This book represents a major contribution to the analysis of philanthropic giving in the United States and illustrates how the field would greatly benefit from donors more conscious of the responsibility, challenges and opportunities that giving away personal wealth represent. While many of the issues illustrated in the book are primarily intended for an American audience, the main message of the book is applicable to other countries and is highly relevant to debates within social policy. Frumkin maintains that the distinctive feature of philanthropy is that it allows private actors to act in public ways: those individuals who have the opportunity and the willingness to donate their resources to solve social problems, by so doing implicitly enact a private vision of the public good.

Ultimately philanthropy occurs because individuals feel there are demands in their community, nation, or indeed around the globe that are currently not being met and want to make a difference, but also because they want to project their commitments and beliefs into the public arena. The balance between the instrumental dimension of giving – wanting to make a difference – and the expressive dimension of giving – projecting personal beliefs and commitments in the public sphere – is what sustains the philanthropic field and guarantees its long-term well-being. The unconventional and creative approaches private philanthropy can use to tackle problems are often the result of the inherent tension that exists between these two dimensions: the instrumental and the expressive.

The book reviews how, because of the fiscal advantages philanthropic donations enjoy in the United States, both the general public and the government have in several instances expressed concerns over how donated resources are being spent. The ‘undemocratic nature’ of philanthropy, coupled with the fiscal aid provided by society has inevitably generated calls to restrict the discretionary power currently enjoyed by donors. While tax allowances provide a powerful incentive for donors to engage in philanthropic activity, they also create unsolved dilemmas. It is through philanthropy that decision making on the use of financial resources is shifted from the representatives of the community to individual donors. The government recognises that the value-added of philanthropy ultimately comes from its independence – this is for example why in the United States tax breaks are uniform across nonprofits, with nonprofits operating in priority areas receiving the same fiscal incentive as those that would perhaps be deemed less meritorious by the government. The fact that through fiscal incentives society forgoes a part of its tax revenues, however, generates calls for greater monitoring and for restrictions to such independence.

The response of the philanthropic field to concerns over effectiveness, accountability and legitimacy has been to make an increasing use of professionals who now work as staff members at foundations and as aides of independent donors. As a result, most grant-making activities are conducted by professionals who are responsible for the allocation of the donor's financial resources in the most transparent and effective manner. While the move towards a professionalisation of the philanthropic field cannot in itself solve accountability and legitimacy issues, it has had the effect of shifting the balance between instrumental and expressive dimensions of philanthropy towards the former and by doing so compromising the nature of philanthropy itself.

The marriage of private interest and public value creates challenges in terms of effectiveness, accountability and legitimacy, but it also represents a great opportunity to find innovative and creative ways to solve important social issues. Government activity in general responds to widely expressed demands. Private philanthropists on the other hand have a greater freedom of manoeuvre because they are using their own personal wealth rather than the community's and as such they can be proactive in their actions. The creativity of philanthropy can only derive from its expressive dimension, it derives its strength from the individual vision of the world and the deeply held convictions are at the core of private giving and that push donors to engage in the public sphere. By loosing its expressive content, philanthropy looses its function as a high risk, high return enterprise as well as its meaning.

Frumkin proposes strategic philanthropy as a solution to calls for greater effectiveness, accountability and legitimacy: donors can face these issues by developing a comprehensive strategy to guide their philanthropic activities. The book is grounded in the experience of the author at the Hauser Center for Non-profit Organisations and uses famous and less well-known examples on individual donors and foundations to piece together how giving can greatly benefit a strategic approach and a smaller emphasis on professionalism.

Some of the tenets of the book are not valid outside the United States. For example, there are countries that specifically adopt a system where differential tax incentives are applied to donations by recipient organisation on the basis of the presumed social desirability and usefulness of such donations. While this does not invalidate Frumkin's argument for the United States, it should be acknowledged and implications for a general theory of philanthropy discussed. Also, at times the book is redundant and some lengthy parts run the risk of obscuring rather than clarifying the arguments being made, it would do well if greatly shortened.

The most important contribution of Strategic Giving is that it conceptualises philanthropy. By doing so it helps to show its limits as well as its strengths. Frumkin identifies the distinctive feature of philanthropy in the fact that this allows private resources to be used to enact a private vision of the public good. This guarantees creativity and risk taking, passion and highly controversial solutions to public problems to be injected in the system. While at times the independence of private donors may feel like a burden, societies can greatly benefit from the vibrant, dynamic and creative third sector that the independence of donors guarantees.