• Alpizar, F., Carlsson, F. and Johansson-Stenman, O. (2008). ‘Anonymity, reciprocity, and conformity: evidence from voluntary contributions to a national park in Costa Rica’, Journal of Public Economics, vol. 92(5–6), pp. 104760.
  • Andreoni, J. (1998). ‘Toward a theory of charitable fundraising’, Journal of Political Economy, vol. 106(6), pp. 1186213.
  • Andreoni, J. and Scholz, K. (1998). ‘An econometric analysis of charitable giving with interdependent preferences’, Economic Inquiry, vol. 36(3), pp. 41028.
  • Arellano, M. and Bond, S. (1991). ‘Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations’, Review of Economic Studies, vol. 58(2), pp. 27797.
  • Becker, G. (1974). ‘A theory of social interactions’, Journal of Political Economy, vol. 82(6), pp. 106393.
  • Bernheim, D. (1994). ‘A theory of conformity’, Journal of Political Economy, vol. 102(5), pp. 8417.
  • Brock, W. and Durlauf, X. (2001). ‘Interactions-based models’ in (J. Heckman, and E. Leamer, eds.), Handbook of Econometrics, vol. 5, pp. 3297380, Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
  • Carman, K. (2004). ‘Social influences and the private provision of public goods: evidence from charitable contributions in the workplace’, Working Paper, Harvard University.
  • Feldstein, M. and Clotfelter, S. (1976). ‘Tax incentives and charitable contributions in the US: a microeconometric analysis’, Journal of Public Economics, vol. 5(1–2), pp. 126.
  • Frey, B. and Meier, S. (2004). ‘Social comparisons and pro-social behavior: testing “conditional cooperation” in a field experiment’, American Economic Review, vol. 94(5), pp. 171822.
  • Glazer, A. and Konrad, K. (1996). ‘A signaling explanation for charity’, American Economic Review, vol. 86(4), pp. 101928.
  • Harbaugh, W. (1998). ‘The prestige motive for making charitable transfers’, American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings, vol. 88(2), pp. 27782.
  • Heutel, G. (2013) ‘Crowding out and crowding in of private donations and government grants’, Public Finance Review (forthcoming).
  • Manski, C. (2003). ‘Identification of endogenous social effects: the reflection problem’, Review of Economic Studies, vol. 60(3), pp. 53142.
  • Mas, A. and Moretti, E. (2009). ‘Peers at work’, American Economic Review, vol. 99(1), pp. 11245.
  • Meer, J. (2011). ‘Brother, can you spare a dime: peer pressure in charitable solicitation’, Journal of Public Economics, vol. 95(7–8), pp. 92641.
  • Nickell, S. (1981). ‘Biases in dynamic models with fixed effects’, Econometrica, vol. 49(6), pp. 141726.
  • Payne, A., Scharf, K. and Smith, S. (2011). ‘Survey of online fundraisers, donors and sponsors - summary of responses’, available at,, last accessed 3 January 2014.
  • Roberts, R. (1984). ‘A positive model of private charity and public transfers’, Journal of Political Economy, vol. 92(1), pp. 13648.
  • Roodman, D. (2006). ‘How to do xtabond2: an introduction to “Difference” and “System” GMM in Stata’, Working Paper Number 103, Center for Global Development.
  • Sacerdote, B. (2011) ‘Peer effects in education: How might they work, how big are they and how much do we know thus far?’ in (E. Hanushek, S. Machin and L. Woessmann, eds.), Handbook of the Economics of Education, vol. 3, pp. 24977, Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
  • Shang, J. and Croson, R. (2009) ‘Field experiments in charitable contribution: the impact of social influence on the voluntary provision of public goods’, Economic Journal, vol. 119(54), pp. 142239.
  • Vesterlund, L. (2003). ‘The informational value of sequential fundraising’, Journal of Public Economics, vol. 87(3–4), pp. 62758.
  • Warr, P. (1982) ‘Pareto optimal redistribution and private charity’, Journal of Public Economics, vol. 19(1), pp. 1318.