Generosity in Canada is socially engineered and depends on connectedness, well-being and social norms
A healthy democracy depends not only on governments, laws, and institutions, but also on citizens’ willingness to support others and strengthen community life. Prosocial behaviours (such as giving, volunteering, voting, donating blood, and so on) help hold society together. Where prosocial behaviours are strong, communities are more resilient, cooperative, and able to absorb social strain. Where they weaken, more pressure falls on public systems, formal services, and already-stretched charities.
This study was designed to understand what drives prosocial behaviours in Canada and where policy needs to focus to strengthen it. The central conclusion from the research is that prosocial behaviour is not driven by goodwill alone. It is socially produced. It grows more readily where people are connected to others, embedded in communities, supported by strong norms of helping, and able to see generosity as part of what people like them do.
Connection as social infrastructure
Canadians who are more connected tend to have higher well-being and much stronger prosocial behaviour. One especially important insight is that prosocial behaviour is linked less to soft sentiment and more to embeddedness in civic and social life. People who are involved in groups, organizations, neighbourhoods, faith communities, clubs, and other forms of participation are much more likely to give, volunteer, and help others. In this sense, connectedness functions less like a private feeling and more like social infrastructure.
Well-being also matters
Many Canadians are not doing equally well, with wide variation in happiness, loneliness, financial security, and the sense of control over life. Stronger well-being is associated with stronger connectedness and stronger prosocial behaviour. Still, the study suggests that connectedness is the more direct bridge to generosity and civic action. This distinction matters strategically: strengthening prosocial behaviour may depend less on improving individual emotional condition and more on rebuilding belonging, participation, connectedness, and social embeddedness.
Room for improvement
The study also shows that although Canadians act prosocially only a minority are active across many of the social behaviours that matter. That is, prosocial behaviours appear broad but often shallow. This suggests room for improvement. Furthermore, Statistics Canada data implies that several prosocial behaviours are waning in Canada (e.g. lower giving incidence, lower volunteered hours).
The strength of obligation
Social norms and prosocial values are among the most important differentiators. The key divide is not simply whether people believe helping others is good. Many do. The more important question is whether they see helping, giving, and supporting charities as part of their own responsibility. This is about our strength of obligation instead of just being empathetic. Attitudes such as “supporting charities is a conscious obligation I have for myself,” “everyone has a responsibility to help,” and “I was raised to help others” are powerful correlates of higher prosocial behaviour. In contrast, where people believe social problems are mainly the responsibility of government rather than people like themselves, prosocial behaviour is weaker.
Religiosity is another important theme
More religious Canadians tend to have stronger giving norms, a stronger sense of obligation, and higher prosocial behaviour, especially in giving and volunteering. But the deeper insight is not that private belief, spirituality, or divinity alone causes generosity. Religion appears to matter because it creates a durable social-moral environment where generosity is taught, repeated, modeled, expected, and reinforced. Religious service attendance appears to be a particularly strong predictor of giving, while spirituality often works more indirectly through values, obligation, and identity. The practical lesson is not that governments should make Canadians more religious, but that a more secular society must ask what other institutions can perform similar functions of belonging, repetition, visibility, expectation, mentoring, and moral formation.
Generosity cannot be reduced to economics
Financial capacity also matters, especially for the amount people give. Older Canadians, wealthier households, and those with stronger savings tend to give more. But generosity cannot be reduced to economics. A person with greater resources but no felt obligation may give less than someone with fewer resources but stronger social norms of generosity.
For charities, the message is clear: generosity should not be treated as purely transactional. Fundraising is not only about better asks or stronger evidence of need. It is also about belonging, participation, social proof, and rebuilding the norms that sustain giving over time.
For policymakers, connectedness, volunteering infrastructure, civic spaces, community associations, and youth service should be seen as part of Canada’s social infrastructure. The task is not only to ask more of Canadians, but to strengthen the social foundations that make prosocial behaviour more likely. Many countries are developing programs and policies to nurture greater connectedness. We need more of the same in Canada, otherwise the declines in connectedness and religiosity threaten our prosocial behaviours for the future. This will be further exacerbated by the passing of Baby Boomers (who hold stronger prosocial values and social norms than younger Canadians).
Access to the full report for free.
John Hallward is the President of GIV3, a charity working to strengthen capacity of the social sector, and is President of Sector3Insights, a social enterprise developing insights for the empowerment of non-profits.
