Crowdfunding has created new opportunities for poor microentrepreneurs. One crucial question is the impact that the purpose of a loan—either business investment or basic necessities—may have on the success of a campaign. Investigating a prosocial crowdfunding platform, we find that loans taken out to meet basic needs are funded faster than business-related loans, especially for small amounts, which can be explained by the prosocial motivation of microlenders. Moreover, female microborrowers are funded faster than men, especially for basic needs loans. Our results therefore suggest an ethical blind spot, since prosocially motivated crowdlenders may unintentionally end up producing adverse effects, replicating gender role by supporting women to a lesser extent when they apply for business loans. This finding expands prosocial motivational theory in ethical finance.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
To a large extent, the two coders allocated loan activities in the same way. The few items that were not coded similarly were discussed with the third author.
The eight world regions are determined by Kiva.
With this exact-matching process, we sought to find campaigns that were as similar as possible by controlling for multiple dimensions, including: both campaigns raising the exact same amount (to the dollar) and the same percentile of number of competing loans in the same sector and world region. This very precise matching increases the validity of the results, yet comes at the cost of reducing the sample size. However, although the sample may seem small compared to the whole dataset used in this paper, it is still a large sample that leaves us with high enough power for computing robust statistical tests.
We do not present a matching analysis for the effect of size on the dependent variable, since it is not relevant in this setting. However, the results can be provided on request.
Compared to the baseline (a male borrower asking for a basic necessity loan), the coefficient associated with a male borrower asking for a business loan is, as expected, significantly higher (βBusiness = 0.09, p = 0.011).
Nayebpour and Koehn (2003) call upon this concept, for example in the case of total quality management (TQM), since TQM’s customer focus may result in other key stakeholders being ignored.
Afuah, A., & Tucci, C. (2012). Crowdsourcing as a Solution to Distant Search. Academy of Management Review, 37(3), 355–375.
Agrawal, A. K., Catalini, C., & Goldfarb, A. (2011). The Geography of Crowdfunding (No. w16820). National bureau of economic research.
Aldohni, A. K. (2018). Is ethical finance the answer to the ills of the UK financial market? A post-crisis analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 151, 265–278.
Allison, T. H., Davis, B. C., Short, J. C., & Webb, J. W. (2015). Crowdfunding in a prosocial microlending environment: Examining the role of intrinsic versus extrinsic cues. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39(1), 53–73.
Allison, T. H., McKenny, A. F., & Short, J. C. (2013). The effect of entrepreneurial rhetoric on microlending investment: An examination of the warm-glow effect. Journal of Business Venturing, 28(6), 690–707.
Alsos, G. A., & Ljunggren, E. (2017). the role of gender in entrepreneur–investor relationships: A signaling theory approach. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41(4), 567–590.
André, K., Bureau, S., Gautier, A., & Rubel, O. (2017). Beyond the opposition between altruism and self-interest: Reciprocal giving in reward-based crowdfunding. Journal of Business Ethics, 146(2), 313–332.
Armendáriz, B., & Labie, M. (2011). The handbook of microfinance. London-Singapore: Scientific Work.
Ashta, A., Assadi, J., & Marakkath, N. (2015). The strategic challenges of a social innovation: The case of Rang De in Crowdfunding. Strategic Change, 24, 1–14.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Dholakia, U. M. (2006). Open source software user communities: A study of participation in Linux user groups. Management Science, 52(7), 1099–1115.
Baierl, R., Behrens, J., & Brem, A. (2019). Digital Entrepreneurship. Berlin: Springer.
Barigozzi, F., & Tedeschi, P. (2019). On the credibility of ethical banking. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 166, 381–402.
Battilana, J., & Dorado, S. (2010). Building sustainable hybrid organizations: The case of commercial microfinance organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 53(6), 1419–1440.
