Abstract
Drawing on the charitable giving literature, we deploy the 2010–2018 waves of the China Family Panel Studies and employ the Heckman model to determine the more generous age group. The results demonstrate that young donors are more likely to donate and to give more. The robustness checks based on probit, ordinary least squares, IV-Heckman and propensity score matching further support the above findings. Further examinations show that the more years of schooling caused by the change in the education system is the reason for the more generous behavior of young households and find that the change in the education system enhances the incidence and the amount of giving partially by giving the young an advantage in savings. The study suggests that the more generous age group may vary by economic and social factors, and a further understanding of the relationship between age and giving in different contexts is conducive to promoting the development of philanthropy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amore, M. D., & Murtinu, S. (2021). Tobit models in strategy research: Critical issues and applications. Global Strategy Journal, 11(3), 331–355. https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1363
Barkema, H. G., Chen, X.-P., George, G., Luo, Y., & Tsui, A. S. (2015). West meets east: New concepts and theories. Academy of Management Journal, 58(2), 460–479. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2015.4021
Becker, G. S. (1974). A theory of social interactions. Journal of Political Economy, 82(6), 1063–1093. https://doi.org/10.1086/260265
Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P. (2011). Who gives? A literature review of predictors of charitable giving Part One: Religion, education, age and socialisation. Voluntary Sector Review, 2(3), 337–365. https://doi.org/10.1332/204080511X6087712
Belfield, C. R., & Beney, A. P. (2000). What determines alumni generosity? Evidence for the UK. Education Economics, 8(1), 65–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/096452900110300
Bhandari, G., & Deaves, R. (2008). Misinformed and informed asset allocation decisions of self-directed retirement plan members. Journal of Economic Psychology, 29(4), 473–490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2007.12.003
Brooks, A. C. (2005). Does social capital make you generous?*. Social Science Quarterly, 86(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0038-4941.2005.00287.x
Brown, E., & Ferris, J. M. (2007). Social capital and philanthropy: An analysis of the impact of social capital on individual giving and volunteering. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 36(1), 85–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764006293178
Cai, M., Caskey, G. W., Cowen, N., Murtazashvili, I., Murtazashvili, J. B., & Salahodjaev, R. (2022). Individualism, economic freedom, and charitable giving. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 200, 868–884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2022.06.037
Caliendo, M., & Kopeinig, S. (2008). Some practical guidance for the implementation of propensity score matching. Journal of Economic Surveys, 22(1), 31–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6419.2007.00527.x
Christensen, R. K., Nesbit, R., & Stritch, J. M. (2018). The role of employees’ public service motives and organizational commitment in workplace giving campaigns. The American Review of Public Administration, 48(7), 644–658. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074017701223
Daneshvary, N., & Luksetich, W. A. (1997). Income sources and declared charitable tax deductions. Applied Economics Letters, 4(5), 271–274. https://doi.org/10.1080/758532591
Doyle, W. R., & Skinner, B. T. (2017). Does postsecondary education result in civic benefits? Journal of Higher Education, 88(6), 863–893. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2017.1291258
Estrada-Mejia, C., Peters, E., Dieckmann, N. F., Zeelenberg, M., De Vries, M., & Baker, D. P. (2020). Schooling, numeracy, and wealth accumulation: A study involving an agrarian population. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 54(2), 648–674. https://doi.org/10.1111/joca.12294
Gandelman, N., & Lluberas, R. (2023). Wealth in Latin America: Evidence from Chile. Review of Income and Wealth. https://doi.org/10.1111/roiw.12634
Gittell, R., & Tebaldi, E. (2006). Charitable giving: Factors influencing giving in US states. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35(4), 721–736. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764006289768
Glenday, G., Gupta, A. K., & Pawlak, H. (1986). Tax incentives for personal charitable contributions. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 68(4), 688. https://doi.org/10.2307/1924530
Gong, X., & Ye, S. (2021). Social capital, the state’s structural intervention and donors’ choice among charitable causes: Evidence from China. Social Indicators Research, 155(2), 647–674. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-021-02609-7
Heckman, J. J. (1979). Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica, 47(1), 153. https://doi.org/10.2307/1912352
James, R. N. (2009). Health, wealth, and charitable estate planning a longitudinal examination of testamentary charitable giving plans. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38(6), 1026–1043. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764008323860
Landry, C. E., Lange, A., List, J. A., Price, M. K., & Rupp, N. G. (2006). Toward an understanding of the economics of charity: Evidence from a field experiment. Quarterly Journal of Economics. https://doi.org/10.1162/qjec.2006.121.2.747
Li, P., & Wang, L. (2022). Does political trust matter for charitable giving? The antecedence and consequence of trust in local officials. Voluntas, 63, 9544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-022-00535-x
Liu, P., & Yang, Y. (2021). Facilitating or inhibiting charitable giving? Exploring the dual role of compulsory donations in China. The Social Science Journal, 2, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/03623319.2021.1949550
Meer, J., & Priday, B. A. (2021). Generosity across the income and wealth distributions. National Tax Journal, 74(3), 655–687. https://doi.org/10.1086/714998
Mesch, D. J., Osili, U. O., Dale, E. J., Ackerman, J., Bergdoll, J., & O’Connor, H. A. (2022). Charitable giving in married couples: Untangling the effects of education and income on spouses’ giving. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 51(2), 444–458. https://doi.org/10.1177/08997640211008983
Mesch, D. J., Rooney, P. M., Steinberg, K. S., & Denton, B. (2006). The effects of race, gender, and marital status on giving and volunteering in Indiana. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35(4), 565–587. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764006288288
Micklewright, J., & Schnepf, S. V. (2009). Who gives charitable donations for overseas development? Journal of Social Policy, 38, 317–341. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279408002869
Midlarsky, E., & Hannah, M. E. (1989). The generous elderly: Naturalistic studies of donations across the life span. Psychology and Aging, 4(3), 346–351. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.4.3.346
Modigliani, F., & Brumberg, R. (1954). Utility analysis and the consumption function: An interpretation of cross section data. In F. Modigliani (Ed.), The Collected Papers of Franco (pp. 3–46). Modigliani.
