BETA
This is a BETA experience. You may opt-out by clicking here

More From Forbes

Edit Story

The Faces Of China's New Philanthropy

Following
This article is more than 8 years old.

Five months before Chinese e-commerce behemoth Alibaba's  went public in September 2014, cofounders Jack Ma and Joseph Tsai created charitable trusts and seeded them with a combined 50 million in share options. Today those trusts are worth nearly $3.5 billion.

It's one sign of a new age of large-scale philanthropy in China. Three decades after economic reforms paved the way for 400 billionaires to emerge (if briefly), extremely wealthy Chinese have started giving their money away in large sums.

Although Ma was one of the top 10 Chinese givers in absolute terms last year, he wasn't the most generous, according to research on China's top 100 philanthropists released Wednesday by the Ash Center for Democratic Governance at the Harvard Kennedy School. Ma donated $20 million to charity, less than 1% of his net worth, which Forbes estimates is currently $21.8 billion. Meanwhile, Wang Miaotong, chairman of engine maker Century Huatong Co. Ltd., gave away nearly 6% of his fortune, or $15 million, the Ash Center found. China's top giver (in absolute terms) was billionaire He Xiangjian, who donated more than $60 million to social welfare causes. The study looked at donations paid out, not pledged, between August 2014 and September 2015.

"It's important to look at the trends in how rich people are giving back to society. We wanted to create healthy competition among donors and shift the national debate from wealth creation to philanthropy," said Peiran Wei, who led the research as a fellow at the Kennedy School.

Billionaires made up half of the 10 philanthropists who gave the most, but only three of the billionaires were among the 10 most generous: Ke Xiping, Wang Yusuo and Liang Guangwei.

Among the 100 philanthropists, the average donation was around $8 million, and the average age of donors was 54. Nearly a third came from the construction and real estate industry. They gave most often to education and least often to environmental causes, the study found.

"In Asian cultures, we put a high emphasis on education, so that's understandable," Wei said. "But you also see short-term benefits: you have a scholarship or a building named after you. If you give money to tackle environmental issues, it's a long-term effort."

He also pointed out that donors may select more straightforward recipients, such as universities, disaster relief funds or government-backed charities, because the state still heavily regulates philanthropic activity.

"If you're a businessman in China, it's probably easier for you to make money than to give it away. It's not a free market for philanthropy," Wei said.

More than half of the philanthropists gave to charities affiliated with the government. Wei speculates this is both to curry favor and because these are some of the few entities today that can handle giving at a large scale. However, 19 donors on the list have created private foundations, which Wei says signals a shift toward more professionalized philanthropy.

Researchers also found that donors made 60% of their contributions near their home regions. As a result, China's poorest areas, such as Tibet, Xinjiang and Ningxia, received less than 2% of donations.

Researchers sourced information from press reports, corporate filings, reports from government charities and other aid recipients, and when possible, conversations with philanthropists.  They used shareholdings in publicly traded companies to approximate net worth.

The Ash Center plans to update the study annually. The research is part of the Ash Center's China Philanthropy Project, backed by hedge fund billionaire Ray Dalio through a gift of an undisclosed amount announced Jan. 22. Dalio's foundation, among others, also donated to open the China Global Philanthropy Institute in Shenzhen in November 2015.