APPC Conf Papers May 6asianphilanthropy.org/APPC/DiasporaGiving-conference... · 2011-10-05 · to the bibliography. 1. ... a small fraction of that number?3 ... Within their own

$Page 1: APPC Conf Papers May 6asianphilanthropy.org/APPC/DiasporaGiving-conference... · 2011-10-05 · to the bibliography. 1. ... a small fraction of that number?3 ... Within their own$
1

Th is overview paper on diaspora philan-thropy in the Asia Pacifi c region has four objectives, as defi ned by APPC.1 Based on the Terms of Reference provided by APPC, I seek to • Provide an overview of research on

diaspora philanthropy over the past ten years, particularly research on diaspora philanthropy back to the Asia Pacifi c region, specifi cally in China, India, the Philippines, Vietnam, Bangladesh, Indonesia and Pakistan.

• Identify innovative practices in social investment and social entrepreneur-ship through strategic philanthropy by migrants and discuss how these may have facilitated sustainable social change and development in the diaspo-ras’ communities of origin.

• Analyze the enabling environment for diaspora philanthropy in the key coun-tries of the region vis-à-vis its degree of conduciveness in allowing or encourag-ing the practice.

• Recommend collective follow up action to encourage eff ective diaspora giving and sustainable social development and change in migrants’ communities of origin.In terms of organization, the four sec-

tions of this overview paper directly track the four primary “content” areas set forth in the Terms of Reference. Section 1 (begin-ning on page 2) covers the “overview of research on diaspora philanthropy in Asia Pacifi c” and the specifi c issues discussed in that part of the terms of reference. Section 2 (beginning on page 8) discusses “diaspora

DIASPORA GIVING: AN AGENT OF CHANGE IN

ASIA PACIFIC COMMUNITIES?

OVERVIEW

A Decade of Research and Practice of Diaspora Philanthropy in the Asia Pacifi c Region:

The State of the Field

Mark Sidel

DIASPORA GIVING: An Agent of Change in Asia Pacifi c Communities?

2 Asia Pacifi c Philanthropy Consortium

philanthropy, social investing, strategic philanthropy: what does the research show, and what more needs to be done?” and the issues identifi ed there. Section 3 (begin-ning on page 16) analyzes the “enabling environment” for diaspora philanthropy in the region. Section 4 (beginning on page 18), continues the discussion in Section 2 on the gaps and limitations in current research, discusses the specifi c needs for “further research on diaspora philanthropy in the Asia Pacifi c region.” Th e bibliogra-phy of research on diaspora philanthropy in Asia (perhaps the most comprehensive such reference list yet compiled) begins on page 20. Th is discussion does not include the papers prepared for this APPC confer-ence (May 2008), which are not available to the author in fi nal form at the time of writing; those references will be added later to the bibliography.

1. Overview of Research on Diaspora Philanthropy in Asia Pacifi c

History of Research on Diaspora Philanthropy in the Asia Pacifi c Region and Specifi c Countries

Th e Asia Pacifi c Philanthropy Consor-tium’s project on diaspora philanthropy and the exciting country studies underway mark an important step in our work on the role of diasporas in equitable social develop-ment in Asia. In addition to the fi ne work that the country paper writers are contrib-uting, the conference that APPC plans will bring this research to a wider audience and will, we all hope, spur further and better work in this important area.

What could we mean by better work in diaspora giving? What could be better than

émigrés from Bangladesh, China, India, Indonesia, Pakistan, the Philippines, and Vietnam, having gone abroad temporarily or permanently to make their careers and lives abroad, giving back to their countries of origin? Th at is one goal of this paper, and of reviewing the rich results from the fi rst ten years of research on diaspora philanthropy in Asia – to stimulate further research that can integrate with practical giving and the organization of that giving and use of funds to improve diaspora philanthropy, par-ticularly giving for equitable social develop-ment. I believe that most or all of us agree that diaspora philanthropy – like other types of giving – should be focused on important social, cultural and economic problems as identifi ed within specifi c countries using participatory and democratic processes wherever possible; should be focused on assisting the poor rather than assisting the already rich and the elite; and should remain as autonomous as is feasible while also being accountable, transparent, and responsible.

We must also rely on a review of what we know about diaspora philanthropy in Asia to help us understand how the next stage of giving, and of research, can help diaspora giving serve the peoples of Asia even more eff ectively in the future than it has in the past. Th at is the goal of this paper – in reviewing the past, to understand where diaspora philanthropy to Asia has come, and to give us ideas for improving these proc-esses in the future. Th is is, as far as I know, the fi rst such overall eff ort to analyze the fi rst decade of research on diaspora philanthropy in Asia, and thus readers are likely to have many comments and criticisms, particularly on the lessons I draw from this research

Mark Sidel 3

OVERVIEW

experience. I welcome those comments and criticisms and hope that this paper spurs response, and that it helps to spark more and diff erent and better research – and bet-ter diaspora giving.

Ten Years of Research on Diaspora Philanthropy in Asia

In seeking to understand the past to improve the future I begin in this fi eld with the very recent past. I do so because diaspora philanthropy back to Asia – donations back to Asian countries for purposes of charitable, social, economic, cultural, religious and other forms of development as distinct from family relief, busi-ness investment, and other forms of remittances – has a relatively recent history. In Asia, some forms of diaspora giving – contributions from overseas for religious and charitable work, for example – clearly go back much further than large-scale contributions for the build-ing of universities or support for social justice organizations. But research on that phenom-enon – what I focus on here – is even more recent. It is virtually impossible to fi nd signifi -cant research on diaspora giving to Asia that appears much before the mid to late1990s. In the late 1990s, however, research on diaspora philanthropy to Asia virtually exploded – but unevenly, with strong emphasis on India, the Philippines, and China, and relatively little work on other countries and regions of Asia.

Why Is Th ere So Much Research on Diaspora Philanthropy to Asia?

Academic understanding of diaspora giving began with work on the philanthropy of the Jewish diaspora to Israel (discussed further below), and some very initial work on Mexico and other countries.2 But much

of the initial modern research on diaspora philanthropy has sought to understand the scope, channels and goals of giving back to Asia – far more, it appears, than we have research on diaspora giving back to Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, or other parts of the world.

Why has so much of the recent research on diaspora philanthropy focused on Asia rather than on Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, or other nations and regions of the world? Or, to put the question a dif-ferent way, how is it that a bibliography of research on diaspora philanthropy to Asia (attached to this paper) includes nearly one hundred research results in the Asian context, while a similar bibliography for any other region would likely garner only a small fraction of that number?3

Th ere are a number of possible reasons why initial research on diaspora giving has focused so signifi cantly on Asia. One reason is the size and demographics of the Asian diaspora population in the west (and, in the 1990s and this decade, throughout Asia and in the Middle East and the Gulf as well). Th e size of that diaspora, its relative youth, and the relative wealth of those groups made them key actors in diaspora giving in the 1990s and thus in initial research eff orts. In particular, we can note the growing numbers and wealth of Indian, Chinese and Filipinos abroad, and their relatively prominent role in giving back home. Within Asia the focus of the fi rst stage of diaspora philanthropy research from 1997/98 to about 2003, was clearly on India and China. Th e size, relative youth, and relative wealth of those diaspo-ras were important factors in the attention we gave them.



But perhaps there were other reasons as well for the strong attention given to the Asian diaspora philanthropy process when organized research began in the mid to late 1990s. Within their own countries, Indian, Chinese and later Filipino diaspora givers became rapidly prominent – from the vil-lage level in the case of schools and clinics,4 to the national level in terms of building universities, hospitals, temples and other work. Governments in some Asian coun-tries appear to have focused earlier on a more rapidly and sharply growing phenom-enon in their countries – again, initially and primarily in India, the Philippines and China – adding fuel once again to diaspora giving and to research on it.

Nor should we ignore the role played by research institutions, philanthropic intermediary institutions, donors and oth-ers sponsoring and organizing this research: In response to the rapid development of Asian diaspora giving which perhaps devel-oped more quickly than in other regions, it became inevitable that the focus of confer-ences, articles, volumes and other indicia of research activity should focus on Asia. Th at theme – Asian diaspora philanthropy – captured the attention of the Global Equity Initiative at Harvard, the Interna-tional Network for Strategic Philanthropy, Th e Philanthropic Initiative, Asian Devel-opment Bank and other institutions.5 And within that substantial research output, particularly for India and the Philippines, we should particularly note and enthu-siastically celebrate the prominent roles played by indigenous and diaspora scholars and activists in spurring and conducting research on diaspora giving in their coun-

tries and around the Asia Pacifi c region.6 Th ose contributions have been invaluable to our understanding of these processes and their impacts.

What Have We Learned? Th e Achievements of Research on Diaspora Philanthropy to Asia in the First Decade

Th ere have been both achievements and limitations in this initial ten years of research on diaspora philanthropy to Asia. Th e achievements include: • Detailed description of the types of

diaspora giving back to India,7 the Phil-ippines,8 and to some degree to China,9 through research beginning in the late 1990s, with initial research on the types of diaspora giving to Pakistan,10 Vietnam,11 and Taiwan.12

Th e types of diaspora giving identifi ed and described in detail in these country contexts include giving in kind, giving in cash, giving through remittance transfers (along with the diffi culties of sorting out philanthropic remittances from other forms of remittances), giving through corporate means, and other types of diaspora giving. • An initial understanding of the channels

for diaspora giving back to India13 and the Philippines,14 and a more initial understanding of the channels for giv-ing back to China15 and Pakistan,16 with some preliminary work done on Vietnam17 and Taiwan.18

What are these channels for diaspora giving back to Asia? Th ey include fam-ily channels in virtually every country – diaspora giving through families – as well as giving through clan associations in China and Taiwan, through ethnic and profes-

Mark Sidel 5

OVERVIEW

sional groups in India and other countries, through neighborhood and regional groups in the Philippines, and through foreign-based ethnic NGOs for virtually every country. We have learned that these are often elite channels – but not always – and that middle class and poor émigrés certainly give back too. We have learned that the channels for diaspora giving are as broad and diverse and imaginative as the full panoply of ways that remittances and other resources make their way back home. • Valuable but preliminary inquiries into

the nature of diaspora giving for religious causes, primarily focused on India.19

What does this work show? First, it indicates that there are truly enormous fl ows from the diaspora to religious groups and institutions in India. But it also tells us of the very signifi cant diffi culties in measuring that fl ow with any precision, and in deter-mining how those diaspora funds are being deployed for charitable and philanthropic purposes given the relatively little infor-mation released by many receiving groups and the light regulatory requirements for disclosure on many religious organizations. Th is work also gives us an indication – in many cases without details since they are not readily available to researchers – of the links between overseas philanthropy, reli-gion, and politics in India. • Initial attempts to understand the relation-

ships between remittance fl ows, diaspora giving, and diaspora-promoted social development, with some focus on Asia.20

What does this work show? We have learned that in every country, diaspora phi-lanthropy is a portion of remittance fl ows from that nation’s diaspora back home.