Bauwens, T., Huybrechts, B., & Dufays, F. (2019). Understanding the diverse scaling strategies of social enterprises as hybrid organizations: The case of renewable energy cooperatives. Organization & Environment. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026619837126.
Bazerman, M. H., & Sezer, (2016). Bounded awareness: Implications for ethical decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 136, 95–105.
Belleflamme, P., Lambert, T., & Schwienbacher, A. (2014). Crowdfunding: Tapping the right crowd. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(5), 585–609.
Belleflamme, P., Omrani, N., & Peitz, M. (2015). The economics of crowdfunding platforms. Information Economics and Policy, 33, 11–28.
Bendell, B. L. (2017). I don’t want to be green: Prosocial motivation effects on firm environmental innovation rejection decisions. Journal of Business Ethics, 143, 277–288.
Berns, J. P., Figueroa-Armijos, M., da Motta Veiga, S. P., & Dunne, T. C. (2020). Dynamics of lending-based prosocial crowdfunding: Using a social responsibility lens. Journal of Business Ethics, 161(1), 169–185.
Bradford, S. C. (2012). Crowdfunding and the federal securities laws. Columbia Business Law Review, 1, 1–150.
Brolis, O., & Nyssens, M. (2019). Does the mission of an organization affect the quality of low-skilled jobs in quasi-markets?: A comparison between social enterprises and for-profit organizations. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-019-00164-x.
Bruton, G., Khavul, S., Siegel, D., & Wright, M. (2015). New financial alternatives in seeding entrepreneurship: Microfinance, crowdfunding, and peer-to-peer innovations. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39(1), 9–26.
Burtch, G., Ghose, A., & Wattal, S. (2015). The hidden cost of accomodating crowdfunder privacy preferences: A randomized field experiment. Management Science, 61(5), 949–962.
Buttice, V., Colombo, M. G., & Wright, M. (2017). Serial crowdfunding, social capital, and project success. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41(2), 183–207.
Buvinić, M., & Gupta, G. R. (1997). Female-headed households and female-maintained families: Are they worth targeting to reduce poverty in developing countries? Economic Development and Cultural Change, 45(2), 259–280.
Chan, C. S. R., & Parhankangas, A. (2017). Crowdfunding innovative ideas: How incremental and radical innovativeness influence funding outcomes. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41(2), 237–263.
Collins, D., Morduch, J., Rutherford, S., & Ruthven, O. (2009). Portfolios of the poor: How the world’s poor live on $2 a day. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Colombo, M. G., Franzoni, C., & Rossi-Lamastra, C. (2015). Internal social capital and the attraction of early contributions in crowdfunding. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39(1), 75–100.
Conger, M., McMullen, J. S., Bergman, B. J., Jr., & York, J. G. (2018). Category membership, identity control, and the reevaluation of prosocial opportunities. Journal of Business Venturing, 33(2), 179–206.
Cornée, S., & Szafarz, A. (2014). Vive la différence: social banks and reciprocity in the credit market. Journal of Business Ethics, 125, 361–380.
Cowling, M., & Westhead, P. (1996). Bank lending decisions and small firms: Does size matter? International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 2(2), 52–68.
Cox, D. R. (1972). Regression models and life tables. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 34, 187–220.
Cull, R., Demirgüç-Kunt, A., & Morduch, J. (2009). Microfinance meets the market. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 23(1), 167–192.
Cumming, D., Hou, W., & Lee, E. (2016). Sustainable and ethical entrepreneurship, corporate finance and governance, and institutional reform in China. Journal of Business Ethics, 134(4), 505–508.
D’Espallier, B., Guérin, I., & Mersland, R. (2011). Women and repayment in microfinance: A global analysis. World Development, 39(5), 758–772.
De Cooman, R., De Gieter, S., Pepermans, R., & Jegers, M. (2011). A cross-sector comparison of motivation-related concepts in for-profit and not-for-profit service organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(2), 296–317.
