As anyone with a marketing background will tell you, humans are simple creatures. We have an appetite for the new. Old ideas must be repackaged in innovative and shiny ways, even if the core purpose remains the same.

One idea that has caught the imagination of the public is the new start-up Eat My Lunch. The programme is part-run by renowned chef Michael Meredith. For every lunch a customer purchases, the programme provides a free lunch to a child in need. It is based on the buy-one, give-one concept that blends social and private returns. 

With a slick website, a media campaign run by Colenso BBDO, and an attractive product to sell, Eat My Lunch has all the markings of a competitive business.

Yet, the intention of Eat My Lunch is to “make it easy for Kiwis to help other Kiwis”. In part, by addressing an issue many New Zealanders care about: children whose parents cannot provide lunch. But also by appealing to that part of human nature that responds to incentives. In this case, enjoying the convenience of a delicious packed lunch.

Eat My Lunch has already been dismissed by the Child Poverty Action Group as “a drop in the bucket”. A spokesperson claims, “we need to address the evidence of need in our community by systemic policy change. Not bite-by-bite individual philanthropic charitable efforts."

It is true Eat My Lunch will probably never feed the entire country’s hungry children. It also may not appeal to everyone’s charitable tastes. Some may believe there are more effective or rewarding ways of contributing to social causes.

However, a market for philanthropy motivates organisations to put their best foot forward. It incentivises new thinking, and new methods of achieving outcomes, in order to engage their target audience.

Most importantly, recipients of charity reportedly do not become dependent, perhaps because it is provided by their own community, rather than a “right” provided by government.

The rise of social enterprise and social entrepreneurship has certainly shaken up the social services market, often mixing social outcomes with profit. Social bonds easily fit into this space too.

It’s hard to see why a donor receiving a guaranteed packed lunch for their giving is that different from a social bonds investor who could potentially earn a financial return.
 
Perhaps social bonds just need a stronger PR strategy.