IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rsocec/v75y2017i4p523-543.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Civic participation of secular groups in Canada

Author

Listed:
  • Maryam Dilmaghani

Abstract

Using two recent nationally representative Canadian surveys, this paper investigates how secularization affects civic participation, inclusive of political engagement and philanthropy. Three mutually exclusive categories of secularized individuals are considered. The analysis suggests that Canadian secular groups are relatively less engaged with politics and volunteer fewer hours, compared with the actively religious. They are, however, found to contribute significantly more money to secular causes, controlling for a wide range of individual attributes. Various explanations are explored.

Suggested Citation

  • Maryam Dilmaghani, 2017. "Civic participation of secular groups in Canada," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 75(4), pages 523-543, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:rsocec:v:75:y:2017:i:4:p:523-543
    DOI: 10.1080/00346764.2017.1299203
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00346764.2017.1299203
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00346764.2017.1299203?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. Mark Ottoni-Wilhelm & Lise Vesterlund & Huan Xie, 2017. "Why Do People Give? Testing Pure and Impure Altruism," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(11), pages 3617-3633, November.
    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. Maryam Dilmaghani, 2019. "Religiosity, Secularity and Fertility in Canada," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 35(2), pages 403-428, May.
    2. Maryam Dilmaghani, 2021. "Deep-Level Religious Diversity and Work-Life Balance Satisfaction in Canada," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 16(1), pages 315-350, February.

    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. Arbel, Yuval & Bar-El, Ronen & Schwarz, Mordechai E. & Tobol, Yossef, 2019. "To What Do People Contribute? Ongoing Operations vs. Sustainable Supplies," IZA Discussion Papers 12180, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. 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.
    3. Ester Manna, 2017. "Customer‐oriented employees: Blessing or curse for firms?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 842-875, December.
    4. Michele Fioretti, 2022. "Caring or Pretending to Care? Social Impact, Firms' Objectives, and Welfare (former title: Social Responsibility and Firm's Objectives)," SciencePo Working papers hal-03393065, HAL.
    5. Lionel Richefort, 2018. "Warm-glow giving in networks with multiple public goods," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 47(4), pages 1211-1238, November.
    6. Gandullia, Luca & Lezzi, Emanuela & Parciasepe, Paolo, 2020. "Replication with MTurk of the experimental design by Gangadharan, Grossman, Jones & Leister (2018): Charitable giving across donor types," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    7. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/7fsnj6af7v9ncrf76qn5p5on9e is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Raúl López-Pérez & Aldo Ramírez-Almudio, 2020. "Why people give to their governments: The role of outcome-oriented norms," Working Papers 2007, Instituto de Políticas y Bienes Públicos (IPP), CSIC.
    9. Jay Simon & Donald Saari & Donald Saari, 2020. "Interdependent Altruistic Preference Models," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 17(3), pages 189-207, September.
    10. Mark Ottoni-Wilhelm & Lise Vesterlund & Huan Xie, 2017. "Why Do People Give? Testing Pure and Impure Altruism," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(11), pages 3617-3633, November.
    11. De Chiara, Alessandro & Manna, Ester, 2022. "Firms' ownership, employees’ altruism, and product market competition," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    12. Prendergast, Canice, 2023. "Organizational design for making a difference," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    13. Osório, António, 2017. "Self-interest and equity concerns: A behavioural allocation rule for operational problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 261(1), pages 205-213.
    14. Benabou, Roland & Jaroszewicz, Ania & Loewenstein, George, 2022. "It Hurts to Ask," IZA Discussion Papers 15576, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. David Fielding & Stephen Knowles & Ronald Peeters, 2022. "In search of competitive givers," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 88(4), pages 1517-1548, April.
    16. Adena, Maja & Huck, Steffen, 2019. "Can mass fundraising harm your core business? A field experiment on how fundraising affects ticket sales," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Economics of Change SP II 2019-304, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    17. Gangadharan, Lata & Grossman, Philip J. & Xue, Nina, 2023. "Using willingness to pay to measure the strength of altruistic motives," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    18. Daniel M. Hungerman & Mark Ottoni-Wilhelm, 2021. "Impure Impact Giving: Theory and Evidence," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 129(5), pages 1553-1614.
    19. Mesa-Vázquez, Ernesto & Rodriguez-Lara, Ismael & Urbano, Amparo, 2021. "Standard vs random dictator games: On the effects of role uncertainty and framing on generosity," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    20. Esteban Jaimovich, 2024. "The Intensive Margin of Altruism: Impact of Covid-19 on Charitable Giving in England and Wales," Working Papers 297, Red Nacional de Investigadores en Economía (RedNIE).
    21. Pinar Yildirim & Andrei Simonov & Maria Petrova & Ricardo Perez-Truglia, 2020. "Are Political and Charitable Giving Substitutes? Evidence from the United States," NBER Working Papers 26616, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:rsocec:v:75:y:2017:i:4:p:523-543. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RRSE20 .

    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.