Defazio, D., Franzoni, C., & Rossi-Lamastra, C. (2020). How pro-social framing affects the success of crowdfunding projects: The role of emphasis and information crowdedness. Journal of Business Ethics, 1-22.
Defourny, J., & Nyssens, N. (2017). Fundamentals for an international typology of social enterprise models. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 28(6), 2469–2497.
Demirguc-Kunt, A., Klapper, L., Singer, D., Ansar, S., & Hess, J. (2018). The global findex database 2017: Measuring financial inclusion and the Fintech Revolution. Singapore: The World Bank.
Dorfleitner, G., Oswald, E. M., & Röhe, M. (2019). The access of microfinance institutions to financing via the worldwide crowd. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance.
Dufays, F. (2019). Exploring the drivers of tensions in social innovation management in the context of social entrepreneurial teams. Management Decision, 57(6), 1344–1361.
Duarte, J., Siegel, S., & Young, L. A. (2012). Trust and credit: The role of appearance in peer-to-peer lending. Review of Financial Studies, 25(8), 2455–2484.
Eddleston, K. A., Ladge, J. J., Mitteness, C., & Balachandra, L. (2016). Do you see what i see? Signaling effects of gender and firm characteristics on financing entrepreneurial ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 40(3), 489–514.
Figueroa-Armijos, M., & Berns, J. (2019). Vulnerable populations and entrepreneurship in prosocial crowdfunding: Do gender & location matter? Academy of Management Proceedings, 1, 15350.
Figueroa-Armijos, M., & Johnson, T. G. (2016). Entrepreneurship policy and economic growth: Solution or delusion? Evidence fro a state initiative Small Business Economics, 47(4), 1033–1047.
Fleming, L., & Sorenson, O. (2016). Financing by and for the masses: An introduction to the special issue on crowdfunding. California Management Review, 58, 5–19.
Gafni, H., Marom, D., Robb, A., & Sade, O. (2019). Gender dynamics in crowdfunding (Kickstarter): Evidence on entrepreneurs, investors, deals and taste-based discrimination.
Galak, J., Small, D., & Stephenson, A. T. (2011). Microfinance decision making: A field study of prosocial lending. Journal of Marketing Research, 48, S130–S137.
Garikipati, S. (2008). The impact of lending to women on household vulnerability and women’s empowerment: Evidence from India. World Development, 36(12), 2620–2642.
Gorbatai, A. D., & Nelson, L. (2015). Gender and the language of crowdfunding. Academy of Management Proceedings, 1, 15785.
Grant, A. M. (2007). Relational job design and the motivation to make a prosocial difference. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 393–417.
Grant, A. M. (2008). Does intrinsic motivation fuel the prosocial fire? motivational synergy in predicting persistence, performance, and productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 48–58.
Grant, A. M., & Berry, J. W. (2011). The necessity of others is the mother of invention: Intrinsic and prosocial motivations, perspective taking, and creativity. The Academy of Management Journal., 54(1), 73–96.
Greenberg, J., & Mollick, E. R. (2017). Activist Choice homophily and the crowdfunding of female founders. Administrative Science Quarterly.
Grown, C. (2014). Missing women: Gender and the extreme poverty debate. Washington, DC: Learning Lab, United States Agency for International Development.
Guenther, C., Johan, S., & Schweizer, D. (2018). Is the crowd sensitive to distance?—How investment decisions differ by investor type. Small Business Economics, 50(2), 289–305.
Harrer, T., & Lehner, O. M. (2019). Crowdfunding and societal change: A critical feminist perspective on entrepreneurial discourse. Academy of Management Proceedings, 1, 10657.
Hermes, N., & Lensink, R. (2011). Microfinance: Its impact, outreach, and sustainability. World Development, 39(6), 875–881.
Hildebrand, T., Puri, M., & Rocholl, J. (2017). Adverse incentives in crowdfunding. Management Science, 63(3), 587–608.
