"Stone Soup" is a traditional folk story about a traveler who came to a poor village. Begging for something to eat, he heard the same story at every door: "We have not enough to feed ourselves!"

He then asked to borrow a big pot and proceeded to fill it with water and built a fire. He dropped a few stones into the water and stirred it and tasted it. The people gathered round this strange event. He kept stirring and tasting the water, adding more stones.

Finally he said, "One of the best stone soups I ever had included an onion or two . . ." Someone remembered an onion in her garden and went and got it. He cut it up and stirred and tasted with a little smile. After a few minutes, he said, "One of the very best stone soup recipes I've tried, had a couple of potatoes. " Someone else remembered that he'd saved too many seed potatoes, and could spare a few. Another asked if a turnip would be good to add . . .

By the end of the day this man was able to feed that entire village, who had not had enough to feed themselves.

Corporations in Central Europe are also reviving the philanthropic tradition. A survey by the Donor's Forum, a Czech organization, documented philanthropic contributions by a majority (90%) of the large businesses which they surveyed in 1996. For Estonia, a similar study of 207 Estonian corporations found that 80% had contributed support to NGOs. High percentages of corporations supported social services (64%); popular and youth culture: folk ensembles and dancing (52%), and health care (50%). By contrast, only 15% of the corporations supported environment, and 9% supported science.

The Estonian companies tended to distrust large foundations and to prefer to give directly to NGOs. "Part of the reason may be that it is more difficult to see direct results when foundations receive money." [The Estonian survey was conducted by Prof. Voldemar Koga, Tallinn Pedagogical University, Narva 25 EE0100 Tallinn Estonia. This and other studies are detailed in NGO News, No. 4, October 1996, published by The National Forum Foundation, Menesi ut. 18, 1118 Budapest, Hungary.]

In addition to seeing results from their donations, corporations also anticipate good publicity and improved relations with employees and the community as a result of their philanthropy. Keeping this in mind, NGOs should approach corporate executives with requests for contributions to specific projects with visible outcomes, and should organize publicity for corporate donors as a reward for their contributions.

In the 19th and early 20th centuries, many wealthy individuals became known for their philanthropy. One famous American philanthropist was Andrew Carnegie. Born in Scotland, he immigrated to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania in 1848 as a young boy. As an adult, he founded the Carnegie Steel Company, earned a fortune, and after he retired, dedicated the rest of his life and his money to various philanthropic projects.

In one project, Carnegie gave money to build over 2,500 public libraries in a variety of English-speaking countries. The arrangement was that he would provide the building, and the community would agree to provide the books and library staff, and to enable access to all members of the community, free of charge. Among his many other philanthropic projects are the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and Carnegie-Mellon Institute of Technology.

Many American foundations which now support environmental NGOs in other countries were originally created by wealthy philanthropists, who donated their money to develop mechanisms of support for such fields. Most earned their money through business, such as oil (the Rockefeller Foundation) or automobiles (the Mott Foundation). George Soros is a present-day example of a very wealthy man who is donating a large amount of his own money to develop and support "open society" programs in Central and Eastern Europe.

These wealthy philanthropists are part of a continuing "civil society" activity, that of donating one's private money for activities and institutions which serve a larger, public good.

Numerous philanthropic institutions emerged throughout Central Europe and Russia during the time of nation-building in the late 19th century. As is true of Western philanthropies, these were often started by privately wealthy businessmen. For example, young Russian painters in the early 1800s could receive support from the privately funded Society for the Encouragement of Artists in St. Petersburg. Three wealthy patrons provided resources to purchase the artists' works and to provide them with money to travel abroad to study. [source: Suzanne Massie, Land of the Firebird: The Beauty of Old Russia, 1980, p. 220]

Savva Mamontov, a businessman successful in railroad building during the 1870s, used a good deal of his private earnings to support painters, sculptors and musicians at his estate outside Moscow. His wife, Elizaveta Mamontova, developed a museum of folk art (woodcarvings and embroidery) and built a hospital and a school (the first in the area) for the children of the local peasants.

During one generation, Russian merchant industrialist families, who had earned their money from trade in furs and leathers, textile factories, and railroads, spent a great deal on promoting science, theater and visual and performing arts. Sergei Shchukin collected modern French artists (impressionists) for several decades from 1890; he made his collection of 221 Impressionist paintings open to the public every Sunday. Another businessman, Savva Morozov, planned and financed the Moscow Art Theater, promoting unknown Russian playwrights such as Anton Chekhov. Another wealthy philanthropist started the first public library in Moscow. Others gave money to old people's homes, schools, or hospitals.

"This extraordinary class of merchants hardly had time to consolidate themselves into a cohesive group, for they lasted only a generation. But, in the short time that they existed, they accomplished miracles for their country [Russia] and the city they loved so much [Moscow]. After the Revolution, their collections were seized. Many of their magnificent Impressionist paintings can be seen today in the Hermitage in St. Petersburg and the Pushkin museum in Moscow. Their names have been all but obliterated. No major work has yet been written on their collective contribution to the arts. " (Massie, p. 406).

It is true that such "merchant princes" had a great deal of wealth to donate. It is also true that they enjoyed, and believed in, many of the causes which they supported. Clearly, the private funding of programs to benefit the public is a Russian as well as an American tradition.

In every nation, there are drawbacks to relying exclusively on donations. Different NGOs can find themselves in competition for limited grant money. Often NGOs run on a "shoestring budget", limping along from month to month. They may find it easier to raise money for specific programs than to support themselves. High staff turnover and "burn out" among overworked and underpaid or volunteer staff can make it hard to develop continuity. Donor "burn-out", or "compassion fatigue", can lead to dwindling contributions over time.

Some American fundraisers argue that NGOs should earn money by running their own businesses. NGOs need to locate a need, and then create or find something to sell that fills that need. By doing this, the NGO raises money for its programs (taking a share of the profits from the business venture), and also publicizes its work. From producing and selling greeting cards, tee shirts, salad dressing, or fashionable clothing, NGOs can generate profits as well as providing jobs. This all depends on whether NGO members can either develop the skills to run a business, or find such people to contribute their services.

Bill Shore is the founder and head of a hunger-relief NGO in the United States, "Share Our Strength". He came to charitable work after disappointments in his job as a staff member for a Washington politician. He advocates the entrepreneurial approach to NGO fundraising, writing that: "Government funds, charitable solicitations, and foundation grants all have one thing in common: they represent somebody else's money. Nonprofits that rely on these sources shift limited dollars from one place to another, dividing the philanthropic pie rather than taking steps to create a bigger pie." (Bill Shore, Revolution of the Heart, 1995, p. 79)

Shore suggests that interested NGOs take the time to study the demand for products in their region, and develop a strategy for producing and marketing items that would be popular. In neighborhoods where there are more people than money, ingenuity combined with hard work can often yield excellent results. The NGO provides employment as well as earning some money for its programs.

Another way to use the capitalist system to benefit NGOs occurs when NGOs form partnerships with profit-making companies on specific projects, for example, producing special issue wines with the NGO logo on the label. These are sold for a higher than usual price, and the extra profits are split between the company and the NGO.

For more information about this Newsletter or about ECOLOGIA, return to the Newsletter Index
This page is accessible from the CCSI Home Page: http://www.friends-partners.org/~ccsi/.