We understand now that the distinction between “remittances” and “diaspora giv-ing” or “philanthropy” can be a complex and fi ne line – and a distinction that can be measured diff erently in diff erent countries. We also now understand the very real dif-fi culties in measuring both total remittance fl ows and particularly remittance fl ows for charitable and philanthropic purposes.

Successful Initiatives in Diaspora Philanthropy in Countries Outside of Asia and the Pacifi c

Along with the achievements in research on diaspora philanthropy to Asia that are discussed in this paper, there is a long history of successful diaspora giving to other countries. A full examination of those initiatives is not feasible here, but merely an indication of that long history, depth and sophistication of research on diaspora giving to several other countries. It may be that some of the methodologies used in understanding diaspora giving back to other societies may be of use in deepening research on diaspora philanthropy in Asia. At the same time, even while we emphasize the history of diaspora giving in other parts of the world, it is important to recognize the long history of diaspora giving back to some parts of Asia. Diaspora philanthropy back to China, for example, to support temples, education, health care and other needs has a long history from the United States and other countries, and it is impor-tant not to lose sight of that history as we seek to understand and analyze more cur-rent patterns. It is important, too, to honor the earlier scholars of Chinese diasporas and their contributions home, such as Him



Mark Lai and Renqiu Yu, whose valuable work has charted the earlier contributions of the Chinese diaspora long before the study of diasporas and their giving was a common topic of research.21

In other parts of the world, diaspora giving to Israel, for example, has a long history, and thus a long history of research. Studies have analyzed the struc-ture and channels for diaspora philan-thropy to Israel, but they have also gone beyond structure to discuss specifi c case examples, questions of impact, the chang-ing nature of diaspora giving over time, and the impact of returning diasporas on the philanthropic fi eld.22 Similarly but more recently, early cursory research on diaspora giving to Mexico has given way to sophisticated analyses of the structure and channels for giving to Mexico and then to considerably deeper and more sophis-ticated studies at the local and organiza-tional level that have emphasized the roles of neighborhood associations and other special linkages between particular groups in the Mexican diaspora abroad and par-ticular localities at home.23

In Asia, the research on India and on the Philippines approaches the detail and sophistication of the research on diaspora giving to Israel and Mexico. Th e detail and sophistication of the research on India and the Philippines results from a range of fac-tors, including the signifi cant amounts of diaspora giving, the intense interest in the social and charitable uses of remittances in those societies, the growth of a cadre of researchers, scholars and activists commit-ted to deeper understanding of the phe-nomenon, the availability of international

networks for discussion of these issues and cross-fertilization with domestic research, and other factors.

Characteristics of Diaspora Philanthropy in Asia Pacifi c Societies in Terms of Widely Utilized Mechanisms for Giving, Motivation Factors and Benefi ciaries

Th ere is extensive research in and on diaspora philanthropy to Asia that addresses the mechanisms of giving. Th ere is far less on the motivations for diaspora giving. And there is some, but insuffi cient, research on identifying benefi ciaries and impact.

Much of the fi rst decade of research in Asia has focused precisely on the mecha-nisms of giving. From this work, we have learned of the enormous diversity and vital-ity of the widely used mechanisms for giv-ing. Th ese range from family and banking channels to corporate, clan, neighborhood associations, informal banking, giving in kind and other channels as well. We now have a relatively clear picture, at the coun-try level, of the mechanisms available for giving back to India, the Philippines, and China (including the full range of philan-thropic intermediaries established in those countries, in sending countries such as the United States, web portals, standard remit-tance channels (such as money transfer operators), and other mechanisms). We have some understanding of the mecha-nisms for Pakistan, though less than in the three countries fi rst mentioned.

But our understanding of the mecha-nisms for giving back to Asia fall off quickly once we get beyond India, the Philippines, and China. There is a bit of work on these mechanisms in Taiwan,24

Mark Sidel 7

OVERVIEW

and Vietnam.25 But for other countries in Asia – Bangladesh or Indonesia, for example – which are being covered by papers for this APPC conference, or for other possibly important destinations for diaspora giving, such as Burma, Cam-bodia, Japan, Korea (both South and North), Laos, Malaysia, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Thailand and other states, we have little information on mechanisms for giving beyond our very limited understanding that philanthropic intermediaries in the United States (such as Give2Asia) also work in some of those countries. That anecdotal and highly restricted knowl-edge is no substitute for a fuller under-standing of the mechanisms of giving.

When it comes to motivations for diaspora giving, the research record is even more limited. Motivations for diaspora giving to Asia clearly include the charitable and philanthropic impulse to do good in these societies, to give back some of what has been gained and earned abroad, and to bring back models for organization and administration from other countries. Some initial research in this area for Pakistan shows a range of motivations from the personal (i.e. recognition) to benefi ting local areas of origin, to the institutional to the political,26 and a few other papers and articles have sought, in the most prelimi-nary ways, to touch upon this question.27 But beyond that there has been very little study of diaspora motivations for giving back, mostly because the greater amount of research in this area has focused on the dynamics and mechanisms of fl ows rather than the motivations that animate the donors.

Should we do more in this area? If we begin with the premise that the range of motivations for philanthropic and charita-ble giving is broad and diverse, then it may be useful to devote time and resources to exploring motivation in the diaspora con-text if we believe that diasporic motivations are in some way diff erent, or more limited, or otherwise more focused, than in broader philanthropy and charity. Otherwise it may be that research and advocacy time and resources are best spent in other tasks, such as analyzing impact, or seeking to preserve an open space for diaspora giving to pro-mote social justice.

Most of the fi rst decade of research on diaspora giving to Asia focused on the structure and channels for giving, as I have indicated above. With several exceptions, very little research has focused thus far beyond structure and channels to impact and benefi ciaries (among the exceptions, see several of the essays in Merz et al 2007, as well as Kapur 2004, 2007, Johnson 2007, and several other works). Th e next major area for deepening and detailing research on migrant giving in Asia are precisely the issues of social, economic and philanthropic impact and on benefi ciaries. Th e initial work on these issues – sometimes based in knowledgeable conjecture rather than “data” – serves as a useful bridge to further work on impact and benefi ciaries.

Analysis and Characteristics of the Formation of Diaspora Communities in Countries of Immigration and Th eir Role in Diaspora Philanthropy

In the characteristics and analysis of the formation of diaspora communities in coun-



tries of immigration and their role in diaspora philanthropy, we have a relatively rich under-standing of the formation and philanthropic role of diasporic Indian, Filipino, and Chinese communities in the United States, and an ini-tial understanding of Pakistani and Vietnamese communities in the U.S. Th e demographics and relative wealth of Indian, Filipino and Chinese communities in the United States, and to some degree the demographics and relative wealth of Pakistani and Vietnamese communities in the United States, clearly sup-port extensive diaspora giving, both reported and unreported. Beyond those countries, there has been virtually no research done on the characteristics of other diaspora communities in the United States and their role in diaspora giving, including diasporas from such sites as Burma, Cambodia, Japan, Korea (both South and North), Laos, Malaysia, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Th ailand and other states.

When we move beyond the United States, even the work on the characteristics and phil-anthropic role of Chinese and Indian diaspora communities in such countries as Australia, Canada, the U.K., other countries of Europe, the Gulf, and other regions remains woefully unstudied. Th e sole exception here is work on Filipino diaspora giving. Filipino and other researchers have been considerably more active in seeking to understand the charac-teristics and philanthropic role of Filipino diaspora communities far beyond the United States, including Australia, Canada,28 New Zealand,29 and other countries. Beyond the Philippines, India, and China, there is very little work on the philanthropic role of other Asian diasporas beyond the United States context. Getting beyond the U.S. context to understand the characteristics and philan-

thropic role of a range of Asian diasporas that live in other countries is a signifi cant strategic task for the next state of research in diaspora philanthropy.

If Available, Data from Migrant Receiving Countries of US, UK and Canada Th at Have Monitored Migrant Giving Th rough Tax Deductions Which May Provide an Outlook of Giving by Diaspora Communities

Th e research currently available has not uncovered and does not address data obtained from tax authorities or through other means on tax deductions for diaspora or migrant giving. Additional research for this overview paper has also not uncovered such data for the United States, United Kingdom, and Canada. Th e availability of tax data on diaspora giving is identifi ed in Section 4 as a potential task for further research.

2. Diaspora Philanthropy, Social Investing, Strategic Philanthropy: What Does the Research Show, and What More Needs to Be Done?

Th is section of the overview paper deals with the four sub-questions asked in the Terms of Reference provided by APPC. Th ey are as follows:

• Discuss if and how diaspora philanthropy has evolved in countries of Asia from an ad hoc practice into a more strategic practice of philanthropy, including factors that infl uence remittance-sending, chari-table giving and social investing, and if there is a recognizable shift from one to the other. If so, discuss the factors that infl uence such shifts.

Mark Sidel 9

OVERVIEW

Th ere is little signifi cant evidence in the research literature on diaspora philanthropy to Asia thus far to indicate that diaspora philanthropy in Asia has evolved from an “ad hoc practice into a more strategic prac-tice of philanthropy.” Instead, ad hoc prac-tices by individuals, families and ethnic, religious, professional, locational and other communities are generally the order of the day in diaspora giving back to Asia. Some diaspora giving may be highly organized, especially that undertaken by families and by communities in the diaspora. But it has not, for the most part, evolved into a more strategic practice of philanthropy.

At the same time, we should recognize that some strategic questions are being taken up by some diaspora groups in their giving. Th e impact of diaspora giv-ing is a recent and ever stronger concern among donors. So too is the tendency of diaspora giving to substitute for govern-ment expenditures, particularly on health, education and other social services, and for governments to reduce their expenditures in reliance on diaspora giving. And there is increasing diaspora concern, especially in such countries as India and the Philippines for issues of social justice in overseas giving. So we should recognize that strategic issues are gradually coming to occupy some of the concerns of some diaspora givers, even if a more strategic practice of philanthropy does not yet appear to be evolving across the board. • Are remittances social investing? Social

philanthropy? Is diaspora giving an agent of social change and development in communities of origin? How has strate-gic philanthropy by migrants become an

emerging driver of development in the communities of origin?