Hudon, M. (2009). Should access to credit be a right? Journal of Business Ethics, 84, 17–28.
Hudon, M., Labie, M., & Reichert, P. (2020). What is a fair level of profit for social enterprise? Insights from microfinance. Journal of Business Ethics, 162, 627–644.
Huis, M., Lensink, R., Vu, N., & Hansen, N. (2019). Impacts of the gender and entrepreneurship together ahead (GET ahead) training on empowerment of female microfinance borrowers in Northern Vietnam. World Development, 120, 46–61.
Imai, K. S., & Azam, M. S. (2012). Does microfinance reduce poverty in Bangladesh? New evidence from household panel data. Journal of Development Studies, 48(5), 633–653.
Johnston, J., & Morduch, J. (2008). The unbanked: Evidence from Indonesia. World Bank Economic Review, 22(3), 517–537.
Kappel, T. (2009). Ex ante crowdfunding and the recording industry: A model for the U.S.? Entertainment Law Review, 3(3), 375–385.
Kaufman, Z. D., Kassinger, T. W., & Traeger, H. L. (2013). Democratizing entrepreneurship: An overview of the past, present, and future of crowdfunding. Bloomberg BNA Securities Regulation & Law Report, 45(5), 208–217.
Kent, D., & Dacin, M. T. (2013). Bankers at the gate: Microfinance and the high cost of borrowed logics. Journal of Business Venturing, 28(6), 759–773.
Kennedy, P. (2008). A guide to econometrics (6th ed.). New York: Wiley-Blackwell.
Khavul, S., Bruton, G. D., & Wood, E. (2009). Informal family business in Africa. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(6), 1219–1238.
Khavul, S., Chavez, H., & Bruton, G. D. (2013). When institutional change outruns the change agent: The contested terrain of entrepreneurial microfinance for those in poverty. Journal of Business Venturing, 28(1), 30–50.
Lehner, O. M. (2013). Crowdfunding social ventures: A model and research agenda. Venture Capital, 15(4), 289–311.
Lehner, O. M. (2014). The formation and interplay of social capital in crowdfunded social ventures. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 26(5–6), 478–499.
Lehner, O. M., & Harrer, T. (2019). Crowdfunding platforms as focal actors in an entrepreneurial ecosystem: An interdisciplinary value perspective. In Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
Ly, P., & Mason, G. (2011). Competition between microfinance NGOs: Evidence from Kiva. World Development, 40(3), 643–655.
Massolution. (2016). 2015CF: Crowdfunding industry report. Retrieved from: http://www.crowdsourcing.org/editorial/global-crowdfunding-market-to-reach-344b-in-2015-predicts-massolutions-2015cf-industry-report/45376
McKenny, A. F., Allison, T. H., Ketchen, D. J., Jr., Short, J. C., & Ireland, R. D. (2017). How should crowdfunding research evolve? A survey of the entrepreneurship theory and practice editorial board. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41(2), 291–304.
Mitra, P., Hermans, J., Janssen, F., & Kickul, J. R. (2019). Social entrepreneurship and crowdfunding: The importance of rewards and prosocial motivation. Academy of Management Proceedings, 1, 18159.
Moberg, D. J. (2006). Ethics blind spots in organizations: How systematic errors in person perception undermine moral agency. Organization Studies, 27(3), 413–428.
Mollick, E. (2014). The dynamics of crowdfunding: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(1), 1–16.
Mollick, E., & Nanda, R. (2015). Wisdom or madness? Comparing crowds with expert evaluation in funding the arts. Management Science, 62(6), 1533–1553.
Montgomery, A. W., Dacin, P. A., & Dacin, M. T. (2012). Collective social entrepreneurship: Collaboratively shaping social good. Journal of Business Ethics, 111(3), 375–388.
Moss, T. W., Neubaum, D. O., & Meyskens, M. (2015). The effect of virtuous and entrepreneurial orientations on microfinance lending and repayment: A signaling theory perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39(1), 27–52.