Oosterhoff, B., Wray-Lake, L., & Harden, K. P. (2022). Adolescents provide more complex reasons for lowering the voting age than do adults: Evidence from national convenience samples. Developmental Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0001366
Park, H. (2022). Giving and volunteering over a lifecycle. Personal and Group. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11150-022-09602-0
Pennerstorfer, A., & Neumayr, M. (2017). Examining the association of welfare state expenditure, non-profit regimes and charitable giving. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 28(2), 532–555. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-016-9739-7
Reyes-Garcia, V. (2006). Personal and group incentives to invest in prosocial behavior—A study in the Bolivian Amazon. Journal of Anthropological Research, 62(1), 81–101. https://doi.org/10.3998/jar.0521004.0062.104
Rimes, H., Nesbit, R., & Christensen, R. K. (2019). Giving at work: Exploring connections between workplace giving campaigns and patterns of household charitable giving in the USA. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 30(4), 828–840. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-019-00125-4
Roberts, J. R., & Maxfield, M. (2019). Mortality salience and age effects on charitable donations. Rising above It, 63(14), 1863–1884. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764219850864
Rooney, P. M., Steinberg, K. S., & Schervish, P. G. (2001). A methodological comparison of giving surveys: Indiana as a test case. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 30(3), 551–568. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764001303011
Rosenbaum, P., & Rubin, D. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70(1), 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/70.1.41
Schervish, P. G., & Havens, J. J. (2001). Wealth and the commonwealth: New findings on wherewithal and philanthropy. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 30(1), 5–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764001301001
Siahpush, M., Tibbits, M., Maloney, S., Johansson, P., Grimm, B., Nguyen, M., Soliman, G. A., Wani, R. J., & Singh, G. K. (2020). Smoking households give less to charity. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 49(3), 589–610. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764019883950
Tremblay-Boire, J., & Prakash, A. (2017). Will you trust me?: How individual American donors respond to informational signals regarding local and global humanitarian charities. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 28(2), 646–672. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-016-9782-4
Ugur, Z. B. (2018). Donate more, be happier! Evidence from the Netherlands. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 13(1), 157–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-017-9512-0
Vamstad, J., & von Essen, J. (2013). Charitable giving in a universal welfare state-charity and social rights in Sweden. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 42(2), 285–301. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764012466176
Wang, H., Cheng, Z., Smyth, R., Sun, G., Li, J., & Wang, W. (2022). University education, homeownership and housing wealth. China Economic Review, 71, 101742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2021.101742
Wang, Q., & Sun, Z. (2021). Geographic location, development of higher education and donations to Chinese non-public foundations. Journal of Chinese Governance, 52, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/23812346.2021.1908733
Wiepking, P., & James, R. N. (2013). Why are the oldest old less generous? Explanations for the unexpected age-related drop in charitable giving. Ageing & Society, 33, 486–510. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X12000062
Wiepking, P., & Maas, I. (2009). Resources that make you generous: Effects of social and human resources on charitable giving. Social Forces, 87(4), 1973–1995. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.0.0191
Wilhelm, M. O., Brown, E., Rooney, P. M., & Steinberg, R. (2008). The intergenerational transmission of generosity. Journal of Public Economics, 92(10–11), 2146–2156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2008.04.004
Willer, R., Wimer, C., & Owens, L. A. (2015). What drives the gender gap in charitable giving? Lower empathy leads men to give less to poverty relief. Social Science Research, 52, 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2014.12.014
Yogo, M. (2016). Portfolio choice in retirement: Health risk and the demand for annuities, housing, and risky assets. Journal of Monetary Economics, 80, 17–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2016.04.008
Funding
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China [G. No. 72173012], the National “Four Batches” Talents of China [G. No. 47], and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [G. No. 02020052020071].
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interests
The authors report there are no competing interests to declare.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix
Appendix
See Figs.
The distributions of household giving
3,
Savings of households with different educational backgrounds
4.
See Table
6,
7,
8.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Liu, Y., Zu, Q. Who is more generous over a life cycle? Evidence from China. Soc Indic Res 171, 729–748 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-023-03278-4
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-023-03278-4