• Discuss the research conducted thus far and still needed on the potential and challenges of diaspora philanthropy as a driver of sustainable social development and change in communities of origin.Recent studies of diaspora giving in Asia

have begun to address, in the larger sense or in the context of individual communities, the impact of diaspora philanthropy on the communities it serves and on social justice and social change.30 But these inquiries are at their very earliest stages and, as research moves toward the sub-national and com-munity level, and focuses upon particular ethnic, religious, source and other commu-nities, it may become possible to explore the actual impact and the social justice implications of diaspora giving in consid-erably more detail. Left almost entirely uncovered, even in the research and discus-sions of the impact and social justice impli-cations of diaspora giving, are questions of accountability and legitimacy in diaspora philanthropy. Problems of accountability have begun to be addressed in the context of giving for religious causes in India,31 but the accountability of émigré donors must be addressed far more widely in research on this area.

In general terms, the vast majority of remittances to Asia cannot be considered social investing or social philanthropy. But a subset of remittances – extremely hard to quantify – is indeed for diaspora giving.32 And that giving is starting to shows signs of concern for social change and equitable development in communities of origin. Philanthropy by migrants has become an



emerging driver of development in some communities of origin – especially in some areas of India, southern China, the Philip-pines, and certain areas of Bangladesh, for example – but in many cases it is not clear that these drivers of development are in fact strategic, or focused on social change or equitable development. At root, however, our research on diaspora philanthropy, the research we support, and the research we use must be encouraged to move from mapping structures and channels to ana-lyzing impact, social change, social justice, accountability and legitimacy. Th at shift in focus in the goals of research on diaspora giving should be the key priority in the next stage of work in this fi eld. • Discuss research available on innovative

mechanisms and institutions that have facilitated the transfer of contributions to the diaspora communities of origin and that have paved the way for strategic phi-lanthropy.Innovative mechanism and institutions

that have facilitated the transfer of contri-butions to diasporic communities of origin and may be beginning to pave the way for strategic philanthropy include the giving by professional groups (such as doctors) in the Indian community; giving by neighbor-hood groups back to the Philippines; and the work of philanthropic intermediaries for diaspora giving in the United States and other countries (such as the American India Foundation, Give2Asia, and many others). Th ese are among the innovative mechanisms and institutions, but it is going too far to say that any of these have successfully helped the diaspora community make the full transition to “strategic philanthropy.” Instead, perhaps

the most we can say is that these innovative mechanisms and institutions are helping to make diaspora giving more intentioned and more planned, more focused on impact, and sometimes more focused on social change and equitable development. If that is what is meant by “strategic philanthropy,” then perhaps we are moving in that direction.

Th e Limitations of the First Decade of Research on Diaspora Philanthropy to Asia – and an Agenda for Research

Th e limitations and gaps in research on diaspora giving are also signifi cant, and those are also discussed in more detail below in response to the Terms of Refer-ence. In summary, those limitations and gaps include: • Th e geographic imbalance of research

– work on diaspora giving has been highly unbalanced, with heavy cover-age of India, some coverage of China, the Philippines, Pakistan, and Vietnam, and almost no research on any other parts of Asia.33

• Imbalance in research on source coun-tries for diaspora giving – research has focused almost entirely on the United States as a source country for diaspora giving, despite clear evidence that the U.S. is far from the only source of that philanthropy.

• A lack of studies that focus in depth on cases involving localities and organiza-tions.

• Overly anecdotal and insuffi ciently data-based methodology for under-standing the scope and impact of diaspora philanthropy on recipient countries and communities.

Mark Sidel 11

OVERVIEW

• Insuffi cient attention to and research on the role of diaspora giving in and responding to natural disasters and domestic confl icts.

• Th e pace and sophistication of research on diaspora giving to Asia has fallen well behind the advances made in the practice of diaspora philanthropy, par-ticularly through new generation of diasporic intermediaries to Asia – and the need to link practice and research.

• Related to that, insuffi cient understand-ing of the roles of diaspora philanthropy intermediaries and the methods of facilitation and control of diaspora giv-ing used by national and sub-national governments of receiving states.

• Insuffi cient understanding of the impact of diaspora giving on social development, poverty, social justice, accountability, and legitimacy in receiv-ing states.

• Th e relative isolation of most early and current research on diaspora philan-thropy from related fi elds of research – such as diaspora and migrant studies; studies of the motivation of philanthro-pists, both diasporic and non-diaspora; and the rapidly growing fi eld of citizen-ship studies.

Detailed Discussion of the Limitations and Gaps in Research on Diaspora Philanthropy to Asia, and Needs for the Future

Redressing the Geographic Imbalance in Research

Th e fi rst ten years of research on diaspora giving back to Asia focused

almost entirely on India, the Philippines, and to some degree China. In recent years we have begun to see a diversifi cation of focus beyond India, the Philippines, and China, as well as more detailed attempts to understand the implications and results of diaspora giving for populations at home as well as for social justice and social equity. Beginning in about 2003 and 2004, a sec-ond stage of research built upon earlier sur-veys and sought to deepen the analysis for countries already studied (primarily India and the Philippines), as well as diversify research into new countries. In that stage studies began to appear on Pakistan,34 Viet-nam,35 Taiwan,36 and other Asian states and territories with substantial and generous diasporas.

Th e extensive initial work available for India, the Philippines and China is unmatched by virtually any work on diaspora contributions to such countries as Bangladesh, Indonesia, Singapore, Malay-sia, Th ailand, Japan, Korea, and Hong Kong, and by only very limited work on Vietnam and Taiwan. A truer picture of the extent and impact of diaspora philanthropy in Asia must take these important jurisdic-tions into account through a rapid diversifi -cation of countries researched and studied, and such new work should be made widely available, including via the Internet.

Redressing the Imbalance in Research on Sources of Diaspora Philanthropy

Much of the initial research on diaspora philanthropy in Asia has focused on giving from the United States – a function of the location of research sponsors and research conferences, the activism and relative wealth



of India, Filipino, Chinese and other com-munities based in the United States, the prominent leadership role played by the wealthy in these communities in the United States, and the faster building of intermediary institutions to serve and facilitate diaspora giving (both within ethnic communities and in the broader philanthropic arena) in the United States than in other countries.

Diaspora giving may have progressed somewhat faster, and perhaps larger, in the United States than elsewhere, but that is no excuse for the almost complete absence of research and data on diaspora giving back to Asia from most other parts of the world. Th ere is extensive giving from Bangladeshi immigrants in the United Kingdom back to Sylhet, where many of them come from, from Vietnamese émigrés in Germany and Russia, from the Chinese diaspora in Europe, and many others. But we have virtually no research on the substantial contributions of these communities. And the diasporic con-tributions of Asian populations in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and other locations have been all but ignored – along with the giving within Asia by migrants in other Asian countries, and by workers in the Gulf and other areas.

Th e U.S.-based source of much of the initial diaspora philanthropy research must be diversifi ed and redressed, to provide a more accurate picture of the scope and diversity of diaspora support for home-lands. Th is process is beginning and must be accelerated. An early example is Alay-on’s preliminary study of giving back to the Philippines by Filipino associations in Canada,37 and Silva’s thesis on diaspora giv-ing to the Philippines by the New Zealand

émigré community.38 Nick Young and Qian Xiaofeng’s recent work is a useful example of the directions in which research must go: Nick Young and Qian Xiaofeng’s paper seeks to redress the U.S. focus and gener-ality of earlier work on overseas Chinese giving by focusing on philanthropy from the overseas Chinese in Malaysia back to China.39

Improving the Insuffi ciency of Case Studies of Localities and Specifi c Sectors of Giving

Virtually all of the fi rst decade of diaspora philanthropy research in Asia focused on the country level. Th e result was general and often anecdotal research, undiff erentiated as to diff erences between locations within coun-tries. Most of the early research on India, the Philippines, and China suff ered from this generality – an approach to national giving that was inevitable given the data available (often anecdotal accounts of giving and impact), and continues in newer research on such countries as Vietnam.40 But in the past several years some researchers have begun to focus more fi nely at subnational levels, such as states and provinces. Th is work includes, for example, Sadananda Sahoo’s initial work on diaspora giving in the health care indus-try to Hyderabad, India,41 and Jeremaiah Opiniano’s work on giving to Pororrubio in the Philippines.42

Th e fi rst stage of research on diaspora philanthropy to Asia was unable to have a sectoral or organizational focus – there was insuffi cient data, or opportunity for detailed research, on diaspora giving back for reli-gion, the health sector, specifi c ethnic and religious groups, or other sectors beyond

Mark Sidel 13

OVERVIEW

fairly general information at the national level. But again this is changing, as research-ers begin the process of gathering data on diaspora giving for religion and for specifi c religious organizations in India,43 for the health care sector in India,44 on the Sikh community in India,45 and even, if a very preliminary way, on social justice organiza-tions in China.46

Limitations in MethodologyClosely related to the imbalances in the

countries studied, the country sources of diaspora giving researched, and few studies of giving to specifi c organizations, locali-ties, and sectors are limitations in research methodology on diaspora philanthropy. Put simply, diaspora giving is diffi cult to defi ne, and almost impossible to measure. Research conducted in the fi rst decade tended to rely on anecdotal accounts of giving, self-reported contributions, donors’ optimistic accounts of impact, episodic media cover-age, government and institutional reports, and similar fragmentary data.

Th e fi rst studies of diaspora philan-thropy in Asia surveyed what was clearly a real and growing phenomenon, but with-out the tools available to measure it, or its implications, with any signifi cant accuracy – though, as I point out below, methodolo-gies have already begun to improve.47 In the early years of research on diaspora giving in Asia, virtually the only methodology pos-sible was anecdotal discussion of gifts and their givers, primarily to India and China and later the Philippines, along with the identifi cation of some key economic, eth-nic, religious and other groups of donors in the diaspora community, and some initial analysis or conjecture on implications. But

this was clearly a nascent fi eld. Virtually all early work on diaspora philanthropy in Asia in the fi rst stage of this research, from about 1997 to about 2003, and most work since – whether conducted from the per-spective of remittance research, or through a philanthropy lens, or as a new way of looking at diasporas – refl ects this sort of anecdotal methodology. I do not criticize this, but merely point it out.48

In recent years researchers are attempt-ing to utilize remittance data to ascertain and analyze diaspora giving, part of a re-conception of the development role of remittances.49 But disaggregating giving for public and charitable purposes from the other purposes of remittances is excep-tionally diffi cult given the data currently available. Th at problem is not likely to be suffi ciently redressed until the collectors of remittance data – governments and multi-lateral development organizations such as the World Bank – begin supporting large scale studies of the purposes of remittance fl ows that specifi cally include understand-ing the philanthropic and public goals of at least some remittances.

