Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 100, Issue 1, pp 175–190 | Cite as

Towards Shared Social Responsibility: A Study of Consumers’ Willingness to Donate Micro-Insurances when Taking Out Their Own Insurance

  • Patty Jansen
  • Tobias Gössling
  • Toon Bullens


In recent years, the concepts of charity and development aid have changed significantly. Present concepts combine direct money transfer with co-production, knowledge sharing and the development of products and services designed for the need of developing and transition economies. The concept of micro-financing is a financial service which has proven to allow for entrepreneurs in the respective countries to start up their businesses. A relatively new financial product for these countries is micro-insurance. This article deals with the question whether consumers in the Netherlands are willing to donate micro-insurances and which factors influence this willingness to contribute to the non-profit micro-insurance approach of an insurance company. The data were collected with questionnaires among a sample of the Dutch population (N = 504). The data have been processed in a one-way between-groups ANOVA, a paired sample t test and an ordinal regression analysis. The results show that approximately half of the Dutch consumers are willing to pay an additional amount on their insurance premium for the donation of micro-insurances. The amount of the insurance premium did, however, not affect the willingness to donate (WTD). If consumers could choose the beneficiary less people are willing to donate, yet those people are willing to donate more money. In conclusion, there is readiness among consumers to contribute to micro-insurance via an insurance company that assists in setting up micro-insurance projects. This indicates a possible role for companies to act as an intermediary between philanthropic acts and consumers.


consumer behaviour corporate social responsibility micro-insurance willingness to donate 



