We’ve got you covered!

We’ve found two people who can answer these concerns. At Kyoto University’s Graduate School of Economics, there’s a scholar who focuses on crowdfunding from a behavioral economics perspective, and is well-versed in its workings. Also, in the Graduate School of Letters there is a scholar who researches the origins of charity culture and social welfare in modern British history. We asked them about developments in and the future of donating, including the recent practice of crowdfunding.

Scholars of Today are Like “Salarymen”

Historically speaking, is it rare for people to seek donations for research funds?

Kanazawa: From a long-term historical perspective, I do feel that it is a relatively new phenomenon for scholars to carry out their own research while relying on the financial support of others, whether it be the national government or specific individuals. Even in nineteenth century Europe and US, unaffiliated scholars who did not rely on a university salary often would have the greatest level of influence. Good examples from Britain include Charles Darwin and John Ruskin. What I want to say is that those of us who have lived in the second half of the twentieth century and later are the first “salaryman”-like scholars in history. The majority of scholars who are not celebrities or anything of the sort can’t live without their salary, and can’t do research without receiving research funds. I think that this is a new situation. Also, I think it is a new phenomenon for completely unknown scholars to seek money in society.

The Kobe Earthquake and the Power of Charity

Kanazawa: I do research on the UK, and even today charities there have a great presence. While having various problems, as a general rule medical care remains free. While it could all be covered with taxes, even so it’s done with charity. In Japan, after the Kobe Earthquake, all of a sudden the term “volunteer” came to be widely used throughout the country.

What aspect of the earthquake gave rise to this change?

Kanazawa: Put simply, it was that the limits of the state’ s power were revealed. The Kobe Earthquake led to many deaths and had a catastrophic effect on infrastructure. However, at an early stage citizen volunteers were involved where the national government’s support had not reached. Amidst a tragic situation, people became aware that citizens have power in times of crisis, and a lot of donations were received.

Sasaki: We can also see from statistical data that in the Great East Japan Earthquake recovery process, many Japanese people donated and engaged in volunteer activities. However, there is still no evidence with which we can state with certainty that donating and volunteering took root in Japanese people after this earthquake. The total amount of money donated in Japan increased greatly in 2011, the year of the earthquake.¹ While the major reforms to the tax system for donations² in the same year were supposed to encourage people to donate during regular times, in reality the amount of money decreased in the following year. In other words, we cannot say that it greatly increased after the earthquake. Research is still needed to judge whether the events of 2011 encouraged Japanese people to donate and engage in volunteer activities during normal times.

On the other hand, the number of donations for research at Kyoto University has increased approximately sixfold in the past ten years.³

Sasaki: Regardless of where people are donating, they have many similar motivations. In my field of behavioral economics, it’s said that there are four reasons why people donate.⁴ First is “pure altruism”: donating because one becomes happy when the other person’s situation improves. Second is “self-satisfied joy”: being happy with yourself for donating. Third is “conformity”: donating because many other people are doing so. Fourth and last is “reciprocity”: donating because the other person was nice to you before, or donating because you think that the other person will return the favor.

The operator of the academic crowdfunding site “academist” once said to me that they found in a survey that there are various types of supporters. For example, there are purely altruistic supporters who see scholars and their activities as important, or reciprocal supporters who expect, for example, a “return” like their name being included in an article.

Kanazawa: From a historical perspective, this is something I can really understand. We could say that purely supporting scholars is a “serious” motivation and that supporting while expecting something in return is an “enjoyment” motivation. In Japan, donating and volunteering places an emphasis on the former, and such activities are always accompanied by concern about displays of fake virtue. However, the practice of voting charity,⁵ which was popular in British history, appears to be very imprudent from a contemporary perspective. I think that one of the big reasons that giving continues today is that donors find it interesting and are able to have indiscreet, impure fun.

Will a Donation Culture Take Root in Japan?

There is the opinion that there are limits to giving and crowdfunding in Japan since there’s no donation culture.