Another methodology has focused not on fi nancial contributions through various channels of philanthropy or remittances, but on transfer of knowledge by diasporic communities home. Th e recent work coor-dinated by Westcott and Brinkerhoff typi-fi es this approach.50

Insuffi cient Research on Diaspora Giving in Natural Disasters and Domestic Confl ict Situations

Th ere has been very little research on the role of diaspora giving in recovery and re-development after signifi cant natural disas-



ters, and the role of diaspora philanthropy in confl ict situations. Th e role of philanthropy, including diaspora giving, after the Asian tsunami of 2004 was discussed in a 2005 APPC report,51 and informs recent work on philanthropy and nonprofi t sector activity in Sri Lanka.52 At a workshop of the APPC-convened Philanthropy and Law in South Asia research group in August 2007, for example, the twin infl uences of the tsunami and insurgency played a substantial role in the discussions of Sri Lanka.53 But much more is needed in this important area.

Th e role of philanthropy in confl ict situations in Asia, and the related issues of diaspora giving to insurgents have received only little research attention so far. Th ere has been some very preliminary work on the complex nonprofi t and philanthropic scene in confl ict-ridden Sri Lanka, including diaspora giving to insurgents there.54 But little work in Asia approaches the detail and depth of the debate over diaspora support for groups in the Middle East that overlaps charitable relief, political contributions, and the use of donated funds for military purposes.55 Th e fast-moving and dangerous situations in both Sri Lanka and Nepal, for example, have not yet allowed substantial analytical research on the role of diasporas in insurgent territory and with insurgent groups, particularly work that relies on gathering data in the fi eld.

Th e Pace and Sophistication of the Practice of Diaspora Philanthropy to Asia is Ahead of Research – and the Need for Better Understanding of Philanthropic Intermediaries

A wide and diverse array of mechanisms has developed for channeling and linking

diaspora philanthropy back to Asia. Most of these mechanisms have developed in the United States, and relatively few have devel-oped in other parts of the world – a key lim-itation and gap in diaspora giving practice since the mid-1990s. Despite that glaring gap, it is clear that the pace and sophistica-tion of diaspora philanthropy practice has outstripped research into these issues. Th at is indicated by the diversity of mechanisms: recipient country-based foundations and institutions (such as the Ayala Foundation in the Philippines), diaspora giving inter-mediary organizations in the United States (such as Give2Asia), and to a considerably less degree in other countries; web portals and online channels; the use of community foundations and commercial charitable giv-ing funds, and other mechanisms.

Research needs to keep up with prac-tice in this area – not only tapping into the extensive knowledge base on diaspora philanthropy that the practical intermedi-aries have amassed, but reassessing the role of the intermediaries themselves. Whether diaspora giving intermediaries are engaging in social philanthropy, promoting social change and development in communities of origin, and whether they are indeed assist-ing migrant philanthropy to emerge as a driver of development in the communities of origin are questions raised by the terms of reference but not in any signifi cant way answered by the literature available in the fi rst decade of research on diaspora giving to Asia.

Reassessing and deepening understand-ing of the role of diaspora giving philan-thropies is complicated by the fact that so much of the research in this area is in fact

Mark Sidel 15

OVERVIEW

facilitated or even sponsored by the inter-mediaries themselves. Th is is particularly the case in such countries as India and the Philippines, where intermediary institu-tions have developed quickly and have linked eff ectively to international research-ers. Negotiating these already close rela-tionships in the interest of strong research will be a signifi cant task.

Th e Need for Better Understanding of the Roles of Receiving States

Th e fi rst decade of research on diaspora giving to Asia focuses on émigré donors, the intermediary institutions that have developed to channel their gifts back to Asia, and, to a very preliminary degree, recipients – both organizations and indi-viduals – in home countries. A key gap in our understanding of this chain of diaspora giving has been an absence of a keen sense for the policies and regulatory attitudes of receiving states toward migrant philan-thropy. Receiving state policies are dis-cussed in a fragmented way in a number of chapters and articles, with a focus either on specifi c instances of national facilitation of diaspora giving (such as the conference of the Indian diaspora in India in 2000, dis-cussed in several chapters of Geithner et al 2004), or channeling, limiting, restricting, and controlling diaspora gifts (discussed in a number of country contexts, perhaps most frequently for India and the Philip-pines, but without signifi cant depth). Little diaspora giving research has focused directly on the role of receiving states.56

Receiving state policies can, of course, be political, legal, and fi nancial in nature – and perhaps incorporate other types

of facilitation and control as well. I deal with this understudied area in Section 3, because the terms of reference seek separate information about the “enabling environ-ment” for diaspora gifts in receiving states, but take this opportunity to emphasize that the research agenda for diaspora giving must re-focus on the views and policies of receiving states.

Diaspora Philanthropy, Development, Poverty Relief, Social Justice, Accountability, Legitimacy: Some of the Larger Questions in Future Research

Recent studies of diaspora giving in Asia have begun to address, in the larger sense or in the context of individual communities, the impact of diaspora philanthropy on the communities it serves and on social justice and social change (i.e., Geithner et al 2004, Merz et al 2007). But these inquiries are at their very earliest stages and, as research moves toward the sub-national and commu-nity level, and focuses upon particular ethnic, religious, source and other communities, it may become possible to explore the actual impact and the social justice implications of diaspora giving in considerably more detail. Left almost entirely uncovered, even in the research and discussions of the impact and social justice implications of diaspora giving, are questions of accountability and legiti-macy in diaspora philanthropy. Problems of accountability have begun to be addressed in the context of giving for religious causes in India,57 but the accountability of émigré donors must be addressed far more widely in research on this area.

At root, however, our research on diaspora philanthropy, the research we



support, and the research we use must be encouraged to move from mapping struc-tures and channels to analyzing impact, social change, social justice, accountability and legitimacy. Th at shift in focus in the goals of research on diaspora giving should be the key priority in the next stage of work in this fi eld. And that research may be inseparable from a more detailed look at the special roles of overseas elites in diaspora giving to such countries as India, China, and the Philippines. In India, for example, overseas wealthy donors have come to dominate the public aspects of the diaspora giving community and the atten-tions of Indian policymakers and local offi cials as they seek to lead and dominate giving campaigns. Th e role of such overseas elites bears considerably more research, and more critical analysis.

Linking Research on Diaspora Philanthropy to Related Fields of Research: Diaspora and Migrant Studies, Philanthropic Motivation, and Citizenship Studies

Research on diaspora philanthropy, both in Asia and more broadly, has tended to be a fi eld enclosed in a bubble – largely cut off from other areas of inquiry that might well contribute to a broader under-standing of the diaspora giving phenom-enon. Researchers and scholars in other areas are also looking at diasporas and their giving, and our research needs to link to those eff orts rather than remaining apart from them. Four streams of research are of particular importance here:

• Th e burgeoning fi elds of diaspora and migrant studies, where the impact of

diasporas on social development in the original home country is of signifi cant interest.

• Th e equally burgeoning fi eld of citizen-ship studies, where commitments and donations home as an element of a re-assessment of modes and meanings of citizenship is increasingly important.

• Considerably stronger linkages to the growing corps of researchers focused on remittances and the social impact of remittances.

• Research focusing on philanthropic motivation, since those who study diaspora giving must begin to look at the motivations of émigré donors who give back home.In general terms, there is a need to link

diaspora philanthropy research to other changes in and research on state-diaspora relations – research on diaspora philan-thropy has been conducted in too much of a vacuum for too long.

3. Th e Enabling Environment

Th e following section seeks to address the key issues in the Terms of Reference exploring the enabling environment for diaspora philanthropy in countries around the Asia Pacifi c region. Th e Terms of Refer-ence request discussion of the following:

• Th e current state of research and prac-tice on how government involvement has encouraged or discouraged diaspora philanthropy or has remained neutral. Illustrate involvement through exam-ples such as the formation of agencies or departments, projects and initia-tives.

Mark Sidel 17

OVERVIEW

• How the legal and fi scal framework facilitates or hinders diaspora philan-thropy.

• Th e state of research on support of dif-ferent sectors for strategic philanthropy by migrants, particularly not for profi t and business sectors.

• Gap areas in the enabling environment for diaspora philanthropy as a driver of sustainable social change in communi-ties of origin and provide recommen-dations on how to address these areas to further encourage social investing by migrants.

Given the importance of the role of receiving states in diaspora philanthropy, and the enabling or restrictive environ-ment that receiving states mandate, it is surprising and unfortunate how little detailed research has been conducted on the role of the receiving states and the policy and legal environment that they put into place. States can be facilitative, controlling, restrictive, or channeling in their policies toward diaspora giving, and in every state in Asia in which there is signifi cant diaspora giving the state plays one or more of those roles, at least epi-sodically and in certain areas of policy and law. But in the long international chain of diaspora giving – from émigré donors through institutional or organizational or fi nancial intermediaries through home state governments, fi nancial institutions to schools, clinics and other recipients of diaspora aid – perhaps the most under-studied institutional elements are receiving states and their policy and legal responses to diaspora giving.

Th at said, some work on the role of receiving states and enabling (or restrictive, controlling, or channeling) environment for diaspora giving has been done (Sidel 2007). In India and the Philippines, the state’s role in diaspora giving processes cannot be ignored and researchers have at least out-lined state responses to diaspora giving. In each of these countries, the authorities have established government bodies and policies to facilitate and channel diaspora giving. But beyond those two countries, research coverage of national policies toward the receipt and utilization of diaspora giving is woefully lacking.

In specifi c terms, states encourage, enable, restrict, control or channel diaspora giving through a number of mechanisms. Already existing legal and policy chan-nels play this role, such as tax authorities in India, the Philippines and China; the Foreign Contribution Registration Act (FCRA) authorities in India and other over-seers of foreign donations in other parts of the region; and existing police, security and civil aff airs authorities. But states have also set up new bodies to encourage, enable, restrict, control diaspora giving, including commissions dealing with the diaspora, sub-national authorities dealing with diaspora social and fi nancial investments; and other new bodies.

Similarly legal and fi scal frameworks are diverse as well – and are variously intended, in diff erent countries and some-times in the same country, to encourage, enable, restrict, control or channel diaspora giving. Th e purposes or objects of diaspora philanthropy can be restricted or left uncontrolled; tax authorities can take small



pieces of diaspora giving for state purposes; administrative or security authorities can seek and use authority to license, investi-gate or otherwise involve themselves in diaspora giving and utilization. In many countries of the region we see a number of these methods at work, sometimes seem-ingly at cross purposes – some ostensibly to facilitate and encourage social develop-ment by the diaspora, and others to control or restrict diaspora giving.

