James Austin & Howard Stevenson & Jane Wei–Skillern, 2006. "Social and Commercial Entrepreneurship: Same, Different, or Both?," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 30(1), pages 1-22, January.
    15. Steinberg, Richard & Weisbrod, Burton A., 2005. "Nonprofits with distributional objectives: price discrimination and corner solutions," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(11-12), pages 2205-2230, December.
    16. Bilodeau, Marc, 1992. "Voluntary contributions to united charities," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 119-133, June.
    17. Sah, Raaj Kumar, 1987. "Queues, Rations, and Market: Comparisons of Outcomes for the Poor and the Rich," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(1), pages 69-77, March.
    18. James Andreoni & A. Abigail Payne, 2003. "Do Government Grants to Private Charities Crowd Out Giving or Fund-raising?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 792-812, June.
    19. Feldstein, Martin S, 1972. "Distributional Equity and the Optimal Structure of Public Prices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(1), pages 32-36, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Christoph Starke & Steffen Burchhardt, 2014. "Revealing the Preferences of Social Financiers," FEMM Working Papers 140002, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    2. Siebold, Nicole, 2021. "Reference points for business model innovation in social purpose organizations: A stakeholder perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 710-719.
    3. Dohrmann Susanne & Raith Matthias & Siebold Nicole, 2015. "Monetizing Social Value Creation – A Business Model Approach," Entrepreneurship Research Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 127-154, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christoph Starke, 2010. "Serving the Many or Serving the Most Needy?," FEMM Working Papers 100002, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    2. Gong, Ning & Grundy, Bruce D., 2014. "The design of charitable fund-raising schemes: Matching grants or seed money," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 147-165.
    3. Paskalev, Zdravko & Yildirim, Huseyin, 2017. "A theory of outsourced fundraising: Why dollars turn into “Pennies for Charity”," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 1-18.
    4. Bartels, Lara & Kesternich, Martin, 2022. "Motivate the crowd or crowd- them out? The impact of local government spending on the voluntary provision of a green public good," ZEW Discussion Papers 22-040, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    5. Vincent C.H. Chua & Chung Ming Wong, 2003. "The Role of United Charities in Fundraising: The Case of Singapore," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(3), pages 433-464, September.
    6. John A. List, 2011. "The Market for Charitable Giving," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(2), pages 157-180, Spring.
    7. Krasteva, Silvana & Yildirim, Huseyin, 2013. "(Un)Informed charitable giving," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 14-26.
    8. Fuminori Toyasaki & Tina Wakolbinger, 2014. "Impacts of earmarked private donations for disaster fundraising," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 221(1), pages 427-447, October.
    9. Kulshreshtha, Praveen, 2007. "An efficiency and welfare classification of rationing by waiting in the presence of bribery," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 530-548, July.
    10. Vladislav Valentinov, 2009. "The German Gemeinwirtschaftslehre: Implications for modern nonprofit economics," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(2), pages 186-195, June.
    11. Valentinov, Vladislav, 2009. "Managerial nonpecuniary preferences in the market failure theories of nonprofit organisation," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 36(1/2), pages 81-92.
    12. Christoph Starke & Steffen Burchhardt, 2014. "Revealing the Preferences of Social Financiers," FEMM Working Papers 140002, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    13. Steffen Burchhardt & Christoph Starke, 2010. "Target-Group and Quality Decisions of Inequity-Averse Entrepreneurs," FEMM Working Papers 100011, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    14. Krasteva, Silvana & Yildirim, Huseyin, 2014. "Reprint of: (Un)Informed charitable giving," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 108-120.
    15. Poledrini Simone & Searing Elizabeth A. M. & Montrone Alessandro, 2022. "A Model for Directing and Modulating Public Interventions in Social Enterprises," Nonprofit Policy Forum, De Gruyter, vol. 13(4), pages 307-332, October.
    16. Dean Karlan & John A List, 2012. "How Can Bill and Melinda Gates Increase Other People’s Donations to Fund Public Goods?," Working Papers id:4880, eSocialSciences.
    17. Katia Melnik & Jean-Benoît Zimmermann, 2008. "An Economic Approach To Voluntary Association," Working Papers halshs-00347448, HAL.
    18. Gregory E. Goering, 2007. "The strategic use of managerial incentives in a non-profit firm mixed duopoly," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(2), pages 83-91.
    19. Drouvelis, Michalis & Marx, Benjamin M., 2022. "Can charitable appeals identify and exploit belief heterogeneity?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 198(C), pages 631-649.
    20. Karlan, Dean & List, John A., 2020. "How can Bill and Melinda Gates increase other people's donations to fund public goods?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:ecogov:v:13:y:2012:i:4:p:365-386. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.