Cause-related marketing


Corporate social responsibility


Non-governmental organization


Willingness to donate


Willingness to pay


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ajzen, I. and M. Fishbein: 1980, Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour (Prentice Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J).Google Scholar
  2. Auger, P., P. Burke, T. M. Devinney and L. L. Louviere: 2003, ‘What will consumers pay for social product features?’, Journal of Business Ethics 42(3), 281-304. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baarda, D. B. and M. P. M. de Goede: 2001, Basisboek methoden en technieken:Handleiding voor het opzetten en uitvoeren van onderzoek (Wolters-Noordhoff, Groningen).Google Scholar
  4. Baarda, D. B., M. P. M. de Goede and M. Kalmijn: 2000, Enquêteren en gestructureerd interviewen (Wolters-Noordhoff, Groningen).Google Scholar
  5. Bekkers, R.: 2007, ‘Measuring altruistic behaviour in surveys: the all-or-nothing dictator game’, Survey Research Methods 1(3), 139-144.Google Scholar
  6. Bhattacharya, C. B. and S. Sen: 2003, ‘Consumer-Company Identification: A Framework for Understanding Consumers’ Relationships with Companies’, Journal of marketing: a quarterly publication of the American Marketing Association 67(2), 76-88.Google Scholar
  7. Bird, K. and D. R. Hughes: 1997, ‘Ethical consumerism: the case of “fairly-traded” coffee’, Business Ethics: A European Review 6(3), 159-167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Booth-Kewley, S., G. E. Larson and D. K. Miyoshi: 2007, ‘Social desirability effects on computerized and paper-and-pencil questionnaires’, Computers in Human Behavior 23(1), 463-477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brooks, A. C.: 2004, ‘Faith, secularism, and charity’, Faith and Economics 43, 1-8.Google Scholar
  10. Brown, T. C., P. A. Champ, R. C. Bishop and D. McCollum: 1996, ‘Which response format reveals the truth about donations to the public good?’, Land Economics 72(2), 152-166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Champ, P. A. and R. C. Bishop: 2001, ‘Donation payment mechanisms and contingent valuation: an empirical study of hypothetical bias’, Environmental and research economics 19(4), 383-402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Churchill, C. F., D. Liber, J. M. McCord and J. Roth: 2003, Making insurance work for microfinance institutions. A technical guide to developing and delivering microinsurance (International Labour Organization, Geneva).Google Scholar
  13. Dacin, P. A. and T. J. Brown: 1997, ‘The company and the product: Corporate associations and consumer product responses’, Journal of Marketing 61(1), 68-84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. De Pelsmacker, P., L. Driesen and G. Rayp: 2005, ‘Do consumers care about ethics? Willingness to pay for fair-trade coffee’, The Journal of Consumer Affairs 39(2), 363-385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dean, D. H.: 2003, ‘Consumer perception of corporate donations’, Journal of Advertising 31(4), 91-102.Google Scholar
  16. Desmet, P. and F. M. Feinberg: 2003, ‘Ask and ye shall receive: The effect of the appeals scale on consumers’ donation behavior’, Journal of Economic Psychology 23(3), 349-376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Doane, D.: 2001, Taking flight: the rapid growth of ethical consumerism. The ethical purchasing index 2001 (New Economics Foundation, London).Google Scholar
  18. Donaldson, C., A. M. Jones, T. J. Mapp and J. A. Olson: 1998, ‘Limited dependent variables in willingness to pay studies: applications in health care’, Applied Economics 30(5), 667-677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Edison, S. and S. German: 1995, ‘Why Do People Donate. A Model of Willingness to Donate’, Retrieved 26 Feb 2008.
  20. Elfenbein, D. W. and B. McManus: 2007, ‘A Greater Price for a Greater Good? The Charity Premium in Online Auctions’, Social Science Research Network, Retrieved 26 Feb 2008.
  21. Eliott, K. A. and R. B. Freeman: 2004, ‘White Hats and Don Quixotes? Human Right Vigilantes in the Global Economy’, Centre for Economic Performance, Article 638, Retrieved 24 Feb 2008.
  22. Fishbein, M. and I. Ajzen: 1975, Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: an introduction to theory and research (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).Google Scholar
  23. Foster, M. K. and A. G. Meinhard: 1997, ‘Donating Behaviour and Attitudes: An Exploratory Study of the Differences in Age Cohorts’, Centre for Voluntary Sector Studies, Reyerson University, Retrieved 17 May 2008.
  24. Friedman, M: 1962, Capitalism and freedom (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Google Scholar
  25. Gössling, T.: 2003, ‘The Price of Morality. An Analysis of Personality, Moral Behaviour, and Social Rules in Economic Terms’, Journal of Business Ethics 45(1-2), 121-131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gössling, T. and C. Vocht: 2007, ‘Social Role Conceptions and CSR Policy Success’, Journal of Business Ethics 74(4), 363-372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Halbrendt, C., L. Sterling, S. Snider and G. Santoro: 1995, ‘Contingent valuation of consumers’ willingness to purchase pork with lower saturated fat’, in J. A. Caswell (ed.), Valuing food safety and nutrition (Westview Press, Boulder, CO), pp. 319-339.Google Scholar
  28. Hertz, N.: 2002, The Silent Takeover. Global Capitalism and the Death of Democracy (Arrow Books, London).Google Scholar
  29. Jenni, K. E. and G. Loewenstein: 1997, ‘Explaining the identifiable victim effect’, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 14(3), 235-257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jorgensen, B. S. and G. J. Syme: 2000, ‘Protest responses and willingness to pay: attitude toward paying for stormwater pollution abatement’, Ecological economics 33(2), 251-265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky: 1979, ‘Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk’, Econometrica 47(2), 263-292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky: 1991, ‘Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference-dependent model’, The Quarterly Journal of Economics 106(4), 1039-1061.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky (eds.): 2000, Choices, Values, and Frames (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge), pp. 1–116.Google Scholar
  34. Kanji, G. K.: 2006, 100 statistical tests (Sage Publications, London).Google Scholar
  35. Langer, A. J.: 1983, The psychology of control (Sage Publications, Beverly Hills).Google Scholar
  36. Lee, H. K. and C. B Hatcher: 2001, ‘Willingness to pay for information: an analyst’s guide’, The Journal of Consumers Affairs 35(1), 120-140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. MacGillivray, A.: 2000, The fair share: the growing market share of green and ethical products (New Economics Foundation, London).Google Scholar
  38. Mohr, L. A. and D. J. Webb: 2005, ‘The effects of corporate social responsibility and price on consumer responses’, The Journal of Consumer Affairs 39(1), 121-147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. MORI: 2000, European attitudes towards Corporate Social Responsibility, Research for CSR Europe (MORI, London).Google Scholar
  40. Nisbett, R. and L. Ross: 1980, Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.).Google Scholar
  41. Nordušis, M. J.: 2004, SPSS 13.0 advanced statistical procedures companion (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ).Google Scholar
  42. Pallant, J.: 2005, SPSS Survival Manual. A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS version 12 (Open University Press, Maidenhead).Google Scholar
  43. Piliavin, J. A. and H. W. Charng: 1990, ‘Altruism: A review of recent theory and research’, Annual Review of Sociology 16, 27-65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Porter, M. E. and M. R. Kramer: 2002, ‘The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy’. Harvard Business Review 80(12), 56-68.Google Scholar
  45. Roth, J., M. J. McCord and D. Liber: 2007, The landscape of microinsurance in the world’s 100 poorest countries (The Microinsurance Centre, Appleton).Google Scholar
  46. Sanker, S. and C. B. Bhattacharya: 2001, ‘Does Doing Good Always Lead to Doing Better? Consumer Reactions to Corporate Social Responsibility’, Journal of Marketing Research 38(2), 225-243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Seifert, B., S. A. Morris and B. R. Bartkus: 2003, ‘Comparing Big Givers and Small Givers: Financial Correlates of Corporate Philanthropy’, Journal of business ethics 45(3), 195-211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Skitka, L. J.: 1999, ‘Ideological and Attributional Boundaries on Public Compassion: Reactions to Individuals and Communities Affected by a Natural Disaster’, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 25(7), 793-808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Small, D. A. and G. Loewenstein: 2003, ‘Helping a victim or helping the victim: altruism and identifiability’, The Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 26(1), 5-16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Strahilevitz, M. and J. G. Myers: 1999, ‘Donations to Charity as Purchase Incentives: How Well They Work May Depend on What You Are Trying to Sell’, Journal of Consumer Research 24(4), 434-446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Tabachnick, B. G. and L. S. Fidell: 2001, Using multivariate statistics, 4th edition (Harper Collins, New York).Google Scholar
  52. Wang, H., J. Choi and L. Jiatao: 2008, ‘Too Little or Too Much? Untangling the Relationship Between Corporate Philanthropy and Firm Financial Performance’, Organization Science 19(1), 143-159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Webb, D. J., C. L. Green and T. G. Brashear: 2000, ‘Development and validation of scales to measure attitudes influencing monetary donations to charitable organizations’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 28(2), 299-309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Yen, S. T.: 2002, ‘An econometric analysis of household donations in the USA’, Applied Economic Letters 9(13), 837-841.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Interpolis, Marketing IntelligenceTilburg The Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Organisation Studies, Tilburg School of Social and Behavioral SciencesTilburg UniversityTilburgThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Tilburg Sustainability CenterTilburg UniversityTilburgThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Center for Cooperative Financial ServicesNyenrode Business UniversityBreukelenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations