The Guardian view on fewer people giving to charity: generosity is good
Charity is often said to be begin at home, but should not end there unless by necessity. So research showing that fewer people in the UK donated to charity in 2018 than in either of the previous two years is dispiriting. Britons have traditionally been generous, performing well in international comparisons of giving. The overall amount donated in the UK, £10.1bn in 2018, has been stable for a decade. And the bad news is offset by the fact that the number of people donating goods (56%), rather than money, has not changed. But the fact that 43% said they had not given any money to charity over the previous 12 months, while just 16% (down from 17%) volunteered their time, is a cause for concern.
Of course, giving to charities is not compulsory. In some people’s ideal world, the work they do would not be necessary, as human and other needs would be met in other ways – by governments, but also employers (last year the number of working poor in the UK topped 4 million). This survey does not capture which income groups have stopped giving to charity, or why. But given the context of rising inequality, homelessness and use of food banks, alongside cuts to health and other services, the only positive reason to stop, or reduce giving – that charities no longer need the money – is surely not the reason for the drop-off.
Instead, the report’s authors suggest a combination of factors, including a decrease in trust following recent scandals involving Kids Company, the London garden bridge project, Oxfam and others, new requirements following on from stricter rules around fundraising and data protection, and a decision by charities to focus on cultivating existing donors rather than finding new ones. The continuing squeeze on household incomes – at 22%, the number of people living in poverty is scandalously high – could also have caused some people to change their behaviour. But there is no firm evidence for this. While academic research into fundraising and philanthropy is limited, it is widely accepted that poor people are generally more generous than rich ones, in the sense that they give away a higher proportion of their incomes.
It is almost a decade since David Cameron made the case for the revitalised voluntary sector that he called the “big society”. There was every reason to suspect at the time that the policy was cover for an assault on the public. As austerity has bitten deeper, reality has exceeded even the most pessimistic predictions. In some areas, audacious community-minded groups and individuals have found ways to patch up gaps created by the withdrawal of services. More often, holes in public provision of health, education and other services have been impossible to fill.
Charities can’t mend what has been broken. But since medical research and children consistently fill two of the top three slots, when the popularity of good causes is measured (animals take the third), it is clear that they have a role to play. The state will never fund every possible clinical trial or buy the newest equipment for each playground. In numerous areas, enthusiasts and specialists play a vital role.
The last decade has placed enormous pressure on charities. In the decline in donors, we are seeing the effect. Governance and other failures played their part. Donors may also have felt discouraged by the sheer scale and difficulty of the problems being addressed. But no one should be under any illusion that we can do without these organisations. A healthy, active democracy requires a vibrant civil society as well as government. Generosity is a healthy impulse.