Th e primary gaps in the enabling environment for diaspora philanthropy as a driver of sustainable social change in communities of origin largely rest in the mechanisms, structures, policies and rules that national and sub-national authorities have established to enable and yet control or channel diaspora giving. In most cases, even where the state is a facilitative actor, it seeks to facilitate either state-sponsored projects or causes, or it preferences tra-ditional social service, education, health and similar charitable works rather than activities that can be “driver[s] of sustain-able social change,” innovative commu-nity-based projects, advocacy work, public interest law, and other philanthropic pur-poses that may challenge the state.

In a number of countries, state ambiva-lence toward diaspora giving is the order of the day – support for diaspora giving in general terms, but seeking to channel and control it, for example. Governments around the region face signifi cant choices in strengthening the enabling environ-ment for diaspora giving: they can decide to lift and relax governmental channeling functions, leaving diaspora giving almost entirely to the market. Th ey can maintain

certain controls and channeling functions. Th ey can affi rmatively seek to strengthen the social change and equitable develop-ment aspects of diaspora giving, but privi-leging philanthropy for poorer areas, for social change, for equitable development, and other progressive causes. Th is author’s preference is clear – that state policy should seek to nudge diaspora giving toward social change, equitable development and serving the poor through additional tax privileges, government matching funds, and other means.

4. Further Research on Diaspora Phi- lanthropy in the Asia Pacifi c Region

Th is concluding section seeks to address two key issues, as identifi ed in the terms of reference provided by APPC: • Given the challenges to diaspora phi-

lanthropy, provide leads for regional and national research and action for the promotion of social investing by migrants

• Recommend strategies to signifi cant institutional and societal actors to encourage transformative philanthropy by migrants. Th ese actors include gov-ernment, business, fi nancial services and non-profi t sectors, associations of migrant communities and philan-thropy support organizations.Th e issues identifi ed in this overview paper

lead rather directly to a series of recommenda-tions for research on diaspora philanthropy in the Asia Pacifi c region. Th ese are preliminary and subject to change and addition based on comments by readers, at the writers’ work-shop, and at the APPC conference in 2008. My recommendations are as follows:

Mark Sidel 19

OVERVIEW

• We must redress the enormous geo-graphic imbalance of research of diaspora philanthropy in Asia. As the attached bibliography shows, there has been extensive and excellent work on India, the Philippines, and to some degree China – though of course with limitations as further discussed below. Some initial work has been done on Pakistan and Vietnam. Virtually no research has yet been conducted on other countries and sub-regions of Asia, and we must focus on mapping and analyzing the situation in those countries. Th e APPC paper-writing and conference process will contribute to that, for example with respect to Indo-nesia, Vietnam, and other countries, but much more needs to be done.

• We must redress the imbalance in research on source countries for diaspora giving – the almost complete focus of research on the United States as a source country for diaspora giving, despite clear evidence that the U.S. is far from the only source of that philan-thropy. In a few cases – isolated writing about India and the Philippines – a few researchers have discussed aspects of diaspora giving from Canada or New Zealand. But much, much more needs to be done on diaspora philan-thropy back to Asia from Europe, Latin America, the Middle East and the Gulf, other parts of Asia, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, and other countries and regions.

• We must encourage and accelerate research in depth on case studies,

research on diaspora philanthropy that focuses on giving to particular com-munities, organizations, and sectors and that makes the understanding of these processes far more specifi c and detailed.

• We must develop a wider range of methodologies for studying the struc-tures, channels, recipients, and impact of diaspora giving, including mecha-nisms that are more data-driven as well as those that focus on cases and deep understanding of specifi c localities and organizations. In doing so we should focus on strengthening methodologies that particularly help in understanding the scope and impact of diaspora phi-lanthropy on recipient countries and communities.

• We should encourage and support research on the role of diasporas in responding to natural disasters and signifi cant domestic confl icts, and the role of diasporas in reconstructing institutions and social development in the wake of disasters and confl ict situ-ations.

• We must encourage research that links to the rapid pace and increasing sophis-tication of diaspora philanthropy practice in Asia, including the learning for action that has taken place through intermediary institutions in the Phil-ippines, India, the United States and other countries. Th e pace and sophisti-cation of research on diaspora giving to Asia has fallen well behind the advances made in the practice of diaspora phi-lanthropy, particularly through new



generation of diasporic intermediaries to Asia.

• We must encourage deeper under-standing of the role and impact of diaspora philanthropy intermediaries.

• We must encourage deeper under-standing of the roles of receiving states in the diaspora philanthropy process and on the enabling environment for diaspora giving, including legal con-straints and facilitation, state power toward diasporas and other aspects of the enabling environment.

• We must deepen understanding of the impact of diaspora giving on social development, poverty, social justice, accountability, and legitimacy.

• We must encourage research and researchers on diaspora giving to link to important related fi elds of research and to step outside the “bubble” of research in this fi eld – to link to the exciting work underway in diaspora and migrant studies; citizenship stud-ies; remittance research and impact on social development; and studies of the motivation of philanthropy and phi-lanthropists.

Bibliography on Diaspora Philanthropy in Asia

Compiled by Mark Sidel

March 2008

Th is bibliography focuses entirely on diaspora philanthropy to Asia, rather than more general work on diaspora, interna-tional or global philanthropy unrelated to

Asia. Each citation here has a specifi c tie to diaspora philanthropy to Asia, either in the regional context or analyzing a par-ticular country. Within categories citations are by date. Th is bibliography does not yet include the papers presented at the APPC conference on diaspora philanthropy to be held in Hanoi in May 2008; those refer-ences will be added after the conference to an updated bibliography.

Th is bibliography is based on an exten-sive review of sources on diaspora philan-thropy to Asia, including bibliographies in other books and articles such as the excel-lent compilation by Trina Vithayathil, An Annotated Bibliography of the Chinese and Indian Diasporas, in Geithner, Johnson, and Chen, Diaspora Philanthropy and Equitable Development in China and India (Global Equity Initiative, Harvard Uni-versity, 2004), references in the chapters of that volume, references in the chapters of Diaspora and Development (edited by Merz, Chen, and Geithner, Global Equity Initiative, Harvard University, 2007), and numerous other sources.

Research on Diaspora Philanthropy with Asia Content or Focus

Mark Sidel, Giving Home: Diaspora Giving from the United States as a Funding Source for Indigenous Philanthropic and Nonprofi t Institutions (Report prepared for the Ford Foundation world wide philanthropy meet-ing, London, 1997)

Th omas Silk (ed.), Philanthropy and Law in Asia: A Comparative Study of the Non-profi t Legal Systems in Ten East Asian Societies (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Pub-lishers, 1999)

Mark Sidel 21

OVERVIEW

Esther Lethlean, Diaspora: Th e New Philan-thropy? (New York: CUNY Center for the Study of Philanthropy, 2001)

Pnina Werbner, Th e Place Which is Diaspora: Citizenship, Religion, and Gender in the Making of Chaordic Transformation, Jour-nal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 28: 1, pp. 119-133 (January 2002)]

Hein de Haas, Engaging Diasporas: How Governments and Development Agen-cies Can Support Diaspora Involvement in the Development of Origin Countries (Oxford: International Migration Insti-tute, James Martin 21st Century School, University of Oxford, 2003)

Graeme Hugo, Migration and Development: A Perspective from Asia (Vienna: Interna-tional Organization for Migration, 2003).

Promoting Diaspora Philanthropy: Lessons Being Learned, APPC Post (Special Issue), 2004 [http://www.asianphilanthropy.org/pdfs/post/appcpostissue18.pdf ]

Peter F. Geithner, Paula D. Johnson, and Lincoln C. Chen, Diaspora Philanthropy and Equitable Development in China and India (Cambridge: Global Equity Initia-tive, Harvard University, 2004)

Overview, in Geithner, Johnson, and Chen, Diaspora Philanthropy and Equitable Development in China and India (Cam-bridge: Global Equity Initiative, Harvard University, 2004), pp. xiii-xxii

Diaspora Philanthropy Workshop: Conference Report, in Geithner, Johnson, and Chen, Diaspora Philanthropy and Equitable Development in China and India (Cam-bridge: Global Equity Initiative, Harvard University, 2004), pp. 325-385

Andrew Ho, Asian-American Philanthropy: Expanding Knowledge, Increasing Pos-

sibilities (Center for Public & Nonprofi t Leadership Working Paper 4, Georgetown University, 2004) [http://cpnl.georgetown.edu/doc_pool/WP04Ho.pdf ]

Devesh Kapur, Remittances: Th e New Develop-ment Mantra? United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, G-24 Dis-cussion Paper Series, No. 29, April 2004 [http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/gdsm-dpbg2420045_en.pdf ]

Katherine Newland, Beyond Remittances: Th e Role of Diaspora in Poverty Reduction in their Countries of Origin (Washington DC: Migration Policy Institute, Department of International Development, 2004)

Kathleen Nowland with Erin Patrick, Beyond Remittances: Th e Role of Diaspora in Poverty Reduction in their Countries of Origin (Scop-ing Study by the Migration Policy Insti-tute for the Department of International Development, July 2004) [http://www.migrationpolicy.org/pubs/Beyond_Remit-tances_0704.pdf ]

Asia Pacifi c Philanthropy Consortium (APPC), Philanthropy and Disaster: Tsunami and After (APPC, 2005) [http://www.asian-philanthropy.org]

Paula Johnson, Diaspora Philanthropy: Existing Models, Emerging Applications, (Interna-tional Network for Strategic Philanthropy (INSP), 2005) [www.insp.efc.be and www.tpi.org], digested at Diaspora Philanthropy: Existing Models, Emerging Applications, Alliance, November 2005 [http://www.efc.be/ftp/public/EitW/alliance/ INSPdiaspo-raDec05.pdf ]

Paula Johnson, Andrew Kingman, and Stephen Johnson, Promoting Philanthropy: Global Challenges and Approaches (Boston: Th e Philanthropic Initiative, 2005) [http://www.tpi.org/tpi_services/strengthening_global_philanthropy.aspx]



Samuel M. Maimbo and Dilip Ratha (eds.), Remittances: Development Impact and Future Prospects (Washington: World Bank, 2005)

John Paul, What Works: Th amel.Com: Diaspora-Enabled Development (Wash-ington: World Resources Institute, 2005)

Jayaram K. Manivannan, Virtual Leadership: Th e Next Phase of Diaspora Philanthropy (New York: CUNY Center for the Study of Philanthropy, 2006)

Clay G. Westcott and Jennifer Brinkerhoff (eds.), Converting Migration Drains into Gains: Harnessing the Resources of Over-seas Professionals (Manila: Asian Develop-ment Bank, 2006, focusing on the PRC, the Philippines, and Afghanistan) [http://www.adb.org/ Documents/Books/Con-verting-Migration-Drains-Gains/default.asp]

Clay G. Wescott, Harnessing Knowledge Exchange Among Overseas Professionals, International Public Management Review 2006, 7:1, pp. 30-69 (focusing on PRC, Philippines, and Afghanistan) [http://www.unisg.ch/org/idt/ipmr.nsf/]

Barbara J. Merz, Lincoln C. Chen, and Peter F. Geithner, Overview: Diasporas and Devel-opment, in Merz, Chen, and Geithner, Diasporas and Development (Cambridge: Global Equity Initiative, Harvard Univer-sity, 2007), pp. 1-23.

Mark Sidel, Focusing on the State: Government Responses to Diaspora Giving and Impli-cations for Equity, in Merz, Chen, and Geithner, Diasporas and Development (Cambridge: Global Equity Initiative, Harvard University, 2007), pp. 25-54 (examples from Asia).

Devesh Kapur, Th e Janus Face of Diasporas, in Merz, Chen, and Geithner, Diasporas and Development (Cambridge: Global Equity

Initiative, Harvard University, 2007), pp. 89-118.

Adil Najam, Diaspora Philanthropy to Asia, in Merz, Chen, and Geithner, Diasporas and Development (Cambridge: Global Equity Initiative, Harvard University, 2007), pp. 119-150.

Paula D. Johnson, Diaspora Philanthropy: Infl uences, Initiatives, and Issues (Cam-bridge: Th e Philanthropic Initiative, 2007) [http://www.tpi.org/tpi_services/ strength-ening_global_philanthropy.aspx]

Christopher Helland, Diaspora on the Electronic Frontier: Developing Virtual Connections with Sacred Homelands, 2007 Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 12(3), article 10 [http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol12/issue3/helland.html]

Afghanistan

Clay G. Westcott and Jennifer Brinkerhoff (eds.), Converting Migration Drains into Gains: Harnessing the Resources of Over-seas Professionals (Asian Development Bank, 2006, focusing on the PRC, the Philippines, and Afghanistan) [http://www.adb.org/ Documents/Books/Converting-Migration-Drains-Gains/default.asp]


Bangladesh

Sumaiya Khair and Saira Khan, Bangladesh, in Philanthropy and Law in South Asia (Manila: Asia Pacifi c Philanthropy Con-sortium, 2004, Sidel and Zaman eds.)

Philanthropy and Law in South Asia: Recent Developments in Bangladesh, India, Nepal,

Mark Sidel 23

OVERVIEW

Pakistan and Sri Lanka (PALISA), Report from the New Delhi workshop, Asia Pacifi c Philanthropy Consortium, 2007 [available at www.asianphilanthropy.org, www.istr.org, and other sites]

China

Renqiu Yu, Chinese American Contributions to the Educational Development of Toisan 1910-1949, Amerasia Journal 10.1 (1983): 47-72

Him Mark Lai, From Overseas Chinese to Chi-nese American: History of Development of Chinese American Society during the Twen-tieth Century (1992, in Chinese)

J.F. Handlin Smith, Chinese Philanthropy as Seen Th rough a Case of Famine Relief in the 1640s, in Ilchman, Katz, and Queen, Philanthropy in the World’s Traditions (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1998)

Yong Chen, Chinese San Francisco: A Trans-Pacifi c Community, 1850-1943 (Stanford University Press, 2000)

Madeline Hsu, Dreaming of Gold, Dream of Home: Transnationalism and Migration Between the United States and South China, 1882-1942 (Stanford University Press, 2000)

John Deeney, A Neglected Minority in a Neglected Field: Th e Emerging Role of Chinese Ameri-can Philanthropy in US-China Relations, in Peter Koehn and Xiao-huang Yin (eds.), Th e Expanding Role of Chinese-Ameri-cans in US-China Relations: Transnational Networks and Trans-Pacifi c Interactions (Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, 2002)

Peter Koehn and Xiao-huang Yin (eds.), Th e Expanding Role of Chinese-Americans in US-China Relations: Transnational Networks and Trans-Pacifi c Interactions (Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, 2002)

Norton Wheeler, A Civic Trend Within Eth-nic Transnationalism? Some Insights from Classical Social Th eory and the Chinese American Experience, Global Networks 4, 4 (2004), 391–408 [http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1471-0374.2004.00100.x]

Xiao-huang Yin and Zhiyong Lan, Why Do Th ey Give? Chinese American Transnational Philanthropy since the 1970s, in Geithner, Johnson, and Chen, Diaspora Philanthropy and Equitable Development in China and India (Global Equity Initiative, Harvard University, 2004), pp. 79-127

Nick Young, Richesse Oblige, and So Does the State: Philanthropy and Equity in China, in Geithner, Johnson, and Chen, Diaspora Philanthropy and Equitable Develop-ment in China and India (Global Equity Initiative, Harvard University, 2004), pp. 29-77.

Nick Young and June Shih, Philanthropic Links between the Chinese Diaspora and the Peo-ple’s Republic of China, in Geithner, John-son, and Chen, Diaspora Philanthropy and Equitable Development in China and India (Global Equity Initiative, Harvard University, 2004), pp. 129-175

Edward T. Jackson, Gregory Chin and Yixin Huang, Financing Social-Justice Civil-Society Organizations in China: Strategies, Constraints and Possibilities in Rural Poverty Alleviation (Paper presented to the Inter-national Conference of the International Society for Th ird-Sector Research, Toronto, July 2004, revised February 2005) [http://www.istr.org/conferences/toronto/work-ingpapers/jackson.edward.pdf ]

Clay G. Westcott and Jennifer Brinkerhoff (eds.), Converting Migration Drains into Gains: Harnessing the Resources of Over-seas Professionals (Asian Development Bank, 2006, focusing on the PRC, the



Philippines, and Afghanistan) [http://www.adb.org/ Documents/Books/Converting-Migration-Drains-Gains/default.asp]


India

Arthur W. Helweg, Emigrant Remittances: Th eir Nature and Impact on a Punjabi Village, New Community, (1983) 10 (3), Pp. 435-43

Priya Viswanath, Rejuvenating the Spirit of India: Diaspora Philanthropy and Non-Resi-dent Indians in the US (New Delhi: Chari-ties Aid Foundation India, June 2000)

Shahnaz Taplin and Associates, Diaspora Phi-lanthropy: Silicon Valley Indian Americans Care, Commit, Contribute (2001)

Report of the High Level Committee on the Indian Diaspora, Chapter 39: Philan-thropy (2002) (http://indiandiaspora.nic.in/pressrelease.htm)

Sabrang Communications Private Limited (India), A Foreign Exchange of Hate: IDRF and the Foreign Funding of Hindutva (November 2002) [www.mnet.fr/aiindex]

Pushpa Sundar (ed.), For God’s Sake: Religious Charity and Social Development in India (New Delhi: Sampradaan Indian Centre for Philanthropy, 2002)

Pushpa Sundar, Responses of Faith to the Chal-lenges of Modernization: Religious Organi-zations and Social Development in India, International Society for Th ird Sector Research, Fifth International Conference, Cape Town, South Africa, July 2002

Sadananda Sahoo, Can India Catch Up with China: From a Diaspora Perspective (Center for the Study of the Indian Diaspora, Sep-tember 2002) [www.geocities.com/husoci-ology/china.htm]

Sadananda Sahoo, Indian Diaspora and Healthcare: A Case of Corporate Hospi-tals in Hyderabad (Center for the Study of the Indian Diaspora, University of Hyderabad, 2002) [www.geocities.com/husociology/health.htm] (revised version in R. Gopa Kumar, Indian Diaspora and Giving Patterns of Indian Americans in USA, 2003)

Priya Anand, Hindu Diaspora and Religious Philanthropy in the United States (CUNY Center for the Study of Philanthropy, 2003) [revised version at http://www.istr.org/conferences/toronto/workingpapers/anand.priya.pdf ]

Gopa Kumar (ed.), Indian Diaspora and Giv-ing Patterns of Indian Americans in the US (New Delhi: Charities Aid Foundation India, 2003)

Priya Viswanath, Diaspora Indians: On the Philanthropy Fast Track (Mumbai: Centre for Advancement of Philanthropy, 2003)

Priya Viswanath, Diaspora and the Emerging Challenge in India’s Social Development – Th e Role of Pravasi Bharatiyas (Address at the fi rst Pravasi Bhartiya Divas, New Delhi, January 2003) [http://www.cata-lystindia.net/Documents/ PravasiBhartiya-DivasTh emeAddress10Jan2003.doc

Upala Devi Banerjee, Engaging Diaspora Indian Women Entrepreneurs in Building Sustainable Mechanisms for Gender Issue Support in India: Challenges and Opportu-nities (CUNY Center for the Study of Phi-lanthropy, 2004)

Noshir Dadrawala and Sanjay Agarwal, India, in Philanthropy and Law in South Asia

Mark Sidel 25

OVERVIEW

(Manila: Asia Pacifi c Philanthropy Con-sortium, 2004, Sidel and Zaman eds.)

Devesh Kapur, Ajay S. Mehta, and R. Moon Dutt, Indian Diaspora Philanthropy, in Geithner, Johnson, and Chen, Diaspora Philanthropy and Equitable Development in China and India (Global Equity Initia-tive, Harvard University, 2004), pp. 177-214.

Melissa Kelly, Th e Guru Nanak Mission Medi-cal and Educational Trust: An Exploration of Diaspora-Homeland Linkages in a Vol-untary Organization (M.A. Th esis, Centre for East and South-East Asian Studies, Lund University, 2004) [http://theses.lub.lu.se/archive/2006/02/13/1139828913-2615-604/MelissaKelly.pdf

Anne Murphy, Mobilizing SEVA (‘Service’): Modes of Sikh Diasporic Action, in Knut A. Jacobsen and P. Pratap Kumar (eds.), South Asians in the Diaspora: Histories and Religious Traditions (Brill, 2004), pp. 337-372

Shyamala Shiveshwarkar, Mapping for Diaspora Investment in the Social Development Sec-tor in India (New Delhi: CAF India, 2004) [discussed at http://indianngos.com/nri/ diasporapublication.htm]

Mark Sidel, Diaspora Philanthropy to India: A Perspective from the United States, in Geithner, Johnson, and Chen, Diaspora Philanthropy and Equitable Development in China and India (Global Equity Initia-tive, Harvard University, 2004), pp. 215-258.

