Indian Giving

Ninety percent of what is written about philanthropy is based on info from the USA. Yet, philanthropy is but an infant in North America.
 
The JN Tata Endowment  pre-dates the Carnegie Foundation. There are suggestions that that Rockefeller’s philanthropy was influenced by Swami Vivekananda. In any case, philanthropy in the US did not really take root until the early 20th century.

In Europe, philanthropy is in its childhood. Philanthropy came to Europe from Arabia, in the 11th Century. Ancient philanthropy however, traces its roots back to Islamic and Hindu scriptures. The Laws of Manu (first century CE) are among the earliest quoted by scholars, writing about philanthropy.

Yet, today, if you talk to people in the West of ‘Indian’ philanthropy their faces tell a story, even before they open their mouths: "Indian philanthropy… What, is there philanthropy in India?"
In the course of the last two years I have been interviewing around 30 major philanthropists India.

There is no doubt in my mind that, "There is much philanthropy in India".  Nor do I agree with those pundits who bemoan the failure of India's billionaires at philanthropy. Comparisons are odious and, frankly, comparative data simply does not exist. In fact, what is needed is more study, more constructive debate and more enthusiasm for the philanthropy of the wealthy that definitely does exist in India today. I suggest that there are four broad sources of philanthropy currently in India.

The old business families, the Tatas, Bajajas, Birlas and Godrejs, to name some, undoubtedly play an important part in India's philanthropy - as they have done for at least three generations.
Major Indian philanthropy, has emerged from Indians who have made their fortunes through the IT sector; the professional sector, notably financial services; and others, who have successfully grown businesses in emerging sectors, post 1991.

The categories of philanthropy through which these flow, in my view, can be described as institution building; risk taking; 'new’ or 'venture' philanthropy; and major gifts.

Examples of institution building are the founding of hospitals and universities. This is a practice that goes back centuries. Though it predated the British, they encouraged this by awarding titles to prominent philanthropists. To this era belongs the tradition of attaching family names to institutions such as colleges, schools and hospitals. Whilst names may not be as well known today as they were then, second and third generations of these philanthropic families of the colonial era continue to oversee family philanthropic trusts Today’s exemplars of institution building are those founding eponymous universities, such as Infosys founder's, Azim Premji University or Shiv Nadar University. Biocon Founder, Kirin Mazumdar-Shaw has her name attached to the Cancer Center her philanthropy funds.

Risk taking philanthropy is exemplified by organisations founded by individual philanthropists such as the Screwvala’s Swades Foundation, with its unique 360 degree approach; or Padmini Solami's Salaam Bombay Foundation with its creative approach to empower slum kids. These are philanthropists who are applying innovation and entrepreneurial acumen to grass roots challenges.

Venture philanthropy - sometimes irreverently referred to as ‘philanthropy for bankers’ - is philanthropy which emulates financial investment or venture capital structures. It places emphasis on measuring impact and return on investment. A notable example is Ashish Dhawan’s Central Square Foundation, in education.

Major gift donations are made to established organizations such as schools, universities and hospitals, and existing NGOs. Major gifts may support causes close to the giver’s heart, such as alma mater, arts, crafts, historic monuments, or endangered animals.

Today's younger major gift philanthropists tend to differ from earlier more traditional donors by actively overseeing and contributing time to the NGOs they support. 

The practice of any of these categories of philanthropy is not exclusive to one or other of types of philanthropist. Members of business families are involved in both traditional and risk taking philanthropy. Many who have made their wealth through financial services favor philanthropy which emulates investment or venture capital structures.  However, others follow the major gift route.

There are noteworthy differences between philanthropy in India and that of the West. First, and most significant, is that a large amount of philanthropy is dedicated to fundamental, grassroots challenges – education, health, economic uplift - often after some firsthand investigation by philanthropists themselves of the issues to be combated.

American commentators frequently point out that there, much philanthropy is directed at causes from which philanthropists and their families directly benefit. This, so-called ‘consumption philanthropy’ is given to universities, schools and arts institutions the philanthropists and their families attend. This seems true of only a small fraction of philanthropy in India.

In the West, especially in the United States, many philanthropists see themselves as offering an alternative, better solution and a substitute for government funding. They are dismissive of and reluctant to deal with government.  The rationale for enjoying a tax deduction on their donations is that they are saving the government money and doing a better job.

Indian philanthropists seem to follow a much more pragmatic path. They recognize the importance of collaborating with and enhancing government programs. Collaboration, including with other philanthropists and NGOs, is common amongst India’s major philanthropic names.

Tax, in contrast to the West and especially given the absence of estate duties in India, is of little or no incentive to donors.

Most are candid that their primary motivation is their recognition of the enormous gap that exists between their great fortune and the lot of those at the bottom of the pyramid.

It is commonly assumed that much giving in India is religiously motivated. While some whom I interviewed follow religious practices, others claim to be spiritual rather than religious. Few make significant donations to church, mosque or temple.

Added to all the above, there is the philanthropy of the middle class and the poor - pointing to a wider-spread story of charity and philanthropy. The Charities Aid Foundation (CAF India) 2012 India Giving report told of a clear majority (84%)of Indians who had given money to a good cause in the previous year.

Indian philanthropy is significant, different and worth celebrating. It is not without its faults and challenges, though not dwelt on here. Ways need to be found to give it more oxygen and light. The media and academia have an important role to play in this endeavour.

[An edited version of this piece was published as 'The art of giving, the Indian way'  in Live Mint on 2 October 2015]