财富与慈善慈善资本主义诞生.docVIP

财富与慈善慈善资本主义诞生 　　The leading new philanthropists see themselves as social investors. The need for philanthropy to become more like the for-profit capital markets is a common theme among them, especially those who have made their fortune in finance. America’s early charitable foundations were built by entrepreneurs. 3)Carnegie and 4)Rockefeller would have understood the new investment-oriented model. 　　 　　“Having seen their own economic activity transform the world, they thought that the foundations they left behind would be transformative organizations,” says Carl Schramm, head of the 5)Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation. Those foundations did remarkable things. Set up as 6)conduits for making grants as well as running the programmes that would benefit from the money, they thought big, concentrated on clear goals and were willing to invest heavily for long periods to achieve them, says Mr. Schramm. The Rockefeller Foundation, for example, found a cure for 7)yellow fever and drove the “8)green revolution” in agriculture. Carnegie, among other things, built thousands of public libraries. 　　 　　Yet this long-term investment 9)ethos has proved to be the exception, not the rule. In a landmark article, Philanthropy’s New Agenda: Creating Value, Michael Porter and Mark Kramer described widespread flaws in America’s foundations that mostly remain to this day. For instance, little effort is devoted to measuring results, and foundations have unjustifiably high administration costs. 10)Arguably the biggest problem is the way that foundations make grants to organizations they support. Melissa Berman of Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors argues that there is too much emphasis on funding individual programmes and too little on the sustainability of the non-profit organization running the programme.11)Overheads are seen as a bad thing, and grants tend to be short-term. 　　 　　Should the new generation of philanthropists try something different from the traditional foundation? 12)