Shinder Th andi, Diasporas as Development Agents: Can Diaspora Philanthropy Aid the Rural Development Process in Punjab, India? (Paper presented to the International Con-ference on Indian Diaspora, University of Hyderabad, 2004)

Priya Viswanath and Noshir Dadrawala, Philanthropic Investment and Equitable Development: Th e Case of India, Geithner, Johnson, and Chen, Diaspora Philanthropy and Equitable Development in China and India (Global Equity Initiative, Harvard University, 2004), pp. 259-289.

Sanjay Chaturvedi, Diaspora in India’s Geo-political Visions: Linkages, Categories, and Contestations, Asian Aff airs: An American Review, Fall 2005 (32: 3), pp. 141-168

Sadananda Sahoo, Indian Diaspora and Nation Building: Philanthropic Engagement with the Country of Origin (2005) [http://www.geoci-ties.com/husociology/philanthropy7.htm]

Philanthropy and Law in South Asia: Recent Developments in Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka (PALISA), Report from the New Delhi workshop, Asia Pacifi c Philanthropy Consortium, 2007 [available at www.asianphilanthropy.org, www.istr.org, and other sites]

Van Dusenbery and Darshan S. Tatla, Sikh Diaspora Philanthropy in Punjab: Global Giving for Local Good (manuscript in preparation, forthcoming 2008)

John R. Hinnells and Alan Williams, Par-sis in India and the Diaspora (London: Routledge, 2007)

Nepal

Anil Kumar Sinha and Sapana Malla, Nepal, in Philanthropy and Law in South Asia (Manila: Asia Pacifi c Philanthropy Con-sortium, 2004, Sidel and Zaman eds.)




Pakistan

Pakistan Center for Philanthropy, Building Credibility for NGOs: Th e Enabling Envi-ronment Initiative Report, International Journal of Civil Society Law, January 2003

Zafar Ismail and Qadeer Baig, Pakistan, in Phi-lanthropy and Law in South Asia (Manila: Asia Pacifi c Philanthropy Consortium, 2004, Sidel and Zaman eds.)

Irfan Mufti, New Non-Profi t Law and Cer-tifi cation of Non-Profi t Organizations in Pakistan, 2 International Journal of Civil Society Law 88-91, October 2004

Muhammad Ahsan Rana, Setting Standards in the Nonprofi t Sector: Th e Certifi cation Expe-rience in Pakistan, 2 International Journal of Civil Society Law 83, October 2004

Adil Najam, Portrait of a Giving Community: Philanthropy by the Pakistani-American Diaspora (Cambridge: Global Equity Ini-tiative, Harvard University, 2007)

Adil Najam, Diaspora Philanthropy to Asia, in Merz, Chen, and Geithner, Diasporas and Development (Cambridge: Global Equity Initiative, Harvard University, 2007), pp. 119-150 (focus on Pakistan)


Philippines

Jeremaiah M. Opiniano, Th e Dynamics of Tran-snational Philanthropy by Migrant Workers to the Communities of Origin: Th e Case of Pororrubio, Philippines (Paper presented to the Fifth International Society for Th ird-

Sector Research (ISTR) International Conference, July 2002) [http://www.istr.org/conferences/capetown/ volume/opini-ano.pdf ]

Jeremaiah M. Opiniano, Our Future Beside the Exodus: Migration and Development Issues in the Philippines, Institute for Migration and Development Issues, August 2004 [http://www.fes.org.ph/pdf/Our%20Future%20Beside%20the%20Exodus.pdf ]

Jeremaiah M. Opiniano, Filipinos Doing Diaspora Philanthropy: Th e Development Potential of Transnational Migration, Asian and Pacifi c Migration Journal 14:1/2, pp. 225-241 (2005) [http://www.fi lipinodi-asporagiving.org] [check and expand]

Jeremaiah M. Opiniano, Good News for the Poor: Diaspora Philanthropy by Filipinos (Quezon City: Association of Founda-tions, 2005)

John Richard Simon Alayon, Diaspora Philan-thropy: New Zealand Filipino Communities and the Practice of International Community Development (Paper presented to the bien-nial conference on “Southern Perspectives on Development: Dialogue or Division?” Otago University (New Zealand), Decem-ber 2006) [http://www.fi lipinodiaspora-giving.org]

Jeremaiah M. Opiniano, Filipinos Abroad as Social Development Partners (Paper presented at the workshop on Tapping Diaspora Philanthropy for Philippine Social Development, Mandaluyong City, April 2006) [http://www.fi lipinodiaspora-giving.org]

Jeremaiah M. Opiniano, Migrant Philanthropy: Th e Philippines (Presented at the Round-table on Diaspora Philanthropy: Giving Back to the Homeland, November 2006, University of San Francisco) [http://www.fi lipinodiasporagiving.org/]

Mark Sidel 27

OVERVIEW

Shawn Powers, Bayanihan Across the Seas: Diaspora Philanthropy and Development in the Philippines (Report completed under a U.S. Fulbright grant, 2006) [http://www.fi li-pinodiasporagiving.org/Attached%20fi les/Shawn%20Powers%20study.pdf ]

Jon Silva, Engaging Diaspora Communities in Development: An Investigation of Filipino Hometown Associations in Canada (MPP Th esis, Simon Fraser University (Canada), 2006) [http://www.sfu.ca/mpp/pdf_news/Capstone/Silva_Jon.pdf ]

Clay G. Westcott and Jennifer Brinkerhoff (eds.), Converting Migration Drains into Gains: Harnessing the Resources of Over-seas Professionals (Asian Development Bank, 2006, focusing on the PRC, the Philippines, and Afghanistan) [http://www.adb.org/ Documents/Books/Converting-Migration-Drains-Gains/default.asp]


Maruja M.B. Asis, How International Migra-tion Can Support Development: A Challenge for the Philippines, Migración y Desarrollo, 2007, no. 2, pp. 96-122 [http://redalyc.uae-mex.mx/redalyc/pdf/660/66000705.pdf ]

Natasha Amott, Cases from the Philippines in Innovative Philanthropy: An Overview of the Philippines, in Helmut K. Anheier, Adele Simmons, and David Winder, Innovation in Strategic Philanthropy (Springer, 2007)

Victoria P. Garchitorena, Diaspora Philan-thropy: Th e Philippine Experience (Bos-ton: Th e Philanthropic Initiative, 2007) [http://www.tpi.org/tpi_services/ strength-ening_global_philanthropy.aspx]

Victoria P. Garchitorena, Migration and Development: Philippine Diaspora Phi-lanthropy (UN Institute for Training and Research, 7 March 2007) [http://www.unitarny.org/mm/File/Migration/VPG_diaspora%20philantropy.pdf ]

Sri Lanka

Sujeevan Perera, Th e Development of Local Phi-lanthropy and Management of Foundation Resources (CUNY Center for the Study of Philanthropy, 2003)

Arittha Wikramanayake, Sri Lanka, in Philan-thropy and Law in South Asia (Manila: Asia Pacifi c Philanthropy Consortium, 2004)

Shawn Teresa Flanigan, Nonprofi t Service Provi-sion by Insurgent Organizations –

Th e Cases of Hizballah and the Tamil Tigers, Studies in Confl ict and Terrorism, forth-coming 2007/8


Taiwan

Snow (Hsueh-Lin) Lee, Make It Powerful: Tap Diaspora Philanthropy to Resource, an Example for Taiwanese-Americans (CUNY Center for the Study of Philanthropy 2003) [www.tpic.org.tw/EPhilNews/ show_news.asp?ENEWSID=4081]

Vietnam

Le Xuan Khoa, Normalization of Relations Between the Overseas Vietnamese and Viet-nam (November 2001) [www.giaodiem.com/doithoai/lexuankhoa.htm]



Le Xuan Khoa, Vietnamese Expatriates and Viet-nam: Challenges and Opportunities, Review of Vietnamese Studies (November 2002)

Nguyen Hoai Duc Tri, MD, Returning to Viet-nam: An Alternate Perspective (2002)

Nguyen Hoai Duc Tri, MD, Perspectives of the VMA [Vietnamese Medical Association], From a Younger Physician (2002)

Pacifi c Links Foundation, Report on the First Vietnamese American Nongovernmental Organization Conference (May 7-9, 2004) and VA NGO Network Activities (September 2003-May 2005); Executive Summary and Post Conference Statement issued after the fi rst conference of Vietnamese American NGOs in May 2004 [www.va-ngo.org/vjmla]

Dang Nguyen Anh, Enhancing the Develop-ment Impact of Migrant Remittances and Diaspora: Th e Case of Vietnam, Asia-Pacifi c Population Journal 20:3 (April 2005) [www.unescap.org/esid/psis/population/journal/2005/No3/DevelopmentIm-pactOfMigrant.pdf ]

Statement by Professor Le Xuan Khoa at the Reception of the VA NGO Lifetime Achieve-ment Award (November 2005) [www.va-ngo.org/vjmla/]

Le Xuan Khoa, Vietnamese Americans’ Charity and Social Development Work in Vietnam (Delivered at the second conference of Vietnamese American NGOs, November 2005) [www.va-ngo.org/vjmla/] [Also available in Vietnamese as Le Xuan Khoa, Hoat dong Tu thien va Phat trien xa hoi cua nguoi My goc Viet o Viet Nam (Charitable and Social Development Activities by Viet-namese Americans in Vietnam (2005)]

VA NGO Collaborations 2004-05 (November 2005) [www.va-ngo.org/vjmla]

Le Xuan Khoa, Th e Role of the Vietnamese American Community (2005)

Mark Sidel, Vietnamese-American Diaspora Philanthropy to Vietnam (Boston: Th e Phil-anthropic Initiative, 2007) [http://www.tpi.org/tpi_services/ strengthening_glo-bal_philanthropy.aspx]

Newspaper articles on diaspora philanthropy in Asia (selected articles)

Celia W. Dugger, In New York, Just a Cabby. In India, A School’s Hero, Th e New York Times, January 23, 2000.

