This research project offers a comprehensive and multi-dimensional examination of volunteering and civic engagement in the United States, with particular focus on how local organizational infrastructures and economic conditions shape those behaviors
Building on a rich theoretical foundation from sociology, political science, and organizational studies, the project investigates both the structural determinants of civic life and the nuanced ways in which place-based factors influence participation in public life. The research is framed around the concept of civic infrastructure—the configuration of nonprofit, governmental, and commercial organizations that underpin local civic life—and addresses how this infrastructure varies by community type, geography, and social identity.
Spanning several interrelated studies, the project integrates empirical analyses using large-scale data sets, including the U.S. Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey (CPS) Volunteering and Civic Engagement Supplements, the NCCS nonprofit data, and county-level socioeconomic indicators. Collectively, the work reveals how organizational ecology, regional economies, and socio-demographic factors interact to create environments that either foster or inhibit volunteering and civic engagement.
Core concepts and theoretical framework
At the heart of the research is the argument that civic engagement is not solely the result of individual dispositions or capacities, but rather is embedded in a broader institutional and community context. The authors conceptualize organizational infrastructure in terms of:
- Sector (nonprofit, for-profit, government)
- Scale (large, professional vs. small, grassroots)
- Function (bonding vs. bridging organizations)
- Beneficiary orientation (elite-serving vs. welfare-oriented)
The research builds on theories from organizational institutionalism, community ecology, and social capital. The framework emphasizes how the diversity, density, and nature of organizational forms can either enable or suppress volunteering and civic behaviors. A key distinction is made between enabling civic infrastructure—which invites broad participation and cross-cutting ties—and substitutive infrastructure—which dampens or isolates engagement.
Key findings and implications
-
Diverse organizational forms matter
In contrast to prior studies that focus simply on nonprofit density, this project dissects how different types of organizations influence volunteering:
- Bridging nonprofits (those that connect diverse individuals) are strongly associated with higher volunteerism.
- Bonding nonprofits, such as religious or fraternal organizations that foster homogeneity, may limit broader community engagement.
- Welfare-oriented organizations paradoxically show a negative relationship with volunteering, possibly due to the professionalization of service delivery.
These findings challenge assumptions that all nonprofits equally encourage civic engagement and reveal that the character of organizational life in a community is crucial. The results of this study are in the forthcoming book with Cambridge University Press.
-
Rural vs. urban civic engagement
In a separate but related study, the team investigates the rural/urban volunteering divide. While conventional wisdom suggests that rural residents are more civically engaged, findings show that this gap is shrinking over time. Using the CPS Volunteering Supplment from 2002–2015, the research reveals:
- Rural residents historically have higher volunteer rates, but the difference is declining.
- The contextual characteristics of place (e.g., racial homogeneity, religious adherence, organizational density) differentially affect volunteering across rural and urban areas.
- Volunteering is shaped by both developmental factors (like small community size and face-to-face interactions) and environmental ones (such as economic resources and institutional assets).
This work extends theory by showing how the same community characteristics (e.g., religious density or nonprofit presence) have different effects depending on context. This research is published in Voluntas.
Paarlberg, Laurie E., Nesbit, Rebecca, Choi, Su Young, and Moss, Ryan. (2022) “The Rural/Urban Volunteering Divide.” Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 33(1): 107-120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-021-00401-2.
-
Economic shocks and inequality
Another component examines how economic conditions—especially the Great Recession—affect civic behavior. Drawing again on the CPS data and community-level indicators, the findings include:
- Volunteering declined significantly during and after the Great Recession, particularly in communities that were previously economically advantaged and experienced high growth.
- Economic disadvantage, income inequality, and economic stagnation significantly suppress volunteering
- In rural areas, the recession’s effects were particularly pronounced, with declines in engagement reflecting both material scarcity and social disconnection.
This analysis highlights how macroeconomic trends intersect with local conditions to produce uneven patterns of civic decline, reinforcing concerns about “geographies of discontent.”
This research appears in Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. (Nesbit, Rebecca, Paarlberg, Laurie E., Jo, Suyeon (2025) “The Decline of Volunteering in the United States: Is it the Economy?” Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 54(3): 583-613, https://doi.org/10.1177/089)
Innovations in civic typology
The team introduces a configurational approach to civic engagement, categorizing U.S. states by levels of organizational membership, religious and secular volunteering, political action, and informal helping. This approach, rooted in social origins theory, reveals that:
- States with robust civic infrastructures tend to have higher political and economic development.
- Civic configurations are patterned not just by individual factors but by regional histories and public policy environments.
This subnational application of social origins theory advances comparative studies of civil society and reinforces the importance of place in understanding civic life.
Practical and policy implications
This research has far-reaching implications for public policy and nonprofit practice:
- Policymakers should invest in bridging institutions that foster diverse participation and strengthen civic ties.
- Funders and nonprofits should be cautious about over-professionalization, which can crowd out volunteer involvement.
- Economic developers should consider civic infrastructure as a form of community capital that contributes to resilience and democratic vitality.
Crucially, this work affirms that revitalizing civic life requires attention not just to individual-level interventions, but to the broader systems and structures that make volunteering viable, visible, and valuable.
This project represents a landmark contribution to the study of civic engagement in the United States. By weaving together organizational theory, rural sociology, economic geography, and civil society scholarship, it offers a nuanced portrait of how place and institutions shape public participation. The findings underscore that the future of democracy depends not just on individual willingness to serve, but on the health and inclusivity of the infrastructures that support collective action.
Rebecca Nesbit, Ph.D. is a professor of nonprofit management in the Department of Public Administration and Policy at the University of Georgia. Dr. Nesbit received her Ph.D. in public affairs from the School of Public and Environmental Affairs at Indiana University. She also has a Master of Public Administration degree from Brigham Young University. Dr. Nesbit’s research explores issues of philanthropy and volunteerism, public policy and management in the nonprofit and public sectors. In particular, Dr. Nesbit conducts research on volunteer programs, volunteers’ characteristics and motivations, and volunteer management in public and nonprofit organizations. Her work has appeared in Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, Nonprofit Management and Leadership, Public Administration Review, the Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, and Administration & Society.
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6253-1101
Laurie E. Paarlberg is a Professor of Philanthropic Studies at the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, Indiana University Indianapolis. She holds the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation Chair on Community Foundations at the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy and is an affiliate faculty in the O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs (IUI). Her research focuses on intersection between community and philanthropy, particularly the changing structure and practices of community philanthropy. Her research focuses on the strategic shifts in United Ways and community foundation systems, philanthropic equity, and rural philanthropy.