Kanazawa: If there is a barrier in Japan today to donation culture taking root, it is the liberal people who have had intellectual hegemony in the social welfare state system. I think that they have a physiological aversion to donation culture because it appears to be incompatible with the principles of equality, freedom, and fairness. In the UK, it doesn’t start from the idea that people should be equal, but that each person has their own circumstances and there’s nothing wrong with people in better circumstances helping those who are not. If the community becomes more abundant that way, then what’s wrong? That’s the idea. In the years since the middle of the twentieth century, for better or worse, people in Japan have lost this sensibility.

Sasaki: There are some people who think that their money is a result of their own efforts and therefore don’t want to use it for donations or taxes. Or, they don’t want to support poor people based on the view that poverty is one’s own responsibility, a result of a lack of effort. According to research in economics,⁶ it is easy for people who face a bad economy when graduating from university to hold the view that success in society is more a result of luck than effort. In other words, it’s easy for people who got a job at a good company when the economy was good to think that this was a result of their own effort. Perhaps many people with a high status in society have this idea. In order for donation culture to take root in Japan, I think it’s important for awareness to be cultivated that one’s current position is in large part due to chance and good fortune. Also, I feel like there are many Japanese people who assume that one should only donate for “serious” reasons. This way of thinking holds that it’s shameful to donate while asking for your name or portrait to be displayed. In the background to Japanese NGOs’ fundraising efforts not progressing is this kind of attitude particular to Japanese people. It’s difficult to change culture and awareness, but I think it’s fine to start with donating for the first time due to the expected return, or because other people are doing so.

People Seeking Donations: Outlook

Skillfully making use of donors’ reciprocity or conformity would be one way to get donations. Looking into the future, what will research crowdfunding become for scholars?

Kanazawa: I think that if there is only one academic crowdfunding organization, it will turn into competitions between scholars, like a private sector version of JSPS grants-in-aid. Scholars will work desperately hard on applications, and universities will probably create manuals for applying based on faculty members’ experiences. I think that large universities and people who have already acquired funding and produced results will be the ones that come out on top.

Sasaki: I think that such a situation is still a long way off. Universities have accumulated know-how regarding acquiring grants-in-aid, so there are probably presently an unexpectedly large number of researchers who decide to apply for them because crowdfunding seems like a lot of bothersome work. It’s my hypothesis that there is a positive correlation between the ability to be selected for grants-in-aid and the ability to succeed in crowdfunding. I think one ideal model for the future would be announcing on crowdfunding sites interdisciplinary research projects not frequently given grants-in-aid and asking for people’s support.

Kanazawa: It seems like there would also be demand from the younger generation, for example, driven graduate students who want to study overseas or who do not yet have a PhD but want research funds.

There’s a Future that Doesn’t Depend on the National Government

It seems like for scholars crowdfunding could play a role that goes beyond just the acquisition of research funds—it allows them to directly interact with the general public.

Kanazawa: If private citizens do end up increasingly supporting research that hasn’t seen the light of day, the core of this support will probably be the liberal people that I mentioned previously. People who understand well that income is not being redistributed and public funds for academic research won’t increase, as well as that a future won’t come easily in which tax revenue will grow and finances become sound. An appeal could be made to the “serious” people—that disparities created via policy in the academic world can be corrected with the power of the people, and that a donation culture and social democracy can coexist.

Sasaki: Perhaps there are many people who think this way amongst Kyoto University graduates and supporters.

Kanazawa: While people have been made to think that the goal of humanity is state social welfare, as became clear in the Kobe Earthquake, perhaps citizens supporting each other has also been part of the foundation. While the national government’s large role in supporting scholars probably will not change, it’d be good if, through things like crowdfunding, scholars are able to consider engaging in “interesting” research, finding in their communities supporters drawn to little research ideas and then meeting, while modestly, these supporters’ expectations. I think if people start to feel that giving is not a duty but a right, then a sustainable shared awareness will be cultivated and scholars will be able to engage in academic research in a stable fashion. This does appear to be like the stuff of dreams, though.

(Interviewer: Asa Nakano)