Serving the many or serving the most needy?
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
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 13 (2012)
Issue (Month): 4 (December)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/10101/index.htm|
|Order Information:||Web: http://link.springer.de/orders.htm|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Richard Steinberg, 1986. "The Revealed Objective Functions of Nonprofit Firms," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(4), pages 508-526, Winter.
- 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.
- Andreoni,J., 2002.
"Leadership giving in charitable fund-raising,"
13, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
- 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.
- 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.
- Fisher, Franklin M, 1977. "On Donor Sovereignty and United Charities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(4), pages 632-38, September.
- 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 810-23, August.
- 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.
- 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.
- Glazer, Amihai & Niskanen, Esko, 1992.
"Why voters may prefer congested public clubs,"
University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers
qt16j5s39d, University of California Transportation Center.
- Glazer, A. & Niskanen, E., 1990. "Why Voters May Prefer Congested Public Clubs," Papers 90-91-18, California Irvine - School of Social Sciences.
- Glazer, Amihai & Niskanen, Esko, 1992. "Why Voters May Prefer Congested Public Clubs," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt9vk9r6zm, University of California Transportation Center.
- Glazer, Amihai & Niskanen, Esko, 2001. "Why voters may prefer congested public clubs," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt2rm6x4kc, University of California Transportation Center.
- 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.
- David Lucking-Reiley & John List, 2002. "The effects of seed money and refunds on charitable giving: Experimental evidence from a university capital campaign," Natural Field Experiments 00301, The Field Experiments Website.
- John A. List & David Lucking-Reiley, 2000. "The Effects of Seed Money and Refunds on Charitable Giving: Experimental Evidence from a University Capital Campaign," Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers 0008, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics.
- 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.
- Bilodeau, Marc, 1992. "Voluntary contributions to united charities," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 119-133, June.
- 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.
- 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 312-23, June.
- Le Grand, Julian, 1975. "Public Price Discrimination and Aid to Low Income Groups," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 42(165), pages 32-42, February.
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.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn)or (Christopher F Baum)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.