This study interprets legacy giving not as a technical act of property transfer but as a process in which individuals confront the ontological condition of death and reconstruct the meaning of life. In Korean society, rapid aging, the increase of sing...
This study interprets legacy giving not as a technical act of property transfer but as a process in which individuals confront the ontological condition of death and reconstruct the meaning of life. In Korean society, rapid aging, the increase of single-person households, and the spread of the well-dying discourse have heightened interest in death and life’s completeness. However, the emotional, relational, and identity transformations surrounding legacy giving have not been sufficiently explored. Previous research has primarily focused on institutional, fiscal, and socioeconomic factors, leaving unexamined the inner narratives and changes that occur after the decision to give. In particular, within Korea’s family-oriented norms and death-avoidant culture, the emotional and relational weight of legacy giving carries unique characteristics distinct from Western contexts, yet empirical data explaining these aspects remain scarce.
To address this gap, the study applied Braun and Clarke’s (2006) thematic analysis to 16 publicly available cases of legacy donors from major domestic nonprofit organizations, exploring emotional changes, identity reconstruction, relational expansion, and processes of meaning completion following the decision to give. The analysis involved iterative reading, segmentation of meaning units, initial coding, and thematic integration. To compensate for data limitations, a reflexive thematic analysis approach was employed to reconstruct latent meanings, accompanied by reflective memos, peer review, and theoretical triangulation to minimize interpretive bias.
Findings revealed five overarching themes. First, in the stage of recognizing and accepting death, donors reinterpreted death not as a termination but as a point of closure and completion, forming the emotional basis of legacy giving. Second, in the stage of emotional transition, initial anxiety, confusion, and family conflict shifted over time toward reflection, acceptance, and gratitude, resonating with Hochschild’s theory of emotion management. Third, in the stage of self-confirmation through giving, donors reconstructed their lives into meaningful narratives, experiencing identity reaffirmation as “leaving traces of life,” directly linked to McAdams’ (1993) narrative identity theory. Fourth, in the stage of relational expansion, legacy giving served as a bridge reconnecting donors with family, community, and future generations, extending personal choice into social solidarity. Finally, in the stage of life completion and social return, donors transformed their lives into social value, experiencing ego integration and psychological peace.
These results demonstrate that legacy giving constitutes a life-transition process encompassing death recognition, emotional transformation, identity reconstruction, relational expansion, and meaning completion. The changes can be explained as an integrated structure of emotions, identity, and relational networks, conceptualized in this study as the “Emotion–Identity–Relational Network” model. This provides a new theoretical framework that moves beyond economic and rational motivations, centering on the donor’s inner world. Despite limitations in source data, the study highlights the complex nature of legacy giving as involving death acceptance, narrative completion, and social return. Legacy giving is thus confirmed as more than a charitable act; it is a process in which individuals reflect on their lives and deaths while re-establishing connections with others and the community. Future research incorporating richer narratives and diverse groups may further expand legacy giving into a practical model integrated with well-dying, meaning-centered counseling, and end-of-life care.