Stephen G. Greene, New Philanthropies Court Prosperous Indian-Americans, Chronicle of Philanthropy, May 16, 2002

Stephen G. Greene, Giving Back to Th eir Homelands: Charities Worldwide Get Sup-port from Emigrants in America, Chronicle of Philanthropy, May 16, 2002

When Times are Tight, Roots Become Stronger, India Abroad, June 6, 2003 (33:36)

Phuong Ly, Moving Forward, Giving Back; U.S. Immigrants Become Homeland Philan-thropists, Th e Washington Post, March 4, 2004

Robert Marquand, As South China Rises, Giv-ing from Overseas Chinese Shifts, Christian Science Monitor, April 27, 2005, p. 7

Juan L. Mercado, Diaspora Philanthropy, Phil-ippine Daily Inquirer, March 30, 2006

Diaspora Philanthropy, Th e Nation (Pakistan), September 24, 2006

Greg B. Macabenta, Diaspora Philanthropy, Th e Manila Times, November 8, 2006 [http://www.manilatimes.net/national/2006/nov/08/yehey/opinion/20061108opi4.html]

What Did We Learn about Giving by Pakistan Diaspora in the US, Business Recorder (Pakistan), January 8, 2007

Mark Sidel 29

OVERVIEW

Time for Giving (interview with Rory Tolentino), Forbes, March 12, 2007 [http://members.forbes.com/global/2007/0312/052.html]

Notes 1 I am grateful to the Asia Pacifi c Philan-

thropy Consortium (APPC) for inviting me to write this paper, to many friends in Asia, the United States, and elsewhere, for valuable discussions of this theme over many years, to readers and discussants at the APPC paper writers’ workshop in December 2007 for their valuable com-ments and suggestions, and to Sanjay Agarwal, Van Dusenbery, Peter Geithner, Le Xuan Khoa, Paula Johnson, Rory Tolentino, Priya Viswanath, Xiao-huang Yin, Nick Young, and others for suggesting very useful additions to the bibliography on research on diaspora philanthropy that accompanies this eff ort. All references in footnotes are to the attached bibliography.

I am particularly grateful to Rory Tolen-tino for presenting this paper and seeking comments at the APPC paper writers’ workshop in Manila in December 2007. Research and writing of this paper has also been supported by the University of Iowa and its College of Law, Obermann Center for Advanced Studies, and Provost’s Faculty Scholar Support Fund, to whom acknowl-edgement is gratefully made. Comments on this paper are gratefully accepted and should be sent to Mark Sidel at [email protected]. Copyright © Mark Sidel, 2007.

2 See Sidel 1997 for early references.

3 I have not tried to survey other regions – but I think that the basic point is cor-rect, and that most readers knowledgeable about diaspora philanthropy research will concede it. Th ere is, of course, a substan-tial literature on diaspora giving back to

Mexico, but relatively little for the rest of Latin America. For Africa, unfortunately there has been relatively little research on diaspora philanthropy; much of what is available is cited in Mojúbàolú Olúfúnké Okome, African Diasporas, in Merz et al 2007.

4 See, e.g., Dugger 2000, Greene 2002a.

5 See, e.g., Geithner et al 2004, Johnson 2005, Johnson et al 2005, Westcott and Brinkerhoff 2006, Merz et al 2007.

6 See Yin 2002, Yin and Lan, 2004, Viswa-nath 2000, 2003, Taplin 2001, Sundar, 2002, Sahoo 2003, 2005, Anand 2003, Kumar 2003, Kapur et al 2004, Shiv-eshwarkar 2004, Viswanath and Dadrawala 2004, Najam 2007, Opiniano 2002, 2004, 2005a, 2005b, 2006a, 2006b, Asis 2007, Garchitorena 2007a, 2007b, 2007c, Lee 2003, Khoa 2001, 2002, 2005a, 2005b.

7 See, e.g., Viswanath 2000, 2003, Taplin 2001, Sahoo 2002, Anand 2003, Kumar 2003, Kapur et al 2004, Kelly 2004, Sidel 2004, Viswanath and Dadrawala 2004, Van Dusenbery and Tatla 2008 forthcom-ing).

8 See, e.g., Opiniano 2002, 2004, 2005a, 2005b, 2006, Powers 2006, Asis 2007, Amott 2007, Garchitorena 2007a, 2007b.

9 See Yin and Lan 2004, Young 2004, Young and Shih 2004.

10 See Najam 2007a, 2007b.

11 See Khoa 2002, 2005a, 2005b, Anh 2005, Sidel 2007.

12 Lee 2003.

13 See the references in note 7 above.

14 See e.g. Opiniano 2002, 2004, 2005a, 2005b, 2006, Powers 2006, Asis 2007, Amott 2007, Garchitorena 2007a, 2007b and other sources for the Philippines listed in the bibliography.



15 See Yin and Lan 2004, Young 2004, Young and Shih 2004.

16 See Najam 2007a, 2007b.

17 See Khoa 2005a, 2005b, Anh 2005, Sidel 2007.

18 Lee 2003.

19 See Sabrang 2002, Sundar 2002a, Sundar 2002b, Anand 2003, Kapur et al 2004, Kelly 2004, Sidel 2004, Viswanath and Dadrawala 2004, Dusenbery and Tatla 2008 forthcoming.

20 See Helweg 1983, Geithner et al 2004, Kapur 2004, Newland 2004, Nowland 2004, Johnson 2005, 2007, Merz et al 2007.

21 See, e.g., Yu 1983, Lai 1992, Smith 1998, Chen 2000, Hsu 2000.

22 See, e.g., Ephraim Kleiman, Jewish and Palestinian Diaspora Attitudes to Philan-thropy and Investment: Lessons from Israel’s Experience (Harry S. Truman Research Institute for the Advancement of Peace, Th e Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1996)..

23 Some of the best work on the Mexico case is in Barbara J. Merz (ed.), New Patterns for Mexico: Observations on Remittances, Philan-thropic Giving, and Equitable Development/ Nuevas Pautas para México: Observaciones sobre Remesas, Donaciones Filantrópicas y Desarrollo Equitativo (Cambridge: Global Equity Initiative, 2005). For a shorter article on the Mexican case see Barbara Merz and Lincoln Chen, Diaspora Giving and Equitable Develop-ment in Mexico, Alliance 10: 4, December 2005, at http://www.alliancemagazine.org. For a comparative look at hometown associations that draws on the very sophisticated research by Manuel Orozco and others, see Manuel Oro-zco and Rebecca Rouse, Migrant Hometown Associations and Opportunities for Develop-ment: A Global Perspective, Inter-American Dialogue, February 1, 2007, at http://www.migrationinformation.org/USfocus/print.cfm?ID=579.

24 Lee 2003.

25 Khoa 2005a, 2005b, Sidel 2007.

26 Najam 2007a, 2007b.

27 See, e.g., Johnson 2005, Sidel 2007.

28 See Silva 2006.

29 See Ayalon 2006.

30 See, e.g., Geithner et al 2004, Merz et al 2007.

31 See, e.g., Sabrang 2002.

32 See Ferranti and Ody 2007.

33 In fact, to be completely candid, one might term the fi rst ten years of research on diaspora philanthropy in Asia as primarily ten years of research on diaspora philanthropy in India, the Philippines, and China, and the bibliography bears that out to a signifi cant extent.

34 Najam 2007a, 2007b.

35 Khoa 2005a, 2005b, Sidel 2007.

36 Lee 2003.

37 Ayalon 2006.

38 Silva 2006.

39 Young and Qian 2007.

40 Sidel 2007.

41 Sahoo 2003.

42 Opiniano 2002.

43 See, e.g., Sabrang 2002, Sundar 2002, Anand 2003, Kelly 2004, Sidel 2004.

44 Sahoo 2003.

45 See Murphy 1998, Van Dusenbery 2008 forthcoming.

46 Jackson et al 2005.

47 For a key example, see Najam 2007a.

48 And I have done it myself, on multiple occasions (Sidel 1997, 2004, 2007).

Mark Sidel 31

OVERVIEW

49 See Kapur 2004, Maimbo and Ratha 2004, Newland 2004, Nowland 2004, Johnson 2005, Merz et al 2007, Kapur 2007.

50 Westcott and Brinkerhoff 2006a, 2006b.

51 APPC 2005.

52 Philanthropy and Law in South Asia 2007, Flanigan forthcoming 2008. Th ere is some research and reporting on the role of phi-lanthropy after the Katrina disaster in New Orleans, which is interesting as an analogy to the Asian tsunami but, of course, does not include the element of diaspora giv-ing.

53 Philanthropy and Law in South Asia 2007.

54 See Flanigan 2006.

55 On diff erent aspects of this issue see, e.g., Jonathan Benthall and Jerome Bellion-Jourdan, Th e Charitable Crescent: Politics of Aid in the Muslim World (I.B. Tauris, 2003); Janine A. Clark, Islam, Charity, and Activism: Middle-Class Networks and Social Welfare in Egypt, Jordan, and Yemen (Indiana University Press, 2003); Matthew Levitt, Hamas: Politics, Charity and Terrorism in the Service of Jihad (Yale University Press, 2007); Jonathan Benthall, Islamic charities, faith-based organizations and the international aid system, in J. Alter-man and K. van Hippel (eds.), Islamic Charities (Center for Strategic and Interna-tional Studies, 2007).

56 But see a very preliminary eff ort in Sidel 2007.

57 Sabrang 2002.



Mark Sidel

Mark Sidel is Professor of Law, Faculty Scholar, and Lauridsen Family Fellow at the

University of Iowa. He established the Ford Foundation’s programs in Vietnam in the

1990s, and was Ford’s program offi cer on law and governance in Beijing, and managed a

program on philanthropy and the voluntary sector in New Delhi. He has written extensively

on philanthropy and the nonprofi t sector in Asia, including co-editing Philanthropy and

the Law in South Asia (APPC, 2004), as well as contributing to Philanthropy and Law

in Asia (1999). Sidel is the author of Law and Society in Vietnam (Cambridge University

Press, 2008); Regulation of the Voluntary Sector: Freedom and Security in an Age of

Uncertainty (Routledge, forthcoming 2008); Th e Constitution of Vietnam: A Contextual

Analysis (Hart, forthcoming 2008); More Secure, Less Free? Antiterrorism Policy and

Civil Liberties after September 11 (University of Michigan Press, 2004, revised ed. 2007);

and Old Hanoi (Oxford University Press, 1998), as well as co-editor of Cinema, Law and

the State in Asia (Palgrave, 2007); and Vietnam’s New Order: International Perspectives on

the State and Reform (Palgrave 2006). He has consulted for UNDP, the Ford Foundation,

World Bank, Asian Development Bank, Oxfam, Vietnamese Ministry of Justice, Vietnam

Union of Science and Technology Associations (VUSTA), Luce Foundation, McKnight

Foundation, U.S. Department of Justice, and the U.S. Department of State.