A MAN dressed as a Pokemon shakes a bucket of change by the Highbury & Islington Underground station in London. Commuters ignore him—as they do another nearby bucket-shaker, an uncomfortable-looking Superman. Fewer people are donating money to charity these days, and they are giving less. Using official surveys that reflect ordinary personal giving, the Charities Aid Foundation (CAF) has calculated that donations are at their lowest in real terms since at least 2004-05, when the data began.

The sluggish economy probably has something to do with it. But another explanation is that charity has failed to keep up with technological change. Richard Harrison, head of research at CAF, says the charitable sector is stuck in the 1990s, or even the 1980s. More than half of personal donations are of cash (by volume, not value). Online giving accounts for a scant 7% of gifts, and just 1% arrive by text message. As a result, charity is ageing. The proportion of all donations coming from people under the age of 30 has fallen from 8% to 3% since 1980.

“The guy with a bucket is completely outdated,” says Joe Hedinger at Fallon, an advertising agency. To help change that, he has designed Chip In, which uses existing contactless payment methods, such as London’s Oyster travel cards or bank cards, to make giving as simple as possible. If Transport for London consents, he will roll out Chip In terminals at stations later in the year. This will feature an oversized prosthetic arm that commuters can “high five” to give 50p to a charity.

Chip In is one of several projects that have earned a grant from the Innovation in Giving Fund, overseen by Nesta, Britain’s innovation foundation, and part of a £34m ($51m) package from the Cabinet Office to foster social action and spending. If most government efforts to inspire philanthropy have concentrated on well-heeled donors, the Nesta fund is about tapping the generosity of more ordinary folk.

Another innovator is the National Funding Scheme, which began rolling out at 11 cultural institutions last month. Visitors will be able to use their mobile phones to make a casual donation to a specific cause, from repairing a painting at the National Portrait Gallery to financing a new show at the Phoenix Dance Theatre. This makes it easier to give money at the “moment of emotion”, when visitors are enjoying themselves at a museum or concert. William Makower, the architect of the scheme, predicts that it will unlock many more donations. Young donors in particular prefer to give for specific projects.

Nudging more charitable fund-raising into the digital sphere also offers useful data on giving and helps organisations track their spontaneous donors. When cash is dropped into a box at a museum, nobody knows whom to thank. Being able to follow up with even the smallest donors would allow charities to deepen their pool of givers. Demographic and behavioural insight should also prove handy.

“Giving to charity should be easier and more fun than buying a book from Amazon,” says Mr Harrison of CAF. The sooner charities move into the digital age, the better placed they will be to nurture the philanthropists of the future.