Nayebpour, M. R., & Koehn, D. (2003). The ethics of quality: Problems and preconditions. Journal of Business Ethics, 44, 37–48.
Palazzo, G., Krings, F., & Hoffrage, U. (2012). Ethical blindness. Journal of Business Ethics, 109, 323–338.
Parhankangas, A., & Renko, M. (2017). Linguistic style and crowdfunding success among social and commercial entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 32(2), 215–236.
Parhankangas, A., Renko, M., & McWilliams, A. (2019). He says, she says: The impact of gender-specific linguistic style on crowdfunding outcomes. Academy of Management Proceedings, 1, 12932.
Périlleux, A., & Szafarz, A. (2015). Women leaders and social performance: Evidence from financial cooperatives in Senegal. World Development, 74, 437–452.
Pittarello, A., Leib, M., Gordon-Hecker, T., & Shalvi, S. (2015). Justifications shape ethical blind spots. Psychological Science, 26, 794–804.
Ravina, E. (2008). Love & loans: The effect of beauty and personal characteristics in credit markets.
Ryan, R. M., & Connell, J. P. (1989). Perceived locus of causality and internalization: Examining reasons for acting in two domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 749–761.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.
Scarlata, M., & Alemany, L. (2010). Deal structuring in philanthropic venture capital investments: Financing instrument, valuation and covenants. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(2), 121–145.
Schicks, J. (2014). Over-indebtedness in microfinance—An empirical analysis of related factors on the borrower level. World Development, 54, 301–324.
Schwienbacher, A. (2015). Financing the business. In T. Baker & F. Welter (Eds.), The Routeledge Companion to Entrepreneurship. London: Routeledge.
Sezer, O., Gino, F., & Bazerman, M. H. (2015). Ethical blind spots: Explaining unintentional unethical behavior. Current Opinion in Psychology, 6, 77–81.
Singh, R., & Mukhopadhyay, K. (2011). Survival analysis in clinical trials: Basics and must know areas. Perspectives in Clinical Research, 2(4), 145–148.
Tchakoute-Tchuigoua, H. (2018). Which types of microfinance institutions decentralize the loan approval process? The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 67, 237–244.
Vismara, S., Benaroio, D., & Carne, F. (2017). Gender in entrepreneurial finance: Matching investors and entrepreneurs in equity crowdfunding. In A. Links (Ed.), Gender and entrepreneurial activity (pp. 271–288). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
World Bank. (2011). World development report 2012: Gender equality and development. Singapore: World Bank Publications.
Younkin, P., & Kashkooli, K. (2016). What problems does crowdfunding solve? California Management Review, 58(2), 20–43.
Younkin, P., & Kuppuswamy, V. (2018). The colorblind crowd? Founder race and performance in crowdfunding. Management Science, 64(7), 3269–3287.
Zhang, Q., & Posso, A. (2017). Microfinance and gender inequality: Cross-country evidence. Applied Economics Letters, 24(20), 1494–1498.
We thank Zineb Aouni, Judith Behrens, Oscar Bernal, Marc Labie, Marthe Nyssens, Patrick Reichert, Ariane Szafarz and Vera Rocha for their very useful comments. Hadar Gafni has started this research during a research stay at CERMi, Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB). Anaïs Périlleux carried out this research in the framework of an Action de Recherche Concertée programme (grant n°19/24-101) from the Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles entitled Platform Regulation and Operations in the Sharing Economy (PROSEco). We also thank the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments. Hadar Gafni, Marek Hudon and Anaïs Périlleux have contributed equally to this work.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Research Involving Human and Animal Rights
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Gafni, H., Hudon, M. & Périlleux, A. Business or Basic Needs? The Impact of Loan Purpose on Social Crowdfunding Platforms. J Bus Ethics 173, 777–793 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04530-4
- Business loans
- Basic necessities
- Ethical finance
- Gender preference